The Star Awards for Social Media Award was an award presented annually from 2014 to 2016 at the Star Awards, where Mediacorp of Singapore recognises entertainers under their employment with awards for artistic and technical merit for outstanding performances of the year. == History == The category was introduced in 2014, at the 20th Star Awards ceremony; Jeanette Aw received the award and it is given in honour of a Mediacorp artiste with the most social media engagement. The results are based on the calculations from three international social media analysis systems; artistes must be active on at least one of the following platforms in order to qualify: Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Since its inception, the award has been given to two artistes. Carrie Wong is the most recent and final winner in this category. Since the ceremony held in 2016, Aw remains as the only artiste to win in this category twice, surpassing Wong who has one win. The award was discontinued from 2017 onwards as the popularity element of the award is already represented in the Top 10 Most Popular Male Artistes and Top 10 Most Popular Female Artistes awards. == Recipients ==
Joint constraints
Joint constraints are rotational constraints on the joints of an artificial system. They are used in an inverse kinematics chain, in fields including 3D animation or robotics. Joint constraints can be implemented in a number of ways, but the most common method is to limit rotation about the X, Y and Z axis independently. An elbow, for instance, could be represented by limiting rotation on X and Z axis to 0 degrees, and constraining the Y-axis rotation to 130 degrees. To simulate joint constraints more accurately, dot-products can be used with an independent axis to repulse the child bones orientation from the unreachable axis. Limiting the orientation of the child bone to a border of vectors tangent to the surface of the joint, repulsing the child bone away from the border, can also be useful in the precise restriction of shoulder movement.
Undeniable signature
An undeniable signature is a digital signature scheme which allows the signer to be selective to whom they allow to verify signatures. The scheme adds explicit signature repudiation, preventing a signer later refusing to verify a signature by omission; a situation that would devalue the signature in the eyes of the verifier. It was invented by David Chaum and Hans van Antwerpen in 1989. == Overview == In this scheme, a signer possessing a private key can publish a signature of a message. However, the signature reveals nothing to a recipient/verifier of the message and signature without taking part in either of two interactive protocols: Confirmation protocol, which confirms that a candidate is a valid signature of the message issued by the signer, identified by the public key. Disavowal protocol, which confirms that a candidate is not a valid signature of the message issued by the signer. The motivation for the scheme is to allow the signer to choose to whom signatures are verified. However, that the signer might claim the signature is invalid at any later point, by refusing to take part in verification, would devalue signatures to verifiers. The disavowal protocol distinguishes these cases removing the signer's plausible deniability. It is important that the confirmation and disavowal exchanges are not transferable. They achieve this by having the property of zero-knowledge; both parties can create transcripts of both confirmation and disavowal that are indistinguishable, to a third-party, of correct exchanges. The designated verifier signature scheme improves upon deniable signatures by allowing, for each signature, the interactive portion of the scheme to be offloaded onto another party, a designated verifier, reducing the burden on the signer. == Zero-knowledge protocol == The following protocol was suggested by David Chaum. A group, G, is chosen in which the discrete logarithm problem is intractable, and all operation in the scheme take place in this group. Commonly, this will be the finite cyclic group of order p contained in Z/nZ, with p being a large prime number; this group is equipped with the group operation of integer multiplication modulo n. An arbitrary primitive element (or generator), g, of G is chosen; computed powers of g then combine obeying fixed axioms. Alice generates a key pair, randomly chooses a private key, x, and then derives and publishes the public key, y = gx. === Message signing === Alice signs the message, m, by computing and publishing the signature, z = mx. === Confirmation (i.e., avowal) protocol === Bob wishes to verify the signature, z, of m by Alice under the key, y. Bob picks two random numbers: a and b, and uses them to blind the message, sending to Alice: c = magb. Alice picks a random number, q, uses it to blind, c, and then signing this using her private key, x, sending to Bob: s1 = cgq ands2 = s1x. Note that s1x = (cgq)x = (magb)xgqx = (mx)a(gx)b+q = zayb+q. Bob reveals a and b. Alice verifies that a and b are the correct blind values, then, if so, reveals q. Revealing these blinds makes the exchange zero knowledge. Bob verifies s1 = cgq, proving q has not been chosen dishonestly, and s2 = zayb+q, proving z is valid signature issued by Alice's key. Note that zayb+q = (mx)a(gx)b+q. Alice can cheat at step 2 by attempting to randomly guess s2. === Disavowal protocol === Alice wishes to convince Bob that z is not a valid signature of m under the key, gx; i.e., z ≠ mx. Alice and Bob have agreed an integer, k, which sets the computational burden on Alice and the likelihood that she should succeed by chance. Bob picks random values, s ∈ {0, 1, ..., k} and a, and sends: v1 = msga and v2 = zsya, where exponentiating by a is used to blind the sent values. Note that v2 = zsya = (mx)s(gx)a = v1x. Alice, using her private key, computes v1x and then the quotient, v1xv2−1 = (msga)x(zsgxa)−1 = msxz−s = (mxz−1)s. Thus, v1xv2−1 = 1, unless z ≠ mx. Alice then tests v1xv2−1 for equality against the values: (mxz−1)i for i ∈ {0, 1, …, k}; which are calculated by repeated multiplication of mxz−1 (rather than exponentiating for each i). If the test succeeds, Alice conjectures the relevant i to be s; otherwise, she conjectures random value. Where z = mx, (mxz−1)i = v1xv2−1 = 1 for all i, s is unrecoverable. Alice commits to i: she picks a random r and sends hash(r, i) to Bob. Bob reveals a. Alice confirms that a is the correct blind (i.e., v1 and v2 can be generated using it), then, if so, reveals r. Revealing these blinds makes the exchange zero knowledge. Bob checks hash(r, i) = hash(r, s), proving Alice knows s, hence z ≠ mx. If Alice attempts to cheat at step 3 by guessing s at random, the probability of succeeding is 1/(k + 1). So, if k = 1023 and the protocol is conducted ten times, her chances are 1 to 2100.
Cut, copy, and paste
Cut, copy, and paste are essential commands of modern human–computer interaction and user interface design. They offer an interprocess communication technique for transferring data through a computer's user interface. The cut command removes the selected data from its original position, and the copy command creates a duplicate; in both cases the selected data is kept in temporary storage called the clipboard. Clipboard data is later inserted wherever a paste command is issued. The data remains available to any application supporting the feature, thus allowing easy data transfer between applications. The command names are a (skeuomorphic) interface metaphor based on the physical procedure used in manuscript print editing to create a page layout, like with paper. The commands were pioneered into computing by Xerox PARC in 1974, popularized by Apple Computer in the 1983 Lisa workstation and the 1984 Macintosh computer, and in a few home computer applications such as the 1984 word processor Cut & Paste. This interaction technique has close associations with related techniques in graphical user interfaces (GUIs) that use pointing devices such as a computer mouse (by drag and drop, for example). Typically, clipboard support is provided by an operating system as part of its GUI and widget toolkit. The capability to replicate information with ease, changing it between contexts and applications, involves privacy concerns because of the risks of disclosure when handling sensitive information. Terms like cloning, copy forward, carry forward, or re-use refer to the dissemination of such information through documents, and may be subject to regulation by administrative bodies. == History == === Origins === The term "cut and paste" comes from the traditional practice in manuscript editing, whereby people cut paragraphs from a page with scissors and paste them onto another page. This practice remained standard into the 1980s. Stationery stores sold "editing scissors" with blades long enough to cut an 8½"-wide page. The advent of photocopiers made the practice easier and more flexible. The act of copying or transferring text from one part of a computer-based document ("buffer") to a different location within the same or different computer-based document was a part of the earliest on-line computer editors. As soon as computer data entry moved from punch-cards to online files (in the mid/late 1960s) there were "commands" for accomplishing this operation. This mechanism was often used to transfer frequently-used commands or text snippets from additional buffers into the document, as was the case with the QED text editor. === Early methods === The earliest editors (designed for teleprinter terminals) provided keyboard commands to delineate a contiguous region of text, then delete or move it. Since moving a region of text requires first removing it from its initial location and then inserting it into its new location, various schemes had to be invented to allow for this multi-step process to be specified by the user. Often this was done with a "move" command, but some text editors required that the text be first put into some temporary location for later retrieval/placement. In 1983, the Apple Lisa became the first text editing system to call that temporary location "the clipboard". Earlier control schemes such as NLS used a verb—object command structure, where the command name was provided first and the object to be copied or moved was second. The inversion from verb—object to object—verb on which copy and paste are based, where the user selects the object to be operated before initiating the operation, was an innovation crucial for the success of the desktop metaphor as it allowed copy and move operations based on direct manipulation. === Popularization === Inspired by early line and character editors, such as Pentti Kanerva's TV-Edit, that broke a move or copy operation into two steps—between which the user could invoke a preparatory action such as navigation—Lawrence G. "Larry" Tesler proposed the names "cut" and "copy" for the first step and "paste" for the second step. Beginning in 1974, he and colleagues at Xerox PARC implemented several text editors that used cut/copy-and-paste commands to move and copy text. Apple Computer popularized this paradigm with its Lisa (1983) and Macintosh (1984) operating systems and applications. The functions were mapped to key combinations using the ⌘ Command key as a special modifier, which is held down while also pressing X for cut, C for copy, or V for paste. These few keyboard shortcuts allow the user to perform all the basic editing operations, and the keys are clustered at the left end of the bottom row of the standard QWERTY keyboard. These are the standard shortcuts: Control-Z (or ⌘ Command+Z) to undo Control-X (or ⌘ Command+X) to cut Control-C (or ⌘ Command+C) to copy Control-V (or ⌘ Command+V) to paste The IBM Common User Access (CUA) standard also uses combinations of the Insert, Del, Shift and Control keys. Early versions of Windows used the IBM standard. Microsoft later also adopted the Apple key combinations with the introduction of Windows, using the control key as modifier key. Similar patterns of key combinations, later borrowed by others, are widely available in most GUI applications. The original cut, copy, and paste workflow, as implemented at PARC, utilizes a unique workflow: With two windows on the same screen, the user could use the mouse to pick a point at which to make an insertion in one window (or a segment of text to replace). Then, by holding shift and selecting the copy source elsewhere on the same screen, the copy would be made as soon as the shift was released. Similarly, holding shift and control would copy and cut (delete) the source. This workflow requires many fewer keystrokes/mouse clicks than the current multi-step workflows, and did not require an explicit copy buffer. It was dropped, one presumes, because the original Apple and IBM GUIs were not high enough density to permit multiple windows, as were the PARC machines, and so multiple simultaneous windows were rarely used. == Cut and paste == Computer-based editing can involve very frequent use of cut-and-paste operations. Most software-suppliers provide several methods for performing such tasks, and this can involve (for example) key combinations, pulldown menus, pop-up menus, or toolbar buttons. The user selects or "highlights" the text or file for moving by some method, typically by dragging over the text or file name with the pointing-device or holding down the Shift key while using the arrow keys to move the text cursor. The user performs a "cut" operation via key combination Ctrl+x (⌘+x for Macintosh users), menu, or other means. Visibly, "cut" text immediately disappears from its location. "Cut" files typically change color to indicate that they will be moved. Conceptually, the text has now moved to a location often called the clipboard. The clipboard typically remains invisible. On most systems only one clipboard location exists, hence another cut or copy operation overwrites the previously stored information. Many UNIX text-editors provide multiple clipboard entries, as do some Macintosh programs such as Clipboard Master, and Windows clipboard-manager programs such as the one in Microsoft Office. The user selects a location for insertion by some method, typically by clicking at the desired insertion point. A paste operation takes place which visibly inserts the clipboard text at the insertion point. (The paste operation does not typically destroy the clipboard text: it remains available in the clipboard and the user can insert additional copies at other points). Whereas cut-and-paste often takes place with a mouse-equivalent in Windows-like GUI environments, it may also occur entirely from the keyboard, especially in UNIX text editors, such as Pico or vi. Cutting and pasting without a mouse can involve a selection (for which Ctrl+x is pressed in most graphical systems) or the entire current line, but it may also involve text after the cursor until the end of the line and other more sophisticated operations. The clipboard usually stays invisible, because the operations of cutting and pasting, while actually independent, usually take place in quick succession, and the user (usually) needs no assistance in understanding the operation or maintaining mental context. Some application programs provide a means of viewing, or sometimes even editing, the data on the clipboard. == Copy and paste == The term "copy-and-paste" refers to the popular, simple method of reproducing text or other data from a source to a destination. It differs from cut and paste in that the original source text or data does not get deleted or removed. The popularity of this method stems from its simplicity and the ease with which users can move data between various applications visually – without resorting to permanent storage. Use in healthcare do
Atomicity (database systems)
In database systems, atomicity (; from Ancient Greek: ἄτομος, romanized: átomos, lit. 'undividable') is the property of a database transaction consisting of an indivisible and irreducible series of database operations such that either all occur, or none occur. It is one of the ACID transaction properties: Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability. A guarantee of atomicity prevents partial database updates from occurring, because they can cause greater problems than rejecting the whole series outright. As a consequence, an atomic transaction cannot be observed to be in progress by another database client: at one moment in time, it has not yet happened, and at the next it has already occurred in whole (or nothing happened if the transaction was cancelled in progress). An example of transaction atomicity could be a digital monetary transfer from bank account A to account B. It consists of two operations, debiting the money from account A and crediting it to account B. Performing both of these operations inside of an atomic transaction ensures that the database remains in a consistent state, if either operation fails there will not be any unaccountable credits or debits affecting either account. The same term is also used in the definition of First normal form in database systems, where it instead refers to the concept that the values for fields may not consist of multiple smaller values to be decomposed, such as a string into which multiple names, numbers, dates, or other types may be packed. == Orthogonality == Atomicity does not behave completely orthogonally with regard to the other ACID properties of transactions. For example, isolation relies on atomicity to roll back the enclosing transaction in the event of an isolation violation such as a deadlock; consistency also relies on atomicity to roll back the enclosing transaction in the event of a consistency violation by an illegal transaction. As a result of this, a failure to detect a violation and roll back the enclosing transaction may cause an isolation or consistency failure. == Implementation == Typically, systems implement Atomicity by providing some mechanism to indicate which transactions have started and which finished; or by keeping a copy of the data before any changes occurred (Read-copy-update). Several filesystems have developed methods for avoiding the need to keep multiple copies of data, using journaling (see journaling file system). Databases usually implement this using some form of logging/journaling to track changes. The system synchronizes the logs (often the metadata) as necessary after changes have successfully taken place. Afterwards, crash recovery ignores incomplete entries. Although implementations vary depending on factors such as concurrency issues, the principle of atomicity – i.e. complete success or complete failure – remain. Ultimately, any application-level implementation relies on operating-system functionality. At the file-system level, POSIX-compliant systems provide system calls such as open(2) and flock(2) that allow applications to atomically open or lock a file. At the process level, POSIX Threads provide adequate synchronization primitives. The hardware level requires atomic operations such as Test-and-set, Fetch-and-add, Compare-and-swap, or Load-Link/Store-Conditional, together with memory barriers. Portable operating systems cannot simply block interrupts to implement synchronization, since hardware that lacks concurrent execution such as hyper-threading or multi-processing is now extremely rare. In distributed and sharded databases, atomicity is complicated by network latency and the potential for partial failures. While traditional distributed systems often employ locking protocols (like 2PC) to ensure cross-shard atomicity, these can introduce performance bottlenecks. Recent research into distributed ledger consensus suggests alternative models, such as "braided synchronization". This technique, utilized in protocols like Cerberus, intertwines the consensus phases of multiple shards to enforce atomic guarantees without a global ordering of all transactions.
Wunderlist
Wunderlist is a discontinued cloud-based task management application. It allowed users to create lists to manage their tasks from a smartphone, tablet, computer and smartwatch. Wunderlist was free; additional collaboration features were available in a paid version known as Wunderlist Pro, released April 2013. Wunderlist was created in 2011 by Berlin-based startup 6Wunderkinder (Engl.: 6Prodigies). The company was acquired by Microsoft in June 2015, at which time the app had over 13 million users. In April 2017, Microsoft announced that Wunderlist would eventually be discontinued in favor of Microsoft To Do, a new multi-platform app developed by the Wunderlist team that has direct integration with the company's Office 365 service. On December 6, 2019, Microsoft announced that it would shut down Wunderlist on May 6, 2020. After this date, the application would no longer sync but users could still import their content into Microsoft To Do. == History == In 2009, Wunderlist's CEO Christian Reber called on the social network platform XING for business partners to create a new to-do app. Frank Thelen responded and together Reber and Thelen developed first concepts for Wunderlist. The necessary seed funding was granted by High-Tech Gründerfonds and e42 GmbH. The first version of Wunderlist was launched on November 9, 2010. Initially, the program was created for desktop PCs and platforms such as Windows, Linux and Mac OS X. In December 2011, the app received approval for the iPhone. Subsequently, the developers released a version prepared for the iPad with the name Wunderlist HD. In September 2012, the developers announced a shutdown of their service Wunderkit. Instead they wanted to focus on creating a new version of Wunderlist, which was later on released in December 2012 under the name Wunderlist 2. In September 2013, the company announced it had over 5 million users. In July 2014, a new major update was released under the name of Wunderlist 3, with a new real-time sync architecture. Wunderlist reached 10 million users in December 2014. On June 1, 2015, it was announced that Microsoft had acquired 6Wunderkinder, makers of Wunderlist, for between US$100 million and US$200 million (~$258 million in 2024). Following its acquisition of the app, Microsoft announced in April 2017 a preview of To-Do, a multi-platform task management app developed by the Wunderlist team that was intended to eventually replace Wunderlist and incorporate most of its features. As of January 2019, To-Do had not yet reached feature parity with Wunderlist, with its team citing that the service had to be completely re-written to use Microsoft Azure instead of Amazon Web Services. Frustrated by the perceived lack of roadmap, in September 2019, Reber began to publicly ask Microsoft-related accounts on Twitter whether he could buy Wunderlist back. Shortly afterward, however, Microsoft unveiled updates to To-Do that make it more closely resemble Wunderlist. In December 2019, Microsoft announced that it would fully shut down Wunderlist as of May 6, 2020. The team responsible for creating Wunderlist, led by co-founder Christian Reber, created that Superlist app in early 2024. == Finances == In its initial round of funding, 100,000 euro was invested in 6Wunderkinder by Frank Thelen and others. In December 2010, High-Tech Gründerfonds invested 500,000 euro (approximately US$660,000) in the company. T-Venture also invested an undisclosed amount in the startup. In its Series A round of funding in November 2011, Atomico invested $4.2 million (~$5.76 million in 2024) while High-Tech Gründerfonds invested an undisclosed additional amount. In May 2012, High-Tech Gründerfonds sold off its stake in 6Wunderkinder to Earlybird Venture Capital. In November 2013, $19 million (~$25.2 million in 2024) was raised in a Series B round led by Sequoia Capital with participation from Earlybird and Atomico. == Awards == In 2013, Wunderlist for Mac was named App of the Year. Wunderlist was selected as a Google Play Top Developer in 2013. In 2014, Wunderlist won the "Golden Mi" award from Xiaomi, and also named as one of its Best Apps of 2014 was given a "Google Play Editor's Choice" award, and was named in Google Play's Best Apps of 2014 as well as Apple's Best of 2014.
Information Networking Institute
Information Networking Institute (INI) is an academic department within the College of Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University. The institute was established in 1989 as the nation's first research and education center devoted to information networking. The INI also partners with research and outreach entities to extend educational and training programs to a broad audience of people using information networking as part of their daily lives. The INI is the educational partner of Carnegie Mellon CyLab, a university-wide, multidisciplinary research center involving more than 50 faculty and 100 graduate students. == Center of Academic Excellence Designations == Through the work of the INI and CyLab, Carnegie Mellon University has been designated by the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security as a National Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance/Cyber Defense Education (CAE-IA/CD) and a National Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance/Cyber Defense Research (CAE-R). It has also been designated by the NSA and the U.S. Cyber Command as a National Center of Academic Excellence in Cyber Operations (CAE-Cyber Ops). Through these designations, the INI and CyLab participate in the: Federal CyberCorps Scholarship for Service (SFS) Program - Students pursuing graduate degrees in information security (MSIS or MSISPM) are eligible for scholarships under the SFS program. Information Assurance Scholarship Program (IASP) - Students pursuing graduate degrees in information security and seeking careers with the Department of Defense may be eligible for scholarships under the IASP. Capacity Building Program for Faculty from Historically Black and Hispanic Serving Institutions - The INI and CyLab developed a month-long, in-residence summer program to help build information assurance education and research capacity at colleges and universities designated as Minority Serving Institutions – specifically, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs). This program is supported through a grant from the National Science Foundation. == Faculty and researchers == Faculty involved in teaching and advising in the INI programs are conducting research in all aspects of information networking and information security. Affiliated research centers are: Carnegie Mellon CyLab SEI's CERT Division == Alumni == The INI has graduated over 1,400 alumni who currently occupy positions in a variety of sectors across industry, government and academia.