The color clock, or color timer, is a part of the video circuitry of computer graphics hardware that works with analog color television systems. The clock is timed to match the timing of the color standard it works with, typically NTSC or PAL, ensuring that the data being read from the computer memory to create the image on-screen is in sync with the display. Depending on the speed of the color clock, the product of the resolution and number of colors is defined. Slow color clocks of many early games consoles and home computers resulted in limited color palettes at the highest resolutions.
Olio (app)
Olio is a mobile app for sharing by giving away, getting, borrowing or lending things in your community for free, aiming to reduce household and food waste. It does this by connecting neighbours with spare food or household items to others nearby who wish to pick up those items. The food must be edible; it can be raw or cooked, sealed or open. Non-food items often listed on Olio include books, clothes and furniture. Those donating surplus food can be individuals or companies such as food retailers, restaurants, corporate canteens, food photographers etc., and donations can take place on an ad-hoc or recurrent basis. For example, some supermarket chains in the UK, including Tesco, the Midcounties Co-operative, Morrisons, Sainsbury's and Iceland have piloted Olio as an 'online food bank' to donate food and to reduce their waste. In March 2022, Olio partnered with Pandamart in Singapore. First launched in early 2015 by Tessa Clarke and Saasha Celestial-One, by October 2017 the company had raised $2.2 million in funding. Olio subsequently performed a series A funding round of $6 million in 2018 and a Series B of $43 million. Notable investors include Accel, Octopus Ventures and VNV Global. The Olio app had around 7 million registered users as of May 2023.
Sharenting
"Sharenting" is a portmanteau of "sharing" and "parenting", describing the practice of parents publicizing a large amount of potentially sensitive content about their children on internet platforms, most notably on social media. While the term was coined as recently as 2010, sharenting has become an international phenomenon with widespread presence in the United States, Spain, France, and the United Kingdom. Proponents of sharenting frame the practice as a natural expression of parental pride in their children and argue that critics take sharenting-related posts out of context. Detractors find that it violates child privacy and hurts a parent–child relationship. Academic research has been conducted over the potential social motivations for sharenting and legal frameworks to balance child privacy with this parental practice. Researchers have conducted several psychological surveys, outlining social media accessibility, parental self-identification with children, and social pressure as potential causes for sharenting. Legal scholars have identified international human rights laws, labor protections, and recent online child privacy statutes as potential legal standards to check sharenting abuses. == History == The origins of the term "sharenting" have been attributed to the Wall Street Journal, where they called it "oversharenting," a portmanteau of "oversharing" and "parenting." Priya Kumar suggests that recording life moments of children rearing is not a new practice: people have been using diaries, scrapbooks and baby log books as the media of documentation for centuries. Scholars assert that sharenting has become popular as a result of social media, which has made many people more comfortable with sharing their lives and those of their children online. The trend of oversharing on social media has raised public attention in the 2010s and become the focus of a number of editorials and academic research projects. It was also added to Times Word of the Day in February 2013 and Collins English Dictionary in 2016 given its influence. == Popularity == Several studies describe sharenting as an international phenomenon with widespread prevalence across households. In the United States, researchers at the University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children's Hospital found that almost 75% of American parents were familiar with someone who over-shared information about their child on social media, and an AVG survey determined that 92% of all American two-year-olds had some presence on the internet. In Australia, Fisher-Price conducted a survey which revealed that 90% of Australian parents admitted to over-sharing. In Spain and Czech Republic, a survey of approximately 1,500 parents found that 70-80% participated in sharenting. In the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Italy, a Research Now report revealed that almost three-quarters of surveyed parents said that they were "willing to share images of their infants". Some claim that sharenting presents a violation of child privacy, and this backlash includes anti-sharenting sites and apps that block baby pictures. One particular outlet of protest was the blog STFU Parents, founded in 2009 to criticize parental oversharing on social media. Some parents felt that these criticisms of sharenting often took posts out of context and neglected some positive aspects of the practice, including advancing a stronger sense of online community. Others, while acknowledging the potential privacy violations of sharenting, suggested a more tailored approach that would only permit posting under certain conditions, notwithstanding audience and identification restrictions for social media posts. == Motivations == Research has suggested that sharenting is associated with a mix of parent self-identification with children, mothering pressures, and the accessibility of social media. Conducting 17 interviews with mothers in the United Kingdom, a London School of Economics study found that parent bloggers often re-explained their sharing practices in terms of expressing their own personal identity, representing their own child as part of themselves. In particular, the report surveyed the use of blogs as a networking vehicle to connect parents with similar family situations and found that sharenting parents, by filtering self-presentation through their parent-child relationship, adopted a more relational identity on social media websites. This included identifying oneself in terms of parental circumstances, whether it be raising a child with a disability or being a single mother. Alternatively, some have suggested that these online expressions indicate the infiltration of individual pride into the sphere of parenting, as family photography becomes a means to "show off" one's children to the others and strengthens a parent's sense of individuated self. Addressing the prevalence of mothers engaging in sharenting, those who purport this view argue that the rise of digital communication has pressured mothers into performing the role of a "good" parent on social media platforms. They claim that these developments may reinforce a dominant vision of a "normal" family, as sharenting posts could be motivated by the need to converge to a normative interpretation of family. == Controversy == While some people assert that online platforms enable parents to establish a community and seek parenting support, others are concerned about the children's data privacy and their lack of informed consent. Sharing content may not only embarrass children but also creates an initial digital footprint, a history of online activity, that the children themselves have no control over. This might bring some negative consequences, such as being ridiculed at school or leaving a negative impression on future employers. === Parental benefits === Many parents use social media to seek parenting advice and share information about their children. With the convenience of online platforms, parent bloggers can easily connect with other people in similar situations as well as those who are willing to contribute meaningful advice. By forming a community, parents can receive encouragement from empathetic peers and assistance from experts in children rearing. Parents whose children need special educational accommodations or have disabilities often found themselves detached from the mainstream parenting style. Therefore, they regard online blogs as a means to gain support from others and support back. Online blogging enables parents of children with disabilities and special needs to connect with other parents. The advice from similarly situated families can open up new possibilities that help the parents "negotiate the complexities of social services, health care, and schools". However, in some cases, posting online about a parent's struggles can cause a backlash, as advocates may accuse the parent of presenting people with that condition in a bad light, or wonder how the child will feel, if they later read these posts and see how much their parents struggled to care for them. Such advantages of social media are not limited to particular groups of parents. In general, most parents benefit from exchanging parenting experience. Statistically speaking, 72% of parents rate social media useful for emotional connection and affirmations, and 74% of them receive support about parenting from friends on social media. Sharenting also plays a role in fostering interpersonal relationships. As the images and words about children's lives initiate conversations, parents use sharenting to stay connected with distant friends and relatives. In particular, mothers, as a research study reveals, are willing to engage in sharenting since they believe that the positive contents can help avoid digital conflicts and maintain close relations with those in their social circles. Researchers also found that female participants in this study carefully chose photos and phrases to express love and present laudable behaviors of children in their updates, which indicates their intention to convey positive messages. These messages also promote a close social network for a child as the parents invites supportive family members and friends into daily life. === Children's privacy === Given the potential misuse of digital data, people are critical about sharenting, and the majority of parents are cautious about the wrongdoing with online posts. The disclosure of minors' personal information, such as geographic location, name, date of birth, pictures, and the schools they attend, might expose them to illegal practices by recipients with malicious intentions. Sharented information is often abused for "identity theft", when imposters manage to track, stalk, commit fraud against children, or even blackmail the family. According to Barclays, online fraud targeting the young generation will contribute to a loss of £670 million (approximately $790 million) by 2030, and two-thirds of identity fraud will be related to s
Strong secrecy
Strong secrecy is a term used in formal proof-based cryptography for making propositions about the security of cryptographic protocols. It is a stronger notion of security than syntactic (or weak) secrecy. Strong secrecy is related with the concept of semantic security or indistinguishability used in the computational proof-based approach. Bruno Blanchet provides the following definition for strong secrecy: Strong secrecy means that an adversary cannot see any difference when the value of the secret changes For example, if a process encrypts a message m an attacker can differentiate between different messages, since their ciphertexts will be different. Thus m is not a strong secret. If however, probabilistic encryption were used, m would be a strong secret. The randomness incorporated into the encryption algorithm will yield different ciphertexts for the same value of m.
Contrast set learning
Contrast set learning is a form of association rule learning that seeks to identify meaningful differences between separate groups by reverse-engineering the key predictors that identify for each particular group. For example, given a set of attributes for a pool of students (labeled by degree type), a contrast set learner would identify the contrasting features between students seeking bachelor's degrees and those working toward PhD degrees. == Overview == A common practice in data mining is to classify, to look at the attributes of an object or situation and make a guess at what category the observed item belongs to. As new evidence is examined (typically by feeding a training set to a learning algorithm), these guesses are refined and improved. Contrast set learning works in the opposite direction. While classifiers read a collection of data and collect information that is used to place new data into a series of discrete categories, contrast set learning takes the category that an item belongs to and attempts to reverse engineer the statistical evidence that identifies an item as a member of a class. That is, contrast set learners seek rules associating attribute values with changes to the class distribution. They seek to identify the key predictors that contrast one classification from another. For example, an aerospace engineer might record data on test launches of a new rocket. Measurements would be taken at regular intervals throughout the launch, noting factors such as the trajectory of the rocket, operating temperatures, external pressures, and so on. If the rocket launch fails after a number of successful tests, the engineer could use contrast set learning to distinguish between the successful and failed tests. A contrast set learner will produce a set of association rules that, when applied, will indicate the key predictors of each failed tests versus the successful ones (the temperature was too high, the wind pressure was too high, etc.). Contrast set learning is a form of association rule learning. Association rule learners typically offer rules linking attributes commonly occurring together in a training set (for instance, people who are enrolled in four-year programs and take a full course load tend to also live near campus). Instead of finding rules that describe the current situation, contrast set learners seek rules that differ meaningfully in their distribution across groups (and thus, can be used as predictors for those groups). For example, a contrast set learner could ask, “What are the key identifiers of a person with a bachelor's degree or a person with a PhD, and how do people with PhD's and bachelor’s degrees differ?” Standard classifier algorithms, such as C4.5, have no concept of class importance (that is, they do not know if a class is "good" or "bad"). Such learners cannot bias or filter their predictions towards certain desired classes. As the goal of contrast set learning is to discover meaningful differences between groups, it is useful to be able to target the learned rules towards certain classifications. Several contrast set learners, such as MINWAL or the family of TAR algorithms, assign weights to each class in order to focus the learned theories toward outcomes that are of interest to a particular audience. Thus, contrast set learning can be thought of as a form of weighted class learning. === Example: Supermarket Purchases === The differences between standard classification, association rule learning, and contrast set learning can be illustrated with a simple supermarket metaphor. In the following small dataset, each row is a supermarket transaction and each "1" indicates that the item was purchased (a "0" indicates that the item was not purchased): Given this data, Association rule learning may discover that customers that buy onions and potatoes together are likely to also purchase hamburger meat. Classification may discover that customers that bought onions, potatoes, and hamburger meats were purchasing items for a cookout. Contrast set learning may discover that the major difference between customers shopping for a cookout and those shopping for an anniversary dinner are that customers acquiring items for a cookout purchase onions, potatoes, and hamburger meat (and do not purchase foie gras or champagne). == Treatment learning == Treatment learning is a form of weighted contrast-set learning that takes a single desirable group and contrasts it against the remaining undesirable groups (the level of desirability is represented by weighted classes). The resulting "treatment" suggests a set of rules that, when applied, will lead to the desired outcome. Treatment learning differs from standard contrast set learning through the following constraints: Rather than seeking the differences between all groups, treatment learning specifies a particular group to focus on, applies a weight to this desired grouping, and lumps the remaining groups into one "undesired" category. Treatment learning has a stated focus on minimal theories. In practice, treatment are limited to a maximum of four constraints (i.e., rather than stating all of the reasons that a rocket differs from a skateboard, a treatment learner will state one to four major differences that predict for rockets at a high level of statistical significance). This focus on simplicity is an important goal for treatment learners. Treatment learning seeks the smallest change that has the greatest impact on the class distribution. Conceptually, treatment learners explore all possible subsets of the range of values for all attributes. Such a search is often infeasible in practice, so treatment learning often focuses instead on quickly pruning and ignoring attribute ranges that, when applied, lead to a class distribution where the desired class is in the minority. === Example: Boston housing data === The following example demonstrates the output of the treatment learner TAR3 on a dataset of housing data from the city of Boston (a nontrivial public dataset with over 500 examples). In this dataset, a number of factors are collected for each house, and each house is classified according to its quality (low, medium-low, medium-high, and high). The desired class is set to "high", and all other classes are lumped together as undesirable. The output of the treatment learner is as follows: Baseline class distribution: low: 29% medlow: 29% medhigh: 21% high: 21% Suggested Treatment: [PTRATIO=[12.6..16), RM=[6.7..9.78)] New class distribution: low: 0% medlow: 0% medhigh: 3% high: 97% With no applied treatments (rules), the desired class represents only 21% of the class distribution. However, if one filters the data set for houses with 6.7 to 9.78 rooms and a neighborhood parent-teacher ratio of 12.6 to 16, then 97% of the remaining examples fall into the desired class (high-quality houses). == Algorithms == There are a number of algorithms that perform contrast set learning. The following subsections describe two examples. === STUCCO === The STUCCO contrast set learner treats the task of learning from contrast sets as a tree search problem where the root node of the tree is an empty contrast set. Children are added by specializing the set with additional items picked through a canonical ordering of attributes (to avoid visiting the same nodes twice). Children are formed by appending terms that follow all existing terms in a given ordering. The formed tree is searched in a breadth-first manner. Given the nodes at each level, the dataset is scanned and the support is counted for each group. Each node is then examined to determine if it is significant and large, if it should be pruned, and if new children should be generated. After all significant contrast sets are located, a post-processor selects a subset to show to the user - the low order, simpler results are shown first, followed by the higher order results which are "surprising and significantly different." The support calculation comes from testing a null hypothesis that the contrast set support is equal across all groups (i.e., that contrast set support is independent of group membership). The support count for each group is a frequency value that can be analyzed in a contingency table where each row represents the truth value of the contrast set and each column variable indicates the group membership frequency. If there is a difference in proportions between the contrast set frequencies and those of the null hypothesis, the algorithm must then determine if the differences in proportions represent a relation between variables or if it can be attributed to random causes. This can be determined through a chi-square test comparing the observed frequency count to the expected count. Nodes are pruned from the tree when all specializations of the node can never lead to a significant and large contrast set. The decision to prune is based on: The minimum deviation size: The maximum difference between the support
Computational semantics
Computational semantics is a subfield of computational linguistics. Its goal is to elucidate the cognitive mechanisms supporting the generation and interpretation of meaning in humans. It usually involves the creation of computational models that simulate particular semantic phenomena, and the evaluation of those models against data from human participants. While computational semantics is a scientific field, it has many applications in real-world settings and substantially overlaps with Artificial Intelligence. Broadly speaking, the discipline can be subdivided into areas that mirror the internal organization of linguistics. For example, lexical semantics and frame semantics have active research communities within computational linguistics. Some popular methodologies are also strongly inspired by traditional linguistics. Most prominently, the area of distributional semantics, which underpins investigations into embeddings and the internals of Large Language Models, has roots in the work of Zellig Harris. Some traditional topics of interest in computational semantics are: construction of meaning representations, semantic underspecification, anaphora resolution, presupposition projection, and quantifier scope resolution. Methods employed usually draw from formal semantics or statistical semantics. Computational semantics has points of contact with the areas of lexical semantics (word-sense disambiguation and semantic role labeling), discourse semantics, knowledge representation and automated reasoning (in particular, automated theorem proving). Since 1999 there has been an ACL special interest group on computational semantics, SIGSEM.
Data product
In data management and product management, a data product is a reusable, active, and standardized data asset designed to deliver measurable value to its users, whether internal or external, by applying the rigorous principles of product thinking and management. It comprises one or more data artifacts (e.g., datasets, models, pipelines) and is enriched with metadata, including governance policies, data quality rules, data contracts, and, where applicable, a software bill of materials (SBOM) to document its dependencies and components. Ownership of a data product is aligned to a specific domain or use case, ensuring accountability, stewardship, and its continuous evolution throughout its lifecycle. Adhering to the FAIR principles – findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable – a data product is designed to be discoverable, scalable, reusable, and aligned with both business and regulatory standards, driving innovation and efficiency in modern data ecosystems. == History == In 2012, DJ Patil proposed the first documented definition: a data product is a product that facilitates an end goal through the use of data. In 2019, Zhamak Dehghani introduced Data Mesh, with a strong focus on domain-oriented data products. Later, in 2020, she solidifies Data Mesh around four principles, one being Data as a Product, in which she defines Data Product as the node on the mesh that encapsulates three structural components required for its function, providing access to the domain's analytical data as a product. In 2024, Andrea Gioia published one of the first books specifically on data products post Data Mesh announcement. In his book, Gioia defines the concept of pure data product. In 2025, during the Data Day Texas conference, Jean-Georges Perrin and a collective of product managers and data engineers got together to craft the current definition and make it available to the public domain. In July 2025, Bitol, a project of The Linux Foundation, released and early version of the Open Data Product Standard (ODPS) aiming at normalizing data products