Adrozek is malware that injects fake ads into online search results. Microsoft announced the malware threat on 10 December 2020, and noted that many different browsers are affected, including Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Mozilla Firefox and Yandex Browser. The malware was first detected in May 2020 and, at its peak in August 2020, controlled over 30,000 devices a day. But during the December 2020 announcement, Microsoft claimed "hundreds of thousands" of infected devices worldwide between May and September 2020. According to Microsoft, if not detected and blocked, Adrozek adds browser extensions, modifies a specific DLL per target browser, and changes browser settings to insert additional, unauthorized ads into web pages, often on top of legitimate ads from search engines. For each user tricked into clicking on the fake ads, the scammers earn affiliate advertising dollars. The malware has been observed to extract device data and, in some cases, steal credentials, sending them to remote servers. Users may unintentionally install the malware because of a drive-by download, by visiting a tampered website, opening an e-mail attachment, or clicking on a deceptive link or a deceptive pop-up window. The main malware program is downloaded to the “Programs Files” folder using file names such as Audiolava.exe, QuickAudio.exe, and converter.exe. According to PC Magazine, a good way to avoid, or mitigate, infection by Adrozek is to keep browser and related software programs up to date.
CHAOS (chess)
CHAOS (Chess Heuristics and Other Stuff) is a chess playing program that was developed by programmers working at the RCA Systems Programming division in the late 1960s. It played competitively in computer chess competitions in the 1970s and 1980s. It differed from other programs of that era in its look-ahead philosophy, choosing to use chess knowledge to evaluate fewer positions and continuations as opposed to simple evaluations that relied on deep look-ahead to avoid bad moves. == Introduction == CHAOS was originally developed by Ira Ruben, Fred Swartz, Victor Berman, Joe Winograd and William Toikka while working at RCA in Cinnaminson, NJ. Its name is an acronym for 'Chess Heuristics and Other Stuff.' Program development moved to the Computing Center of the University of Michigan when Swartz changed jobs, and Mike Alexander joined the development group. Swartz, Alexander and Berman were continuously group members from that point onward in CHAOS' evolution, as others of the original authors left and new members contributed episodically. Chess Senior Master Jack O'Keefe contributed to CHAOS' development from about 1980 onwards. CHAOS was written in Fortran, except for low-level board representation manipulations written in assembly language or C. Due to this portability, it ran on RCA, Univac and IBM-compatible mainframes in its lifetime. CHAOS heralds from the mainframe computing era when only machines of that capacity were able to play at a high level. Consequently, development and testing could only take place at off-peak times for production use of the machine. In a competition, CHAOS had to run on a dedicated mainframe with a telephone link to the match venue. In its later years, CHAOS ran on computers on the machine assembly floor of Amdahl Corporation on MTS. == Background == === Chess and artificial intelligence === Mathematicians Claude Shannon and Alan Turing, working separately, were the first to view playing chess as a challenge to machines. Working for AT&T / Bell Labs with its access to telephone switching equipment, Shannon built a relay-based machine that learned how to work its way through a two-dimensional, 5x5 cell maze in 1949. Shannon viewed this as an analogue of the way that organisms learn things about their natural environment. There is a random element to searching it, a memory element to benefit from the search outcome, and a reward element that reinforces learning when the global outcome is favorable to the organism. Soon afterward, Shannon wrote a mathematical analysis of the game of chess, published in 1950. Like with the maze, he broke down game play into the necessary elements for reinforcement learning. Associated with each board configuration a move will be made from, there is a numerical score. To decide what move to make, a player wants to maximize their own position's score after the move and to minimize their opponent's score (a minimax view). Since there are about 32 possible moves at each of the early stages of the game, and about 40 moves and responses in each game, then there are about 32 80 {\displaystyle 32^{80}} or about 10 120 {\displaystyle 10^{120}} possible games - an impossibly large set to evaluate completely. Therefore, there must be a way to limit the number of moves to look ahead for to find the best one. Reducing the game to these few key elements provided a way to think about human intelligence in general. Shannon became part of a wider group using computing machines to mimic aspects of human intelligence that grew into the general idea of artificial intelligence. (Other members of this group were John McCarthy, Herbert Simon, Allen Newell, Alan Kotok, Alex Bernstein and Richard Greenblatt.) The paradigm that evolved was that there was a quantification of the position on the board into a score, an evaluation method to find favorable outcomes (minimax, later alpha-beta pruning), and a strategy to manage the combinatorial explosion of the look-ahead possibilities. By the early 1960s, there were computer programs that played chess at a rudimentary level. They used very simple evaluation functions for each position and tried to search as far forward as was practical given the time constraints and available compute power. Naturally, programmers optimized their code to use the available computing resources. This led to a major philosophical divide among chess programs: those that tried to evaluate as many positions as possible, and those that tried to evaluate the most promising move sequences as deeply as possible. CHAOS was firmly in the camp believing only the most promising moves should be evaluated in depth. Said Swartz, "The 'brute force people' ... look at every (possible move) no matter what garbage it is. Most moves are just terrible, terrible moves, and most computing time is being spent on pure garbage." The program spent more time evaluating each board position in the expectation that it would find the most promising lines of play to explore in depth. In 1983, the then-fastest chess program (Belle) evaluated 110,000 positions per second, and typical programs 1000–50,000 per second, whereas CHAOS evaluated about 50-100 per second. === Machine learning and strategies to manage search === From about 1949 onward, Arthur Samuel began work for IBM on machine learning, culminating in a checkers-playing program in 1952 and publications on the topic. Concurrently, Christopher Strachey created Checkers, a program to play the board game of checkers in 1951, but it had no capacity to learn from its play. Checkers was chosen by both authors because it was simpler than chess yet contained the basic characteristics of an intellectual activity, and, in Samuel's view, was a test-bed in which heuristic procedures and learning processes could be evaluated quickly. Checker playing programs introduced the notion of the game tree and evaluating play to various depths to choose the best move. The complexity of chess, however, promoted it to the status of an analogue for human intelligence, and it attracted computer scientists' attention, who referred to it as research into artificial intelligence (AI). Like checkers, it required a numerical assessment of each arrangement of chess pieces on a board. It also required looking ahead to future moves to decide how to play the present position. Due to the enormous number of possible moves, there had to be a way to confine the look-ahead search to the most promising lines of play. From these factors, the notion of minimax score evaluation developed and, later, alpha-beta tree pruning to abandon looking at positions worse than any that have already been examined. === Chess search strategies === The AI community viewed artificial intelligence as comprising two parts: a way to symbolically quantify the knowledge in hand (a chess board position), and a set of heuristics to limit look-ahead to the consequences of a move. The early chess playing programs attempted to look forward as far as possible, perhaps to 3 moves ahead by each player, and to choose the best outcome. This led to the horizon effect, whereby a key move 4 or more moves ahead would be unexamined and therefore missed. Consequently, the programs were quite weak and heuristics to manage the search became important in their development. CHAOS used a selective search strategy with iterative widening. As chess programs evolved, they incorporated books of opening lines of play from historic sources. Nowadays, book moves are catalogued in machine-readable form, but originally programmers had to type them in. CHAOS had an extensive book for its time of around 10,000 moves that O'Keefe helped to develop. A problem with play from an opening book is the behavior of the program when the play leaves the book: the positional advantage may be so subtle that the evaluation scheme may be unable to understand it, leading to very wide and shallow searches to establish a line of play. The horizon effect again plagues move selection after leaving the book. CHAOS mitigated these problems by only using book lines that it could understand, and by relying on cached analyses of continuations out of the book made while the opponent's clock was running. == Game Play History == CHAOS played in twelve ACM computer chess tournaments and four World Computer Chess Championships (WCCC). Its debut was the ACM computer chess tournament in 1973, taking 2nd place. In 1974, it again won 2nd place in the WCCC, defeating the tournament favorite Chess 4.0 but losing to Kaissa. CHAOS was close to winning the 1980 WCCC, but lost to Belle in a playoff. The 1985 ACM computer chess tournament was CHAOS' last competition. One of CHAOS' notable victories was over Chess 4.0 at the 1974 WCCC tournament. Chess 4.0 was unbeaten by any other program up until then. Playing as white, CHAOS made a knight sacrifice (16 Nd4-e6!!) that traded material for open lines of attack and eventually won the game. CHAOS’ authors thought the move was due to a
Social influence bias
The social influence bias is an asymmetric herding effect on online social media platforms which makes users overcompensate for negative ratings but amplify positive ones. Driven by the desire to be accepted within a specific group, it surrounds the idea that people alter certain behaviors to be like those of the people within a group. Therefore, it is a subgroup term for various types of cognitive biases. Some social influence bias types include the bandwagon effect, authority bias, groupthinking effect, social comparison bias, social media bias and more. Understanding these biases helps us understand the term overall. However, the composition of the term "social influence bias" requires critical examination to understand the way that it affects individuals' and groups' lives. The term "influence" has 2 different types of stigma. For one, it surrounds the idea that people show their true inner selves when "under the influence". On the other end, it also proposes the idea that people are not their own selves when "under the influence". These tend to be constructions made by people, which also tend to fit the situation based on their own perspectives. So, even in social terms, it requires both sides to be examined to understand whether we truly are affected by context, or we remain to be and behave in terms of our own selves. The term "influence" doesn't necessarily say that there lies greater strength in our inner self's desires and decisions, nor does it say that external factors have the greater power. In a similar manner, both social and non-social judgments are to be associated with anxiety, but the same can't necessarily be said in the case of social conformity. So, the gray areas within this topic beg the question, "What does social influence bias say about us, and does it affect us all in the same way?" == Social media bias == Media bias is reflected in search systems in social media. Kulshrestha and her team found through research in 2018 that the top-ranked results returned by these search engines can influence users' perceptions when they conduct searches for events or people, which is particularly reflected in political bias and polarizing topics. Fueled by confirmation bias, online echo chambers allow users to be steeped within their own ideology. Because social media is tailored to your interests and your selected friends, it is an easy outlet for political echo chambers. Social media bias is also reflected in hostile media effect. Social media has a place in disseminating news in modern society, where viewers are exposed to other people's comments while reading news articles. In their 2020 study, Gearhart and her team showed that viewers' perceptions of bias increased and perceptions of credibility decreased after seeing comments with which they held different opinions. == In research context == In observational data, how social influence affects collected judgment is challenging to fully understand. Positive social influence can accumulate and result in a rating bubble, while negative social influence is neutralized by crowd correction. This phenomenon was first described in a paper written by Lev Muchnik, Sinan Aral and Sean J. Taylor in 2014, then the question was revisited by Cicognani et al., whose experiment reinforced Munchnik's and his co-authors' results. == Relevance == Online customer reviews are trusted sources of information in various contexts such as online marketplaces, dining, accommodation, movies, or digital products. However, these online ratings are not immune to herd behavior, which means that subsequent reviews are not independent from each other. As on many such sites, preceding opinions are visible to a new reviewer, he or she can be heavily influenced by the antecedent evaluations in his or her decision about the certain product, service or online content. This form of herding behavior inspired Muchnik, Aral and Taylor to conduct their experiment on influence in social contexts. == Experimental design == Muchnik, Aral, and Taylor designed a large-scale randomized experiment to measure social influence on user reviews. The experiment was conducted on social news aggregation website like Reddit. The study lasted for 5 months, the authors randomly assigned 101 281 comments to one of the following treatment groups: up-treated (4049), down-treated (1942), or control (the proportions reflect the observed ratio of up-and down-votes. Comments which fell to the first group were given an up-vote upon the creation of the comment, the second group got a down-vote upon creation, the comments in the control group remained untouched. A vote is equivalent to a single rating (+1 or -1). As other users are unable to trace a user’s votes, they were unaware of the experiment. Due to randomization, comments in the control and the treatment group were not different in terms of expected rating. The treated comments were viewed more than 10 million times and rated 308 515 times by successive users. == Results == The up-vote treatment increased the probability of up-voting by the first viewer by 32% over the control group, while the probability of down-voting did not change compared to the control group, which means that users did not correct the random positive rating. The upward bias remained inplace for the observed 5-month period. The accumulating herding effect increased the comment’s mean rating by 25% compared to the control group comments. Positively manipulated comments did receive higher ratings at all parts of the distribution, which means that they were also more likely to collect extremely high scores. The negative manipulation created an asymmetric herd effect: although the probability of subsequent down-votes was increased by the negative treatment, the probability of up-voting also grew for these comments. The community performed a correction which neutralized the negative treatment and resulted non-different final mean ratings from the control group. The authors also compared the final mean scores of comments across the most active topic categories on the website. The observed positive herding effect was present in the "politics," "culture and society," and "business" subreddits, but was not applicable for "economics," "IT," "fun," and "general news".- == Implications == The skewed nature of online ratings makes review outcomes different to what it would be without the social influence bias. In a 2009 experiment by Hu, Zhang and Pavlou showed that the distribution of reviews of a certain product made by unconnected individuals is approximately normal, however, the rating of the same product on Amazon followed a J-Shaped distribution with twice as much five-star ratings than others. Cicognani, Figini and Magnani came to similar conclusions after their experiment conducted on a tourism services website: positive preceding ratings influenced raters' behavior more than mediocre ones. Positive crowd correction makes community-based opinions upward-biased.
Talim (textiles)
Talim (Kashmiri: تعليم, Kashmiri pronunciation: [t̪əːliːm], Urdu: تَعْلِیم, Arabic: تعليم, pronounced [taʕ.liːm] ) in textiles is a symbolic code and system of notation that facilitates the creation of intricate patterns in fabrics, such as shawls and carpets, and the written coded plans that include colour schemes and weaving instructions. The term is used in traditional hand-weaving in the Indian subcontinent. Talim was initially used to create certain types of patterns in Kashmiri shawls, and later came to be applied in the production of carpets. == Etymology and origin == The term talim, which refers to a symbolic code and system of notation used by shawl and carpet artisans in their weaving processes, came to the Urdu language from the Arabic noun taʻlim (تعليم), which means "authoritative instruction", "teaching", or "edification". It means the same in Urdu and Kashmiri. The Arabic noun originated from the second form of the Arabic root verb ʻalima (علم), which means "to know". According to a local belief in Kashmir, talim was introduced to them by Persian scholar and Sufi Muslim saint Mir Sayyid Ali Hamadani. The belief notwithstanding, talim might have originated from Kashmir; Amritsar was the only place outside of Srinagar where talim was used, by migrated Kashmiri artisans. == Technique == Whereas carpets are generally woven horizontally, providing weavers with a clear view of the progress they are making in creating designs, in Kashmir, carpets are woven vertically, so the weaver is reliant on the talim. The talim technique forms fabrics by passing the weft thread as per a given script that has design codes. Weavers use talim to weave the desired pattern with planned colours. Talim involves teamwork when applying the technique, as the process of creating intricate fabric designs in weaving begins with the Naqash (designer, who designs using pencils on graphs) meticulously crafting the design on a blank sheet of paper called a naska, and the master, Talim guru, making the colour codes and symbols for weft yarns that would interlace the warp to construct the desired design. He writes on a long strip of paper, in specific symbols, the colour codes, and the number of knots to be woven with each colour. Taraha guru collaborates with talim guru and is known as the artisan responsible for determining the colours. Talim uthana is a process or the act of "picking the codes" from the graph. A clerk called the Talim Navis would record the step-by-step instructions for these numbers and colours, and thousands of low-paid and interchangeable weavers would read or recite the record to carry out the design. Afterward, a talim copyist makes copies, which are needed when multiple looms weave the same product. The script, which has been encoded, is deciphered and translated according to the specific guidelines of weavers in order to incorporate the design that is included within it. Talim has been compared to "hieroglyphics" or as a "notational-cum-cryptographic system", as it is challenging to decipher and is unique to the shawls of Kashmir, which requires expertise to comprehend. According to researcher Gagan Deep Kaur, "The talim is widely held to be a trade secret of the community and has always been fiercely guarded by the owners." Those who use talim for shawl-making do not assign important tasks to women, because of the fear that the technique and knowledge may be divulged to other communities when the women are sent there to be married. The coded cards known as talim in the Kashmiri language were used for creating certain types of patterns in shawl weaving. The talim technique is employed in the creation of kani shawls, which originated from the Kanihama region of the Kashmir valley. Carpet weaving adapted the technique from shawl making. When Kashmiri artisans started to create carpets, they chose to continue using the talim rather than switching to a different method. The resurgence of the carpet industry in Amritsar during the last century resulted in the prevalent use of the talim technique among the local weavers, a majority of whom hailed from the region of Kashmir. === Recitation of codes === Talim was also communicated through recitation accompanied by a melodic chant or song. In traditional weaving practices, the use of chanting was common. The movement of the shuttles was synchronised with the song of the weaver, adding a musical rhythm to the instructions represented through hieroglyphics. The weaver's chant, "Two blue, one red, three yellow, two blue," served as a guide as they wove and replicated the designated pattern. == Usage == The first factories established in Amritsar around 1860 utilised Bokhara designs. However, Kashmiri weavers maintained their traditional techniques and employed the talim, instead of a cartoon, for tying knots. As a result, Amritsar became the second location in the Indian subcontinent to use the talim. The traditional weaving practices are still carried out in some parts of the Indian subcontinent. The exact date when talim was last used in the subcontinent varies depending on the region and the specific weaving community. Indian textile historian Jasleen Dhamija wrote in her 1989 book Handwoven Fabrics of India that there were still some weavers in the Kashmiri village of Kanihama who applied talim in weaving shawls. As of 2022, the carpet weavers in Kashmir were the only remaining users of talim in carpets, according to Zubair Ahmed, director of the Indian Institute of Carpet Technology. The institute aims to preserve traditional Kashmiri carpet designs by digitising talim and training weavers in the technique. == Gallery ==
Correlation immunity
In mathematics, the correlation immunity of a Boolean function is a measure of the degree to which its outputs are uncorrelated with some subset of its inputs. Specifically, a Boolean function is said to be correlation-immune of order m if every subset of m or fewer variables in x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n}} is statistically independent of the value of f ( x 1 , x 2 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle f(x_{1},x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n})} . == Definition == A function f : F 2 n → F 2 {\displaystyle f:\mathbb {F} _{2}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb {F} _{2}} is k {\displaystyle k} -th order correlation immune if for any independent n {\displaystyle n} binary random variables X 0 … X n − 1 {\displaystyle X_{0}\ldots X_{n-1}} , the random variable Z = f ( X 0 , … , X n − 1 ) {\displaystyle Z=f(X_{0},\ldots ,X_{n-1})} is independent from any random vector ( X i 1 … X i k ) {\displaystyle (X_{i_{1}}\ldots X_{i_{k}})} with 0 ≤ i 1 < … < i k < n {\displaystyle 0\leq i_{1}<\ldots An automated dispensing cabinet (ADC), also called a unit-based cabinet (UBC), automated dispensing device (ADD), or automated dispensing machine (ADM)[1], is a computerized medicine cabinet for hospitals and healthcare settings. ADCs allow medications to be stored and dispensed near the point of care while controlling and tracking drug distribution. == Overview == Hospital pharmacies have provided medications for patients by filling patient-specific cassettes of unit-dose medications that were then delivered to the nursing unit and stored in medication cabinets or carts. ADCs, originally designed for hospital use, were introduced in hospitals in the 1980s and have facilitated the transition to alternative delivery models and more decentralized medication distribution systems.[2] Implementing automated dispensing cabinets as part of a decentralized or hybrid medication distribution system can improve patient safety and the accountability of the inventory, streamline certain billing processes. However, in the 2000s, the technology began to be deployed into other care settings where medication doses were stored onsite, and higher security methods were needed to control inventory, access, and dispensing of each patient dose. Settings that now deploy ADCs include long-term care facilities, hospice, critical access hospitals, surgery centers, group homes, residential care facilities, rehab and psych environments, animal health, dental clinics, and nursing education simulation. These diverse care settings share a common need to safely store, account for, and dispense individual doses of medications, especially narcotics and high-value medications, at the point of care.[3] ADCs track user access and dispensed medications, and their use can improve control over medication inventory. The real-time inventory reports generated by many cabinets can simplify the filling process and help the pharmacy track expired drugs. Furthermore, by restricting individual drugs – such as high-risk medications and controlled substances – to unique drawers within the cabinet, overall inventory management, patient safety, and medication security can be improved. Automated dispensing cabinets allow the pharmacy department to profile physician orders before they are dispensed.[4] ADCs can also enable providers to record medication charges upon dispensing, reducing the billing paperwork the pharmacy is responsible for. In addition, nurses can note returned medications using the cabinets' computers, enabling direct credits to patients' accounts. Since automated cabinets can be located on the nursing unit floor, nursing have speedier access to a patient's medications. Also, shorter waiting time ensures improved patient comfort and care.[5] == Role of automated dispensing in healthcare == Automated dispensing is a pharmacy practice in which a device dispenses medications and fills prescriptions. ADCs, which can handle many different medications, are available from a number of manufacturers such as BD, ARxIUM, and Omnicell. Though members of the pharmacy community have been utilizing automation technology since the 1980s, companies are constantly improving ADCs to meet changing needs and health standards in the industry. Several goals can be met by implementing an automated product in a healthcare facility. Patient safety can be ensured with the use of ADC technology such as barcoding. Anesthesia ADCs in operating rooms and perioperative areas may include label printing to prevent mix-ups such as errors between morphine and hydromorphone, two different opioid analgesics that frequently get confused. These systems also communicate with the pharmacy and its information management system to track medications removed and support inventory replenishment. == Key features == ADCs are like automated teller machines whose specific technologies such as barcode scanning and clinical decision support can improve medication safety. Some have metal locking drawers for added security and some have automated single-dose dispensing to prevent the need for a blind count each time a controlled substance is accessed. Over the years, ADCs have been adapted to facilitate compliance with emerging regulatory requirements such as pharmacy review of medication orders and safe practice recommendations. ADCs incorporate advanced software and electronic interfaces to synthesize high-risk steps in the medication use process. These unit-based medication repositories provide computer-controlled storage, dispensation, tracking, and documentation of medication distribution in the resident care unit. Since automated dispensing cabinets are not located in the pharmacy, they are considered "decentralized" medication distribution systems. Instead, they can be found at the point of care on the resident care unit. Tracking of the stocking and distribution process can occur by interfacing the unit with a central pharmacy computer. These cabinets can also be interfaced with other external databases such as resident profiles, the facility's admission/discharge/transfer system, and billing systems. Most ADC providers offer scalable systems since several important factors vary widely by facility such as budget, physical room size, patient population/demographics, type of healthcare facility, etc. In mathematics, the correlation immunity of a Boolean function is a measure of the degree to which its outputs are uncorrelated with some subset of its inputs. Specifically, a Boolean function is said to be correlation-immune of order m if every subset of m or fewer variables in x 1 , x 2 , … , x n {\displaystyle x_{1},x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n}} is statistically independent of the value of f ( x 1 , x 2 , … , x n ) {\displaystyle f(x_{1},x_{2},\ldots ,x_{n})} . == Definition == A function f : F 2 n → F 2 {\displaystyle f:\mathbb {F} _{2}^{n}\rightarrow \mathbb {F} _{2}} is k {\displaystyle k} -th order correlation immune if for any independent n {\displaystyle n} binary random variables X 0 … X n − 1 {\displaystyle X_{0}\ldots X_{n-1}} , the random variable Z = f ( X 0 , … , X n − 1 ) {\displaystyle Z=f(X_{0},\ldots ,X_{n-1})} is independent from any random vector ( X i 1 … X i k ) {\displaystyle (X_{i_{1}}\ldots X_{i_{k}})} with 0 ≤ i 1 < … < i k < n {\displaystyle 0\leq i_{1}<\ldots Automated dispensing cabinet
Correlation immunity