AI For Students Essay

AI For Students Essay — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Open information extraction

  In natural language processing, open information extraction (OIE) is the task of generating a structured, machine-readable representation of the information in text, usually in the form of triples or n-ary propositions. == Overview == A proposition can be understood as truth-bearer, a textual expression of a potential fact (e.g., "Dante wrote the Divine Comedy"), represented in an amenable structure for computers [e.g., ("Dante", "wrote", "Divine Comedy")]. An OIE extraction normally consists of a relation and a set of arguments. For instance, ("Dante", "passed away in" "Ravenna") is a proposition formed by the relation "passed away in" and the arguments "Dante" and "Ravenna". The first argument is usually referred as the subject while the second is considered to be the object. The extraction is said to be a textual representation of a potential fact because its elements are not linked to a knowledge base. Furthermore, the factual nature of the proposition has not yet been established. In the above example, transforming the extraction into a full fledged fact would first require linking, if possible, the relation and the arguments to a knowledge base. Second, the truth of the extraction would need to be determined. In computer science transforming OIE extractions into ontological facts is known as relation extraction. In fact, OIE can be seen as the first step to a wide range of deeper text understanding tasks such as relation extraction, knowledge-base construction, question answering, semantic role labeling. The extracted propositions can also be directly used for end-user applications such as structured search (e.g., retrieve all propositions with "Dante" as subject). OIE was first introduced by TextRunner developed at the University of Washington Turing Center headed by Oren Etzioni. Other methods introduced later such as Reverb, OLLIE, ClausIE or CSD helped to shape the OIE task by characterizing some of its aspects. At a high level, all of these approaches make use of a set of patterns to generate the extractions. Depending on the particular approach, these patterns are either hand-crafted or learned. == OIE systems and contributions == Reverb suggested the necessity to produce meaningful relations to more accurately capture the information in the input text. For instance, given the sentence "Faust made a pact with the devil", it would be erroneous to just produce the extraction ("Faust", "made", "a pact") since it would not be adequately informative. A more precise extraction would be ("Faust", "made a pact with", "the devil"). Reverb also argued against the generation of overspecific relations. OLLIE stressed two important aspects for OIE. First, it pointed to the lack of factuality of the propositions. For instance, in a sentence like "If John studies hard, he will pass the exam", it would be inaccurate to consider ("John", "will pass", "the exam") as a fact. Additionally, the authors indicated that an OIE system should be able to extract non-verb mediated relations, which account for significant portion of the information expressed in natural language text. For instance, in the sentence "Obama, the former US president, was born in Hawaii", an OIE system should be able to recognize a proposition ("Obama", "is", "former US president"). ClausIE introduced the connection between grammatical clauses, propositions, and OIE extractions. The authors stated that as each grammatical clause expresses a proposition, each verb mediated proposition can be identified by solely recognizing the set of clauses expressed in each sentence. This implies that to correctly recognize the set of propositions in an input sentence, it is necessary to understand its grammatical structure. The authors studied the case in the English language that only admits seven clause types, meaning that the identification of each proposition only requires defining seven grammatical patterns. The finding also established a separation between the recognition of the propositions and its materialization. In a first step, the proposition can be identified without any consideration of its final form, in a domain-independent and unsupervised way, mostly based on linguistic principles. In a second step, the information can be represented according to the requirements of the underlying application, without conditioning the identification phase. Consider the sentence "Albert Einstein was born in Ulm and died in Princeton". The first step will recognize the two propositions ("Albert Einstein", "was born", "in Ulm") and ("Albert Einstein", "died", "in Princeton"). Once the information has been correctly identified, the propositions can take the particular form required by the underlying application [e.g., ("Albert Einstein", "was born in", "Ulm") and ("Albert Einstein", "died in", "Princeton")]. CSD introduced the idea of minimality in OIE. It considers that computers can make better use of the extractions if they are expressed in a compact way. This is especially important in sentences with subordinate clauses. In these cases, CSD suggests the generation of nested extractions. For example, consider the sentence "The Embassy said that 6,700 Americans were in Pakistan". CSD generates two extractions [i] ("6,700 Americans", "were", "in Pakistan") and [ii] ("The Embassy", "said", "that [i]"). This is usually known as reification.

  Read more →
• 

  OpenNN

  OpenNN (Open Neural Networks Library) is a software library written in the C++ programming language which implements neural networks, a main area of deep learning research. The library is open-source, licensed under the GNU Lesser General Public License. == Characteristics == The software implements any number of layers of non-linear processing units for supervised learning. This deep architecture allows the design of neural networks with universal approximation properties. Additionally, it allows multiprocessing programming by means of OpenMP, in order to increase computer performance. OpenNN contains machine learning algorithms as a bundle of functions. These can be embedded in other software tools, using an application programming interface, for the integration of the predictive analytics tasks. In this regard, a graphical user interface is missing but some functions can be supported by specific visualization tools. == History == The development started in 2003 at the International Center for Numerical Methods in Engineering, within the research project funded by the European Union called RAMFLOOD (Risk Assessment and Management of FLOODs). Then it continued as part of similar projects. OpenNN is being developed by the startup company Artelnics. == Applications == OpenNN is a general purpose artificial intelligence software package. It uses machine learning techniques for solving predictive analytics tasks in different fields. For instance, the library has been applied in the engineering, energy, or chemistry sectors.

  Read more →
• 

  DreamBooth

  DreamBooth is a deep learning generation model used to personalize existing text-to-image models by fine-tuning. It was developed by researchers from Google Research and Boston University in 2022. Originally developed using Google's own Imagen text-to-image model, DreamBooth implementations can be applied to other text-to-image models, where it can allow the model to generate more fine-tuned and personalized outputs after training on three to five images of a subject. == Technology == Pretrained text-to-image diffusion models, while often capable of offering a diverse range of different image output types, lack the specificity required to generate images of lesser-known subjects, and are limited in their ability to render known subjects in different situations and contexts. The methodology used to run implementations of DreamBooth involves the fine-tuning the full UNet component of the diffusion model using a few images (usually 3--5) depicting a specific subject. Images are paired with text prompts that contain the name of the class the subject belongs to, plus a unique identifier. As an example, a photograph of a [Nissan R34 GTR] car, with car being the class); a class-specific prior preservation loss is applied to encourage the model to generate diverse instances of the subject based on what the model is already trained on for the original class. Pairs of low-resolution and high-resolution images taken from the set of input images are used to fine-tune the super-resolution components, allowing the minute details of the subject to be maintained. == Usage == DreamBooth can be used to fine-tune models such as Stable Diffusion, where it may alleviate a common shortcoming of Stable Diffusion not being able to adequately generate images of specific individual people. Such a use case is quite VRAM intensive, however, and thus cost-prohibitive for hobbyist users. The Stable Diffusion adaptation of DreamBooth in particular is released as a free and open-source project based on the technology outlined by the original paper published by Ruiz et. al. in 2022. Concerns have been raised regarding the ability for bad actors to utilise DreamBooth to generate misleading images for malicious purposes, and that its open-source nature allows anyone to utilise or even make improvements to the technology. In addition, artists have expressed their apprehension regarding the ethics of using DreamBooth to train model checkpoints that are specifically aimed at imitating specific art styles associated with human artists; one such critic is Hollie Mengert, an illustrator for Disney and Penguin Random House who has had her art style trained into a checkpoint model via DreamBooth and shared online, without her consent.

  Read more →
• 

  No Fakes Act

  The NO FAKES Act or the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act, is proposed United States federal legislation concerning digital replicas. The bill was first introduced in 2023 as a discussion draft, formally introduced in 2024, and reintroduced in 2025. If enacted, the bill would establish a federal right of publicity, giving public figures and private individuals greater control over the creation and use of digital replicas of their likenesses, including artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content. If passed, the NO FAKES Act would create a legal framework for licensing digital replicas, including provisions for liability, safe harbors, and statutory exceptions. The proposal has received broad support from the entertainment and technology industries. However, digital rights organizations have raised concerns that the Act risks chilling protected speech. == Background == === Entertainment industry concerns === Actors’ concerns over studios' use of their digital likeness were one of the primary drivers of the Screen Actors Guild–American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) strike in 2023. Negotiators for SAG-AFTRA alleged that the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) sought to use the digital likenesses of actors in perpetuity and would try to replace union members, especially background actors. The AMPTP denied SAG-AFTRA's interpretation of its proposal. In November 2023, AMPTP and SAG-AFTRA reached an agreement on the use of actors’ digital replicas, which included requirements for consent and compensation. Recording labels have also expressed concerns over unauthorized digital replicas of their performers' likeness. In 2023, TikTok user Ghostwriter977 released "Heart on My Sleeve," an AI-produced song in the styles of Drake and the Weeknd. After the song received millions of streams, the Universal Music Group (UMG) initiated takedown requests to TikTok and YouTube, which removed the song from their platforms. The legal arguments attorneys made were not disclosed; however, commentators noted that they likely used the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). This presented a novel scenario, since UMG did not have licensing rights to "Heart on My Sleeve." According to The Verge, UMG based its DMCA takedown request on an unauthorized sample used at the start of the song for the producer tag. While legal commentators noted that UMG could have asserted a violation of the artists’ rights of publicity, existing state right of publicity laws do not provide notice-and-takedown mechanisms comparable to those under the DMCA. === Legal landscape === Legal scholars have observed that AI-generated digital replicas raise questions under existing copyright and intellectual property law. U.S. copyright law generally requires that original authorship be attributable to a human; however, the extent of human intervention needed to satisfy this requirement is not clear. Copyright holders have filed lawsuits against AI companies alleging unauthorized usage of copyrighted material to train their models, though many of these cases remain pending. In terms of outputs, record labels often hold rights to artists’ musical works but do not necessarily control the artists’ voice, appearance, or likeness in the same way. As a result, AI-generated recordings such as "Heart on My Sleeve" may fall outside the scope of certain traditional copyright protections. Individuals' likenesses have historically been governed under the Lanham Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, and right of publicity laws. The right of publicity, recognized in many state-level statutes and common law, allows individuals to bring legal claims against unauthorized commercial use of their identities. It has often, but not exclusively, been applied to celebrities or other recognizable individuals. There is no federal-level right to publicity, and state-level protections vary, especially on issues relating to digital replicas and posthumous rights, which makes it difficult for creators or other individuals to prevent unauthorized use of their likenesses. In July 2024, the U.S. Copyright Office released a report on digital replicas and recommended that Congress create a federal law to protect individuals from unauthorized uses of their digital replicas, noting the inadequacy, narrowness, and inconsistency of existing laws. == Provisions == Under the NO FAKES Act of 2025, a digital replica is defined as "a newly created, computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of an individual," living or dead. A digital replica can be embodied in sound recordings, images, or audiovisual works in which the individual did not perform or in which the individual did perform but the "fundamental character of the performance or appearance has been materially altered." The Act specifies that digital replicas do not include reproduced samples of works authorized by the copyright holder. The Act defines a "right holder" as either the individual who is the subject of a digital replica or an entity that has acquired the rights to that individual’s likeness. The Act grants right holders the exclusive right to authorize the use of an individual’s likeness in a digital replica. This right is not assignable during the individual’s lifetime; however, it can be licensed to a living individual for up to 10 years under certain conditions. Postmortem rights The Act provides that the right does not automatically expire upon an individual’s death. It may be transferred to executors, heirs, or other parties designated by the individual. The right is held by the right holder for 10 years following the individual’s death. If the right holder demonstrates active use of the digital replica within the 2 years preceding the end of the 10-year term, the right may be extended for an additional 5-year period. These five-year extensions may be renewed for up to 70 years after the individual’s death. Liability The Act establishes liability for individuals who knowingly distribute a digital replica without authorization from the right holder, as well as for entities that make available a service primarily designed to produce unlawful digital replicas. Safe harbor provisions Similar to the Communications Decency Act and the DMCA, the Act establishes safe harbor provisions for online service providers. Providers are shielded from liability if they adopt and inform users of a policy for terminating accounts that repeatedly violate the Act. The NO FAKES Act does not require online services to proactively monitor content. Instead, it creates a notice-and-takedown mechanism under which providers must promptly respond to notifications seeking the removal of unauthorized digital replicas. These safe harbor protections apply only if the online service provider designates an agent with the U.S. Copyright Office to receive notifications of alleged violations. Remedies The NO FAKES Act provides remedies that are similar to those available under U.S. copyright law. Under the Act, individuals may be held liable for either statutory damages of $5,000 or actual damages for creating or distributing an unauthorized digital replica. The legislation also establishes a tiered liability framework for online service providers. Those that make good faith efforts to comply with the Act may face statutory damages of up to $25,000 per work for violations or actual damages. Providers that do not undertake such compliance efforts may be liable for $5,000 per unauthorized display or transmission of a digital replica, with damages capped at $750,000 per work. Exclusions The Act includes several exceptions to liability that are modeled in part on fair use principles. Digital replicas are excluded from liability when "used in a bona fide news, public affairs, or sports broadcast or account;" in a documentary or historical context; or in a way that is "consistent with the public interest." These exclusions do not apply to de minimis uses or to digital replicas that are sexually explicit in nature. The Act further states that licensing requirements do not apply to licenses established through collective bargaining agreements that contain provisions governing the use of digital replicas. The Act does not impose secondary liability on providers of generative artificial intelligence tools or services whose primary purpose is not the creation of unauthorized digital replicas. Preemption The NO FAKES Act preempts laws that protect "an individual's voice and visual likeness rights in connection with a digital replica, as defined in this Act, in an expressive work." However, the Act preserves state laws governing digital replicas enacted before January 2, 2025, as well as state laws addressing digital replicas that portray sexually explicit conduct. == History == In 2023, Senators Marsha Blackburn, Chris Coons, Amy Klobuchar, and Th

  Read more →
• 

  Uniphore

  Uniphore is an American software company that develops artificial intelligence platforms for business use. The company is headquartered in Palo Alto, California, with offices in the United States, United Kingdom, Spain, Israel, United Arab Emirates, and India. Uniphore is known for its "Business AI Cloud," an enterprise AI platform that combines data, knowledge, models, and software agents for use in sales, marketing, and service. The company has also acquired firms in video emotion AI, AI agents, low-code automation, knowledge automation, voice and screen capture, customer data platforms, and data engineering. == History == Uniphore Software Systems was founded by Umesh Sachdev and Ravi Saraogi in 2008 and was incubated at IIT Madras. The company received an initial grant of $100,000 from the National Research Development Corporation. Early work focused on speech technologies for emerging markets. Uniphore partnered with companies that specialized in English and European languages, and adapting the technology for Indian languages and dialects. In 2014, Uniphore released its first flagship products, auMina, along with two other products, Akeira and amVoice. Uniphore raised series A funding, led by Kris Gopalakrishnan (cofounder of Infosys), in April 2015. The next month, Uniphore received additional investment from IDG Ventures. With input from its investors, Uniphore changed its business model from license fee-based income to a software as a service-based subscription fee model in 2015. By June 2016, it had added more than 70 global languages and expanded its services to Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and the United States. The company opened operations in Singapore in October 2016. The company raised Series B funding in October 2017, led by John Chambers and existing investors. Series C funding of $51 million was announced in August 2019 and led by March Capital. Uniphore acquired an exclusive third-party license for robotic process automation technology from NTT DATA in October 2020. In January 2021, Uniphore acquired Emotion Research Lab, a startup based in Spain that uses artificial intelligence and machine learning to analyze video and interpret emotions. The company received $140 million in Series D funding, led by Sorenson Capital Partners, in March 2021, bringing total funding to $210 million. In January 2021, Uniphore acquired Emotion Research Lab. In July 2021, it agreed to acquire Jacada, a provider of low-code/no-code automation; the transaction closed in October 2021. On February 16, 2022, Uniphore announced a $400 million Series E financing led by NEA, which valued the company at $2.5 billion. Hilarie Koplow-McAdams, an NEA venture partner and former Salesforce/New Relic executive, joined Uniphore's board in 2022. Uniphore's board has also included former Cisco CEO John Chambers, former Convergys CEO Andrea J. Ayers, and CrowdStrike CFO Burt Podbere (appointed January 2021). In February 2023, Uniphore acquired UK-based Red Box, a platform for capturing voice and screen recordings used in regulated and large-scale environments. It also acquired France-based Hexagone, a behavioral analytics firm combining computer vision and natural-language techniques. On December 5, 2024, Uniphore announced agreements to acquire ActionIQ, a customer data platform (CDP) vendor, and Infoworks, an enterprise data engineering platform. Uniphore launched the Business AI Cloud on June 9, 2025. The Business AI Cloud consists of a single, unified platform that includes data, knowledge, AI models, and AI agents. Uniphore announced in August 2025 that it had acquired Orby AI and intended to acquire Autonom8 to extend multi-agent and workflow automation capabilities. As of September 2025, Uniphore's customers included the United States Coast Guard, Singapore Police Force, London Underground, DirecTV, JPMorgan Chase, LG, DHL, UPS, Vodafone, Verizon, NTT Data, and as of May 2021, Firstsource. In October 2025, Uniphore raised $260 million in a Series F round at a reported valuation of $2.5 billion. Investors included March Capital, NEA, Nvidia, AMD, Snowflake, and Databricks. In January 2026, KPMG and Uniphore announced a collaboration focused on deploying AI agents powered by specialized small language models. The announcement was made at the World Economic Forum held in Davos. Cognizant and Uniphore announced a partnership in February 2026 to develop industry-specific AI tools for regulated sectors, which would initially focus on life sciences and finance. Uniphore and Rackspace also announced a partnership in March 2026. This partnership was announced in order to create an "Infrastructure-to-Agents" architecture, focusing on Business AI as a private cloud service. == Products == As of 2025, Uniphore's core offering is the Business AI Cloud and Business AI Suite of agentic AI applications. === Business AI Cloud === Uniphore’s Business AI Cloud is a full-stack platform that organizes enterprise data and knowledge for agentic AI applications. The platform enables deployment across clouds and existing data sources. Key layers and capabilities include the following. Agentic layer: Includes prebuilt agents, a natural-language agent builder, and orchestration based on Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) to run AI workflows across business units. Model layer: Supports an open, interoperable mix of closed and open-source large language models (LLMs). Models can be orchestrated, governed, and replaced as needed. Knowledge layer: Organizes raw data into structured knowledge used for retrieval, explainability, and fine-tuning of small language models (SLMs). Data layer: Connects to data across multiple platforms and clouds through a zero-copy, composable fabric, enabling in-place preparation and supporting data residency and sovereignty requirements. === Business AI Suite === The Uniphore Business AI Suite has various prebuilt AI agents that can be used in customer service, sales, marketing, and human resources. The Uniphore Business AI Suite includes several LOBs (Lines of Business) for business functions with intelligent agents that are prebuilt, but composable. Built on the Uniphore Business AI Cloud, each application combines agentic automation and fine-tuned models. Marketing AI, Customer Service AI, Sales AI, and People AI (for human resources) are included. Competitors include Palantir, Microsoft Azure, Amazon Bedrock, Google's Vertex AI, Databricks, and Snowflake. == Recognition == Deloitte Technology Fast 50 India identified Uniphore as the 17th fastest-growing technology company in India in 2012 and one of the top 500 fastest growing companies in the Asia-Pacific region in 2014. In 2016, Time included Sachdev on its list of "10 millennials who are changing the world" for “building a phone that can understand almost any language”. NASSCOM named Uniphore to its "League of 10" emerging Indian technology companies in 2017. In 2020, the San Francisco Business Times ranked Uniphore as No. 7 among small companies in its list of the best places to work in the San Francisco Bay Area. In 2022, the company was featured on the Forbes AI 50 list. Uniphore was mentioned in the Deloitte Technology Fast 500 list in 2023, 2024, and 2025. In 2025, Inc. included Uniphore in its Best in Business program.

  Read more →
• 

  Computational theory of mind

  In philosophy of mind, the computational theory of mind (CTM), also known as computationalism, is a family of views that hold that the human mind is an information processing system and that cognition and consciousness together are a form of computation. It is closely related to functionalism, a broader theory that defines mental states by what they do rather than what they are made of. == History == Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts (1943) were the first to suggest that neural activity is computational. They argued that neural computations explain cognition. A version of the theory was put forward by Peter Putnam and Robert W. Fuller in 1964. The theory was proposed in its modern form by Hilary Putnam in 1960 and 1961, aided by his then PhD student, philosopher and cognitive scientist Jerry Fodor, who continued the research as a post-doc in the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. It was later criticized by Putnam himself, John Searle, and others. == Classical computational theory of mind == The CTM holds that the human mind is a computational system that is realized (i.e., physically implemented) by neural activity in the brain. The theory can be elaborated in many ways and varies largely based on how the term computation is understood. In classical computational theory of mind (CCTM), computation is modeled in terms of Turing machines which manipulate symbols according to a rule, in combination with the internal state of the machine. A Turing machine is an abstract machine with unlimited time and storage. CCTM does not pretend that the mind looks like a Turing machine, but instead uses Turing machines as a formalism. Alan Turing argued that any symbolic algorithm executed by a human brain can in theory be replicated on a Turing machine. The critical aspect of such a computational model is that it allows to abstract away from particular physical details of the machine that is implementing the computation. For example, the appropriate computation could be implemented either by silicon chips or biological neural networks, so long as there is a series of outputs based on manipulations of inputs and internal states, performed according to a rule. Computational theories of mind are often said to require mental representation because 'input' into a computation comes in the form of symbols or representations of other objects. A computer cannot compute an actual object but must interpret and represent the object in some form and then compute the representation. Unlike CTM, the representational theory of mind shifts the focus to the symbols being manipulated. This approach better accounts for systematicity and productivity. In Fodor's view, the mind is a computational system that processes the language of thought. == Variants == Connectionist computationalism models the mind as a neural network. Steven Pinker and Alan Prince distinguish two types of connectionists: eliminative and implementationist. Eliminative connectionists generally reject classical CTMs and the idea of a structured, symbolic mind, whereas implementationists view neural networks and Turing machines as two potentially complementary levels of analysis. It is indeed possible in theory to implement a neural network in a Turing machine, or a Turing machine in a neural network. Building from the tradition of McCulloch and Pitts, the computational theory of cognition (CTC) states that neural computations explain cognition. The computational theory of mind asserts that not only cognition, but also phenomenal consciousness or qualia, are computational. That is to say, CTM entails CTC. While phenomenal consciousness could fulfill some other functional role, computational theory of cognition leaves open the possibility that some aspects of the mind could be non-computational. CTC, therefore, provides an important explanatory framework for understanding neural networks, while avoiding counter-arguments that center around phenomenal consciousness. == "Computer metaphor" == Computational theory of mind is not the same as the computer metaphor, comparing the mind to a modern-day digital computer. While the computer metaphor draws an analogy between the mind as software and the brain as hardware, CTM is the claim that the mind is literally a computational system. "Computational system" is not intended to mean a modern-day electronic computer. == Pancomputationalism == CTM raises a question that remains a subject of debate: what does it take for a physical system (such as a mind, or an artificial computer) to perform computations? A very straightforward account is based on a simple mapping between abstract mathematical computations and physical systems: a system performs computation C if and only if there is a mapping between a sequence of states individuated by C and a sequence of states individuated by a physical description of the system. Putnam (1988) and Searle (1992) argue that this simple mapping account (SMA) trivializes the empirical import of computational descriptions. As Putnam put it, "everything is a Probabilistic Automaton under some Description". Even rocks, walls, and buckets of water—contrary to appearances—are computing systems. Gualtiero Piccinini identifies different versions of pancomputationalism. Searle wrote:the wall behind my back is right now implementing the WordStar program, because there is some pattern of molecule movements that is isomorphic with the formal structure of WordStar. But if the wall is implementing WordStar, if it is a big enough wall it is implementing any program, including any program implemented in the brain.In response to the trivialization criticism, and to restrict SMA, philosophers of mind have offered different accounts of computational systems. These typically include causal account, semantic account, syntactic account, and mechanistic account. Instead of a semantic restriction, the syntactic account imposes a syntactic restriction. The mechanistic account was first introduced by Gualtiero Piccinini in 2007. == Criticism == A range of arguments have been proposed against physicalist conceptions used in computational theories of mind. An early, though indirect, criticism of the computational theory of mind comes from philosopher John Searle. In his thought experiment known as the Chinese room, Searle attempts to refute the claims that artificially intelligent agents can be said to have intentionality and understanding and that these systems, because they can be said to be minds themselves, are sufficient for the study of the human mind. Searle asks us to imagine that there is a man in a room with no way of communicating with anyone or anything outside of the room except for a piece of paper with symbols written on it that is passed under the door. With the paper, the man is to use a series of provided rule books to return paper containing different symbols. Unknown to the man in the room, these symbols are of a Chinese language, and this process generates a conversation that a Chinese speaker outside of the room can actually understand. Searle contends that the man in the room does not understand the Chinese conversation. This was originally written as a repudiation of the idea that computers work like minds. Objections like Searle's might be called insufficiency objections. They claim that computational theories of mind fail because computation is insufficient to account for some capacity of the mind. Arguments from qualia, such as Frank Jackson's knowledge argument, can be understood as objections to computational theories of mind in this way—though they take aim at physicalist conceptions of the mind in general, and not computational theories specifically. Objections have also been put forth that are directly tailored for computational theories of mind. Jerry Fodor himself argues that the mind is still a very long way from having been explained by the computational theory of mind. The main reason for this shortcoming is that most cognition is abductive and global, hence sensitive to all possibly relevant background beliefs to (dis)confirm a belief. This creates, among other problems, the frame problem for the computational theory, because the relevance of a belief is not one of its local, syntactic properties but context-dependent. Putnam himself (see in particular Representation and Reality and the first part of Renewing Philosophy) became a prominent critic of computationalism for a variety of reasons, including ones related to Searle's Chinese room arguments, questions of world-word reference relations, and thoughts about the mind-body problem. Regarding functionalism in particular, Putnam has claimed along lines similar to, but more general than Searle's arguments, that the question of whether the human mind can implement computational states is not relevant to the question of the nature of mind, because "every ordinary open system realizes every abstract finite automaton." Computationalists have responded by aiming to develop criteri

  Read more →
• 

  User modeling

  User modeling is the subdivision of human–computer interaction which describes the process of building up and modifying a conceptual understanding of the user. The main goal of user modeling is customization and adaptation of systems to the user's specific needs. The system needs to "say the 'right' thing at the 'right' time in the 'right' way". To do so it needs an internal representation of the user. Another common purpose is modeling specific kinds of users, including modeling of their skills and declarative knowledge, for use in automatic software-tests. User-models can thus serve as a cheaper alternative to user testing but should not replace user testing. == Background == A user model is the collection and categorization of personal data associated with a specific user. A user model is a (data) structure that is used to capture certain characteristics about an individual user, and a user profile is the actual representation in a given user model. The process of obtaining the user profile is called user modeling. Therefore, it is the basis for any adaptive changes to the system's behavior. Which data is included in the model depends on the purpose of the application. It can include personal information such as users' names and ages, their interests, their skills and knowledge, their goals and plans, their preferences and their dislikes or data about their behavior and their interactions with the system. There are different design patterns for user models, though often a mixture of them is used. Static user models Static user models are the most basic kinds of user models. Once the main data is gathered they are normally not changed again, they are static. Shifts in users' preferences are not registered and no learning algorithms are used to alter the model. Dynamic user models Dynamic user models allow a more up to date representation of users. Changes in their interests, their learning progress or interactions with the system are noticed and influence the user models. The models can thus be updated and take the current needs and goals of the users into account. Stereotype based user models Stereotype based user models are based on demographic statistics. Based on the gathered information users are classified into common stereotypes. The system then adapts to this stereotype. The application therefore can make assumptions about a user even though there might be no data about that specific area, because demographic studies have shown that other users in this stereotype have the same characteristics. Thus, stereotype based user models mainly rely on statistics and do not take into account that personal attributes might not match the stereotype. However, they allow predictions about a user even if there is rather little information about him or her. Highly adaptive user models Highly adaptive user models try to represent one particular user and therefore allow a very high adaptivity of the system. In contrast to stereotype based user models they do not rely on demographic statistics but aim to find a specific solution for each user. Although users can take great benefit from this high adaptivity, this kind of model needs to gather a lot of information first. == Data gathering == Information about users can be gathered in several ways. There are three main methods: Asking for specific facts while (first) interacting with the system Mostly this kind of data gathering is linked with the registration process. While registering users are asked for specific facts, their likes and dislikes and their needs. Often the given answers can be altered afterwards. Learning users' preferences by observing and interpreting their interactions with the system In this case users are not asked directly for their personal data and preferences, but this information is derived from their behavior while interacting with the system. The ways they choose to accomplish a tasks, the combination of things they takes interest in, these observations allow inferences about a specific user. The application dynamically learns from observing these interactions. Different machine learning algorithms may be used to accomplish this task. A hybrid approach which asks for explicit feedback and alters the user model by adaptive learning This approach is a mixture of the ones above. Users have to answer specific questions and give explicit feedback. Furthermore, their interactions with the system are observed and the derived information are used to automatically adjust the user models. Though the first method is a good way to quickly collect main data it lacks the ability to automatically adapt to shifts in users' interests. It depends on the users' readiness to give information and it is unlikely that they are going to edit their answers once the registration process is finished. Therefore, there is a high likelihood that the user models are not up to date. However, this first method allows the users to have full control over the collected data about them. It is their decision which information they are willing to provide. This possibility is missing in the second method. Adaptive changes in a system that learns users' preferences and needs only by interpreting their behavior might appear a bit opaque to the users, because they cannot fully understand and reconstruct why the system behaves the way it does. Moreover, the system is forced to collect a certain amount of data before it is able to predict the users' needs with the required accuracy. Therefore, it takes a certain learning time before a user can benefit from adaptive changes. However, afterwards these automatically adjusted user models allow a quite accurate adaptivity of the system. The hybrid approach tries to combine the advantages of both methods. Through collecting data by directly asking its users it gathers a first stock of information which can be used for adaptive changes. By learning from the users' interactions it can adjust the user models and reach more accuracy. Yet, the designer of the system has to decide, which of these information should have which amount of influence and what to do with learned data that contradicts some of the information given by a user. == System adaptation == Once a system has gathered information about a user it can evaluate that data by preset analytical algorithm and then start to adapt to the user's needs. These adaptations may concern every aspect of the system's behavior and depend on the system's purpose. Information and functions can be presented according to the user's interests, knowledge or goals by displaying only relevant features, hiding information the user does not need, making proposals what to do next and so on. One has to distinguish between adaptive and adaptable systems. In an adaptable system the user can manually change the system's appearance, behavior or functionality by actively selecting the corresponding options. Afterwards the system will stick to these choices. In an adaptive system a dynamic adaption to the user is automatically performed by the system itself, based on the built user model. Thus, an adaptive system needs ways to interpret information about the user in order to make these adaptations. One way to accomplish this task is implementing rule-based filtering. In this case a set of IF... THEN... rules is established that covers the knowledge base of the system. The IF-conditions can check for specific user-information and if they match the THEN-branch is performed which is responsible for the adaptive changes. Another approach is based on collaborative filtering. In this case information about a user is compared to that of other users of the same systems. Thus, if characteristics of the current user match those of another, the system can make assumptions about the current user by presuming that he or she is likely to have similar characteristics in areas where the model of the current user is lacking data. Based on these assumption the system then can perform adaptive changes. == Usages == Adaptive hypermedia: In an adaptive hypermedia system the displayed content and the offered hyperlinks are chosen on basis of users' specific characteristics, taking their goals, interests, knowledge and abilities into account. Thus, an adaptive hypermedia system aims to reduce the "lost in hyperspace" syndrome by presenting only relevant information. Adaptive educational hypermedia: Being a subdivision of adaptive hypermedia the main focus of adaptive educational hypermedia lies on education, displaying content and hyperlinks corresponding to the user's knowledge on the field of study. Intelligent tutoring system: Unlike adaptive educational hypermedia systems intelligent tutoring systems are stand-alone systems. Their aim is to help students in a specific field of study. To do so, they build up a user model where they store information about abilities, knowledge and needs of the user. The system can now adapt to this user by presenting approp

  Read more →
• 

  Yann LeCun

  Yann André Le Cun ( lə-KUN; French: [ləkœ̃]; usually spelled LeCun; born 8 July 1960) is a French-American computer scientist working in the fields of artificial intelligence, machine learning, computer vision, robotics and image compression. He is the Jacob T. Schwartz Professor of Computer Science at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences at New York University. He served as Chief AI Scientist at Meta Platforms before co-founding Advanced Machine Intelligence Labs in December 2025. He is well known for his work on optical character recognition and computer vision using convolutional neural networks (CNNs). He is also one of the main creators of the DjVu image compression technology, alongside Léon Bottou and Patrick Haffner. He co-developed the Lush programming language with Léon Bottou. In 2018, LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton received the Turing Award from the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) for their work on deep learning. LeCun, Bengio, and Hinton, and occasionally Jürgen Schmidhuber, are sometimes referred to as the "Godfathers of AI" and "Godfathers of Deep Learning". == Early life and education == Yann André Le Cun was born on 8 July 1960 at Soisy-sous-Montmorency, in the suburbs of Paris. His surname, Le Cun, derives from the old Breton form Le Cunff and originates from the region of Guingamp in northern Brittany. Yann is the Breton form of Jean, the French form of John. He received a Diplôme d'Ingénieur from the ESIEE Paris in 1983 and a PhD in computer science from Université Pierre et Marie Curie (now Sorbonne University) in 1987, during which he proposed an early form of backpropagation, an algorithm crucial for enabling neural networks to learn. Before joining AT&T, LeCun was a postdoctoral researcher for a year, starting in 1987, supervised by Geoffrey Hinton at the University of Toronto. LeCun has three sons, and his brother is employed by Google. He has American citizenship. == Career and research == LeCun's career has been spent primarily at Bell Labs, New York University and Meta Platforms, Inc. === Bell Labs === In 1988, LeCun joined the Adaptive Systems Research Department at AT&T Bell Laboratories in Holmdel, New Jersey, United States, headed by Lawrence D. Jackel, where he developed a number of new machine learning methods, such as a biologically inspired model of image recognition called convolutional neural networks (LeNet), the "Optimal Brain Damage" regularization methods, and the Graph Transformer Networks method (similar to conditional random field), which he applied to handwriting recognition and Optical character recognition (OCR). The bank check recognition system that he helped develop was widely deployed by NCR and other companies. In 1996, he joined AT&T Labs-Research as head of the Image Processing Research Department, which was part of Lawrence Rabiner's Speech and Image Processing Research Lab, and worked primarily on the DjVu image compression technology, a format designed for efficient distribution of scanned documents, and used by the Internet Archive to provide access to digitized texts. His collaborators at AT&T include Léon Bottou and Vladimir Vapnik. === New York University === After a brief tenure as a fellow of NEC Research Institute, LeCun joined New York University in 2003, where he is Jacob T. Schwartz Chaired Professor of Computer Science and Neural Science at the Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences and the Center for Neural Science. At NYU, he has worked primarily on energy-based models for supervised and unsupervised learning, feature learning for object recognition in computer vision, and mobile robotics. In 2012, he became the founding director of the NYU Center for Data Science. On 9 December 2013, LeCun became the first director of Meta AI Research in New York City and in early 2014 stepped down from the NYU–CDS directorship. In 2013, he and Yoshua Bengio co-founded the International Conference on Learning Representations, which adopted a post-publication open review process he previously advocated on his website. He was the chair and organiser of the "Learning Workshop" held every year between 1986 and 2012 in Snowbird, Utah. He is a member of the Science Advisory Board of the Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics at UCLA. He is the co-director of the Learning in Machines and Brain research program (formerly Neural Computation & Adaptive Perception) of CIFAR. In 2016, he was the visiting professor of computer science on the Chaire Annuelle Informatique et Sciences Numériques at Collège de France in Paris, where he presented the leçon inaugurale (inaugural lecture). In 2023, he was named as the inaugural Jacob T. Schwartz Chaired Professor in Computer Science at NYU's Courant Institute. LeCun is also a scientific advisor to French research group Kyutai which is being funded by Xavier Niel, Rodolphe Saadé, Eric Schmidt, and others. === Meta Platforms === LeCun joined Facebook (now Meta Platforms) in 2013 as chief AI scientist and led the company's AI research laboratory, FAIR. === AMI Labs === On 19 November 2025, LeCun confirmed that he would be leaving Meta after ten years to found his own company focused on world-model architectures and human-like artificial intelligence he calls superintelligence. The company he founded, Advanced Machine Intelligence Labs (or AMI Labs), is run by CEO Alex LeBrun, with LeCun serving as Executive Chair. This venture is focused on building AI "world models": systems that learn to understand the physical world's structure and dynamics rather than just predict text like large language models. In March 2026, AMI announced it had raised $1.03 billion in funding at a $3.5 billion pre-money valuation. The funding round was co-led by investors including Cathay Innovation, Greycroft, Hiro Capital, HV Capital and Bezos Expeditions. In January 2026, LeCun became founding chair of the Technical Research Board of Logical Intelligence, an AI company developing energy-based (EBM) reasoning systems. == Honours and awards == LeCun is a member of the US National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering and the French Académie des Sciences. He has received honorary doctorates from Instituto Politécnico Nacional (IPN) in Mexico City in 2016, from EPFL in 2018, from Université Côte d'Azur in 2021, from Università di Siena in 2023, and from Hong Kong University of Science and Technology in 2023. In 2014, he received the IEEE Neural Network Pioneer Award and in 2015, the PAMI Distinguished Researcher Award. In 2018, LeCun was awarded the IRI Medal, established by the Industrial Research Institute (IRI), and the Harold Pender Award, given by the University of Pennsylvania. In 2019, he received the Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement. In March 2019, LeCun won the 2018 Turing Award, sharing it with Yoshua Bengio and Geoffrey Hinton. In 2022, he received the Princess of Asturias Award in the category "Scientific Research", along with Yoshua Bengio, Geoffrey Hinton and Demis Hassabis. In 2023, the President of France made him a Chevalier (Knight) of the French Legion of Honour. During the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2024 in Davos, he received the Global Swiss AI Award 2023. The same year, he received the grand prize of the VinFuture Prize alongside Yoshua Bengio, Jensen Huang, Geoffrey Hinton, and Fei-Fei Li for their groundbreaking contributions to neural networks and deep learning algorithms. In 2025 he was awarded the Queen Elizabeth Prize for Engineering jointly with Yoshua Bengio, Bill Dally, Geoffrey E. Hinton, John Hopfield, Jensen Huang and Fei-Fei Li.

  Read more →
• 

  Lemmy (social network)

  Lemmy is free and open-source, social news aggregation software for running self-hosted discussion forums. These hosts, known as "instances", communicate with each other using the ActivityPub protocol. == History == Lemmy was created by the user Dessalines on GitHub in February 2019 and licensed under the Affero General Public License. In a 2020 post, Lemmy's co-creator Dessalines wrote about the origin of the name Lemmy. "It was nameless for a long time, but I wanted to keep with the fediverse tradition of naming projects after animals. I was playing that old-school game Lemmings, and Lemmy (from Motorhead) had passed away that week, and we held a few polls for names, and I went with that." According to the Fediverse statistics sites the-federation.info and fedidb.com, Lemmy had fewer than 100 instances prior to June 2023, but grew to 455 instances with approximately 48,600 monthly active users as of 22 December 2025, with the largest instances being lemmy.world and lemmy.ml, reporting about 14,144 and 1,982 monthly active users, respectively. == Description == Lemmy is made up of a network of individual installations of the Lemmy software that can intercommunicate. This departs from the centralized, monolithic structure of other social media platforms. It has been described as a federated alternative to Reddit. Users on individual instances submit posts with links, text, or pictures to user-created forums for discussion called "communities". Discussion is in the form of threaded comments. Posts and comments can be upvoted or downvoted though the ability to downvote can be disabled by the admins of each instance. Communities are local to each instance, however users may subscribe to communities, create posts and leave comments across instances. Moderation is conducted by the administrators of each instance and moderators of specific communities. Community names begin with c/ in the URL (e.g lemmy.ml/c/simpleliving) and are mentionable using the !community@instance format. On each instance, a front page presents the user with popular posts from several communities. These posts can then be filtered according to origin: posts from the instance the user is on, or from all federated instances. It can also be made to only show posts from communities the user has subscribed to. Lemmy instances are generally supported by donations. == Relations with other social networks == ActivityPub is the protocol used to allow Lemmy instances to operate as a federated social network. It allows users to interact with compatible platforms such as Kbin and Mastodon. In June 2023, following the announcement of Reddit API service changes intended to reduce the use of third-party Reddit clients, community members discussed relocating to Lemmy and other Reddit competitors. Reddit banned a user for promoting switching to Lemmy along with the r/LemmyMigration subreddit as a whole, leading to a Streisand effect after it garnered attention on sites like Hacker News. The ban was reversed a day later. == Third-party software == Prominent third-party Reddit clients Sync and Boost which had shut down due to changes to the pricing of Reddit's API began working on Lemmy clients, with them later relaunching as Sync for Lemmy and Boost for Lemmy. Multiple other apps and browser clients have also been developed.

  Read more →
• 

  Learning rule

  An artificial neural network's learning rule or learning process is a method, mathematical logic or algorithm which improves the network's performance and/or training time. Usually, this rule is applied repeatedly over the network. It is done by updating the weight and bias levels of a network when it is simulated in a specific data environment. A learning rule may accept existing conditions (weights and biases) of the network, and will compare the expected result and actual result of the network to give new and improved values for the weights and biases. Depending on the complexity of the model being simulated, the learning rule of the network can be as simple as an XOR gate or mean squared error, or as complex as the result of a system of differential equations. The learning rule is one of the factors which decides how fast or how accurately the neural network can be developed. Depending on the process to develop the network, there are three main paradigms of machine learning: supervised learning, unsupervised learning, and reinforcement learning. == Background == A lot of the learning methods in machine learning work similar to each other, and are based on each other, which makes it difficult to classify them in clear categories. But they can be broadly understood in 4 categories of learning methods, though these categories don't have clear boundaries and they tend to belong to multiple categories of learning methods - Hebbian - Neocognitron, Brain-state-in-a-box Gradient Descent - ADALINE, Hopfield Network, Recurrent Neural Network Competitive - Learning Vector Quantisation, Self-Organising Feature Map, Adaptive Resonance Theory Stochastic - Boltzmann Machine, Cauchy Machine Though these learning rules might appear to be based on similar ideas, they do have subtle differences, as they are a generalisation or application over the previous rule, and hence it makes sense to study them separately based on their origins and intents. === Hebbian Learning === Developed by Donald Hebb in 1949 to describe biological neuron firing. In the mid-1950s it was also applied to computer simulations of neural networks. Δ w i = η x i y {\displaystyle \Delta w_{i}=\eta x_{i}y} Where η {\displaystyle \eta } represents the learning rate, x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} represents the input of neuron i, and y is the output of the neuron. It has been shown that Hebb's rule in its basic form is unstable. Oja's Rule, BCM Theory are other learning rules built on top of or alongside Hebb's Rule in the study of biological neurons. ==== Perceptron Learning Rule (PLR) ==== The perceptron learning rule originates from the Hebbian assumption, and was used by Frank Rosenblatt in his perceptron in 1958. The net is passed to the activation (transfer) function and the function's output is used for adjusting the weights. The learning signal is the difference between the desired response and the actual response of a neuron. The step function is often used as an activation function, and the outputs are generally restricted to -1, 0, or 1. The weights are updated with w new = w old + η ( t − o ) x i {\displaystyle w_{\text{new}}=w_{\text{old}}+\eta (t-o)x_{i}} where "t" is the target value and "o" is the output of the perceptron, and η {\displaystyle \eta } is called the learning rate. The algorithm converges to the correct classification if: the training data is linearly separable η {\displaystyle \eta } is sufficiently small (though smaller η {\displaystyle \eta } generally means a longer learning time and more epochs) It should also be noted that a single layer perceptron with this learning rule is incapable of working on linearly non-separable inputs, and hence the XOR problem cannot be solved using this rule alone === Backpropagation === Seppo Linnainmaa in 1970 is said to have developed the Backpropagation Algorithm but the origins of the algorithm go back to the 1960s with many contributors. It is a generalisation of the least mean squares algorithm in the linear perceptron and the Delta Learning Rule. It implements gradient descent search through the space possible network weights, iteratively reducing the error, between the target values and the network outputs. ==== Widrow-Hoff Learning (Delta Learning Rule) ==== Similar to the perceptron learning rule but with different origin. It was developed for use in the ADALINE network, which differs from the Perceptron mainly in terms of the training. The weights are adjusted according to the weighted sum of the inputs (the net), whereas in perceptron the sign of the weighted sum was useful for determining the output as the threshold was set to 0, -1, or +1. This makes ADALINE different from the normal perceptron. Delta rule (DR) is similar to the Perceptron Learning Rule (PLR), with some differences: Error (δ) in DR is not restricted to having values of 0, 1, or -1 (as in PLR), but may have any value DR can be derived for any differentiable output/activation function f, whereas in PLR only works for threshold output function Sometimes only when the Widrow-Hoff is applied to binary targets specifically, it is referred to as Delta Rule, but the terms seem to be used often interchangeably. The delta rule is considered to a special case of the back-propagation algorithm. Delta rule also closely resembles the Rescorla-Wagner model under which Pavlovian conditioning occurs. === Competitive Learning === Competitive learning is considered a variant of Hebbian learning, but it is special enough to be discussed separately. Competitive learning works by increasing the specialization of each node in the network. It is well suited to finding clusters within data. Models and algorithms based on the principle of competitive learning include vector quantization and self-organizing maps (Kohonen maps).

  Read more →
• 

  Elon Musk

  Elon Reeve Musk ( EE-lon; born June 28, 1971) is a businessman and former public official known for his leadership of Tesla and SpaceX. Musk has been the wealthiest person in the world since 2025; as of June 2026, Forbes estimates his net worth to be US$834 billion. Born into the wealthy Musk family in Pretoria, South Africa, Musk emigrated in 1989 to Canada; he has Canadian citizenship since his mother was born there. He received bachelor's degrees in 1997 from the University of Pennsylvania before moving to California to pursue business ventures. In 1995, Musk co-founded the software company Zip2. Following its sale in 1999, he co-founded X.com, an online payment company that later merged to form PayPal, which was acquired by eBay in 2002. Musk also became an American citizen in 2002. In 2002, Musk founded the space technology company SpaceX, becoming its CEO and chief engineer; the company has since led innovations in reusable rockets and commercial spaceflight. Musk joined the automaker Tesla as an early investor in 2004 and became its CEO and product architect in 2008; it has since become a leader in electric vehicles. In 2015, he co-founded OpenAI to advance artificial intelligence (AI) research, but later left; growing discontent with the organization's direction and leadership in the AI boom in the 2020s led him to establish xAI, which became a subsidiary of SpaceX in 2026. In 2022, he acquired the social network Twitter, implementing significant changes, and rebranding it as X in 2023. His other businesses include the neurotechnology company Neuralink, which he co-founded in 2016, and the tunneling company the Boring Company, which he founded in 2017. In November 2025, Tesla approved a pay package worth $1 trillion for Musk, which he is to receive over 10 years if he meets specific goals. Musk is a supporter of global far-right politics, figures, and political parties. He was the largest donor in the 2024 U.S. presidential election, where he supported Donald Trump. After Trump was inaugurated as president in January 2025, Musk served as Senior Advisor to the President and as the de facto head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Shortly before a public feud with Trump, Musk left the Trump administration in May 2025 and returned to managing his companies. Musk's political activities, statements and views have made him a polarizing figure. He has been criticized for making unscientific and misleading statements, including spreading COVID-19 misinformation, promoting conspiracy theories, and affirming antisemitic, racist, and transphobic comments. His acquisition of Twitter was controversial due to a subsequent increase in hate speech and the spread of misinformation on the service, following his pledge to decrease censorship. His role in the second Trump administration attracted public backlash, particularly in response to DOGE. == Early life and education == Elon Reeve Musk was born on June 28, 1971, in Pretoria, South Africa's administrative capital. He is of British and Pennsylvania Dutch ancestry. His mother, Maye (née Haldeman), is a model and dietitian born in Saskatchewan, Canada, and raised in South Africa. Musk therefore holds both South African and Canadian citizenship from birth. His father, Errol Musk, is a South African electromechanical engineer, pilot, sailor, consultant, emerald dealer, and property developer, who partly owned a rental lodge at Timbavati Private Nature Reserve. His maternal grandfather, Joshua N. Haldeman, who died in a plane crash when Elon was a toddler, was an American-born Canadian chiropractor, aviator and political activist in the Technocracy movement who moved to South Africa in 1950. Haldeman's anti-government, anti-democratic and conspiracist views, which included the promotion of far-right antisemitic conspiracy theories, "fanatical" support of apartheid, and according to Errol Musk, support of Nazism, have been suggested as an influence on Elon. During his childhood, Elon was told stories by his grandmother of Haldeman's travels and exploits, and Elon has suggested that all of Haldeman's descendants have his "desire for adventure, exploration – doing crazy things". Elon has a younger brother, Kimbal, a younger sister, Tosca, and four paternal half-siblings. Musk was baptized as a child in the Anglican Church of Southern Africa. The Musk family was wealthy during Elon's youth. Despite both Elon and Errol previously stating that Errol was a part owner of a Zambian emerald mine, in 2023, Errol recounted that the deal he made was to receive "a portion of the emeralds produced at three small mines". Errol was elected to the Pretoria City Council as a representative of the anti-apartheid Progressive Party and has said that his children shared their father's dislike of apartheid. After his parents divorced in 1979, Elon, aged around 9, chose to live with his father because he had an Encyclopædia Britannica set and a computer. Elon later regretted his decision and became estranged from his father. Elon has recounted trips to a wilderness school that he described as a "paramilitary Lord of the Flies" where "bullying was a virtue" and children were encouraged to fight over rations. In one incident, after an altercation with a fellow pupil, Elon was thrown down concrete steps and beaten severely, leading to him being hospitalized for his injuries. Elon described his father berating him after he was discharged from the hospital. Errol denied berating Elon and claimed, "The [other] boy had just lost his father to suicide, and Elon had called him stupid. Elon had a tendency to call people stupid. How could I possibly blame that child?" Elon was an enthusiastic reader of books, and had attributed his success in part to having read The Lord of the Rings, the Foundation series, and The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. At age ten, he developed an interest in computing and video games, teaching himself how to program from the VIC-20 user manual. At age twelve, Elon sold his BASIC-based game Blastar to PC and Office Technology magazine for approximately $500 (equivalent to $1,600 in 2025). === Education === Musk attended Waterkloof House Preparatory School, Bryanston High School, and then Pretoria Boys High School, where he graduated. Musk was a decent but unexceptional student, earning a 61/100 in Afrikaans and a B on his senior math certification. Musk applied for a Canadian passport through his Canadian-born mother to avoid South Africa's mandatory military service, which would have forced him to participate in the apartheid regime, as well as to ease his path to immigration to the United States. While waiting for his application to be processed, he attended the University of Pretoria for five months. Musk arrived in Canada in June 1989, connected with a second cousin in Saskatchewan, and worked odd jobs, including at a farm and a lumber mill. In 1990, he entered Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario. Two years later, he transferred to the University of Pennsylvania, where he studied until 1995. Although Musk has said that he earned his degrees in 1995, the University of Pennsylvania did not award them until 1997 – a Bachelor of Arts in physics and a Bachelor of Science in economics from the university's Wharton School. He reportedly hosted large, ticketed house parties to help pay for tuition, and wrote a business plan for an electronic book-scanning service similar to Google Books. In 1994, Musk held two internships in Silicon Valley: one at energy storage startup Pinnacle Research Institute, which investigated electrolytic supercapacitors for energy storage, and another at Palo Alto–based startup Rocket Science Games. In 1995, he was accepted to a graduate program in materials science at Stanford University, but did not enroll. Musk decided to join the Internet boom of the 1990s, applying for a job at Netscape, to which he reportedly never received a response. The Washington Post reported that Musk lacked legal authorization to remain and work in the United States after failing to enroll at Stanford. In response, Musk said he was allowed to work at that time and that his student visa transitioned to an H1-B. According to numerous former business associates and shareholders, Musk said he was on a student visa at the time. == Business career == === Zip2 === In 1995, Musk, his brother Kimbal, and Greg Kouri founded the web software company Zip2 with funding from a group of angel investors. They housed the venture at a small rented office in Palo Alto. Replying to Rolling Stone, Musk denounced the notion that they started their company with funds borrowed from Elon's father Errol Musk, but in a tweet, he recognized that his father contributed 10% of a later funding round. The company developed and marketed an Internet city guide for the newspaper publishing industry, with maps, directions, and yellow pages. According to Musk, "The website was up during the day and I was coding it

  Read more →
• 

  Alliance for Secure AI

  The Alliance for Secure AI is a U.S.-based nonprofit organization which educates the public about the risks of advanced artificial intelligence (AI). Politico has described the Alliance as a "bipartisan nonprofit trying to push a middle-ground approach to AI guardrails." == History == In June 2025, the Alliance was launched as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit watchdog in Washington, D.C. That same month, the organization rolled out a six-figure advertising campaign featuring bipartisan warnings about advanced AI. The ad campaign presented different messages for different political audiences. The Alliance opposed the idea of a moratorium on state AI laws as part of the July 2025 budget bill, in addition to President Donald Trump's December 2025 executive order on the issue. The group has also criticized AI companies like Meta and OpenAI for what it says are failures to prevent harms to children. In addition, the Alliance has criticized OpenAI for subpoenaing nonprofit organizations in the AI safety space. In March 2026, the Alliance launched JobLoss.ai, a website that tracks the jobs that have been eliminated with AI cited as a contributing factor. As of April 2026, JobLoss.ai has tracked more than 127,000 lost jobs. == Leadership == Brendan Steinhauser, a longtime political and communications strategist, is the founder and CEO of the Alliance. He was an early Tea Party movement organizer, and ran campaigns for multiple members of Congress, including Sen. John Cornyn, Rep. Dan Crenshaw, and Rep. Michael McCaul. Peyton Hornberger is the group's communications director. In July 2025, Hornberger criticized Palantir for its use of AI in a USA Today op-ed column.

  Read more →
• 

  Software diagnosis

  Software diagnosis (also: software diagnostics) refers to concepts, techniques, and tools that allow for obtaining findings, conclusions, and evaluations about software systems and their implementation, composition, behaviour, and evolution. It serves as means to monitor, steer, observe and optimize software development, software maintenance, and software re-engineering in the sense of a business intelligence approach specific to software systems. It is generally based on the automatic extraction, analysis, and visualization of corresponding information sources of the software system. It can also be manually done and not automatic. == Applications == Software diagnosis supports all branches of software engineering, in particular project management, quality management, risk management as well as implementation and test. Its main strength is to support all stakeholders of software projects (in particular during software maintenance and for software re-engineering tasks) and to provide effective communication means for software development projects. For example, software diagnosis facilitates "bridging an essential information gap between management and development, improve awareness, and serve as early risk detection instrument". Software diagnosis includes assessment methods for "perfective maintenance" that, for example, apply "visual analysis techniques to combine multiple indicators for low maintainability, including code complexity and entanglement with other parts of the system, and recent changes applied to the code". == Characteristics == In contrast to manifold approaches and techniques in software engineering, software diagnosis does not depend on programming languages, modeling techniques, software development processes or the specific techniques used in the various stages of the software development process. Instead, software diagnosis aims at analyzing and evaluating the software system in its as-is state and based on system-generated information to bypass any subjective or potentially outdated information sources (e.g., initial software models). For it, software diagnosis combines and relates sources of information that are typically not directly linked. Examples: Source-code metrics are related with software developer activity to gain insight into developer-specific effects on software code quality. System structure and run-time execution traces are correlated to facilitate program comprehension through dynamic analysis in software maintenance tasks. == Principles == The core principle of software diagnosis is to automatically extract information from all available information sources of a given software projects such as source code base, project repository, code metrics, execution traces, test results, etc. To combine information, software-specific data mining, analysis, and visualization techniques are applied. Its strength results, among various reasons, from integrating decoupled information spaces in the scope of a typical software project, for example development and developer activities (recorded by the repository) and code and quality metrics (derived by analyzing source code) or key performance indicators (KPIs). == Examples == Examples of software diagnosis tools include software maps and software metrics. == Critics == Software diagnosis—in contrast to many approaches in software engineering—does not assume that developer capabilities, development methods, programming or modeling languages are right or wrong (or better or worse compared to each other): Software diagnosis aims at giving insight into a given software system and its status regardless of the methods, languages, or models used to create and maintain the system. === Related subjects === Cost estimation in software engineering Programming productivity Rapid application development Software design Software development Software documentation Software map Software release life cycle Systems design Systems Development Life Cycle

  Read more →
• 

  Future of Life Institute

  The Future of Life Institute (FLI) is a nonprofit organization which aims to steer transformative technology towards benefiting life and away from large-scale risks, with a focus on existential risk from advanced artificial intelligence (AI). FLI's work includes grantmaking, educational outreach, and advocacy within the United Nations, United States government, and European Union institutions. The founders of the Institute include MIT cosmologist Max Tegmark, UCSC cosmologist Anthony Aguirre, and Skype co-founder Jaan Tallinn. == Purpose == FLI's stated mission is to steer transformative technology towards benefiting life and away from large-scale risks. FLI's philosophy focuses on the potential risk to humanity from the development of human-level or superintelligent artificial general intelligence (AGI), but also works to mitigate risk from biotechnology, nuclear weapons and global warming. == History == === Founding === FLI was founded in March 2014 by MIT cosmologist Max Tegmark, Skype co-founder Jaan Tallinn, DeepMind research scientist Viktoriya Krakovna, Tufts University postdoctoral scholar Meia Chita-Tegmark, and UCSC physicist Anthony Aguirre. === Activism === Starting in 2017, FLI has offered an annual "Future of Life Award", with the first awardee being Vasili Arkhipov. The same year, FLI released Slaughterbots, a short arms-control advocacy film. FLI released a sequel in 2021. In 2018, FLI drafted a letter calling for "laws against lethal autonomous weapons". Signatories included Elon Musk, Demis Hassabis, Shane Legg, and Mustafa Suleyman. In January 2023, Swedish magazine Expo reported that the FLI had offered a grant of $100,000 to a foundation set up by Nya Dagbladet, a Swedish far-right online newspaper. In response, Tegmark said that the institute had only become aware of Nya Dagbladet's positions during due diligence processes a few months after the grant was initially offered, and that the grant had been immediately revoked. === Open letter on an AI pause === In March 2023, FLI published a letter titled "Pause Giant AI Experiments: An Open Letter". This called on major AI developers to agree on a verifiable six-month pause of any systems "more powerful than GPT-4" and to use that time to institute a framework for ensuring safety; or, failing that, for governments to step in with a moratorium. The letter said: "recent months have seen AI labs locked in an out-of-control race to develop and deploy ever more powerful digital minds that no-one - not even their creators - can understand, predict, or reliably control". The letter referred to the possibility of "a profound change in the history of life on Earth" as well as potential risks of AI-generated propaganda, loss of jobs, human obsolescence, and society-wide loss of control. Prominent signatories of the letter included Elon Musk, Steve Wozniak, Evan Sharp, Chris Larsen, and Gary Marcus; AI lab CEOs Connor Leahy and Emad Mostaque; politician Andrew Yang; deep-learning researcher Yoshua Bengio; and Yuval Noah Harari. Marcus stated "the letter isn't perfect, but the spirit is right." Mostaque stated, "I don't think a six month pause is the best idea or agree with everything but there are some interesting things in that letter." In contrast, Bengio explicitly endorsed the six-month pause in a press conference. Musk predicted that "Leading AGI developers will not heed this warning, but at least it was said." Some signatories, including Musk, said they were motivated by fears of existential risk from artificial general intelligence. Some of the other signatories, such as Marcus, instead said they signed out of concern about risks such as AI-generated propaganda. The authors of one of the papers cited in FLI's letter, "On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?" including Emily M. Bender, Timnit Gebru, and Margaret Mitchell, criticised the letter. Mitchell said that “by treating a lot of questionable ideas as a given, the letter asserts a set of priorities and a narrative on AI that benefits the supporters of FLI. Ignoring active harms right now is a privilege that some of us don’t have.” === Open letter on prohibiting superintelligence === In October 2025, another letter, the "Statement on Superintelligence", was published. It called for a prohibition on the development of superintelligence not lifted before there is "broad scientific consensus that it will be done safely and controllably" and "strong public buy-in". FLI director Anthony Aguirre explained that "time is running out", expecting that the technology could arrive in as little as one to two years and counting on "widespread realization among society at all its levels" to stop it. He added that "whether it's soon or it takes a while, after we develop superintelligence, the machines are going to be in charge" and "that is not an experiment that we want to just run toward". The list of signatories included Nobel laureates Geoffrey Hinton, Daron Acemoglu, Beatrice Fihn, Frank Wilczek and John C. Mather as well as Hinton's fellow "godfather" of modern AI Yoshua Bengio, Steve Wozniak, Steve Bannon, Paolo Benanti, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. The letter was also signed by the actors Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Stephen Fry, rapper Will.i.am and author Yuval Noah Harari. Former national security advisor Susan Rice, and OpenAI member of technical staff Leo Gao also signed their names to the letter. Polling released alongside the letter showed that 64% of American agreed that superintelligence "shouldn't be developed until it's provably safe and controllable" and only 5% believed it should be developed as quickly as possible. == Operations == === Advocacy === FLI has actively contributed to policymaking on AI. In October 2023, for example, U.S. Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer invited FLI to share its perspective on AI regulation with selected senators. In Europe, FLI successfully advocated for the inclusion of more general AI systems, such as GPT-4, in the EU's Artificial Intelligence Act. In military policy, FLI coordinated the support of the scientific community for the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. At the UN and elsewhere, the institute has also advocated for a treaty on autonomous weapons. === Research grants === The FLI research program started in 2015 with an initial donation of $10 million from Elon Musk. In this initial round, a total of $7 million was awarded to 37 research projects. In July 2021, FLI announced that it would launch a new $25 million grant program with funding from the Russian–Canadian programmer Vitalik Buterin. === Conferences === In 2014, the Future of Life Institute held its opening event at MIT: a panel discussion on "The Future of Technology: Benefits and Risks", moderated by Alan Alda. The panelists were synthetic biologist George Church, geneticist Ting Wu, economist Andrew McAfee, physicist and Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek and Skype co-founder Jaan Tallinn. Since 2015, FLI has organised biannual conferences with the stated purpose of bringing together AI researchers from academia and industry. As of April 2023, the following conferences have taken place: "The Future of AI: Opportunities and Challenges" conference in Puerto Rico (2015). The stated goal was to identify promising research directions that could help maximize the future benefits of AI. At the conference, FLI circulated an open letter on AI safety which was subsequently signed by Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and many artificial intelligence researchers. The Beneficial AI conference in Asilomar, California (2017), a private gathering of what The New York Times called "heavy hitters of A.I." (including Yann LeCun, Elon Musk, and Nick Bostrom). The institute released a set of principles for responsible AI development that came out of the discussion at the conference, signed by Yoshua Bengio, Yann LeCun, and many other AI researchers. These principles may have influenced the regulation of artificial intelligence and subsequent initiatives, such as the OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence. The beneficial AGI conference in Puerto Rico (2019). The stated focus of the meeting was answering long-term questions with the goal of ensuring that artificial general intelligence is beneficial to humanity. == In the media == "The Fight to Define When AI is 'High-Risk'" in Wired. "Lethal Autonomous Weapons exist; They Must Be Banned" in IEEE Spectrum. "United States and Allies Protest U.N. Talks to Ban Nuclear Weapons" in The New York Times. "Is Artificial Intelligence a Threat?" in The Chronicle of Higher Education, including interviews with FLI founders Max Tegmark, Jaan Tallinn and Viktoriya Krakovna. "But What Would the End of Humanity Mean for Me?", an interview with Max Tegmark on the ideas behind FLI in The Atlantic.

  Read more →
• 

  Minimum intelligent signal test

  The minimum intelligent signal test, or MIST, is a variation of the Turing test proposed by Chris McKinstry in which only boolean (yes/no or true/false) answers may be given to questions. The purpose of such a test is to provide a quantitative statistical measure of humanness, which may subsequently be used to optimize the performance of artificial intelligence systems intended to imitate human responses. McKinstry gathered approximately 80,000 propositions that could be answered yes or no, e.g.: Is Earth a planet? Was Abraham Lincoln once President of the United States? Is the sun bigger than my foot? Do people sometimes lie? He called these propositions Mindpixels. These questions test both specific knowledge of aspects of culture, and basic facts about the meaning of various words and concepts. It could therefore be compared with the SAT, intelligence testing and other controversial measures of mental ability. McKinstry's aim was not to distinguish between shades of intelligence but to identify whether a computer program could be considered intelligent at all. According to McKinstry, a program able to do much better than chance on a large number of MIST questions would be judged to have some level of intelligence and understanding. For example, on a 20-question test, if a program were guessing the answers at random, it could be expected to score 10 correct on average. But the probability of a program scoring 20 out of 20 correct by guesswork is only one in 220, i.e. one in 1,048,576; so if a program were able to sustain this level of performance over several independent trials, with no prior access to the propositions, it should be considered intelligent. == Discussion == McKinstry criticized existing approaches to artificial intelligence such as chatterbots, saying that his questions could "kill" AI programs by quickly exposing their weaknesses. He contrasted his approach, a series of direct questions assessing an AI's capabilities, to the Turing test and Loebner Prize method of engaging an AI in undirected typed conversation. Critics of the MIST have noted that it would be easy to "kill" a McKinstry-style AI too, due to the impossibility of supplying it with correct answers to all possible yes/no questions by ways of a finite set of human-generated Mindpixels: the fact that an AI can answer the question "Is the sun bigger than my foot?" correctly does not mean that it can answer variations like "Is the sun bigger than (my hand | my liver | an egg yolk | Alpha Centauri A | ...)" correctly, too. However, the late McKinstry might have replied that a truly intelligent, knowledgeable entity (on a par with humans) would be able to work out answers such as (yes | yes | yes | don't know | ...) by applying its knowledge of the relative sizes of the objects named. In other words, the MIST was intended as a test of AI, not as a suggestion for implementing AI. It can also be argued that the MIST is a more objective test of intelligence than the Turing test, a subjective assessment that some might consider to be more a measure of the interrogator's gullibility than of the machine's intelligence. According to this argument, a human's judgment of a Turing test is vulnerable to the ELIZA effect, a tendency to mistake superficial signs of intelligence for the real thing, anthropomorphizing the program. The response, suggested by Alan Turing's essay Computing Machinery and Intelligence, is that if a program is a convincing imitation of an intelligent being, it is in fact intelligent. The dispute is thus over what it means for a program to have "real" intelligence, and by what signs it can be detected. A similar debate exists in the controversy over great ape language, in which nonhuman primates are said to have learned some aspects of sign languages but the significance of this learning is disputed.

  Read more →