The Chinese room argument holds that a computer executing a program cannot have a mind, understanding, or consciousness, regardless of how intelligently or human-like the program may make the computer behave. The argument was presented in a 1980 paper by the American philosopher John Searle, entitled "Minds, Brains, and Programs" and published in the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences. Similar arguments had been made previously by others, including Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Peter Winch, and Anatoly Dneprov. Searle's version has been widely discussed in the years since. The centerpiece of Searle's argument is a thought experiment known as the "Chinese room". The argument is directed against the philosophical positions of functionalism and computationalism, which hold that the mind may be viewed as an information-processing system operating on formal symbols, and that simulation of a given mental state is sufficient for its presence. Specifically, the argument is intended to refute a position Searle calls the strong AI hypothesis: "The appropriately programmed computer with the right inputs and outputs would thereby have a mind in exactly the same sense human beings have minds." Although its proponents originally presented the argument in reaction to statements of artificial intelligence (AI) researchers, it is not an argument against the goals of mainstream AI research because it does not show a limit in the amount of intelligent behavior a machine can display. The argument applies only to digital computers running programs and does not apply to machines in general. While widely discussed, the argument has been subject to significant criticism and remains controversial among philosophers of mind and AI researchers. == Chinese room thought experiment == Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so perfectly that no one can tell that they are communicating with a machine and not a hidden Chinese speaker. The questions at issue are these: does the machine actually understand the conversation, or is it just simulating the ability to understand the conversation? Does the machine have a mind in exactly the same sense that people do, or is it just acting as if it had a mind? Now suppose that Searle is in a room with an English version of the program, along with sufficient pencils, paper, erasers and filing cabinets. Chinese characters are slipped in under the door, and he follows the program step-by-step, which eventually instructs him to slide other Chinese characters back out under the door. If the computer had passed the Turing test this way, it follows that Searle would do so as well, simply by running the program by hand. Searle can see no essential difference between the roles of the computer and himself in the experiment. Each simply follows a program, step-by-step, producing behavior that makes them appear to understand. However, Searle would not be able to understand the conversation. Therefore, he argues, it follows that the computer would not be able to understand the conversation either. Searle argues that, without "understanding" (or "intentionality"), we cannot describe what the machine is doing as "thinking" and, since it does not think, it does not have a "mind" in the normal sense of the word. Therefore, he concludes that the strong AI hypothesis is false: a computer running a program that simulates a mind would not have a mind in the same sense that human beings have a mind. == History == Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz made a similar argument in 1713 against mechanism, the idea that everything that makes up a human being could, in principle, be explained in mechanical terms—in other words, that a person, including their mind, is merely a very complex machine. Leibniz used the thought experiment of expanding the brain until it was the size of a mill. He found it difficult to imagine that a "mind" capable of "perception" could be constructed using only mechanical processes. British philosopher Peter Winch made the same point in his 1958 book The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy, in which he argues that "a man who understands Chinese is not a man who has a firm grasp of the statistical probabilities for the occurrence of the various words in the Chinese language" (p. 108). Soviet cyberneticist Anatoly Dneprov made an essentially identical argument in 1961, in the form of his short story "The Game". In it, a stadium of people act as switches and memory cells implementing a program to translate a sentence from Portuguese, a language none of them know. The game was organized by a "Professor Zarubin" to answer the question "Can mathematical machines think?" Speaking through Zarubin, Dneprov writes that "the only way to prove that machines can think is to turn yourself into a machine and examine your thinking process", and he concludes, as Searle does, that "even the most perfect simulation of machine thinking is not the thinking process itself." In 1974, Lawrence H. Davis imagined duplicating the brain using telephone lines and offices staffed by people, and in 1978, Ned Block envisioned the entire population of China involved in such a brain simulation. This is known as the China brain thought experiment. Searle's version appeared in his 1980 article "Minds, Brains, and Programs", published in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. It eventually became the journal's "most influential target article", generating an enormous number of commentaries and responses in the ensuing decades, and Searle had continued to defend and refine the argument in multiple papers, popular articles, and books. David Cole writes that "the Chinese Room argument has probably been the most widely discussed philosophical argument in cognitive science to appear in the past 25 years". Most of the discussion consists of attempts to refute it. "The overwhelming majority", notes Behavioral and Brain Sciences editor Stevan Harnad, "still think that the Chinese Room Argument is dead wrong". The sheer volume of the literature that has grown up around it inspired Pat Hayes to comment that the field of cognitive science ought to be redefined as "the ongoing research program of showing Searle's Chinese Room Argument to be false". Searle's argument has become "something of a classic in cognitive science", according to Harnad. Varol Akman agrees, and has described the original paper as "an exemplar of philosophical clarity and purity". == Philosophy == Although the Chinese Room argument was originally presented in reaction to the statements of artificial intelligence researchers, philosophers have come to consider it as an important part of the philosophy of mind. It is a challenge to functionalism and the computational theory of mind, and is related to such questions as the mind–body problem, the problem of other minds, the symbol grounding problem, and the hard problem of consciousness. === Strong AI === Searle identified a philosophical position he calls "strong AI": The appropriately programmed computer with the right inputs and outputs would thereby have a mind in exactly the same sense human beings have minds. The definition depends on the distinction between simulating a mind and actually having one. Searle writes that "according to Strong AI, the correct simulation really is a mind. According to Weak AI, the correct simulation is a model of the mind." The claim is implicit in some of the statements of early AI researchers and analysts. For example, in 1957, the economist and psychologist Herbert A. Simon declared that "there are now in the world machines that think, that learn and create". Simon, together with Allen Newell and Cliff Shaw, after having completed the first program that could do formal reasoning (the Logic Theorist), claimed that they had "solved the venerable mind–body problem, explaining how a system composed of matter can have the properties of mind." John Haugeland wrote that "AI wants only the genuine article: machines with minds, in the full and literal sense. This is not science fiction, but real science, based on a theoretical conception as deep as it is daring: namely, we are, at root, computers ourselves." Searle also ascribes the following claims to advocates of strong AI: AI systems can be used to explain the mind; The study of the brain is irrelevant to the study of the mind; and The Turing test is adequate for establishing the existence of mental states. === Strong AI as computationalism or functionalism === In more recent presentations of the Chinese room argument, Searle has identified "strong AI" as "computer functionalism" (a term he attributes to Daniel Dennett). Functionalism is a position in modern philosophy of mind that holds that we can define menta
Deadbot
A deadbot, deathbot, or griefbot is a digital avatar, created with artificial intelligence, which resembles a person who is dead. Griefbots employ natural language processing and machine-learning techniques to approximate the style and personality of a deceased person. They may appear as chatbots, voice assistants, or animated avatars, and are often trained on an individual's digital remains. == History == Among the earliest researchers, Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad of the University of Washington, developed the Grandpa Bot project, a conversational simulation of his late father designed for his children to interact with. Other efforts include journalist James Vlahos's Dadbot, which evolved into the commercial platform HereAfter AI. Hossein Rahnama's Augmented Eternity research at MIT Media Lab and Toronto Metropolitan University, and game designer Jason Rohrer's "Project December", have enabled users to converse with language-model representations of loved ones. Early commercial projects such as Eternime, founded by Marius Ursache, also popularized the notion of interactive digital immortality. == Cultural and societal impact == Scholars have proposed frameworks and critiques addressing the ethics of these technologies. Tomasz Hollanek and Katarzyna Nowaczyk-Basińska developed a design-ethics taxonomy distinguishing the data donor, data recipient, and interactant. Edina Harbinja and Lilian Edwards formalized the concept of post-mortem privacy, and Carl J. Öhman at the Oxford Internet Institute studied the management of large-scale digital remains. Cultural acceptance varies: while some view them as expressions of remembrance, others regard them as unsettling or ethically problematic. Concerns have been raised about deadbots' potential for creating psychological harm. Griefbots are considered part of the phenomenon of artificial intimacy.
Talim (textiles)
Talim (Kashmiri: تعليم, Kashmiri pronunciation: [t̪əːliːm], Urdu: تَعْلِیم, Arabic: تعليم, pronounced [taʕ.liːm] ) in textiles is a symbolic code and system of notation that facilitates the creation of intricate patterns in fabrics, such as shawls and carpets, and the written coded plans that include colour schemes and weaving instructions. The term is used in traditional hand-weaving in the Indian subcontinent. Talim was initially used to create certain types of patterns in Kashmiri shawls, and later came to be applied in the production of carpets. == Etymology and origin == The term talim, which refers to a symbolic code and system of notation used by shawl and carpet artisans in their weaving processes, came to the Urdu language from the Arabic noun taʻlim (تعليم), which means "authoritative instruction", "teaching", or "edification". It means the same in Urdu and Kashmiri. The Arabic noun originated from the second form of the Arabic root verb ʻalima (علم), which means "to know". According to a local belief in Kashmir, talim was introduced to them by Persian scholar and Sufi Muslim saint Mir Sayyid Ali Hamadani. The belief notwithstanding, talim might have originated from Kashmir; Amritsar was the only place outside of Srinagar where talim was used, by migrated Kashmiri artisans. == Technique == Whereas carpets are generally woven horizontally, providing weavers with a clear view of the progress they are making in creating designs, in Kashmir, carpets are woven vertically, so the weaver is reliant on the talim. The talim technique forms fabrics by passing the weft thread as per a given script that has design codes. Weavers use talim to weave the desired pattern with planned colours. Talim involves teamwork when applying the technique, as the process of creating intricate fabric designs in weaving begins with the Naqash (designer, who designs using pencils on graphs) meticulously crafting the design on a blank sheet of paper called a naska, and the master, Talim guru, making the colour codes and symbols for weft yarns that would interlace the warp to construct the desired design. He writes on a long strip of paper, in specific symbols, the colour codes, and the number of knots to be woven with each colour. Taraha guru collaborates with talim guru and is known as the artisan responsible for determining the colours. Talim uthana is a process or the act of "picking the codes" from the graph. A clerk called the Talim Navis would record the step-by-step instructions for these numbers and colours, and thousands of low-paid and interchangeable weavers would read or recite the record to carry out the design. Afterward, a talim copyist makes copies, which are needed when multiple looms weave the same product. The script, which has been encoded, is deciphered and translated according to the specific guidelines of weavers in order to incorporate the design that is included within it. Talim has been compared to "hieroglyphics" or as a "notational-cum-cryptographic system", as it is challenging to decipher and is unique to the shawls of Kashmir, which requires expertise to comprehend. According to researcher Gagan Deep Kaur, "The talim is widely held to be a trade secret of the community and has always been fiercely guarded by the owners." Those who use talim for shawl-making do not assign important tasks to women, because of the fear that the technique and knowledge may be divulged to other communities when the women are sent there to be married. The coded cards known as talim in the Kashmiri language were used for creating certain types of patterns in shawl weaving. The talim technique is employed in the creation of kani shawls, which originated from the Kanihama region of the Kashmir valley. Carpet weaving adapted the technique from shawl making. When Kashmiri artisans started to create carpets, they chose to continue using the talim rather than switching to a different method. The resurgence of the carpet industry in Amritsar during the last century resulted in the prevalent use of the talim technique among the local weavers, a majority of whom hailed from the region of Kashmir. === Recitation of codes === Talim was also communicated through recitation accompanied by a melodic chant or song. In traditional weaving practices, the use of chanting was common. The movement of the shuttles was synchronised with the song of the weaver, adding a musical rhythm to the instructions represented through hieroglyphics. The weaver's chant, "Two blue, one red, three yellow, two blue," served as a guide as they wove and replicated the designated pattern. == Usage == The first factories established in Amritsar around 1860 utilised Bokhara designs. However, Kashmiri weavers maintained their traditional techniques and employed the talim, instead of a cartoon, for tying knots. As a result, Amritsar became the second location in the Indian subcontinent to use the talim. The traditional weaving practices are still carried out in some parts of the Indian subcontinent. The exact date when talim was last used in the subcontinent varies depending on the region and the specific weaving community. Indian textile historian Jasleen Dhamija wrote in her 1989 book Handwoven Fabrics of India that there were still some weavers in the Kashmiri village of Kanihama who applied talim in weaving shawls. As of 2022, the carpet weavers in Kashmir were the only remaining users of talim in carpets, according to Zubair Ahmed, director of the Indian Institute of Carpet Technology. The institute aims to preserve traditional Kashmiri carpet designs by digitising talim and training weavers in the technique. == Gallery ==
Backdoor (computing)
A backdoor is a typically covert method of bypassing normal authentication or encryption in a computer, product, embedded device (e.g. a home router), or its embodiment (e.g. part of a cryptosystem, algorithm, chipset, or even a "homunculus computer"—a tiny computer-within-a-computer such as that found in Intel's AMT technology). Backdoors are most often used for securing remote access to a computer, or obtaining access to plaintext in cryptosystems. From there it may be used to gain access to privileged information like passwords, corrupt or delete data on hard drives, or transfer information within compromised networks. In the United States, the 1994 Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act forces internet providers to provide backdoors for government authorities. In 2024, the U.S. government realized that China had been tapping communications in the U.S. using that infrastructure for months, or perhaps longer; China recorded presidential candidate campaign office phone calls—including employees of the then-vice president of the nation, and of the candidates themselves. A backdoor may take the form of a hidden part of a program, a separate program (e.g. Back Orifice may subvert the system through a rootkit), code in the firmware of the hardware, or parts of an operating system such as Windows, for example, device drivers. Trojan horses can be used to create vulnerabilities in a device. A Trojan horse may appear to be an entirely legitimate program, but when executed, it triggers an activity that may install a backdoor. Although some are secretly installed, other backdoors are deliberate and widely known. These kinds of backdoors have "legitimate" uses such as providing the manufacturer with a way to restore user passwords. Many systems that store information within the cloud fail to create accurate security measures. If many systems are connected within the cloud, hackers can gain access to all other platforms through the most vulnerable system. Default passwords (or other default credentials) can function as backdoors if they are not changed by the user. Some debugging features can also act as backdoors if they are not removed in the release version. In 1993, the United States government attempted to deploy an encryption system, the Clipper chip, with an explicit backdoor for law enforcement and national security access. The chip was unsuccessful. Recent proposals to counter backdoors include creating a database of backdoors' triggers and then using neural networks to detect them. == Overview == The threat of backdoors surfaced when multiuser and networked operating systems became widely adopted. Petersen and Turn discussed computer subversion in a paper published in the proceedings of the 1967 AFIPS Conference. They noted a class of active infiltration attacks that use "trapdoor" entry points into the system to bypass security facilities and permit direct access to data. The use of the word trapdoor here clearly coincides with more recent definitions of a backdoor. However, since the advent of public key cryptography the term trapdoor has acquired a different meaning (see: Trapdoor function), and thus the term "backdoor" is now preferred, only after the term trapdoor went out of use. More generally, such security breaches were discussed at length in a RAND Corporation task force report published under DARPA sponsorship by J.P. Anderson and D.J. Edwards in 1970. While initially targeting the computer vision domain, backdoor attacks have expanded to encompass various other domains, including text, audio, ML-based computer-aided design, and ML-based wireless signal classification. Additionally, vulnerabilities in backdoors have been demonstrated in deep generative models, reinforcement learning (e.g., AI GO), and deep graph models. These broad-ranging potential risks have prompted concerns from national security agencies regarding their potentially disastrous consequences. A backdoor in a login system might take the form of a hard coded user and password combination which gives access to the system. An example of this sort of backdoor was used as a plot device in the 1983 film WarGames, in which the architect of the "WOPR" computer system had inserted a hardcoded password-less account which gave the user access to the system, and to undocumented parts of the system (in particular, a video game-like simulation mode and direct interaction with the artificial intelligence). Although the number of backdoors in systems using proprietary software (software whose source code is not publicly available) is not widely credited, they are nevertheless frequently exposed. Programmers have even succeeded in secretly installing large amounts of benign code as Easter eggs in programs, although such cases may involve official forbearance, if not actual permission. == Examples == === Worms === Many computer worms, such as Sobig and Mydoom, install a backdoor on the affected computer (generally a PC on broadband running Microsoft Windows and Microsoft Outlook). Such backdoors appear to be installed so that spammers can send junk e-mail from the infected machines. Others, such as the Sony/BMG rootkit, placed secretly on millions of music CDs through late 2005, are intended as DRM measures—and, in that case, as data-gathering agents, since both surreptitious programs they installed routinely contacted central servers. A sophisticated attempt to plant a backdoor in the Linux kernel, exposed in November 2003, added a small and subtle code change by subverting the revision control system. In this case, a two-line change appeared to check root access permissions of a caller to the sys_wait4 function, but because it used assignment = instead of equality checking ==, it actually granted permissions to the system. This difference is easily overlooked, and could even be interpreted as an accidental typographical error, rather than an intentional attack. In January 2014, a backdoor was discovered in certain Samsung Android products, like the Galaxy devices. The Samsung proprietary Android versions are fitted with a backdoor that provides remote access to the data stored on the device. In particular, the Samsung Android software that is in charge of handling the communications with the modem, using the Samsung IPC protocol, implements a class of requests known as remote file server (RFS) commands, that allows the backdoor operator to perform via modem remote I/O operations on the device hard disk or other storage. As the modem is running Samsung proprietary Android software, it is likely that it offers over-the-air remote control that could then be used to issue the RFS commands and thus to access the file system on the device. === Object code backdoors === Harder to detect backdoors involve modifying object code, rather than source code—object code is much harder to inspect, as it is designed to be machine-readable, not human-readable. These backdoors can be inserted either directly in the on-disk object code, or inserted at some point during compilation, assembly linking, or loading—in the latter case the backdoor never appears on disk, only in memory. Object code backdoors are difficult to detect by inspection of the object code, but are easily detected by simply checking for changes (differences), notably in length or in checksum, and in some cases can be detected or analyzed by disassembling the object code. Further, object code backdoors can be removed (assuming source code is available) by simply recompiling from source on a trusted system. Thus for such backdoors to avoid detection, all extant copies of a binary must be subverted, and any validation checksums must also be compromised, and source must be unavailable, to prevent recompilation. Alternatively, these other tools (length checks, diff, checksumming, disassemblers) can themselves be compromised to conceal the backdoor, for example detecting that the subverted binary is being checksummed and returning the expected value, not the actual value. To conceal these further subversions, the tools must also conceal the changes in themselves—for example, a subverted checksummer must also detect if it is checksumming itself (or other subverted tools) and return false values. This leads to extensive changes in the system and tools being needed to conceal a single change. As object code can be regenerated by recompiling (reassembling, relinking) the original source code, making a persistent object code backdoor (without modifying source code) requires subverting the compiler itself—so that when it detects that it is compiling the program under attack it inserts the backdoor—or alternatively the assembler, linker, or loader. As this requires subverting the compiler, this in turn can be fixed by recompiling the compiler, removing the backdoor insertion code. This defense can in turn be subverted by putting a source meta-backdoor in the compiler, so that when it detects that it is compiling itself
Strategic Air Command Digital Information Network
The Strategic Air Command DIgital Network (SACDIN) was a United States military computer network that provided computerized record communications, replacing the Data Transmission Subsystem and part of the Data Display Subsystem of the SAC Automated Command and Control System. SACDIN enabled a rapid flow of communications from headquarters SAC to its fielded forces, such as B-52 bases and ICBM Launch Control Centers. == Logistics == Major portions of SACDIN were developed, engineered and installed by the International Telephone and Telegraph (ITT) company, under contract to the Electronic Systems Center. == Chronology == 1969 - Headquarters SAC submits a request to the Joint Chiefs of Staff to study an expanded communications system, known as the SAC Total Information Network (SATIN). It would interconnect Air Force Satellite Communications (AFSATCOM), Advanced Airborne Command Post (AABNCP), Airborne Command Post (ABNCP), high frequency/single sideband radio HF/SSB radio, SAC Automated Command and Control System (SACCS), Automatic Digital Information Network (AUTODIN), Survivable Low Frequency Communications System (SLFCS) and Command Data Buffer (CDB) 1977 1 November - SATIN IV was effectively terminated by Congress. The restructured program was renamed SAC Digital Network (SACDIN), and was formulated to meet SAC's minimum essential data communications requirements, but also had the capability to grow in a modular fashion. 1986 ?? ??? - SACDIN replaces much of the SAC Automated Command and Control System (SACCS) and the SAC Automated Total Information Network (SATIN)
Lemmy (social network)
Lemmy is free and open-source, social news aggregation software for running self-hosted discussion forums. These hosts, known as "instances", communicate with each other using the ActivityPub protocol. == History == Lemmy was created by the user Dessalines on GitHub in February 2019 and licensed under the Affero General Public License. In a 2020 post, Lemmy's co-creator Dessalines wrote about the origin of the name Lemmy. "It was nameless for a long time, but I wanted to keep with the fediverse tradition of naming projects after animals. I was playing that old-school game Lemmings, and Lemmy (from Motorhead) had passed away that week, and we held a few polls for names, and I went with that." According to the Fediverse statistics sites the-federation.info and fedidb.com, Lemmy had fewer than 100 instances prior to June 2023, but grew to 455 instances with approximately 48,600 monthly active users as of 22 December 2025, with the largest instances being lemmy.world and lemmy.ml, reporting about 14,144 and 1,982 monthly active users, respectively. == Description == Lemmy is made up of a network of individual installations of the Lemmy software that can intercommunicate. This departs from the centralized, monolithic structure of other social media platforms. It has been described as a federated alternative to Reddit. Users on individual instances submit posts with links, text, or pictures to user-created forums for discussion called "communities". Discussion is in the form of threaded comments. Posts and comments can be upvoted or downvoted though the ability to downvote can be disabled by the admins of each instance. Communities are local to each instance, however users may subscribe to communities, create posts and leave comments across instances. Moderation is conducted by the administrators of each instance and moderators of specific communities. Community names begin with c/ in the URL (e.g lemmy.ml/c/simpleliving) and are mentionable using the !community@instance format. On each instance, a front page presents the user with popular posts from several communities. These posts can then be filtered according to origin: posts from the instance the user is on, or from all federated instances. It can also be made to only show posts from communities the user has subscribed to. Lemmy instances are generally supported by donations. == Relations with other social networks == ActivityPub is the protocol used to allow Lemmy instances to operate as a federated social network. It allows users to interact with compatible platforms such as Kbin and Mastodon. In June 2023, following the announcement of Reddit API service changes intended to reduce the use of third-party Reddit clients, community members discussed relocating to Lemmy and other Reddit competitors. Reddit banned a user for promoting switching to Lemmy along with the r/LemmyMigration subreddit as a whole, leading to a Streisand effect after it garnered attention on sites like Hacker News. The ban was reversed a day later. == Third-party software == Prominent third-party Reddit clients Sync and Boost which had shut down due to changes to the pricing of Reddit's API began working on Lemmy clients, with them later relaunching as Sync for Lemmy and Boost for Lemmy. Multiple other apps and browser clients have also been developed.
ISO 15765-2
ISO 15765-2, or ISO-TP (Transport Layer), is an international standard for sending data packets over a CAN bus. The protocol allows for the transport of messages that exceed the eight byte maximum payload of CAN frames. ISO-TP segments longer messages into multiple frames, adding metadata (CAN-TP Header) that allows the interpretation of individual frames and reassembly into a complete message packet by the recipient. It can carry up to 232-1 (4294967295) bytes of payload per message packet starting from the 2016 version. Prior versions were limited to a maximum payload size of 4095 bytes. In the OSI model, ISO-TP covers the layer 3 (network layer) and 4 (transport layer). The most common application for ISO-TP is the transfer of diagnostic messages with OBD-II equipped vehicles using KWP2000 and UDS, but is used broadly in other application-specific CAN implementations where one might need to send messages longer than what the CAN protocol physical layer allows (eight bytes for CAN, 64 bytes for CAN FD, and 2048 bytes for CAN-XL). ISO-TP can be operated with its own addressing as so-called Extended Addressing or without address using only the CAN ID (so-called Normal Addressing). Extended addressing uses the first data byte of each frame as an additional element of the address, reducing the application payload by one byte. For clarity the protocol description below is based on Normal Addressing with eight byte CAN frames. In total, six types of addressing are allowed by the ISO 15765-2 Protocol. ISO-TP prepends one or more metadata bytes to the payload data in the eight byte CAN frame, reducing the payload to seven or fewer bytes per frame. The metadata is called the Protocol Control Information, or PCI. The PCI is one, two or three bytes. The initial field is four bits indicating the frame type, and implicitly describing the PCI length. ISO 15765-2 is a part of ISO 15765 (headlined Road vehicles — Diagnostic communication over Controller Area Network (DoCAN)), which has the following parts: ISO 15765-1 Part 1: General information and use case definition ISO 15765-2 Part 2: Transport protocol and network layer services ISO 15765-3 Part 3: Implementation of unified diagnostic services (UDS on CAN) – replaced by ISO 14229-3 Road vehicles — Unified diagnostic services ISO 15765-4 Part 4: Requirements for emissions-related systems == List of protocol control information (PCI) field types == The ISO-TP defines four frame types: A message of seven bytes or less is sent in a single frame, with the initial byte containing the type (0) and payload length (1-7 bytes). With the 0 in the type field, this can also pass as a simpler protocol with a length-data format and is often misinterpreted as such. A message longer than 7 bytes requires segmenting the message packet over multiple frames. A segmented transfer starts with a First Frame. The PCI is two bytes in this case, with the first 4 bit field the type (type 1) and the following 12 bits the message length (excluding the type and length bytes). The recipient confirms the transfer with a flow control frame. The flow control frame has three PCI bytes specifying the interval between subsequent frames and how many consecutive frames may be sent (Block Size). For CAN FD, the ISO 15765-2 protocol has been extended for Single and First frame, to allow larger size values, but still backwards compatible with traditional ISO 15765. See CAN FD. The initial byte contains the type (type = 3) in the first four bits, and a flag in the next four bits indicating if the transfer is allowed (0 = Continue To Send, 1 = Wait, 2 = Overflow/abort). The next byte is the block size, the count of frames that may be sent before waiting for the next flow control frame. A value of zero allows the remaining frames to be sent without flow control or delay. The third byte is the minimum Separation Time (STmin), the minimum delay time between frames. STmin values up to 127 (0x7F) specify the minimum number of milliseconds to delay between frames, while values in the range 241 (0xF1) to 249 (0xF9) specify delays increasing from 100 to 900 microseconds. Note that the Separation Time is defined as the minimum time between the end of one frame to the beginning of the next. Robust implementations should be prepared to accept frames from a sender that misinterprets this as the frame repetition rate i.e. from start-of-frame to start-of-frame. Even careful implementations may fail to account for the minor effect of bit-stuffing in the physical layer. The sender transmits the rest of the message using Consecutive Frames. Each Consecutive Frame has a one byte PCI, with a four bit type (type = 2) followed by a 4-bit sequence number. The sequence number starts at 1 and increments with each frame sent (1, 2,..., F, 0, 1,...), with which lost or discarded frames can be detected. Each consecutive frame starts at 0, initially for the first set of data in the first frame will be considered as 0th data. So the first set of CF(Consecutive frames) start from 0x1. There afterwards when it reaches 0x2F, will be started from 0x20 (e.g. 0x21, 0x22, 0x23...0x2F, 0x20, 0x21...). The 12-bit length field (as indicated in the First Frame) allows up to 4095 bytes of user data in a segmented message, but in practice the typical application-specific limit is considerably lower because of receive buffer or hardware limitations. == Timing parameters == Timing parameters, such as P1 and P2 timers, have to be mentioned. == Standards == ISO 15765-2:2016 Road vehicles -- Diagnostic communication over Controller Area Network (DoCAN) -- Part 2: Transport protocol and network layer services