Q-learning is a reinforcement learning algorithm that trains an agent to assign values to its possible actions based on its current state, without requiring a model of the environment (model-free). It can handle problems with stochastic transitions and rewards without requiring adaptations. For example, in a grid maze, an agent learns to reach an exit worth 10 points. At a junction, Q-learning might assign a higher value to moving right than left if right gets to the exit faster, improving this choice by trying both directions over time. For any finite Markov decision process, Q-learning finds an optimal policy in the sense of maximizing the expected value of the total reward over any and all successive steps, starting from the current state. Q-learning can identify an optimal action-selection policy for any given finite Markov decision process, given infinite exploration time and a partly random policy. "Q" refers to the function that the algorithm computes: the expected reward—that is, the quality—of an action taken in a given state. == Reinforcement learning == Reinforcement learning involves an agent, a set of states S {\displaystyle {\mathcal {S}}} , and a set A {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}} of actions per state. By performing an action a ∈ A {\displaystyle a\in {\mathcal {A}}} , the agent transitions from state to state. Executing an action in a specific state provides the agent with a reward (a numerical score). The goal of the agent is to maximize its total reward. It does this by adding the maximum reward attainable from future states to the reward for achieving its current state, effectively influencing the current action by the potential future reward. This potential reward is a weighted sum of expected values of the rewards of all future steps starting from the current state. As an example, consider the process of boarding a train, in which the reward is measured by the negative of the total time spent boarding (alternatively, the cost of boarding the train is equal to the boarding time). One strategy is to enter the train door as soon as they open, minimizing the initial wait time for yourself. If the train is crowded, however, then you will have a slow entry after the initial action of entering the door as people are fighting you to depart the train as you attempt to board. The total boarding time, or cost, is then: 0 seconds wait time + 15 seconds fight time On the next day, by random chance (exploration), you decide to wait and let other people depart first. This initially results in a longer wait time. However, less time is spent fighting the departing passengers. Overall, this path has a higher reward than that of the previous day, since the total boarding time is now: 5 second wait time + 0 second fight time Through exploration, despite the initial (patient) action resulting in a larger cost (or negative reward) than in the forceful strategy, the overall cost is lower, thus revealing a more rewarding strategy. == Algorithm == After Δ t {\displaystyle \Delta t} steps into the future the agent will decide some next step. The weight for this step is calculated as γ Δ t {\displaystyle \gamma ^{\Delta t}} , where γ {\displaystyle \gamma } (the discount factor) is a number between 0 and 1 ( 0 ≤ γ ≤ 1 {\displaystyle 0\leq \gamma \leq 1} ). Assuming γ < 1 {\displaystyle \gamma <1} , it has the effect of valuing rewards received earlier higher than those received later (reflecting the value of a "good start"). γ {\displaystyle \gamma } may also be interpreted as the probability to succeed (or survive) at every step Δ t {\displaystyle \Delta t} . The algorithm, therefore, has a function that calculates the quality of a state–action combination: Q : S × A → R {\displaystyle Q:{\mathcal {S}}\times {\mathcal {A}}\to \mathbb {R} } . Before learning begins, Q {\displaystyle Q} is initialized to a possibly arbitrary fixed value (chosen by the programmer). Then, at each time t {\displaystyle t} the agent selects an action A t {\displaystyle A_{t}} , observes a reward R t + 1 {\displaystyle R_{t+1}} , enters a new state S t + 1 {\displaystyle S_{t+1}} (that may depend on both the previous state S t {\displaystyle S_{t}} and the selected action), and Q {\displaystyle Q} is updated. The core of the algorithm is a Bellman equation as a simple value iteration update, using the weighted average of the current value and the new information: Q n e w ( S t , A t ) ← ( 1 − α ⏟ learning rate ) ⋅ Q ( S t , A t ) ⏟ current value + α ⏟ learning rate ⋅ ( R t + 1 ⏟ reward + γ ⏟ discount factor ⋅ max a Q ( S t + 1 , a ) ⏟ estimate of optimal future value ⏟ new value (temporal difference target) ) {\displaystyle Q^{new}(S_{t},A_{t})\leftarrow (1-\underbrace {\alpha } _{\text{learning rate}})\cdot \underbrace {Q(S_{t},A_{t})} _{\text{current value}}+\underbrace {\alpha } _{\text{learning rate}}\cdot {\bigg (}\underbrace {\underbrace {R_{t+1}} _{\text{reward}}+\underbrace {\gamma } _{\text{discount factor}}\cdot \underbrace {\max _{a}Q(S_{t+1},a)} _{\text{estimate of optimal future value}}} _{\text{new value (temporal difference target)}}{\bigg )}} where R t + 1 {\displaystyle R_{t+1}} is the reward received when moving from the state S t {\displaystyle S_{t}} to the state S t + 1 {\displaystyle S_{t+1}} , and α {\displaystyle \alpha } is the learning rate ( 0 < α ≤ 1 ) {\displaystyle (0<\alpha \leq 1)} . Note that Q n e w ( S t , A t ) {\displaystyle Q^{new}(S_{t},A_{t})} is the sum of three terms: ( 1 − α ) Q ( S t , A t ) {\displaystyle (1-\alpha )Q(S_{t},A_{t})} : the current value (weighted by one minus the learning rate) α R t + 1 {\displaystyle \alpha \,R_{t+1}} : the reward R t + 1 {\displaystyle R_{t+1}} to obtain if action A t {\displaystyle A_{t}} is taken when in state S t {\displaystyle S_{t}} (weighted by learning rate) α γ max a Q ( S t + 1 , a ) {\displaystyle \alpha \gamma \max _{a}Q(S_{t+1},a)} : the maximum reward that can be obtained from state S t + 1 {\displaystyle S_{t+1}} (weighted by learning rate and discount factor) An episode of the algorithm ends when state S t + 1 {\displaystyle S_{t+1}} is a final or terminal state. However, Q-learning can also learn in non-episodic tasks (as a result of the property of convergent infinite series). If the discount factor is lower than 1, the action values are finite even if the problem can contain infinite loops or paths. For all final states s f {\displaystyle s_{f}} , Q ( s f , a ) {\displaystyle Q(s_{f},a)} is never updated, but is set to the reward value r {\displaystyle r} observed for state s f {\displaystyle s_{f}} . In most cases, Q ( s f , a ) {\displaystyle Q(s_{f},a)} can be taken to equal zero. == Influence of variables == === Learning rate === The learning rate or step size determines to what extent newly acquired information overrides old information. A factor of 0 makes the agent learn nothing (exclusively exploiting prior knowledge), while a factor of 1 makes the agent consider only the most recent information (ignoring prior knowledge to explore possibilities). In fully deterministic environments, a learning rate of α t = 1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}=1} is optimal. When the problem is stochastic, the algorithm converges under some technical conditions on the learning rate that require it to decrease to zero. In practice, often a constant learning rate is used, such as α t = 0.1 {\displaystyle \alpha _{t}=0.1} for all t {\displaystyle t} . === Discount factor === The discount factor γ {\displaystyle \gamma } determines the importance of future rewards. A factor of 0 will make the agent "myopic" (or short-sighted) by only considering current rewards, i.e. r t {\displaystyle r_{t}} (in the update rule above), while a factor approaching 1 will make it strive for a long-term high reward. If the discount factor meets or exceeds 1, the action values may diverge. For γ = 1 {\displaystyle \gamma =1} , without a terminal state, or if the agent never reaches one, all environment histories become infinitely long, and utilities with additive, undiscounted rewards generally become infinite. Even with a discount factor only slightly lower than 1, Q-function learning leads to propagation of errors and instabilities when the value function is approximated with an artificial neural network. In that case, starting with a lower discount factor and increasing it towards its final value accelerates learning. === Initial conditions (Q0) === Since Q-learning is an iterative algorithm, it implicitly assumes an initial condition before the first update occurs. High initial values, also known as "optimistic initial conditions", can encourage exploration: no matter what action is selected, the update rule will cause it to have lower values than the other alternative, thus increasing their choice probability. The first reward r {\displaystyle r} can be used to reset the initial conditions. According to this idea, the first time an action is taken the reward is used to set the value
Dark data
Dark data is data which is acquired through various computer network operations but not used in any manner to derive insights or for decision making. The ability of an organisation to collect data can exceed the throughput at which it can analyse the data. In some cases the organisation may not even be aware that the data is being collected. IBM estimate that roughly 90 percent of data generated by sensors and analog-to-digital conversions never get used. In an industrial context, dark data can include information gathered by sensors and telematics. Organizations retain dark data for a multitude of reasons, and it is estimated that most companies are only analyzing 1% of their data. Often it is stored for regulatory compliance and record keeping. Some organizations believe that dark data could be useful to them in the future, once they have acquired better analytic and business intelligence technology to process the information. Because storage is inexpensive, storing data is easy. However, storing and securing the data usually entails greater expenses (or even risk) than the potential return profit. In academic discourse, the term dark data was essentially coined by Bryan P. Heidorn. He uses it to describe research data, especially from the long tail of science (the many, small research projects), which are not or no longer available for research because they disappear in a drawer without adequate data management. Without this, the data become dark, and further reasons for this are e.g. missing metadata annotation, missing data management plans and data curators. == Analysis == The term "dark data" very often refers to data that is not amenable to computer processing. For example, a company might have a great deal of data that exists only as scanned page-images. Even the bare text in such documents is not available without something like Optical character recognition, which can vary greatly in accuracy. Even with OCR, the significance of each part of the data is unavailable. An obvious examples is whether a capitalized word is a name or not, and if so, whether it represents a person, place, organization, or even a work of art. Bibliographic and other references, data within tables (that may be labeled quite adequately for humans, but not for processing), and countless assertions represented with the full complexity and ambiguity of human language. A lot of unused data is very valuable, and would be used if it could be; but is blocked because it is in formats that are difficult to process, categorise, identify, and analyse. Often the reason that business does not use their dark data is because of the amount of resources it would take and the difficulty of having that data analysed. In other words, the data is "dark" not because it is not used, but because it cannot (feasibly or affordably) be used, given its poor representation. There are many data representations that can make data much more accessible for automation. However, a great deal of information lacks any such identification of information items or relationships; and much more loses it during "downhill" conversion such as saving to page-oriented representations, printing, scanning, or faxing. The journey back "uphill" can be costly. According to Computer Weekly, 60% of organisations believe that their own business intelligence reporting capability is "inadequate" and 65% say that they have "somewhat disorganised content management approaches". == Relevance == Useful data may become dark data after it becomes irrelevant, as it is not processed fast enough. This is called "perishable insights" in "live flowing data". For example, if the geolocation of a customer is known to a business, the business can make offer based on the location, however if this data is not processed immediately, it may be irrelevant in the future. According to IBM, about 60 percent of data loses its value immediately. == Storage == According to the New York Times, 90% of energy used by data centres is wasted. If data was not stored, energy costs could be saved. Furthermore, there are costs associated with the underutilisation of information and thus missed opportunities. According to Datamation, "the storage environments of EMEA organizations consist of 54 percent dark data, 32 percent redundant, obsolete and trivial data and 14 percent business-critical data. By 2020, this can add up to $891 billion in storage and management costs that can otherwise be avoided." The continuous storage of dark data can put an organisation at risk, especially if this data is sensitive. In the case of a breach, this can result in serious repercussions. These can be financial, legal and can seriously hurt an organisation's reputation. For example, a breach of private records of customers could result in the stealing of sensitive information, which could result in identity theft. Another example could be the breach of the company's own sensitive information, for example relating to research and development. These risks can be mitigated by assessing and auditing whether this data is useful to the organisation, employing strong encryption and security and finally, if it is determined to be discarded, then it should be discarded in a way that it becomes unretrievable. == Future == It is generally considered that as more advanced computing systems for analysis of data are built, the higher the value of dark data will be. It has been noted that "data and analytics will be the foundation of the modern industrial revolution". Of course, this includes data that is currently considered "dark data" since there are not enough resources to process it. All this data that is being collected can be used in the future to bring maximum productivity and an ability for organisations to meet consumers' demand. Technology advancements are helping to leverage this dark data affordably. Furthermore, many organisations do not realise the value of dark data right now, for example in healthcare and education organisations deal with large amounts of data that could create a significant "potential to service students and patients in the manner in which the consumer and financial services pursue their target population".
Democratization of technology
Democratization of technology is the process by which access to technology rapidly extends to an ever-broader audience, especially from a select group of people to the average public. New technologies and improved user experiences have empowered those outside of the technical industry to access and use technological products and services. At an increasing scale, consumers have greater access to use and purchase technologically sophisticated products, as well as to participate meaningfully in the development of these products. Industry innovation and user demand have been associated with more affordable, user-friendly products. This is an ongoing process, beginning with the development of mass production and increasing dramatically as digitization became commonplace. Thomas Friedman argued that the era of globalization has been characterized by the democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and democratization of information. Technology has been critical in the latter two processes, facilitating the rapid expansion of access to specialized knowledge and tools, as well as changing the way that people view and demand such access. A counter argument is that this is just a process of 'massification' - more people can use banks, technology, have access to information, but it does not mean there is any more democratic influence over its production, or that this massification promotes Democracy. == History == Scholars and social critics often cite the invention of the printing press as a major invention that changed the course of history. The force of the printing press rested not in its impact on the printing industry or inventors, but on its ability to transmit information to a broader public by way of mass production. This event is so widely recognized because of its social impact – as a democratizing force. The printing press is often seen as the historical counterpart to the Internet. After the development of the Internet in 1969, its use remained limited to communications between scientists and within government, although use of email and boards gained popularity among those with access. It did not become a popular means of communication until the 1990s. In 1993 the US federal government opened the Internet to commerce and the creation of HTML formed the basis for universal accessibility. === Major innovations === The Internet has played a critical role in modern life as a typical feature of most Western households, and has been key in the democratization of knowledge. It not only constitutes arguably the most critical innovation in this trend thus far; it has also allowed users to gain knowledge of and access to other technologies. Users can learn of new developments more quickly, and purchase high-tech products otherwise only actively marketed to recognized experts. Social media has also empowered and emboldened users to become contributors and critics of technological developments. Some have argued that cloud computing is having a major effect by allowing users greater access through mobility and pay-as-you-use capacity. The open-source model allows users to participate directly in development of software, rather than indirect participation, through contributing opinions. By being shaped by the user, development is directly responsive to user demand and can be obtained for free or at a low cost. In a comparable trend, arduino and littleBits have made electronics more accessible to users of all backgrounds and ages. The development of 3D printers has the potential to increasingly democratize production. Generative artificial intelligence tools have the potential to democratize the process of innovation by improving the ability of individuals to specify and visualize ideas. The democratization of artificial intelligence refers to the transition from AI as a high-cost, specialized field to one accessible to non-experts and smaller organizations. This process is driven by the release of open-weights models, the availability of cloud computing for model training, and the emergence of no-code development platforms. While early AI development was concentrated within Big Tech firms and elite research universities, the 2020s saw a proliferation of public tools like ChatGPT and repositories such as Hugging Face, which lowered the technical barriers to entry. However, the trend has faced criticism as the "illusion of democratization," as the underlying GPU hardware remains concentrated among a few global providers. == Cultural impact == This trend is linked to the spread of knowledge of and ability to perform high-tech tasks, challenging previous conceptions of expertise. Widespread access to technology, including lower costs, was critical to the transition to the new economy. Similarly, democratization of technology was also fuelled by this economic transition, which produced demands for technological innovation and optimism in technology-driven progress. Since the 1980s, a spreading constructivist conception of technology has emphasized that the social and technical domains are critically intertwined. Scholars have argued that technology is non-neutral, defined contextually and locally by a certain relationship with society. Andrew Feenberg, a central thinker in the philosophy of technology, argued that democratizing technology means expanding technological design to include alternative interests and values. When successful in doing so, this can be a tool for increasing inclusiveness. This also suggests an important participatory role for consumers if technology is to be truly democratic. Feenberg asserts that this must be achieved by consumer intervention in a liberated design process. Improved access to specialized knowledge and tools has been associated with an increase in the "do it yourself" (DIY) trend. This has also been associated with consumerization, whereby personal or privately owned devices and software are also used for business purposes. Some have argued that this is linked to reduced dependence on traditional information technology departments. Astra Taylor, the author of the book The People's Platform: Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age, argues, "The promotion of Internet-enabled amateurism is a lazy substitute for real equality of opportunity." === Industry impact === In some ways, democratization of technology has strengthened this industry. Markets have broadened and diversified. Consumer feedback and input is available at a very low or no cost. However, related industries are experiencing decreased demand for qualified professionals as consumers are able to fill more of their demands themselves. Users of a range of types and status have access to increasingly similar technology. Because of the decreased costs and expertise necessary to use products and software, professionals (e.g. in the audio industry) may experience loss of work. In some cases, technology is accessible but sufficiently complex that most users without specialized training are able to operate it without necessarily understanding how it works. Additionally, the process of consumerization has led to an influx in the number of devices in businesses and accessing private networks that IT departments cannot control or access. While this can lead to lowered operating costs and increased innovation, it is also associated with security concerns that most businesses are unable to address at the pace of the spread of technology. === Political impact === Some scholars have argued that technological change will bring about a third wave of democracy. The Internet has been recognized for its role in promoting increased citizen advocacy and government transparency. Jesse Chen, a leading thinker in democratic engagement technologies, distinguishes the democratizing effects of technology from democracy itself. Chen has argued that, while the Internet may have democratizing effects, the Internet alone cannot deliver democracy at all levels of society unless technologies are purposely designed for the nuances of democracy, specifically the engagement of large groups of people in between elections in and beyond government. The spread of the Internet and other forms of technology has led to increased global connectivity. Many scholars believe that it has been associated in the developing world not only with increased Western influence, but also with the spread of democracy through increased communication, efficiency, and access to information. Scholars have drawn associations between the level of technological connectedness and democracy in many nations. Technology can enhance democracy in the developed world as well. In addition to increased communication and transparency, some electorates have implemented online voting to accommodate an increased number of citizens.
HTTP cookie
An HTTP cookie (also called web cookie, Internet cookie, browser cookie, or simply cookie) is a small block of data created by a web server while a user is browsing a website and placed on the user's computer or other device by the user's web browser. Cookies are placed on the device used to access a website, and more than one cookie may be placed on a user's device during a session. Cookies serve useful and sometimes essential functions on the web. They enable web servers to store stateful information (such as items added in the shopping cart in an online store) on the user's device or to track the user's browsing activity (including clicking particular buttons, logging in, or recording which pages were visited in the past). They can also be used to save information that the user previously entered into form fields, such as names, addresses, passwords, and payment card numbers for subsequent use. Authentication cookies are commonly used by web servers to authenticate that a user is logged in, and with which account they are logged in. Without the cookie, users would need to authenticate themselves by logging in on each page containing sensitive information that they wish to access. The security of an authentication cookie generally depends on the security of the issuing website and the user's web browser, and on whether the cookie data is encrypted. Security vulnerabilities may allow a cookie's data to be read by an attacker, used to gain access to user data, or used to gain access (with the user's credentials) to the website to which the cookie belongs (see cross-site scripting and cross-site request forgery for examples). Tracking cookies, and especially third-party tracking cookies, are commonly used as ways to compile long-term records of individuals' browsing histories — a potential privacy concern that prompted European and U.S. lawmakers to take action in 2011. European law requires that all websites targeting European Union member states gain "informed consent" from users before storing non-essential cookies on their device. == Background == === Origin of the name === The term cookie was coined by web-browser programmer Lou Montulli. It was derived from the term magic cookie, which is a packet of data a program receives and sends back unchanged, used by Unix programmers. === History === Magic cookies were already used in computing when computer programmer Lou Montulli had the idea of using them in web communications in June 1994. At the time, he was an employee of Netscape Communications, which was developing an e-commerce application for MCI. Vint Cerf and John Klensin represented MCI in technical discussions with Netscape Communications. MCI did not want its servers to have to retain partial transaction states, which led them to ask Netscape to find a way to store that state in each user's computer instead. Cookies provided a solution to the problem of reliably implementing a virtual shopping cart. Together with John Giannandrea, Montulli wrote the initial Netscape cookie specification the same year. Version 0.9beta of Mosaic Netscape, released on 13 October 1994, supported cookies. The first use of cookies (out of the labs) was checking whether visitors to the Netscape website had already visited the site. Montulli applied for a patent for the cookie technology in 1995, which was granted in 1998. Support for cookies was integrated with Internet Explorer in version 2, released in October 1995. The introduction of cookies was not widely known to the public at the time. In particular, cookies were accepted by default, and users were not notified of their presence. The public learned about cookies after the Financial Times published an article about them on 12 February 1996. In the same year, cookies received a lot of media attention, especially because of potential privacy implications. Cookies were discussed in two U.S. Federal Trade Commission hearings in 1996 and 1997. The development of the formal cookie specifications was already ongoing. In particular, the first discussions about a formal specification started in April 1995 on the www-talk mailing list. A special working group within the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) was formed. Two alternative proposals for introducing state in HTTP transactions had been proposed by Brian Behlendorf and David Kristol respectively. But the group, headed by Kristol himself and Lou Montulli, soon decided to use the Netscape specification as a starting point. In February 1996, the working group identified third-party cookies as a considerable privacy threat. The specification produced by the group was eventually published as RFC 2109 in February 1997. It specifies that third-party cookies were either not allowed at all, or at least not enabled by default. At this time, advertising companies were already using third-party cookies. The recommendation about third-party cookies of RFC 2109 was not followed by Netscape and Internet Explorer. RFC 2109 was superseded by RFC 2965 in October 2000. RFC 2965 added a Set-Cookie2 header field, which informally came to be called "RFC 2965-style cookies" as opposed to the original Set-Cookie header field which was called "Netscape-style cookies". Set-Cookie2 was seldom used, however, and was deprecated in RFC 6265 in April 2011 which was written as a definitive specification for cookies as used in the real world. No modern browser recognizes the Set-Cookie2 header field. == Terminology == === Session cookie === A session cookie (also known as an in-memory cookie, transient cookie or non-persistent cookie) exists only in temporary memory while the user navigates a website. Session cookies expire or are deleted when the user closes the web browser. Session cookies are identified by the browser by the absence of an expiration date assigned to them. === Persistent cookie === A persistent cookie expires at a specific date or after a specific length of time. For the persistent cookie's lifespan set by its creator, its information will be transmitted to the server every time the user visits the website that it belongs to, or every time the user views a resource belonging to that website from another website (such as an advertisement). For this reason, persistent cookies are sometimes referred to as tracking cookies because they can be used by advertisers to record information about a user's web browsing habits over an extended period of time. Persistent cookies are also used for reasons such as keeping users logged into their accounts on websites, to avoid re-entering login credentials at every visit. (See § Uses, below.) === Secure cookie === A secure cookie can only be transmitted over an encrypted connection (i.e. HTTPS). They cannot be transmitted over unencrypted connections (i.e. HTTP). This makes the cookie less likely to be exposed to cookie theft via eavesdropping. A cookie is made secure by adding the Secure flag to the cookie. === Http-only cookie === An http-only cookie cannot be accessed by client-side APIs, such as JavaScript. This restriction eliminates the threat of cookie theft via cross-site scripting (XSS). However, the cookie remains vulnerable to cross-site tracing (XST) and cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks. A cookie is given this characteristic by adding the HttpOnly flag to the cookie. === Same-site cookie === In 2016 Google Chrome version 51 introduced a new kind of cookie with attribute SameSite with possible values of Strict, Lax or None. With attribute SameSite=Strict, the browsers would only send cookies to a target domain that is the same as the origin domain. This would effectively mitigate cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks. With SameSite=Lax, browsers would send cookies with requests to a target domain even it is different from the origin domain, but only for safe requests such as GET (POST is unsafe) and not third-party cookies (inside iframe). Attribute SameSite=None would allow third-party (cross-site) cookies, however, most browsers require secure attribute on SameSite=None cookies. The Same-site cookie is incorporated into a new RFC draft for "Cookies: HTTP State Management Mechanism" to update RFC 6265 (if approved). Chrome, Firefox, and Edge started to support Same-site cookies. The key of rollout is the treatment of existing cookies without the SameSite attribute defined, Chrome has been treating those existing cookies as if SameSite=None, this would let all website/applications run as before. Google intended to change that default to SameSite=Lax in Chrome 80 planned to be released in February 2020, but due to potential for breakage of those applications/websites that rely on third-party/cross-site cookies and COVID-19 circumstances, Google postponed this change to Chrome 84. === Supercookie === A supercookie is a cookie with an origin of a top-level domain (such as .com) or a public suffix (such as .co.uk). Ordinary cookies, by contrast, have an origin of a specific domain name, such as ex
Fingerprint scanner
Fingerprint scanners are a type of biometric security device that identify an individual by identifying the structure of their fingerprints. They are used in police stations, security industries, smartphones, and other mobile devices. == Fingerprints == People have patterns of friction ridges on their fingers, these patterns are called the fingerprints. Fingerprints are uniquely detailed, durable over an individual's lifetime, and difficult to alter. Due to the unique combinations, fingerprints have become an ideal means of identification. == Types of fingerprint scanners == There are four types of fingerprint scanners: Optical scanners take a visual image of the fingerprint using a digital camera. Capacitive or CMOS scanners use capacitors and thus electric current to form an image of the fingerprint. This type of scanner tends to excel in terms of precision. Ultrasonic fingerprint scanners use high frequency sound waves to penetrate the epidermal (outer) layer of the skin. Thermal scanners sense the temperature differences on the contact surface, in between fingerprint ridges and valleys. All fingerprint scanners are susceptible to spoofing through fingerprints replicated using photographs and 3D printing. == Construction forms == Each type of fingerprint sensor can take two basic forms: the stagnant and the moving fingerprint scanner. Stagnant: The scanning module is mounted statically, and the user is required to swipe their fingers across it. This is cheaper but also less reliable than the moving form. Imaging can be less than ideal if the finger is not dragged over the scanning area at constant speed. Moving: The scanning module is mounted on a movable surface, while the user's finger can remain static. Because this layout allows the scanning module to pass the fingerprint at a constant speed, this method is generally more reliable. == Form factors == === Peripherals === Add-on fingerprint readers for PCs initially appeared in the late 1990's in the form of PCMCIA modules. Microsoft released a model in its IntelliMouse line with an integrated fingerprint reader in 2005. === Integrated readers === Laptops with built-in readers emerged around the same time as peripheral readers with devices such as NECs MC/R730F. IBM produced laptops with integrated readers starting in 2004. Apple introduced fingerprint scanners to their devices under the name Touch ID in 2013. These were initially released on the iPhone 5S, with the technology remaining exclusive to iPhones until the release of the 2016 MacBook Pro. On both laptops and smartphones, the fingerprint sensor usually uses a USB or I2C interface internally.
Apertus (LLM)
Apertus is a public large language model, developed by the Swiss AI Initiative (a collaboration between EPFL, ETH Zurich, and the Swiss National Supercomputing Centre). It was released on September 2, 2025, under the free and open-source Apache 2.0 license. Designed initially for business and research use cases around the world, Apertus was trained on over 1800 languages, and comes in 8 billion or 70 billion parameter versions and is available on Hugging Face for download. The model was developed aiming to adhere to European copyright law, and is one of the first examples of AI as a public good in the vein of AI Sovereignty. It is also the first large model to comply with the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act. At its launch, the model creators emphasized multilinguality, transparency, and auditability as priorities in contrast to commercial frontier model. While international reception was largely positive, the first iteration was significantly behind the capabilities of frontier models and needs adaptation for many use cases with chatbots being a secondary but not a primary use case. As of late 2025, it was considered the largest and most capable fully open model. The capability of future models will depend in part on how much more funding can be secured.
Groundswell (book)
Groundswell is a book by Forrester Research executives Charlene Li and Josh Bernoff that focuses on how companies can take advantage of emerging social technologies. It was published in 2008 by Harvard Business Press. A revised edition was published in 2011. The book attempts to explain a shift in the relationship between customers and companies, in which companies are no longer able to control customers' attitudes through market research, customer service, and advertising. Instead, customers are controlling the conversation by using new media to communicate about products and companies. == Synopsis == The groundswell is characterized by several tactics that guide companies into using social technologies strategically and effectively. Listening: Businesses should listen to their customers to understand what the market is looking for in their products. In order to do this, a company needs to find out if their customers are using social technologies and how they are using them. Talking: Instead of advertising to customers, marketing departments should find creative ways to connect with users about their experience with a product and their feelings about the brand. One common method is participation in social networks. Energizing: Enthusiastic customers are part of the groundswell, and companies can recognize and appreciate these customers by creating online communities and social platforms where they can connect with the brand and provide reviews. Supporting: Businesses can harness the support of their own employees by creating internal social applications for them to connect with the brand, also known as enterprise social software. == Groundswell in action == === Examples === Some companies distinguish their product through the use of social technologies. Tom Dickson successfully marketed his Blendtec line of blenders through the viral marketing campaign Will It Blend? The groundswell spread marketing messages through Digg and YouTube with a small budget and little marketing experience. Other companies have been able to listen to and talk with the groundswell by building their own online communities. Procter & Gamble created beinggirl.com Archived 2016-04-10 at the Wayback Machine to introduce girls to P&G feminine care products. The community approach worked because the company could reach girls with information that might seem embarrassing or sensitive in a traditional marketing campaign. === Risks === Features of particular industries or companies can make direct customer engagement more difficult. For instance, some companies must work within industry regulations, national or multinational corporations must balance corporate and local engagement, and other companies must find ways to engage with customers on time-sensitive issues. == Reception == Kevin Allison of the Financial Times praised the book for its focus on Web analytics: "[Groundswell] is not so much a manifesto or a dissection of online culture as it is a how-to manual for executives and mid-level managers trying to navigate this fast-changing and often confusing environment." The book won the American Marketing Association Foundation’s Berry-AMA Book Prize for best marketing book of 2009. It was also listed by: Amazon, as one of the Top 10 Business & Investing Books of 2008 CIO Insight, as one of the Top 10 Business-Tech Books of 2008 and one of 10 Insightful Web 2.0 Books Fortune as Magazine as one of the 3 best Web books of 2008 Advertising Age as number 3 of 10 Books You Should Have Read BusinessWeek as one of the Best Innovation & Design Books of 2008 "strategy+business" as one of the Best Business Books 2008 and “Top Shelf” in Marketing