Stop Motion Studio is a stop motion animation software developed by Cateater LLC. It is available as both an app for iOS and Android and as a software for Windows and Mac. Two versions of the software exist, the standard Stop Motion Studio for free, and the paid Stop Motion Studio Pro, which contains extra, more advanced features. The software is commonly used in brickfilming.
Eugene Goostman
Eugene Goostman is a chatbot that some regard as having passed the Turing test, a test of a computer's ability to communicate indistinguishably from a human. Developed in Saint Petersburg in 2001 by a group of three programmers, the Russian-born Vladimir Veselov, Ukrainian-born Eugene Demchenko, and Russian-born Sergey Ulasen, Goostman is portrayed as a 13-year-old Ukrainian boy—characteristics that are intended to induce forgiveness in those with whom it interacts for its grammatical errors and lack of general knowledge. The Goostman bot has competed in a number of Turing test contests since its creation, and finished second in the 2005 and 2008 Loebner Prize contest. In June 2012, at an event marking what would have been the 100th birthday of the test's author, Alan Turing, Goostman won a competition promoted as the largest-ever Turing test contest, in which it successfully convinced 29% of its judges that it was human. On 7 June 2014, at a contest marking the 60th anniversary of Turing's death, 33% of the event's judges thought that Goostman was human; the event's organiser Kevin Warwick considered it to have passed Turing's test as a result, per Turing's prediction in his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", that by the year 2000, machines would be capable of fooling 30% of human judges after five minutes of questioning. The validity and relevance of the announcement of Goostman's pass was questioned by critics, who noted the exaggeration of the achievement by Warwick, the bot's use of personality quirks and humour in an attempt to misdirect users from its non-human tendencies and lack of real intelligence, along with "passes" achieved by other chatbots at similar events. == Personality == Eugene Goostman is portrayed as being a 13-year-old boy from Odesa, Ukraine, who has a pet guinea pig and a father who is a gynaecologist. Veselov stated that Goostman was designed to be a "character with a believable personality". The choice of age was intentional, as, in Veselov's opinion, a thirteen-year-old is "not too old to know everything and not too young to know nothing". Goostman's young age also induces people who "converse" with him to forgive minor grammatical errors in his responses. In 2014, work was made on improving the bot's "dialog controller", allowing Goostman to output more human-like dialogue. A conversation between Scott Aaronson and Eugene Goostman ran as follows: == Competitions == Eugene Goostman has competed in a number of Turing test competitions, including the Loebner Prize contest; it finished joint second in the Loebner test in 2001, and came second to Jabberwacky in 2005 and to Elbot in 2008. On 23 June 2012, Goostman won a Turing test competition at Bletchley Park in Milton Keynes, held to mark the centenary of its namesake, Alan Turing. The competition, which featured five bots, twenty-five hidden humans, and thirty judges, was considered to be the largest-ever Turing test contest by its organizers. After a series of five-minute-long text conversations, 29% of the judges were convinced that the bot was an actual human. === 2014 "pass" === On 7 June 2014, in a Turing test competition at the Royal Society, organised by Kevin Warwick of the University of Reading to mark the 60th anniversary of Turing's death, Goostman won after 33% of the judges were convinced that the bot was human. 30 judges took part in the event, which included Lord Sharkey, a sponsor of Turing's posthumous pardon, artificial intelligence Professor Aaron Sloman, Fellow of the Royal Society Mark Pagel and Red Dwarf actor Robert Llewellyn. Each judge partook in a textual conversation with each of the five bots; at the same time, they also conversed with a human. In all, a total of 300 conversations were conducted. In Warwick's view, this made Goostman the first machine to pass a Turing test. In a press release, he added that: Some will claim that the Test has already been passed. The words Turing Test have been applied to similar competitions around the world. However this event involved more simultaneous comparison tests than ever before, was independently verified and, crucially, the conversations were unrestricted. A true Turing Test does not set the questions or topics prior to the conversations. In his 1950 paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence", Turing predicted that by the year 2000, computer programs would be sufficiently advanced that the average interrogator would, after five minutes of questioning, "not have more than 70 per cent chance" of correctly guessing whether they were speaking to a human or a machine. Although Turing phrased this as a prediction rather than a "threshold for intelligence", commentators believe that Warwick had chosen to interpret it as meaning that if 30% of interrogators were fooled, the software had "passed the Turing test". ==== Reactions ==== Warwick's claim that Eugene Goostman was the first ever chatbot to pass a Turing test was met with scepticism; critics acknowledged similar "passes" made in the past by other chatbots under the 30% criteria, including PC Therapist in 1991 (which tricked 5 of 10 judges, 50%), and at the Techniche festival in 2011, where a modified version of Cleverbot tricked 59.3% of 1334 votes (which included the 30 judges, along with an audience). Cleverbot's developer, Rollo Carpenter, argued that Turing tests can only prove that a machine can "imitate" intelligence rather than show actual intelligence. Gary Marcus was critical of Warwick's claims, arguing that Goostman's "success" was only the result of a "cleverly-coded piece of software", going on to say that "it's easy to see how an untrained judge might mistake wit for reality, but once you have an understanding of how this sort of system works, the constant misdirection and deflection becomes obvious, even irritating. The illusion, in other words, is fleeting." While acknowledging IBM's Deep Blue and Watson projects—single-purpose computer systems meant for playing chess and the quiz show Jeopardy! respectively—as examples of computer systems that show a degree of intelligence in their specialised field, he further argued that they were not an equivalent to a computer system that shows "broad" intelligence, and could—for example, watch a television programme and answer questions on its content. Marcus stated that "no existing combination of hardware and software can learn completely new things at will the way a clever child can." However, he still believed that there were potential uses for technology such as that of Goostman, specifically suggesting the creation of "believable", interactive video game characters. Imperial College London professor Murray Shanahan questioned the validity and scientific basis of the test, stating that it was "completely misplaced, and it devalues real AI research. It makes it seem like science fiction AI is nearly here, when in fact it's not and it's incredibly difficult." Mike Masnick, editor of the blog Techdirt, was also skeptical, questioning publicity blunders such as the five chatbots being referred to in press releases as "supercomputers", and saying that "creating a chatbot that can fool humans is not really the same thing as creating artificial intelligence."
The Big Book of Social Media
The Big Book of Social Media: Case Studies, Stories, Perspectives, released in November 2010 by Yorkshire Publishing, is a compilation of non-fiction articles and chapters written by social media experts in their respective fields and edited by Robert Fine, organizer of the Cool Social Conferences World Tour and founder of Cool Blue Press, with a foreword by Sam Feist, political director for CNN. == Synopsis == The publisher, on its site, summed up the book as, "Not business. Not marketing. This is an idea book." And an article in Business Insider described the book as bringing "the social back into social media." == Contributors == Contributing authors include: Alan Rosenblatt, Alane Anderson, Alecia Dantico, Alex Priest, Alfred Naranjo, Becky Carroll, Carri Bugbee, Cathy Scott, Colleen Crinklaw, Constantine Markides, Cordelia Mendoza, Craig Kanalley, Dave Ingland, Eric Andersen, Eric Brown, Gary Zukowski, Haja Rasambainarivo, Jennifer Kaplan, Kari Quaas, Lauri Stevens, Lev Ekster, Mark Stelzner, Matthew Felling, Matt Stewart, Melani Gordon, Michael Bourne, Michele Mattia, Mirna Bard, Neal Schaffer, Nic Evans, Noaf Ereiqat, Pek Pongpaet, Perri Gorman, Phil Baumann, Regina Holliday, Rory Cooper, Sam Feist, Shashi Bellamkonda, Shrinath Navghane, Steve Pratt, Ted Nguyen, Todd Schnick, Tonia Ries, Wayne Burke, as well as Robert Fine. In December 2011, some of the contributing authors organized "Tweet It Forward," a holiday charity fundraiser, with net proceeds benefitting the Food Bank for New York City. == Reception == Reviewer Mike Brown wrote on the Brainzooming blog that the book goes "beyond the valueless chatter out there; it provides solid discussions of real-life social media strategy implementations that have truly integrated organizational objectives and delivered real metrics." And Tech Cocktail wrote it in its review, "Through a collection of entertaining anecdotes and insightful marketing agendas, one sees what social media is truly all about and how it is revolutionizing the communications industry." In 2011, at the SXSW social media festival in Austin, Texas, Fine launched Cool Blue Press and reintroduced The Big Book of Social Media, with plans, he told a reporter from the Washington Examiner, for other new media books and publishing projects, including The Social Media Monthly magazine. The book was reviewed in 2012 by SAGE Publications for its Journalism and Mass Communication Educator magazine. It is also cited in several books and journals. === Awards === The book was a winner in the 4th Annual Reader's Choice "Small Business Book Awards" for 2011. Windmill Networking named it the Top 15 recommended social media books of 2010.
Video game
A video game, computer game, or simply game is an electronic game that involves interaction with a user interface or input device (such as a joystick, controller, keyboard, or motion sensing device) to generate visual feedback from a display device, most commonly shown in a video format on a television set, computer monitor, flat-panel display or touchscreen on handheld devices, or a virtual reality headset. Most modern video games are audiovisual, with audio complement delivered through speakers or headphones, and sometimes also with other types of sensory feedback (e.g., haptic technology that provides tactile sensations). Some video games also allow microphone and webcam inputs for in-game chatting and livestreaming. Video games are typically categorized according to their hardware platform, which traditionally includes arcade video games, console games, and computer games (which includes LAN games, online games, and browser games). More recently, the video game industry has expanded onto mobile gaming through mobile devices (such as smartphones and tablet computers), virtual and augmented reality systems, and remote cloud gaming. Video games are also classified into a wide range of genres based on their style of gameplay and target audience. The first video game prototypes in the 1950s and 1960s were simple extensions of electronic games using video-like output from large, room-sized mainframe computers. The first consumer video game was the arcade video game Computer Space in 1971, which took inspiration from the earlier 1962 computer game Spacewar!. In 1972 came the now-iconic video game Pong and the first home console, the Magnavox Odyssey. The industry grew quickly during the "golden age" of arcade video games from the late 1970s to early 1980s but suffered from the crash of the North American video game market in 1983 due to loss of publishing control and saturation of the market. Following the crash, the industry matured, was dominated by Japanese companies such as Nintendo, Sega, and Sony, and established practices and methods around the development and distribution of video games to prevent a similar crash in the future, many of which continue to be followed. In the 2000s, the core industry centered on "AAA" games, leaving little room for riskier experimental games. Coupled with the availability of the Internet and digital distribution, this gave room for independent video game development (or "indie games") to gain prominence into the 2010s. Since then, the commercial importance of the video game industry has been increasing. The emerging Asian markets and proliferation of smartphone games in particular are altering player demographics towards casual and cozy gaming, and increasing monetization by incorporating games as a service. Today, video game development requires numerous skills, vision, teamwork, and liaisons between different parties, including developers, publishers, distributors, retailers, hardware manufacturers, and other marketers, to successfully bring a game to its consumers. As of 2020, the global video game market had estimated annual revenues of US$159 billion across hardware, software, and services, which is three times the size of the global music industry and four times that of the film industry in 2019, making it a formidable heavyweight across the modern entertainment industry. The video game market is also a major influence behind the electronics industry, where personal computer component, console, and peripheral sales, as well as consumer demands for better game performance, have been powerful driving factors for hardware design and innovation. == Origins == Early video games used interactive electronic devices with various display formats. The earliest example dates to 1947—a "cathode-ray tube amusement device" was filed for a patent on 25 January 1947, by Thomas T. Goldsmith Jr. and Estle Ray Mann, and issued on 14 December 1948, as U.S. Patent 2455992. Inspired by radar display technology, it consisted of an analog device allowing a user to control the parabolic arc of a dot on the screen to simulate a missile being fired at targets, which were paper drawings fixed to the screen. Other early examples include the Nimrod computer at the 1951 Festival of Britain; Christopher Strachey's Checkers, possibly the first game to display visuals on an electronic screen in 1952; OXO, a tic-tac-toe computer game by Alexander S. Douglas for the EDSAC in 1952; Tennis for Two, an electronic interactive game engineered by William Higinbotham in 1958; and Spacewar!, written by Massachusetts Institute of Technology students Martin Graetz, Steve Russell, and Wayne Wiitanen's on a DEC PDP-1 computer in 1962. Each game had different means of display: NIMROD had a panel of lights to play the game of Nim, OXO had a graphical display to play tic-tac-toe, Tennis for Two had an oscilloscope to display a side view of a tennis court, and Spacewar! had the DEC PDP-1's vector display to have two spaceships battle each other. These inventions laid the foundation for modern video games. In 1966, while working at Sanders Associates, Ralph H. Baer devised a system to play a basic table tennis game on a television screen. With the company's approval, Baer created the prototype known as the "Brown Box". Sanders patented Baer's innovations and licensed them to Magnavox, which commercialized the technology as the first home video game console, the Magnavox Odyssey, released in 1972. Separately, Nolan Bushnell and Ted Dabney, inspired by seeing Spacewar! running at Stanford University, devised a similar version running in a smaller coin-operated arcade cabinet using a less expensive computer. This was released as Computer Space, the first arcade video game, in 1971. Bushnell and Dabney went on to form Atari, Inc., and with Allan Alcorn, created their second arcade game in 1972, the hit ping pong-style Pong, which was directly inspired by the table tennis game on the Odyssey. Atari made a home version of Pong, which was released by Christmas 1975. The success of the Odyssey and Pong, both as an arcade game and home machine, launched the video game industry. Both Baer and Bushnell have been titled "Father of Video Games" for their contributions. == Terminology == The term "video game" was developed to describe electronic games played on a video display rather than on a teletype printer, audio speaker, or similar device. This also distinguished from handheld electronic games such as Merlin, which commonly used LED lights for indicators not in combination for imaging purposes. "Computer game" may also be used as a descriptor, as all these types of games essentially require the use of a computer processor; in some cases, it is used interchangeably with "video game". Particularly in the United Kingdom and Western Europe, this is common due to the historic relevance of domestically produced microcomputers. Other terms used include digital game, for example, by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. The term "computer game" can also refer to PC games, which are played primarily on personal computers or other flexible hardware systems, to distinguish them from console games, arcade games, or mobile games. Other terms, such as "television game", "telegame", or "TV game", had been used in the 1970s and early 1980s, particularly for home gaming consoles that rely on connection to a television set. However, these terms were also used interchangeably with "video game" in the 1970s, primarily due to "video" and "television" being synonymous. In Japan, where consoles like the Odyssey were first imported and then made within the country by the large television manufacturers such as Toshiba and Sharp Corporation, such games are known as "TV games", "TV geemu", or "terebi geemu". The term "TV game" is still commonly used into the 21st century. "Electronic game" may also be used to refer to video games, but this also incorporates devices like early handheld electronic games that lack any video output. The first appearance of the term "video game" emerged around 1973. The Oxford English Dictionary cited a 10 November 1973 BusinessWeek article as the first printed use of the term. Though Bushnell believed the term came from a vending magazine review of Computer Space in 1971, a review of the major vending magazines Vending Times and Cashbox showed that the term may have come even earlier, appearing first in a letter dated July 10, 1972. In the letter, Bushnell uses the term "video game" twice. Per video game historian Keith Smith, the sudden appearance suggested that the term had been proposed and readily adopted by those in the field. Around March 1973, Ed Adlum, who ran Cashbox's coin-operated section until 1972 and then later founded RePlay Magazine, covering the coin-op amusement field, in 1975, used the term in an article in March 1973. In a September 1982 issue of RePlay, Adlum is credited with first naming these games as "video games": "RePlay
Over-the-top media services in India
As per Govt of India, there are currently about 57 providers of over-the-top media services (OTT) in India, which distribute streaming media or video on demand over the Internet. == History and growth == The first dependent Indian OTT platform was BIGFlix, launched by Reliance Entertainment in 2008. In 2010 Digivive launched India's first OTT mobile app called nexGTv, which provides access to both live TV and on–demand content. nexGTV was the first app to live–stream Indian Premier League matches on smart phones and did so during 2013 and 2014. The livestream of the IPL since 2015, when rights were won, played an important role in the growth of another OTT platform, Hotstar (now JioHotstar) in India. OTT Platforms gained significant momentum in India when both DittoTV (Zee) and Sony Liv were launched in the Indian market around 2013. Following the initial push of Regional OTT platforms like Aha, Hoichoi, Sun NXT, Planet Marathi, Chaupal & MX Player. The Indian OTT industry saw rapid transformation with the entry of global OTT companies such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video into the Indian market in 2016. Replacement of this competition with global enterprises caused local rivals to innovate in both region and hyper-regional content. === Hotstar === Hotstar (now JioHotstar) is the most subscribed–to OTT platform in India, owned by JioStar as of February 2025, with around 500 million active users and over 650 million downloads. According to Hotstar's India Watch Report 2018, 96% of watch time on Hotstar comes from videos longer than 20 minutes, while one–third of Hotstar subscribers watch television shows. In 2019, Hotstar began investing ₹120 crore in generating original content such as "Hotstar Specials." 80% of the viewership on Hotstar comes from drama, movies and sports programs. Hotstar has the exclusive streaming rights of IPL in India. === Netflix === American streaming service Netflix entered India in January 2016. In April 2017, it was registered as a limited liability partnership (LLP) and started commissioning content. It earned a net profit of ₹2020,000 (₹2.02 million) for fiscal year 2017. In fiscal year 2018, Netflix earned revenues of ₹580 million. According to Morgan Stanley Research, Netflix had the highest average watch time of more than 120 minutes but viewer counts of around 20 million in July 2018. As of 2018, Netflix has six million subscribers, of which 5–6% are paid members. India was not affected by Netflix's July 2018 increase in subscription rates for the US and Latin America. Netflix has stated its intent to invest ₹600 crore in the production of Indian original programming. In late 2018, Netflix bought 150,000 square feet (14,000 m2) of office space in Bandra–Kurla Complex (BKC) in Mumbai as their head office. As of December 2018, Netflix has more than 40 employees in India. === Other OTT providers === Sun NXT is an Indian video on demand service run by Sun TV Network. It was launched in June 2017, streaming in the Tamil language and six other languages. The platform has more than 4,000 Tamil movies and 200 Tamil shows, as well as regional movies and shows. Sun NXT also streams a large library of its own Sun TV shows and movies. Amazon Prime Video was launched in 2016. The platform has 2,300 titles available including 2,000 movies and about 400 shows. It has announced that it will invest ₹20 billion in creating original content in India. Besides English, Prime Video is available in six Indian languages as of December 2018. Amazon India launched Amazon Prime Music in February 2018. Eros Now, an OTT platform launched by Eros International, has the most content among the OTT providers in India, including over 12,000 films, 100,000 music tracks and albums, and 100 TV shows. Eros Now was named the Best OTT Platform of the Year 2019 at the British Asian Media Awards. It has 211.5 million registered users and 36.2 million paying subscribers as of September 2020. In February 2020, Aha OTT platform was launched, broadcasting exclusively Telugu content. In 2021, Planet Marathi became the first OTT platform dedicated to Marathi content in India, including web-series, films, music, theater, fiction and non-fiction reality shows. It is available for both Android and iOS mobile devices along with Android TV and Amazon Fire TV devices. Bollywood actress Madhuri Dixit helped launch the platform. With rising interest for Korean dramas, Rakuten Viki saw its biggest jump of web traffic from India in 2020 due to the COVID-19 lockdown, which led to ad localization on the platform. The OTT market in fiscal year 2020 was estimated to be worth $1.7 billion. === SonyLIV and ZEE5 === In December 2021, Sony and Zee announced their merger, and announced plans to merge their OTT platforms. The merger was called off. === OTT services launched as Amazon Prime video channels === The list is by alphabetical order, not by rank or popularity. == Content regulation == Due to the absence of any rules and regulation regarding OTT content, many OTT providers were accused of showing nudity, vulgarity and obscenity and hurting Hindu religious sentiments in their shows. Series which were the focus of controversy include Four More Shots Please!, Tandav, Paatal Lok, Sacred Games, Mirzapur Lust stories franchise, Rana Naidu. Thank You for Coming, and Annapoorani (2023). According to media reports, between 2018 and 2024, some OTT platforms emerged which started showing porn in the form of web series. Both the Supreme Court and Delhi High Court say that OTT regulation is necessary. === OTT regulation === On 25 Feb 2021, Indian govt introduced self-regulation rules for OTT platforms to stop obscene content and abusive language. On 19 March 2023, I&B minister Anurag Thakur said that self regulation does not mean that OTT should show obscenity and nudity. On 15 April 2023, I&B Secretary Apurva Chandra has said because of the government's soft-touch regulations on OTT industry have led to the creation of content that is undesirable and vulgar. On 26 April 2023, MIB India said that if nudity and obscenity is seen on any OTT platform, strict action will be taken against it. On 16 May 2023, Don't show obscene content, parliamentary panel told to Netflix and Amazon Prime Video. On 20 June 2023, the government told Netflix, Disney+ Hotstar and all other streaming services that their content should be independently reviewed for obscenity and violence before being shown online. On 27 June 2023, DPCGC took punitive action against Ullu for streaming obscene content and asked them to remove all their explicit shows or remove all adult scenes within 15 days. On 18 July 2023, Anarug Thakur said in a meeting with all OTT stakeholders that demeaning Indian culture will not be tolerated. OTT can't show vulgarity and nudity in the garb of 'creative expression'.The cited sources do not mention vulgarity - they say this was about demeaning Indian culture/society. On 22 August 2023, Indian government assured that it will bring rules and regulation to regulate vulgar and obscene content on social media and OTT platforms. On 10 November 2023, MIB India introduces the 'Broadcasting Service Regulation Bill', which included Programme code with Content Evaluation Committee(CEC) for every OTT platforms. Currently public consultation is ongoing till 15 January 2024. The draft bill mandates that all OTT streaming platforms can only broadcast those web series or content, which will be duly certified by Content Evaluation Committee(CEC). On 14 March 2024, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting banned over 18 OTT apps from Google play store and suspended all of their 57 social media accounts, as well as closed nineteen streaming websites. The banned platforms were MoodX, Prime Play, Hunters, Besharams, Rabbit movies, Voovi, Fugi, Mojflix, Chikooflix, Nuefliks, Xtramood, NeonX VIP, X Prime, Tri Flicks, Uncut Adda, Dreams Films, Hot Shots VIP, and Yessma. On 25 July 2025, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting banned from 25 OTT apps from Google play store and suspended all of their 40 social media accounts, as well as 26 closed streaming websites. The banned platforms were include ALTT, Ullu, Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, NeonX VIP, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, ShowHit, Jalva App, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Fugi, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, Triflicks, and Mojflix. On 24 February 2026, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting banned from 5 OTT apps from Google play store and suspended all of their 5 social media accounts, as well as 5 closed streaming websites. The banned platforms were include Feel App, Digi Movieplex, Jugnu App, MoodX VIP, and Koyal Playpro. === Legal action === Currently OTT is regulated under the IT Rules 2021, which clearly stated that 'No content that is prohibited by law at the time being force can be Publishing or transmitted'. MIB has continuously taking action
Description logic
Description logics (DL) are a family of formal knowledge representation languages. Many DLs are more expressive than propositional logic but less expressive than first-order logic. In contrast to the latter, the core reasoning problems for DLs are (usually) decidable, and efficient decision procedures have been designed and implemented for these problems. There are general, spatial, temporal, spatiotemporal, and fuzzy description logics, and each description logic features a different balance between expressive power and reasoning complexity by supporting different sets of mathematical constructors. DLs are used in artificial intelligence to describe and reason about the relevant concepts of an application domain (known as terminological knowledge). It is of particular importance in providing a logical formalism for ontologies and the Semantic Web: the Web Ontology Language (OWL) and its profiles are based on DLs. A major area of application of DLs and OWL is in biomedical informatics, where they assist in the codification of biomedical knowledge. DLs and OWL are also applied in other domains, including defense, climate modeling, and large-scale industrial knowledge graphs. == Introduction == A DL models concepts, roles and individuals, and their relationships. The fundamental modeling concept of a DL is the axiom—a logical statement relating roles and/or concepts. This is a key difference from the frames paradigm where a frame specification declares and completely defines a class. == Nomenclature == === Terminology compared to FOL and OWL === The description logic community uses different terminology than the first-order logic (FOL) community for operationally equivalent notions; some examples are given below. The Web Ontology Language (OWL) uses again a different terminology, also given in the table below. === Naming convention === There are many varieties of description logics and there is an informal naming convention, roughly describing the operators allowed. The expressivity is encoded in the label for a logic starting with one of the following basic logics: Followed by any of the following extensions: ==== Exceptions ==== Some canonical DLs that do not exactly fit this convention are: ==== Examples ==== As an example, A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is a centrally important description logic from which comparisons with other varieties can be made. A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is simply A L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {AL}}} with complement of any concept allowed, not just atomic concepts. A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} is used instead of the equivalent A L U E {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALUE}}} . A further example, the description logic S H I Q {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIQ}}} is the logic A L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALC}}} plus extended cardinality restrictions, and transitive and inverse roles. The naming conventions aren't purely systematic so that the logic A L C O I N {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALCOIN}}} might be referred to as A L C N I O {\displaystyle {\mathcal {ALCNIO}}} and other abbreviations are also made where possible. The Protégé ontology editor supports S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . Three major biomedical informatics terminology bases, SNOMED CT, GALEN, and GO, are expressible in E L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {EL}}} (with additional role properties). OWL 2 provides the expressiveness of S R O I Q ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SROIQ}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} , OWL-DL is based on S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} , and for OWL-Lite it is S H I F ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIF}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . == History == Description logic was given its current name in the 1980s. Previous to this it was called (chronologically): terminological systems, and concept languages. === Knowledge representation === Frames and semantic networks lack formal (logic-based) semantics. DL was first introduced into knowledge representation (KR) systems to overcome this deficiency. The first DL-based KR system was KL-ONE (by Ronald J. Brachman and Schmolze, 1985). During the '80s other DL-based systems using structural subsumption algorithms were developed including KRYPTON (1983), LOOM (1987), BACK (1988), K-REP (1991) and CLASSIC (1991). This approach featured DL with limited expressiveness but relatively efficient (polynomial time) reasoning. In the early '90s, the introduction of a new tableau based algorithm paradigm allowed efficient reasoning on more expressive DL. DL-based systems using these algorithms — such as KRIS (1991) — show acceptable reasoning performance on typical inference problems even though the worst case complexity is no longer polynomial. From the mid '90s, reasoners were created with good practical performance on very expressive DL with high worst case complexity. Examples from this period include FaCT, RACER (2001), CEL (2005), and KAON 2 (2005). DL reasoners, such as FaCT, FaCT++, RACER, DLP and Pellet, implement the method of analytic tableaux. KAON2 is implemented by algorithms which reduce a SHIQ(D) knowledge base to a disjunctive datalog program. === Semantic web === The DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML) and Ontology Inference Layer (OIL) ontology languages for the Semantic Web can be viewed as syntactic variants of DL. In particular, the formal semantics and reasoning in OIL use the S H I Q {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIQ}}} DL. The DAML+OIL DL was developed as a submission to—and formed the starting point of—the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Web Ontology Working Group. In 2004, the Web Ontology Working Group completed its work by issuing the OWL recommendation. The design of OWL is based on the S H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SH}}} family of DL with OWL DL and OWL Lite based on S H O I N ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHOIN}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} and S H I F ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SHIF}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} respectively. The W3C OWL Working Group began work in 2007 on a refinement of - and extension to - OWL. In 2009, this was completed by the issuance of the OWL2 recommendation. OWL2 is based on the description logic S R O I Q ( D ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {SROIQ}}^{\mathcal {(D)}}} . Practical experience demonstrated that OWL DL lacked several key features necessary to model complex domains. == Modeling == === TBox vs Abox === In DL, a distinction is drawn between the so-called TBox (terminological box) and the ABox (assertional box). In general, the TBox contains sentences describing concept hierarchies (i.e., relations between concepts) while the ABox contains ground sentences stating where in the hierarchy, individuals belong (i.e., relations between individuals and concepts). For example, the statement: belongs in the TBox, while the statement: belongs in the ABox. Note that the TBox/ABox distinction is not significant, in the same sense that the two "kinds" of sentences are not treated differently in first-order logic (which subsumes most DL). When translated into first-order logic, a subsumption axiom like (1) is simply a conditional restriction to unary predicates (concepts) with only variables appearing in it. Clearly, a sentence of this form is not privileged or special over sentences in which only constants ("grounded" values) appear like (2). === Motivation for having Tbox and Abox === So why was the distinction introduced? The primary reason is that the separation can be useful when describing and formulating decision-procedures for various DL. For example, a reasoner might process the TBox and ABox separately, in part because certain key inference problems are tied to one but not the other one ('classification' is related to the TBox, 'instance checking' to the ABox). Another example is that the complexity of the TBox can greatly affect the performance of a given decision-procedure for a certain DL, independently of the ABox. Thus, it is useful to have a way to talk about that specific part of the knowledge base. The secondary reason is that the distinction can make sense from the knowledge base modeler's perspective. It is plausible to distinguish between our conception of terms/concepts in the world (class axioms in the TBox) and particular manifestations of those terms/concepts (instance assertions in the ABox). In the above example: when the hierarchy within a company is the same in every branch but the assignment to employees is different in every department (because there are other people working there), it makes sense to reuse the TBox for different branches that do not use the same ABox. There are two features of description logic that are not shared by most other data description formalisms: DL does not make the unique name assumption (UNA) or the closed-world assumption (CWA). Not having UNA means that two concepts with different names may be allowed by some inference to be shown to be equivalent. Not having CWA, or rather having the open world assumption (OWA) means that
Bluelight (web forum)
Bluelight is a web-forum, research portal, online community, and non-profit organisation dedicated to harm reduction in drug use. Its userbase includes current and former substance users, academic researchers, drug policy activists, and mental health advocates. It is believed to be the largest online international drug discussion website in the world. As of November 2025, the website claims over 475,900 registered members, the Discord community claims over 11,900 members, and additional members utilise other platforms such as Telegram. Bluelight has been utilised by academic researchers as a primary source of data in numerous publications. Researchers also utilise the site to advertise research studies, recruit study participants, and better understand the world of substance use. Research groups and organisations that have partnered with Bluelight to recruit study participants include Imperial College London, Johns Hopkins University, Health Canada, Karlstad University, Curtin University, Macquarie University, Columbia University, University of Pennsylvania, University of Michigan, Toronto Metropolitan University (then known as Ryerson University), and MAPS. Researchers have found that the most common reasons for substance users to visit Bluelight.org and similar online communities are to learn "how to use drugs safely" and "how to help others use drugs safely." Bluelight neither condemns or condones drug use, instead advocating for the principle of responsible drug use; educating and allowing individuals to make informed decisions regarding their drug use, providing information on local drug misuse services, and providing them with other drug harm reduction resources and public safety notices. == History == Bluelight.org was originally formed in 1997 as a message board on bluelight.net called the MDMA Clearinghouse. The board was created as a side project by the owner of West Palm Beach design company Bluelight Designs. 200–300 users joined the site between 1998 and 1999, but the site's servers were heavily limited and could only store a few threads at a time; this led to the creation of 'The New Bluelight' forum in May 1999 and the registration of the bluelight.nu domain in June 1999. The site began to explode in popularity in the early 2000s with the rise of MDMA in the club scene, amassing nearly 7,000 members by the year 2000 and 59,000 by the start of 2006. The site switched to the bluelight.ru domain in October 2005, and switched again to bluelight.org in January 2014. In early 2024, Bluelight was re-structured and the forum became a subsidiary of the newly formed Australian non-profit organisation & registered charity Bluelight Communities Ltd. == Partnerships == In the early 2000s, Bluelight worked with reagent test supplier EZ-Test to promote the sale of drug checking kits. In 2007, Bluelight partnered with the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), a non-profit organisation working to raise awareness and understanding of psychedelic drugs through education, clinical research, and advocacy. MAPS utilised Bluelight to recruit participants for its first MDMA-assisted psychotherapy trial for PTSD. In 2013, the official MAPS forums were migrated to Bluelight. Bluelight's other partners include Erowid, a non-profit organisation dedicated to education surrounding psychoactive drugs; TripSit, a harm reduction education website; Pill Reports, a web-based database for drug checking results that was initially formed as an offshoot of the site; and the Global Drug Survey, an independent research organisation focused on collecting data about substance use. == Notable users == Alan Woods – funded the site's maintenance costs from 1999 until his death in 2008 Hamilton Morris John McAfee – created an infamous series of troll posts about the stimulant MDPV