AI App Reddit

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

Smart object

A smart object is an object that enhances the interaction with not only people but also with other smart objects. Also known as smart connected products or smart connected things (SCoT), they are products, assets and other things embedded with processors, sensors, software and connectivity that allow data to be exchanged between the product and its environment, manufacturer, operator/user, and other products and systems. Connectivity also enables some capabilities of the product to exist outside the physical device, in what is known as the product cloud. The data collected from these products can be then analysed to inform decision-making, enable operational efficiencies and continuously improve the performance of the product. It can not only refer to interaction with physical world objects but also to interaction with virtual (computing environment) objects. A smart physical object may be created either as an artifact or manufactured product or by embedding electronic tags such as RFID tags or sensors into non-smart physical objects. Smart virtual objects are created as software objects that are intrinsic when creating and operating a virtual or cyber world simulation or game. The concept of a smart object has several origins and uses, see History. There are also several overlapping terms, see also smart device, tangible object or tangible user interface and Thing as in the Internet of things. == History == In the early 1990s, Mark Weiser, from whom the term ubiquitous computing originated, referred to a vision "When almost every object either contains a computer or can have a tab attached to it, obtaining information will be trivial", Although Weiser did not specifically refer to an object as being smart, his early work did imply that smart physical objects are smart in the sense that they act as digital information sources. Hiroshi Ishii and Brygg Ullmer refer to tangible objects in terms of tangibles bits or tangible user interfaces that enable users to "grasp & manipulate" bits in the center of users' attention by coupling the bits with everyday physical objects and architectural surfaces. The smart object concept was introduced by Marcelo Kallman and Daniel Thalmann as an object that can describe its own possible interactions. The main focus here is to model interactions of smart virtual objects with virtual humans, agents, in virtual worlds. The opposite approach to smart objects is 'plain' objects that do not provide this information. The additional information provided by this concept enables far more general interaction schemes, and can greatly simplify the planner of an artificial intelligence agent. In contrast to smart virtual objects used in virtual worlds, Lev Manovich focuses on physical space filled with electronic and visual information. Here, "smart objects" are described as "objects connected to the Net; objects that can sense their users and display smart behaviour". More recently in the early 2010s, smart objects are being proposed as a key enabler for the vision of the Internet of things. The combination of the Internet and emerging technologies such as near field communications, real-time localization, and embedded sensors enables everyday objects to be transformed into smart objects that can understand and react to their environment. Such objects are building blocks for the Internet of things and enable novel computing applications. In 2018, one of the world's first smart houses was built in Klaukkala, Finland in the form of a five-floor apartment block, using the Kone Residential Flow solution created by KONE, allowing even a smartphone to act as a home key. == Characteristics == Although we can view interaction with physical smart object in the physical world as distinct from interaction with virtual smart objects in a virtual simulated world, these can be related. Poslad considers the progression of: how humans use models of smart objects situated in the physical world to enhance human to physical world interaction; versus how smart physical objects situated in the physical world can model human interaction in order to lessen the need for human to physical world interaction; versus how virtual smart objects by modelling both physical world objects and modelling humans as objects and their subsequent interactions can form a predominantly smart virtual object environment. === Smart physical objects === The concept smart for a smart physical object simply means that it is active, digital, networked, can operate to some extent autonomously, is reconfigurable and has local control of the resources it needs such as energy, data storage, etc. Note, a smart object does not necessarily need to be intelligent as in exhibiting a strong essence of artificial intelligence—although it can be designed to also be intelligent. Physical world smart objects can be described in terms of three properties: Awareness: is a smart object's ability to understand (that is, sense, interpret, and react to) events and human activities occurring in the physical world. Representation: refers to a smart object's application and programming model—in particular, programming abstractions. Interaction: denotes the object's ability to converse with the user in terms of input, output, control, and feedback. Based upon these properties, these have been classified into three types: Activity-Aware Smart Objects: Are objects that can record information about work activities and its own use. Policy-Aware Smart Objects: Are objects that are activity-aware Objects can interpret events and activities with respect to predefined organizational policies. Process-Aware Smart Objects: Processes play a fundamental role in industrial work management and operation. A process is a collection of related activities or tasks that are ordered according to their position in time and space. === Smart virtual objects === For the virtual object in a virtual world case, an object is called smart when it has the ability to describe its possible interactions. This focuses on constructing a virtual world using only virtual objects that contain their own interaction information. There are four basic elements to constructing such a smart virtual object framework. Object properties: physical properties and a text description Interaction information: position of handles, buttons, grips, and the like Object behavior: different behaviors based on state variables Agent behaviors: description of the behavior an agent should follow when using the object Some versions of smart objects also include animation information in the object information, but this is not considered to be an efficient approach, since this can make objects inappropriately oversized. === Categorization === The terms smart, connected product or smart product can be confusing as it is used to cover a broad range of different products, ranging from smart home appliances (e.g., smart bathroom scales or smart light bulbs) to smart cars (e.g., Tesla). While these products share certain similarities, they often differ substantially in their capabilities. Raff et al. developed a conceptual framework that distinguishes different smart products based on their capabilities, which features 4 types of smart product archetypes (in ascending order of "smartness"). Digital Connected Responsive Intelligent == Advantages == Smart, connected products have three primary components: Physical – made up of the product's mechanical and electrical parts. Smart – made up of sensors, microprocessors, data storage, controls, software, and an embedded operating system with enhanced user interface. Connectivity – made up of ports, antennae, and protocols enabling wired/wireless connections that serve two purposes, it allows data to be exchanged with the product and enables some functions of the product to exist outside the physical device. Each component expands the capabilities of one another resulting in "a virtuous cycle of value improvement". First, the smart components of a product amplify the value and capabilities of the physical components. Then, connectivity amplifies the value and capabilities of the smart components. These improvements include: Monitoring of the product's conditions, its external environment, and its operations and usage. Control of various product functions to better respond to changes in its environment, as well as to personalize the user experience. Optimization of the product's overall operations based on actual performance data, and reduction of downtimes through predictive maintenance and remote service. Autonomous product operation, including learning from their environment, adapting to users' preferences and self-diagnosing and service. === The Internet of things (IoT) === The Internet of things is the network of physical objects that contain embedded technology to communicate and sense or interact with their internal states or the external environment. The phrase "Internet of things" reflects the gro
Read more →
Open Media Framework Interchange

Open Media Format (OMF), Open Media Framework, or Open Media Framework Interchange (OMFI), is a platform-independent file format intended for transfer of digital media between different software applications. OMFI is a file format that aids in exchange of digital media across applications and platforms. This framework enables users to import media elements and to edit information and effects summaries. Sequential media representation is the primary concern that is addressed by this format. The primary objective of OMFI is video production. However, there are a number of additional features which can be listed as follows: The origin of the data can be easily backtracked or identified since the import material is in the form of a videotape or film. There are predefined effects and transitions, which paves the way for easy and quick overlapping and sequencing of various track. The format supports motion control. (i.e. enabling a particular segment to play at a ratio of the speed of another segment) Some of the key benefits of OMFI are: It saves time by getting rid of tape-based file transfers. It brings in flexibility owing to its ability to use a number of applications on multiple workstations. The format preserves the best sound and picture quality during all imports. It eliminates the risk of file formatting and incompatibilities, which in turn allows users to spend their productive time on the creative aspects of their work. It preserves the formatting information during file transfers between applications or workstations. Hence, the need for rebuilding the effects and sequences is eliminated. The OMFI format consists of four primary sections namely Header, Object data, Object dictionary and Track data. The header contains an index of all the segments that constitute the file.
Read more →
Packingham v. North Carolina

Packingham v. North Carolina, 582 U.S. 98 (2017), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a North Carolina statute that prohibited registered sex offenders from using social media websites was unconstitutional because it violated the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects freedom of speech. In 2010, Lester Gerard Packingham, a registered sex offender, posted on Facebook under a pseudonym to comment favorably on a recent traffic court experience. Police then identified Packingham and charged him with violating North Carolina's law. Packingham moved to dismiss the charges, arguing that the state's law violated the First Amendment. The trial court dismissed this motion and ultimately convicted Packingham. A state appellate court initially reversed the trial court, holding that the law did violate the First Amendment, but the North Carolina Supreme Court, the state's highest court, disagreed and reinstated the conviction. In June 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously reversed the North Carolina Supreme Court's judgment. In the majority opinion authored by Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Court held that social media—defined broadly to include Facebook, Amazon.com, The Washington Post, and WebMD, among many others—is a "protected space" under the First Amendment for lawful speech. The Court offered that North Carolina could protect children through less restrictive means, such as prohibiting "conduct that often presages a sexual crime, like contacting a minor or using a website to gather information about a minor". == Background == === North Carolina statute === In 2008, the state of North Carolina passed a law that made it a felony for a registered sex offender "to access a commercial social networking Web site where the sex offender knows that the site permits minor children to become members or to create or maintain personal Web pages". The law defined a "commercial social networking Web site" using four criteria. Specifically, the website must: be "operated by a person who derives revenue from membership fees, advertising, or other sources related to the operation of the Web site". facilitate "the social introduction between two or more persons for the purposes of friendship, meeting other persons, or information exchanges". allow "users to create Web pages or personal profiles that contain information such as the name or nickname of the user, photographs placed on the personal Web page by the user, other personal information about the user, and links to other personal Web pages on the commercial social networking Web site of friends or associates of the user that may be accessed by other users or visitors to the Web site". provide "users or visitors... mechanisms to communicate with other users, such as a message board, chat room, electronic mail, or instant messenger". The law exempted websites that "Provid[e] only one of the following discrete services: photo-sharing, electronic mail, instant messenger, or chat room or message board platform", as well as websites that have as their primary purpose "the facilitation of commercial transactions involving goods or services between [their] members or visitors". === Facts of the case === In 2002, Lester Gerard Packingham was convicted of taking "indecent liberties with a child", a felony that required him to register as a sex offender. A North Carolina court sentenced him to 10–12 months in prison with 24 months of supervised release. He was given no other special instructions on his behavior outside of prison other than to "remain away from" the minor. In 2010, after a state court dismissed a traffic ticket against Packingham, he submitted a post on Facebook under the name "J. R. Gerrard", stating: "Man God is Good! How about I got so much favor they dismissed the ticket before court even started? No fine, no court cost, no nothing spent. . . . . .Praise be to GOD, WOW! Thanks JESUS!" The Durham Police Department identified Packingham as the author of the post after cross-checking the time of the post with recently dismissed traffic tickets, and a grand jury indicted him for violating the North Carolina statute. === Lower court proceedings === Initially, Packingham moved to dismiss his indictment, arguing that it violated the First Amendment. A North Carolina Superior Court judge denied this motion, and he was convicted of violating the North Carolina social media law. Packingham appealed his conviction to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which reversed the trial court's decision in 2013. Applying intermediate scrutiny, the court of appeals determined that North Carolina's law violated the First Amendment because it was too broad, applying to all registered sex offenders regardless of whether the offender had committed a crime involving a minor or whether the offender was a continuing threat to minors. The appeals court also stated that the law had been defined broadly enough to prohibit a registered sex offender from conducting a wide array of Internet activity, such as "conducting a 'Google' search, purchasing items on Amazon.com, or accessing a plethora of Web sites unrelated to online communication with minors". In 2015, the North Carolina Supreme Court, the state's highest court, reversed the court of appeals, holding that the law was "constitutional in all respects". The North Carolina Supreme Court found that the statute was a "limitation on conduct" and did not impede any free speech. The state had a vested interest in “forestalling the illicit lurking and contact of minors” by registered sex offenders and potential future victims, and upheld Packingham's conviction. == Supreme Court ruling == Packingham filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. The federal government also filed a brief recommending that the Supreme Court grant certiorari, arguing that the North Carolina Supreme Court incorrectly decided the case in favor of the state. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in October 2016. Amicus briefs in support of Packingham were filed by the libertarian Cato Institute and the American Civil Liberties Union. The North Carolina Supreme Court filed a brief supporting its prior decision, urging the importance of protecting minors from being stalked online. === Oral argument === The oral argument took place in February 2017. Packingham’s lawyer, David T. Goldberg, argued that the law banned “vast swaths of First Amendment activity”, went too far in restricting which Internet sites could be accessed, and forbade use of the Internet in general. The law targeted speech on some of the platforms that Americans use most often, Goldberg noted, and that under the law Packingham could not even use Twitter to read the myriad messages discussing his own case. He further noted that the law imposes punishment without regard to whether the offender actually did anything wrong. North Carolina’s senior deputy Attorney General, Robert C. Montgomery, argued for the state, and claimed that communication through social media sites is a “crucial channel”. Justice Sonia Sotomayor asked Montgomery to provide evidence as to the claim that by giving Packingham Internet privileges, he would commit another crime. Justice Stephen Breyer added that “It seems to be well-settled law that the state can’t (bar usage) unless there is a 'clear and present danger'." === Opinion of the Court === In June 2017 the Supreme Court delivered a judgment in favor of Packingham, unanimously voting to reverse the state court's ruling. Justice Anthony Kennedy authored the decision, joined by Justice Ginsburg, Justice Breyer, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Kagan. Kennedy explained the decision: "A fundamental principle of the First Amendment is that all persons have access to places where they can speak and listen, and then, after reflection, speak and listen once more." He continued that "By prohibiting sex offenders from using those websites, North Carolina with one broad stroke bars access to what for many are the principal sources for knowing current events, checking ads for employment, speaking and listening in the modern public square, and otherwise exploring the vast realms of human thought and knowledge." Citing Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition as a precedent, Kennedy also wrote: "It is well established that, as a general rule, the Government 'may not suppress lawful speech as the means to suppress unlawful speech'." === Concurring opinion === Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion concurring in the judgment, joined by John Roberts and Clarence Thomas. While Alito agreed that the state statute at issue violated the First Amendment, he noted that there are reasonable scenarios for which legal bans for sex offenders can be placed, such as for sites targeted at teenagers. Justice Gorsuch took no part in the decision of the case. == Impact == Packingham v. North Carolina was one of the first U.S. Supreme Court cases to ana
Read more →
Bridgefy

Bridgefy is a Mexican software company with offices in Mexico and California, the United States, dedicated to developing mesh-networking technology for mobile apps. It was founded circa 2014 by Jorge Rios, Roberto Betancourt and Diego Garcia who conceived the idea while participating in a tech competition called StartupBus. Bridgefy's smartphone ad hoc network technology, apparently using Bluetooth Mesh, is licensed to other apps. The app gained popularity during protests in different countries since it can operate without Internet, using Bluetooth instead. Aware of the security issues of not using cryptography and the criticism surrounding it, Bridgefy announced in late October 2020 that they adopted the Signal protocol, in both their app and SDK, to keep information private, though security researchers have demonstrated that Bridgefy's usage of the Signal Protocol is insecure. == Usage == The app gained popularity as a communication tactic during the 2019–2020 Hong Kong protests and Citizenship Amendment Act protests in India, because it requires people who want to intercept the message to be physically close because of Bluetooth's limited range, and the ability to daisy-chain devices to send messages further than Bluetooth's range. == Security == In August 2020, researchers published a paper describing numerous attacks against the application, which allow de-anonymizing users, building social graphs of users’ interactions (both in real time and after the fact), decrypting and reading direct messages, impersonating users to anyone else on the network, completely shutting down the network, performing active man-in-the-middle attacks to read messages and even modify them. In response to the disclosures, developers acknowledged that "no part of the Bridgefy app is encrypted now" and gave a vague promise to release a new version "encrypted with top security protocols". Later developers said they plan to switch to Signal Protocol, which is widely recognized by cryptographers and used by Signal and WhatsApp. The Signal Protocol was integrated into the Bridgefy app and SDK by late October 2020, with the developers claiming to have included improvements such as the impossibility of a third person impersonating any other user, man-in-the-middle attacks done by modifying stored keys, and historical proximity tracking, among others. However, in 2022, the same security researchers, now including Kenny Paterson, published a paper describing how Bridgefy's usage of the Signal Protocol was incorrect, failing to remedy the previously discovered issues. The researchers performed a demonstration, showing that it was possible for users to intercept messages intended for others without the sender noticing. The researchers disclosed the vulnerabilities to the developers of Bridgefy in August 2021, but, according to the researchers, the developers had yet to resolve the issues as of June 2022. On July 31, 2023, the security firm 7asecurity released a blog post and pentest report of a white box penetration test and overall security review of the Bridgefy app in collaboration with the platform's developers. Their review, which began in November 2022 and concluded in May 2023, identified multiple critical vulnerabilities throughout the application. Many of the issues were fixed, or partially fixed, before the end of the audit, including user impersonation and biometric bypass. Bridgefy also published a blog post on August 8, 2023, announcing the audit results.
Read more →
System Service Descriptor Table

The System Service Descriptor Table (SSDT) is an internal dispatch table within Microsoft Windows. == Function == The SSDT maps syscalls to kernel function addresses. When a syscall is issued by a user space application, it contains the service index as parameter to indicate which syscall is called. The SSDT is then used to resolve the address of the corresponding function within ntoskrnl.exe. In modern Windows kernels, two SSDTs are used: One for generic routines (KeServiceDescriptorTable) and a second (KeServiceDescriptorTableShadow) for graphical routines. A parameter passed by the calling userspace application determines which SSDT shall be used. == Hooking == Modification of the SSDT allows to redirect syscalls to routines outside the kernel. These routines can be either used to hide the presence of software or to act as a backdoor to allow attackers permanent code execution with kernel privileges. For both reasons, hooking SSDT calls is often used as a technique in both Windows kernel mode rootkits and antivirus software. In 2010, many computer security products which relied on hooking SSDT calls were shown to be vulnerable to exploits using race conditions to attack the products' security checks.
Read more →
Comparison of JavaScript-based web frameworks

This is a comparison of web frameworks for front-end web development that are reliant on JavaScript code for their behavior. == General information == == High-level framework comparison == JavaScript-based web application frameworks, such as React and Vue, provide extensive capabilities but come with associated trade-offs. These frameworks often extend or enhance features available through native web technologies, such as routing, component-based development, and state management. While native web standards, including Web Components, modern JavaScript APIs like Fetch and ES Modules, and browser capabilities like Shadow DOM, have advanced significantly, frameworks remain widely used for their ability to enhance developer productivity, offer structured patterns for large-scale applications, simplify handling edge cases, and provide tools for performance optimization. Frameworks can introduce abstraction layers that may contribute to performance overhead, larger bundle sizes, and increased complexity. Modern frameworks, such as React 18 and Vue 3, address these challenges with features like concurrent rendering, tree-shaking, and selective hydration. While these advancements improve rendering efficiency and resource management, their benefits depend on the specific application and implementation context. Lightweight frameworks, such as Svelte and Preact, take different architectural approaches, with Svelte eliminating the virtual DOM entirely in favor of compiling components to efficient JavaScript code, and Preact offering a minimal, compatible alternative to React. Framework choice depends on an application’s requirements, including the team’s expertise, performance goals, and development priorities. A newer category of web frameworks, including enhance.dev, Astro, and Fresh, leverages native web standards while minimizing abstractions and development tooling. These solutions emphasize progressive enhancement, server-side rendering, and optimizing performance. Astro renders static HTML by default while hydrating only interactive parts. Fresh focuses on server-side rendering with zero runtime overhead. Enhance.dev prioritizes progressive enhancement patterns using Web Components. While these tools reduce reliance on client-side JavaScript by shifting logic to build-time or server-side execution, they still use JavaScript where necessary for interactivity. This approach makes them particularly suitable for performance-critical and content-focused applications. == Features == == Browser support ==
Read more →
Duck face

Duck face or duck lips is a photographic pose that is common on profile pictures in social networks. The lips are pressed together as in a pout and the cheeks are typically also sucked in. The pose is usually seen as an attempt to appear alluring, but it can be ironic or an attempt to hide self-conscious embarrassment. == History == Fashion models frequently use exaggerated pouts, and self-portraits with a pouty face go back to Rembrandt. In the 1994 film Four Weddings and a Funeral, one of the lead characters, Henrietta, played by Anna Chancellor, is nicknamed Duckface for her pouty expressions. Ben Stiller mocked models' pouty expressions in 1996 comedy sketches and the 2001 feature film Zoolander. The silly expressions made by his narcissistic character have retroactively been identified as an example of duck face. As social networks became popular, young women frequently made exaggeratedly pouty expressions. This became a major fad by the 2010s, provoking a strong negative reaction among some viewers. OxfordDictionaries.com added "duck face" as a new word in 2014 to their list of current and modern words, but it has not been added to the Oxford English Dictionary. In an animal communication studies of capuchin monkeys, the "duck face" term has been used synonymously with "protruded lip face", which females exhibit in the proceptive phase before mating.
Read more →
OpenWebRTC

OpenWebRTC (OWR) is a free software stack that implements the WebRTC standard, a set of protocols and application programming interfaces defined by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It is an alternative to the reference implementation that is based on software from Global IP Solutions (GIPS). It is published under the terms of the Simplified (2-clause) BSD license and officially supports iOS, Linux, OS X, and Android operating systems. It is meant to also work outside web browsers, e.g. to power native mobile apps. It is mostly written in C and based largely on the multimedia framework GStreamer and a number of other, smaller external libraries. It officially supports both VP8 and H.264 as video formats. For H.264 it uses OpenH264 to which Cisco pays the patent licensing bills. Development of OpenWebRTC started at Ericsson Research under the lead of Stefan Ålund. They released it as free software in September 2014, together with the proof-of-concept web browser "Bowser" that is based on the stack. Among other things, this initial version didn't support data channels yet and was said to still be less mature than Google's reference implementation.
Read more →
Secure element

A secure element (SE) is a secure operating system (OS) in a tamper-resistant processor chip or secure component. It can protect assets (root of trust, sensitive data, keys, certificates, applications) against high-level software and hardware attacks. Applications that process this sensitive data on an SE are isolated and so operate within a controlled environment not affected by software (including possible malware) found elsewhere on the OS. The hardware and embedded software meet the requirements of the Security IC Platform Protection Profile [PP 0084] including resistance to physical tampering scenarios described within it. More than 96 billion secure elements were produced and shipped between 2010 and 2021. SEs exist in various form factors, as devices such as smart cards, UICCs, or smart microSD cards, or embedded, or integrated, as parts of larger devices. SEs are an evolution of the chips in earlier smart cards, which have been adapted to suit the needs of numerous use cases, such as smartphones, tablets, set-top boxes, wearables, connected cars, and other internet of things (IoT) devices. The technology is widely used by technology firms such as Oracle, Apple and Samsung. SEs provide secure isolation, storage and processing for applications (called applets) they host while being isolated from the external world (e.g. rich OS and application processor when embedded in a smartphone) and from other applications running on the SE. Java Card and MULTOS are the most deployed standardized multi-application operating systems currently used to develop applications running on SEs. Since 1999, GlobalPlatform has been the body responsible for standardizing secure element technologies to support a dynamic model of application management in a multi-actor model. GlobalPlatform also runs Functional and Security Certification programmes for secure elements, and hosts a list of Functional Certified and Security Certified products. GlobalPlatform technology is also embedded in other standards such as ETSI SCP (now SET) since release 7. A Common Criteria Secure Element Protection Profile has been released targeting EAL4+ level with ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 extension to standardize the security features of a secure element across markets.
Read more →
Algorithmic curation

Algorithm curation is the selection of online media by technologies such as recommender systems and personalized search. Curation entails the selective sharing of online content and recommendations based on inferred interests. Curation algorithms implement different filter approaches, such as collaborative filtering and content-based filtering. Examples include search engine and social media products such as the Twitter feed, Facebook's News Feed, and Google Personalized Search. == History == === Early algorithmic curation === Online platforms use newsfeed algorithms to determine what content to present to each user. The volume of content published on social media platforms created a need for automated filtering, as manual review of all available content by users is not feasible. These systems function as a form of gatekeeper, shaping which new material users are exposed to and influencing knowledge, attention, and political exposure. ==== Information overload ==== Early ranking algorithms addressed information overload by surfacing the most recent or most popular posts. Later systems shifted toward ranking content based on predicted engagement, aiming to increase the time users spend on a platform. Research has found that these engagement-oriented systems can increase the spread of misinformation and contribute to political polarization as a side effect of optimising for user interaction. ==== How algorithm changes users' feeds over time ==== Algorithmic curation has been found to increase source diversity in some respects while simultaneously reducing the number of external links presented to users, which limits exposure to off-platform content. Research using agent-based modelling has examined how user behaviour, information quality, and algorithmic design interact with one another over time. === Emergence of AI === Platforms increasingly shifted from rule-based ranking systems toward machine-learning and AI-driven approaches, which allow feeds to be personalised at a larger scale and with greater responsiveness to user behaviour. For example, X (formerly Twitter) moved away from a chronological feed toward an AI-powered ranking system that personalises content for each user. These systems are capable of making ranking decisions across volumes of content and user interactions that would not be practical to handle manually. == Approach == === Filter types === ==== Collaborative filtering ==== Collaborative filtering (CF) methods create recommendations based on a person's usage patterns. CF predicts a person's preference for an item by matching their interests with those of users who have similar interests. This process allows for the sharing of ratings between users with similar profiles. CF is based on patterns of human behaviour rather than machine analysis of content itself. Users of CF systems rate items they have interacted with, and these ratings form a profile of interests. The CF system then matches that user with others who have similar profiles, and uses their ratings to generate recommendations. Collaborative filtering can be applied across various content types including text, images, music, and financial products, and can account for complex attributes such as taste and quality that are difficult to represent explicitly. ==== Content-based filtering ==== Content-based filtering (CBF) builds a user profile to represent the types of items a user has engaged with, based on keywords and attributes used to describe those items. Recommendations are generated by presenting items similar to those the user has previously engaged with or is currently viewing. The CBF method creates a profile for each item based on discrete attributes and features, and then constructs a content-based user profile using a weighted vector of those features derived from items the user has rated, purchased, or interacted with. The weights represent the relative importance of each feature, and can be computed using techniques such as Bayesian classifiers, cluster analysis, decision trees, and artificial neural networks, with the goal of estimating the probability that a user will engage with a suggested item. One application of content-based filtering is Pandora Radio, where users provide an artist, genre, or composer to generate a station, and the system surfaces music with similar attributes. == Technology == === Recommender system === Recommender systems rank and suggest content to users based on a combination of implicit and explicit user input. Implicit signals include time spent viewing or engaging with a specific item. Explicit signals include actions such as liking posts, saving store pages, reading news articles, or sharing content. === Personalized search === Personalized search aims to retrieve results most relevant to the user by incorporating contextual factors beyond the explicit query, such as past queries, browsing history, and inferred interests. Social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter) and Bluesky generate recommendations based on similar users and the content those users interact with. Personalized search may also allow users to explicitly filter results by blocking content containing certain phrases or hashtags. For first-time users without prior history, personalized search may draw on content-based filtering to establish an initial context. Similar processes are used by search engines and retail platforms to tailor results and product recommendations to individual users. == AI contribution == Artificial intelligence contributes to algorithmic curation through machine-learning models capable of processing large volumes of data. Techniques such as deep learning and reinforcement learning allow curation algorithms to model user preferences with greater granularity alongside established filtering approaches. This enables platforms to adjust content rankings rapidly in response to user behaviour. In social media and streaming contexts, AI-driven systems arrange feeds according to predicted relevance, with the outputs shaped by patterns present in the training data. == Social media and potential impact == === Echo chambers === Social media algorithms, such as those used by X (formerly Twitter), recommend content that the system predicts a user will engage with positively. Content from accounts with differing perspectives is less likely to be surfaced, which may reduce source and topic diversity and contribute to the formation of echo chambers. For example, Facebook's news feed is designed to surface content aligned with users' prior engagement, which may reinforce existing views. This dynamic may contribute to filter bubbles, in which users are seldom exposed to content outside their existing interests. Users may further narrow their feeds by actively blocking certain content or accounts. === Over-representation === A pattern observed across social media platforms is the concentration of algorithmic visibility among a small subset of users. Content from the most active users, those with the largest followings, or those generating the most engagement tends to be surfaced more frequently, meaning a small number of accounts can account for a disproportionate share of what appears in other users' feeds.
Read more →
Microelectronics

Microelectronics is a subfield of electronics. As the name suggests, microelectronics relates to the study and manufacture (or microfabrication) of very small electronic designs and components. Usually, but not always, this means micrometre-scale or smaller. These devices are typically made from semiconductor materials. Many components of a normal electronic design are available in a microelectronic equivalent. These include transistors, capacitors, inductors, resistors, diodes and (naturally) insulators and conductors can all be found in microelectronic devices. Unique wiring techniques such as wire bonding are also often used in microelectronics because of the unusually small size of the components, leads and pads. This technique requires specialized equipment and is expensive. Digital integrated circuits (ICs) consist of billions of transistors, resistors, diodes, and capacitors. Analog circuits commonly contain resistors and capacitors as well. Inductors are used in some high frequency analog circuits, but tend to occupy larger chip area due to their lower reactance at low frequencies. Gyrators can replace them in many applications. As techniques have improved, the scale of microelectronic components has continued to decrease. At smaller scales, the relative impact of intrinsic circuit properties, such as unintended interactions between components or their parts, may become more significant. These are called parasitic effects, and the goal of the microelectronics design engineer is to find ways to compensate for or to minimize these effects, while delivering smaller, faster, and cheaper devices. Today, microelectronics design is largely aided by electronic design automation (EDA) software.
Read more →
Awwwards

Awwwards (Awwwards Online SL) is an organization that hosts web design competitions and conferences across Europe and the United States. Website owners and developers can participate by submitting their websites for review. Submissions are assessed by a jury, and top entries are presented and awarded prizes on a rotational basis. == Nomination process == Web designers submit their websites through Awwwards' platform for consideration for the Site of the Day. A jury, composed of industry professionals, and the Awwwards community evaluate the entries. The best daily sites are published annually in "The 365 Best Websites Around the World" book. == Jury == The jury consists of international designers, developers, and agencies who assess the creativity, technical skills, and insight of the submitted web projects. The panel's expertise ensures a comprehensive review process. === Developer Award === Awwwards, in partnership with Microsoft, created the Developer Award to recognize web developers who demonstrate excellence in creating websites that meet modern standards. The award highlights websites that work seamlessly across various platforms and devices, using best practices in HTML5, JavaScript, and CSS. == Annual winners == Some prominent Site of the Year winners include Mercedes-Benz, Bloomberg L.P., Bose Corporation, Warner Brothers, Volkswagen, Uber, and Google. == Awwwards conference == Awwwards also organizes two-day conferences featuring speakers from major tech companies and industry leaders such as Microsoft, Google, Spotify, Adobe, Opera, and Smashing Magazine. These events focus on the latest trends in web design and development. Speakers at Awwwards conferences have included notable figures in the design and technology industry such as Stefan Sagmeister, Paula Scher, and design leaders from companies including Wix. == Corporate affairs == === Platform === Awwwards operates an online platform where web designers and developers submit websites for evaluation and awards. Submitted projects are reviewed by a jury based on design, usability, creativity, and content. The platform also serves as a community hub for discovering digital trends, showcasing work, and accessing educational resources including talks and interviews. Design professionals from international companies have participated in Awwwards events and platform content. For example, Wix, a cloud-based web development company known for its website builder tools, has featured prominently in Awwwards conferences, with its design leadership contributing to discussions on design trends and creative thinking.
Read more →
Conversational user interface

A conversational user interface (CUI) is a user interface for computers that emulates a conversation with a human. Historically, computers have relied on text-based user interfaces and graphical user interfaces (GUIs) (such as the user pressing a "back" button) to translate the user's desired action into commands the computer understands. While an effective mechanism of completing computing actions, there is a learning curve for the user associated with GUI. Instead, CUIs provide opportunity for the user to communicate with the computer in their natural language rather than in a syntax specific commands.
Read more →
WebGL

WebGL (short for Web Graphics Library) is a JavaScript API for rendering interactive 2D and 3D graphics within any compatible web browser without the use of plug-ins. WebGL is fully integrated with other web standards, allowing GPU-accelerated usage of physics, image processing, and effects in the HTML canvas. WebGL elements can be mixed with other HTML elements and composited with other parts of the page or page background. WebGL programs consist of control code written in JavaScript, and shader code written in OpenGL ES Shading Language (GLSL ES, sometimes referred to as ESSL), a language similar to C or C++. WebGL code is executed on a computer's GPU. WebGL is designed and maintained by the non-profit Khronos Group. On February 9, 2022, Khronos Group announced WebGL 2.0 support from all major browsers. From 2024, a new graphics API, WebGPU, is being developed to supersede WebGL. WebGPU provides extended capabilities, a more modern interface, and direct GPU access, which is useful for demanding graphics as well as AI applications. == Design == WebGL 1.0 is based on OpenGL ES 2.0 and provides an API for 3D graphics. It uses the HTML5 canvas element and is accessed using Document Object Model (DOM) interfaces. WebGL 2.0 is based on OpenGL ES 3.0. It guarantees the availability of many optional extensions of WebGL 1.0, and exposes new APIs. Automatic memory management is provided implicitly by JavaScript. Like OpenGL ES 2.0, WebGL lacks the fixed-function APIs introduced in OpenGL 1.0 and deprecated in OpenGL 3.0. This functionality, if required, has to be implemented by the developer using shader code and JavaScript. Shaders in WebGL are written in GLSL and passed to the WebGL API as text strings. The WebGL implementation compiles these strings to GPU code. This code is executed for each vertex sent through the API and for each pixel rasterized to the screen. == History == WebGL evolved out of the Canvas 3D experiments started by Vladimir Vukićević at Mozilla. Vukićević first demonstrated a Canvas 3D prototype in 2006. By the end of 2007, both Mozilla and Opera had made their own separate implementations. In early 2009, the non-profit technology consortium Khronos Group started the WebGL Working Group, with initial participation from Apple, Google, Mozilla, Opera, and others. Version 1.0 of the WebGL specification was released March 2011. An early application of WebGL was Zygote Body. In November 2012 Autodesk announced that they ported most of their applications to the cloud running on local WebGL clients. These applications included Autodesk Fusion and AutoCAD. Development of the WebGL 2 specification started in 2013 and finished in January 2017. The specification is based on OpenGL ES 3.0. First implementations are in Firefox 51, Chrome 56 and Opera 43. == Implementations == === Almost Native Graphics Layer Engine === Almost Native Graphics Layer Engine (ANGLE) is an open source graphic engine which implements WebGL 1.0 (2.0 which closely conforms to ES 3.0) and OpenGL ES 2.0 and 3.0 standards. It is a default backend for both Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox on Windows platforms and works by translating WebGL and OpenGL calls to available platform-specific APIs. ANGLE currently provides access to OpenGL ES 2.0 and 3.0 to desktop OpenGL, OpenGL ES, Direct3D 9, and Direct3D 11 APIs. ″[Google] Chrome uses ANGLE for all graphics rendering on Windows, including the accelerated Canvas2D implementation and the Native Client sandbox environment.″ == Software == WebGL is widely supported by modern browsers. However, its availability depends on other factors, too, like whether the GPU supports it. The official WebGL website offers a simple test page. More detailed information (like what renderer the browser uses, and what extensions are available) can be found at third-party websites. === Desktop browsers === Source: Google Chrome – WebGL 1.0 has been enabled on all platforms that have a capable graphics card with updated drivers since version 9, released in February 2011. By default on Windows, Chrome uses the ANGLE (Almost Native Graphics Layer Engine) renderer to translate OpenGL ES to Direct X 9.0c or 11.0, which have better driver support. However, on Linux and Mac OS X, the default renderer is OpenGL. It is also possible to force OpenGL as the renderer on Windows. Since September 2013, Chrome also has a newer Direct3D 11 renderer, which requires a newer graphics card. Chrome 56+ supports WebGL 2.0. Firefox – WebGL 1.0 has been enabled on all platforms that have a capable graphics card with updated drivers since version 4.0. Since 2013 Firefox also uses DirectX on the Windows platform via ANGLE. Firefox 51+ supports WebGL 2.0. Safari – Safari 6.0 and newer versions installed on OS X Mountain Lion, Mac OS X Lion and Safari 5.1 on Mac OS X Snow Leopard implemented support for WebGL 1.0, which was disabled by default before Safari 8.0. Safari version 12 (available in MacOS Mojave) has available support for WebGL 2.0 as an "Experimental" feature. Safari 15 enables WebGL 2.0 for all users. Opera – WebGL 1.0 has been implemented in Opera 11 and 12, but was disabled by default in 2014. Opera 43+ supports WebGL 2.0. Internet Explorer – WebGL 1.0 is partially supported in Internet Explorer 11. Internet Explorer initially failed most of the official WebGL conformance tests, but Microsoft later released several updates. The latest 0.94 WebGL engine currently passes ≈97% of Khronos tests. WebGL support can also be manually added to earlier versions of Internet Explorer using third-party plugins such as IEWebGL. Microsoft Edge – For Microsoft Edge Legacy, the initial stable release supports WebGL version 0.95 (context name: "experimental-webgl") with an open source GLSL to HLSL transpiler. Version 10240+ supports WebGL 1.0 as prefixed. Latest Chromium-based Edge supports WebGL 2.0. === Mobile browsers === Google Chrome – WebGL 1.0 is supported on Android as of Chrome 25. WebGL 2.0 is supported on Android as of Chrome 58. Chrome is used for the Android system webview as of Android 5. Firefox for mobile – WebGL 1.0 is available for Android devices since Firefox 4. Safari on iOS – WebGL 1.0 is available for mobile Safari in iOS 8. WebGL 2.0 is available for mobile Safari in iOS 15. Microsoft Edge – Prefixed WebGL 1.0 was available on Windows 10 Mobile.. Latest Chromium-based Edge supports WebGL 2.0. Opera Mobile – Opera Mobile 12 supports WebGL 1.0 (on Android only). Sailfish OS – WebGL 1.0 is supported in the default Sailfish browser. Tizen – WebGL 1.0 is supported == Tools and ecosystem == === Utilities === The low-level nature of the WebGL API, which provides little on its own to quickly create desirable 3D graphics, motivated the creation of higher-level libraries that abstract common operations (e.g. loading scene graphs and 3D objects in certain formats; applying linear transformations to shaders or view frustums). Some such libraries were ported to JavaScript from other languages. Examples of libraries that provide high-level features include A-Frame (VR), BabylonJS, PlayCanvas, three.js, OSG.JS, Google’s model-viewer and CopperLicht. Web3D also made a project called X3DOM to make X3D and VRML content run on WebGL. === Games === There has been an emergence of 2D and 3D game engines for WebGL, such as Unreal Engine 4 and Unity. The Stage3D/Flash-based Away3D high-level library also has a port to WebGL via TypeScript. A more light-weight utility library that provides just the vector and matrix math utilities for shaders is sylvester.js. It is sometimes used in conjunction with a WebGL specific extension called glUtils.js. There are also some 2D libraries built atop WebGL, like Cocos2d-x or Pixi.js, which were implemented this way for performance reasons in a move that parallels what happened with the Starling Framework over Stage3D in the Flash world. The WebGL-based 2D libraries fall back to HTML5 canvas when WebGL is not available. Removing the rendering bottleneck by giving almost direct access to the GPU has exposed performance limitations in the JavaScript implementations. Some were addressed by asm.js and WebAssembly (similarly, the introduction of Stage3D exposed performance problems within ActionScript, which were addressed by projects like CrossBridge). === Content creation === As with any other graphics API, creating content for WebGL scenes requires using a 3D content creation tool and exporting the scene to a format that is readable by the viewer or helper library. Desktop 3D authoring software such as Blender, Autodesk Maya or SimLab Composer can be used for this purpose. In particular, Blend4Web allows a WebGL scene to be authored entirely in Blender and exported to a browser with a single click, even as a standalone web page. There are also some WebGL-specific software such as CopperCube and the online WebGL-based editor Clara.io. Online platforms such as Sketchfab and Clara.io allow users to directly upload their 3D models
Read more →
Hardware backdoor

A hardware backdoor is a backdoor implemented within the physical components of a computer system, also known as its hardware. They can be created by introducing malicious code to a component's firmware, or even during the manufacturing process of an integrated circuit. Often, they are used to undermine security in smartcards and cryptoprocessors, unless investment is made in anti-backdoor design methods. They have also been considered for car hacking. Backdoors differ from hardware Trojans as backdoors are introduced intentionally by the original designer or during the design process, whereas hardware Trojans are inserted later by an external party. == Background == The existence of hardware backdoors poses significant security risks for several reasons. They are difficult to detect and are impossible to remove using conventional methods like antivirus software. They can also bypass other security measures, such as disk encryption. Hardware trojans can be introduced during manufacturing where the end-user lacks control over the production chain. == History == In 2008, the FBI reported the discovery of approximately 3,500 counterfeit Cisco network components in the United States, some of which were introduced in military and government infrastructure. In the same year, the possibility of a backdoor SPARC CPU was demonstrated with an FPGA running Linux that supported various hidden malicious services. A few years later, in 2011, Jonathan Brossard presented "Rakshasa", a proof-of-concept hardware backdoor. This backdoor could be installed by an individual with physical access to the hardware. It utilized coreboot to re-flash the BIOS with a SeaBIOS and iPXE-based bootkit composed of legitimate, open-source tools, allowing malware to be fetched from the internet during the boot process. The following year, in 2012, Sergei Skorobogatov and Christopher Woods from the University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory reported the discovery of a backdoor in a military-grade FPGA device, which could be exploited to access and modify sensitive information. It has been said that this was proven to be a software problem and not a deliberate attempt at sabotage. This still brought to attention that equipment manufacturers should ensure that microchips operate as intended. Later that year, two mobile phones developed by the Chinese company ZTE were found to carry a root access backdoor. According to security researcher Dmitri Alperovitch, the exploit used a hard-coded password in its software. Starting in 2012, the United States stated that Huawei might have backdoors present in their products. In 2013, researchers at the University of Massachusetts devised a method of breaking a CPU's internal cryptographic mechanisms by introducing specific impurities into the crystalline structure of transistors to change Intel's random-number generator. Documents revealed from 2013 onwards during the surveillance disclosures initiated by Edward Snowden showed that the Tailored Access Operations (TAO) unit and other NSA employees intercepted servers, routers, and other network gear being shipped to organizations targeted for surveillance to install covert implant firmware onto them before delivery. These tools include custom BIOS exploits that survive the reinstallation of operating systems and USB cables with spy hardware and radio transceiver packed inside. In June 2016 it was reported that University of Michigan Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science had built a hardware backdoor that leveraged "analog circuits to create a hardware attack" so that after the capacitors store up enough electricity to be fully charged, it would be switched on, to give an attacker complete access to whatever system or device − such as a PC − that contains the backdoored chip. In the study that won the "best paper" award at the IEEE Symposium on Privacy and Security they also note that microscopic hardware backdoor wouldn't be caught by practically any modern method of hardware security analysis, and could be planted by a single employee of a chip factory. In October 2018 Bloomberg reported that an attack by Chinese spies reached almost 30 U.S. companies, including Amazon and Apple, by compromising America's technology supply chain. == Countermeasures == Skorobogatov has developed a technique capable of detecting malicious insertions into chips. New York University Tandon School of Engineering researchers have developed a way to corroborate a chip's operation using verifiable computing whereby "manufactured for sale" chips contain an embedded verification module that proves the chip's calculations are correct and an associated external module validates the embedded verification module. Another technique developed by researchers at University College London (UCL) relies on distributing trust between multiple identical chips from disjoint supply chains. Assuming that at least one of those chips remains honest the security of the device is preserved. Researchers at the University of Southern California Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and the Photonic Science Division at the Paul Scherrer Institute have developed a new technique called Ptychographic X-ray laminography. This technique is the only current method that allows for verification of the chips blueprint and design without destroying or cutting the chip. It also does so in significantly less time than other current methods. Anthony F. J. Levi Professor of electrical and computer engineering at University of Southern California explains “It’s the only approach to non-destructive reverse engineering of electronic chips—[and] not just reverse engineering but assurance that chips are manufactured according to design. You can identify the foundry, aspects of the design, who did the design. It’s like a fingerprint.” This method currently is able to scan chips in 3D and zoom in on sections and can accommodate chips up to 12 millimeters by 12 millimeters easily accommodating an Apple A12 chip but not yet able to scan a full Nvidia Volta GPU. "Future versions of the laminography technique could reach a resolution of just 2 nanometers or reduce the time for a low-resolution inspection of that 300-by-300-micrometer segment to less than an hour, the researchers say."
Read more →