Order-independent transparency (OIT) is a class of techniques in rasterisational computer graphics for rendering transparency in a 3D scene, which do not require rendering geometry in sorted order for alpha compositing. == Description == Commonly, 3D geometry with transparency is rendered by blending (using alpha compositing) all surfaces into a single buffer (think of this as a canvas). Each surface occludes existing color and adds some of its own color depending on its alpha value, a ratio of light transmittance. The order in which surfaces are blended affects the total occlusion or visibility of each surface. For a correct result, surfaces must be blended from farthest to nearest or nearest to farthest, depending on the alpha compositing operation, over or under. Ordering may be achieved by rendering the geometry in sorted order, for example sorting triangles by depth, but can take a significant amount of time, not always produce a solution (in the case of intersecting or circularly overlapping geometry) and the implementation is complex. Instead, order-independent transparency sorts geometry per-pixel, after rasterisation. For exact results this requires storing all fragments before sorting and compositing. == History == The A-buffer is a computer graphics technique introduced in 1984 which stores per-pixel lists of fragment data (including micro-polygon information) in a software rasteriser, REYES, originally designed for anti-aliasing but also supporting transparency. More recently, depth peeling in 2001 described a hardware accelerated OIT technique. With limitations in graphics hardware the scene's geometry had to be rendered many times. A number of techniques have followed, to improve on the performance of depth peeling, still with the many-pass rendering limitation. For example, Dual Depth Peeling (2008). In 2009, two significant features were introduced in GPU hardware/drivers/Graphics APIs that allowed capturing and storing fragment data in a single rendering pass of the scene, something not previously possible. These are, the ability to write to arbitrary GPU memory from shaders and atomic operations. With these features a new class of OIT techniques became possible that do not require many rendering passes of the scene's geometry. The first was storing the fragment data in a 3D array, where fragments are stored along the z dimension for each pixel x/y. In practice, most of the 3D array is unused or overflows, as a scene's depth complexity is typically uneven. To avoid overflow the 3D array requires large amounts of memory, which in many cases is impractical. Two approaches to reducing this memory overhead exist. Packing the 3D array with a prefix sum scan, or linearizing, removed the unused memory issue but requires an additional depth complexity computation rendering pass of the geometry. The "Sparsity-aware" S-Buffer, Dynamic Fragment Buffer, "deque" D-Buffer, Linearized Layered Fragment Buffer all pack fragment data with a prefix sum scan and are demonstrated with OIT. Storing fragments in per-pixel linked lists provides tight packing of this data and in late 2011, driver improvements reduced the atomic operation contention overhead making the technique very competitive. == Exact OIT == Exact, as opposed to approximate, OIT accurately computes the final color, for which all fragments must be sorted. For high depth complexity scenes, sorting becomes the bottleneck. One issue with the sorting stage is local memory limited occupancy, in this case a SIMT attribute relating to the throughput and operation latency hiding of GPUs. Backwards memory allocation (BMA) groups pixels by their depth complexity and sorts them in batches to improve the occupancy and hence performance of low depth complexity pixels in the context of a potentially high depth complexity scene. Up to a 3× overall OIT performance increase is reported. Sorting is typically performed in a local array, however performance can be improved further by making use of the GPU's memory hierarchy and sorting in registers, similarly to an external merge sort, especially in conjunction with BMA. == Approximate OIT == Approximate OIT techniques relax the constraint of exact rendering to provide faster results. Higher performance can be gained from not having to store all fragments or only partially sorting the geometry. A number of techniques also compress, or reduce, the fragment data. These include: Stochastic Transparency: draw in a higher resolution in full opacity but discard some fragments. Downsampling will then yield transparency. Adaptive Transparency, a two-pass technique where the first constructs a visibility function which compresses on the fly (this compression avoids having to fully sort the fragments) and the second uses this data to composite unordered fragments. Intel's pixel synchronization avoids the need to store all fragments, removing the unbounded memory requirement of many other OIT techniques. Weighted Blended Order-Independent Transparency replaced the over operator with a commutative approximation. Feeding depth information into the weight produces visually-acceptable occlusion. == OIT in Hardware == The Sega Dreamcast games console included hardware support for automatic OIT.
AI nationalism
AI nationalism is the idea that nations should develop and control their own artificial intelligence technologies to advance their own interests and ensure technological sovereignty. This concept is gaining traction globally, leading countries to implement new laws, form strategic alliances, and invest significantly in domestic AI capabilities. == Global trends and national strategies == In 2018, British technology investor Ian Hogarth published an influential essay titled AI Nationalism. He argued that as AI gains more power and its economic and military significance expands, governments will take measures to bolster their own domestic AI industries, and predicted that the advancement of machine learning systems would lead to what he termed "AI nationalism." He anticipated that this rise in AI would accelerate a global arms race, resulting in more closed economies, restrictions on foreign acquisitions, and limitations on the movement of talent. Hogarth predicted that AI policy would become a central focus of government agendas. He also criticized Britain’s approach to AI strategy, citing the sale of London-based DeepMind—one of the leading AI laboratories, acquired by Google for a relatively modest £400 million in 2014—as a significant misstep. AI nationalism is chiefly reflected in the escalating rhetoric of an artificial intelligence arms race, portraying AI development as a zero-sum game where the winner gains significant economic, political, and military advantages. This mindset, as highlighted in a 2017 Pentagon report, warns that sharing AI technology could erode technological supremacy and enhance rivals' capabilities. The winner-takes-all mentality of AI nationalism poses risks including unsafe AI development, increased geopolitical tension, and potential military aggression (such as cyberattacks or targeting AI professionals). Several countries, including Canada, France, and India, have formulated national strategies to advance their positions in AI. In the United States, a leading player in the global AI arena, trade policies have been enacted to restrict China's access to critical microchips, reflecting a strategic effort to maintain a technological edge. The United States’ National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI) frames AI development as a critical aspect of a broader technology competition crucial for national success. It emphasizes the need to outpace China in AI to maintain strategic advantage, reflecting AI nationalism by linking geopolitical power directly to advancements in AI. France has seen notable governmental support for local AI startups, particularly those specializing in language technologies that cater to French and other non-English languages. In Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is investing billions in AI research and development. The country has actively collaborated with major technology firms such as Amazon, IBM, and Microsoft to establish itself as a prominent AI hub. == Historical and cultural context == AI nationalism is seen as deeply connected to historical racism and imperialism. It is viewed not merely as a technological competition but as a contest over racial and civilizational superiority. Historically, technological achievements were often used to justify colonialism and racial hierarchies, with Western societies perceiving their advancements as evidence of superiority. In the context of AI, this historical context continues to shape views on intelligence and development. Some argue that AI nationalism reinforces the idea of fundamental civilizational divides, especially between the Western world and China. This perspective often frames China's progress in AI as a direct challenge to Western values, presenting the AI competition as a struggle over values. AI nationalism is said to draw from long-standing anti-Asian stereotypes, such as the "Yellow Peril," which portray Asian nations as threats to Western civilization. This viewpoint links Asian technological advances with dehumanization and artificiality, reflecting persistent anxieties about China's growing role in the global tech landscape. == Implications == AI nationalism is seen as a component of a broader trend towards the fragmentation of the internet, where digital services are increasingly influenced by local regulations and national interests. This shift is creating a new technological landscape in which the impact of artificial intelligence on individuals' lives can vary significantly depending on their geographic location. J. Paul Goode argues that AI nationalism may exacerbate existing societal divisions by promoting the development of systems that embed cultural biases, thereby privileging certain groups while disadvantaging others.
Managed private cloud
Managed private cloud (also known as "hosted private cloud" or "single-tenant SaaS") refers to a principle in software architecture where a single instance of the software runs on a server, serves a single client organization (tenant), and is managed by a third party. The third-party provider is responsible for providing the hardware for the server and also for preliminary maintenance. This is in contrast to multitenancy, where multiple client organizations share a single server, or an on-premises deployment, where the client organization hosts its software instance. Managed private clouds also fall under the larger umbrella of cloud computing. == Adoption == The need for private clouds arose due to enterprises requiring a dedicated service and infrastructure for their cloud computing needs, such as for business-critical operations, improved security, and better control over their resources. Managed private cloud adoption is a popular choice among organizations. It has been on the rise due to enterprises requiring a dedicated cloud environment and preferring to avoid having to deal with management, maintenance, or future upgrade costs for the associated infrastructure and services. Such operational costs are unavoidable in on-premises private cloud data centers. == Advantages and challenges of managed private cloud == A managed private cloud cuts down on upkeep costs by outsourcing infrastructure management and maintenance to the managed cloud provider. It is easier to integrate an organization's existing software, services, and applications into a dedicated cloud hosting infrastructure which can be customized to the client's needs instead of a public cloud platform, whose hardware or infrastructure/software platform cannot be individualized to each client. Customers who choose a managed private cloud deployment usually choose them because of their desire for efficient cloud deployment, but also have the need for service customization or integration only available in a single-tenant environment. This chart shows the key benefits of the different types of deployments, and shows the overlap between these cloud solutions. This chart shows key drawbacks. Since deployments are done in a single-tenant environment, it is usually cost-prohibitive for small and medium-sized businesses. While server upkeep and maintenance are handled by the service provider, including network management and security, the client is charged for all such services. It is up to the potential client to determine if a managed private cloud solution aligns with their business objectives and budget. While the service provider maintains the upkeep of servers, network, and platform infrastructure, sensitive data is typically not stored on managed private clouds as it may leave business-critical information prone to breaches via third-party attacks on the cloud service provider. Common customizations and integrations include: Active Directory Single Sign-on Learning Management Systems Video Teleconferencing == Deployment strategies and service providers == Software companies have taken a variety of strategies in the Managed Private Cloud realm. Some software organizations have provided managed private cloud options internally, such as Microsoft. Companies that offer an on-premises deployment option, by definition, enable third-party companies to market Managed Private Cloud solutions. A few managed private cloud service providers are: Adobe Connect: Adobe Connect may be purchased for on-premises deployment, multi-tenant hosted deployment, managed private cloud as ACMS, or managed by third-party managed private cloud provider ConnectSolutions. Rackspace CenturyLink Microsoft licenses for Lync, SharePoint and Exchange may be purchased for on-premises deployment, a multi-tenant hosted deployment via Office 365, or managed by third-party cloud hosting from Azaleos, ConnectSolutions and others.
InciWeb
InciWeb is an interagency all-risk incident web information management system provided by the United States Forest Service released in 2004. It was originally developed for wildland fire emergencies, but can be also used for other emergency incidents (natural disasters, such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes). == Introduction == It was developed with two primary missions: 1. Provide the public a single source of incident related information 2. Provide a standardized reporting tool for the Public Affairs community Official announcements include evacuations, road closures, news releases, maps, photographs, and basic info and current situation about the incident. Incident information can be accessed by: web browser at https://inciweb.wildfire.gov/ Twitter RSS web feed == Technical == The original application was hosted at the United States Forest Service - Wildland Fire Training and Conference Center, at McClellan Airfield, California, comprising three servers: Database server Administrative server Load balancer for the public content which routes traffic to a pool of eight servers. Web traffic averages 2 million plus hits daily during the fire season with the ability to handle 3.5 million hits. The servers were moved to the National information Technology Center (NITC), Kansas City, Missouri on July 16, 2008, along with the release of version 2.0; the current version is 2.2. == Availability issues == InciWeb was having technical difficulties due to the high volume of Internet users trying to access the site during the September–October 2006 Day Fire and the Summer 2008 California wildfires. == Participating agencies == United States Forest Service Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Indian Affairs Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Department of the Interior Office of Aircraft Services National Association of State Foresters United States Fire Administration These same agencies are also in the National Interagency Fire Center.
Crucible (software)
Crucible is a collaborative code review application by Australian software company Atlassian. Like other Atlassian products, Crucible is a Web-based application primarily aimed at enterprise, and certain features that enable peer review of a codebase may be considered enterprise social software. Crucible is particularly tailored to remote workers, and facilitates asynchronous review and commenting on code. Crucible also integrates with popular source control tools, such as Git and Subversion. Crucible is not open source, but customers are allowed to view and modify the code for their own use.
VideoThang
VideoThang was free video editing software for Windows 2000, XP, and Vista. The software has three parts to it which are My Stuff, Edit My Stuff, and My Mix. The software accepts MOV, AVI, MPG, MP4, PNG, WMV, FLV, and MP3 standards. Its official website is now no longer available. == Reception == Jan Ozer, of Pcmag, said that the software "suffers from several unfortunate design and implementation flaws that dramatically limit output quality and overall utility." Jon L. Jacobi, of PC World, said that the software "may not be the most flexible multimedia editor in the world, but the trim/zoom basics are there, it's free, and it's so simple to use that just about anyone in the world should be able figure it out." Amit Agarwal, of Digital Inspiration, said that the software "doesn’t offer loads of features like other video editors but is perfect for making quick video slideshows of your pictures that you can upload on the web or share via email."
Cloud load balancing
Cloud load balancing is a type of load balancing that is performed in cloud computing. Cloud load balancing is the process of distributing workloads across multiple computing resources. Cloud load balancing reduces costs associated with document management systems and maximizes availability of resources. It is a type of load balancing and not to be confused with Domain Name System (DNS) load balancing. While DNS load balancing uses software or hardware to perform the function, cloud load balancing uses services offered by various computer network companies. == Comparison With DNS load balancing == Cloud load balancing has an advantage over DNS load balancing as it can transfer loads to servers globally as opposed to distributing it across local servers. In the event of a local server outage, cloud load balancing delivers users to the closest regional server without interruption for the user. Cloud load balancing addresses issues relating to TTL reliance present during DNS load balancing. DNS directives can only be enforced once in every TTL cycle and can take several hours if switching between servers during a lag or server failure. Incoming server traffic will continue to route to the original server until the TTL expires and can create an uneven performance as different internet service providers may reach the new server before other internet service providers. Another advantage is that cloud load balancing improves response time by routing remote sessions to the best performing data centers. == Importance of Load Balancing == Cloud computing brings advantages in "cost, flexibility and availability of service users." Those advantages drive the demand for Cloud services. The demand raises technical issues in Service Oriented Architectures and Internet of Services (IoS)-style applications, such as high availability and scalability. As a major concern in these issues, load balancing allows cloud computing to "scale up to increasing demands" by efficiently allocating dynamic local workload evenly across all nodes. == Load Balancing Techniques == === Scheduling Algorithms === Opportunistic Load Balancing (OLB) is the algorithm that assigns workloads to nodes in free order. It is simple but does not consider the expected execution time of each node. Load balance Min-Min (LBMM) assigns sub-tasks to the node which requires minimum execution time. === Load Balancing Policies === Workload and Client Aware Policy (WCAP) specifies the unique and special property (USP) of requests and computing nodes. With the information of USP, the schedule can decide the most suitable node to complete a request. WCAP makes the most of computing nodes by reducing their idle time. Also, it reduces performance time through searches based on content information. === A Comparative Study of Algorithms === Biased Random Sampling bases its job allocation on the network represented by a directed graph. For each execution node in this graph, in-degree means available resources and out-degree means allocated jobs. In-degree will decrease during job execution while out-degree will increase after job allocation. Active Clustering is a self-aggregation algorithm to rewire the network. The experiment result is that"Active Clustering and Random Sampling Walk predictably perform better as the number of processing nodes is increased" while the Honeyhive algorithm does not show the increasing pattern. == Client-side Load Balancer Using Cloud Computing == Load balancer forwards packets to web servers according to different workloads on servers. However, it is hard to implement a scalable load balancer because of both the "cloud's commodity business model and the limited infrastructure control allowed by cloud providers." Client-side Load Balancer (CLB) solve this problem by using a scalable cloud storage service. CLB allows clients to choose back-end web servers for dynamic content although it delivers static content.