AI For Young Learners Pdf

AI For Young Learners Pdf — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Cepstral mean and variance normalization

  Cepstral mean and variance normalization (CMVN) is a computationally efficient normalization technique for robust speech recognition. The performance of CMVN is known to degrade for short utterances. This is due to insufficient data for parameter estimation and loss of discriminable information as all utterances are forced to have zero mean and unit variance. CMVN minimizes distortion by noise contamination for robust feature extraction by linearly transforming the cepstral coefficients to have the same segmental statistics. Cepstral Normalization has been effective in the CMU Sphinx for maintaining a high level of recognition accuracy over a wide variety of acoustical environments. == Cepstral Normalization Techniques == There are multiple algorithms that achieve Cepstral Normalization in different ways. === Fixed codeword-dependent cepstral normalization (FCDCN) === FCDCN was developed to provide a form of compensation that provides greater recognition accuracy than SDCN but in a more computationally-efficient manner than the CDCN algorithm. The FCDCN algorithm applies an additive correction that depends on the instantaneous SNR of the input (like SDCN), but that can also vary from codeword to codeword (like CDCN). === Multiple Fixed Codeword-dependent Cepstral Normalization (MFCDCN) === MFCDCN is a simple extension of FCDCN algorithm that does not need environment specific training. In MFCDCN, compensation vectors are pre-computed in parallel for a set of target environments, using the FCDCN algorithm. === Incremental Multiple Fixed Codeword-dependent Cepstral Normalization (IMFCDCN) === While environment selection for the compensation vectors of MFCDCN is generally performed on an utterance-by-utterance basis, IMFCFCN improves on it by allowing the classification process to make use of cepstral vectors from previous utterances in a given session. == Cepstral Noise Subtraction == Automatic speech recognition (ASR) describes the steps of transcribing speech utterances represented as acoustic wave forms to written words. As is, CMVN has been used in different applications as this technique has proven to provide better speech recognitions results in different environments. CMVN has the capabilities to reduce differences between test and training data produced by channel distortions and colorizations . CMVN has also been found to be able to reduce differences in feature representation between speakers can also partly reduce the influence of background noise.

  Read more →
• 

  Browser sniffing

  Browser sniffing (also known as User agent sniffing and browser detection) is a set of techniques used in websites and web applications in order to determine the web browser a visitor is using, and to serve browser-appropriate content to the visitor. It is also used to detect mobile browsers and send them mobile-optimized websites. This practice is sometimes used to circumvent incompatibilities between browsers due to misinterpretation of HTML, Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), or the Document Object Model (DOM). While the World Wide Web Consortium maintains up-to-date central versions of some of the most important Web standards in the form of recommendations, in practice no software developer has designed a browser which adheres exactly to these standards; implementation of other standards and protocols, such as SVG and XMLHttpRequest, varies as well. As a result, different browsers display the same page differently, and so browser sniffing was developed to detect the web browser in order to help ensure consistent display of content. == Sniffer methods == === Client-side sniffing === Web pages can use programming languages such as JavaScript which are interpreted by the user agent, with results sent to the web server. For example: This code is run by the client computer, and the results are used by other code to make necessary adjustments on client-side. In this example, the client computer is asked to determine whether the browser can use a feature called ActiveX. Since this feature was proprietary to Microsoft, a positive result will indicate that the client may be running Microsoft's Internet Explorer. This is no longer a reliable indicator since Microsoft's open-source release of the ActiveX code, however, meaning that it can be used by any browser. === Standard Browser detection method === The web server communicates with the client using a communication protocol known as HTTP, or Hypertext Transfer Protocol, which specifies that the client send the server information about the browser being used to view the website in a User-Agent header. === Server-side sniffing === Extensive browser techniques enable persistent user tracking even if users try to stay anonymous. See device fingerprint for more details on browser fingerprinting. == Issues and standards == Many websites use browser sniffing to determine whether a visitor's browser is unable to use certain features (such as JavaScript, DHTML, ActiveX, or cascading style sheets), and display an error page if a certain browser is not used. However, it is virtually impossible to account for the tremendous variety of browsers available to users. Generally, a web designer using browser sniffing to determine what kind of page to present will test for the three or four most popular browsers, and provide content tailored to each of these. If a user is employing a user agent not tested for, there is no guarantee that a usable page will be served; thus, the user may be forced either to change browsers or to avoid the page. The World Wide Web Consortium, which sets standards for the construction of web pages, recommends that web sites be designed in accordance with its standards, and be arranged to "fail gracefully" when presented to a browser which cannot deal with a particular standard. Browser sniffing increases maintenance needed. Websites treating some browsers differently should provide an alternative version for other browsers. Use of user agent strings are error-prone because the developer must check for the appropriate part, such as "Gecko" instead of "Firefox". They must also ensure that future versions are supported. Furthermore, some browsers allow changing the user agent string, making the technique useless.

  Read more →
• 

  Are We Dating The Same Guy?

  Are We Dating The Same Guy?, also abbreviated AWDTSG is a series of over 200 individual Facebook groups where women share dating profiles of men they matched with on dating networks to seek the opinion of other women who may have dated the same man in the past. The first group was created by Paola Sanchez and aimed at women living in the New York City environs. The groups have over 3.5 million members as of January 2024. The group's function is to post screenshots of a man's dating profile to that city's designated Facebook group, after which the poster asks "any tea?". Other users in the group will then share information about the man and share warnings. The groups are moderated by volunteers, and have been described as a feminist group. The groups have rules saying that personal information such as addresses must not be included in the Facebook posts. Users attempting to join the group are also examined to prevent fake profiles. The group is mainly for straight women. According to Vice, the men being posted about have no way to defend against accusations made about them, and on the other hand, posters cannot prove their stories unless backed up by others. Often times, members post pictures alongside personal information such as names, which may infringe on subjects' legal right to privacy. Lawyers have said these issues can lead to defamation lawsuits, and members can make false allegations and create fabricated stories. If members tell a man that he's been talked about on the group, the "snitch" will be banned and be "exposed to the whole group". == History == The first Are We Dating The Same Guy group was created by Paola Sanchez. The first group was created in March 2022 in New York City. A male counterpart, named "Are We Dating the Same Girl NYC" was created for New York, with mostly the same guidelines and rules to the original. When the original Are We Dating The Same Guy group found it, they denounced the new group. == Operations == Administrators are told not to respond to men asking to have posts about them removed, and to not remove said posts. The people being posted about have reported being questioned by their employers about things they have not done. Members of the groups sometimes criticise the physical appearance of the men being posted about. According to the Evening Standard, the groups "frequent[ly] mock" the appearance or dating profiles of the men who are posted about, despite being against the rules. For this behaviour, women are sometimes kicked out, or the group is disciplined en masse by admins. The groups have rules against hate towards men, but the rules can be difficult to enforce in large groups, with some having over 100,000 members. Some men have also been able to join the groups without being noticed. == Reception == In October 2023, Sera Bozza of Body+Soul wrote that consistently using Are We Dating The Same Guy can "affect your real-world view". She wrote that "A few stories of cheating may persuade you to believe that all men are unfaithful". Some lawyers and commentators have expressed concern that the groups fail to acknowledge the legal right to privacy and users can create false allegations and fabricated stories, and cyberbully men without them being able to defend themselves. This may lead to civil lawsuits against the author for defamation, harassment, and other related privacy torts. Netsafe, an online safety organisation in New Zealand, advises users of a similar group to familiarise themselves with the Harmful Digital Communications Act to ensure that posts do not lead to "harmful consequences". The Independent reported that men who have been posted on the dating groups have felt violated, and that even if reviewed positively by potentially thousands of strangers, the men being discussed about may have their reputation slightly decreased due to the association with being on the groups. The Independent also reported that some men believe that the groups are created to spread lies or mock them. Mashable reported that the growth of AWDTSG in recent years has led to the rise of a small industry of online reputation and content removal services, as increasing numbers of men seek assistance. A co-founder of Maximatic Media, one such agency offering these removal services, stated that many of the men contacting the firm do so in a state of panic after learning that allegations about them have circulated among tens of thousands of participants without their knowledge. Mashable similarly reported that the growing visibility of AWDTSG and similar platforms has contributed to what commentators describe as a "public trial" dynamic, where subjective accounts about dating behavior are interpreted as factual assessments and can influence a person's reputation among large audiences within their locale. The Oklahoman reported that anonymous, unverified claims in these groups have led some men to experience social and dating repercussions, although legal analysts argue that the benefits of community-based safety networks still outweigh these concerns in modern, app based dating environments. UTV/ITV News reportedly spoke to a man who was posted who alleged he attempted suicide, was clinically dead for three minutes, and spent three weeks in a psychiatric hospital as a result of the posts made about him. Many other men have talked about malicious false claims made about them. Self-described men’s rights activists have taken a dislike to these groups and have gotten multiple North American groups shut down by running campaigns, threatening lawsuits, and mass Facebook reporting. They also have Reddit communities dedicated to getting rid of such groups. Women who have posted in the groups have felt that they have put their safety at risk, with some having been confronted by the men they posted about. The group has been noted for exposing men who use dating apps while already in a relationship, misrepresent their ages, or repeatedly stand up the women they meet through apps, among other bad dating behaviors. For example, some members of the group had matched on a dating site with a man who had, several years prior, killed a stranger while having a mental break. After this information came to light, members of the group were warned. The group has also been noted to be complimentary of some men. == Lawsuits == In 2023, a 41-year-old man sued the administrators of the London group for $35,000 under defamation, alleging that the group "called names, accused of sending lewd photos and of being a bad parent". In January 2024 a man sued Meta, the owner of Facebook, along with Patreon, GoFundMe, and the AWDTSG website, as well as almost 30 group members due to alleged defamation, emotional distress, and invasion of privacy. Claiming that the groups violate anti-doxxing laws and do not fact check, seeking $75,000 in damages. He claims that the group shared fake images of him sending women texts containing harassment, his name and photo. His attorneys claim that if the images were real, they would fall under free speech in the First Amendment. By February, groups had raised $80,000. The Washington Post said that this case caused AWDTSG to "explode into public view". The case was dismissed in 2025 by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. On May 15, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit declined to renew the case in D'Ambrosio v. Meta Platforms Inc., et al. The plaintiff and his attorneys, Marc Trent and Aaron Walner of Trent Law Firm, were sanctioned "for frivolously appealing the dismissal of the claims," "misrepresentations of law," in connection with falsified citations included in the plaintiff's brief, and " disputing at oral argument without any evidentiary basis that [the plaintiff] client sent the text message she attributed to him." == By country == === Australia === In Australia, there are groups for multiple cities including Sydney, Melbourne, Adelaide, Perth, Brisbane and Rockhampton with many having several thousand members. The Sydney group has 30,000 members. In March 2023, the Adelaide version of the group, which had 7,000 members, was shut down. In 2024, groups titled "Sis, Are We Dating The Same Guy" stopped accepting new posts after an admin was sued for defamation and had to pay over AU$20,000 in legal fees. The case was settled out of court. The administrator announcing these closures cited a 2021 defamation High Court case involving detainee Dylan Voller, which led to the High Court saying that owners of Facebook groups can be held liable for defamatory comments, even if they did not know the comments had been made. === Canada === In 2023, a group was started for Ottawa. The founder previously was in a relationship full of "cheating and lies", which prompted her to creating the Facebook community. In 2023, the group for Vancouver and British Columbia was shut down after concerns about men being unable to protect themselves against fa

  Read more →
• 

  Digital citizen

  The term digital citizen is used with different meanings. According to the definition provided by Karen Mossberger, one of the authors of Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation, digital citizens are "those who use the internet regularly and effectively". In this sense, a digital citizen is a person who uses information technology (IT) to engage in society, politics, and government. More recent elaborations of the concept define digital citizenship as the self-enactment of people’s role in society through the use of digital technologies, stressing the empowering and democratizing characteristics of the citizenship idea. These theories aim at taking into account the ever-increasing datafication of contemporary societies (symbolically linked to the Snowden leaks), which has called into question the meaning of “being (digital) citizens in a datafied society”. This condition is also referred to as the “algorithmic society”, characterised by the increasing datafication of social life and the pervasive presence of surveillance practices – see surveillance and surveillance capitalism, the use of artificial intelligence, and Big Data. Datafication presents crucial challenges for the very notion of citizenship, so that data collection can no longer be seen as an issue of privacy alone so that:We cannot simply assume that being a citizen online already means something (whether it is the ability to participate or the ability to stay safe) and then look for those whose conduct conforms to this meaning Instead, the idea of digital citizenship shall reflect the idea that we are no longer mere “users” of technologies since they shape our agency both as individuals and as citizens. Digital citizenship refers to the responsible and respectful use of technology to engage online, evaluate information, and protect human rights. It encompasses skills for communication, collaboration, empathy, privacy protection, and security to prevent data breaches and identity theft. == Digital citizenship in the "algorithmic society" == In the context of the algorithmic society, the question of digital citizenship "becomes one of the extents to which subjects are able to challenge, avoid or mediate their data double in this datafied society”. These reflections put the emphasis on the idea of the digital space (or cyberspace) as a political space where the respect of fundamental rights of the individual shall be granted (with reference both to the traditional ones as well as to new specific rights of the internet [see “digital constitutionalism”]) and where the agency and the identity of the individuals as citizens is at stake. This idea of digital citizenship is thought to be not only active but also performative, in the sense that “in societies that are increasingly mediated through digital technologies, digital acts become important means through which citizens create, enact and perform their role in society.” In particular, for Isin and Ruppert this points towards an active meaning of (digital) citizenship based on the idea that we constitute ourselves as digital citizen by claiming rights on the internet, either by saying or by doing something. == Types of digital participation == People who characterize themselves as digital citizens often use IT extensively—creating blogs, using social networks, and participating in online journalism. Although digital citizenship begins when any child, teen, or adult signs up for an email address, posts pictures online, uses e-commerce to buy merchandise online, and/or participates in any electronic function that is B2B or B2C, the process of becoming a digital citizen goes beyond simple internet activity. According to Thomas Humphrey Marshall, a British sociologist known for his work on social citizenship, a primary framework of citizenship comprises three different traditions: liberalism, republicanism, and ascriptive hierarchy. Within this framework, the digital citizen needs to exist in order to promote equal economic opportunities and increase political participation. In this way, digital technology helps to lower the barriers to entry for participation as a citizen within a society. They also have a comprehensive understanding of digital citizenship, which is the appropriate and responsible behavior when using technology. Since digital citizenship evaluates the quality of an individual's response to membership in a digital community, it often requires the participation of all community members, both visible and those who are less visible. A large part in being a responsible digital citizen encompasses digital literacy, etiquette, online safety, and an acknowledgement of private versus public information. The development of digital citizen participation can be divided into two main stages. The first stage is through information dissemination, which includes subcategories of its own: static information dissemination, characterized largely by citizens who use read-only websites where they take control of data from credible sources in order to formulate judgments or facts. Many of these websites where credible information may be found are provided by the government. dynamic information dissemination, which is more interactive and involves citizens as well as public servants. Both questions and answers can be communicated, and citizens have the opportunity to engage in question-and-answer dialogues through two-way communication platforms The second stage of digital citizen participation is citizen deliberation, which evaluates what type of participation and role that they play when attempting to ignite some sort of policy change. static citizen participants can play a role by engaging in online polls as well as through complaints and recommendations sent up, mainly toward the government who can create changes in policy decisions. dynamic citizen participants can deliberate amongst others on their thoughts and recommendations in town hall meetings or various media sites. One potential advantage of online participation through digital citizenship is increased social inclusion. In a report on civic engagement, citizen-powered democracy can be initiated either through information shared through the web, direct communication signals made by the state toward the public, and social media tactics from both private and public companies. In fact, it was found that the community-based nature of social media platforms allow individuals to feel more socially included and informed about political issues that peers have also been found to engage with, otherwise known as a "second-order effect." Understanding strategic marketing on social media would further explain social media customers’ participation. Two types of opportunities rise as a result, the first being the ability to lower barriers that can make exchanges much easier. In addition, they have the chance to participate in transformative disruption, giving people who have a historically lower political engagement to mobilize in a much easier and convenient fashion. Nonetheless, there are several challenges that face the presence of digital technologies in political participation. Both current as well as potential challenges can create significant risks for democratic processes. Not only is digital technology still seen as relatively ambiguous, it was also seen to have "less inclusivity in democratic life." Demographic groups differ considerably in the use of technology, and thus, one group could potentially be more represented than another as a result of digital participation. Another primary challenge consists in the ideology of a "filter bubble" effect. Alongside a tremendous spread of false information, internet users could reinforce existing prejudices and assist in polarizing disagreements in the public sphere. This can lead to misinformed voting and decisions based on exposure rather than on pure knowledge. A communication technology director, Van Dijk, stated, "Computerized information campaigns and mass public information systems have to be designed and supported in such a way that they help to narrow the gap between the 'information rich' and 'information poor' otherwise the spontaneous development of ICT will widen it." Access and equivalent amounts of knowledge behind digital technology must be equivalent in order for a fair system to put into place. Alongside a lack of evidenced support for technology that can be proven to be safe for citizens, the OECD has identified five struggles for the online engagement of citizens: Scale: To what extent can a society allow every individual's voice to be heard, but also not be lost in the mass debate? This can be extremely challenging for the government, which may not effectively know how to listen and respond to each individual contribution. Capacity: How can digital technology offer citizens more information on public policy-making? The opportunity for citizens to debate with one another is lacking for acti

  Read more →
• 

  Vujak

  VuJak is an early video sampler, a VJ remix and mashup tool created in 1992 by Brian Kane, Lisa Eisenpresser, and Jay Haynes. The original name of the project was Mideo, but it was later changed to VuJak. VuJak was based on MIDI control of video in real-time. It was created with MAX from Opcode Systems, and utilized the newly released QuickTime 1.0 movie object. The first working version of the program was built on a Mac IIfx with 8 megs of ram, and could jump in real-time across a 160 x 120 pixel QuickTime movie via a midi keyboard. Later versions could manipulate full screen video, included the first real-time video scratch feature, had looping, vari-speed, and random play features, and allowed for recording and editing of video sequences within the application. VuJak also had networking capabilities which allowed artists to "jam" in real time across standard phone lines. The first public exhibition of VuJak was at the Digital Hollywood conference in Beverly Hills in 1993, where it was promoted by Timothy Leary. VuJak was featured in Mondo 2000, CBS Evening News, Wired Magazine, Electronic Musician, Billboard Magazine, The Hollywood Reporter, and it was used to create promotional videos for MTV. In 1994, VuJak was a featured interactive exhibition at the Exploratorium in San Francisco. Development of VuJak ceased in 1995.

  Read more →
• 

  Web engineering

  The World Wide Web has become a major delivery platform for a variety of complex and sophisticated enterprise applications in several domains. In addition to their inherent multifaceted functionality, these Web applications exhibit complex behaviour and place some unique demands on their usability, performance, security, and ability to grow and evolve. However, a vast majority of these applications continue to be developed in an ad hoc way, contributing to problems of usability, maintainability, quality and reliability. While Web development can benefit from established practices from other related disciplines, it has certain distinguishing characteristics that demand special considerations. In recent years, there have been developments towards addressing these considerations. Web engineering focuses on the methodologies, techniques, and tools that are the foundation of Web application development and which support their design, development, evolution, and evaluation. Web application development has certain characteristics that make it different from traditional software, information systems, or computer application development. Web engineering is multidisciplinary and encompasses contributions from diverse areas: systems analysis and design, software engineering, hypermedia/hypertext engineering, requirements engineering, human-computer interaction, user interface, data engineering, information science, information indexing and retrieval, testing, modelling and simulation, project management, and graphic design and presentation. Web engineering is neither a clone nor a subset of software engineering, although both involve programming and software development. While Web Engineering uses software engineering principles, it encompasses new approaches, methodologies, tools, techniques, and guidelines to meet the unique requirements of Web-based applications. == As a discipline == Proponents of Web engineering supported the establishment of Web engineering as a discipline at an early stage of Web. Major arguments for Web engineering as a new discipline are: Web-based Information Systems (WIS) development process is different and unique. Web engineering is multi-disciplinary; no single discipline (such as software engineering) can provide a complete theory basis, body of knowledge and practices to guide WIS development. Issues of evolution and lifecycle management when compared to more 'traditional' applications. Web-based information systems and applications are pervasive and non-trivial. The prospect of Web as a platform will continue to grow and it is worth being treated specifically. However, it has been controversial, especially for people in other traditional disciplines such as software engineering, to recognize Web engineering as a new field. The issue is how different and independent Web engineering is, compared with other disciplines. Main topics of Web engineering include, but are not limited to, the following areas: === Modeling disciplines === Business Processes for Applications on the Web Process Modelling of Web applications Requirements Engineering for Web applications B2B applications === Design disciplines, tools, and methods === UML and the Web Conceptual Modeling of Web Applications (aka. Web modeling) Prototyping Methods and Tools Web design methods CASE Tools for Web Applications Web Interface Design Data Models for Web Information Systems === Implementation disciplines === Integrated Web Application Development Environments Code Generation for Web Applications Software Factories for/on the Web Web 2.0, AJAX, E4X, ASP.NET, PHP and Other New Developments Web Services Development and Deployment === Testing disciplines === Testing and Evaluation of Web systems and Applications. Testing Automation, Methods, and Tools. === Applications categories disciplines === Semantic Web applications Document centric Web sites Transactional Web applications Interactive Web applications Workflow-based Web applications Collaborative Web applications Portal-oriented Web applications Ubiquitous and Mobile Web Applications Device Independent Web Delivery Localization and Internationalization of Web Applications Personalization of Web Applications == Attributes == === Web quality === Web Metrics, Cost Estimation, and Measurement Personalisation and Adaptation of Web applications Web Quality Usability of Web Applications Web accessibility Performance of Web-based applications === Content-related === Web Content Management Content Management System (CMS) Multimedia Authoring Tools and Software Authoring of adaptive hypermedia == Education == Master of Science: Web Engineering as a branch of study within the MSc program Web Sciences at the Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria Diploma in Web Engineering: Web Engineering as a study program at the International Webmasters College (iWMC), Germany

  Read more →
• 

  Far-Play

  Far-Play (stylized fAR-Play, from augmented reality) was a software platform developed at the University of Alberta, for creating location-based, scavenger-hunt style games which use the GPS and web-connectivity features of a player's smartphone. According to the development team, "our long-term objective is to develop a general framework that supports the implementation of AARGs that are fun to play and also educational". It utilizes Layar, an augmented reality smartphone application, QR codes located at particular real-world sites, or a phone's web browser, to facilitate games which require players to be in close physical proximity to predefined "nodes". A node, referred to by the developers as a Virtual Point of Interest (vPOI), is a point in space defined by a set of map coordinates; fAR-Play uses the GPS function of a player's smartphone — or, for indoor games, which are not easily tracked by GPS satellites, specially-created QR codes— to confirm that they are adequately near a given node. Once a player is within a node's proximity, Layar's various augmented reality features can be utilized to display a range of extra content overlaid upon the physical play-space or launch another application for extra functionality. == Development and features == fAR-Play began development in 2008, emerging from a collaborative project undertaken by a group of University of Alberta students from the Computer Science and Humanities Computing departments. fAR-Play is still under development, but a beta version is available for testing by request. fAR-Play's development is managed by a team of interdisciplinary professors and students at the University of Alberta. Currently, the developing team's roster includes Supervising Professors Geoffrey Rockwell and Eleni Stroulia, Developers Lucio Gutierrez and Matthew Delaney, and Website Developers Calen Henry and Garry Wong. === Technology === fAR-Play relies on a number of open- and closed-source web technologies as tools to create, and enhance the users' experience. Layar is the recommended client-side frontend for delivering game content to the player; it is available on Android and iOS, which covers over 91% of smartphones. While Layar is not a requirement to play fAR-Play games, the application does supply additional augmented reality functionality; Layar also includes a built-in QR scanner. Depending on the design of the particular game, the player may instead use a dedicated QR code scanner; the developers recommend BeeTagg, but any such application will do. Layar or a QR code scanner are the maximum software requirements to play a fAR-Play game, making implementation of games on a wide variety of platforms relatively straightforward. fAR-Play games can also be designed for play strictly within a mobile phone's web browser. On the server side, fAR-Play's engine is composed of an Apache server which manages the system's web interface, including the mobile and desktop versions of the fAR-Play website, and a Java-based REST framework for managing the database of nodes. === Features === As a platform for designing AR games, as opposed to an AR game itself, fAR-Play offers little in the way of explicit shapes or patterns for games to take; instead, these elements are left to the game designer or players to develop. However, the nonspecific nature of nodes, the many options they offer for content delivery, and the open design of the platform are such that these elements can be developed extensively. Functionally, fAR-Play is a tool for tracking arbitrary points in space and a given player's proximity to them; what it does beyond that is up to the developers' and players' discretion. However, the fAR-Play website contains a leaderboard which tracks registered user's total scores. Players are assigned levels based on their total score, ranging from Novice — Super Player. Player profiles will display nodes that the player has recently caught, and any achievements the player has gained. Additionally, players can share their adventure progress, achievements, and the capture of vPOIs on Facebook. == How to play == In order to participate in the locative aspects of fAR-Play games, users must have an Android or iOS mobile device and access to wireless internet. Players can participate in fAR-Play anonymously, or create and sign into a fAR-Play account. Those who choose to play anonymously will lose the ability to track their progress across multiple games. When signed in, the player is presented with a list of games that are currently available for play. Each game includes a brief description and the various "adventures" available to the player. Once the game has been started, the player has three different methods for capturing nodes: they may scan a QR in the physical space, discover a node through the Layar camera virtual view, or receive a link in their device's web browser. === QR codes and Layar === QR codes can only be used as a method for capturing nodes and initiating games when there is a physical code present. In order to scan a QR code, players are required to have an application which can capture and recognize QR codes. If the player is utilizing a QR scanning application that has a built in browser, they will be required to log into fAR-Play through the app. Layar is a free to download augmented reality app, containing a built in QR code scanner, which enables its users to participate in fAR-Play games. === Capturing nodes === Layar permits the player to see nodes on their mobile device, guiding the player to their goal. Using this application, the player is able to navigate to their objective with map provided by Google Maps' API or by using their camera — Layar overlays a virtual image onto the real-world scene presented by the camera. The representations on screen expand in size as the player approaches the node destination, simulating relative distance. If the player taps any of the nodes that are presented on the screen, they will be provided additional information about that node, including the node's name and a brief description. Nodes can be captured by tapping the "capture" button. === Playing on browsers === The player can also play fAR-Play games within their mobile device's browser. By visiting https://archive.today/20131123223038/http://farplay.ualberta.ca/far-play/ on a mobile device, players will be presented with a fully realized user interface, permitting full interaction with the games. The player can capture the in game vPOIs through their browser by tapping the "nodes" button. This will bring up a list of all the accessible nodes, complete with a brief description for each location. By clicking on one of the nodes, the player is shown to a screen with a mapped location of the vPOI, an in-depth description of it, and hints. At the top of the page, the player can tap "CAPTURE THIS NODE" and advance in the game. When attempting to capture a node, the developer may or may not associate a challenge with the node. For example, in the game "Zombies ate my Campus", when players are attempting to capture a node, they're presented with a multiple choice question associated with the current node. === Game types === Players complete an adventure when they have captured all of the nodes within it. fAR-Play provides two game modes: in a Virtual Scavenger Hunt, nodes must be captured in a specific order; in a Virtual Treasure Hunt, the order is unimportant. == Existing fAR-Play games == Games currently available through fAR-Play include: Giselle Ever After Thought Hub Comics Arts Capture Challenge Pioneering Edmonton The Intelliphone Challenge A Tour of Atwater Zombies ate my Campus == For developers == fAR-Play's ultimate goal is to provide a simple, effective platform for the creation of locative augmented reality games, but the developer tools are still under active development and not openly available to the public. Access can be granted on a case-by-case basis, however, and a developer's manual is available. Users with development privileges can create new games or edit their existing games, in addition to playing their own or others' games. === Adventures === Games that are developed with fAR-Play are segmented into components called "Adventures". To progress through each game adventure, the player must reach and capture virtual points of interest, referred to in the game as vPOIs. In order to capture a vPOI, the player must travel to a physical location that is set by the developer. It is the developer's choice to include a challenge question to capture the vPOI, though it is not mandatory. A deduction of points can be implemented if the player submits an incorrect answer to a challenge question. === Points and achievements === Each of the nodes will reward the player with a predetermined number of points once they have been captured by the player. These points are added to the player's total points. Each of the adventures that are created require a predetermined number of vPOIs

  Read more →
• 

  Bluelight (web forum)

  Bluelight is a web-forum, research portal, online community, and non-profit organisation dedicated to harm reduction in drug use. Its userbase includes current and former substance users, academic researchers, drug policy activists, and mental health advocates. It is believed to be the largest online international drug discussion website in the world. As of November 2025, the website claims over 475,900 registered members, the Discord community claims over 11,900 members, and additional members utilise other platforms such as Telegram. Bluelight has been utilised by academic researchers as a primary source of data in numerous publications. Researchers also utilise the site to advertise research studies, recruit study participants, and better understand the world of substance use. Research groups and organisations that have partnered with Bluelight to recruit study participants include Imperial College London, Johns Hopkins University, Health Canada, Karlstad University, Curtin University, Macquarie University, Columbia University, University of Pennsylvania, University of Michigan, Toronto Metropolitan University (then known as Ryerson University), and MAPS. Researchers have found that the most common reasons for substance users to visit Bluelight.org and similar online communities are to learn "how to use drugs safely" and "how to help others use drugs safely." Bluelight neither condemns or condones drug use, instead advocating for the principle of responsible drug use; educating and allowing individuals to make informed decisions regarding their drug use, providing information on local drug misuse services, and providing them with other drug harm reduction resources and public safety notices. == History == Bluelight.org was originally formed in 1997 as a message board on bluelight.net called the MDMA Clearinghouse. The board was created as a side project by the owner of West Palm Beach design company Bluelight Designs. 200–300 users joined the site between 1998 and 1999, but the site's servers were heavily limited and could only store a few threads at a time; this led to the creation of 'The New Bluelight' forum in May 1999 and the registration of the bluelight.nu domain in June 1999. The site began to explode in popularity in the early 2000s with the rise of MDMA in the club scene, amassing nearly 7,000 members by the year 2000 and 59,000 by the start of 2006. The site switched to the bluelight.ru domain in October 2005, and switched again to bluelight.org in January 2014. In early 2024, Bluelight was re-structured and the forum became a subsidiary of the newly formed Australian non-profit organisation & registered charity Bluelight Communities Ltd. == Partnerships == In the early 2000s, Bluelight worked with reagent test supplier EZ-Test to promote the sale of drug checking kits. In 2007, Bluelight partnered with the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), a non-profit organisation working to raise awareness and understanding of psychedelic drugs through education, clinical research, and advocacy. MAPS utilised Bluelight to recruit participants for its first MDMA-assisted psychotherapy trial for PTSD. In 2013, the official MAPS forums were migrated to Bluelight. Bluelight's other partners include Erowid, a non-profit organisation dedicated to education surrounding psychoactive drugs; TripSit, a harm reduction education website; Pill Reports, a web-based database for drug checking results that was initially formed as an offshoot of the site; and the Global Drug Survey, an independent research organisation focused on collecting data about substance use. == Notable users == Alan Woods – funded the site's maintenance costs from 1999 until his death in 2008 Hamilton Morris John McAfee – created an infamous series of troll posts about the stimulant MDPV

  Read more →
• 

  Weight initialization

  In deep learning, weight initialization or parameter initialization describes the initial step in creating a neural network. A neural network contains trainable parameters that are modified during training: weight initialization is the pre-training step of assigning initial values to these parameters. The choice of weight initialization method affects the speed of convergence, the scale of neural activation within the network, the scale of gradient signals during backpropagation, and the quality of the final model. Proper initialization is necessary for avoiding issues such as vanishing and exploding gradients and activation function saturation. Note that even though this article is titled "weight initialization", both weights and biases are used in a neural network as trainable parameters, so this article describes how both of these are initialized. Similarly, trainable parameters in convolutional neural networks (CNNs) are called kernels and biases, and this article also describes these. == Constant initialization == We discuss the main methods of initialization in the context of a multilayer perceptron (MLP). Specific strategies for initializing other network architectures are discussed in later sections. For an MLP, there are only two kinds of trainable parameters, called weights and biases. Each layer l {\displaystyle l} contains a weight matrix W ( l ) ∈ R n l − 1 × n l {\displaystyle W^{(l)}\in \mathbb {R} ^{n_{l-1}\times n_{l}}} and a bias vector b ( l ) ∈ R n l {\displaystyle b^{(l)}\in \mathbb {R} ^{n_{l}}} , where n l {\displaystyle n_{l}} is the number of neurons in that layer. A weight initialization method is an algorithm for setting the initial values for W ( l ) , b ( l ) {\displaystyle W^{(l)},b^{(l)}} for each layer l {\displaystyle l} . The simplest form is zero initialization: W ( l ) = 0 , b ( l ) = 0 {\displaystyle W^{(l)}=0,b^{(l)}=0} Zero initialization is usually used for initializing biases, but it is not used for initializing weights, as it leads to symmetry in the network, causing all neurons to learn the same features. In this page, we assume b = 0 {\displaystyle b=0} unless otherwise stated. Recurrent neural networks typically use activation functions with bounded range, such as sigmoid and tanh, since unbounded activation may cause exploding values. (Le, Jaitly, Hinton, 2015) suggested initializing weights in the recurrent parts of the network to identity and zero bias, similar to the idea of residual connections and LSTM with no forget gate. In most cases, the biases are initialized to zero, though some situations can use a nonzero initialization. For example, in multiplicative units, such as the forget gate of LSTM, the bias can be initialized to 1 to allow good gradient signal through the gate. For neurons with ReLU activation, one can initialize the bias to a small positive value like 0.1, so that the gradient is likely nonzero at initialization, avoiding the dying ReLU problem. == Random initialization == Random initialization means sampling the weights from a normal distribution or a uniform distribution, usually independently. === LeCun initialization === LeCun initialization, popularized in (LeCun et al., 1998), is designed to preserve the variance of neural activations during the forward pass. It samples each entry in W ( l ) {\displaystyle W^{(l)}} independently from a distribution with mean 0 and variance 1 / n l − 1 {\displaystyle 1/n_{l-1}} . For example, if the distribution is a continuous uniform distribution, then the distribution is U ( ± 3 / n l − 1 ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {U}}(\pm {\sqrt {3/n_{l-1}}})} . === Glorot initialization === Glorot initialization (or Xavier initialization) was proposed by Xavier Glorot and Yoshua Bengio. It was designed as a compromise between two goals: to preserve activation variance during the forward pass and to preserve gradient variance during the backward pass. For uniform initialization, it samples each entry in W ( l ) {\displaystyle W^{(l)}} independently and identically from U ( ± 6 / ( n l + 1 + n l − 1 ) ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {U}}(\pm {\sqrt {6/(n_{l+1}+n_{l-1})}})} . In the context, n l − 1 {\displaystyle n_{l-1}} is also called the "fan-in", and n l + 1 {\displaystyle n_{l+1}} the "fan-out". When the fan-in and fan-out are equal, then Glorot initialization is the same as LeCun initialization. === He initialization === As Glorot initialization performs poorly for ReLU activation, He initialization (or Kaiming initialization) was proposed by Kaiming He et al. for networks with ReLU activation. It samples each entry in W ( l ) {\displaystyle W^{(l)}} from N ( 0 , 2 / n l − 1 ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {N}}(0,2/n_{l-1})} . === Orthogonal initialization === (Saxe et al. 2013) proposed orthogonal initialization: initializing weight matrices as uniformly random (according to the Haar measure) semi-orthogonal matrices, multiplied by a factor that depends on the activation function of the layer. It was designed so that if one initializes a deep linear network this way, then its training time until convergence is independent of depth. Sampling a uniformly random semi-orthogonal matrix can be done by initializing X {\displaystyle X} by IID sampling its entries from a standard normal distribution, then calculate ( X X ⊤ ) − 1 / 2 X {\displaystyle \left(XX^{\top }\right)^{-1/2}X} or its transpose, depending on whether X {\displaystyle X} is tall or wide. For CNN kernels with odd widths and heights, orthogonal initialization is done this way: initialize the central point by a semi-orthogonal matrix, and fill the other entries with zero. As an illustration, a kernel K {\displaystyle K} of shape 3 × 3 × c × c ′ {\displaystyle 3\times 3\times c\times c'} is initialized by filling K [ 2 , 2 , : , : ] {\displaystyle K[2,2,:,:]} with the entries of a random semi-orthogonal matrix of shape c × c ′ {\displaystyle c\times c'} , and the other entries with zero. (Balduzzi et al., 2017) used it with stride 1 and zero-padding. This is sometimes called the Orthogonal Delta initialization. Related to this approach, unitary initialization proposes to parameterize the weight matrices to be unitary matrices, with the result that at initialization they are random unitary matrices (and throughout training, they remain unitary). This is found to improve long-sequence modelling in LSTM. Orthogonal initialization has been generalized to layer-sequential unit-variance (LSUV) initialization. It is a data-dependent initialization method, and can be used in convolutional neural networks. It first initializes weights of each convolution or fully connected layer with orthonormal matrices. Then, proceeding from the first to the last layer, it runs a forward pass on a random minibatch, and divides the layer's weights by the standard deviation of its output, so that its output has variance approximately 1. === Fixup initialization === In 2015, the introduction of residual connections allowed very deep neural networks to be trained, much deeper than the ~20 layers of the previous state of the art (such as the VGG-19). Residual connections gave rise to their own weight initialization problems and strategies. These are sometimes called "normalization-free" methods, since using residual connection could stabilize the training of a deep neural network so much that normalizations become unnecessary. Fixup initialization is designed specifically for networks with residual connections and without batch normalization, as follows: Initialize the classification layer and the last layer of each residual branch to 0. Initialize every other layer using a standard method (such as He initialization), and scale only the weight layers inside residual branches by L − 1 2 m − 2 {\displaystyle L^{-{\frac {1}{2m-2}}}} . Add a scalar multiplier (initialized at 1) in every branch and a scalar bias (initialized at 0) before each convolution, linear, and element-wise activation layer. Similarly, T-Fixup initialization is designed for Transformers without layer normalization. === Others === Instead of initializing all weights with random values on the order of O ( 1 / n ) {\displaystyle O(1/{\sqrt {n}})} , sparse initialization initialized only a small subset of the weights with larger random values, and the other weights zero, so that the total variance is still on the order of O ( 1 ) {\displaystyle O(1)} . Random walk initialization was designed for MLP so that during backpropagation, the L2 norm of gradient at each layer performs an unbiased random walk as one moves from the last layer to the first. Looks linear initialization was designed to allow the neural network to behave like a deep linear network at initialization, since W R e L U ( x ) − W R e L U ( − x ) = W x {\displaystyle W\;\mathrm {ReLU} (x)-W\;\mathrm {ReLU} (-x)=Wx} . It initializes a matrix W {\displaystyle W} of shape R n 2 × m {\displaystyle \mathbb {R} ^{{\frac {n}{2}}\times m}} by any method, such as orthogonal initialization, t

  Read more →
• 

  SitePal

  SitePal is a speaking avatar platform for small and medium-sized businesses developed by Oddcast. SitePal allows users to deploy "virtual employees" on websites that can welcome visitors, guide them around the site and answer questions. The use of SitePal on commercial websites has been controversial because many visitors report finding them annoying. Some research has shown that they can increase sales in comparison to using static photographs. == Development == The technology used was the result of more than 4 years of research at Stanford University. The research was based on a literature review and other previous work in the field of artificial intelligence research. The SitePal AI option uses the AIML programming language, which is partially editable by users. This allows web designers to simulate normal human conversation by using keywords or key phrases that the bot can respond to. == Features == The company provides web designers with options to customize the chosen avatar. A large selection of faces, clothing, hair, backgrounds, voices and other details are available. If a web designer wants to use a particular face, Sitepal can create one from a photo. Thus, a mascot or a known face can be simulated. == Speech == Sitepal avatars talk through text-to-speech (tts) software. A short paragraph can be written (up to 900 characters) and the text-to-speech engine will compile the actual speech, which can be reproduced and edited. The tts engine is not perfect, but it comes close to actual speech and is easy to understand. Tts can be further enhanced by some commands, like /laugh and /loud which make the avatar laugh or talk loud. Even pronunciation is possible. The web designer can record and upload his or her own audio messages. Alternatively Sitepal offers professional voice acting service at extra cost. == User interaction == The company provides 5 options for visitor interaction: No interaction. The avatar simply says a pre-fixed message. FAQ mode. Questions can be configured, which are clickable and the user can hear the answer. Lead mode. The avatar prompts the user to type his email and short message, so it can be sent to the webmaster (usually used on a "contact us" page) Chatbot mode. The avatar greets the user, and he can type his questions and have a conversation with the bot. With predetermined replies, this can work as an FAQ as well. API customization. Experienced programmers can make their avatar interact with their website, making it talk when the user clicks on a link or when other triggers occur. Even dual avatar conversations can be created, like a talk show. == Posting options == The company provides five options for posting the avatar: Embed in webpage (via javascript) Embed in HTML Send by email Publish to eBay Embed in Flash == Criticism == Early reviews, such as one by Troy Dreier published in PC World in 2002 were positive and described SitePal as: "an engagingly simple and personal tool, and the price is reasonable for what it adds to a site". Although Dreier did note that the program had "bugs that suggested it hadn't been tested thoroughly". In more recent years, reaction to SitePal has been much more negative with reviews such as Tom Spring writing in a PC World review citing SitePal ads and described his reaction as "Not so nice". Paul Bissex, writing in E-Scribe News described SitePal as "heinous... and embarrassing if anyone is within earshot...they creep me out" == Research on effectiveness == In one single-website research project Anita Campbell had half the visitors to Small Business Trends see a SitePal and the other half see just a static photograph. Over 11,000 visitors the SitePal avatar improved sign-up for a newsletter 144% over the control condition.

  Read more →
• 

  Packingham v. North Carolina

  Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. 98 (2017), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a North Carolina statute that prohibited registered sex offenders from using social media websites was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects freedom of speech. In 2010, Lester Gerard Packingham, a registered sex offender, posted on Facebook under a pseudonym to comment favorably on a recent traffic court experience. Police then identified Packingham and charged him with violating North Carolina's law. Packingham moved to dismiss the charges, arguing that the state's law violated the First Amendment. The trial court dismissed this motion and ultimately convicted Packingham. A state appellate court initially reversed the trial court, holding that the law did violate the First Amendment, but the North Carolina Supreme Court, the state's highest court, disagreed and reinstated the conviction. In June 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the North Carolina Supreme Court's judgment. In the majority opinion authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Court held that social media—defined broadly to include Facebook, Amazon.com, The Washington Post, and WebMD, among many others—is a "protected space" under the First Amendment for lawful speech. The Court offered that North Carolina could protect children through less restrictive means, such as prohibiting "conduct that often presages a sexual crime, like contacting a minor or using a website to gather information about a minor". == Background == === North Carolina statute === In 2008, the state of North Carolina passed a law that made it a felony for a registered sex offender "to access a commercial social networking Web site where the sex offender knows that the site permits minor children to become members or to create or maintain personal Web pages". The law defined a "commercial social networking Web site" using four criteria. Specifically, the website must: be "operated by a person who derives revenue from membership fees, advertising, or other sources related to the operation of the Web site". facilitate "the social introduction between two or more persons for the purposes of friendship, meeting other persons, or information exchanges". allow "users to create Web pages or personal profiles that contain information such as the name or nickname of the user, photographs placed on the personal Web page by the user, other personal information about the user, and links to other personal Web pages on the commercial social networking Web site of friends or associates of the user that may be accessed by other users or visitors to the Web site". provide "users or visitors... mechanisms to communicate with other users, such as a message board, chat room, electronic mail, or instant messenger". The law exempted websites that "Provid[e] only one of the following discrete services: photo-sharing, electronic mail, instant messenger, or chat room or message board platform", as well as websites that have as their primary purpose "the facilitation of commercial transactions involving goods or services between [their] members or visitors". === Facts of the case === In 2002, Lester Gerard Packingham was convicted of taking "indecent liberties with a child", a felony that required him to register as a sex offender. A North Carolina court sentenced him to 10–12 months in prison with 24 months of supervised release. He was given no other special instructions on his behavior outside of prison other than to "remain away from" the minor. In 2010, after a state court dismissed a traffic ticket against Packingham, he submitted a post on Facebook under the name "J. R. Gerrard", stating: "Man God is Good! How about I got so much favor they dismissed the ticket before court even started? No fine, no court cost, no nothing spent. . . . . .Praise be to GOD, WOW! Thanks JESUS!" The Durham Police Department identified Packingham as the author of the post after cross-checking the time of the post with recently dismissed traffic tickets, and a grand jury indicted him for violating the North Carolina statute. === Lower court proceedings === Initially, Packingham moved to dismiss his indictment, arguing that it violated the First Amendment. A North Carolina Superior Court judge denied this motion, and he was convicted of violating the North Carolina social media law. Packingham appealed his conviction to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which reversed the trial court's decision in 2013. Applying intermediate scrutiny, the court of appeals determined that North Carolina's law violated the First Amendment because it was too broad, applying to all registered sex offenders regardless of whether the offender had committed a crime involving a minor or whether the offender was a continuing threat to minors. The appeals court also stated that the law had been defined broadly enough to prohibit a registered sex offender from conducting a wide array of Internet activity, such as "conducting a 'Google' search, purchasing items on Amazon.com, or accessing a plethora of Web sites unrelated to online communication with minors". In 2015, the North Carolina Supreme Court, the state's highest court, reversed the court of appeals, holding that the law was "constitutional in all respects". The North Carolina Supreme Court found that the statute was a "limitation on conduct" and did not impede any free speech. The state had a vested interest in “forestalling the illicit lurking and contact of minors” by registered sex offenders and potential future victims, and upheld Packingham's conviction. == Supreme Court ruling == Packingham filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. The federal government also filed a brief recommending that the Supreme Court grant certiorari, arguing that the North Carolina Supreme Court incorrectly decided the case in favor of the state. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in October 2016. Amicus briefs in support of Packingham were filed by the libertarian Cato Institute and the American Civil Liberties Union. The North Carolina Supreme Court filed a brief supporting its prior decision, urging the importance of protecting minors from being stalked online. === Oral argument === The oral argument took place in February 2017. Packingham’s lawyer, David T. Goldberg, argued that the law banned “vast swaths of First Amendment activity”, went too far in restricting which Internet sites could be accessed, and forbade use of the Internet in general. The law targeted speech on some of the platforms that Americans use most often, Goldberg noted, and that under the law Packingham could not even use Twitter to read the myriad messages discussing his own case. He further noted that the law imposes punishment without regard to whether the offender actually did anything wrong. North Carolina’s senior deputy Attorney General, Robert C. Montgomery, argued for the state, and claimed that communication through social media sites is a “crucial channel”. Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Montgomery to provide evidence as to the claim that by giving Packingham Internet privileges, he would commit another crime. Justice Stephen Breyer added that “It seems to be well-settled law that the state can’t (bar usage) unless there is a 'clear and present danger'." === Opinion of the Court === In June 2017 the Supreme Court delivered a judgment in favor of Packingham, unanimously voting to reverse the state court's ruling. Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the decision, joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan. Kennedy explained the decision: "A fundamental principle of the First Amendment is that all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen, and then, after reflection, speak and listen once more." He continued that "By prohibiting sex offenders from using those websites, North Carolina with one broad stroke bars access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge." Citing Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition as a precedent, Kennedy also wrote: "It is well established that, as a general rule, the Government 'may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech'." === Concurring opinion === Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment, joined by John Roberts and Clarence Thomas. While Alito agreed that the state statute at issue violated the First Amendment, he noted that there are reasonable scenarios for which legal bans for sex offenders can be placed, such as for sites targeted at teenagers. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the decision of the case. == Impact == Packingham v. North Carolina was one of the first U.S. Supreme Court cases to ana

  Read more →
• 

  Commercial skipping

  Commercial skipping is a feature of some digital video recorders that makes it possible to automatically skip commercials in recorded programs. This feature created controversy, with major television networks and movie studios claiming it violates copyright and should be banned. == History == After the video cassette recorder (VCR) became popular in the 1980s, the television industry began studying the impact of users fast forwarding through commercials. Advertising agencies fought the trend by making them more entertaining. For many years, video recorders manufactured for the Japanese market have been able to skip advertisements automatically, which is done by detecting when foreign language audio overdub tracks provided for many programmes go silent, as advertisements were broadcast with a single language only. The first digital video recorder (DVR) with a built-in commercial skipping feature was ReplayTV with its "4000 Series" and "5000 Series" units. In 2002, the main television networks and movie studios sued ReplayTV, claiming that skipping advertisements during replay violates copyright. Later, five owners of ReplayTV represented by Electronic Frontier Foundation and attorneys Ira Rothken and Richard Wiebe countersued, asking the federal judge to uphold consumers' rights to record TV shows and skip commercials, claiming that features like commercial skipping help parents protect their kids from excessive consumerism. ReplayTV ended up filing for bankruptcy in 2003 after fighting a copyright infringement suit over the ReplayTV's ability to skip commercials. === Commercial skipping software === In addition to the DVR devices which existed in the private market since the late 1990s, towards the mid-2000s, due to the significant advances in home computers, Home theater PCs started gaining popularity in the private market and many users began using their Home theater PCs in their living room for entertainment purposes. Following this, many DVR programs were developed, including popular programs such as Windows Media Center, which contained all of the features of the DVR devices in addition to advanced features such as HDTV and the use of Multiple TV Tuner Cards. Some independent developers began developing independent software capable of skipping the commercial segments when playing recorded videos, and permanently removing the commercial segments from recorded video files. By 2014, many DVR programs such as Windows Media Center, SageTV and MythTV had the capability to skip commercials segments in recorded TV broadcasts after installing third-party add-ons such as DVRMSToolbox, Comskip and ShowAnalyzer, which use various advanced techniques to locate the commercial segments in the video files and save their locations to text files. The text files can also be fed into programs such as MEncoder or DVRMSToolboxGUI which can delete the commercial segments from the recorded video files. A few third-party tools such as MCEBuddy automate detection and removal/marking of commercials. One of the weaknesses of commercial skippers is that, operating automatically, they may misidentify program material as a commercial. Some programs like MCEBuddy provide the ability to fine-tune commercial detection for groups of files (e.g. by channel or country) and provide tools to manually fine-tune commercial segments for individual files. In May 2012, the US Dish Network began offering a DVR with what it calls AutoHop. The device would automatically skip commercials when displaying programming that the viewer had previously recorded with the PrimeTime Anytime feature. It does not skip ads on any live programs. US broadcasters were angered at the news, and FOX embarked on legal action. Most, but not all, of Fox's claims were dismissed; ultimately an agreement was reached whereby AutoHop would only become available for Fox stations seven days after a program is transmitted; terms of the settlement were not disclosed. == The future of TV advertisements == The introduction of digital video recorders and services with skipping and fast-forward capabilities enables viewers to avoid viewing interruptive advertisements in recorded programs, either manually or automatically. While advertising separate to television shows can be skipped, advertising in TV shows themselves ("product placement") cannot be skipped. Streaming services such as Hulu show shorter advertisements with a countdown timer and tailored to the viewers interests, asking interactive questions like "Is this ad relevant to you?".

  Read more →
• 

  Flektor

  Flektor was a web application that allowed users the ability to create and "mashup" their own content (photos, videos, music, etc.) and share it via email, on social networking websites MySpace, Facebook, Blogger, Digg, eBay or on personal blogs. The company's website (Flektor.com) launched on April 2, 2007, and over 40,000 people began utilizing its features just one month later. Flektor closed down in January 2009. Flektor offered tools and widgets that included audio, video, photos, text, and approximately 100 effects, transitions and filters to be used with media. Users could create personalized slideshows, polls, postcards, and streaming video projects which the website calls "fleks". Flektor also offered Chat (used as a MySpace addon) and Movie Editor, which provided the ability to edit content and assets together. Users of Flektor could import media from websites like Photobucket and Google's YouTube, and then edit their content with the site's editing tools. Flektor's erstwhile competitors include Slide.com (founded by PayPal co-founder Max Levchin), RockYou!, Yahoo's JumpCut and Brightcove. == History == Flektor was created by Jason Rubin, Andy Gavin and former HBO executive Jason R. Kay. Both Rubin and Gavin spent most of their careers in the video game industry developing games for publishers like Electronic Arts, Universal Interactive Studios and Sony Computer Entertainment America. They founded a successful game development studio called Naughty Dog and were responsible for games such as Crash Bandicoot and Jak and Daxter. After selling Naughty Dog to Sony, Rubin focused on a comic book series called Iron and the Maiden before teaming up again with Gavin to venture into the web industry with Flektor. Jason Kay spent four years at Home Box Office, working as a consultant to the EVP of Business Development. They recruited former employee and then Naughty Dog Lead Programmer Scott Shumaker to lead the technology team along with Gavin. Ryan Evans joined shortly thereafter, spearheading product development. Flektor is based in Culver City, California. In May 2007, the company was sold to Fox Interactive Media, which is a division of News Corp., for more than $20 million. The deal coincided with Fox's acquisition of Photobucket, an image-hosting and sharing website. Fox Interactive Media already holds possession of MySpace, IGN Entertainment, FOXSports.com, AmericanIdol.com and Rotten Tomatoes. After the acquisition, Rubin, Gavin and Kay departed, leaving the studio in the hands of Shumaker and Evans. In the fall of 2007, Flektor partnered with its sister company, MySpace, and MTV to provide instant audience feedback via polls for the interactive MySpace/ MTV Presidential Dialogues series with presidential candidates Senator Barack Obama, Senator John McCain and John Edwards. Use of Flektor's polling system, enabled hosts John McLaughlin and Geoffrey Garin to cater their questions towards subjects of voter-interest. In the fall of 2008, Flektor built the official site for the 2008 Presidential debates, hosted at MyDebates. In January 2009, due to a company directive to focus on the core MySpace property, Fox Interactive announced that Flektor would be shut down, with some of its technology being incorporated into MySpace.

  Read more →
• 

  Attention inequality

  Attention inequality is the inequality of distribution of attention across users on social networks, people in general, and for scientific papers. Yun Family Foundation introduced "Attention Inequality Coefficient" as a measure of inequality in attention and arguments it by the close interconnection with wealth inequality. == Relationship to economic inequality == Attention inequality is related to economic inequality since attention is an economically scarce good. The same measures and concepts as in classical economy can be applied for attention economy. The relationship develops also beyond the conceptual level—considering the AIDA process, attention is the prerequisite for real monetary income on the Internet. On data of 2018, a significant relationship between likes and comments on Facebook to donations is proven for non-profit organizations. == Attention economy == The attention economy refers to the practice of maximizing the attention users give to a product for advertising-related reasons. Attention economy remains one of the most common forms of advertising, and has been steadily increasing thanks to new technologies such as television, internet and social media. It is one of the most widely-used approaches to economy for its effectiveness for maximising the noticeability of a certain product. == Attention inequality in social media == In social media, attention inequality refers to the unequal distribution of users' attention on social media platforms. This means that instead of an equal distribution of attention, fewer sources receive a disproportionate share of attention, leaving many unnoticed. This phenomenon is possibly the result of social media algorithms, which are commonly designed to drive maximum engagement. This phenomenon is a large factor in the polarization and creation of echo-chambers. Social media algorithms tend to note content that is already performing well and display it to more users, while content that is equally engaging or well-made is not recommended to users. Posts that trigger strong emotions usually out-perform more "uncontroversial" content. When many users interact with the post, it signals the algorithm that the specific post drives engagement. The algorithm then tends to recommend that type of content to an exponential number of people, potentially outperforming "un-emotional" content. These factors, when combined, tend to create an unequal social media environment. == Attention inequality in science == According to a recent 2025 study about research inequality among scientists published in Information Processing and Management, scientific discourse is restricted to a small group of connected scientists, and is frequently not an accurate representation of the whole scientific community. Using citation-network analysis in the fields of nanoscience and chemical physics, the study claims that a group of connected scientists has a significant notability in the scientific community. The calculated connection strength between these scientists is estimated to be about 4.5, the study also says that these authors cite each other four times more often than would be predicted in a random network, whereas ordinary scientists that exist outside of this group only reach an estimated connection strength of 0.9. The study findings suggest that that scientific attention is not distributed by merit, but rather by the connectedness of the scientists involved in the research. == Extent == As data of 2008 shows, 50% of the attention is concentrated on approximately 0.2% of all hostnames, and 80% on 5% of hostnames. The Gini coefficient of attention distribution lay in 2008 at over 0.921 for such commercial domains names as ac.jp and at 0.985 for .org-domains. The Gini coefficient was measured on Twitter in 2016 for the number of followers as 0.9412, for the number of mentions as 0.9133, and for the number of retweets as 0.9034. For comparison, the world's income Gini coefficient was 0.68 in 2005 and 0.904 in 2018. More than 96% of all followers, 93% of the retweets, and 93% of all mentions are owned by 20% of Twitter. == Causes == At least for scientific papers, today's consensus states that inequality is unexplainable by variations of quality and individual talent. The Matthew effect plays a significant role in the emergence of attention inequality—those who already enjoy large amounts of attention get even more attention, and those who do not lose even more. Ranking algorithms based on relevance to the user have been found to alleviate the inequality of the number of posts across topics.

  Read more →
• 

  Feature detection (web development)

  Feature detection (also feature testing) is a technique used in web development for handling differences between runtime environments (typically web browsers or user agents), by programmatically testing for clues that the environment may or may not offer certain functionality. This information is then used to make the application adapt in some way to suit the environment: to make use of certain APIs, or tailor for a better user experience. Its proponents claim it is more reliable and future-proof than other techniques like user agent sniffing and browser-specific CSS hacks. == Techniques == A feature test can take many forms. It is essentially any snippet of code which gives some level of confidence that a required feature is indeed supported. However, in contrast to other techniques, feature detection usually focuses on performing actions which directly relate to the feature to be detected, rather than heuristics. === JavaScript === JavaScript feature detection can inspect the DOM and the local JavaScript environment to test whether browser features or APIs are supported. The simplest technique is to check for the existence of a relevant object or property. For example, the Geolocation API (used for accessing the device's knowledge of its geographical location, possibly obtained from a GPS navigation device) exposes a geolocation property on the navigator object in the DOM; the presence of which implies the Geolocation API is supported: if ('geolocation' in navigator) { // Geolocation API is supported } For a higher level of confidence, some feature tests will attempt to invoke the feature then look for clues that it behaved properly. For example, a test for support for cookies might attempt to set a value as a cookie and then verify it can be read back. === CSS === In CSS, the at-rule @supports introduced in 2015 allows to test if a given feature is supported. For instance the following code activates the declarations only if the user agent supports display: flex: == Undetectables == Some browser features are considered undetectable, because no clues are known to give sufficient confidence that a feature is supported. These are often because of limited information available to the JavaScript environment in the browser; generally features must be exposed via the DOM in some way in order to be detectable using JavaScript. When undetectables are encountered, it is common to turn to user agent sniffing as an alternative mechanism, or to employ defensive coding to minimise the impact if the feature turns out not to be supported. The Modernizr project maintains a record of known undetectables on their wiki.

  Read more →