Test data management (TDM) is a process in software testing concerned with the creation, preparation, and control of data used for testing software systems. It involves supplying datasets required to execute test cases and verifying system behaviour under defined conditions. Test data management is an integral part of the software development lifecycle (SDLC) and is utilized in both manual and automated testing processes. It is applied in environments that use continuous integration and DevOps practices, where test execution requires consistent and repeatable data conditions. == Overview == Test data management includes the generation, selection, and preparation of data for testing purposes, as well as its distribution across test environments. It also involves controlling data versions and ensuring that datasets correspond to specific test scenarios. In many cases, production data is adapted for testing through techniques such as masking or subsetting to reduce size and remove sensitive content. Test data management ensures that test cases are executed with relevant, consistent, and readily available data. This reduces variability in test results and supports reproducibility across test cycles. == Importance == The role of test data management has expanded with the growth of complex, data-driven systems and regulatory requirements governing data usage. Testing often depends on data that reflects real-world conditions, but direct use of production data may introduce security and privacy risks. As a result, organizations apply methods such as data masking and anonymization to meet compliance requirements, including those set by the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) and Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Inadequate control of test data can lead to incomplete test coverage, unreliable test results, or delays in testing processes due to unavailable or inconsistent datasets. == Techniques and tools == Test data management leverages various techniques for preparing and controlling data used in testing. These include the generation of synthetic data, the extraction of subsets from production datasets, and the modification of data to remove or obscure sensitive information. A key technical requirement in these processes is maintaining referential integrity, or ensuring that relationships between data entities remain consistent across different tables and systems after masking or subsetting. Data virtualization is also used to provide access to datasets without full replication. These methods may be implemented using software tools that automate data preparation, masking, and distribution.
Language resource
In linguistics and language technology, a language resource is a "[composition] of linguistic material used in the construction, improvement and/or evaluation of language processing applications, (...) in language and language-mediated research studies and applications." According to Bird & Simons (2003), this includes data, i.e. "any information that documents or describes a language, such as a published monograph, a computer data file, or even a shoebox full of handwritten index cards. The information could range in content from unanalyzed sound recordings to fully transcribed and annotated texts to a complete descriptive grammar", tools, i.e., "computational resources that facilitate creating, viewing, querying, or otherwise using language data", and advice, i.e., "any information about what data sources are reliable, what tools are appropriate in a given situation, what practices to follow when creating new data". The latter aspect is usually referred to as "best practices" or "(community) standards". In a narrower sense, language resource is specifically applied to resources that are available in digital form, and then, "encompassing (a) data sets (textual, multimodal/multimedia and lexical data, grammars, language models, etc.) in machine readable form, and (b) tools/technologies/services used for their processing and management". == Typology == As of May 2020, no widely used standard typology of language resources has been established (current proposals include the LREMap, METASHARE, and, for data, the LLOD classification). Important classes of language resources include data lexical resources, e.g., machine-readable dictionaries, linguistic corpora, i.e., digital collections of natural language data, linguistic data bases such as the Cross-Linguistic Linked Data collection, tools linguistic annotations and tools for creating such annotations in a manual or semiautomated fashion (e.g., tools for annotating interlinear glossed text such as Toolbox and FLEx, or other language documentation tools), applications for search and retrieval over such data (corpus management systems), for automated annotation (part-of-speech tagging, syntactic parsing, semantic parsing, etc.), metadata and vocabularies vocabularies, repositories of linguistic terminology and language metadata, e.g., MetaShare (for language resource metadata), the ISO 12620 data category registry (for linguistic features, data structures and annotations within a language resource), or the Glottolog database (identifiers for language varieties and bibliographical database). == Language resource publication, dissemination and creation == A major concern of the language resource community has been to develop infrastructures and platforms to present, discuss and disseminate language resources. Selected contributions in this regard include: a series of International Conferences on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), the European Language Resources Association (ELRA, EU-based), and the Linguistic Data Consortium (LDC, US-based), which represent commercial hosting and dissemination platforms for language resources, the Open Languages Archives Community (OLAC), which provides and aggregates language resource metadata, the Language Resources and Evaluation Journal (LREJ), the European Language Grid is a European platform for language technologies (eg services), data and resources. As for the development of standards and best practices for language resources, these are subject of several community groups and standardization efforts, including ISO Technical Committee 37: Terminology and other language and content resources (ISO/TC 37), developing standards for all aspects of language resources, W3C Community Group Best Practices for Multilingual Linked Open Data (BPMLOD), working on best practice recommendations for publishing language resources as Linked Data or in RDF, W3C Community Group Linked Data for Language Technology (LD4LT), working on linguistic annotations on the web and language resource metadata, W3C Community Group Ontology-Lexica (OntoLex), working on lexical resources, the Open Linguistics working group of the Open Knowledge Foundation, working on conventions for publishing and linking open language resources, developing the Linguistic Linked Open Data cloud, the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI), working on XML-based specifications for language resources and digitally edited text.
Media preservation
Preservation of documents, pictures, recordings, digital content, etc., is a major aspect of archival science. It is also an important consideration for people who are creating time capsules, family history, historical documents, scrapbooks and family trees. Common storage media are not permanent, and there are few reliable methods of preserving documents and pictures for the future. == Paper/prints (photos) == Color negatives and ordinary color prints may fade away to nothing in a relatively short period if not stored and handled properly. This happens even if the negatives and prints are kept in the dark, because ambient light is not the determining factor, but heat and humidity are. The color degradation is the result of the dyes used in the color processes. Because color processing results in a less stable image than traditional black-and-white processing, black-and-white pictures from the 1920s are more likely to survive long-term than color films and photographs from after the middle 20th century. Black-and-white photographic films using silver halide emulsions are the only film types that have proven to last for archival storage. The determining factors for longevity include the film base type, proper processing (develop, stop, fix and wash) and proper storage. Early films used a Cellulose nitrate base which was prone to decomposition and highly flammable. Nitrate film was replaced with acetate-base films. These Cellulose acetate films were later discovered to outgass acids (also referred to as vinegar syndrome). Acetate films were replaced in the early 1980s by polyester film base materials which have been determined to be more stable than film stocks with a nitrate or acetate base. Color prints made on most inkjet printers look very good at first but they have a very short lifespan, measured in months rather than in years. Even prints from commercial photo labs will start to fade in a matter of years if not processed properly and stored in cool, dry environments. == Documents/books == With documents for which the media are not so critical as what the documents contain, the information in documents can be copied by using photocopiers and image scanners. Books and manuscripts can also have their information saved without destruction by using a book scanner. Where the medium itself needs to be preserved, for example if a document is a crayon sketch by a famous artist on paper, a complex process of preservation may be used. Depending on the condition and importance of the item this can include gluing the media onto more stable media, or protective enclosing of the media. Polyester sleeves, acid-free folders, and pH buffered document boxes are common supportive protective enclosures whose selection must match the media's chemical and physical properties. Other considerations in preserving paper/books are: Damaging light, particularly UV light, which fades and destroys media over time by breaking down the molecules. Atmosphere contains small traces of sulfur dioxide and nitric acid which turn media yellow and break the fibers down. Humidity and moisture also aid in the breakdown of media. If there is too much, the document can be attacked by bacteria, and if too little, cellulose material breaks down. Temperature, particularly elevated ones, can destroy some media. Low temperatures can cause the water to form crystals which expands destroying the structure of paper-based documents. == Online photo albums == Although there are many websites that allow the upload of photographs and videos, digital preservation for the long-term is still considered an issue. There is a lack of confidence that such websites are capable of storing data for long periods of time (ex. 50 years) without data degradation or loss. == Optical media - CD, DVD, Blu-ray, M-Disc == Write-once optical media, such as CD-Rs and DVD-Rs, typically contain an organic dye that distinguishes data reading from data writing based on the dye's transparency along the disc. Conventional CDs and DVDs have finite shelf-life due to natural degradation of the dye; the newer M-DISC uses inorganic material technology to produce molded DVDs and Blu-Rays (up to 3-layer 100GB BDXL) with a claimed lifespan of 100-1000 years if stored correctly with most BD & BDXL rated read/writers enabling the higher power mode for the M-Disc format after 2011. The National Archives and Records Administration lists published life expectancies to be 10 or 25 years or more for normal CDs and DVDs and conservative life expectancies to be between 2 and 5 years. Storage environments, such as temperature and humidity, as well as handling conditions such as frequency of media use and compatibility between the recorder and media, affect media shelf-life. Improvements in media storage and migrations to new recording technologies can make certain formats obsolete within their respective lifespan. Technologists have pointed to internet streaming services, where services such as video-on-demand have contributed to the 33 percent decline in DVD sales the past 5 years, as a challenge for digital preservation. == Magnetic media - video cassettes, tapes, hard drives == Magnetic media such as audio and video tape and floppy disks also have limited life spans. Audio and video tapes require specific care and handling to ensure that the recorded information will be preserved. For information that must be preserved indefinitely, periodic transcription from old media to new ones is necessary, not only because the media are unstable but also because the recording technology may become obsolete. Magnetic media also deteriorates naturally with typical shelf lives between 10 and 20 years. Magnetic tape can degrade from binder hydrolysis or magnetic remanence decay. Binder hydrolysis, also known as sticky-shed syndrome, refers to the breakdown of binder, or glue, that holds the magnetic particles to the polyester base of the tape. Tapes which have been stored in hot, humid conditions are particularly vulnerable to this phenomenon and may suffer from accelerated degradation. Severe binder can cause the magnetic material to fall off or sheds from the base, leaving a pile of dust and clear backing. Archivists can bake the tape, which evaporates water molecules on the tape, to temporarily restore the binder before making a copy. Magnetic tape can also be destabilized by magnetic remanence decay, which refers to the weakening of the tape's magnetization over time. This weakens the affected tape's readability, leading to reduced sound clarity and volume or picture hue and contrast. Baking the tape will not restore magnetization. Media at risk include recorded media such as master audio recordings of symphonies and videotape recordings of the news gathered over the last 40 years. Threats to media that must be considered when archiving important record media include accidental erasure, physical loss due to disasters such as fires and floods, and media degradation. Along with the actual media being degraded over the years, the machines that are available to play back or reproduce the audio sources are becoming archaic themselves. Manufacturers and their support (parts, technical updates) for their machines have disappeared throughout the years. Even if the medium is vaulted and archived correctly, the mechanical properties of the machines have deteriorated to the point that they could do more harm than good to the tape being played. Many major film studios are now backing up their libraries by converting them to electronic media files, such as .AIFF or .WAV-based files via digital audio workstations. That way, even if the digital platform manufacturer goes out of business or no longer supports their product, the files can still be played on any common computer. There is a detailed process that must take place previous to the final archival product now that a digital solution is in place. Sample rates and their conversion and reference speed are both critical in this process. In floppy disks, the lubricants inside the plastic jackets of many older floppies promote the decay of the magnetic medium. Also, the alignment of the magnetic particles of the disk substrate may gradually degrade, leading to a loss of formatting and data. Early laser disk media were prone to degradation as the layers of the disk substrate were bonded with an adhesive that was vulnerable to decay and would crumble over time. This would lead the different layers of the disk to peel apart, damaging the pitted data surface and rendering the disk unreadable.
Timeline of operating systems
This article presents a timeline of events in the history of computer operating systems from 1951 to the current day. For a narrative explaining the overall developments, see the History of operating systems. == 20th Century == == 1940s == 1949 EDSAC was considered the first operating system developed by Maurice Wilkes and manufactured by the University of Cambridge == 1950s == 1951 LEO I 'Lyons Electronic Office' was the commercial development of EDSAC computing platform, supported by British firm J. Lyons and Co. 1953 DYSEAC - an early machine capable of distributing computing 1955 General Motors Operating System made for IBM 701 MIT's Tape Director operating system made for UNIVAC 1103 1956 GM-NAA I/O for IBM 704, based on General Motors Operating System 1957 Atlas Supervisor (Manchester University) (Atlas computer project start) BESYS (Bell Labs), for IBM 704, later IBM 7090 and IBM 7094 1958 University of Michigan Executive System (UMES), for IBM 704, 709, and 7090 1959 SHARE Operating System (SOS), based on GM-NAA I/O == 1960s == 1960 IBSYS (IBM for its 7090 and 7094) 1961 CTSS demonstration (MIT's Compatible Time-Sharing System for the IBM 7094) MCP (Burroughs Master Control Program) for B5000 1962 Atlas Supervisor (Manchester University) (Atlas computer commissioned) BBN Time-Sharing System GCOS (GE's General Comprehensive Operating System, originally GECOS, General Electric Comprehensive Operating Supervisor) 1963 ADMIRAL AN/FSQ-32, another early time-sharing system begun CTSS becomes operational (MIT's Compatible Time-Sharing System for the IBM 7094) JOSS, an interactive time-shared system that did not distinguish between operating system and language Titan Supervisor, early time-sharing system begun 1964 Berkeley Timesharing System (for Scientific Data Systems' SDS 940) Chippewa Operating System (for CDC 6600 supercomputer) Dartmouth Time-Sharing System (Dartmouth College's DTSS for GE computers) EXEC 8 (UNIVAC) KDF9 Timesharing Director (English Electric) – an early, fully hardware secured, fully pre-emptive process switching, multi-programming operating system for KDF9 (originally announced in 1960) OS/360 (IBM's primary OS for its S/360 series) (announced) PDP-6 Monitor (DEC) descendant renamed TOPS-10 in 1970 SCOPE (CDC 3000 series) 1965 BOS/360 (IBM's Basic Operating System) DECsys TOS/360 (IBM's Tape Operating System) Livermore Time Sharing System (LTSS) Multics (MIT, GE, Bell Labs for the GE-645) (announced) Pick operating system SIPROS 66 (Simultaneous Processing Operating System) THE multiprogramming system (Technische Hogeschool Eindhoven) development TSOS (later VMOS) (RCA) 1966 DOS/360 (IBM's Disk Operating System) GEORGE 1 & 2 for ICT 1900 series Mod 1 Mod 2 Mod 8 MS/8 (Richard F. Lary's DEC PDP-8 system) MSOS (Mass Storage Operating System) OS/360 (IBM's primary OS for its S/360 series) PCP and MFT (shipped) RAX Remote Users of Shared Hardware (RUSH), a time-sharing system developed by Allen-Babcock for the IBM 360/50 SODA for Elwro's Odra 1204 Universal Time-Sharing System (XDS Sigma series) 1967 CP-40, predecessor to CP-67 on modified IBM System/360 Model 40 CP-67 (IBM, also known as CP/CMS) Conversational Programming System (CPS), an IBM time-sharing system under OS/360 Michigan Terminal System (MTS) (time-sharing system for the IBM S/360-67 and successors) ITS (MIT's Incompatible Timesharing System for the DEC PDP-6 and PDP-10) OS/360 MVT ORVYL (Stanford University's time-sharing system for the IBM S/360-67) TSS/360 (IBM's Time-sharing System for the S/360-67, never officially released, canceled in 1969 and again in 1971) WAITS (SAIL, Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, time-sharing system for DEC PDP-6 and PDP-10, later TOPS-10) 1968 Airline Control Program (ACP) (IBM) B1 (NCR Century series) CALL/360, an IBM time-sharing system for System/360 HP Real-Time Executive (HP RTE) – Hewlett-Packard HP Time-Shared BASIC (HP TSB) – Hewlett-Packard (time-sharing system for the HP 2000) THE multiprogramming system (Eindhoven University of Technology) publication TSS/8 (DEC for the PDP-8) VP/CSS 1969 B2 (NCR Century series) B3 (NCR Century series) GEORGE 3 For ICL 1900 series MINIMOP Multics (MIT, GE, Bell Labs for the GE-645 and later the Honeywell 6180) (opened for paying customers in October) RC 4000 Multiprogramming System (RC) TENEX (Bolt, Beranek and Newman for DEC systems, later TOPS-20) Unics (later Unix) (AT&T, initially on DEC computers) Xerox Operating System == 1970s == 1970 DOS-11 (PDP-11) 1971 EMAS Kronos RSTS-11 2A-19 (First released version; PDP-11) RSX-15 OS/8 1972 B4 (NCR Century series) COS-300 Data General RDOS Edos MUSIC/SP OS/4 OS 1100 OS/2000 (Honeywell 2000-series) Operating System/Virtual Storage 1 (OS/VS1) Operating System/Virtual Storage 2 R1 (OS/VS2 SVS) PRIMOS (written in FORTRAN IV, that didn't have pointers, while later versions, around version 18, written in a version of PL/I, called PL/P) Virtual Machine/Basic System Extensions Program Product (BSEPP or VM/SE) Virtual Machine/System Extensions Program Product (SEPP or VM/BSE) Virtual Machine Facility/370 (VM/370), sometimes known as VM/CMS 1973 Эльбрус-1 (Elbrus-1) – Soviet computer – created using high-level language uЭль-76 (AL-76/ALGOL 68) Alto OS CP-V (Control Program V) RSX-11D RT-11 VME – implementation language S3 (ALGOL 68) 1974 ACOS-2 (NEC) ACOS-4 ACOS-6 CP/M DOS-11 V09-20C (Last stable release, June 1974) Hydra – capability-based, multiprocessing OS kernel MONECS Multi-Programming Executive (MPE) – Hewlett-Packard Operating System/Virtual Storage 2 R2 (MVS) OS/7 OS/16 OS/32 Sintran III 1975 BS2000 V2.0 (First released version) COS-350 ISIS NOS (Control Data Corporation) OS/3 (Univac) VS/9 (formerly RCA's TSOS, later named VMOS) Version 6 Unix XVM/DOS XVM/RSX 1976 Cambridge CAP computer – all operating system procedures written in ALGOL 68C, with some closely associated protected procedures in BCPL Cray Operating System DX10 FLEX TOPS-20 TX990/TXDS Tandem Nonstop OS v1 Thoth 1977 1BSD AMOS KERNAL OASIS operating system OS68 OS4000 RMX-80 System 88 (Exec) System Support Program (IBM System/34 and System/36) TRSDOS Virtual Memory System (VMS) V1.0 (Initial commercial release, October 25) VRX (Virtual Resource eXecutive) VS Virtual Memory Operating System 1978 2BSD Apple DOS Control Program Facility (IBM System/38) Cray Time Sharing System (CTSS) DPCX (IBM) DPPX (IBM) HDOS KSOS – secure OS design from Ford Aerospace KVM/370 – security retro-fit of IBM VM/370 Lisp machine (CADR) MVS/System Extensions (MVS/SE) OS4 (Naked Mini 4) PTDOS TRIPOS UCSD p-System (First released version) Z80-RIO 1979 Atari DOS 3BSD CP-6 Idris MP/M MVS/System Extensions R2 (MVS/SE2) NLTSS POS Sinclair BASIC Transaction Processing Facility (TPF) (IBM) UCLA Secure UNIX – an early secure UNIX OS based on security kernel UNIX/32V DOS/VSE Version 7 Unix == 1980s == 1980 86-DOS AOS/VS (Data General) Business Operating System CTOS DOSPLUS (TRS-80) MVS/System Product (MVS/SP) V1 NewDos/80 OS-9 RMX-86 RS-DOS SOS Virtual Machine/System Product (VM/SP) Xenix 1981 Acorn MOS Aegis SR1 (First Apollo/DOMAIN systems shipped on March 27) CP/M-86 DRX (Distributed Resource Executive) iMAX – OS for Intel's iAPX 432 capability machine MCS (Multi-user Control System) MS-DOS PC DOS Pilot (Xerox Star operating system) UNOS UTS V VERSAdos VRTX VSOS (Virtual Storage Operating System) Xinu first release 1982 Commodore DOS LDOS (By Logical Systems, Inc. – for the Radio Shack TRS-80 Models I, II & III) PCOS (Olivetti M20) pSOS QNX Stratus VOS Sun UNIX (later SunOS) 0.7 Ultrix Unix System III VAXELN 1983 Coherent DNIX EOS GNU (project start) Lisa Office System 7/7 LOCUS – UNIX compatible, high reliability, distributed OS MVS/System Product V2 (MVS/Extended Architecture, MVS/XA) Novell NetWare (S-Net) PERPOS ProDOS RTU (Real-Time Unix) STOP – TCSEC A1-class, secure OS for SCOMP hardware SunOS 1.0 VSE/System Package (VSE/SP) Version 1 1984 AMSDOS CTIX (Unix variant) DYNIX Mac OS (System 1.0) MSX-DOS NOS/VE PANOS PC/IX ROS Sinclair QDOS SINIX UNICOS Venix 2.0 Virtual Machine/Extended Architecture Migration Assistance (VM/XA MA) 1985 AmigaOS Atari TOS DG/UX DOS Plus Graphics Environment Manager Harmony MacOS 2 MIPS RISC/os Oberon – written in Oberon SunOS 2.0 Version 8 Unix Virtual Machine/Extended Architecture System Facility (VM/XA SF) Windows 1.0 Windows 1.01 Xenix 2.0 1986 AIX 1.0 Cronus distributed OS FlexOS GEMSOS – TCSEC A1-class, secure kernel for BLACKER VPN & GTNP GEOS Genera 7.0 HP-UX MacOS 3 SunOS 3.0 TR-DOS TRIX Version 9 Unix 1987 Arthur (much improved version came in 1989 under the name RISC OS) BS2000 V9.0 IRIX (3.0 is first SGI version) MacOS 4 MacOS 5 MDOS MINIX 1.0 OS/2 (1.0) PC-MOS/386 Topaz – semi-distributed OS for DEC Firefly workstation written in Modula-2+ and garbage collected VxWorks Windows 2.0 1988 A/UX (Apple Computer) AOS/VS II (Data General) CP/M rebranded as DR-DOS Flex machine – tagged, capability machine with OS and other software written
Extremely online
An extremely online (often capitalized), terminally online, or chronically online person is someone who is closely engaged with Internet culture. People said to be extremely online often believe that online posts are very important. Events and phenomena can themselves be extremely online; while often used as a descriptive term, the phenomenon of extreme online usage has been described as "both a reformation of the delivery of ideas – shared through words and videos and memes and GIFs and copypasta – and the ideas themselves". Here, "online" is used to describe "a way of doing things, not [simply] the place they are done". == Criteria == While the term was in use as early as 2014, it gained popularity over the latter half of the 2010s in conjunction with the increasing prevalence and notability of Internet phenomena in all areas of life. Extremely online people, according to The Daily Dot, are interested in topics "no normal, healthy person could possibly care about", and have been analogized to "pop culture fandoms, just without the pop". Extremely online phenomena such as fan culture and reaction GIFs have been described as "swallowing democracy" by journalists such as Amanda Hess in The New York Times, who claimed that a "great convergence between politics and culture, values and aesthetics, citizenship and commercialism" had become "a dominant mode of experiencing politics". Vulture – formerly the pop culture section of New York magazine, now a stand-alone website – has a section for articles tagged "extremely online". == Historical background == In the 2010s, many categories and labels came into wide use from media outlets to describe Internet-mediated cultural trends, such as the alt-right, the dirtbag left, and doomerism. These ideological categories are often defined by their close association with online discourse. For example, the term "alt-right" was added to the Associated Press' stylebook in 2016 to describe the "digital presence" of far-right ideologies, the dirtbag left refers to a group of "underemployed and overly online millennials" who "have no time for the pieties of traditional political discourse", and the doomer's "blackpilled despair" is combined with spending "too much time on message boards in high school" to produce an eclectic "anti-socialism". Extreme onlineness transcends ideological boundaries. For example, right-wing figures like Alex Jones and Laura Loomer have been described as "extremely online", but so have those on the left like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and fans of the Chapo Trap House podcast. Extremely online phenomena can range from acts of offline violence (such as the 2019 Christchurch shootings) to "[going] on NPR to explain the anti-capitalist irony inherent in kids eating Tide Pods". United States President Donald Trump's posts on social media have been frequently cited as extremely online, during both his presidency and his 2020 presidential campaign; Vox claimed his approach to re-election veered into being "Too Online", and Reason questioned whether the final presidential debate was "incomprehensible to normies". While individual people are often given the description, being extremely online has also been posited as an overall cultural phenomenon, applying to trends like lifestyle movements suffixed with "-wave" and "-core" based heavily on Internet media, as well as an increasing expectation for digital social researchers to have an "online presence" to advance in their careers. == Participants and media coverage == One example of a phenomenon considered to be extremely online is the "wife guy" (a guy who posts about his wife); despite being a "stupid online thing" which spent several years as a piece of Internet slang, in 2019 it became the subject of five articles in leading U.S. media outlets. Like many extremely online phrases and phenomena, the "wife guy" has been attributed in part to the in-character Twitter account dril. The account frequently parodies how people behave on the Internet, and has been widely cited as influential on online culture. In one tweet, his character refuses to stop using the Internet, even when someone shouts outside his house that he should log off. Many of dril's other coinages have become ubiquitous parts of Internet slang. Throughout the 2010s, posters such as dril inspired commonly used terms like "corncobbing" (referring to someone losing an argument and failing to admit it); while originally a piece of obscure Internet slang used on sites like Twitter, use of the term (and controversy over its misinterpretation) became a subject of reporting from traditional publications, with some noting that keeping up with the rapid turnover of inside jokes, memes, and quotes online required daily attention to avoid embarrassment. Twitch has been described as "talk radio for the extremely online". Another example of an event cited as extremely online is No Nut November. Increasingly, researchers are expected to have more of an online presence, to advance in their careers, as networking and portfolios continue to transition to the digital world. In November 2020, an article in The Washington Post criticized the filter bubble theory of online discourse on the basis that it "overgeneralized" based on a "small subset of extremely online people". The 2021 storming of the United States Capitol was described as extremely online, with "pro-Trump internet personalities", such as Baked Alaska, and fans livestreaming and taking selfies. People who have been described as extremely online include Chrissy Teigen, Jon Ossoff, and Andrew Yang. In contrast, Joe Biden has been cited as the antithesis of extremely online—The New York Times wrote in 2019 that he had "zero meme energy".
Tinybop
Tinybop is a Brooklyn based publisher of apps for children. == History == Tinybop is a Brooklyn-based children's media company established in 2011 by Raul Gutierrez. App titles are released in two series: the Explorer's Library - a series of science apps and Digital Toys - series of open-ended construction apps. == Published apps == Explorer's Library Titles: The Human Body – An anatomy app for children. Released 2013. The company's first app was illustrated by Kelli Anderson and has been downloaded millions of times. Selected for the American Library Association's Notable Children's Media List in 2022. Named Apple App Store's Best of 2013. Winner of the Digital Ehon Yuichi Kimura Prize for Children's Digital Media. Plants – An app about biomes around the world. Homes – An app about houses around with world. Illustrated by Tuesday Bassen. Winner of the Parents Gold Choice Award for children's apps. Simple Machines – A children's physics app about simple machines. The Earth – An app for children about the geologic Earth illustrated by Sarah Jacoby. Weather – A children's weather app. Skyscrapers – A children's app about building tall buildings. Space – An interactive solar system. Mammals – A children's app about mammals illustrated by Wenjia Tang. Winner of the Digital Ehon Award for Children's Educational media. Coral Reef – An app about marine ecosystems. Winner of an Excellence in Early Learning Digital Media Honor from the American Library Association. State of Matter – An app covering solids, liquids, and gases. Winner of Excellence in Early Learning Digital Media Honor from the American Library Association. Light and Color – An app about light and color. Selected for The American Library Association's Notable Children's Media List 2023. Winner of the 2022 Yoichi Sakakihara Prize for Children's Media. Digital Toys Titles: The Robot Factory – A robot building app for children illustrated by Owen Davey. Apple named The Robot Factory as iPad App of the Year in 2015. The Everything Machine – A visual coding app for children. The Everything Machine was named Apple's Best of 2015. Monsters – A monster creation app illustrated by Tianhua Mao. The Infinite Arcade – An arcade game building app. Me: A Kids Diary – A digital journal for children. Selected for The American Library Association's Notable Children's Media List 2020. The Creature Garden – An app that allows children to create fantastical animals illustrated by Natasha Durley. Selected for The American Library Association's Notable Children's Media List 2021. Things that Go Bump – A multiplayer game set in an enchanted Japanese house, released on Apple Arcade in 2018.
Mean opinion score
Mean opinion score (MOS) is a measure used in the domain of Quality of Experience and telecommunications engineering, representing overall quality of a stimulus or system. It is the arithmetic mean over all individual "values on a predefined scale that a subject assigns to his opinion of the performance of a system quality". Such ratings are usually gathered in a subjective quality evaluation test, but they can also be algorithmically estimated. MOS is a commonly used measure for video, audio, and audiovisual quality evaluation, but not restricted to those modalities. ITU-T has defined several ways of referring to a MOS in Recommendation ITU-T P.800.1, depending on whether the score was obtained from audiovisual, conversational, listening, talking, or video quality tests. == Rating scales and mathematical definition == The MOS is expressed as a single rational number, typically in the range 1–5, where 1 is lowest perceived quality, and 5 is the highest perceived quality. Other MOS ranges are also possible, depending on the rating scale that has been used in the underlying test. The Absolute Category Rating scale is very commonly used, which maps ratings between Bad and Excellent to numbers between 1 and 5, as seen in below table. Other standardized quality rating scales exist in ITU-T Recommendations (such as ITU-T P.800 or ITU-T P.910). For example, one could use a continuous scale ranging between 1–100. Which scale is used depends on the purpose of the test. In certain contexts there are no statistically significant differences between ratings for the same stimuli when they are obtained using different scales. The MOS is calculated as the arithmetic mean over single ratings performed by human subjects for a given stimulus in a subjective quality evaluation test. Thus: M O S = ∑ n = 1 N R n N {\displaystyle MOS={\frac {\sum _{n=1}^{N}{R_{n}}}{N}}} Where R {\displaystyle R} are the individual ratings for a given stimulus by N {\displaystyle N} subjects. == Properties of the MOS == The MOS is subject to certain mathematical properties and biases. In general, there is an ongoing debate on the usefulness of the MOS to quantify Quality of Experience in a single scalar value. When the MOS is acquired using a categorical rating scales, it is based on – similar to Likert scales – an ordinal scale. In this case, the ranking of the scale items is known, but their interval is not. Therefore, it is mathematically incorrect to calculate a mean over individual ratings in order to obtain the central tendency; the median should be used instead. However, in practice and in the definition of MOS, it is considered acceptable to calculate the arithmetic mean. It has been shown that for categorical rating scales (such as ACR), the individual items are not perceived equidistant by subjects. For example, there may be a larger "gap" between Good and Fair than there is between Good and Excellent. The perceived distance may also depend on the language into which the scale is translated. However, there exist studies that could not prove a significant impact of scale translation on the obtained results. Several other biases are present in the way MOS ratings are typically acquired. In addition to the above-mentioned issues with scales that are perceived non-linearly, there is a so-called "range-equalization bias": subjects, over the course of a subjective experiment, tend to give scores that span the entire rating scale. This makes it impossible to compare two different subjective tests if the range of presented quality differs. In other words, the MOS is never an absolute measure of quality, but only relative to the test in which it has been acquired. For the above reasons – and due to several other contextual factors influencing the perceived quality in a subjective test – a MOS value should only be reported if the context in which the values have been collected in is known and reported as well. MOS values gathered from different contexts and test designs therefore should not be directly compared. Recommendation ITU-T P.800.2 prescribes how MOS values should be reported. Specifically, P.800.2 says:it is not meaningful to directly compare MOS values produced from separate experiments, unless those experiments were explicitly designed to be compared, and even then the data should be statistically analysed to ensure that such a comparison is valid. == MOS for speech and audio quality estimation == MOS historically originates from subjective measurements where listeners would sit in a "quiet room" and score a telephone call quality as they perceived it. This kind of test methodology had been in use in the telephony industry for decades and was standardized in Recommendation ITU-T P.800. It specifies that "the talker should be seated in a quiet room with volume between 30 and 120 m³ and a reverberation time less than 500 ms (preferably in the range 200–300 ms). The room noise level must be below 30 dBA with no dominant peaks in the spectrum." Requirements for other modalities were similarly specified in later ITU-T Recommendations. == MOS estimation using quality models == Obtaining MOS ratings may be time-consuming and expensive as it requires the recruitment of human assessors. For various use cases such as codec development or service quality monitoring purposes – where quality should be estimated repeatedly and automatically – MOS scores can also be predicted by objective quality models, which typically have been developed and trained using human MOS ratings. A question that arises from using such models is whether the MOS differences produced are noticeable to the users. For example, when rating images on a five point MOS scale, an image with a MOS equal to 5 is expected to be noticeably better in quality than one with a MOS equal to 1. Contrary to that, it is not evident whether an image with a MOS equal to 3.8 is noticeably better in quality than one with a MOS equal to 3.6. Research conducted on determining the smallest MOS difference that is perceptible to users for digital photographs showed that a MOS difference of approximately 0.46 is required in order for 75% of the users to be able to detect the higher quality image. Nevertheless, image quality expectation, and hence MOS, changes over time with the change of user expectations. As a result, minimum noticeable MOS differences determined using analytical methods such as in may change over time.