Cooliris (for Desktop), formerly known as PicLens, was a web browser extension developed by Cooliris, Inc, and later acquired by Yahoo. The plugin provides an interactive 3D-like experience for viewing digital images and videos from the web and from desktop applications. The software places a small icon atop image thumbnails that appear on a webpage. Clicking on the icon loads the Cooliris 3D Wall, a browsing environment that gives the user the effect of flying through a three-dimensional space. Released to the public in January 2008, The New York Times described Cooliris as the "new immersive approach to Web navigation". Cooliris went out to win the 2008 Crunchies Award for Best Design. The plugin has received over 50 million downloads. As of May 2014 browser plugins are unavailable from the official website. There are only links to tablet apps - for iOS and Android.
Sayre's paradox
Sayre's paradox is a dilemma encountered in the design of automated handwriting recognition systems. A standard statement of the paradox is that a cursively written word cannot be recognized without being segmented and cannot be segmented without being recognized. The paradox was first articulated in a 1973 publication by Kenneth M. Sayre, after whom it was named. == Nature of the problem == It is relatively easy to design automated systems capable of recognizing words inscribed in a printed format. Such words are segmented into letters by the very act of writing them on the page. Given templates matching typical letter shapes in a given language, individual letters can be identified with a high degree of probability. In cases of ambiguity, probable letter sequences can be compared with a selection of properly spelled words in that language (called a lexicon). If necessary, syntactic features of the language can be applied to render a generally accurate identification of the words in question. Printed-character recognition systems of this sort are commonly used in processing standardized government forms, in sorting mail by zip code, and so forth. In cursive writing, however, letters comprising a given word typically flow sequentially without gaps between them. Unlike a sequence of printed letters, cursively connected letters are not segmented in advance. Here is where Sayre's Paradox comes into play. Unless the word is already segmented into letters, template-matching techniques like those described above cannot be applied. That is, segmentation is a prerequisite for word recognition. But there are no reliable techniques for segmenting a word into letters unless the word itself has been identified. Word recognition requires letter segmentation, and letter segmentation requires word recognition. There is no way a cursive writing recognition system employing standard template-matching techniques can do both simultaneously. Advantages to be gained by use of automated cursive writing recognition systems include routing mail with handwritten addresses, reading handwritten bank checks, and automated digitalization of hand-written documents. These are practical incentives for finding ways of circumventing Sayre's Paradox. == Avoiding the paradox == One way of ameliorating the adverse effects of the paradox is to normalize the word inscriptions to be recognized. Normalization amounts to eliminating idiosyncrasies in the penmanship of the writer, such as unusual slope of the letters and unusual slant of the cursive line. This procedure can increase the probability of a correct match with a letter template, resulting in an incremental improvement in the success rate of the system. Since improvement of this sort still depends on accurate segmentation, however, it remains subject to the limitations of Sayre's Paradox. Researchers have come to realize that the only way to circumvent the paradox is by use of procedures that do not rely on accurate segmentation. == Directions of current research == Segmentation is accurate to the extent that it matches distinctions among letters in the actual inscriptions presented to the system for recognition (the input data). This is sometimes referred to as “explicit segmentation”. “Implicit segmentation,” by contrast, is division of the cursive line into more parts than the number of actual letters in the cursive line itself. Processing these “implicit parts” to achieve eventual word identification requires specific statistical procedures involving hidden Markov models (HMM). A Markov model is a statistical representation of a random process, which is to say a process in which future states are independent of states occurring before the present. In such a process, a given state is dependent only on the conditional probability of its following the state immediately before it. An example is a series of outcomes from successive casts of a die. An HMM is a Markov model, individual states of which are not fully known. Conditional probabilities between states are still determinate, but the identities of individual states are not fully disclosed. Recognition proceeds by matching HMMs of words to be recognized with previously prepared HMMs of words in the lexicon. The best match in a given case is taken to indicate the identity of the handwritten word in question. As with systems based on explicit segmentation, automated recognition systems based on implicit segmentation are judged more or less successful according to the percentage of correct identifications they accomplish. Instead of explicit segmentation techniques, most automated handwriting recognition systems today employ implicit segmentation in conjunction with HMM-based matching procedures. The constraints epitomized by Sayre's Paradox are largely responsible for this shift in approach.
Paperless society
A paperless society is a society in which paper communication (written documents, email, letters, etc.) is replaced by electronic communication and storage. The concept was first introduced by Frederick Wilfrid Lancaster in 1978. Furthermore, libraries would no longer be needed to handle printed documents. "Librarians will, in time, become information specialists in a deinstitutionalized setting". Lancaster also stated that both computers and libraries will not always give us the information that other people and living life will. == Literature == Brodman, E. (1979). Review of Toward Paperless Information Systems. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 67(4), 437–439. Buckland, M. K. (1980). Review of Toward Paperless Information Systems. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 5(6), 349. Grosch, A. (1979). Review of Toward Paperless Information Systems. College & Research Libraries, 40(1), 88–89. Kohl, D. F. (2004). From the editor . . . The paperless society . . . Not quite yet. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 30(3), 177–178. Lancaster, F. W. (1978a). Toward paperless information systems. New York: Academic Press. Lancaster, F. W. (1980b). The future of the librarian lies outside of the library. Catholic Library World, 51, 388–391. Lancaster, F. W. (1982a). Libraries and librarians in an age of electronics. Arlington, VA: Information Resources Press. Lancaster, F. W. (1982b). The evolving paperless society and its implications for libraries. International Forum on Information and Documentation, 7(4), 3–10. Lancaster, F. W. (1983). Future librarianship: Preparing for an unconventional career. Wilson Library Bulletin, 57, 747–753. Lancaster, F. W. (1985). The paperless society revisited. American Libraries, 16, 553–555. Lancaster, F. W. (1993). Libraries and the future: Essays on the library in the twenty-first century. New York: Haworth Press. Lancaster, F. W. (1999). Second thoughts on the paperless society. Library Journal, 124(15), 48– 50. Lancaster, F. W., & Smith, L. C. (1980c). On-Line systems in the communication process: Projections. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 31(3), 193–200. Miall, D. S. (2001). The library versus the Internet: Literary studies under siege? Proceedings of the Modern Language Association, 116(5), 1405–1414. Salton, G. (1979). Review of Toward Paperless Information Systems. Journal of Documentation, 35(3), 250–252. Sellen, A. J., & Harper, R. H. R. (2003). The myth of the paperless office. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Stevens, N. D. (2006). The fully electronic academic library. College & Research Libraries, 67(1),5–14. Young, Arthur P. (2008).Aftermath of a Prediction: F. W. Lancaster and the Paperless Society LIBRARY TRENDS, 56(4),(“The Evaluation and Transformation of Information Systems: Essays Honoring the Legacy of F. W. Lancaster,” edited by Lorraine J. Haricombe and Keith Russell), pp. 843–858.
Style sheet (web development)
A web style sheet is a form of separation of content and presentation for web design in which the markup (i.e., HTML or XHTML) of a webpage contains the page's semantic content and structure, but does not define its visual layout (style). Instead, the style is defined in an external style sheet file using a style sheet language such as CSS or XSLT. This design approach is identified as a "separation" because it largely supersedes the antecedent methodology in which a page's markup defined both style and structure. The philosophy underlying this methodology is a specific case of separation of concerns. == Benefits == Separation of style and content has advantages, but has only become practical after improvements in popular web browsers' CSS implementations. === Speed === Overall, users experience of a site utilising style sheets will generally be quicker than sites that do not use the technology. ‘Overall’ as the first page will probably load more slowly – because the style sheet AND the content will need to be transferred. Subsequent pages will load faster because no style information will need to be downloaded – the CSS file will already be in the browser’s cache. === Maintainability === Holding all the presentation styles in one file can reduce the maintenance time and reduces the chance of error, thereby improving presentation consistency. For example, the font color associated with a type of text element may be specified — and therefore easily modified — throughout an entire website simply by changing one short string of characters in a single file. The alternative approach, using styles embedded in each individual page, would require a cumbersome, time consuming, and error-prone edit of every file. === Accessibility === Sites that use CSS with either XHTML or HTML are easier to tweak so that they appear similar in different browsers (Chrome, Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Safari, etc.). Sites using CSS "degrade gracefully" in browsers unable to display graphical content, such as Lynx, or those so very old that they cannot use CSS. Browsers ignore CSS that they do not understand, such as CSS 3 statements. This enables a wide variety of user agents to be able to access the content of a site even if they cannot render the style sheet or are not designed with graphical capability in mind. For example, a browser using a refreshable braille display for output could disregard layout information entirely, and the user would still have access to all page content. === Customization === If a page's layout information is stored externally, a user can decide to disable the layout information entirely, leaving the site's bare content still in a readable form. Site authors may also offer multiple style sheets, which can be used to completely change the appearance of the site without altering any of its content. Most modern web browsers also allow the user to define their own style sheet, which can include rules that override the author's layout rules. This allows users, for example, to bold every hyperlink on every page they visit. Browser extensions like Stylish and Stylus have been created to facilitate management of such user style sheets. === Consistency === Because the semantic file contains only the meanings an author intends to convey, the styling of the various elements of the document's content is very consistent. For example, headings, emphasized text, lists and mathematical expressions all receive consistently applied style properties from the external style sheet. Authors need not concern themselves with the style properties at the time of composition. These presentational details can be deferred until the moment of presentation. === Portability === The deferment of presentational details until the time of presentation means that a document can be easily re-purposed for an entirely different presentation medium with merely the application of a new style sheet already prepared for the new medium and consistent with elemental or structural vocabulary of the semantic document. A carefully authored document for a web page can easily be printed to a hard-bound volume complete with headers and footers, page numbers and a generated table of contents simply by applying a new style sheet.
Visopsys
Visopsys (Visual Operating System), is an operating system, written by Andy McLaughlin. Development of the operating system began in 1997. The operating system is licensed under the GNU GPL, with the headers and libraries under the less restrictive LGPL license. It runs on the 32-bit IA-32 architecture. It features a multitasking kernel, supports asynchronous I/O and the FAT line of file systems. It requires a Pentium processor. == History == The development of Visopsys began in 1997, being written by Andy McLaughlin. The first public release of the Operating System was on 2 March 2001, with version 0.1. In this release, Visopsys was a 32 bit operating system, supporting preemptive multitasking and virtual memory. == System overview == Visopsys uses a monolithic kernel, written in the C programming language, with elements of assembly language for certain interactions with the hardware. The operating system supports a graphical user interface, with a small C library.
Caffe (software)
Caffe (Convolutional Architecture for Fast Feature Embedding) is a deep learning framework, originally developed at University of California, Berkeley. It is open source, under a BSD license. It is written in C++, with a Python interface. == History == Yangqing Jia created the Caffe project during his PhD at UC Berkeley, while working the lab of Trevor Darrell. The first version, called "DeCAF", made its first appearance in Spring 2013 when it was used for the ILSVRC challenge (later called ImageNet). The library was named Caffe and released to the public in December 2013. It reached end-of-support in 2018. It is hosted on GitHub. == Features == Caffe supports many different types of deep learning architectures geared towards image classification and image segmentation. It supports CNN, RCNN, LSTM and fully-connected neural network designs. Caffe supports GPU- and CPU-based acceleration computational kernel libraries such as Nvidia cuDNN and Intel MKL. == Applications == Caffe is being used in academic research projects, startup prototypes, and even large-scale industrial applications in vision, speech, and multimedia. Yahoo! has also integrated Caffe with Apache Spark to create CaffeOnSpark, a distributed deep learning framework. == Caffe2 == In April 2017, Facebook announced Caffe2, which included new features such as recurrent neural network (RNN). At the end of March 2018, Caffe2 was merged into PyTorch.
Proximedia Group
Proximedia Group is a Belgian media group. == History == Proximedia Belgium was founded in 1998, by Fabrice Wuyts and Eric Glachant. The company specializes in providing websites for SMEs. The Proximedia Group SA was founded in 1999 and became the coordinating organization of Proximedia Belgium, Online, Bizbook Channel, Globule Bleu bvba, Click+, Proximedia France, Proximedia Nederland, and Proximedia Spain. The Proximedia Group has been listed at the Free Market of Euronext Brussels since 2005. In 2007, the Proximedia Group founded the Bizbook Channel. This branch specialized in creating corporate videos. In 2008, Proximedia SA took over the web agency Globule Bleu. The following year, Proximedia launched the brand BeUP. They were also elected ‘Enterprise of The Year 2009’ by Ernst & Young. Proximedia launched two new services in 2011: Videobiz and Promobook. In 2012, the Bizbook Channel was launched. Proximedia was acquired by Publicis Groupe S.A. in July 2014. == Branches == Proximedia Belgium: the oldest branch of the Proximedia Group. It makes websites and provides support for their customers. Similar branches are Proximedia France and Proximedia Nederland. Batibouw +: specialized in bringing contractors and clients together. Bizbook Channel: specialized in creating corporate videos for SMEs. Click+: offers the management of Google AdWords campaigns. This contains advertising in Google's search results. Globule Bleu: specialized in digital campaigns for larger companies or organisations. Online: an Internet Service Provider (ISP) that provides internet access, domain names, hosting of websites and data centers, email service, etc. Bizbook: an online guestbook where users can post reviews on products and services of a company. Promobook: an online service which can be used to print promotions and coupons. == Key figures == == Sale tactics and lawsuits == There are a lot of websites, forums and blogs that warn for Proximedia. This is because of the long duration of the contract, the inability to terminate the contract and the alleged aggressive approach of Proximedia and the alleged low quality of service that Proximedia offers. Also, there are a lot of lawsuits every month, some of which are customers that wish to terminate the contract, others that allege Proximedia of misguiding. List of some example lawsuits: Mitigation of contractual termination compensation on the basis of article 6:248 paragraph 2 of the Dutch Civil Code A clause on the basis of which a termination fee is claimed can be considered a penalty clause. Mitigation of the penalty based on article 6:94 of the Dutch Civil Code? Performance claim rejected; successful appeal to breach of contract; dissolution; restitution claim awarded. Agreement for IT services. Contents of the agreement. No reflex effect of the Door-to-Door Sales Act for small entrepreneurs. Implementation Act of the Consumer Rights Directive. Breach of contract? Unreasonably onerous clause? Cassation: ECLI:NL:HR:2016:996, (Partial) annulment with referral. Final judgment: ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2014:4228 Error. Reflex effect of the unfair commercial practices law? Compelling evidentiary force of written agreement. (No summary provided by court) Proximedia case. No valid defense against the claim concerning a number of monthly invoices. Article 7.1 of the agreement (containing a termination fee) is a general term in the sense of article 6:231 introductory text and under a of the Dutch Civil Code. No "reflex effect" of article 6:237 introductory text and under i of the Dutch Civil Code. Insufficiently argued why article 7.1 would be unreasonably onerous in the sense of article 6:233 of the Dutch Civil Code and that granting the claim would be unacceptable according to standards of reasonableness and fairness. Termination fee is not a penalty in the sense of article 6:91 of the Dutch Civil Code. A retailer (sole proprietorship) is approached by a representative of a company and enters into an "agreement for IT services" with a term of four years, which includes a dissolution fee of 60% of the not yet due monthly payments. The retailer is instructed to prove that, at the time of entering the agreement, the company promised him that he could terminate the agreement without any further obligations if he terminated his business. The retailer is considered to have succeeded in the burden of proof, and the company's claim for payment of the dissolution fee is rejected.