AI Art Video

AI Art Video — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Knowledge integration

Knowledge integration is the process of synthesizing multiple knowledge models (or representations) into a common model (representation). Compared to information integration, which involves merging information having different schemas and representation models, knowledge integration focuses more on synthesizing the understanding of a given subject from different perspectives. For example, multiple interpretations are possible of a set of student grades, typically each from a certain perspective. An overall, integrated view and understanding of this information can be achieved if these interpretations can be put under a common model, say, a student performance index. The Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE), from the University of California at Berkeley has been developed along the lines of knowledge integration theory. Knowledge integration has also been studied as the process of incorporating new information into a body of existing knowledge with an interdisciplinary approach. This process involves determining how the new information and the existing knowledge interact, how existing knowledge should be modified to accommodate the new information, and how the new information should be modified in light of the existing knowledge. A learning agent that actively investigates the consequences of new information can detect and exploit a variety of learning opportunities; e.g., to resolve knowledge conflicts and to fill knowledge gaps. By exploiting these learning opportunities the learning agent is able to learn beyond the explicit content of the new information. The machine learning program KI, developed by Murray and Porter at the University of Texas at Austin, was created to study the use of automated and semi-automated knowledge integration to assist knowledge engineers constructing a large knowledge base. A possible technique which can be used is semantic matching. More recently, a technique useful to minimize the effort in mapping validation and visualization has been presented which is based on Minimal Mappings. Minimal mappings are high quality mappings such that i) all the other mappings can be computed from them in time linear in the size of the input graphs, and ii) none of them can be dropped without losing property i). The University of Waterloo operates a Bachelor of Knowledge Integration undergraduate degree program as an academic major or minor. The program started in 2008.
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 →
Fifth Estate

The Fifth Estate is a socio-cultural reference to groupings of outlier viewpoints in contemporary society, and is most associated with bloggers, journalists publishing in non-mainstream media outlets, and online social networks. The "Fifth" Estate extends the sequence of the three classical estates (clergy (first), nobility (second), commoners (third)) and the preceding Fourth Estate, essentially the common press. The use of "fifth estate" dates to the 1960s counterculture, and in particular the influential Fifth Estate, an underground newspaper first published in Detroit in 1965. Web-based technologies have enhanced the scope and power of the Fifth Estate far beyond the modest and boutique conditions of its beginnings. Nimmo and Combs asserted in 1992 that political pundits constitute a Fifth Estate. Media researcher Stephen D. Cooper argued in 2006 that bloggers are the Fifth Estate. In 2009, William Dutton argued that the Fifth Estate is not just the blogging community, nor an extension of the media, but "networked individuals" enabled by the Internet, e.g. social media, in ways that can hold the other estates accountable.
Read more →
M-DISC

M-DISC (Millennial Disc) is a write-once optical disc technology introduced in 2009 by Millenniata, Inc. and available as DVD and Blu-ray discs. == Overview == M-DISC's design is intended to provide archival media longevity. M-Disc claims that properly stored M-DISC DVD recordings will last up to 1000 years. The M-DISC DVD looks like a standard disc, except it is almost transparent with later DVD and BD-R M-Disks having standard and inkjet printable labels. The patents protecting the M-DISC technology assert that the data layer is a glassy carbon material that is substantially inert to oxidation and has a melting point of 200–1000 °C (392–1832 °F). M-Discs are readable by most regular DVD players made after 2005 and Blu-Ray and BDXL disc drives and writable by most made after 2011. Available recording capacities conform to standard DVD/Blu-ray sizes: 4.7 GB DVD+R to 25 GB BD-R, 50 GB BD-R and 100 GB BDXL. == History == M-DISC developer Millenniata, Inc. was co-founded by Brigham Young University professors Barry Lunt, Matthew Linford, CEO Henry O'Connell and CTO Doug Hansen. The company was incorporated on May 13, 2010, in American Fork, Utah. Millenniata, Inc. officially went bankrupt in December 2016. Under the direction of CEO Paul Brockbank, Millenniata had issued convertible debt. When the obligation for conversion was not satisfied, the company defaulted on the debt payment and the debt holders took possession of all of the company's assets. The debt holders subsequently started a new company, Yours.co, to sell M-DISCs and related services. As of the 2020s, there are only 2 licensed manufacturers of M-Discs: Ritek, sold under the Ritek and RiDATA brands, and Verbatim with co-branded discs, marketed as the "Verbatim M-DISC". 128 GB BDXL never made it to market due to the 2016 bankruptcy. Early in 2022, Verbatim changed the formulation of their M-DISC branded Blu-rays. These new discs could be written at a faster rate than the previous ones – 6× speed instead of 4×. The new discs also had different colouration and markings compared with older version. Later in the year customers accused Verbatim of selling an inferior product and deceptive marketing. Verbatim responded that the new discs were a further development of the older discs and should have the same longevity, and that the technical changes therein were responsible for the altered appearance and higher write speeds. The updated M-DISC currently sold on the market uses the same metal ablative layer (MABL) metal oxide inorganic recording layer used in many of Verbatim's regular Blu-ray products. == Durability claims == The original M-DISC DVD+R was tested according to ISO/IEC 10995:2011 and ECMA-379 with a projected rated lifespan of several hundred years in archival use. The glassy carbon layers, in theory if preserved correctly in an environment like a salt mine, could store the data for over 10,000 years before going outside of readable specifications. However, the polycarbonate plastics, which are commonly used by almost all optical media and heavily in CBRN and ballistic protective equipment due to their optical, physical impact and chemical resistant properties, have a lifespan rating of only around 1000 years before degradation. Verbatim Japan claims that M-DISCs now use a titanium layer to prevent moisture ingression and to provide environmental stability. M-DISCs sold in Japan are advertised to have a projected lifespan of 100 years or more based on internal ISO/IEC 16963 testing, while other regional Verbatim websites claim that M-DISCs have a projected lifespan of "several hundred years" based on ISO/IEC 16963 testing. == Durability testing == In 2009, testing was done by the US Department of Defense (DoD) producing the China Lake Report testing Millenniata's M-Disk DVD to current market offerings from Delkin, MAM-A, Mitsubishi, Taiyo Yuden and Verbatim with all brands using organic dyes failing to pass the series of accelerated aging tests. From 2010 to 2012, the French National Laboratory of Metrology and Testing (LNE) used high-temperature accelerated aging testing, at 90 °C (194 °F) and 85% relative humidity inside a CLIMATS Excal 5423-U, for 250 to 1000 hours with a mix of inorganic DVD+R discs from MPO, Verbatim, Maxell, Syylex and DataTresor. The summary of the tests states that Syylex Glass Master Disc was rated for 1000+ hours, DataTresor Disc 250 hours+ and M-Disk under 250 hours. The Syylex disc was a custom-ordered product that could not be burned in a consumer player when they were still purchaseable from Syylex before their bankruptcy, so it was not truly in the same category as the others. In 2016, a consumer Mol Smith did real world stress testing on the 25 GB BD-R M-Disc alongside TDK's standard BD-R 25 GB disc using a copied movie, which demonstrated the reliability of M-Disc's molding compared to standard discs; after 60 days of outdoor direct exposure the M-Disk was played without error, while the TDK disc was physically destroyed. In 2022, the NIST Interagency Report NIST IR 8387 listed the M-Disc as an acceptable archival format rated for 100+ years, citing the aforementioned 2009 and 2012 tests by the US Department of Defense and French National Laboratory of Metrology and Testing as sources. == Commercial support == While recorded discs are readable in conventional DVD and BD drives, M-disc DVDs can only be burned by drives with firmware that supports the slightly higher power mode that M-Disk requires for burning its inorganic layers, as such writing speed is typically 2× speed. Blu-ray M-discs can be both written and read in most standard Blu-ray drives and are certified by the Blu-ray Disc Association to meet all current standard specifications as of 2019. Typically, the M-Discs cost 1.5–3× the price of standard Blu-Ray discs with DVD M-Discs now having sparse availability. With the first-generation DVD M-DISCs, it was difficult to determine which was the writable side of the disc due to being near fully translucent, until coloring and later labels similar to that on standard DVD discs was added to discs to help distinguish the sides preventing user error. Asus, LG Electronics, Lite-On, Pioneer, Buffalo Technology, and Hitachi-LG produce drives that can record M-DISC media while Verbatim and Ritek produce M-DISC discs. == Adoption == The regional government of the U.S. state of Utah has used M-Disc since 2011. Some consumers and avid datahoarders have adopted the format for cold digital data storage. == Alternative technologies == === Optical === Syylex Glass Master Disc: these discs use etched glass and are only typically degradable by physical or chemical damage, but not by normal ageing inside an archival environment. Current BD 25 GB, BD-R DL 50 GB & BDXL 100 GB (three layer) and Sony's BDXL 128 GB (four layer) discs are rated for up to 50 years (Standard inorganic HTL discs). Sony's Optical Disc Archive, is an optical competitor to the LTO tape-based data storage system, currently with up to 5.5 TB cartridges of dual-sided 120mm discs, with desktop readers and automated rackmount standard archival systems allowing for large scale archival and data retrieval rated for an estimated 100+ years. Pioneer DM for Archive is a disc media and drive combination developed by Pioneer to meet the requirements laid out by the Japanese government for preservation of financial data for a minimum of 100 years. The discs use a MABL type recording layer and are manufactured with tight tolerances. Although burnable in any BD Writer, when burned in Pioneers DM for Archive writers using the DM Archiver software the media and burn quality meet ISO/IEC 18630 which defines the testing methods needed for ensuring media and burn quality. === Magnetic === Linear Tape-Open (LTO) is rated for up to 30 years in a climate-controlled environment and is currently in use by most industries, including broadcast and corporate digital data systems. The latest generation released in 2026 is LTO-10, it defines two unique cartridge types which can hold 30 TB or 40 TB each Hard disk drives are currently available up to 30 TB (HDD) capacity in 3.5-inch format and 5 TB in 2.5-inch laptop format. However, unlike optical media, they are limited to 5–25 years of operation lifespan due to inevitable mechanical failure or magnetic instability. == Gallery ==
Read more →
Netomi

Netomi, formerly msg.ai, is an American artificial intelligence company and developer of chatbot technologies. == History == msg.ai was founded in May 2015 by Puneet Mehta. msg.ai worked with Sony Pictures to launch a chat bot on Facebook Messenger for a $100M film, Goosebumps and subsequently joined Y Combinator as a member of the Winter 2016 class. Later that year and in 2017, msg.ai completed two rounds of seed funding, led by Y Combinator and Index Ventures. In 2018, the company changed its name to Netomi. In 2019, the company raised $14.7 million in a Series A funding round also led by Index Ventures. In 2021, the company raised $30 million in a Series B funding round led by WndrCo LLC.
Read more →
Digital classics

Digital classics is the application of the tools of digital humanities to the field of classics, or more broadly to the study of the ancient world. == History == Classics was one of the first of the humanities disciplines to adopt computing approaches; the first references to the use of computing in the classical humanities date to the early 1960s, which might be surprising considering the reputation of the discipline as old-fashioned and stuffily traditionalist. Major projects such as the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, founded in 1972, and the text collections of the Packard Humanities Institute set the trend, and there are still a significantly large number of ancient world projects among Humanities Computing projects today. Also, the success of traditional scholarly publications in digital guises, such as seen in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review, and the early adoption of hypertext in high profile projects like the Perseus Digital Library helped to legitimize computing in the study of classics in ways that has not always been the case in other areas of the humanities. This apparent paradox may be as a result of the many methodologies and different sources of evidence that classicists have always had to embrace, from literary sources and linguistics, to art history and archaeology, history, philosophy, religious theory, ancient documents such as inscriptions and papyri, and so forth. The fragmentary nature of many of the texts and languages of the ancient world, the scattered evidence from the material culture of ancient Greece and Rome, and the necessity to evaluate all these varieties of evidence in context are particularly likely to benefit from digital approaches such as databases, text markup, image manipulation and machine learning. == Digital classics projects == There are currently several major projects that aim to encourage and develop digital approaches to classical scholarship. The Stoa Consortium at the University of Kentucky distributes news of the discipline, and serves as a peer-reviewed electronic publication venue, and encourages open source approaches to digital classics. The Perseus Project is a digital library that also provides a collection of digital texts and analysis tools to the public; principally (but not exclusively) classical. Digital Classicist is another project and community which shares information and advice about the digital humanities applied to the field of classics. Epigraphy.info is an international open community pursuing a collaborative environment for digital epigraphy. The Liverpool Classics Mailing List is a project which can be subscribed to in which one receives email regarding Classics events around the world, as well as call for papers, studentships and public lectures.
Read more →
Hyperscale computing

In computing, hyperscale is the ability of an architecture to scale appropriately as increased demand is added to the system. This typically involves the ability to seamlessly provide and add computing, memory, networking, and storage resources to a given node or set of nodes that make up a larger computing, distributed computing, or grid computing environment. Hyperscale computing is necessary in order to build a robust and scalable cloud, big data, map reduce, or distributed storage system and is often associated with the infrastructure required to run large distributed sites such as Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, Microsoft, IBM Cloud, Oracle Cloud, or Cloudflare. Companies like Ericsson, AMD, and Intel provide hyperscale infrastructure kits for IT service providers. Companies like Scaleway, Switch, Alibaba, IBM, QTS, Neysa, Digital Realty Trust, Equinix, Oracle, Meta, Amazon Web Services, SAP, Microsoft, Google, and Cloudflare build data centers for hyperscale computing. Such companies are sometimes called "hyperscalers". They are recognized for their massive scale in cloud computing and data management, operating in environments that require extensive infrastructure to accommodate large-scale data processing and storage.
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 →
Cloudlet

A cloudlet is a mobility-enhanced small-scale cloud datacenter that is located at the edge of the Internet. The main purpose of the cloudlet is supporting resource-intensive and interactive mobile applications by providing powerful computing resources to mobile devices with lower latency. It is a new architectural element that extends today's cloud computing infrastructure. It represents the middle tier of a 3-tier hierarchy: mobile device - cloudlet - cloud. A cloudlet can be viewed as a data center in a box whose goal is to bring the cloud closer. The cloudlet term was first coined by M. Satyanarayanan, Victor Bahl, Ramón Cáceres, and Nigel Davies, and a prototype implementation is developed by Carnegie Mellon University as a research project. The concept of cloudlet is also known as follow me cloud, and mobile micro-cloud. == Motivation == Many mobile services split the application into a front-end client program and a back-end server program following the traditional client-server model. The front-end mobile application offloads its functionality to the back-end servers for various reasons such as speeding up processing. With the advent of cloud computing, the back-end server is typically hosted at the cloud datacenter. Though the use of a cloud datacenter offers various benefits such as scalability and elasticity, its consolidation and centralization lead to a large separation between a mobile device and its associated datacenter. End-to-end communication then involves many network hops and results in high latencies and low bandwidth. For the reasons of latency, some emerging mobile applications require cloud offload infrastructure to be close to the mobile device to achieve low response time. In the ideal case, it is just one wireless hop away. For example, the offload infrastructure could be located in a cellular base station or it could be LAN-connected to a set of Wi-Fi base stations. The individual elements of this offload infrastructure are referred to as cloudlets. == Applications == Cloudlets aim to support mobile applications that are both resource-intensive and interactive. Augmented reality applications that use head-tracked systems require end-to-end latencies of less than 16 ms. Cloud games with remote rendering also require low latencies and high bandwidth. Wearable cognitive assistance systems combine devices such as Google Glass with cloud-based processing to guide users through complex tasks. This futuristic genre of applications is characterized as “astonishingly transformative” by the report of the 2013 NSF Workshop on Future Directions in Wireless Networking. These applications use cloud resources in the critical path of real-time user interaction. Consequently, they cannot tolerate end-to-end operation latencies of more than a few tens of milliseconds. Apple Siri and Google Now which perform compute-intensive speech recognition in the cloud, are further examples in this emerging space. == Cloudlet vs Cloud == There is significant overlap in the requirements for cloud and cloudlet. At both levels, there is the need for: (a) strong isolation between untrusted user-level computations; (b) mechanisms for authentication, access control, and metering; (c) dynamic resource allocation for user-level computations; and, (d) the ability to support a very wide range of user-level computations, with minimal restrictions on their process structure, programming languages or operating systems. At a cloud datacenter, these requirements are met today using the virtual machine (VM) abstraction. For the same reasons they are used in cloud computing today, VMs are used as an abstraction for cloudlets. Meanwhile, there are a few but important differentiators between cloud and cloudlet. === Rapid provisioning === Different from cloud data centers that are optimized for launching existing VM images in their storage tier, cloudlets need to be much more agile in their provisioning. Their association with mobile devices is highly dynamic, with considerable churn due to user mobility. A user from far away may unexpectedly show up at a cloudlet (e.g., if he just got off an international flight) and try to use it for an application such as a personalized language translator. For that user, the provisioning delay before he is able to use the application impacts usability. === VM handoff across cloudlets === If a mobile device user moves away from the cloudlet he is currently using, the interactive response will degrade as the logical network distance increases. To address this effect of user mobility, the offloaded services on the first cloudlet need to be transferred to the second cloudlet maintaining end-to-end network quality. This resembles live migration in cloud computing but differs considerably in a sense that the VM handoff happens in Wide Area Network (WAN). == OpenStack++ == Since the cloudlet model requires reconfiguration or additional deployment of hardware/software, it is important to provide a systematic way to incentivise the deployment. However, it can face a classic bootstrapping problem. Cloudlets need practical applications to incentivize cloudlet deployment. However, developers cannot heavily rely on cloudlet infrastructure until it is widely deployed. To break this deadlock and bootstrap the cloudlet deployment, researchers at Carnegie Mellon University proposed OpenStack++ that extends OpenStack to leverage its open ecosystem. OpenStack++ provides a set of cloudlet-specific APIs as OpenStack extensions. == Commercial implementations and standardization effort == By 2015 cloudlet based applications were commercially available. In 2017 the National Institute of Standards and Technology published draft standards for fog computing in which cloudlets were defined as nodes on the fog architecture.
Read more →
Data plan

A data plan is a subscription plan from a cellular or other mobile service provider to provide internet data and connectivity. == Formatting == Data plans are usually created by a contract between the telecommunications carrier and the user of their service. This contract outlines a maximum amount of usable data, usually highlighted in either megabytes or gigabytes, allotted per month for the user. In most cases companies will allow a user to surpass the amount of data allowed in the contract, however, will have to pay a per-gigabyte fee, ranging anywhere from five to fifteen U.S. dollars. === Popularization of unlimited plans === Unlimited data plans have seen a large increase in usage by consumers since their initial introduction by U.S. network T-Mobile. These plans, instead of setting an overall maximum for the user, have an amount set-up that, when surpassed, will slow the speed of the network for that user. Unlimited plans typically cost significantly more than the traditional shared data plans, which is a major reason that carriers have set large boundaries and fees. The limits imposed on unlimited plans are designed to fight against attempts to misuse the network, such as a DDoS attack, but are more commonly reasoned as a method to increase the number of people that can use one tower simultaneously. === Data speed changes === When a network is near reaching peak capacity data speeds may be slowed down by carriers as part of most major telecom contracts. This, as stated previously, allows for more people to be utilizing one tower, reducing needed capital for the company. Since speed changes are allowed at the company's will, the user has no official guarantee of speed on most major networks. === Costs brought upon by additional data === In many cases both the user and carrier have to incur additional costs when a user utilizes more of a given data package, which has helped in the proliferation of data caps and other forms of shared data plans. Most of the charges that the carrier has to incur for additional data usage is partially or fully given to the user of the network. ==== Users ==== Users are required to pay flat-rate additional fees that occur when they go above the amount of data given to them in their contract, utility, or prepaid plan. The cost per gigabyte of this fee is usually higher than what the contract itself offers, which discourages users from over-utilizing data and incurring a charge for the carrier. Certain contracts, which do not offer paying additional fees for an increase in data, may result in a shutdown of service, or in extremely rare cases, termination of the service as a whole. ==== Carriers ==== Carriers incur costs for additional data usage, as it limits the number of customers, and associated contracts, that they can handle on one network. Creating more cell phone towers in a given area would be costly, and largely useless until particular spikes in traffic. When the peak usable amount of one tower is reached, it may cause negative public relations towards the reliability of the corporation as a whole.
Read more →
Digital studio

A digital studio provides both a technology-equipped space and technological/rhetorical support to students (commonly at a university) working individually or in groups on a variety of digital projects, such as designing a website, developing an electronic portfolio for a class, creating a blog, making edits, selecting images for a visual essay, or writing a script for a podcast. == History/theory == === Overview === Digital Studios are places with different names but similar objectives. They have risen in response to the need for resources dedicated to improving students' interactions with digital technologies for rhetorical ends. Digital Studios have often been theoretically and administratively linked to writing centers, which are sites where students can seek assistance with their text-based projects. The academic term that has been used for this kind of site (i.e. a writing center with a focus on digital and new media) is multiliteracy center. Besides having a multimodal focus, Digital Studios also make a departure from writing center model in allowing students the freedom to work in the Studio without one-on-one interaction with a writing tutor. === The rise of technology === ==== Computer literacy in popular culture ==== As early as 1983, computer literacy was being hailed in The New York Times as the "new goal in schools." As computer technology became more ubiquitous, and the World Wide Web became more popular and accessible, and as the teaching of computer skills became official US policy with the enactment of the "Technology Literacy Challenge" by the Clinton Administration in 1996, educators across disciplines began to investigate with renewed vigor the role of computer technology in curriculum as both a means and an end. ==== Scholarly interest in 'multiliteracies' ==== The same year that President Clinton initiated the "Technology Literacy Challenge", the New London Group (NLG) issued a call for scholars of literacy pedagogy to account for the burgeoning variety of text forms associated with information and multimedia technologies. This includes understanding and competent control of representational forms that are becoming increasingly significant in the overall communications environment, such as visual images and their relationship to the written word – for instance, visual design in desktop publishing or the interface of visual and linguistic meaning in multimedia. This account for new text forms, combined with a similar account for "increasingly globalized societies," is called 'multiliteracies' by the NLG. ==== Technological literacy in rhetoric and composition ==== Two years later, during the 1998 CCCC Chair's Address, Cynthia Selfe (who founded the peer-reviewed journal Computers and Composition in 1983) addressed professionals in the field of Rhetoric and Composition with an objective similar to that of the NLG, arguing that as a field, composition scholars had "paid technology issues precious little focused attention over the years." She called this lack of attention "dangerously shortsighted." What was needed, Selfe claimed, was for teachers to "pay attention" to "how technology is now inextricably linked with literacy and literacy education in this country." In a way, Selfe's call marked the beginning of a new scholarly interest in what Selfe called "critical technological literacy": Composition teachers, language arts teachers, and other literacy specialists need to recognize that the relevance of technology in the English studies disciplines is not simply a matter of helping students work effectively with communication software and hardware, but, rather, also a matter of helping them to understand and to be able to assess – to pay attention to – the social, economic, and pedagogical implications of new communication technologies and technological initiatives that affect their lives. Scholars who took up this call included Barbara Blakely Duffelmeyer, who conducted studies involving the incorporation of "critical computer literacy" (an adaptation of Selfe's term) into first-year composition. ==== Communications across media, inside and outside school ==== The years following Selfe's address saw more rapid advancements in mobile technologies, social media, and Web 2.0, creating even more new venues of composing for teachers to pay attention to. In her own CCCC Chair's Address in 2004, Kathleen Blake Yancey cited these new venues in her argument as a "new curriculum for the 21st century," one that would bring "together the writing outside of school and that of inside." Such a curriculum, she said: is located in a new vocabulary, a new set of practices, and a new set of outcomes; it will focus our research in new and provocative ways; it has as its goal the creation of thoughtful, informed, technologically adept writing publics. A professor at Clemson at the time of her speech, Yancey also argued for the creation of an undergraduate major in composition and rhetoric. She soon moved to Florida State University, where she helped to establish a new major in line with the one she argued for at CCCC called Editing, Writing, and Media (EWM). As teachers and administrators across the country looked to incorporate more digital technology into their curriculum, the need for spaces for digital composition and for support with the innumerable digital composing platforms became apparent. A Digital Studio is one such space. === Link with writing centers === With the need for support for students who would engage with digital writing and multimedia projects, professionals involved with work in writing centers began to draw comparisons between their traditional work — assisting students with alphabetic texts on the page — and a new kind of work: assisting students with their multimedia projects on the screen. John Trimbur predicted in 2000: My guess is that writing centers will more and more define themselves as multiliteracy centers. Many are already doing so – tutoring oral presentations, adding online tutorials, offering workshops in evaluating web sources, and being more conscious of document design. To my mind, new digital literacies will increasingly be incorporated into writing centers not just as sources of information or delivery systems for tutoring but as productive arts in their own right, and writing center work will, if anything, become more rhetorical in paying attention to the practices and effects of design in written and visual communication — more product-oriented and perhaps less like the composing conferences of the process movement. Later, just months before Yancey delivered her CCCC Chair's Address, Michael Pemberton, writing in the Writing Center Journal, asked: As we enter an era when electronic publishing and computer-mediated discourse are the norm, an era when new literary genres and new forms of communication emerge on, seemingly, a weekly basis, we must ask ourselves whether writing centers should continue to dwell exclusively in the linear, non-linked world of the printed page or whether they should plan to redefine themselves – and retrain themselves – to take residence in the emerging world of multimedia, hyperlinked, digital documents. To put it plainly, should we be preparing tutors to conference with students about hypertexts? Pemberton also surveyed (by his account) the forty-year history of how "writing centers [have] viewed new technologies," observing that "the relationship between writing centers and computer technology has been, overall, only a cordial one." Pemberton's article is evidence of the continuing discussion among writing center professionals about the need for support for students' digital creations, support which they saw as analogous to work in writing centers. In 2010, a collection edited by David Sheridan and James Inman, Multiliteracy Centers: Writing Center Work, New Media, and Multimodal Rhetoric, was published. Many of the chapters therein cite the above Trimbur and Pemberton quotes as they work to explain the exigence for the collection, the instances in which multiliteracy centers have been established (the founding of the Clemson Class of 1941 Studio for Student Communication is the subject of two chapters), and both theoretical and practical analyses of potential futures of such work. === 'Studio' vs. 'Center:' A break from the model === The conflation of digital studios and writing centers into multiliteracy centers is helpful in some respects, for example, administratively the two may be managed in similar ways and staffed by the same people. In other respects, it has been said that it is better to separate them into two distinct kinds of facilities. The very choice of naming a "writing center" or "digital studio" by either (or another) title, for instance, ought (according to some) to be informed by what kinds of student-activities are expected to take place there. A writing center is a place for individual students to seek help from individual writing
Read more →
Frictionless sharing

Frictionless sharing refers to the transparent or automatic dissemination of user activity across social media platforms, typically without requiring explicit action from the user each time content is shared. The concept gained prominence in 2011 after Mark Zuckerberg announced a series of new features for Facebook at the F8 developers conference, framing the changes as enabling “real-time serendipity in a friction-less experience.” == History and concept == Before 2011, the term “frictionless sharing” was occasionally used in academic and technical contexts to describe sharing of resources with minimal effort, such as through social bookmarking or Creative Commons licensing to reduce barriers to reuse of research data. The concept took on a broader cultural meaning when Facebook introduced its Timeline interface and new “social apps” in 2011. These features enabled third-party applications to automatically publish user activity to the platform—effectively shifting sharing from a deliberate act to a passive process. For example, integrating music streaming service Spotify meant that any song a user listened to could automatically appear in a Facebook “Ticker,” allowing friends to see the activity and click through to play the song themselves. == Zuckerberg’s vision == Zuckerberg articulated a vision of a Web in which sharing occurs by default rather than by choice: “You read, you watch, you listen, you buy—and everyone you know will hear all about it on Facebook.” This “frictionless” model assumes ongoing consent after an initial opt-in. Once users connect an app to their profile, any future activity with that app may be automatically shared. This shift from intentional posting to ambient sharing represented a significant evolution in how personal data is distributed online. == Criticism and debate == Many commentators and users have raised concerns about frictionless sharing. While some criticism centers on online privacy, others focus on how automatic updates can flood news feeds and erode the social value of sharing. Critics argue that when sharing becomes automatic, it dilutes the personal curation that makes social media exchanges meaningful. According to Slate, this approach risks “killing taste,” because users typically choose to share only select content they find worth highlighting, rather than everything they consume. AL.com similarly observed that the frictionless model encourages over-sharing, overwhelming both users and their networks with minor or trivial activities. For example, integrating multiple platforms—such as Twitter, Foursquare, Pinterest, Spotify, and others—can create an incessant stream of updates that some users may find intrusive or irritating. This can lead to what critics describe as “narcissistic” or noisy timelines, potentially undermining the “social” nature of social media. == Business model and data implications == For Facebook, frictionless sharing offers clear business advantages. More frequent and detailed sharing provides valuable data that can be used to refine targeted advertising and personalize content delivery. The model also encourages users to spend more time on the platform, reinforcing its position as a central hub of online social activity. Other technology companies have experimented with similar approaches. Google has introduced forms of cross-platform integration that facilitate automatic activity sharing, though with a more explicit opt-in structure compared to Facebook. This approach has been described as “friction with consent,” allowing users to manually enable or disable integrations on a per-service basis.
Read more →
Organoid intelligence

Organoid intelligence (OI) is an emerging field of study in computer science and biology that develops and studies biological wetware computing using 3D cultures of human brain cells (or brain organoids) and brain-machine interface technologies. Such technologies may be referred to as OIs or the nervous filesystem. Organoid intelligent computer systems can be an example of biohybrid systems. == Differences with non-organic computing == As opposed to traditional non-organic silicon-based approaches, OI seeks to use lab-grown cerebral organoids to serve as "biological hardware". While these structures are still far from being able to think like a regular human brain and do not yet possess strong computing capabilities, OI research currently offers the potential to improve the understanding of brain development, learning and memory, potentially finding treatments for neurological disorders such as dementia. Thomas Hartung, a professor from Johns Hopkins University, argued in 2023 that "while silicon-based computers are certainly better with numbers, brains are better at learning." He noted that transistor density in computer chip may be approaching its limits, whereas brains, being wired differently, are more energy-efficient and can store large amounts of information. Some researchers claim that even though human brains are slower than machines at processing simple information, they are far better at processing complex information as brains can deal with fewer and more uncertain data, perform both sequential and parallel processing, being highly heterogenous, use incomplete datasets, and is said to outperform non-organic machines in decision-making. Training OIs involve the process of biological learning (BL) as opposed to machine learning (ML) for AIs. == Bioinformatics in OI == OI generates complex biological data, necessitating sophisticated methods for processing and analysis. Bioinformatics provides the tools and techniques to decipher raw data, uncovering the patterns and insights. Researchers have developed a platform named Neuroplatform for experimenting remotely with brain organoids via an API. == Intended functions == Brain-inspired computing hardware aims to emulate the structure and working principles of the brain and could be used to address current limitations in AI technologies. However, brain-inspired silicon chips are still limited in their ability to fully mimic brain function, as most examples are built on digital electronic principles. One study performed OI computation (which they termed Brainoware) by sending and receiving information from the brain organoid using a high-density multielectrode array. By applying spatiotemporal electrical stimulation, nonlinear dynamics, and fading memory properties, as well as unsupervised learning from training data by reshaping the organoid functional connectivity, the study showed the potential of this technology by using it for speech recognition and nonlinear equation prediction in a reservoir computing framework. == Ethical concerns == While researchers are hoping to use OI and biological computing to complement traditional silicon-based computing, there are also questions about the ethics of such an approach. Concerns include the possibility that an organoid could develop sentience or consciousness, and the question of the relationship between a stem cell donor (for growing the organoid) and the respective OI system.
Read more →
Digital exhibition

Digital Exhibition includes both the projection technologies, such as High Definition, and delivery technologies of a film to a movie theater. Delivery technologies include disk drives, satellite relay, and fiber optics. This can save money in distribution but is usually more expensive overall due to maintenance and standardization of technology. However, there are benefits to digital exhibition, for example it requires less assembly by the exhibitor and can contain the trailers that the distributor wishes.
Read more →
MicroTCA

MicroTCA (short for Micro Telecommunications Computing Architecture, also: μTCA) is a modular, open standard, created and maintained by the PCI Industrial Computer Manufacturers Group (PICMG). It provides the electrical, mechanical, thermal and management specifications to create a switched fabric computer system, using Advanced Mezzanine Cards (AMC), connected directly to a backplane. MicroTCA is a descendant of the AdvancedTCA standard. == History == The rapid expansion of mobile telecommunications and their associated services (such as text messages) at the beginning of the millennium increased the demand of processing power in telecommunication systems. The existing "carrier grade" (see RAS) computing architectures were not fit to house the high performance processors of the time. In order to answer those demands, about 100 companies worked together in PICMG, resulting in the Advanced Telecommunications Architecture (AdvancedTCA, ATCA), published in 2002. After the introduction of AdvancedTCA, a standard was developed, to cater towards smaller telecommunications systems at the edge of the network. This standard was geared towards a more compact, less expensive systems, without cutting back on reliability or data throughput. This standard, called MicroTCA, was ratified 2006. MicroTCA systems migrated after its release into non-telecommunication sectors, like defence, avionics and science. This resulted in extensions to the base-standard, called modules. == Modules == === MicroTCA.0 === The base-specification for properties common to all other modules, ratified July 6, 2006. This includes: Mechanical specifications, like possible dimensions of card cages, backplanes and supported AMC-modules Electrical specifications, like power distribution and interface layout Thermal specifications, like possible cooling layouts or available cooling power Management specifications A second revision of the base-specifications was ratified January 16, 2020, containing some corrections, as well as alterations, necessary to implement higher speed Ethernet fabrics, like 10GBASE-KR and 40GBASE-KR4. === MicroTCA.1 === This module adds specifications for ruggedized systems, using forced air for cooling. Possible scenarios for MicroTCA.1-based systems include outside plant telecom, industrial and aerospace environments === MicroTCA.2 === This module adds specifications for more stringent requirements with regards to temperature, shock, vibration and other environmental conditions. These specifications are geared towards use in outside plant telecom, machine and transport industry, as well as military airborne, shipboard and ground mobile equipment. MicroTCA.2 allows the use of air- and conduction-cooled AMC-modules. === MicroTCA.3 === This module adds specifications for even more stringent requirements with regards to temperature, shock, vibration and other environmental conditions. These specifications are geared towards use in outside plant telecom, machine and transport industry, as well as military airborne, shipboard and ground mobile equipment. MicroTCA.3 requires the use of conduction-cooled AMC-modules. === MicroTCA.4 === This module extends the AMC with a Rear Transition Module (RTM), increasing PCB-space and modularity. AMC and RTM are connected with a connector, located in zone 3, defined in MicroTCA.0. These specifications are geared towards use in large-scale scientific devices, like particle accelerators or telescopes. == Components of MicroTCA == === Card Cage === The card cage (also: shelf, crate) houses all the other components and as such has two primary functions: Provide mechanical stability to the other components Ensure sufficient cooling There exist a wide array of card cages. They usually differ in: the type of modules they support (MTCA.0, MTCA.1, ...) the number of slots they provide (typically between 2 and 12) the architecture of the installed backplane (see below) the cooling scheme they use (i.e. airflow front-to-back, bottom-to-top, side-to-side, conductive,...) === Backplane === The backplane is a printed circuit board, mounted directly into the card cage. It connects all other components of a MicroTCA system to each other and provides power, data access and management access to them. Two types of power are distributed over the backplane, Management Power (+3.3 V) and Payload Power (+12 V). Unlike typical backplanes, where power is distributed to all components via a common "powerplane" in the PCB, on a MicroTCA backplane, Management and Payload Power are distributed to each component individually. While Management Power is provided to each module connected to a powered backplane, Payload Power has to be granted by the MicroTCA Carrier Hub (MCH), after ensuring that the module is MicroTCA-compatible. The standard defines various communication buses, which the backplane can/should provide: Gigabit Ethernet IPMI SATA Fat pipe (can be used for PCIe, SRIO or 10G/40G Ethernet) Point to Point Links Clocks JTAG === Cooling Unit === The Cooling Unit (CU) provides controlled air flow in air-flow-cooled card cages. It usually consists of an array of fans and a controller, which is connected to the backplane. The MicroTCA Carrier Hub (MCH) can read-out temperature sensors (if present) and fan speed, as well as change fan speed via IPMI. The Cooling Unit is usually fitted to a specific card cage. Some CUs are easily detachable (i.e. for cleaning or replacement), while other card cages come with integrated, non-detachable CUs. === Power Module === The Power Module (PM, also: Power Supply) converts the AC power from the power line to the +3.3 V Management Power (MP) and +12 V Payload Power (PP), both of which are DC. There exist a variety of power modules, which differ in: form factor (i.e. double width, single width) input voltage (110 V, 220 V, both) output power (i.e. 600 W, 1000 W) The power module senses the presence of a module in a slot via a specified pin in the module connector, and immediately provides that module with management power. Payload power is managed by the MicroTCA Carrier Hub (MCH), which communicates with the power module via IPMI. The power module uses its own type of connector, and can thus only be installed into designated slots, which in turn can't carry any other type of module. Some card cages provide an additional power module slot for redundancy. In such a case, one slot is the primary, which will provide power by default, and the other one is secondary, providing power only, if the primary does not. === MicroTCA Carrier Hub === The MicroTCA Carrier Hub (MCH) is the central managing device of a MicroTCA card cage. It manages power distribution and cooling. It usually also provides Gigabit Ethernet and/or PCIe/Serial RapidIO switching. Some MCHs additionally provide clocking. As the name indicates, they are the hub of various star topologies (i.e. for Ethernet, PCIe) on the backplane and thus require dedicated slot(s). Some backplanes support two MCHs for redundancy. In this case there are two MCH slots, with one being designated primary, and one secondary. === Advanced Mezzanine Card === Advanced Mezzanine Card (AMC) is a standard for hot-pluggable PCBs. It was originally developed to be used in AdvancedTCA systems. The standard specifies: the dimensions of the PCB with two width variants (single, double) and three height variants (Compact, Mid-size, Full) type, location and orientation of connectors (i.e. Zone 1, 2, 3) There is a huge variation of functionalities, an AMC can fulfill: Computing (i.e. a module with CPU, RAM, SSD and on-board graphics) Storage (i.e. SSD carrier) Graphics card FPGA card (i.e. for signal processing) FMC carrier Digitizer card (Analog-Digital and Digital-Analog Conversion) Clocking and Triggering and others === Rear Transition Module (MTCA.4 only) === The Rear Transition Module (RTM) was added in the MicroTCA.4 standard. It is connected directly to an AMC via a connector, located in zone 3, requiring a double width AMC and RTM. An RTM has about the same dimensions, as an AMC, basically doubling the available PCB-space per slot in an MTCA.4 card cage. Its power is provided by the AMC. Thus an RTM can not operate on its own, but requires a paired AMC. The zone 3 connector is electrically free configurable, making it possible, that a mechanically fitting AMC-RTM pair is electrically incompatible. To avoid damage due to that incompatibility, a mechanical code-pin was added to MTCA.4-compatible AMCs and RTMs, mechanically preventing the installation of an electrically incompatible RTM to an AMC. The functionality of RTMs includes, but is not limited to: RF-signal pre-/post-processing (i.e. filtering, Up-/Down-conversion, Vector De-/Modulation) Digital signal pre-/post-processing Clock-generation/-distribution Device interfaces Date storage CPU (only MCH-RTM)
Read more →