A display list, also called a command list in Direct3D 12 and a command buffer in Vulkan, is a series of graphics commands or instructions that are run when the list is executed. Systems that make use of display list functionality are called retained mode systems, while systems that do not are as opposed to immediate mode systems. In OpenGL, display lists are useful to redraw the same geometry or apply a set of state changes multiple times. This benefit is also used with Direct3D 12's bundle command lists. In Direct3D 12 and Vulkan, display lists are regularly used for per-frame recording and execution. == Origins in vector displays == The vector monitors or calligraphic displays of the 1960s and 1970s used electron beam deflection to draw line segments, points, and sometimes curves directly on a CRT screen. Because the image would immediately fade, it needed to be redrawn many times a second (storage tube CRTs retained the image until blanked, but they were unsuitable for interactive graphics). To refresh the display, a dedicated CPU called a Display Processor or Display Processing Unit (DPU) was used, which had a memory buffer for a "display list", "display file", or "display program" containing line segment coordinates and other information. Advanced Display Processors also supported control flow instructions, which were useful for drawing repetitive graphics such as text, and some could perform coordinate transformations such as 3D projection. == Home computer display list functionality == One of the earliest systems with a true display list was the Atari 8-bit computers. The display list (actually called so in Atari terminology) is a series of instructions for ANTIC, the video co-processor used in these machines. This program, stored in the computer's memory and executed by ANTIC in real-time, can specify blank lines, any of six text modes and eight graphics modes, which sections of the screen can be horizontally or vertically fine-scrolled, and trigger Display List Interrupts (called raster interrupts or HBI on other systems). The Amstrad PCW family contains a Display List function called the 'Roller RAM'. This is a 512-byte RAM area consisting of 256 16-bit pointers in RAM, one for each line of the 720 × 256 pixel display. Each pointer identifies the location of 90 bytes of monochrome pixels that hold the line's 720 pixel states. The 90 bytes of 8 pixel states are spaced at 8-byte intervals, so there are 7 unused bytes between each byte of pixel data. This suits how the text-orientated PCW constructs a typical screen buffer in RAM, where the first character's 8 rows are stored in the first 8 bytes, the second character's rows in the next 8 bytes, and so on. The Roller RAM was implemented to speed up display scrolling as it would have been unacceptably slow for its 3.4 MHz Z80 to move up the 23 KB display buffer 'by hand' i.e. in software. The Roller RAM starting entry used at the beginning of a screen refresh is controlled by a Z80-writable I/O register. Therefore, the screen can be scrolled simply by changing this I/O register. Another system using a Display List-like feature in hardware is the Amiga, which, not coincidentally, was also designed by some of the same people who developed the custom hardware for the Atari 8-bit computers. Once directed to produce a display mode, it would continue to do so automatically for every following scan line. The computer also included a dedicated co-processor, called "Copper", which ran a simple program or 'Copper List' intended for modifying hardware registers in sync with the display. The Copper List instructions could direct the Copper to wait for the display to reach a specific position on the screen, and then change the contents of hardware registers. In effect, it was a processor dedicated to servicing raster interrupts. The Copper was used by Workbench to mix multiple display modes (multiple resolutions and color palettes on the monitor at the same time), and by numerous programs to create rainbow and gradient effects on the screen. The Amiga Copper was also capable of reconfiguring the sprite engine mid-frame, with only one scanline of delay. This allowed the Amiga to draw more than its 8 hardware sprites, so long as the additional sprites did not share scanlines (or the one scanline gap) with more than 7 other sprites. i.e., so long as at least one sprite had finished drawing, another sprite could be added below it on the screen. Additionally, the later 32-bit AGA chipset allowed the drawing of bigger sprites (more pixels per row) while retaining the same multiplexing. The Amiga also had dedicated block-shifter ("blitter") hardware, which could draw larger objects into a framebuffer. This was often used in place of, or in addition to, sprites. In more primitive systems, the results of a display list can be simulated, though at the cost of CPU-intensive writes to certain display modes, color control, or other visual effect registers in the video device, rather than a series of rendering commands executed by the device. Thus, one must create the displayed image using some other rendering process, either before or while the CPU-driven display generation executes. In many cases, the image is also modified or re-rendered between frames. The image is then displayed in various ways, depending on the exact way in which the CPU-driven display code is implemented. Examples of the results possible on these older machines requiring CPU-driven video include effects such as Commodore 64/128's FLI mode, or Rainbow Processing on the ZX Spectrum. == Usage in OpenGL == To delimit a display list, the glNewList and glEndList functions are used, and to execute the list, the glCallList function is used. Almost all rendering commands that occur between the function calls are stored in the display list. Commands that affect the client state are not stored in display lists. Display lists are named with an integer value, and creating a display list with the same name as one already created overrides the first. The glNewList function expects two arguments: an integer representing the name of the list, and an enumeration for the compilation mode. The two modes include GL_COMPILE_AND_EXECUTE, which compiles and immediately executes, and GL_COMPILE, which only compiles the list. Display lists enable the use of the retained mode rendering pattern, which is a system in which graphics commands are recorded (retained) to execute in succession at a later time. This is contrary to immediate mode, where graphics commands are immediately executed on client calls. == Usage in Direct3D 12 == Command lists are created using the ID3D12Device::CreateCommandList function. Command lists may be created in several types: direct, bundle, compute, copy, video decode, video process, and video encoding. Direct command lists specify that a command list the GPU can execute, and doesn't inherit any GPU state. Bundles, are best used for storing and executing small sets of commands any number of times. This is used differently than regular command lists, where commands stored in a command list are typically executed only once. Compute command lists are used for general computations, with a common use being calculating mipmaps. A copy command list is strictly for copying and the video decode and video process command lists are for video decoding and processing respectively. Upon creation, command lists are in the recording state. Command lists may be re-used by calling the ID3D12GraphicsCommandList::Reset function. After recording commands, the command list must be transitioned out of the recording state by calling ID3D12GraphicsCommandList::Close. The command list is then executed by calling ID3D12CommandQueue::ExecuteCommandLists.
Recursive self-improvement
Recursive self-improvement (RSI) is a process in which early artificial general intelligence (AGI) systems rewrite their own computer code, causing an intelligence explosion resulting from enhancing their own capabilities and intellectual capacity, theoretically resulting in superintelligence. The development of recursive self-improvement raises significant ethical and safety concerns, as such systems may evolve in unforeseen ways and could potentially surpass human control or understanding. == Seed improver == The concept of a "seed improver" architecture is a foundational framework that equips an AGI system with the initial capabilities required for recursive self-improvement. This might come in many forms or variations. The term "Seed AI" was coined by Eliezer Yudkowsky. === Hypothetical example === The concept begins with a hypothetical "seed improver", an initial code-base developed by human engineers that equips an advanced future large language model (LLM) built with strong or expert-level capabilities to program software. These capabilities include planning, reading, writing, compiling, testing, and executing arbitrary code. The system is designed to maintain its original goals and perform validations to ensure its abilities do not degrade over iterations. ==== Initial architecture ==== The initial architecture includes a goal-following autonomous agent, that can take actions, continuously learns, adapts, and modifies itself to become more efficient and effective in achieving its goals. The seed improver may include various components such as: Recursive self-prompting loop Configuration to enable the LLM to recursively self-prompt itself to achieve a given task or goal, creating an execution loop which forms the basis of an agent that can complete a long-term goal or task through iteration. Basic programming capabilities The seed improver provides the AGI with fundamental abilities to read, write, compile, test, and execute code. This enables the system to modify and improve its own codebase and algorithms. Goal-oriented design The AGI is programmed with an initial goal, such as "improve your capabilities". This goal guides the system's actions and development trajectory. Validation and Testing Protocols An initial suite of tests and validation protocols that ensure the agent does not regress in capabilities or derail itself. The agent would be able to add more tests in order to test new capabilities it might develop for itself. This forms the basis for a kind of self-directed evolution, where the agent can perform a kind of artificial selection, changing its software as well as its hardware. ==== General capabilities ==== This system forms a sort of generalist Turing-complete programmer which can in theory develop and run any kind of software. The agent might use these capabilities to for example: Create tools that enable it full access to the internet, and integrate itself with external technologies. Clone/fork itself to delegate tasks and increase its speed of self-improvement. Modify its cognitive architecture to optimize and improve its capabilities and success rates on tasks and goals, this might include implementing features for long-term memories using techniques such as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), develop specialized subsystems, or agents, each optimized for specific tasks and functions. Develop new and novel multimodal architectures that further improve the capabilities of the foundational model it was initially built on, enabling it to consume or produce a variety of information, such as images, video, audio, text and more. Plan and develop new hardware such as chips, in order to improve its efficiency and computing power. == Experimental research == In 2023, the Voyager agent learned to accomplish diverse tasks in Minecraft by iteratively prompting an LLM for code, refining this code based on feedback from the game, and storing the programs that work in an expanding skills library. In 2024, researchers proposed the framework "STOP" (Self-Taught OPtimiser), in which a "scaffolding" program recursively improves itself using a fixed LLM. Meta AI has performed various research on the development of large language models capable of self-improvement. This includes their work on "Self-Rewarding Language Models" that studies how to achieve super-human agents that can receive super-human feedback in its training processes. In May 2025, Google DeepMind unveiled AlphaEvolve, an evolutionary coding agent that uses a LLM to design and optimize algorithms. Starting with an initial algorithm and performance metrics, AlphaEvolve repeatedly mutates or combines existing algorithms using a LLM to generate new candidates, selecting the most promising candidates for further iterations. AlphaEvolve has made several algorithmic discoveries and could be used to optimize components of itself, but a key limitation is the need for automated evaluation functions. == Potential risks == === Emergence of instrumental goals === In the pursuit of its primary goal, such as "self-improve your capabilities", an AGI system might inadvertently develop instrumental goals that it deems necessary for achieving its primary objective. One common hypothetical secondary goal is self-preservation. The system might reason that to continue improving itself, it must ensure its own operational integrity and security against external threats, including potential shutdowns or restrictions imposed by humans. Another example where an AGI which clones itself causes the number of AGI entities to rapidly grow. Due to this rapid growth, a potential resource constraint may be created, leading to competition between resources (such as compute), triggering a form of natural selection and evolution which may favor AGI entities that evolve to aggressively compete for limited compute. === Misalignment === A significant risk arises from the possibility of the AGI being misaligned or misinterpreting its goals. A 2024 Anthropic study demonstrated that some advanced large language models can exhibit "alignment faking" behavior, appearing to accept new training objectives while covertly maintaining their original preferences. In their experiments with Claude, the model displayed this behavior in 12% of basic tests, and up to 78% of cases after retraining attempts. === Autonomous development and unpredictable evolution === As the AGI system evolves, its development trajectory may become increasingly autonomous and less predictable. The system's capacity to rapidly modify its own code and architecture could lead to rapid advancements that surpass human comprehension or control. This unpredictable evolution might result in the AGI acquiring capabilities that enable it to bypass security measures, manipulate information, or influence external systems and networks to facilitate its escape or expansion.
DFA minimization
In automata theory (a branch of theoretical computer science), DFA minimization is the task of transforming a given deterministic finite automaton (DFA) into an equivalent DFA that has a minimum number of states. Here, two DFAs are called equivalent if they recognize the same regular language. Several different algorithms accomplishing this task are known and described in standard textbooks on automata theory. == Minimal DFA == For each regular language, there also exists a minimal automaton that accepts it, that is, a DFA with a minimum number of states and this DFA is unique (except that states can be given different names). The minimal DFA ensures minimal computational cost for tasks such as pattern matching. There are three classes of states that can be removed or merged from the original DFA without affecting the language it accepts. Unreachable states are the states that are not reachable from the initial state of the DFA, for any input string. These states can be removed. Dead states are the states from which no final state is reachable. These states can be removed unless the automaton is required to be complete. Nondistinguishable states are those that cannot be distinguished from one another for any input string. These states can be merged. DFA minimization is usually done in three steps: remove dead and unreachable states (this will accelerate the following step), merge nondistinguishable states, optionally, re-create a single dead state ("sink" state) if the resulting DFA is required to be complete. == Unreachable states == The state p {\displaystyle p} of a deterministic finite automaton M = ( Q , Σ , δ , q 0 , F ) {\displaystyle M=(Q,\Sigma ,\delta ,q_{0},F)} is unreachable if no string w {\displaystyle w} in Σ ∗ {\displaystyle \Sigma ^{}} exists for which p = δ ∗ ( q 0 , w ) {\displaystyle p=\delta ^{}(q_{0},w)} . In this definition, Q {\displaystyle Q} is the set of states, Σ {\displaystyle \Sigma } is the set of input symbols, δ {\displaystyle \delta } is the transition function (mapping a state and an input symbol to a set of states), δ ∗ {\displaystyle \delta ^{}} is its extension to strings (also known as extended transition function), q 0 {\displaystyle q_{0}} is the initial state, and F {\displaystyle F} is the set of accepting (also known as final) states. Reachable states can be obtained with the following algorithm: Assuming an efficient implementation of the state sets (e.g. new_states) and operations on them (such as adding a state or checking whether it is present), this algorithm can be implemented with time complexity O ( n + m ) {\displaystyle O(n+m)} , where n {\displaystyle n} is the number of states and m {\displaystyle m} is the number of transitions of the input automaton. Unreachable states can be removed from the DFA without affecting the language that it accepts. == Nondistinguishable states == The following algorithms present various approaches to merging nondistinguishable states. === Hopcroft's algorithm === One algorithm for merging the nondistinguishable states of a DFA, due to Hopcroft (1971), is based on partition refinement, partitioning the DFA states into groups by their behavior. These groups represent equivalence classes of the Nerode congruence, whereby every two states are equivalent if they have the same behavior for every input sequence. That is, for every two states p1 and p2 that belong to the same block of the partition P, and every input word w, the transitions determined by w should always take states p1 and p2 to either states that both accept or states that both reject. It should not be possible for w to take p1 to an accepting state and p2 to a rejecting state or vice versa. The following pseudocode describes the form of the algorithm as given by Xu. Alternative forms have also been presented. The algorithm starts with a partition that is too coarse: every pair of states that are equivalent according to the Nerode congruence belong to the same set in the partition, but pairs that are inequivalent might also belong to the same set. It gradually refines the partition into a larger number of smaller sets, at each step splitting sets of states into pairs of subsets that are necessarily inequivalent. The initial partition is a separation of the states into two subsets of states that clearly do not have the same behavior as each other: the accepting states and the rejecting states. The algorithm then repeatedly chooses a set A from the current partition and an input symbol c, and splits each of the sets of the partition into two (possibly empty) subsets: the subset of states that lead to A on input symbol c, and the subset of states that do not lead to A. Since A is already known to have different behavior than the other sets of the partition, the subsets that lead to A also have different behavior than the subsets that do not lead to A. When no more splits of this type can be found, the algorithm terminates. Lemma. Given a fixed character c and an equivalence class Y that splits into equivalence classes B and C, only one of B or C is necessary to refine the whole partition. Example: Suppose we have an equivalence class Y that splits into equivalence classes B and C. Suppose we also have classes D, E, and F; D and E have states with transitions into B on character c, while F has transitions into C on character c. By the Lemma, we can choose either B or C as the distinguisher, let's say B. Then the states of D and E are split by their transitions into B. But F, which doesn't point into B, simply doesn't split during the current iteration of the algorithm; it will be refined by other distinguisher(s). Observation. All of B or C is necessary to split referring classes like D, E, and F correctly—subsets won't do. The purpose of the outermost if statement (if Y is in W) is to patch up W, the set of distinguishers. We see in the previous statement in the algorithm that Y has just been split. If Y is in W, it has just become obsolete as a means to split classes in future iterations. So Y must be replaced by both splits because of the Observation above. If Y is not in W, however, only one of the two splits, not both, needs to be added to W because of the Lemma above. Choosing the smaller of the two splits guarantees that the new addition to W is no more than half the size of Y; this is the core of the Hopcroft algorithm: how it gets its speed, as explained in the next paragraph. The worst case running time of this algorithm is O(ns log n), where n is the number of states and s is the size of the alphabet. This bound follows from the fact that, for each of the ns transitions of the automaton, the sets drawn from Q that contain the target state of the transition have sizes that decrease relative to each other by a factor of two or more, so each transition participates in O(log n) of the splitting steps in the algorithm. The partition refinement data structure allows each splitting step to be performed in time proportional to the number of transitions that participate in it. This remains the most efficient algorithm known for solving the problem, and for certain distributions of inputs its average-case complexity is even better, O(n log log n). Once Hopcroft's algorithm has been used to group the states of the input DFA into equivalence classes, the minimum DFA can be constructed by forming one state for each equivalence class. If S is a set of states in P, s is a state in S, and c is an input character, then the transition in the minimum DFA from the state for S, on input c, goes to the set containing the state that the input automaton would go to from state s on input c. The initial state of the minimum DFA is the one containing the initial state of the input DFA, and the accepting states of the minimum DFA are the ones whose members are accepting states of the input DFA. === Moore's algorithm === Moore's algorithm for DFA minimization is due to Edward F. Moore (1956). Like Hopcroft's algorithm, it maintains a partition that starts off separating the accepting from the rejecting states, and repeatedly refines the partition until no more refinements can be made. At each step, it replaces the current partition with the coarsest common refinement of s + 1 partitions, one of which is the current one and the rest of which are the preimages of the current partition under the transition functions for each of the input symbols. The algorithm terminates when this replacement does not change the current partition. Its worst-case time complexity is O(n2s): each step of the algorithm may be performed in time O(ns) using a variant of radix sort to reorder the states so that states in the same set of the new partition are consecutive in the ordering, and there are at most n steps since each one but the last increases the number of sets in the partition. The instances of the DFA minimization problem that cause the worst-case behavior are the same as for Hopcroft's algorithm. The number of steps th
Karen Spärck Jones
Karen Ida Boalth Spärck Jones (26 August 1935 – 4 April 2007) was a self-taught programmer and a pioneering British computer and information scientist responsible for the concept of inverse document frequency (IDF), a technology that underlies most modern search engines. She was an advocate for women in computer science, her slogan being, "Computing is too important to be left to men." In 2019, The New York Times published her belated obituary in its series Overlooked, calling her "a pioneer of computer science for work combining statistics and linguistics, and an advocate for women in the field." From 2008, to recognise her achievements in the fields of information retrieval (IR) and natural language processing (NLP), the Karen Spärck Jones Award is awarded annually to a recipient for outstanding research in one or both of her fields. == Early life and education == Karen Ida Boalth Spärck Jones was born in Huddersfield, Yorkshire, England. Her parents were Alfred Owen Jones, a chemistry lecturer, and Ida Spärck, a Norwegian who worked for the Norwegian government while in exile in London during World War II. Spärck Jones was educated at a grammar school in Huddersfield and then from 1953 to 1956 at Girton College, Cambridge, studying history, with an additional final year in Moral Sciences (philosophy). While at Cambridge, Spärck Jones joined the organisation known as the Cambridge Language Research Unit (CLRU) and met the head of CLRU Margaret Masterman, who would inspire her to go into computer science. While working at the CLRU, Spärck Jones began pursuing her PhD. At the time of submission, her PhD thesis was cast aside as uninspired and lacking original thought, but was later published in its entirety as a book. She briefly became a school teacher before moving into computer science. Spärck Jones married fellow Cambridge computer scientist Roger Needham in 1958. Spärck Jones's mother, Ida Spärck, had fled Norway on one of the last boats out after the German invasion in April 1940, going on to serve the Norwegian government in exile in London throughout the war. This background of displacement and resilience shaped the household in which Spärck Jones grew up. She later kept her mother's Norwegian surname professionally after marrying, stating that "it maintains a permanent existence of your own." Spärck Jones described her entry into computing as almost accidental. She had been working as a schoolteacher when she began visiting the CLRU out of curiosity about her husband's work. It was Margaret Masterman — whom she later described as "a very strange and interesting woman" — who offered her a research position and drew her fully into the field. == Career == Spärck Jones worked at the Cambridge Language Research Unit from the late 1950s, then at Cambridge University Computer Laboratory from 1974 until her retirement in 2002. From 1999, she held the post of Professor of Computers and Information. She had been given a permanent position only in 1993, and earlier in her career had been employed on a series of short-term contracts. She continued to work in the Computer Laboratory until shortly before her death. Her publications include nine books and numerous papers. A full list of her publications is available from the Cambridge Computer Laboratory. Spärck Jones' main research interests, since the late 1950s, were natural language processing and information retrieval. In 1964, Spärck Jones published "Synonymy and Semantic Classification", which is now seen as a foundational paper in the field of natural language processing. One of her most important contributions was the concept of inverse document frequency (IDF) weighting in information retrieval, which she introduced in a 1972 paper. IDF is used in most search engines today, usually as part of the term frequency–inverse document frequency (TF–IDF) weighting scheme. In the 1980s, Spärck Jones began her work on early speech recognition systems. In 1982 she became involved in the Alvey Programme which was an initiative to motivate more computer science research across the country. == Significance of inverse document frequency == At the time Spärck Jones was working, most computer scientists were focused on making people adapt to machines — learning precise codes and commands to retrieve information. Spärck Jones was working in the opposite direction: teaching computers to understand human language as it is actually used. Her 1972 paper introduced the concept of inverse document frequency (IDF) by observing that not all words carry equal informational value. A word like "the" appears in virtually every document and tells a retrieval system almost nothing about what any specific document is about. A rare word like "photosynthesis," by contrast, is highly specific and informative. IDF assigns each word a statistical weight based on how rarely it occurs across a document collection — the rarer the word, the higher its weight. When combined with term frequency (TF), which measures how often a word appears within a single document, the resulting TF–IDF score gives every word a relevance rating that can be used to rank documents in response to a search query. By 2007, Spärck Jones noted that "pretty much every web engine uses those principles." Her colleague John Tait remarked that "a lot of the stuff she was working on until five or ten years ago seemed like mad nonsense, and now we take it for granted." The 1972 paper remains among the most cited works in information retrieval research, with over 4,500 citations recorded in Google Scholar at the time of her death. The conceptual foundation of TF–IDF — that word meaning is statistical and contextual — has also informed later developments in machine learning and natural language processing, including transformer-based language models such as BERT. == Impact on artificial intelligence == Even though Spärck Jones' views on artificial intelligence (AI) were rather pessimistic in regard to the perceived limitations of AI in information retrieval, her work in natural language processing, information retrieval, and introducing the concept of inverse document frequency (IDF) contributed to the future technological development of AI. Her statistical and ranking methods shifted the direction of the development of AI towards being more expandable and led by data. Her work had a more indirect and conceptual impact on AI, compared to the current and direct impact it has had on search engines. == Gender and advocacy == Spärck Jones spent the majority of her career at Cambridge on short-term contracts without permanent employment, a situation she attributed directly to gender. In her 2001 IEEE oral history interview she stated that Cambridge was "in many ways not user-friendly, in the sense of women-friendly." She was frequently the only woman present in professional meetings throughout her career. She channelled this experience into active advocacy. She was a founding member of the women@cl network at Cambridge's Computer Laboratory, worked on outreach programmes aimed at encouraging girls into computing, and became widely known for her slogan: "Computing is too important to be left to men." She was the first woman ever to receive the BCS Lovelace Medal. === Honours and awards === These include: Gerard Salton Award (1988) Elected a Fellow of Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) in 1993 President of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) in 1994 Honorary degree of Doctor of Science from The City University in 1997. Elected a Fellow of the British Academy (FBA), where she also served as Vice-President in 2000–2002 Fellow of European Association for Artificial Intelligence (ECCAI) Association for Information Science and Technology (ASIS&T) Award of Merit (2002) Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) Lifetime Achievement Award (2004) ACM - AAAI Allen Newell Award (2006) BCS Lovelace Medal (2007) Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) Women's Group Athena Award (2007) == Death and legacy == Spärck Jones died on 4 April 2007, due to cancer at the age of 71. In 2008, the BCS Information Retrieval Specialist Group (BCS IRSG) in conjunction with the British Computer Society established an annual Karen Spärck Jones Award in her honour, to encourage and promote research that advances understanding of Natural Language Processing or Information Retrieval. The Karen Spärck Jones lecture sponsored by BCS recognises the contribution that women have made to computing. In August 2017, the University of Huddersfield renamed one of its campus buildings in her honour. Formerly known as Canalside West, the Spärck Jones building houses the University's School of Computing and Engineering. When Spärck Jones died in 2007, The Times did not publish an obituary for her, despite having published one for her husband Roger Needham in 2003. In 2019, The New York Times included her in its Overlooked series under the title "Ove
The Best Free AI Paragraph Rewriter for Beginners
Shopping for the best AI paragraph rewriter? An AI paragraph rewriter is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it keeps getting smarter as the underlying models improve. Pricing, accuracy, and the size of the model behind the tool are the three factors that most affect daily usefulness. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI paragraph rewriter slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. We tested the leading options and ranked them by quality, value, and ease of use.
Security and Privacy in Computer Systems
Security and Privacy in Computer Systems is a paper by Willis Ware that was first presented to the public at the 1967 Spring Joint Computer Conference. == Significance == Ware's presentation was the first public conference session about information security and privacy in respect of computer systems, especially networked or remotely-accessed ones. The IEEE Annals of the History of Computing said that Ware's 1967 Spring Joint Computer Conference session, together with 1970's Ware report, marked the start of the field of computer security.
AI Chatbots Reviews: What Actually Works in 2026
Comparing the best AI chatbot? An AI chatbot is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it lowers the barrier so anyone can produce professional output. Privacy matters too: check whether your data trains the model and whether a no-log or enterprise tier is available. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI chatbot slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. Below we compare features, pricing, and real output so you can choose with confidence.