Thai QR Payment or PromptPay (พร้อมเพย์) is a real-time payment system in Thailand that allows money transfers through digital channels using identifiers linked to a bank account, including a mobile phone number, citizen identification number, tax identification number or bank account number. The system was introduced in 2016 as part of Thailand's national e-payment infrastructure and was developed under the National e-Payment Master Plan, a government programme intended to expand digital payment infrastructure and reduce the use of cash in everyday transactions. It is owned by National ITMX ltd and Bank of Thailand and developed by Vocalink, a group by Mastercard == History == PromptPay (originally AnyID) is one of the National e-Payment projects and policies by Thailand, to regulate and standardize electronic payments to follow the technologies with internet and smartphones that is expanding and bringing technology into Finance and Commerce. By 22 December 2015, The First Prayut cabinet have approved the project as a national infastructure PromptPay has also been used in cross-border payment linkages with other real-time payment systems in Southeast Asia. In April 2021, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Bank of Thailand launched a linkage between Singapore's PayNow and Thailand's PromptPay, allowing customers of participating banks to send money between the two countries using a mobile phone number. In June 2021, the central banks of Thailand and Malaysia launched a cross-border QR payment linkage between PromptPay and Malaysia's DuitNow system. == Services == PromptPay's Services have included Encrypted Transactions and Payment between Two Individuals (C2C) Government Infrastructure Payment Tax Returns Individual PromptPay e-Wallet Thai QR Payment Pay Alert e-Donation Cross Border QR Payment
Radek Maneuver
The Radek Maneuver is a scale-up-then-scale-down tactic used in the administration of web services, specifically those deployed under a cloud computing paradigm (by a provider e.g. Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud or Microsoft Azure). == History == Developed by Olivier "Radek" Dabrowski in the mid-2010s, the Radek Maneuver was originally conceived of in using and maintaining applications running on a PaaS system. == Execution == The Radek Maneuver consists of a series of steps, usually executed via the PaaS or web portal interface. The tactic should be used when a service is misbehaving or otherwise experiencing errors, and the suspected cause is the underlying cloud layer, rather than the application layer. This includes networking issues and other "bad box" problems. The steps are as follows: Identify the application or service which is misbehaving. Increase the compute resource (number of CPU cores, amount of ram) for the instance on which the application is running. This is also known as scaling up. Wait for the application to re-deploy and stabilize. Scale back down to the original instance size. == Principle of action == This scale-up-scale-down method is understood to shift the application to a different physical machine underlying the PaaS service or application virtual machine. While this layer of the cloud computing stack is generally out of the access of an application developer (instead in the hands of the cloud provider), the maneuver allows troubleshooting and dodging errors in that layer.
VSCO
VSCO ( ), formerly known as VSCO Cam, is a photography mobile app available for iOS and Android devices. The app was created by Joel Flory and Greg Lutze. The VSCO app allows users to capture photos in the app and edit them, using preset filters and editing tools. == History == Visual Supply Company was founded by Joel Flory and Greg Lutze in California, in 2011. VSCO was launched in 2012. It raised $40 million from investors in May 2014. In 2017, VSCO launched a subscription model. As of 2018, Visual Supply Company has $90 million in funding from investors and over 2 million paying members. In 2019, VSCO acquired Rylo, a video editing startup founded by the original developer of Instagram’s Hyperlapse. Visual Supply Company has locations in Oakland, California, where it is headquartered, and Chicago, Illinois. In December 2020 VSCO acquired AI-powered video editing app Trash. In April 2018, VSCO reached over 30 million users. In September 2023, Eric Wittman was appointed as the new CEO and co-founder Joel Flory became executive chairman. == Usage == Users must register an account to use the app. Photos can be taken or imported from the camera roll, as well as short videos or animated GIFs (known in the app as DSCO; iOS only). The user can edit their photos through various preset filters, or through the "toolkit" feature which allows finer adjustments to fade, clarity, skin tone, tint, sharpness, saturation, contrast, temperature, exposure, and other properties. Users have the option of posting their photos to their profile, where they can also add captions and hashtags. Photos can also be exported back into the camera roll or shared with other social networking services. The users also have an option to edit their own videos from their camera roll with the VSCO yearly membership, but they are not able to post camera roll as VSCO Film X videos to their account on VSCO. JPEG and raw image files can be used. Research on image based social media platforms has found that engagement with posting, editing, and interacting with images can influence users' mood, self esteem, and body satisfaction. Studies also suggest that greater emotional investment in social media content is associated with increased negative psychological outcomes including stress and depressive symptoms. == In popular culture == VSCO's Oakland headquarters was a key filming location for Boots Riley's 2018 film Sorry to Bother You.
Screenless video
Screenless video is any system for transmitting visual information from a video source without the use of a screen. Screenless computing systems can be divided into three groups: Visual Image, Retinal Direct, and Synaptic Interface. == Visual image == Visual Image screenless display includes any image that the eye can perceive. The most common example of Visual Image screenless display is a hologram. In these cases, light is reflected off some intermediate object (hologram, LCD panel, or cockpit window) before it reaches the retina. In the case of LCD panels the light is refracted from the back of the panel, but is nonetheless a reflected source. Google has proposed a similar system to replace the screens of tablet computers and smartphones. == Retinal display == Virtual retinal display systems are a class of screenless displays in which images are projected directly onto the retina. They are distinguished from visual image systems because light is not reflected from some intermediate object onto the retina, it is instead projected directly onto the retina. Retinal Direct systems, once marketed, hold out the promise of extreme privacy when computing work is done in public places because most snooping relies on viewing the same light as the person who is legitimately viewing the screen, and retinal direct systems send light only into the pupils of their intended viewer. == Synaptic interface == Synaptic Interface screenless video does not use light at all. Visual information completely bypasses the eye and is transmitted directly to the brain. While such systems have only been implemented in humans in rudimentary form - for example, displaying single Braille characters to blind people – success has been achieved in sampling usable video signals from the biological eyes of a living horseshoe crab through their optic nerves, and in sending video signals from electronic cameras into the creatures' brains using the same method.
Halloween Problem
In computing, the Halloween Problem refers to a phenomenon in databases in which an update operation causes a change in the physical location of a row, potentially allowing the row to be visited again later in the same update operation. This could even cause an infinite loop in some cases where updates continually place the updated record ahead of the scan performing the update operation. The potential for this database error was first discovered by Don Chamberlin, Pat Selinger, and Morton Astrahan in the mid-1970s, on Halloween day, while working on query optimization. They wrote a SQL query supposed to give a ten percent raise to every employee who earned less than $25,000. This query would run successfully, with no errors, but when finished all the employees in the database earned at least $25,000, because it kept giving them a raise until they reached that level. The expectation was that the query would iterate over each of the employee records with a salary less than $25,000 precisely once. In fact, because even updated records were visible to the query execution engine and so continued to match the query's criteria, salary records were matching multiple times and each time being given a 10% raise until they were all greater than $25,000. Contrary to what some believe, the name is not descriptive of the nature of the problem but rather was given due to the day it was discovered on. As recounted by Don Chamberlin: Pat and Morton discovered this problem on Halloween... I remember they came into my office and said, "Chamberlin, look at this. We have to make sure that when the optimizer is making a plan for processing an update, it doesn't use an index that is based on the field that is being updated. How are we going to do that?" It happened to be on a Friday, and we said, "Listen, we are not going to be able to solve this problem this afternoon. Let's just give it a name. We'll call it the Halloween Problem and we'll work on it next week." And it turns out it has been called that ever since.
Community cloud
A community cloud in computing is a collaborative effort in which infrastructure is shared between several organizations from a specific community with common concerns (security, compliance, jurisdiction, etc.), whether managed internally or by a third party and hosted internally or externally. This is controlled and used by a group of organizations that have shared interests. The costs are spread over fewer users than a public cloud (but more than a private cloud), so only some of the cost savings potential of cloud computing are realized. The community cloud is provisioned for use by a group of consumers from different organizations who share the same concerns (e.g., application, security, policy, and efficiency demands).
Patch management
Patch management (or patch management policy or patch policy or patch management process) is concerned with the identification, acquisition, distribution, testing and installation of patches to systems. Proper patch management can be a net productivity boost for an organization. Patches can be used to defend against and eliminate potential vulnerabilities of a system, so that no threats may exploit them. Problems can arise during patch management, including buggy patches that either fail to fix their problem or introduce new issues. Patch management tools help orchestrate all of the procedures involved in patch management. == Description == Patch management is defined as a sub-practice of various disciplines including vulnerability management (part of security management), lifecycle management (with further possible sub-classification into application lifecycle management and release management), change management, and systems management. The practice is broadly concerned with the identification, acquisition, distribution, and installation of patches to systems. Some definitions of patch management are as a software-level practice, while others are as a systems-level process: software, drivers, and firmware. == Cost–benefit analysis == While reserving time for patching takes up enterprise resources, there are balancing factors which can make proper patch management into a net productivity boost for an organization. Up-to-date systems often perform more efficiently, less costly, with less errors, less security risks, and better user workflow. Additionally, compliance with changing local and federal regulations are more likely to be satisfied. Patching security vulnerabilities has been one among many competing priorities for organizations, leading to longer periods before patching for some organizations. Equifax was too slow to implement its 2015 patch management plan to be able to mitigate or prevent the 2017 Equifax data breach, leading to scrutiny from regulators. == Relation to security management == Patches can be used to defend against and eliminate potential vulnerabilities of a system, so that no threats may exploit them; therefore, patch management can be considered a sub-discipline of vulnerability management. Every patchable device in a system presents an attack surface that must be secured. === Time plan === Automatic updates are where the patch is applied automatically with little to know actions or planning required. This approach is recommended for many individuals and organizations. Some organizations also have to prioritize which patches to prioritize given limited resources. Patch Tuesday is the most common process when major companies like Microsoft and Adobe release patches on a known date so that companies can plan resources around implementing the patches more quickly. Linux is open-sourced and patches can be released at any time, leading some to rely on mailing lists or other ways to be alerted to updates. === Inventory === Taking an inventory of software and hardware, including versions can make it easier to correlate with bugs or patches as they become known. Taking stock of how much education and support others in an organization need to install their patches can also help for planning how to implement the patch or design systems to begin with. Streamlining the process by using tools that can communicate with each other can also help to reduce the time of exposure to known vulnerabilities. == Challenges == There are a multitude of problems that can arise during patch management. A common issue is buggy patches, which either fail to fix their problem or introduce new issues. Another issue is deployment synchronization, since various subsystems may receive instructions to update at different times. Similarly, the difficulty of patch management across many devices may grow at an uncontrollable rate depending on organizational size. One prominent demonstration of the challenges facing proper patch management was the buggy Falcon Sensor patch by CrowdStrike which caused one of the worst IT outages of all time. == Implementations == A patch management tool (alternatively patch manager, patch management system, patch management software, or centralized patch management) help orchestrate all of the procedures involved in patch management. Tools can be in-house (applied locally by local administrators), or external, as with managed service providers (applied externally by a provider). === Patch management software === Windows Update for Business, System Center Configuration Manager, and Windows Server Update Services offer control over patch deployment, with features enabling testing, scheduling updates, and setting custom configurations on Windows platforms. === Managed service providers === == Regulatory requirements (United States) == Timely patching of software vulnerabilities is a requirement under multiple regulatory frameworks in the United States. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule requires covered entities to protect electronic protected health information by implementing security measures sufficient to reduce risks to a reasonable and appropriate level, which industry guidance has long interpreted to include timely patch management. A proposed new HIPAA Security Rule would make patch management requirements explicit, mandating that covered entities and business associates deploy security patches and updates within a defined risk-based timeline and maintain written procedures for prioritizing, testing, and applying patches to systems that store, process, or transmit ePHI. The 2025 proposal continues to receive industry pushback as of December 2025. HIPAA was last updated in 2013. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires organizations to protect system components from known vulnerabilities by installing applicable security patches within one month of release for critical patches. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) maintains a Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog that compels U.S. federal agencies to remediate listed vulnerabilities within specified timelines. Agencies are typically required to patch within 3 weeks, though some vulnerabilities must be fixed within 24 hours.