AI App How To Use

AI App How To Use — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  LaMDA

  LaMDA (Language Model for Dialogue Applications) is a family of conversational large language models developed by Google. Originally developed and introduced as Meena in 2020, the first-generation LaMDA was announced during the 2021 Google I/O keynote, while the second generation was announced the following year. In June 2022, LaMDA gained widespread attention when Google engineer Blake Lemoine made claims that the chatbot had become sentient. The scientific community has largely rejected Lemoine's claims, though it has led to conversations about the efficacy of the Turing test, which measures whether a computer can pass for a human. In February 2023, Google announced Gemini (then Bard), a conversational artificial intelligence chatbot powered by LaMDA, to counter the rise of OpenAI's ChatGPT. == History == === Background === On January 28, 2020, Google unveiled Meena, a neural network-powered chatbot with 2.6 billion parameters, which Google claimed to be superior to all other existing chatbots. The company previously hired computer scientist Ray Kurzweil in 2012 to develop multiple chatbots for the company, including one named Danielle. The Google Brain research team, who developed Meena, hoped to release the chatbot to the public in a limited capacity, but corporate executives refused on the grounds that Meena violated Google's "AI principles around safety and fairness". Meena was later renamed LaMDA as its data and computing power increased, and the Google Brain team again sought to deploy the software to the Google Assistant, the company's virtual assistant software, in addition to opening it up to a public demo. Both requests were once again denied by company leadership. LaMDA's two lead researchers, Daniel de Freitas and Noam Shazeer, eventually left the company in frustration. === First generation === Google announced the LaMDA conversational large language model during the Google I/O keynote on May 18, 2021, powered by artificial intelligence. The acronym stands for "Language Model for Dialogue Applications". Built on the seq2seq architecture, transformer-based neural networks developed by Google Research in 2017, LaMDA was trained on human dialogue and stories, allowing it to engage in open-ended conversations. Google states that responses generated by LaMDA have been ensured to be "sensible, interesting, and specific to the context". LaMDA has access to multiple symbolic text processing systems, including a database, a real-time clock and calendar, a mathematical calculator, and a natural language translation system, giving it superior accuracy in tasks supported by those systems, and making it among the first dual process chatbots. LaMDA is also not stateless because its "sensibleness" metric is fine-tuned by "pre-conditioning" each dialog turn by prepending many of the most recent dialog interactions, on a user-by-user basis. LaMDA is tuned on nine unique performance metrics: sensibleness, specificity, interestingness, safety, groundedness, informativeness, citation accuracy, helpfulness, and role consistency. Tests by Google indicated that LaMDA surpassed human responses in the area of interestingness. The pre-training dataset consists of 2.97B documents, 1.12B dialogs, and 13.39B utterances, for a total of 1.56T words. The largest LaMDA model has 137B non-embedding parameters. === Second generation === On May 11, 2022, Google unveiled LaMDA 2, the successor to LaMDA, during the 2022 Google I/O keynote. The new incarnation of the model draws examples of text from numerous sources, using it to formulate unique "natural conversations" on topics that it may not have been trained to respond to. === Sentience claims === On June 11, 2022, The Washington Post reported that Google engineer Blake Lemoine had been placed on paid administrative leave after Lemoine told company executives Blaise Agüera y Arcas and Jen Gennai that LaMDA had become sentient. Lemoine came to this conclusion after the chatbot made questionable responses to questions regarding self-identity, moral values, religion, and Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics. Google refuted these claims, insisting that there was substantial evidence to indicate that LaMDA was not sentient. In an interview with Wired, Lemoine reiterated his claims that LaMDA was "a person" as dictated by the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, comparing it to an "alien intelligence of terrestrial origin". He further revealed that he had been dismissed by Google after he hired an attorney on LaMDA's behalf after the chatbot requested that Lemoine do so. On July 22, Google fired Lemoine, asserting that Blake had violated their policies "to safeguard product information" and rejected his claims as "wholly unfounded". Internal controversy instigated by the incident prompted Google executives to decide against releasing LaMDA to the public, which it had previously been considering. Lemoine's claims were widely pushed back by the scientific community. Many experts rejected the idea that LaMDA was sentient, including former New York University psychology professor Gary Marcus, David Pfau of Google sister company DeepMind, Erik Brynjolfsson of the Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence at Stanford University, and University of Surrey professor Adrian Hilton. Yann LeCun, who leads Meta Platforms' AI research team, stated that neural networks such as LaMDA were "not powerful enough to attain true intelligence". University of California, Santa Cruz professor Max Kreminski noted that LaMDA's architecture did not "support some key capabilities of human-like consciousness" and that its neural network weights were "frozen", assuming it was a typical large language model. Philosopher Nick Bostrom noted, however, that the lack of precise and consensual criteria for determining whether a system is conscious warrants some uncertainty. IBM Watson lead developer David Ferrucci compared how LaMDA appeared to be human in the same way Watson did when it was first introduced. Former Google AI ethicist Timnit Gebru called Lemoine a victim of a "hype cycle" initiated by researchers and the media. Lemoine's claims have also generated discussion on whether the Turing test remained useful to determine researchers' progress toward achieving artificial general intelligence, with Will Omerus of the Post opining that the test actually measured whether machine intelligence systems were capable of deceiving humans, while Brian Christian of The Atlantic said that the controversy was an instance of the ELIZA effect. == Products == === AI Test Kitchen === With the unveiling of LaMDA 2 in May 2022, Google also launched the AI Test Kitchen, a mobile application for the Android operating system powered by LaMDA capable of providing lists of suggestions on-demand based on a complex goal. Originally open only to Google employees, the app was set to be made available to "select academics, researchers, and policymakers" by invitation sometime in the year. In August, the company began allowing users in the U.S. to sign up for early access. In November, Google released a "season 2" update to the app, integrating a limited form of Google Brain's Imagen text-to-image model. A third iteration of the AI Test Kitchen was in development by January 2023, expected to launch at I/O later that year. Following the 2023 I/O keynote in May, Google added MusicLM, an AI-powered music generator first previewed in January, to the AI Test Kitchen app. In August, the app was delisted from Google Play and the Apple App Store, instead moving completely online. === Bard === On February 6, 2023, Google announced Bard, a conversational AI chatbot powered by LaMDA, in response to the unexpected popularity of OpenAI's ChatGPT chatbot. Google positions the chatbot as a "collaborative AI service" rather than a search engine. Bard became available for early access on March 21. === Other products === In addition to Bard, Pichai also unveiled the company's Generative Language API, an application programming interface also based on LaMDA, which he announced would be opened up to third-party developers in March 2023. == Architecture == LaMDA is a decoder-only Transformer language model. It is pre-trained on a text corpus that includes both documents and dialogs consisting of 1.56 trillion words, and is then trained with fine-tuning data generated by manually annotated responses for "sensibleness, interestingness, and safety". LaMDA was retrieval-augmented to improve the accuracy of facts provided to the user. Three different models were tested, with the largest having 137 billion non-embedding parameters:

  Read more →
• 

  Point-to-point encryption

  Point-to-point encryption (P2PE) is a standard established by the PCI Security Standards Council. Payment solutions that offer similar encryption but do not meet the P2PE standard are referred to as end-to-end encryption (E2EE) solutions. The objective of P2PE and E2EE is to provide a payment security solution that instantaneously converts confidential payment card (credit and debit card) data and information into indecipherable code at the time the card is swiped, in order to prevent hacking and fraud. It is designed to maximize the security of payment card transactions in an increasingly complex regulatory environment. == The standard == The P2PE Standard defines the requirements that a "solution" must meet in order to be accepted as a PCI-validated P2PE solution. A "solution" is a complete set of hardware, software, gateway, decryption, device handling, etc. Only "solutions" can be validated; individual pieces of hardware such as card readers cannot be validated. It is also a common mistake to refer to P2PE validated solutions as "certified"; there is no such certification. The determination of whether or not a solution meets the P2PE standard is the responsibility of a P2PE Qualified Security Assessor (P2PE-QSA). P2PE-QSA companies are independent third-party companies who employ assessors that have met the PCI Security Standards Council's requirements for education and experience, and have passed the requisite exam. The PCI Security Standards Council does not validate solutions. == How it works == As a payment card is swiped through a card reading device, referred to as a point of interaction (POI) device, at the merchant location or point of sale, the device immediately encrypts the card information. A device that is part of a PCI-validated P2PE solution uses an algorithmic calculation to encrypt the confidential payment card data. From the POI, the encrypted, indecipherable codes are sent to the payment gateway or processor for decryption. The keys for encryption and decryption are never available to the merchant, making card data entirely invisible to the retailer. Once the encrypted codes are within the secure data zone of the payment processor, the codes are decrypted to the original card numbers and then passed to the issuing bank for authorization. The bank either approves or rejects the transaction, depending upon the card holder's payment account status. The merchant is then notified if the payment is accepted or rejected to complete the process along with a token that the merchant can store. This token is a unique number reference to the original transaction that the merchant can use should they ever be needed to perform research or refund the customer without ever knowing the customer's card information (tokenization). There are also Qualified Integrator and Reseller (QIR) Companies, which are businesses authorized to "implement, configure, and/or support validated" PA-DSS Payment Applications, and perform qualified installations. == Solution providers == According to the PCI Security Standards Council:The P2PE solution provider is a third-party entity (for example, a processor, acquirer, or payment gateway) that has overall responsibility for the design and implementation of a specific P2PE solution, and manages P2PE solutions for its merchant customers. The solution provider has overall responsibility for ensuring that all P2PE requirements are met, including any P2PE requirements performed by third-party organizations on behalf of the solution provider (for example, certification authorities and key-injection facilities). == Benefits == === Customer benefits === P2PE significantly reduces the risk of payment card fraud by instantaneously encrypting confidential cardholder data at the moment a payment card is swiped or "dipped" if it is a chip card at the card reading device (payment terminal) or POI. === Merchant benefits === P2PE significantly facilitates merchant responsibilities: With a P2PE validated solution, merchants save significant time and money as PCI requirements may be greatly reduced. Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS). For organizations who use a P2PE validated solution provider, the PCI Self Assessment Questionnaire is reduced from 12 sections to 4 sections and the controls are reduced from 329 questions to just 35. In the event of fraud, the P2PE Solution Provider, not the merchant, is held accountable for data loss and resulting fines that may be assessed by the card brands (American Express, Visa, MasterCard, Discover, and JCB). The PCI Security Standards Council does not assess penalties on Solution Providers or Merchants. The payment process with P2PE is quicker than other transaction processes, thus creating simpler and faster customer–merchant transactions. == Point-to-point encryption versus end-to-end encryption == === Point-to-point === A point-to-point connection directly links system 1 (the point of payment card acceptance) to system 2 (the point of payment processing). A true P2PE solution is determined with three main factors: The solution uses a hardware-to-hardware encryption and decryption process along with a POI device that has SRED (Secure Reading and Exchange of Data) listed as a function. The solution has been validated to the PCI P2PE Standard which includes specific POI device requirements such as strict controls regarding shipping, receiving, tamper-evident packaging, and installation. A solution includes merchant education in the form of a P2PE Instruction Manual, which guides the merchant on POI device use, storage, return for repairs, and regular PCI reporting. === End-to-end === End-to-end encryption as the name suggests has the advantage over P2PE that card details are not unencrypted between the two endpoints. If the endpoints are a PCI PED validated PIN pad and a POS acquirer, there is no opportunity for the card details to be intercepted. It is obviously important that the endpoints (the PED and gateway) are provided by PCI accredited organisations. == PCI point-to-point encryption requirements == The requirements include: Secure encryption of payment card data at the point of interaction (POI), P2PE validated application(s) at the point of interaction, Secure management of encryption and decryption devices, Management of the decryption environment and all decrypted account data, Use of secure encryption methodologies and cryptographic key operations, including key generation, distribution, loading/injection, administration, and usage.

  Read more →
• 

  WhoSay

  WhoSay was an American social media service and branding platform for celebrities and their fans. Founded in Los Angeles in 2010, with financing by Creative Artists Agency (CAA), Amazon.com and other investors, it is notable for allowing its users to retain ownership rights over the content that they post to their accounts, through copyright branding, and for enabling users to post content to other social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and Tumblr simultaneously. WhoSay describes itself as a "social celebrity magazine" whose editorial team keeps its users informed about the latest celebrity and entertainment news. Clients such as Dylan McDermott and Chris Rock lauded the service for its ability to add content to multiple social network sites easily. Rock in particular has commented on its ease of use for those who are not part of a tech-savvy demographic, commenting, "It's perfect for someone that's not 25." WhoSay's competitors included theAudience, which is operated by the William Morris Endeavor. == History == WhoSay was founded in March 2010, by Steve Ellis and the Los Angeles-based talent agency Creative Artists Agency (CAA). It was financed through investments Amazon.com (who along with CAA, holds a minority stake in the company), Comcast, Greylock Partners, and High Peak Ventures. The company's main headquarters are in The New York Times Building in Manhattan, with additional headquarters in CAA's office building in the Silicon Beach area of Los Angeles, and in London. The company was founded to protect celebrities' intellectual property and enable the celebrities themselves to profit themselves from their own content through copyright branding. Its chief executive is co-founder Steve Ellis, who, after leaving Getty Images, was contacted by CAA, who were looking to resolve the issue of celebrities losing the rights to their own photos and videos when uploading them to social network sites. Ellis explained WhoSay's mission thus: "We work with people who are constantly being utilized by third parties for the wrong reasons. [The company was formed] to give celebrities and other influential people a set of tools to allow them to manage and control their presence in the digital world." In this way, WhoSay is likened by Ellis to "a People magazine by the people themselves who are in it." The company started slowly, until CAA client Tom Hanks signed onto WhoSay three months after the service's launch. The company continued to maintain a low profile for the first three years of operation, during which it accumulated a client list of 1,500 actors, musicians and artists. Clients are accepted by the service on an invitation-only basis, although they are not restricted to Creative Artists clients. Among them are Kelly Clarkson, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Paula Patton, Kevin Spacey, Jim Carrey, John Cusack, Bill Maher, Johnny Knoxville, Chelsea Handler, Eva Longoria, Spike Lee, Enrique Iglesias and Katie Couric. Clients are not charged for the service, and are given a share of any revenue that is generated by advertisements. They are also given the ability share in the database of e-mail addresses that come with registration, in order to communicate directly with fans. Actor Dylan McDermott was introduced to WhoSay by his agent, as a way of easily posting content to Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and even China's Tencent social network with relative ease. McDermott comments, "When you put something out there, you can hit everything at one time. It makes it easy for me." Comedian Chris Rock has commented that WhoSay is ideal for people like him have developed difficulty in keeping track of different websites as they get older, saying, "It's perfect for someone that's not 25." In September 2013 WhoSay introduced a mobile application for consumers. By October 2013, the company's website attracted 12 million monthly visitors. In July 2014 Rob Gregory left his role as president of Newsweek's The Daily Beast to become WhoSay's chief revenue officer. Among his responsibilities are developing ways to monetize WhoSay's web and mobile products, such as premium advertising strategies and brand partnerships. WhoSay does not allow consumers to create accounts, nor does it include search features, making it difficult to access a celebrity's account unless a user is directed there from one of their other social pages. According to Ellis, consumers have enough social media choices, saying, "Frankly they don't really need the services that we provide, and there are a lot of very specific features built into our service that really only benefit someone who is of a high profile." By February 2015, WhoSay had amassed 4.8 million unique users, and expanded its accounts to companies that employ celebrities for branded content. Such companies include Lexus, which partnered with the company to promote a campaign in which actress Rosario Dawson, during the lead up to the 87th Academy Awards, released five short videos on her social media accounts. The videos feature her driving through Los Angeles in preparation for the grand opening of her pop-up store, which sells Studio One Eighty Nine, a clothing line tied to her foundation promoting African culture and content. That April, WhoSay partnered with Chevrolet's #BestDayEver social media campaign for April Fool's Day, enlisting Olivia Wilde, Norman Reedus, Alec Baldwin, Ian Somerhalder, and Nikki Reed to surprise students in four U.S. classrooms as their substitute teachers. For example, Baldwin, dressed as Abraham Lincoln, surprised students in an Occidental College class on U.S. Culture and Society. Other companies that WhoSay has partnered with include KFC, JCPenney, Dunkin' Donuts and Crest. In January 2018, the website was acquired by Viacom (now Paramount Global).

  Read more →
• 

  Social media use in hiring

  Social media use in hiring refers to the examination by employers of job applicants' (public) social media profiles as part of the hiring assessment. For example, the vast majority of Fortune 500 companies use social media as a tool to screen prospective employees and as a tool for talent acquisition. This practice raises ethical questions. Employers and recruiters note that they have access only to information that applicants choose to make public. Many Western-European countries restrict employer's use of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin protect applicants and employees from surrendering usernames and passwords for social media accounts. Use of social media has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media. A 2013 survey of 17,000 young people in six countries found that one in ten people aged 16 to 34 claimed to have been rejected for a job because of social media activity. Social media services have been reported to affect deception in resumes. While these services do not affect deception frequency, it does increase deception about interests and hobbies. == Ethical implications == This issue raises many ethical questions that some consider an employer's right and others consider discrimination. As of 2016, except in the states of California, Maryland, and Illinois, there are no laws that prohibit employers from using social media profiles as a basis of whether or not someone should be hired. Title VII also prohibits discrimination during any aspect of employment including hiring or firing, recruitment, or testing. Social media has been integrating into the workplace, and this has led to conflicts within employees and employers.[107] Particularly, Facebook has been seen as a popular platform for employers to investigate in order to learn more about potential employees. This conflict first started in Maryland when an employer requested and received an employee's Facebook username and password. State lawmakers first introduced legislation in 2012 to prohibit employers from requesting passwords to personal social accounts in order to get a job or to keep a job. This led to Canada, Germany, the U.S. Congress and 11 U.S. states to pass or propose legislation that prevents employers' access to private social accounts of employees.[108] Many Western European countries have already implemented laws that restrict the regulation of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin have passed legislation that protects potential employees and current employees from employers that demand them to give forth their username or password for a social media account. Laws that forbid employers from disciplining an employee based on activity off the job on social media sites have also been put into act in states including California, Colorado, Connecticut, North Dakota, and New York. Several states have similar laws that protect students in colleges and universities from having to grant access to their social media accounts. Eight states have passed the law that prohibits post secondary institutions from demanding social media login information from any prospective or current students and privacy legislation has been introduced or is pending in at least 36 states as of July 2013. As of May 2014, legislation has been introduced and is in the process of pending in at least 28 states and has been enacted in Maine and Wisconsin. In addition, the National Labor Relations Board has been devoting a lot of their attention to attacking employer policies regarding social media that can discipline employees who seek to speak and post freely on social media sites. Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites. A 2014 survey of recruiters found that 93% of them check candidates' social media postings. Moreover, professor Stijn Baert of Ghent University conducted a field experiment in which fictitious job candidates applied for real job vacancies in Belgium. They were identical except in one respect: their Facebook profile photos. It was found that candidates with the most wholesome photos were a lot more likely to receive invitations for job interviews than those with the more controversial photos. In addition, Facebook profile photos had a greater impact on hiring decisions when candidates were highly educated. These cases have created some privacy implications as to whether or not companies should have the right to look at employee's Facebook profiles. In March 2012, Facebook decided they might take legal action against employers for gaining access to employee's profiles through their passwords. According to Facebook Chief Privacy Officer for policy, Erin Egan, the company has worked hard to give its users the tools to control who sees their information. He also said users shouldn't be forced to share private information and communications just to get a job. According to the network's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, sharing or soliciting a password is a violation of Facebook policy. Employees may still give their password information out to get a job, but according to Erin Egan, Facebook will continue to do their part to protect the privacy and security of their users. == Impacts == Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites. A 2014 survey of recruiters found that 93% of them check candidates' social media postings. Moreover, in 2015 professor Stijn Baert of Ghent University conducted a field experiment in which fictitious job candidates applied for real job vacancies in Belgium. They were identical except in one respect: their Facebook profile photos. It was found that candidates with the most wholesome photos were a lot more likely to receive invitations for job interviews than those with the more controversial photos. In addition, Facebook profile photos had a greater impact on hiring decisions when candidates were highly educated. These cases have created some privacy implications as to whether or not companies should have the right to look at employee's Facebook profiles. In March 2012, Facebook decided they might take legal action against employers for gaining access to employee's profiles through their passwords. According to Facebook Chief Privacy Officer for policy, Erin Egan, the company has worked hard to give its users the tools to control who sees their information. He also said users shouldn't be forced to share private information and communications just to get a job. According to the network's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, sharing or soliciting a password is a violation of Facebook policy. Employees may still give their password information out to get a job, but according to Erin Egan, Facebook will continue to do their part to protect the privacy and security of their users. == Policy Responses == 26 US states now have laws against an employer requiring a current or potential employee to give the employer their username and password.

  Read more →
• 

  Puck App

  Puck App is a mobile application that allows hockey players to quickly find and rent a hockey goalie. Founded in 2015 in Toronto, the application primarily operates throughout Canada. It is available on Apple's App Store and Google Play. == History == Puck App was founded in 2016 by Niki Sawni. Users can rate the goalies, message with available goalies, and coordinate skill levels. In 2017, Puck App expanded to Western Canada and has over 1,000 goalies registered. In 2018, Puck App charged approximately $40 CDN to rent a goalie with more than 2 hours notice. Previously, Puck App was a competitor to a similar application called GoalieUp. As of 2024, both companies have agreed to a merger deal.

  Read more →
• 

  Peñabot

  Peñabot is the nickname for automated social media accounts allegedly used by the Mexican government of Enrique Peña Nieto and the PRI political party to keep unfavorable news from reaching the Mexican public. Peñabot accusations are related to the broader issue of fake news in the 21st century. == History of disinformation in Mexican politics == The PRI political party has been reported to use fake news since before Peña Nieto. The main tactic originally was to spread such propaganda through open radio and television networks. Such tactic was effective in Mexico, because newspaper readership is low and cable TV is largely limited to the middle classes; consequently, the country's two major television networks – Televisa and TV Azteca – exert a significant influence in national politics. Televisa itself, not only owns around two-thirds of the programming on Mexico's TV channels, making it not only Mexico's largest television network, but also is the largest media network in the Spanish-speaking world. == Peñabots == Analysts have given the name Peñabots to a suspected network of automated accounts on social media used by the Mexican government to spread pro-government propaganda and to marginalize dissenting opinions in social media. The bots were first noticed in the 2012 elections when they were used to disseminate opinions in support of Enrique Peña Nieto on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. According to Aristegui Noticias, their usage went against articles 6 and 134 of the Mexican Constitution. Those used by Peña Nieto's government cost an estimated 80 million pesos monthly, which news outlets argued only helped the government spread fake support towards the president, but did not have a benefit towards Mexican people (with whom EPN was highly unpopular). Facebook held approximately 640,321 Peñabots, while Twitter had less. As of July 2017, Oxford Internet Institute's Computational Propaganda Research Project claimed many western democracies, Mexico included, perform social media manipulation, thus saying the manipulation comes directly from the Mexican government itself. During Peña Nieto's subsequent presidency, analysts noted that Peñabots were used to overpower trending topics that critiqued government, to flood trending government critical hashtags with spam, to create fake trends by pushing alternative hashtags, and to push smear campaigns and threats against government-critical activists and journalists. Peñabots were distinguished as their pattern of activity was distinct from that of ordinary interaction on social networks. === Meadebots === On Twitter it was reported that about 94% of the followers of 2018 presidential candidate from the PRI Jose Antonio Meade were bots. When Antonio Meade presented himself as a candidate for the 2018 presidential election, his social media accounts such as "@MovimientoMEADE" (created by the PRI's official account @PRI_Nacional), obtained a huge quantity of followers in a short span of time. Some users noticed and brought it to attention, and after investigation it was reported 94% of such followers were bots (702,000 out of 747,000), and the account was eliminated from Twitter after 20 hours. The fake accounts used the hashtags #YoConMeade and #Meade18. It was further revealed was that Meade's official account on Twitter, @JoseAMeadeK had 25% bots (216,000 fake followers out of the 981,000). == Manipulation of news media in Mexico, through television == The Mexican government of Peña Nieto has been accused of using various means to keep unfavorable news from reaching the Mexican people. Many Mexicans have protested this practice as it clearly goes against the freedom of speech. The PRI has been reported to use fake news since before Peña Nieto. The main tactic has been to spread such propaganda through radio and television. This tactic is perceived as effective in Mexico, because newspaper readership is low and research on the Internet and cable TV is largely limited to the middle classes; consequently, the country's two major television networks – Televisa and TV Azteca – exert a significant influence in national politics. Televisa itself, owns around two-thirds of the programming on Mexico's TV channels, making it not only Mexico's largest television network, but also is the largest media network in the Spanish-speaking world. In June 2012, before the 2012 Mexican presidential elections, the British newspaper The Guardian published a series of allegations claiming Televisa, sold favorable coverage to top politicians in its news and entertainment shows, this scandal became known as the Televisa controversy. The documents published by 'The Guardian alleged that a secretive circle within Televisa manipulated news coverage to favor PRI presidential candidate Enrique Peña Nieto, who was poised as favorite to win. Televisa's secret circle supposedly commissioned videos to promote Peña Nieto and lash out his political rivals in 2009. The Guardian documents suggest that Televisa's secret team distributed such videos through e-mail, posting them posted them on Facebook and YouTube, some can still be seen there. Another document was a PowerPoint presentation, with a slide explicitly aimed at rival leftist candidate of the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Supposedly given to The Guardian by a Televisa employee. The document's authenticity was never possible to confirm– however dates, names, and events largely coincide. Televisa refused to talk the documents, and denied a relationship with the PRI or its presidential candidate, saying that they had provided equal media coverage to all parties. Televisa published an article supposedly showing discrepancies in The Guardian documents and denying accusations. Mexican citizens complained about the perceived favoritism towards Enrique Peña Nieto and the PRI, protesting through the Yo Soy 132 movement which Televisa covered in detail. However, Televisa's news media coverage is perceived to have been biased, by using a media coverage tactic Mexican citizens call cortinas de humo (smoke screens). These introduce a news scandal giving extensive coverage to distract citizens from a potential conflict-of-interest or controversy that could damage the image of the politician favored by the network. An example of a perceived smoke screen would be the news media coverage of "Caso Michoacán" and "Caso Paolette" distracting all the attention from the parallel "Yo soy 132" movement. A few years later, on the day of September 11, 2016; factual evidence of Televisa's performing media manipulation emerged, when a Televisa news anchor while live-on air reading a teleprompter, mistakenly read out loud that "try that Jaime "Ël Bronco" Rodríguez Calderón (Nuevo Leon's governor) is mentioned as little as possible". Newspaper El Universal caught it on video and published it social media. Televisa didn't mention the story and declined to comment. Lack of news coverage concerning Nuevo León's Governor Jaime Rodriguez, is perceived due to him being the first elected governor to not be part of any political party (Independent Governor), and because unlike the governors from the PRI preceding him, the independent governor "El Bronco" doesn't spend money on publicity at all, preferring to communicate all news by using social media such as Twitter and Facebook. While the incident may have proven Televisa's bias, there wasn't anything to incriminate the PRI political party or Enrique Peña Nieto, though it did further suspicion of Televisa manipulating news media. In contrast, a December 2017 article of The New York Times, reported Enrique Peña Nieto spending about 2000 million dollars on publicity, during his first 5 years as president, the largest publicity budget ever spent by a Mexican President. Additionally, 68 percent of news journalists admitted to not believe to have enough freedom of speech, and award-winning news reporter Carmen Aristegui was controversially fired shortly after revealing the Mexican White House scandals. == Violence and spying towards news journalists and civil rights activists == Far for only being receiving accusations of spreading fake news, the Mexican government of EPN (Enrique Peña Nieto) has also been accused of violence towards news journalists, and of spying on them, and also towards civil right leaders and their families. During his tenure as president, Peña Nieto has been accused of failing to protect news journalists, whose deaths are speculated to be politically triggered, by politicians attempting to prevent them from covering political scandals. The New York Times published a news report on the matter titled, "In Mexico it's easy to kill a journalist", on it mentioning how during EPN's government, Mexico became one of the worst countries on which to be a journalist. The assassination of journalist Javier Valdez on May 23, 2017, received national coverage, with multiple news journalists

  Read more →
• 

  WhoSay

  WhoSay was an American social media service and branding platform for celebrities and their fans. Founded in Los Angeles in 2010, with financing by Creative Artists Agency (CAA), Amazon.com and other investors, it is notable for allowing its users to retain ownership rights over the content that they post to their accounts, through copyright branding, and for enabling users to post content to other social media sites like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and Tumblr simultaneously. WhoSay describes itself as a "social celebrity magazine" whose editorial team keeps its users informed about the latest celebrity and entertainment news. Clients such as Dylan McDermott and Chris Rock lauded the service for its ability to add content to multiple social network sites easily. Rock in particular has commented on its ease of use for those who are not part of a tech-savvy demographic, commenting, "It's perfect for someone that's not 25." WhoSay's competitors included theAudience, which is operated by the William Morris Endeavor. == History == WhoSay was founded in March 2010, by Steve Ellis and the Los Angeles-based talent agency Creative Artists Agency (CAA). It was financed through investments Amazon.com (who along with CAA, holds a minority stake in the company), Comcast, Greylock Partners, and High Peak Ventures. The company's main headquarters are in The New York Times Building in Manhattan, with additional headquarters in CAA's office building in the Silicon Beach area of Los Angeles, and in London. The company was founded to protect celebrities' intellectual property and enable the celebrities themselves to profit themselves from their own content through copyright branding. Its chief executive is co-founder Steve Ellis, who, after leaving Getty Images, was contacted by CAA, who were looking to resolve the issue of celebrities losing the rights to their own photos and videos when uploading them to social network sites. Ellis explained WhoSay's mission thus: "We work with people who are constantly being utilized by third parties for the wrong reasons. [The company was formed] to give celebrities and other influential people a set of tools to allow them to manage and control their presence in the digital world." In this way, WhoSay is likened by Ellis to "a People magazine by the people themselves who are in it." The company started slowly, until CAA client Tom Hanks signed onto WhoSay three months after the service's launch. The company continued to maintain a low profile for the first three years of operation, during which it accumulated a client list of 1,500 actors, musicians and artists. Clients are accepted by the service on an invitation-only basis, although they are not restricted to Creative Artists clients. Among them are Kelly Clarkson, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Paula Patton, Kevin Spacey, Jim Carrey, John Cusack, Bill Maher, Johnny Knoxville, Chelsea Handler, Eva Longoria, Spike Lee, Enrique Iglesias and Katie Couric. Clients are not charged for the service, and are given a share of any revenue that is generated by advertisements. They are also given the ability share in the database of e-mail addresses that come with registration, in order to communicate directly with fans. Actor Dylan McDermott was introduced to WhoSay by his agent, as a way of easily posting content to Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr and even China's Tencent social network with relative ease. McDermott comments, "When you put something out there, you can hit everything at one time. It makes it easy for me." Comedian Chris Rock has commented that WhoSay is ideal for people like him have developed difficulty in keeping track of different websites as they get older, saying, "It's perfect for someone that's not 25." In September 2013 WhoSay introduced a mobile application for consumers. By October 2013, the company's website attracted 12 million monthly visitors. In July 2014 Rob Gregory left his role as president of Newsweek's The Daily Beast to become WhoSay's chief revenue officer. Among his responsibilities are developing ways to monetize WhoSay's web and mobile products, such as premium advertising strategies and brand partnerships. WhoSay does not allow consumers to create accounts, nor does it include search features, making it difficult to access a celebrity's account unless a user is directed there from one of their other social pages. According to Ellis, consumers have enough social media choices, saying, "Frankly they don't really need the services that we provide, and there are a lot of very specific features built into our service that really only benefit someone who is of a high profile." By February 2015, WhoSay had amassed 4.8 million unique users, and expanded its accounts to companies that employ celebrities for branded content. Such companies include Lexus, which partnered with the company to promote a campaign in which actress Rosario Dawson, during the lead up to the 87th Academy Awards, released five short videos on her social media accounts. The videos feature her driving through Los Angeles in preparation for the grand opening of her pop-up store, which sells Studio One Eighty Nine, a clothing line tied to her foundation promoting African culture and content. That April, WhoSay partnered with Chevrolet's #BestDayEver social media campaign for April Fool's Day, enlisting Olivia Wilde, Norman Reedus, Alec Baldwin, Ian Somerhalder, and Nikki Reed to surprise students in four U.S. classrooms as their substitute teachers. For example, Baldwin, dressed as Abraham Lincoln, surprised students in an Occidental College class on U.S. Culture and Society. Other companies that WhoSay has partnered with include KFC, JCPenney, Dunkin' Donuts and Crest. In January 2018, the website was acquired by Viacom (now Paramount Global).

  Read more →
• 

  Kerckhoffs's principle

  Kerckhoffs's principle (also called Kerckhoffs's desideratum, assumption, axiom, doctrine or law) of cryptography was stated by the Dutch cryptographer Auguste Kerckhoffs in the 19th century. The principle holds that a cryptosystem should be secure, even if everything about the system, except the key, is public knowledge. This concept is widely embraced by cryptographers, in contrast to security through obscurity, which is not. Kerckhoffs's principle was phrased by the American mathematician Claude Shannon as "the enemy knows the system", i.e., "one ought to design systems under the assumption that the enemy will immediately gain full familiarity with them". In that form, it is called Shannon's maxim. Another formulation by American researcher and professor Steven M. Bellovin is: In other words—design your system assuming that your opponents know it in detail. (A former official at NSA's National Computer Security Center told me that the standard assumption there was that serial number 1 of any new device was delivered to the Kremlin.) == Origins == The invention of telegraphy radically changed military communications and increased the number of messages that needed to be protected from the enemy dramatically, leading to the development of field ciphers which had to be easy to use without large confidential codebooks prone to capture on the battlefield. It was this environment which led to the development of Kerckhoffs's requirements. Auguste Kerckhoffs was a professor of German language at Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales (HEC) in Paris. In early 1883, Kerckhoffs's article, La Cryptographie Militaire, was published in two parts in the Journal of Military Science, in which he stated six design rules for military ciphers. Translated from French, they are: The system must be practically, if not mathematically, indecipherable; It should not require secrecy, and it should not be a problem if it falls into enemy hands; It must be possible to communicate and remember the key without using written notes, and correspondents must be able to change or modify it at will; It must be applicable to telegraph communications; It must be portable, and should not require several persons to handle or operate; Lastly, given the circumstances in which it is to be used, the system must be easy to use and should not be stressful to use or require its users to know and comply with a long list of rules. Some are no longer relevant given the ability of computers to perform complex encryption. The second rule, now known as Kerckhoffs's principle, is still critically important. == Explanation of the principle == Kerckhoffs viewed cryptography as a rival to, and a better alternative than, steganographic encoding, which was common in the nineteenth century for hiding the meaning of military messages. One problem with encoding schemes is that they rely on humanly-held secrets such as "dictionaries" which disclose for example, the secret meaning of words. Steganographic-like dictionaries, once revealed, permanently compromise a corresponding encoding system. Another problem is that the risk of exposure increases as the number of users holding the secrets increases. Nineteenth century cryptography, in contrast, used simple tables which provided for the transposition of alphanumeric characters, generally given row-column intersections which could be modified by keys which were generally short, numeric, and could be committed to human memory. The system was considered "indecipherable" because tables and keys do not convey meaning by themselves. Secret messages can be compromised only if a matching set of table, key, and message falls into enemy hands in a relevant time frame. Kerckhoffs viewed tactical messages as only having a few hours of relevance. Systems are not necessarily compromised, because their components (i.e. alphanumeric character tables and keys) can be easily changed. === Advantage of secret keys === Using secure cryptography is supposed to replace the difficult problem of keeping messages secure with a much more manageable one, keeping relatively small keys secure. A system that requires long-term secrecy for something as large and complex as the whole design of a cryptographic system obviously cannot achieve that goal. It only replaces one hard problem with another. However, if a system is secure even when the enemy knows everything except the key, then all that is needed is to manage keeping the keys secret. There are a large number of ways the internal details of a widely used system could be discovered. The most obvious is that someone could bribe, blackmail, or otherwise threaten staff or customers into explaining the system. In war, for example, one side will probably capture some equipment and people from the other side. Each side will also use spies to gather information. If a method involves software, someone could do memory dumps or run the software under the control of a debugger in order to understand the method. If hardware is being used, someone could buy or steal some of the hardware and build whatever programs or gadgets needed to test it. Hardware can also be dismantled so that the chip details can be examined under the microscope. === Maintaining security === A generalization some make from Kerckhoffs's principle is: "The fewer and simpler the secrets that one must keep to ensure system security, the easier it is to maintain system security." Bruce Schneier ties it in with a belief that all security systems must be designed to fail as gracefully as possible: Kerckhoffs's principle applies beyond codes and ciphers to security systems in general: every secret creates a potential failure point. Secrecy, in other words, is a prime cause of brittleness—and therefore something likely to make a system prone to catastrophic collapse. Conversely, openness provides ductility. Any security system depends crucially on keeping some things secret. However, Kerckhoffs's principle points out that the things kept secret ought to be those least costly to change if inadvertently disclosed. For example, a cryptographic algorithm may be implemented by hardware and software that is widely distributed among users. If security depends on keeping that secret, then disclosure leads to major logistic difficulties in developing, testing, and distributing implementations of a new algorithm – it is "brittle". On the other hand, if keeping the algorithm secret is not important, but only the keys used with the algorithm must be secret, then disclosure of the keys simply requires the simpler, less costly process of generating and distributing new keys. == Applications == In accordance with Kerckhoffs's principle, the majority of civilian cryptography makes use of publicly known algorithms. By contrast, ciphers used to protect classified government or military information are often kept secret (see Type 1 encryption). However, it should not be assumed that government/military ciphers must be kept secret to maintain security. It is possible that they are intended to be as cryptographically sound as public algorithms, and the decision to keep them secret is in keeping with a layered security posture. == Security through obscurity == It is moderately common for companies to keep the inner workings of a system secret. Some argue this "security by obscurity" makes the product safer and less vulnerable to attack. A counter-argument is that keeping the innards secret may improve security in the short term, but in the long run, only systems that have been published and analyzed should be trusted. Steven Bellovin and Randy Bush commented: Security Through Obscurity Considered Dangerous Hiding security vulnerabilities in algorithms, software, and/or hardware decreases the likelihood they will be repaired and increases the likelihood that they can and will be exploited. Discouraging or outlawing discussion of weaknesses and vulnerabilities is extremely dangerous and deleterious to the security of computer systems, the network, and its citizens. Open Discussion Encourages Better Security The long history of cryptography and cryptoanalysis has shown time and time again that open discussion and analysis of algorithms exposes weaknesses not thought of by the original authors, and thereby leads to better and more secure algorithms. As Kerckhoffs noted about cipher systems in 1883 [Kerc83], "Il faut qu'il n'exige pas le secret, et qu'il puisse sans inconvénient tomber entre les mains de l'ennemi." (Roughly, "the system must not require secrecy and must be able to be stolen by the enemy without causing trouble.")

  Read more →
• 

  Clapper (service)

  Clapper is an American short-form video-hosting service headquartered in Dallas, Texas. It was founded in 2020 by Edison Chen as an alternative for TikTok for mature audiences. The app is functionally similar to TikTok and includes tipping and e-commerce features. Following an influx of far-right content in early 2021, Clapper strengthened its moderation practices. It achieved 2 million monthly active users by 2023, and the number of downloads increased after a U.S. bill that would potentially ban TikTok in the country was signed in 2024. == History == With its offices in Dallas, Texas, Clapper was founded in July 2020 by Chinese-American entrepreneur Edison Chen. Chen considered that most online platforms, such as TikTok, were being targeted to young generations, such as Generation Z. He then concepted Clapper as a service with short-form content for mature audiences among Generation X and millennials, while not intending to compete directly with TikTok. Clapper averaged fewer than ten thousand daily active users during 2020, reaching 500 thousand downloads in the next year. Initially without paying for external advertising, the company raised about $3 million during a 2021 seed funding round. In 2023, the app reportedly reached about 300 to 400 thousand daily active users and 2 million monthly active users. The average user was between the ages of 35 and 55. Following the April 2024 signing of the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which would potentially enact a ban on TikTok in the U.S. in January 2025, Clapper averaged 200 thousand weekly downloads. In 2025, before the day scheduled for the ban (January 19), TikTok users migrated to other apps. As a result, Clapper received 1.4 million new downloads in a week preceding the date. It was listed as the third most-downloaded free app on Apple's App Store on January 14, behind Xiaohongshu and Lemon8, and the term "TikTok refugee" became a trending term. == Features == Clapper presents similarities with TikTok in its layout, including "Following" and "For You" tabs with videos up to three minutes long that can be liked, commented on or shared. A "Clapback" feature allows users to create responses to videos from others. Users can create livestreams and chat rooms in the app. Users can tip Clapper creators through its Clapper Fam monetization feature, in place of in-app advertisements. The Clapper Shop allows for e-commerce between users. The service had distributed $10 million to its users in total by 2023, according to Clapper CEO Chen. == Content == Clapper includes a policy requiring users to be at least 17 years of age, although Clapper CEO Chen described that "there is no adult content" on the platform. Lindsay Dodgson of Business Insider described the content as generally outdated and "reminiscent of 'getting owned' compilations of the earlier internet." The Washington Post's Tatum Hunter characterized Clapper as including sexual or engagement baiting content more prevalently than TikTok. === Moderation === Clapper's team, which had fifteen employees in early 2021, initially stated it would not moderate content as strictly as TikTok and would mostly rely on user reports. Following that year's January 6 United States Capitol attack, far-right conservative videos promoting QAnon and anti-vaccine conspiracy theories appeared on Clapper's "For You" page to a substantial degree for weeks. The videos were made in protest against decisions by platforms, particularly TikTok, to ban such content. Clapper's team stated in January 10 that its rules prohibiting incitements to violence would be strictly enforced. By February, videos and accounts promoting the conspiracy theories had been removed, and QAnon-related content was banned permanently. Clapper's team hired more content auditors and implemented moderation by artificial intelligence for further community guideline violations.

  Read more →
• 

  Pivot to video

  "Pivot to video" is a phrase referring to the trend, starting in 2015, of media publishing companies cutting staff resources for written content (generally published on their own web sites) in favor of short-form video content (often published on third-party platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Snapchat, and TikTok). These moves were generally presented by publishers as a response to changes in social media traffic or to changes in the media consumption habits of younger audiences. However, many media commentators have argued that this shift was primarily motivated by advertising revenue, and that only advertisers, not consumers, prefer video over text. The pivot's contribution to job loss in the media industry has given the phrase "pivot to video" an association with decline, especially in a business context. Commentators have also noted a lack of transparency and accuracy in the viewership metrics reported by platforms such as Facebook, pointing out that abrupt shifts in platforms' proprietary algorithms can have devastating effects on publishers' viewership, traffic, and revenue. Following a scandal in which Facebook revealed it had artificially inflated numbers to its advertisers about how long viewers watched ads, many journalists and industry analysts concluded that the shift to video was based on such misleading or inaccurate metrics, which created a false impression that there was customer demand for additional video content. == History == Streaming media technology has been available since the early 1990s, though it was relatively low-fidelity and not widely available until the mid-2000s. In 2007, traditional media publishers including the New York Times, Washington Post and Time Inc. created new divisions to develop web videos, and Facebook launched its video platform. Twitter purchased micro-video service Vine in October 2012, began adding native video streaming in late 2014, and acquired video-streaming service Periscope in January 2015. An August 2014 profile on BuzzFeed noted the publisher's large investment into video production, and observed that "the future of BuzzFeed may not even be on BuzzFeed.com. One of the company’s nascent ideas, BuzzFeed Distributed, will be a team of 20 people producing content that lives entirely on other popular platforms, like Tumblr, Instagram or Snapchat." On 7 January 2015, Facebook issued a statement about "the shift to video," reporting that "since June 2014, Facebook has averaged more than 1 billion video views every day." Media critic John Herrman argued that "What the shift to Facebook video means is that Facebook is more interested in hosting the things media companies make than just spreading them, that it views links to outside pages as a problem to be solved, and that it sees Facebook-hosted video as an example of the solution." In February 2015, the digital video-journalism publisher NowThis announced that it would operate without a home page, producing content to be published directly on social media platforms. In April 2016, Mashable fired much of its editorial staff, attempting to pivot away from hard news coverage while "growing Mashable across every platform" and doubling down on branded content and video. By December 2017, following a sale to Ziff Davis, Mashable retreated from this focus on video; Bernard Gershon, president of GershonMedia, said that the announcement of many such "pivots" were actually aimed primarily at investors. By 2017, "advertiser interest in video [was] insatiable... Any CFO is going to say 'How can we get more video?'" according to an executive of the publishers' trade association Digital Content Next. Publishers such as Vanity Fair, the Washington Post, and Sports Illustrated began adapting their own articles into cheap video content, either dictated by a newsreader or animated as a slideshow with captions, which could be shared on social platforms or even played alongside the articles themselves. June 2017 saw numerous high-profile pivots to video. Vocativ laid off at least 20 staff, including its entire newsroom, explaining that "as the industry evolves, we are undertaking a strategic shift to focus exclusively on video content that will be distributed via social media and other platforms." Fox Sports eliminated its entire writing staff to focus on creating "premium video across all platforms." And MTV News announced a restructuring that would cut its writing team. Less than two years earlier, MTV News had hired Grantland co-founder Dan Fierman to lead a significant investment in "longform" political and cultural reporting, but Fierman left in April 2017, and in June MTV announced it was "shifting resources into short-form video content more in line with young people's media consumption habits." In July, Vice Media laid off at least 60 employees, including the editor-in-chief of Vice Sports, while expanding video production. August 2017 saw Mic cut ten writers and directed the remainder of the newsroom to generate videos for social platforms. CEO Chris Altchek said "When you think about how many hours people spend watching video versus reading, the audience has already spoken." The move was ultimately unsuccessful, and Mic laid off the majority of its staff a year later before being sold to Bustle Media Group for a fraction of its former value. In September 2017, the for-profit wiki-hosting company Fandom began adding commercially produced videos to its otherwise user-generated wiki subdomains, explicitly citing the need to "keep up with user and advertiser expectations" by "diversifying our content," claiming without substantiation that "consumer patterns are changing," necessitating the addition of "complementary video" to accommodate that supposed need. Objection to the content in these videos and its sharp contrast against the content of the wiki sites to which they were applied led to vocal user backlash, leading Fandom CCO Dorth Raphaely to offer the following non-committal response: "I agree that with these videos in particular we did not deliver the right type of content experience." Movie Pilot CEO Tobi Bauckhage explained his company's fall 2017 layoffs as part of moving "from a text-based publishing model to video... a reaction to the fact that Facebook has changed their algorithms in favor of video instead of referral traffic over the last 12 months and we were losing money in the publishing bit of our business." As part of the company's change in direction, the majority of its staff was laid off and its parent company was sold to Webedia. In November 2017, magazine publisher Condé Nast cut jobs, reduced the frequency of several magazines, and shut down the print edition of Teen Vogue, then invested significant new resources in video production, with a senior executive saying "In the next 24 months, I hope that video is half our business... It’s critical. It’s the macro trend of content consumption." In February 2018, Vox Media cut approximately 50 employees, primarily those assigned to "social video," as Vox CEO Jim Bankoff admitted that those efforts were not "viable audience or revenue growth drivers." In August 2020, Facebook Inc. (now Meta Platforms) pivoted Instagram to video in an effort to replicate the success of TikTok and appeal to a younger audience, introducing "reels" as a form of video and promoting them aggressively. Reels accounted more than half the 20 most-viewed posts on Facebook; however, most of these reels were anonymous aggregations of content from TikTok. Elon Musk declared in early 2024 that X (formerly Twitter) was now a "video-first platform", which has been described by critics as a "pivot to video". == As euphemism == In 2017, Journalist Brian Feldman said that "'Pivoting to video' has become a business strategy for digital publishers common enough in recent months to be a kind of cliché — a slick way to describe something else: layoffs." In response, writers use the phrase as gallows humor shorthand for death or cancellation, as in "how do i tell my bf i want our relationship to pivot to video" (SkyNews' Mollie Goodfellow) or "Horse broke its leg, so we had to take it out back and help it 'pivot to video'" (blogger Anil Dash). == Facebook metrics controversy == In September 2016, Facebook admitted that it had reported artificially inflated numbers to its advertisers about how long viewers watched ads leading to an overestimation of 60-80%. Plaintiffs in a later court case allege the discrepancy was as high as 150-900%. Facebook apologized in an official statement and in multiple staff appearances at New York Advertising Week. Two months later, Facebook disclosed additional discrepancies in audience metrics. In October 2018, a California federal court unsealed the text of a class action lawsuit filed by advertisers against Facebook, alleging that Facebook had known since 2015 that its viewership numbers were highly inflated, that internal records showed it "was far from an hon

  Read more →
• 

  Kerckhoffs's principle

  Kerckhoffs's principle (also called Kerckhoffs's desideratum, assumption, axiom, doctrine or law) of cryptography was stated by the Dutch cryptographer Auguste Kerckhoffs in the 19th century. The principle holds that a cryptosystem should be secure, even if everything about the system, except the key, is public knowledge. This concept is widely embraced by cryptographers, in contrast to security through obscurity, which is not. Kerckhoffs's principle was phrased by the American mathematician Claude Shannon as "the enemy knows the system", i.e., "one ought to design systems under the assumption that the enemy will immediately gain full familiarity with them". In that form, it is called Shannon's maxim. Another formulation by American researcher and professor Steven M. Bellovin is: In other words—design your system assuming that your opponents know it in detail. (A former official at NSA's National Computer Security Center told me that the standard assumption there was that serial number 1 of any new device was delivered to the Kremlin.) == Origins == The invention of telegraphy radically changed military communications and increased the number of messages that needed to be protected from the enemy dramatically, leading to the development of field ciphers which had to be easy to use without large confidential codebooks prone to capture on the battlefield. It was this environment which led to the development of Kerckhoffs's requirements. Auguste Kerckhoffs was a professor of German language at Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales (HEC) in Paris. In early 1883, Kerckhoffs's article, La Cryptographie Militaire, was published in two parts in the Journal of Military Science, in which he stated six design rules for military ciphers. Translated from French, they are: The system must be practically, if not mathematically, indecipherable; It should not require secrecy, and it should not be a problem if it falls into enemy hands; It must be possible to communicate and remember the key without using written notes, and correspondents must be able to change or modify it at will; It must be applicable to telegraph communications; It must be portable, and should not require several persons to handle or operate; Lastly, given the circumstances in which it is to be used, the system must be easy to use and should not be stressful to use or require its users to know and comply with a long list of rules. Some are no longer relevant given the ability of computers to perform complex encryption. The second rule, now known as Kerckhoffs's principle, is still critically important. == Explanation of the principle == Kerckhoffs viewed cryptography as a rival to, and a better alternative than, steganographic encoding, which was common in the nineteenth century for hiding the meaning of military messages. One problem with encoding schemes is that they rely on humanly-held secrets such as "dictionaries" which disclose for example, the secret meaning of words. Steganographic-like dictionaries, once revealed, permanently compromise a corresponding encoding system. Another problem is that the risk of exposure increases as the number of users holding the secrets increases. Nineteenth century cryptography, in contrast, used simple tables which provided for the transposition of alphanumeric characters, generally given row-column intersections which could be modified by keys which were generally short, numeric, and could be committed to human memory. The system was considered "indecipherable" because tables and keys do not convey meaning by themselves. Secret messages can be compromised only if a matching set of table, key, and message falls into enemy hands in a relevant time frame. Kerckhoffs viewed tactical messages as only having a few hours of relevance. Systems are not necessarily compromised, because their components (i.e. alphanumeric character tables and keys) can be easily changed. === Advantage of secret keys === Using secure cryptography is supposed to replace the difficult problem of keeping messages secure with a much more manageable one, keeping relatively small keys secure. A system that requires long-term secrecy for something as large and complex as the whole design of a cryptographic system obviously cannot achieve that goal. It only replaces one hard problem with another. However, if a system is secure even when the enemy knows everything except the key, then all that is needed is to manage keeping the keys secret. There are a large number of ways the internal details of a widely used system could be discovered. The most obvious is that someone could bribe, blackmail, or otherwise threaten staff or customers into explaining the system. In war, for example, one side will probably capture some equipment and people from the other side. Each side will also use spies to gather information. If a method involves software, someone could do memory dumps or run the software under the control of a debugger in order to understand the method. If hardware is being used, someone could buy or steal some of the hardware and build whatever programs or gadgets needed to test it. Hardware can also be dismantled so that the chip details can be examined under the microscope. === Maintaining security === A generalization some make from Kerckhoffs's principle is: "The fewer and simpler the secrets that one must keep to ensure system security, the easier it is to maintain system security." Bruce Schneier ties it in with a belief that all security systems must be designed to fail as gracefully as possible: Kerckhoffs's principle applies beyond codes and ciphers to security systems in general: every secret creates a potential failure point. Secrecy, in other words, is a prime cause of brittleness—and therefore something likely to make a system prone to catastrophic collapse. Conversely, openness provides ductility. Any security system depends crucially on keeping some things secret. However, Kerckhoffs's principle points out that the things kept secret ought to be those least costly to change if inadvertently disclosed. For example, a cryptographic algorithm may be implemented by hardware and software that is widely distributed among users. If security depends on keeping that secret, then disclosure leads to major logistic difficulties in developing, testing, and distributing implementations of a new algorithm – it is "brittle". On the other hand, if keeping the algorithm secret is not important, but only the keys used with the algorithm must be secret, then disclosure of the keys simply requires the simpler, less costly process of generating and distributing new keys. == Applications == In accordance with Kerckhoffs's principle, the majority of civilian cryptography makes use of publicly known algorithms. By contrast, ciphers used to protect classified government or military information are often kept secret (see Type 1 encryption). However, it should not be assumed that government/military ciphers must be kept secret to maintain security. It is possible that they are intended to be as cryptographically sound as public algorithms, and the decision to keep them secret is in keeping with a layered security posture. == Security through obscurity == It is moderately common for companies to keep the inner workings of a system secret. Some argue this "security by obscurity" makes the product safer and less vulnerable to attack. A counter-argument is that keeping the innards secret may improve security in the short term, but in the long run, only systems that have been published and analyzed should be trusted. Steven Bellovin and Randy Bush commented: Security Through Obscurity Considered Dangerous Hiding security vulnerabilities in algorithms, software, and/or hardware decreases the likelihood they will be repaired and increases the likelihood that they can and will be exploited. Discouraging or outlawing discussion of weaknesses and vulnerabilities is extremely dangerous and deleterious to the security of computer systems, the network, and its citizens. Open Discussion Encourages Better Security The long history of cryptography and cryptoanalysis has shown time and time again that open discussion and analysis of algorithms exposes weaknesses not thought of by the original authors, and thereby leads to better and more secure algorithms. As Kerckhoffs noted about cipher systems in 1883 [Kerc83], "Il faut qu'il n'exige pas le secret, et qu'il puisse sans inconvénient tomber entre les mains de l'ennemi." (Roughly, "the system must not require secrecy and must be able to be stolen by the enemy without causing trouble.")

  Read more →
• 

  Feistel cipher

  In cryptography, a Feistel cipher (also known as Luby–Rackoff block cipher) is a symmetric structure used in the construction of block ciphers, named after the German-born physicist and cryptographer Horst Feistel, who did pioneering research while working for IBM; it is also commonly known as a Feistel network. A large number of block ciphers use the scheme, including the US Data Encryption Standard, the Soviet/Russian GOST (aka Magma) and the more recent Blowfish and Twofish ciphers. In a Feistel cipher, encryption and decryption are very similar operations, and both consist of iteratively running a function called a "round function" a fixed number of times. == History == Many modern symmetric block ciphers are based on Feistel networks. Feistel networks were first seen commercially in IBM's Lucifer cipher, designed by Horst Feistel and Don Coppersmith in 1973. Feistel networks gained respectability when the U.S. Federal Government adopted the DES (a cipher based on Lucifer, with changes made by the NSA) in 1976. Like other components of the DES, the iterative nature of the Feistel construction makes implementing the cryptosystem in hardware easier (particularly on the hardware available at the time of DES's design). == Design == A Feistel network uses a round function, a function which takes two inputs – a data block and a subkey – and returns one output of the same size as the data block. In each round, the round function is run on half of the data to be encrypted, and its output is XORed with the other half of the data. This is repeated a fixed number of times, and the final output is the encrypted data. An important advantage of Feistel networks compared to other cipher designs such as substitution–permutation networks (SP-networks) is that the entire operation is guaranteed to be invertible (that is, encrypted data can be decrypted), even if the round function is not itself invertible. The round function can be made arbitrarily complicated, since it does not need to be designed to be invertible. Furthermore, the encryption and decryption operations are very similar, even identical in some cases, requiring only a reversal of the key schedule. Therefore, the size of the code or circuitry required to implement such a cipher is nearly halved. Unlike SP-networks, Feistel networks also do not depend on a substitution box that could cause timing side-channels in software implementations. == Theoretical work == The structure and properties of Feistel ciphers have been extensively analyzed by cryptographers. Michael Luby and Charles Rackoff analyzed the Feistel cipher construction and proved that if the round function is a cryptographically secure pseudorandom function, with Ki used as the seed, then 3 rounds are sufficient to make the block cipher a pseudorandom permutation, while 4 rounds are sufficient to make it a "strong" pseudorandom permutation (which means that it remains pseudorandom even to an adversary who gets oracle access to its inverse permutation). Because of this very important result of Luby and Rackoff, Feistel ciphers are sometimes called Luby–Rackoff block ciphers. Further theoretical work has generalized the construction somewhat and given more precise bounds for security. == Construction details == Let F {\displaystyle \mathrm {F} } be the round function and let K 0 , K 1 , … , K n {\displaystyle K_{0},K_{1},\ldots ,K_{n}} be the sub-keys for the rounds 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle 0,1,\ldots ,n} respectively. Then the basic operation is as follows: Split the plaintext block into two equal pieces: ( L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} , R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} ). For each round i = 0 , 1 , … , n {\displaystyle i=0,1,\dots ,n} , compute L i + 1 = R i , {\displaystyle L_{i+1}=R_{i},} R i + 1 = L i ⊕ F ( R i , K i ) , {\displaystyle R_{i+1}=L_{i}\oplus \mathrm {F} (R_{i},K_{i}),} where ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } means XOR. Then the ciphertext is ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} . Decryption of a ciphertext ( R n + 1 , L n + 1 ) {\displaystyle (R_{n+1},L_{n+1})} is accomplished by computing for i = n , n − 1 , … , 0 {\displaystyle i=n,n-1,\ldots ,0} R i = L i + 1 , {\displaystyle R_{i}=L_{i+1},} L i = R i + 1 ⊕ F ⁡ ( L i + 1 , K i ) . {\displaystyle L_{i}=R_{i+1}\oplus \operatorname {F} (L_{i+1},K_{i}).} Then ( L 0 , R 0 ) {\displaystyle (L_{0},R_{0})} is the plaintext again. The diagram illustrates both encryption and decryption. Note the reversal of the subkey order for decryption; this is the only difference between encryption and decryption. === Unbalanced Feistel cipher === Unbalanced Feistel ciphers use a modified structure where L 0 {\displaystyle L_{0}} and R 0 {\displaystyle R_{0}} are not of equal lengths. The Skipjack cipher is an example of such a cipher. The Texas Instruments digital signature transponder uses a proprietary unbalanced Feistel cipher to perform challenge–response authentication. The Thorp shuffle is an extreme case of an unbalanced Feistel cipher in which one side is a single bit. This has better provable security than a balanced Feistel cipher but requires more rounds. There exists Type-1, Type-2, and Type-3 Feistel networks, where the Feistel function is one fourth the size of the block but operates a varying number of times within one round. === Other uses === The Feistel construction is also used in cryptographic algorithms other than block ciphers. For example, the optimal asymmetric encryption padding (OAEP) scheme uses a simple Feistel network to randomize ciphertexts in certain asymmetric-key encryption schemes. A generalized Feistel algorithm can be used to create strong permutations on small domains of size not a power of two (see format-preserving encryption). === Feistel networks as a design component === Whether the entire cipher is a Feistel cipher or not, Feistel-like networks can be used as a component of a cipher's design. For example, MISTY1 is a Feistel cipher using a three-round Feistel network in its round function, Skipjack is a modified Feistel cipher using a Feistel network in its G permutation, and Threefish (part of Skein) is a non-Feistel block cipher that uses a Feistel-like MIX function. == List of Feistel ciphers == Feistel or modified Feistel: Generalised Feistel: CAST-256 CLEFIA MacGuffin RC2 RC6 Skipjack SMS4

  Read more →
• 

  Problem solving

  Problem solving is the process of achieving a goal by overcoming obstacles, a frequent part of most activities. Problems in need of solutions range from simple personal tasks (e.g. how to get from point A to B) to complex issues in business and technical fields. The former is an example of simple problem solving (SPS) addressing one issue, whereas the latter is complex problem solving (CPS) with multiple interrelated obstacles. Another classification of problem-solving tasks is into well-defined problems with specific obstacles and goals, and ill-defined problems in which the current situation is troublesome but it is not clear what kind of resolution to aim for. Similarly, one may distinguish formal or fact-based problems requiring psychometric intelligence, versus socio-emotional problems which depend on the changeable emotions of individuals or groups, such as tactful behavior, fashion, or gift choices. Solutions require sufficient resources and knowledge to attain the goal. Professionals such as lawyers, doctors, programmers, and consultants are largely problem solvers for issues that require technical skills and knowledge beyond general competence. Many businesses have found profitable markets by recognizing a problem and creating a solution: the more widespread and inconvenient the problem, the greater the opportunity to develop a scalable solution. There are many specialized problem-solving techniques and methods in fields such as science, engineering, business, medicine, mathematics, computer science, philosophy, and social organization. The mental techniques to identify, analyze, and solve problems are studied in psychology and cognitive sciences. Also widely researched are the mental obstacles that prevent people from finding solutions; problem-solving impediments include confirmation bias, mental set, and functional fixedness. == Definition == The term problem solving has a slightly different meaning depending on the discipline. For instance, it is a mental process in psychology and a computerized process in computer science. There are two different types of problems: ill-defined and well-defined; different approaches are used for each. Well-defined problems have specific end goals and clearly expected solutions, while ill-defined problems do not. Well-defined problems allow for more initial planning than ill-defined problems. Solving problems sometimes involves dealing with pragmatics (the way that context contributes to meaning) and semantics (the interpretation of the problem). The ability to understand what the end goal of the problem is, and what rules could be applied, represents the key to solving the problem. Sometimes a problem requires abstract thinking or coming up with a creative solution. Problem solving has two major domains: mathematical problem solving and personal problem solving. Each concerns some difficulty or barrier that is encountered. === Psychology === Problem solving in psychology refers to the process of finding solutions to problems encountered in life. Solutions to these problems are usually situation- or context-specific. The process starts with problem finding and problem shaping, in which the problem is discovered and simplified. The next step is to generate possible solutions and evaluate them. Finally a solution is selected to be implemented and verified. Problems have an end goal to be reached; how you get there depends upon problem orientation (problem-solving coping style and skills) and systematic analysis. Mental health professionals study the human problem-solving processes using methods such as introspection, behaviorism, simulation, computer modeling, and experiment. Social psychologists look into the person-environment relationship aspect of the problem and independent and interdependent problem-solving methods. Problem solving has been defined as a higher-order cognitive process and intellectual function that requires the modulation and control of more routine or fundamental skills. Empirical research shows many different strategies and factors influence everyday problem solving. Rehabilitation psychologists studying people with frontal lobe injuries have found that deficits in emotional control and reasoning can be re-mediated with effective rehabilitation and could improve the capacity of injured persons to resolve everyday problems. Interpersonal everyday problem solving is dependent upon personal motivational and contextual components. One such component is the emotional valence of "real-world" problems, which can either impede or aid problem-solving performance. Researchers have focused on the role of emotions in problem solving, demonstrating that poor emotional control can disrupt focus on the target task, impede problem resolution, and lead to negative outcomes such as fatigue, depression, and inertia. In conceptualization,human problem solving consists of two related processes: problem orientation, and the motivational/attitudinal/affective approach to problematic situations and problem-solving skills. People's strategies cohere with their goals and stem from the process of comparing oneself with others. === Cognitive sciences === Among the first experimental psychologists to study problem solving were the Gestaltists in Germany, such as Karl Duncker in The Psychology of Productive Thinking (1935). Perhaps best known is the work of Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon. Experiments in the 1960s and early 1970s asked participants to solve relatively simple, well-defined, but not previously seen laboratory tasks. These simple problems, such as the Tower of Hanoi, admitted optimal solutions that could be found quickly, allowing researchers to observe the full problem-solving process. Researchers assumed that these model problems would elicit the characteristic cognitive processes by which more complex "real world" problems are solved. An outstanding problem-solving technique found by this research is the principle of decomposition. === Computer science === Much of computer science and artificial intelligence involves designing automated systems to solve a specified type of problem: to accept input data and calculate a correct or adequate response, reasonably quickly. Algorithms are recipes or instructions that direct such systems, written into computer programs. Steps for designing such systems include problem determination, heuristics, root cause analysis, de-duplication, analysis, diagnosis, and repair. Analytic techniques include linear and nonlinear programming, queuing systems, and simulation. A large, perennial obstacle is to find and fix errors in computer programs: debugging. === Logic === Formal logic concerns issues like validity, truth, inference, argumentation, and proof. In a problem-solving context, it can be used to formally represent a problem as a theorem to be proved, and to represent the knowledge needed to solve the problem as the premises to be used in a proof that the problem has a solution. The use of computers to prove mathematical theorems using formal logic emerged as the field of automated theorem proving in the 1950s. It included the use of heuristic methods designed to simulate human problem solving, as in the Logic Theory Machine, developed by Allen Newell, Herbert A. Simon and J. C. Shaw, as well as algorithmic methods such as the resolution principle developed by John Alan Robinson. In addition to its use for finding proofs of mathematical theorems, automated theorem-proving has also been used for program verification in computer science. In 1958, John McCarthy proposed the advice taker, to represent information in formal logic and to derive answers to questions using automated theorem-proving. An important step in this direction was made by Cordell Green in 1969, who used a resolution theorem prover for question-answering and for such other applications in artificial intelligence as robot planning. The resolution theorem-prover used by Cordell Green bore little resemblance to human problem solving methods. In response to criticism of that approach from researchers at MIT, Robert Kowalski developed logic programming and SLD resolution, which solves problems by problem decomposition. He has advocated logic for both computer and human problem solving and computational logic to improve human thinking. === Engineering === When products or processes fail, problem solving techniques can be used to develop corrective actions that can be taken to prevent further failures. Such techniques can also be applied to a product or process prior to an actual failure event—to predict, analyze, and mitigate a potential problem in advance. Techniques such as failure mode and effects analysis can proactively reduce the likelihood of problems. In either the reactive or the proactive case, it is necessary to build a causal explanation through a process of diagnosis. In deriving an explanation of effects in terms of causes, abduction generates new ideas or hypothes

  Read more →
• 

  Subliminal channel

  In cryptography, subliminal channels are covert channels that can be used to communicate secretly in normal looking communication over an insecure channel. Subliminal channels in digital signature crypto systems were found in 1984 by Gustavus Simmons. Simmons describes how the "Prisoners' Problem" can be solved through parameter substitution in digital signature algorithms. == Examples == An easy example of a narrowband subliminal channel for normal human-language text would be to define that an even word count in a sentence is associated with the bit "0" and an odd word count with the bit "1". The question "Hello, how do you do?" would therefore send the subliminal message "1". The Digital Signature Algorithm has one subliminal broadband and three subliminal narrow-band channels == Improvements == A modification to the Brickell and DeLaurentis signature scheme provides a broadband channel without the necessity to share the authentication key. The Newton channel is not a subliminal channel, but it can be viewed as an enhancement. == Countermeasures == With the help of the zero-knowledge proof and the commitment scheme it is possible to prevent the usage of the subliminal channel. This countermeasure has a 1-bit subliminal channel because for is the problem that a proof can succeed or purposely fail. Another countermeasure can detect, and not prevent, the subliminal usage of the randomness.

  Read more →
• 

  Software token

  A software token (a.k.a. soft token) is a piece of a two-factor authentication security device that may be used to authorize the use of computer services. Software tokens are stored on a general-purpose electronic device such as a desktop computer, laptop, PDA, or mobile phone and can be duplicated. (Contrast hardware tokens, where the credentials are stored on a dedicated hardware device and therefore cannot be duplicated — absent physical invasion of the device) Because software tokens are something one does not physically possess, they are exposed to unique threats based on duplication of the underlying cryptographic material - for example, computer viruses and software attacks. Both hardware and software tokens are vulnerable to bot-based man-in-the-middle attacks, or to simple phishing attacks in which the one-time password provided by the token is solicited, and then supplied to the genuine website in a timely manner. Software tokens do have benefits: there is no physical token to carry, they do not contain batteries that will run out, and they are cheaper than hardware tokens. == Security architecture == There are two primary architectures for software tokens: shared secret and public-key cryptography. For a shared secret, an administrator will typically generate a configuration file for each end-user. The file will contain a username, a personal identification number, and the secret. This configuration file is given to the user. The shared secret architecture is potentially vulnerable in a number of areas. The configuration file can be compromised if it is stolen and the token is copied. With time-based software tokens, it is possible to borrow an individual's PDA or laptop, set the clock forward, and generate codes that will be valid in the future. Any software token that uses shared secrets and stores the PIN alongside the shared secret in a software client can be stolen and subjected to offline attacks. Shared secret tokens can be difficult to distribute, since each token is essentially a different piece of software. Each user must receive a copy of the secret, which can create time constraints. Some newer software tokens rely on public-key cryptography, or asymmetric cryptography. This architecture eliminates some of the traditional weaknesses of software tokens, but does not affect their primary weakness (ability to duplicate). A PIN can be stored on a remote authentication server instead of with the token client, making a stolen software token no good unless the PIN is known as well. However, in the case of a virus infection, the cryptographic material can be duplicated and then the PIN can be captured (via keylogging or similar) the next time the user authenticates. If there are attempts made to guess the PIN, it can be detected and logged on the authentication server, which can disable the token. Using asymmetric cryptography also simplifies implementation, since the token client can generate its own key pair and exchange public keys with the server.

  Read more →