AI Generator Lyrics To Song

AI Generator Lyrics To Song — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

  • SWILE

    SWILE

    SWILE (formerly: Lunchr) is a French app-based company that focuses on improving the employee experience. Among others, the platform offers meal vouchers, gift vouchers, mobility vouchers, and business travel solutions. In March 2020, it was renamed SWILE and entered the lunch break and meal voucher market. == History == The company was founded as Lunchr by Loïc Soubeyrand in 2016. Originally, Lunchr was an app for pre-ordering lunch on the spot or to go. In January 2017, the company raised €2.5 million in seed funding from Daphni. In 2018, the company raised €11 million (series A) from Idinvest, followed by another €30 million in February 2019 (series B), notably from Index Ventures and Kima Ventures. In January 2020, Lunchr became one of the first startups to join the French Tech 120. A few months later, in March, Lunchr diversified its services, adding team life management tools and changing its brand name to Swile. In June 2020, the company raised €70 million more in a new round of financing (Series C) from the same investors and the BPI. In November 2020, Swile acquired Briq, a startup specializing in employee engagement. In January 2021, Swile won a tender with Carrefour and distributed 62,000 Swile cards to its employees. In early October 2021, a new $200 million (€175 million) fundraising round, in which Japanese Softbank joined other investors, allowed Swile to capitalize on $1 billion. President Emmanuel Macron cited the company as "a further proof that FrenchTech is at the forefront internationally." In May 2022, the company acquired the travel management start-up Okarito for €6 million. == Overview == Swile operates in two countries (France and Brazil) and has a total of 1000 employees, 5.5 million users and 85,000 corporate customers, including Carrefour, Le Monde, JCDECAUX, PSG, Airbnb, Spotify, Red Bull, and TikTok in the private sector, as well as numerous local authorities and ministerial references in the public sector.

    Read more →
  • Elonis v. United States

    Elonis v. United States

    Elonis v. United States, 575 U.S. 723 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case concerning whether conviction of threatening another person over interstate lines (under 18 U.S.C. § 875(c)) requires proof of subjective intent to threaten or whether it is enough to show that a "reasonable person" would regard the statement as threatening. In controversy were the purported threats of violent rap lyrics written by Anthony Douglas Elonis and posted to Facebook under a pseudonym. The ACLU filed an amicus brief in support of the petitioner. It was the first time the Court has heard a case considering true threats and the limits of speech on social media. == Background == In May 2010, Elonis was in the process of divorce and made a number of public Facebook posts. Prior to his postings, he had lost his job at an amusement park. He "posted the script of a sketch" by The Whitest Kids U' Know, which originally referenced saying "I want to kill the President of the United States" and replaced the president with his wife: Elonis ended the post with this statement: "Art is about pushing limits. I'm willing to go to jail for my constitutional rights. Are you?" A week later, Elonis posted about local law enforcement and a kindergarten class, which caught the attention of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Then, he wrote a post on Facebook about one of the agents who visited him: He concluded: == Arrest and Conviction == These actions led to Elonis's arrest on December 8, 2010. He was indicted by a grand jury on five counts of threats to his estranged ex-wife, park employees and visitors, local law enforcement, an FBI agent, and a kindergarten class that had been relayed through interstate communication. At the district court, Elonis moved to dismiss the indictment for failing to allege that he had intended to threaten anyone, claiming his Facebook post was not were not intended as a threat. He argued that, as an aspiring rap artist, his posts were intended to be a form of artistic expression to help him cope with his recent loses. According to him, he did not mean anything said in his posts in a literal sense. His motion was denied. He requested a jury instruction that "the government must prove that he intended to communicate a true threat", which was also denied. He was convicted on the last four of the five counts, and was sentenced to 44 months in prison and three years on supervised release. He appealed unsuccessfully to the Third Circuit, renewing his challenge to the jury instructions. He then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court based on lack of any attempt to show intent to threaten and on First Amendment rights. == Decision == On June 1, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed Elonis's conviction in an 8–1 decision. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for a seven-justice majority, Samuel Alito authored an opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part, and Clarence Thomas authored a dissenting opinion. The finding of the circuit court was reversed and the matter remanded. === Majority opinion === The majority opinion, written by Roberts, did not rule on First Amendment matters or on the question of whether recklessness was sufficient mens rea to show intent. It ruled that mens rea was required to prove the commission of a crime under §875(c). Importantly, the mens rea issue had been preserved for review, since Elonis had raised that objection at every stage of the previous proceedings. The government contended that the presence of the words "intent to extort" in §875(b) and §875(d) implied that the absence in §875(c) was constructive. The court disagreed, holding that the absence of the language in §875(c) was because the section was intended to have a broader scope than threats relating to extortion. The opinion drew on many Supreme Court cases holding that in criminal law, mens rea was required though it had not been mentioned explicitly in statute. Consequently, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Elonis. === Alito's concurrence === Justice Samuel Alito, concurring in part and dissenting in part, opined that while agreeing that mens rea was required and specifically that showing negligence was not sufficient, the court should have ruled on the question of recklessness. He further opined that recklessness was sufficient to show a crime under that provision on the basis that going further would amount to amending the statute, rather than interpreting it. Since Elonis explicitly argued that recklessness was not sufficient, Alito said: I would therefore remand for the Third Circuit to determine if Elonis’s failure (indeed, refusal) to argue for recklessness prevents reversal of his conviction. The Third Circuit should also have the opportunity to consider whether the conviction could be upheld on harmless error grounds. Alito also addressed the First Amendment question, elided by the majority opinion. He held that "lyrics in songs that are performed for an audience or sold in recorded form are unlikely to be interpreted as a real threat to a real person. ... Statements on social media that are pointedly directed at their victims, by contrast, are much more likely to be taken seriously." === Thomas's dissent === Justice Clarence Thomas, dissenting, wrote against discarding the "general intent" standard without replacing it with a clearer standard. Thomas argued that "there is no historical practice requiring more than general intent when a statute regulates speech." Thomas cited Rosen v. United States, arguing that general intent was sufficient in this case. However, the majority opinion offers refutation in that Rosen turned on ignorance of the law: knowledge as to whether material was legally obscene, not on whether it was intended to be obscene. Thomas also supported the government's claim that the presence of "intent to extort" language in the adjacent §875(b) and did not address the majority's reasoning on that language. Thomas used precedent, notably from the states and 18th-century England based on other but similar and, arguably, influencing legislation to support his "general intent" claim. Thomas also drew a parallel with general intent in tort. While he sought to address the First Amendment issues, he never strayed far from "general intent". == Aftermath == On remand, the Third Circuit reaffirmed the conviction "concluding beyond a reasonable doubt that Elonis would have been convicted if the jury had been properly instructed" and therefore was harmless error. In 2022, Elonis was once again arrested and indicted on three counts of cyberstalking involving three people. It was discovered that between 2018 and 2021, Elonis had sent numerous threatening messages over email, text, voice mail, and social media platforms like Twitter to a former prosecutor of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, his ex-girlfriend, and ex-wife. On August 5, after a five-day trial, Elonis was found guilty on all three counts, and on March 23, 2023, he was sentenced by U.S. District Court Judge Edward G. Smith of Easton, Pennsylvania to twelve years and seven months in prison.

    Read more →
  • Asynchronous module definition

    Asynchronous module definition

    Asynchronous module definition (AMD) is a specification for the programming language JavaScript. It defines an application programming interface (API) that defines code modules and their dependencies, and loads them asynchronously if desired. Implementations of AMD provide the following benefits: Website performance improvements. AMD implementations load smaller JavaScript files, and then only when they are needed. Fewer page errors. AMD implementations allow developers to define dependencies that must load before a module is executed, so the module does not try to use outside code that is not available yet.... In addition to loading multiple JavaScript files at runtime, AMD implementations allow developers to encapsulate code in smaller, more logically-organized files, in a way similar to other programming languages such as Java. For production and deployment, developers can concatenate and minify JavaScript modules based on an AMD API into one file, the same as traditional JavaScript. AMD provides some CommonJS interoperability. It allows for using a similar exports and require() interface in the code, although its own define() interface is more basal and preferred. The AMD specification is implemented by Dojo Toolkit, RequireJS, and other libraries.

    Read more →
  • CodePen

    CodePen

    CodePen is an online community for testing and showcasing user-created HTML, CSS and JavaScript code snippets. It functions as an online code editor and open-source learning environment, where developers can create code snippets, called "pens," and test them. It was founded in 2012 by full-stack developers Alex Vazquez and Tim Sabat and front-end designer Chris Coyier. Its employees work remotely, rarely all meeting together in person. CodePen is a large community for web designers and developers to showcase their coding skills, with an estimated 330,000 registered users and 14.16 million monthly visitors.

    Read more →
  • Human–robot interaction

    Human–robot interaction

    Human–robot interaction (HRI) is the study of interactions between humans and robots. Human–robot interaction is a multidisciplinary field with contributions from human–computer interaction, artificial intelligence, robotics, natural language processing, design, psychology and philosophy. A subfield known as physical human–robot interaction (pHRI) has tended to focus on device design to enable people to safely interact with robotic systems. == Origins == Human–robot interaction has been a topic of both science fiction and academic speculation even before any robots existed. Because much of active HRI development depends on natural language processing, many aspects of HRI are continuations of human communications, a field of research which is much older than robotics. The origin of HRI as a discrete problem was stated by 20th-century author Isaac Asimov in 1941, in his novel I, Robot. Asimov coined Three Laws of Robotics, namely: A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws. These three laws provide an overview of the goals engineers and researchers hold for safety in the HRI field, although the fields of robot ethics and machine ethics are more complex than these three principles. However, generally human–robot interaction prioritizes the safety of humans that interact with potentially dangerous robotics equipment. Solutions to this problem range from the philosophical approach of treating robots as ethical agents (individuals with moral agency), to the practical approach of creating safety zones. These safety zones use technologies such as lidar to detect human presence or physical barriers to protect humans by preventing any contact between machine and operator. Although initially robots in the human–robot interaction field required some human intervention to function, research has expanded this to the extent that fully autonomous systems are now far more common than in the early 2000s. Autonomous systems include from simultaneous localization and mapping systems which provide intelligent robot movement to natural-language processing and natural-language generation systems which allow for natural, human-esque interaction which meet well-defined psychological benchmarks. Anthropomorphic robots (machines which imitate human body structure) are better described by the biomimetics field, but overlap with HRI in many research applications. Examples of robots which demonstrate this trend include Willow Garage's PR2 robot, the NASA Robonaut, and Honda ASIMO. However, robots in the human–robot interaction field are not limited to human-like robots: Paro and Kismet are both robots designed to elicit emotional response from humans, and so fall into the category of human–robot interaction. Goals in HRI range from industrial manufacturing through Cobots, medical technology through rehabilitation, autism intervention, and elder care devices, entertainment, human augmentation, and human convenience. Future research therefore covers a wide range of fields, much of which focuses on assistive robotics, robot-assisted search-and-rescue, and space exploration. == The goal of friendly human–robot interactions == Robots are artificial agents with capacities of perception and action in the physical world often referred by researchers as workspace. Their use has been generalized in factories but nowadays they tend to be found in the most technologically advanced societies in such critical domains as search and rescue, military battle, mine and bomb detection, scientific exploration, law enforcement, entertainment and hospital care. These new domains of applications imply a closer interaction with the user, sharing the workspace but also goals in terms of task achievement. The subfield of physical human–robot interaction (pHRI) has largely focused on device design to enable people to safely interact with robotic systems but is increasingly developing algorithmic approaches in an attempt to support fluent and expressive interactions between humans and robotic systems. With the advance in AI, the research is focusing on one part towards the safest physical interaction but also on a socially correct interaction, dependent on cultural criteria. The goal is to build an intuitive, and easy communication with the robot through speech, gestures, and facial expressions. Kerstin Dautenhahn refers to friendly Human–robot interaction as "Robotiquette" defining it as the "social rules for robot behaviour (a 'robotiquette') that is comfortable and acceptable to humans" The robot has to adapt itself to our way of expressing desires and orders and not the contrary. But every day environments such as homes have much more complex social rules than those implied by factories or even military environments. Thus, the robot needs perceiving and understanding capacities to build dynamic models of its surroundings. It needs to categorize objects, recognize and locate humans and further recognize their emotions. The need for dynamic capacities pushes forward every sub-field of robotics. Furthermore, by understanding and perceiving social cues, robots can enable collaborative scenarios with humans. For example, with the rapid rise of personal fabrication machines such as desktop 3D printers, laser cutters, etc., entering our homes, scenarios may arise where robots can collaboratively share control, co-ordinate and achieve tasks together. Industrial robots have already been integrated into industrial assembly lines and are collaboratively working with humans. The social impact of such robots have been studied and has indicated that workers still treat robots and social entities, rely on social cues to understand and work together. On the other end of HRI research the cognitive modelling of the "relationship" between human and the robots benefits the psychologists and robotic researchers the user study are often of interests on both sides. This research endeavours part of human society. For effective human – humanoid robot interaction numerous communication skills and related features should be implemented in the design of such artificial agents/systems. == General HRI research == HRI research spans a wide range of fields, some general to the nature of HRI. === Methods for perceiving humans === Methods for perceiving humans in the environment are based on sensor information. Research on sensing components and software led by Microsoft provide useful results for extracting the human kinematics (see Kinect). An example of older technique is to use colour information for example the fact that for light skinned people the hands are lighter than the clothes worn. In any case a human modelled a priori can then be fitted to the sensor data. The robot builds or has (depending on the level of autonomy the robot has) a 3D mapping of its surroundings to which is assigned the humans locations. Most methods intend to build a 3D model through vision of the environment. The proprioception sensors permit the robot to have information over its own state. This information is relative to a reference. Theories of proxemics may be used to perceive and plan around a person's personal space. A speech recognition system is used to interpret human desires or commands. By combining the information inferred by proprioception, sensor and speech the human position and state (standing, seated). In this matter, natural-language processing is concerned with the interactions between computers and human (natural) languages, in particular how to program computers to process and analyze large amounts of natural-language data. For instance, neural-network architectures and learning algorithms that can be applied to various natural-language processing tasks including part-of-speech tagging, chunking, named-entity recognition, and semantic role labeling. === Methods for motion planning === Motion planning in dynamic environments is a challenge that can at the moment only be achieved for robots with 3 to 10 degrees of freedom. Humanoid robots or even 2 armed robots, which can have up to 40 degrees of freedom, are unsuited for dynamic environments with today's technology. However lower-dimensional robots can use the potential field method to compute trajectories which avoid collisions with humans. === Cognitive models and theory of mind === Humans exhibit negative social and emotional responses as well as decreased trust toward some robots that closely, but imperfectly, resemble humans; this phenomenon has been termed the "Uncanny Valley". However recent research in telepresence robots has established that mimicking human body postures and expressive gestures has made the robots likeable and engaging in a remote setting. Further, the presence o

    Read more →
  • Packingham v. North Carolina

    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 →
  • Extremely online

    Extremely online

    An extremely online (often capitalized), terminally online, or chronically online person is someone who is closely engaged with Internet culture. People said to be extremely online often believe that online posts are very important. Events and phenomena can themselves be extremely online; while often used as a descriptive term, the phenomenon of extreme online usage has been described as "both a reformation of the delivery of ideas – shared through words and videos and memes and GIFs and copypasta – and the ideas themselves". Here, "online" is used to describe "a way of doing things, not [simply] the place they are done". == Criteria == While the term was in use as early as 2014, it gained popularity over the latter half of the 2010s in conjunction with the increasing prevalence and notability of Internet phenomena in all areas of life. Extremely online people, according to The Daily Dot, are interested in topics "no normal, healthy person could possibly care about", and have been analogized to "pop culture fandoms, just without the pop". Extremely online phenomena such as fan culture and reaction GIFs have been described as "swallowing democracy" by journalists such as Amanda Hess in The New York Times, who claimed that a "great convergence between politics and culture, values and aesthetics, citizenship and commercialism" had become "a dominant mode of experiencing politics". Vulture – formerly the pop culture section of New York magazine, now a stand-alone website – has a section for articles tagged "extremely online". == Historical background == In the 2010s, many categories and labels came into wide use from media outlets to describe Internet-mediated cultural trends, such as the alt-right, the dirtbag left, and doomerism. These ideological categories are often defined by their close association with online discourse. For example, the term "alt-right" was added to the Associated Press' stylebook in 2016 to describe the "digital presence" of far-right ideologies, the dirtbag left refers to a group of "underemployed and overly online millennials" who "have no time for the pieties of traditional political discourse", and the doomer's "blackpilled despair" is combined with spending "too much time on message boards in high school" to produce an eclectic "anti-socialism". Extreme onlineness transcends ideological boundaries. For example, right-wing figures like Alex Jones and Laura Loomer have been described as "extremely online", but so have those on the left like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and fans of the Chapo Trap House podcast. Extremely online phenomena can range from acts of offline violence (such as the 2019 Christchurch shootings) to "[going] on NPR to explain the anti-capitalist irony inherent in kids eating Tide Pods". United States President Donald Trump's posts on social media have been frequently cited as extremely online, during both his presidency and his 2020 presidential campaign; Vox claimed his approach to re-election veered into being "Too Online", and Reason questioned whether the final presidential debate was "incomprehensible to normies". While individual people are often given the description, being extremely online has also been posited as an overall cultural phenomenon, applying to trends like lifestyle movements suffixed with "-wave" and "-core" based heavily on Internet media, as well as an increasing expectation for digital social researchers to have an "online presence" to advance in their careers. == Participants and media coverage == One example of a phenomenon considered to be extremely online is the "wife guy" (a guy who posts about his wife); despite being a "stupid online thing" which spent several years as a piece of Internet slang, in 2019 it became the subject of five articles in leading U.S. media outlets. Like many extremely online phrases and phenomena, the "wife guy" has been attributed in part to the in-character Twitter account dril. The account frequently parodies how people behave on the Internet, and has been widely cited as influential on online culture. In one tweet, his character refuses to stop using the Internet, even when someone shouts outside his house that he should log off. Many of dril's other coinages have become ubiquitous parts of Internet slang. Throughout the 2010s, posters such as dril inspired commonly used terms like "corncobbing" (referring to someone losing an argument and failing to admit it); while originally a piece of obscure Internet slang used on sites like Twitter, use of the term (and controversy over its misinterpretation) became a subject of reporting from traditional publications, with some noting that keeping up with the rapid turnover of inside jokes, memes, and quotes online required daily attention to avoid embarrassment. Twitch has been described as "talk radio for the extremely online". Another example of an event cited as extremely online is No Nut November. Increasingly, researchers are expected to have more of an online presence, to advance in their careers, as networking and portfolios continue to transition to the digital world. In November 2020, an article in The Washington Post criticized the filter bubble theory of online discourse on the basis that it "overgeneralized" based on a "small subset of extremely online people". The 2021 storming of the United States Capitol was described as extremely online, with "pro-Trump internet personalities", such as Baked Alaska, and fans livestreaming and taking selfies. People who have been described as extremely online include Chrissy Teigen, Jon Ossoff, and Andrew Yang. In contrast, Joe Biden has been cited as the antithesis of extremely online—The New York Times wrote in 2019 that he had "zero meme energy".

    Read more →
  • Digital divide

    Digital divide

    Digital divide is inequitable access to and use of digital technology, encompassing four interrelated dimensions: motivational, material, skills, and usage access. The digital divide worsens inequality in access to information and resources. According to 2026 data from the U.S. Census Bureau, a significant 'digital divide' persists, with over 15.7 million Americans lacking access to high-speed broadband. Students from low-income households often face limited access to reliable internet and digital devices, which negatively affects their educational opportunities. In the Information Age, people without access to the Internet and other technology are at a disadvantage, for they are less able to connect with others, find and apply for jobs, shop, and learn. People living in poverty, in insecure housing or who are homeless, elderly people, and those living in rural communities may have limited access to the Internet; in contrast, urban middle class people have easy access to the Internet. Another divide is between producers and consumers of Internet content, which could be a result of educational disparities. While social media use varies across age groups, a US 2010 study reported no racial divide. == History == The historical roots of the digital divide in the United States refer to the increasing gap that occurred during the early modern period between those who could and could not access the real time forms of calculation, decision-making, and visualization offered via written and printed media. "Over time, focus has shifted from binary access to differentiated use, where quality and purpose of engagement vary across socio-economic groups." Within this context, ethical discussions regarding the relationship between education and the free distribution of information were raised by thinkers such as Immanuel Kant, Jean Jacques Rousseau, and Mary Wollstonecraft (1712–1778). The latter advocated that governments should intervene to ensure that any society's economic benefits should be fairly and meaningfully distributed. Amid the Industrial Revolution in Great Britain, Rousseau's idea helped to justify poor laws that created a safety net for those who were harmed by new forms of production. Later, when telegraph and postal systems evolved, many used Rousseau's ideas to argue for full access to those services, even if it meant subsidizing hard-to-serve citizens. Thus, "universal services" referred to innovations in regulation and taxation that would allow phone services such as AT&T in the United States to serve hard-to-serve rural users. In 1996, as telecommunications companies merged with Internet companies, the Federal Communications Commission adopted Telecommunications Act of 1996 to consider regulatory strategies and taxation policies to close the digital divide. Though the term "digital divide" was coined among consumer groups that sought to tax and regulate information and communications technology (ICeT) companies to close the digital divide, the topic soon moved onto a global stage. The focus was the World Trade Organization which passed the Telecommunications Services Act, which resisted regulation of ICT companies so that they would be required to serve hard-to-serve individuals and communities. In 1999, to assuage anti-globalization forces, the WTO hosted the "Financial Solutions to Digital Divide" in Seattle, US, co-organized by Craig Warren Smith of Digital Divide Institute and Bill Gates Sr. the chairman of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It catalyzed a full-scale global movement to close the digital divide, which quickly spread to all sectors of the global economy. In 2000, US president Bill Clinton mentioned the term in the State of the Union Address. Since the early 2000s, the international community has transitioned from a focus on domestic infrastructure to a global, multi-dimensional framework for digital equity. This shift was formalized through the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in Geneva (2003) and Tunis (2005), where the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) established a roadmap for bridging the Global North-South disparity as part of the Sustainable Development Goals. Academic and policy discourse has since evolved to distinguish between the first-level divide (physical access), the second-level divide (digital literacy), and the third-level divide (the ability to translate technology use into socio-economic capital). By the 2020s, critical reflections on national development emphasized that the divide is fundamentally a socio-institutional gap. Research by Tiwari, Kostenko, and Yekhanurov (2025) identifies four pillars for achieving national digital maturity which are digital governance capacity, institutional design to prevent adverse digital incorporation, infrastructure resilience, and citizen capability. This modern era is characterized by the pursuit of meaningful connectivity, a standard that requires internet access to be not only available but affordable, high-speed, and supportive of active content creation. === During the COVID-19 pandemic === At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments worldwide issued stay-at-home orders that imposed lockdowns, quarantines, restrictions, and closures. The resulting interruptions to schooling, public services, and business operations drove nearly half of the world's population into seeking alternative methods to live while in isolation. These methods included telemedicine, virtual classrooms, online shopping, technology-based social interactions and working remotely, all of which require access to high-speed or broadband internet access and digital technologies. A Pew Research Centre study reports that 90% of Americans describe the use of the Internet as "essential" during the pandemic. The accelerated use of digital technologies created a landscape where the ability, or lack thereof, to access digital spaces became a crucial factor in everyday life. According to the Pew Research Center, 59% of children from lower-income families were likely to face digital obstacles in completing school assignments. These obstacles included the use of a cellphone to complete homework, having to use public Wi-Fi because of unreliable internet service in the home and lack of access to a computer in the home. This difficulty, titled the homework gap, affects more than 30% of K-12 students living below the poverty threshold, and disproportionally affects American Indian/Alaska Native, Black, and Hispanic students. These types of interruptions or privilege gaps in education exemplify problems in the systemic marginalization of historically oppressed individuals in primary education. The pandemic exposed inequity causing discrepancies in learning. "Large-scale events such as COVID-19 intensify both access and skills gaps, underlining the need for resilient digital inclusion policies. Studies during COVID-19 reveal first-level (access) and second-level (skills) divides, with underserved students struggling with reliable internet, devices, and platform navigation ” A lack of "tech readiness", that is, confident and independent use of devices, was reported among the US elderly population; with more than 50% reporting an inadequate knowledge of devices and more than one-third reporting a lack of confidence. "Older adults often face skills and confidence barriers, illustrating later-stage divides in van Dijk’s model." Moreover, according to a UN research paper, similar results can be found across various Asian countries, with those aged over 74, reporting less confident or inconsistent use of digital devices. This aspect of the digital divide and the elderly occurred during the pandemic as healthcare providers increasingly relied upon telemedicine to manage chronic and acute health conditions. == Aspects == There are various definitions of the digital divide, all with slightly different emphasis, which is evidenced by related concepts like digital inclusion, digital participation, digital skills, media literacy, and digital accessibility.“Van Dijk’s model identifies sequential barriers—motivational, material, skills, and usage—that must be addressed to bridge the divide.” === Infrastructure === The infrastructure by which individuals, households, businesses, and communities connect to the Internet addresses the physical mediums that people use to connect to the Internet such as desktop computers, laptops, basic mobile phones or smartphones, MP3 players, gaming consoles, electronic book readers, and tablets. Traditionally, the nature of the divide has been measured in terms of the existing numbers of subscriptions and digital devices. Given the increasing number of such devices, some have concluded that the digital divide among individuals has increasingly been closing as the result of a natural and almost automatic process. Others point to persistent lower levels of connectivity among women, racial and ethnic minorities, people with lower incomes, rura

    Read more →
  • DataViva

    DataViva

    DataViva is an information visualization engine created by the Strategic Priorities Office of the government of Minas Gerais. DataViva makes official data about exports, industries, locations and occupations available for the entirety of Brazil through eight apps and more than 100 million possible visualizations. The first set of datum – also available at ALICEWEB – is provided by MDIC (Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade) / SECEX (Secretariat of Foreign Trade), an official institution of the Government of Brazil and shows foreign trade statistics for all exporting municipalities in the country. The other database, provided by Ministério do Trabalho e Emprego (MTE – Ministry of Labor and Employment), shows information about all the industries and occupations in Brazil (RAIS – Annual Social Information Report). The platform consists of eight core applications, each of which allows different ways of visualizing the data available. Some applications are descriptive, that is, showing data aggregated at various levels in a simple and comparative way, such as Treemapping. Others are prescriptive, using calculations that allow an analytic visualization of the data, based on theories such as the Product Space. All the applications are generated using D3plus, an open source JavaScript library built on top of D3.js by Alexander Simoes and Dave Landry. Inspired by The Observatory of Economic Complexity, DataViva is an open data, open-source, and free to use tool. It was developed in a partnership with Datawheel, co-founded by MIT Media Lab Professor César Hidalgo, and is maintained by the Government of Minas Gerais.

    Read more →
  • Anti-social Media Bill (Nigeria)

    Anti-social Media Bill (Nigeria)

    Anti-social Media Bill was introduced by the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on 5 November 2019 to criminalise the use of the social media in peddling false or malicious information. The original title of the bill is Protection from Internet Falsehood and Manipulations Bill 2019. It was sponsored by Senator Mohammed Sani Musa from the largely conservative northern Nigeria. After the bill passed second reading on the floor of the Nigeria Senate and its details were made public, information emerged on the social media accusing the sponsor of the bill of plagiarising a similar law in Singapore which is at the bottom of global ranking in the freedom of speech and of the press. But the senator denied that he plagiarised Singaporean law. == Opposition to the bill == Angry reactions trailed the introduction of the bill, and a number of civil society organisations, human rights activists, and Nigerian citizens unanimously opposed the bill. International rights group, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch condemned the proposed legislation saying it is aimed at gagging freedom of speech which is a universal right in a country of over two hundred million people. Opposition political parties are very critical of the bill and accused the government of attempting to strip bare, Nigerian citizens of their rights to free speech and destroying same social media on whose power and influence the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC came to power in 2015. Nigeria Information Minister, Lai Mohammed has been at the center of public criticism because he is suspected to be the brain behind the proposed act. Lai was a former spokesman of then opposition All Progressives Congress. A "Stop the Social Media Bill! You can no longer take our rights from us" online petition campaign to force the Nigeria parliament to drop the bill received over 90,000 signatures within 24 hours. In November 2019, after the bill passed second reading in the senate, Akon Eyakenyi, a senator from Akwa Ibom State publicly said he would resist the bill. === Support for the bill === Those who support the proposed act especially Senators have often argued that the law would help curtail hate speech. President Muhammad Buhari who is seen as a beneficiary of the influence and power of the social media and free speech has been mute about it. But the president's senior aides and family members have publicly spoken in support of the bill. In November 2019, the wife of the president, Aisha Buhari, told a gathering at the Nigeria's National Mosque in the capital, Abuja that if China with over one billion people could regulate the social media, Nigeria should do same. But Nigerians reacted saying Nigeria is not a one-party communist state like China. Days later, a daughter to the president, Zahra Indimi told a gathering of young people in Abuja that social media had become a potent weapon for bullying those they thought were doing better than them in terms of social class and called for a critical regulation. == Key provisions of the bill == === Title === Protection from Internet Falsehoods, Manipulations and Other Related Matters Bill 2019. === Explanatory memorandum === This Act is to prevent Falsehoods and Manipulations in Internet transmission and correspondences in Nigeria. To suppress falsehoods and manipulations and counter the effects of such communications and transmissions and to sanction offenders with a view to encouraging and enhancing transparency by Social Media Platforms using the internet correspondences. === Objectives === One objective of the bill is to prevent the transmission of false statements or declaration of facts in Nigeria. Another objective of the bill is to end the financing of online mediums that transmit false statements. Measures will be taken to detect and control inauthentic behaviour and misuse of online accounts (parody accounts). When paid content is posted towards a political end, there will be measures to ensure the poster discloses such information. There will be sanction for offenders. === Transmission of false statement === According to the bill, a person must not: Transmit a statement that is false or, Transmit a statement that might: i. Affect the security or any part of Nigeria. ii. Affect public health, public safety or public finance. iii. Affect Nigeria's relationship with other countries. iv. influence the outcome of an election to any office in a general election. v. Cause enmity or hatred towards a person or group of persons. Anyone guilty of the above is liable to a fine of N300,000 or three years' imprisonment or both (for individual); and a fine not exceeding ten million naira (for corporate organisations). Same punishment applies for fake online accounts that transmit statements listed above. === Parody accounts === The bill says a person shall not open an account to transmit false statement. Anyone found guilty will be fined N200,000 or three years' imprisonment or both (for an individual) or five million naira (for corporate organisations). If such accounts transmit a statement that will affect security or influence the outcome of an election, such a person will be fined N300,000 or three years' imprisonment or both. If a person receives payment or reward to help another to transmit false statements knowingly, he/she is liable to a fine of N150,000 or three years' imprisonment or both. If a person receives payment or reward to help another to transmit a statement affects security or influence the outcome of an election, the fine is N300,000 or three years' imprisonment or both (for individual) and ten million naira for organisations. === Declaration === According to the bill, a law enforcement department can issue a "declaration" to offenders. And this declaration will be issued even if the "false statement" has been corrected or pulled down. The offender will be required to publish a "correction notice" in a specified newspaper, online location or other printed publication of Nigeria. Failure to comply, a person is liable to N200,000 or 12 months' imprisonment or both (for individual) and five million naira for organisations. === Access blocking order === The bill says the law enforcement department will also issue an access blocking order to offenders. The law enforcement department may direct the NCC to order the internet access service provider to disable access by users in Nigeria to the online location and the NCC must give the internet access service provider an access blocking order. An internet access service provider that does not comply with any access blocking order is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding ten million naira for each day during any part of which that order is not fully complied with, up to a total of five million naira.

    Read more →
  • The Big Book of Social Media

    The Big Book of Social Media

    The Big Book of Social Media: Case Studies, Stories, Perspectives, released in November 2010 by Yorkshire Publishing, is a compilation of non-fiction articles and chapters written by social media experts in their respective fields and edited by Robert Fine, organizer of the Cool Social Conferences World Tour and founder of Cool Blue Press, with a foreword by Sam Feist, political director for CNN. == Synopsis == The publisher, on its site, summed up the book as, "Not business. Not marketing. This is an idea book." And an article in Business Insider described the book as bringing "the social back into social media." == Contributors == Contributing authors include: Alan Rosenblatt, Alane Anderson, Alecia Dantico, Alex Priest, Alfred Naranjo, Becky Carroll, Carri Bugbee, Cathy Scott, Colleen Crinklaw, Constantine Markides, Cordelia Mendoza, Craig Kanalley, Dave Ingland, Eric Andersen, Eric Brown, Gary Zukowski, Haja Rasambainarivo, Jennifer Kaplan, Kari Quaas, Lauri Stevens, Lev Ekster, Mark Stelzner, Matthew Felling, Matt Stewart, Melani Gordon, Michael Bourne, Michele Mattia, Mirna Bard, Neal Schaffer, Nic Evans, Noaf Ereiqat, Pek Pongpaet, Perri Gorman, Phil Baumann, Regina Holliday, Rory Cooper, Sam Feist, Shashi Bellamkonda, Shrinath Navghane, Steve Pratt, Ted Nguyen, Todd Schnick, Tonia Ries, Wayne Burke, as well as Robert Fine. In December 2011, some of the contributing authors organized "Tweet It Forward," a holiday charity fundraiser, with net proceeds benefitting the Food Bank for New York City. == Reception == Reviewer Mike Brown wrote on the Brainzooming blog that the book goes "beyond the valueless chatter out there; it provides solid discussions of real-life social media strategy implementations that have truly integrated organizational objectives and delivered real metrics." And Tech Cocktail wrote it in its review, "Through a collection of entertaining anecdotes and insightful marketing agendas, one sees what social media is truly all about and how it is revolutionizing the communications industry." In 2011, at the SXSW social media festival in Austin, Texas, Fine launched Cool Blue Press and reintroduced The Big Book of Social Media, with plans, he told a reporter from the Washington Examiner, for other new media books and publishing projects, including The Social Media Monthly magazine. The book was reviewed in 2012 by SAGE Publications for its Journalism and Mass Communication Educator magazine. It is also cited in several books and journals. === Awards === The book was a winner in the 4th Annual Reader's Choice "Small Business Book Awards" for 2011. Windmill Networking named it the Top 15 recommended social media books of 2010.

    Read more →
  • False answer supervision

    False answer supervision

    False answer supervision (FAS) refers to VoIP fraud where the billed duration for the caller is more than the duration of the actual connection duration. The FAS is usually performed by VoIP wholesalers in their softswitches for randomly selected calls. Adding a small amount of extra billed seconds for many calls results in significant revenue for the VoIP wholesaler. == Implementation of FAS == The FAS fraud can be implemented in a softswitch in many different ways. These include: False billing of party A without calling a party B. Usually a fake ringback tone, loopback audio or voicemail message is played Start of billing before actual answer of party B Extra billing after disconnection of party B == Detection of FAS == The FAS can be detected and blocked in a softswitch. Common methods are: Manual verification of call detail records: listening to voice recordings Identification of FAS types and using algorithms to automatically detect the FAS RTP audio signal processing: detection of voice RTP audio signal processing: detection of silence RTP audio signal processing: detection of ringback tone

    Read more →
  • G'MIC

    G'MIC

    G'MIC (GREYC's Magic for Image Computing) is a free and open-source framework for image processing. It defines a script language that allows the creation of complex macros. Originally usable only through a command line interface, it is currently mostly popular as a GIMP plugin, and is also included in Krita. G'MIC is dual-licensed under CECILL-2.1 or CECILL-C. == Features == G'MIC's graphical interface is notable for its noise removal filters, which came from an earlier project called GREYCstoration by the same authors. G'MIC offers many built-in commands for image processing, including basic mathematical manipulations, look up tables, and filtering operations. More complex macros and pipelines built out of those commands are defined in its library files. == Interpreters == === Command line === G'MIC is primarily a script language callable from a shell. For example, to display an image: This command displays the image contained in the file image.jpg and allows zooming in to examine values. Several filters can be applied in succession. For example, to crop and resize an image: === Graphical interface === G'MIC comes with a Qt-based graphical interface, which may be integrated as a Gimp or Krita plugin. It contains several hundred filters written in the G'MIC language, dynamically updated through an internet feed. The interface provides a preview and setting sliders for each filter. G'MIC is one of the most popular Gimp plugins. === G'MIC Online === Most of the filters available for the graphical interface are also available online. === ZArt === ZArt is a graphical interface for real-time manipulation of webcam images. === libgmic === Libgmic is a C++ library that can be linked to third-party applications. It sees integration in Flowblade and Veejay.

    Read more →
  • Coupling (electronics)

    Coupling (electronics)

    In electronics, electric power and telecommunication, coupling is the transfer of electrical energy from one circuit to another, or between parts of a circuit. Coupling can be deliberate as part of the function of the circuit, or it may be undesirable, for instance due to coupling to stray fields. For example, energy is transferred from a power source to an electrical load by means of conductive coupling, which may be either resistive or direct coupling. An AC potential may be transferred from one circuit segment to another having a DC potential by use of a capacitor. Electrical energy may be transferred from one circuit segment to another segment with different impedance by use of a transformer; this is known as impedance matching. These are examples of electrostatic and electrodynamic inductive coupling. == Types == Electrical conduction: Direct coupling, also called conductive coupling and galvanic coupling Resistive conduction Atmospheric plasma channel coupling Electromagnetic induction: Electrodynamic induction — commonly called inductive coupling, also magnetic coupling Capacitive coupling Evanescent wave coupling Electromagnetic radiation: Radio waves — Wireless telecommunications. Electromagnetic interference (EMI) — Sometimes called radio frequency interference (RFI), is unwanted coupling. Electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) requires techniques to avoid such unwanted coupling, such as electromagnetic shielding. Microwave power transmission Other kinds of energy coupling: Acoustic coupler

    Read more →
  • Hashtag

    Hashtag

    A hashtag is a metadata tag operator that is prefaced by the hash symbol, #. On social media, hashtags are used on microblogging and photo-sharing services–especially Twitter and Tumblr–as a form of user-generated tagging that enables cross-referencing of content by topic or theme. For example, a search within Instagram for the hashtag #flowers returns all posts that have been tagged with that term. After the initial hash symbol, a hashtag may include letters, numerals or other punctuation. The use of hashtags was first proposed by American blogger and product consultant Chris Messina in a 2007 tweet. Messina made no attempt to patent the use because he felt that "they were born of the internet, and owned by no one". Hashtags became entrenched in the culture of Twitter and soon emerged across Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. In June 2014, hashtag was added to the Oxford English Dictionary as "a word or phrase with the symbol # in front of it, used on social media websites and apps so that you can search for all messages with the same subject". == Origin and acceptance == The number sign or hash symbol, #, has long been used in information technology to highlight specific pieces of text. In 1970, the number sign was used to denote immediate address mode in the assembly language of the PDP-11 when placed next to a symbol or a number, and around 1973, '#' was introduced in the C programming language to indicate special keywords that the C preprocessor had to process first. The pound sign was adopted for use within IRC (Internet Relay Chat) networks around 1988 to label groups and topics. Channels or topics that are available across an entire IRC network are prefixed with a hash symbol # (as opposed to those local to a server, which uses an ampersand '&'). The use of the pound sign in IRC inspired Chris Messina to propose a similar system on Twitter to tag topics of interest on the microblogging network. He proposed the usage of hashtags on Twitter: How do you feel about using # (pound) for groups. As in #barcamp [msg]? According to Messina, he suggested use of the hashtag to make it easy for lay users without specialized knowledge of search protocols to find specific relevant content. Therefore, the hashtag "was created organically by Twitter users as a way to categorize messages". The first published use of the term "hash tag" was in a blog post "Hash Tags = Twitter Groupings" by Stowe Boyd, on August 26, 2007, according to lexicographer Ben Zimmer, chair of the American Dialect Society's New Words Committee. Messina's suggestion to use the hashtag was not immediately adopted by Twitter, but the convention gained popular acceptance when hashtags were used in tweets relating to the 2007 San Diego forest fires in Southern California. The hashtag gained international acceptance during the 2009–2010 Iranian election protests; Twitter users used both English- and Persian-language hashtags in communications during the events. Hashtags have since played critical roles in recent social movements such as #jesuischarlie, #BLM, and #MeToo. Beginning July 2, 2009, Twitter began to hyperlink all hashtags in tweets to Twitter search results for the hashtagged word (and for the standard spelling of commonly misspelled words). In 2010, Twitter introduced "Trending Topics" on the Twitter front page, displaying hashtags that are rapidly becoming popular, and the significance of trending hashtags has become so great that the company makes significant efforts to foil attempts to spam the trending list. During the 2010 World Cup, Twitter explicitly encouraged the use of hashtags with the temporary deployment of "hashflags", which replaced hashtags of three-letter country codes with their respective national flags. Other platforms such as YouTube and Gawker Media followed in officially supporting hashtags, and real-time search aggregators such as Google Real-Time Search began supporting hashtags. == Format == A hashtag must begin with a hash (#) character followed by other characters, and is terminated by a space or the end of the line. Some platforms may require the # to be preceded with a space. Most or all platforms that support hashtags permit the inclusion of letters (without diacritics), numerals, and underscores. Other characters may be supported on a platform-by-platform basis. Some characters, such as "&", are generally not supported as they may already serve other search functions. Hashtags are not case sensitive (a search for "#hashtag" will match "#HashTag" as well), but the use of embedded capitals (i.e., CamelCase) increases legibility and improves accessibility. Languages that do not use word dividers handle hashtags differently. In China, microblogs Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo use a double-hashtag-delimited #HashName# format, since the lack of spacing between Chinese characters necessitates a closing tag. Twitter uses a different syntax for Chinese characters and orthographies with similar spacing conventions: the hashtag contains unspaced characters, separated from preceding and following text by spaces (e.g., '我 #爱 你' instead of '我#爱你') or by zero-width non-joiner characters before and after the hashtagged element, to retain a linguistically natural appearance (displaying as unspaced '我‌#爱‌你', but with invisible non-joiners delimiting the hashtag). === Etiquette and regulation === Some communities may limit, officially or unofficially, the number of hashtags permitted on a single post. Misuse of hashtags can lead to account suspensions. Twitter warns that adding hashtags to unrelated tweets, or repeated use of the same hashtag without adding to a conversation can filter an account from search results, or suspend the account. Individual platforms may deactivate certain hashtags either for being too generic to be useful, such as #photography on Instagram, or due to their use to facilitate illegal activities. === Alternate formats === In 2009, StockTwits began using ticker symbols preceded by the dollar sign (e.g., $XRX). In July 2012, Twitter began supporting the tag convention and dubbed it the "cashtag". The convention has extended to national currencies, and Cash App has implemented the cashtag to mark usernames. == Function == Hashtags are particularly useful in unmoderated forums that lack a formal ontological organization. Hashtags help users find content similar interest. Hashtags are neither registered nor controlled by any one user or group of users. They do not contain any set definitions, meaning that a single hashtag can be used for any number of purposes, and that the accepted meaning of a hashtag can change with time. Hashtags intended for discussion of a particular event tend to use an obscure wording to avoid being caught up with generic conversations on similar subjects, such as a cake festival using #cakefestival rather than simply #cake. However, this can also make it difficult for topics to become "trending topics" because people often use different spelling or words to refer to the same topic. For topics to trend, there must be a consensus, whether silent or stated, that the hashtag refers to that specific topic. Hashtags may be used informally to express context around a given message, with no intent to categorize the message for later searching, sharing, or other reasons. Hashtags may thus serve as a reflexive meta-commentary. This can help express contextual cues or offer more depth to the information or message that appears with the hashtag. "My arms are getting darker by the minute. #toomuchfaketan". AnoHashtags can also be used to express personal feelings and emotions. ther function of the hashtag can be used to express personal feelings and emotions. For example, with "It's Monday!! #excited #sarcasm" in which the adjectives are directly indicating the emotions of the speaker. Verbal use of the word hashtag is sometimes used in informal conversations. Use may be humorous, such as "I'm hashtag confused!" By August 2012, use of a hand gesture, sometimes called the "finger hashtag", in which the index and middle finger both hands are extended and arranged perpendicularly to form the hash, was documented. === Co-optation by other industries === Companies, businesses, and advocacy organizations have taken advantage of hashtag-based discussions for promotion of their products, services or campaigns. In the early 2010s, some television broadcasters began to employ hashtags related to programs in digital on-screen graphics, to encourage viewers to participate in a backchannel of discussion via social media prior to, during, or after the program. Television commercials have sometimes contained hashtags for similar purposes. The increased usage of hashtags as brand promotion devices has been compared to the promotion of branded "keywords" by AOL in the late 1990s and early 2000s, as such keywords were also promoted at the end of television commercials and series episodes. Organized real-world events have used hashta

    Read more →