AI Avatar Talking Free

AI Avatar Talking Free — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

PowerBuilder

PowerBuilder is an integrated development environment owned by SAP since the acquisition of Sybase in 2010. On July 5, 2016, SAP and Appeon entered into an agreement whereby Appeon, an independent company, would be responsible for developing, selling, and supporting PowerBuilder. Over the years, PowerBuilder has been updated with new standards. In 2010, a major upgrade of PowerBuilder was released to provide support for the Microsoft .NET Framework. In 2014, support was added for OData, dockable windows, and 64-bit native applications. In 2019 support was added for rapidly creating RESTful Web APIs and non-visual .NET assemblies using the C# language and the .NET Core framework. And PowerScript client app development was revamped with new UI technologies and cloud architecture. In 2025 the IDE was revamped with new code editor and ultra-fast compiler. Appeon has been releasing new features every 6-12 month cycles, which per the product roadmap focus on four key focus areas: sustaining core features, modernizing application UI, improving developer productivity, and incorporating more Cloud technology. == Features == PowerBuilder has a native data-handling component called a DataWindow, which can be used to create, edit, and display data from a database. This object gives the programmer a number of tools for specifying and controlling user interface appearance and behavior, and also provides simplified access to database content and JSON or XML from Web services. To some extent, the DataWindow frees the programmer from considering the differences between Database Management Systems from different vendors. DataWindow can display data using multiple presentation styles and can connect to various data sources. == Usage == PowerBuilder is used primarily for building business-oriented CRUD applications. Although new software products are rarely built with PowerBuilder, many client-server ERP products and line-of-business applications built in the late 1980s to early 2000s with PowerBuilder still provide core database functions for large enterprises in government, higher education, manufacturing, insurance, banking, energy, and telecommunications. == History == === Early history === PowerBuilder originated from Computer Solutions Inc. (CSI), a software consulting firm founded in 1974 by Mitchell Kertzman in Massachusetts. CSI developed GrowthPower, an MRP II software package with integrated financial modules released in 1981, which ran exclusively on the HP 3000 platform and achieved over 1,000 customer installations at its peak. In the late 1980s, as demand increased for graphical user interfaces amid the rise of Microsoft Windows, Kertzman partnered with Dave Litwack, former executive vice president of product development at Cullinet Software (acquired by Computer Associates in 1989). Litwack joined the company in 1988 as head of research and development to develop a client/server GUI tool, leading to its rebranding as Powersoft Corporation in 1990. PowerBuilder 1.0 was released in July 1991 as a rapid application development tool featuring the DataWindow and PowerScript language. Powersoft went public on February 3, 1993, with shares closing at $38 from an initial $20 price. Sybase announced its acquisition of Powersoft on November 15, 1994, in a stock swap valued at approximately $940 million; the merger closed on February 14, 1995, at a revised value of about $904 million due to Sybase's stock fluctuations. === Recent history === In December 2013 SAP announced the new version going directly to number 15 and released a beta version. Key features included support for the .NET Framework v4.5, SQL Server 2012, Oracle 12, Windows 8, OData and Dockable Windows. SAP later released this as version 12.6. On May 31, 2019, PowerBuilder 2019 was released by Appeon. This release supports C# development. It provides a new C# IDE, .NET data access objects, C# migration solution, Web API client, and UI themes. On April 3, 2020, PowerBuilder 2019 R2 was launched by Appeon. This release includes a first-ever PowerScript-to-C# code converter, which can automatically migrate 80-95% of PowerBuilder business logic and DataWindows to C#. Interoperability between PowerScript and .NET programming languages is also now supported. Many existing features have also been enhanced. On January 22, 2021, PowerBuilder 2019 R3 was launched by Appeon. This release provides a groundbreaking new app deployment technology called PowerClient, which securely automates the installation and update of client apps over HTTPS. C# Web API development has been greatly enhanced with asynchronous programming and support for Amazon Aurora and Azure cloud databases. Aside from many other new features, PowerBuilder 2019 R3 is a long-term support (LTS) version that replaces previous LTS versions On August 6, 2021, PowerBuilder 2021 was launched by Appeon. The Cloud deployment capability of the PowerBuilder 2021 IDE, in conjunction with the matching PowerServer 2021 runtime, was revamped, bringing PowerBuilder up-to-date with the latest .NET technologies. The presentation layer now executes PowerScript natively on Windows devices. The middle-tier has been rebuilt around REST API standard with a pure .NET Core implementation. A new CI/CD utility that integrates with Git/SVN and Jenkins, witch compiles all PowerBuilder projects using the command-line interface, was added alongside other features. On September 4, 2022, PowerBuilder 2022 was launched by Appeon. This release brings enhancements to the productivity of developing both client/server & installable cloud apps and more security measures to safeguard your apps. It includes many new features, including Windows 11 support, introducing time-saving functionalities to the IDE, such as Tabbed Code Editor, Jump to Objects, and Quick Code Search, and supports the latest HTTP/2 and TLS 1.3 protocols and two-way TLS authentication. On August 4, 2023, PowerBuilder 2022 R2 was launched by Appeon. This release introduces a range of new features aimed at helping developers build powerful, feature-rich, and secure client/server and installable cloud apps more efficiently, including tabbed windows, fillable PDFs, and SMTP client. On January 8, 2024, PowerBuilder 2022 R3 was launched by Appeon. This release is a long-term support version. Features previously released in earlier releases have been enhanced and/or corrected. On May 7, 2025, PowerBuilder 2025 was launched by Appeon. This release delivers a revamped IDE that boosts developer productivity throughout the SLDC—from writing and extending code to debugging, automating builds, and deploying applications. It features a new-generation code editor, ultra-fast compiler, automatic REST API creation, faster GIT operations, and codeless UI modernization features. == Features == PowerBuilder is an object-oriented programming language. Nearly all of the visual and non-visual objects support inheritance, polymorphism, and encapsulation. The programmer may utilize a common code framework such as PowerBuilder Foundation Classes, also known as PFC, to inherit objects from and leverage pre-existing code. The DataWindow is the key component (and selling point) of PowerBuilder. The DataWindow offers a visual SQL painter which supports outer joins, unions and subquery operations. It can convert SQL to visual representation and back, so the developer can use native SQL if desired. DataWindow updates are automatic — it produces the proper SQL at runtime based on the DBMS to which the user is currently connected. This feature makes it easier for developers who are not experienced with SQL. The DataWindow also has the built-in ability to both retrieve data and update data via stored procedures or REST Web APIs as well as import/export JSON data. The RESTClient object introduced in PowerBuilder 2017 facilitates bridging the DataWindow with REST Web APIs and requiring minimal coding. === RDBMS interfaces === PowerBuilder offers native interfaces to all major databases, as well as ODBC and OLE-DB, in the Enterprise version. There are many connectivity options that allow performance monitoring and tuning, such as: Integrated security Tracing of all SQL Isolation level Password expiration dialog Blocking factor Number of SQL statements to cache Use connection pool Thread safety Trace ODBC API calls Due to the information about the database schema (such as primary key information) that are stored in PowerBuilder's data dictionary, the code required to implement data display and browsing is greatly simplified, because the dictionary information allows generation of the appropriate SQL behind the scenes. PowerBuilder supports the following ways of interacting with a database: DataWindow this is the simplest approach, relying on automatically generated SQL. Embedded SQL Embedded SQL supports SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE and cursors. This option is used when the developer desires more control than is available with the
Read more →
General Problem Solver

General Problem Solver (GPS) is a computer program created in 1957 by Herbert A. Simon, J. C. Shaw, and Allen Newell (RAND Corporation) intended to work as a universal problem solver machine. In contrast to the former Logic Theorist project, the GPS works with means–ends analysis. == Overview == Any problem that can be expressed as a set of well-formed formulas (WFFs) or Horn clauses, and that constitutes a directed graph with one or more sources (that is, hypotheses) and sinks (that is, desired conclusions), can be solved, in principle, by GPS. Proofs in the predicate logic and Euclidean geometry problem spaces are prime examples of the domain of applicability of GPS. It was based on Simon and Newell's theoretical work on logic machines. GPS was the first computer program that separated its knowledge of problems (rules represented as input data) from its strategy of how to solve problems (a generic solver engine). GPS was implemented in the third-order programming language, IPL. While GPS solved simple problems such as the Towers of Hanoi that could be sufficiently formalized, it could not solve any real-world problems because the search was easily lost in the combinatorial explosion. Put another way, the number of "walks" through the inferential digraph became computationally untenable. (In practice, even a straightforward state space search such as the Towers of Hanoi can become computationally infeasible, albeit judicious prunings of the state space can be achieved by such elementary AI techniques as A and IDA). The user defined objects and operations that could be done on the objects, and GPS generated heuristics by means–ends analysis in order to solve problems. It focused on the available operations, finding what inputs were acceptable and what outputs were generated. It then created subgoals to get closer and closer to the goal. The GPS paradigm eventually evolved into the Soar architecture for artificial intelligence.
Read more →
Defeasible logic

Defeasible logic is a non-monotonic logic proposed by Donald Nute to formalize defeasible reasoning. In defeasible logic, there are three different types of propositions: strict rules specify that a fact is always a consequence of another; defeasible rules specify that a fact is typically a consequence of another; undercutting defeaters specify exceptions to defeasible rules. A priority ordering over the defeasible rules and the defeaters can be given. During the process of deduction, the strict rules are always applied, while a defeasible rule can be applied only if no defeater of a higher priority specifies that it should not.
Read more →
Executive Order 14110

Executive Order 14110, titled Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence (sometimes referred to as "Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence") was the 126th executive order signed by former U.S. President Joe Biden. Signed on October 30, 2023, the order defines the administration's policy goals regarding artificial intelligence (AI), and orders executive agencies to take actions pursuant to these goals. The order is considered to be the most comprehensive piece of governance by the United States regarding AI. It was rescinded by U.S. President Donald Trump within hours of his assuming office on January 20, 2025. Policy goals outlined in the executive order pertain to promoting competition in the AI industry, preventing AI-enabled threats to civil liberties and national security, and ensuring U.S. global competitiveness in the AI field. The executive order required a number of major federal agencies to create dedicated "chief artificial intelligence officer" positions within their organizations. == Background == The drafting of the order was motivated by the rapid pace of development in generative AI models in the 2020s, including the release of large language model ChatGPT. Executive Order 14110 is the third executive order dealing explicitly with AI, with two AI-related executive orders being signed by then-President Donald Trump. The development of AI models without policy safeguards has raised a variety of concerns among experts and commentators. These range from future existential risk from advanced AI models to immediate concerns surrounding current technologies' ability to disseminate misinformation, enable discrimination, and undermine national security. In August 2023, Arati Prabhakar, the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, indicated that the White House was expediting its work on executive action on AI. A week prior to the executive order's unveiling, Prabhakar indicated that Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance on the order would be released "soon" after. == Policy goals and provisions == The order has been characterized as an effort for the United States to capture potential benefits from AI while mitigating risks associated with AI technologies. Upon signing the order, Biden stated that AI technologies were being developed at "warp speed", and argued that to "realize the promise of AI and avoid the risk, we need to govern this technology". Policy goals outlined by the order include the following: Promoting competition and innovation in the AI industry Upholding civil and labor rights and protecting consumers and their privacy from AI-enabled harms Specifying federal policies governing procurement and use of AI Developing watermarking systems for AI-generated content and warding off intellectual property theft stemming from the use of generative models Maintaining the nation's place as a global leader in AI == Impact on agencies == === Creation of chief AI officer positions === The executive order required a number of large federal agencies to appoint a chief artificial intelligence officer, with a number of departments having already appointed a relevant officer prior to the order. In the days following the order, news publication FedScoop confirmed that the General Services Administration (GSA) and the United States Department of Education appointed relevant chief AI officers. The National Science Foundation (NSF) also confirmed it had elevated an official to serve as its chief AI officer. === Department responsibilities === Under the executive order, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was responsible for developing AI-related security guidelines, including cybersecurity-related matters. The DHS will also work with private sector firms in sectors including the energy industry and other "critical infrastructure" to coordinate responses to AI-enabled security threats. Executive Order 14110 mandated the Department of Veterans Affairs to launch an AI technology competition aimed at reducing occupational burnout among healthcare workers through AI-assisted tools for routine tasks. The order also mandated the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop a generative artificial intelligence-focused resource to supplement the existing AI Risk Management Framework. == Analysis == The executive order has been described as the most comprehensive piece of governance by the United States government pertaining to AI. Earlier in 2023 prior to the signing of the order, the Biden administration had announced a Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, and had secured non-binding AI safety commitments from major tech companies. The issuing of the executive order comes at a time in which lawmakers including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer have pushed for legislation to regulate AI in the 118th United States Congress. According to Axios, despite the wide scope of the executive order, it notably does not touch upon a number of AI-related policy proposals. This includes proposals for a "licensing regime" to government advanced AI models, which has received support from industry leaders including Sam Altman. Additionally, the executive order does not seek to prohibit 'high-risk' uses of AI technology, and does not aim to mandate that tech companies release information surrounding AI systems' training data and models. == Reception == === Political and media reception === The editorial board of the Houston Chronicle described the order as a "first step toward protecting humanity". The issuing of the order received praise from Democratic members of Congress, including Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Representative Ted Lieu (D-CA). Representative Don Beyer (D-VA), who leads the House AI Caucus, praised the order as a "comprehensive strategy for responsible innovation", while arguing that Congress must take initiative to pass legislation on AI. The draft of the order received criticism from Republican Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), who described it as creating "barriers to innovation disguised as safety measures". === Public reception === Polling from the AI Policy Institute showed that 69% of all voters support the executive order, while 15% oppose it. Breaking it down by party, support was at 78% for Democrats, 65% for independents, and 64% for Republicans. === Industry reception === The executive order received strong criticism from the Chamber of Commerce as well as tech industry groups including NetChoice and the Software and Information Industry Association, all of which count "Big Tech" companies Amazon, Meta, and Google as members. Representatives from the organizations argued that the executive order threatens to hinder private sector innovation. === Civil society reception === According to CNBC, a number of leaders advocacy organizations praised the executive order for its provisions on "AI fairness", while simultaneously urging congressional action to strengthen regulation. Maya Wiley, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, praised the order while urging Congress to take initiative to "ensure that innovation makes us more fair, just, and prosperous, rather than surveilled, silenced, and stereotyped". A representative from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) praised provisions of the order centered on combating AI-enabled discrimination, while also voiced concern over sections of the order focused on law enforcement and national security. === Second Trump administration === Hours after his inauguration as the 47th president of the United States, Donald Trump rescinded the order, labeling it, among several other of Biden's executive orders and actions, as "unpopular, inflationary, illegal, and radical practices".
Read more →
SemEval

SemEval (Semantic Evaluation) is an ongoing series of evaluations of computational semantic analysis systems; it evolved from the Senseval word sense evaluation series. The evaluations are intended to explore the nature of meaning in language. While meaning is intuitive to humans, transferring those intuitions to computational analysis has proved elusive. This series of evaluations provides a mechanism to characterize in more precise terms exactly what is necessary to compute in meaning. As such, the evaluations provide an emergent mechanism to identify the problems and solutions for computations with meaning. These exercises have evolved to articulate more of the dimensions that are involved in our use of language. They began with apparently simple attempts to identify word senses computationally. They have evolved to investigate the interrelationships among the elements in a sentence (e.g., semantic role labeling), relations between sentences (e.g., coreference), and the nature of what we are saying (semantic relations and sentiment analysis). The purpose of the SemEval and Senseval exercises is to evaluate semantic analysis systems. "Semantic Analysis" refers to a formal analysis of meaning, and "computational" refer to approaches that in principle support effective implementation. The first three evaluations, Senseval-1 through Senseval-3, were focused on word sense disambiguation (WSD), each time growing in the number of languages offered in the tasks and in the number of participating teams. Beginning with the fourth workshop, SemEval-2007 (SemEval-1), the nature of the tasks evolved to include semantic analysis tasks outside of word sense disambiguation. Triggered by the conception of the SEM conference, the SemEval community had decided to hold the evaluation workshops yearly in association with the SEM conference. It was also the decision that not every evaluation task will be run every year, e.g. none of the WSD tasks were included in the SemEval-2012 workshop. == History == === Early evaluation of algorithms for word sense disambiguation === From the earliest days, assessing the quality of word sense disambiguation algorithms had been primarily a matter of intrinsic evaluation, and “almost no attempts had been made to evaluate embedded WSD components”. Only very recently (2006) had extrinsic evaluations begun to provide some evidence for the value of WSD in end-user applications. Until 1990 or so, discussions of the sense disambiguation task focused mainly on illustrative examples rather than comprehensive evaluation. The early 1990s saw the beginnings of more systematic and rigorous intrinsic evaluations, including more formal experimentation on small sets of ambiguous words. === Senseval to SemEval === In April 1997, Martha Palmer and Marc Light organized a workshop entitled Tagging with Lexical Semantics: Why, What, and How? in conjunction with the Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing. At the time, there was a clear recognition that manually annotated corpora had revolutionized other areas of NLP, such as part-of-speech tagging and parsing, and that corpus-driven approaches had the potential to revolutionize automatic semantic analysis as well. Kilgarriff recalled that there was "a high degree of consensus that the field needed evaluation", and several practical proposals by Resnik and Yarowsky kicked off a discussion that led to the creation of the Senseval evaluation exercises. === SemEval's 3, 2 or 1 year(s) cycle === After SemEval-2010, many participants feel that the 3-year cycle is a long wait. Many other shared tasks such as Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL) and Recognizing Textual Entailments (RTE) run annually. For this reason, the SemEval coordinators gave the opportunity for task organizers to choose between a 2-year or a 3-year cycle. The SemEval community favored the 3-year cycle. Although the votes within the SemEval community favored a 3-year cycle, organizers and coordinators had settled to split the SemEval task into 2 evaluation workshops. This was triggered by the introduction of the new SEM conference. The SemEval organizers thought it would be appropriate to associate our event with the SEM conference and collocate the SemEval workshop with the SEM conference. The organizers got very positive responses (from the task coordinators/organizers and participants) about the association with the yearly SEM, and 8 tasks were willing to switch to 2012. Thus was born SemEval-2012 and SemEval-2013. The current plan is to switch to a yearly SemEval schedule to associate it with the SEM conference but not every task needs to run every year. ==== List of Senseval and SemEval Workshops ==== Senseval-1 took place in the summer of 1998 for English, French, and Italian, culminating in a workshop held at Herstmonceux Castle, Sussex, England on September 2–4. Senseval-2 took place in the summer of 2001, and was followed by a workshop held in July 2001 in Toulouse, in conjunction with ACL 2001. Senseval-2 included tasks for Basque, Chinese, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Spanish and Swedish. Senseval-3 took place in March–April 2004, followed by a workshop held in July 2004 in Barcelona, in conjunction with ACL 2004. Senseval-3 included 14 different tasks for core word sense disambiguation, as well as identification of semantic roles, multilingual annotations, logic forms, subcategorization acquisition. SemEval-2007 (Senseval-4) took place in 2007, followed by a workshop held in conjunction with ACL in Prague. SemEval-2007 included 18 different tasks targeting the evaluation of systems for the semantic analysis of text. A special issue of Language Resources and Evaluation is devoted to the result. SemEval-2010 took place in 2010, followed by a workshop held in conjunction with ACL in Uppsala. SemEval-2010 included 18 different tasks targeting the evaluation of semantic analysis systems. SemEval-2012 took place in 2012; it was associated with the new SEM, First Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics, and co-located with NAACL, Montreal, Canada. SemEval-2012 included 8 different tasks targeting at evaluating computational semantic systems. However, there was no WSD task involved in SemEval-2012, the WSD related tasks were scheduled in the upcoming SemEval-2013. SemEval-2013 was associated with NAACL 2013, North American Association of Computational Linguistics, Georgia, USA and took place in 2013. It included 13 different tasks targeting at evaluating computational semantic systems. SemEval-2014 took place in 2014. It was co-located with COLING 2014, 25th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and SEM 2014, Second Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics, Dublin, Ireland. There were 10 different tasks in SemEval-2014 evaluating various computational semantic systems. SemEval-2015 took place in 2015. It was co-located with NAACL-HLT 2015, 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics – Human Language Technologies and SEM 2015, Third Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics, Denver, USA. There were 17 different tasks in SemEval-2015 evaluating various computational semantic systems. == SemEval Workshop framework == The framework of the SemEval/Senseval evaluation workshops emulates the Message Understanding Conferences (MUCs) and other evaluation workshops ran by ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency, renamed the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)). Stages of SemEval/Senseval evaluation workshops Firstly, all likely participants were invited to express their interest and participate in the exercise design. A timetable towards a final workshop was worked out. A plan for selecting evaluation materials was agreed. 'Gold standards' for the individual tasks were acquired, often human annotators were considered as a gold standard to measure precision and recall scores of computer systems. These 'gold standards' are what the computational systems strive towards. In WSD tasks, human annotators were set on the task of generating a set of correct WSD answers (i.e. the correct sense for a given word in a given context) The gold standard materials, without answers, were released to participants, who then had a short time to run their programs over them and return their sets of answers to the organizers. The organizers then scored the answers and the scores were announced and discussed at a workshop. == Semantic evaluation tasks == Senseval-1 & Senseval-2 focused on evaluation WSD systems on major languages that were available corpus and computerized dictionary. Senseval-3 looked beyond the lexemes and started to evaluate systems that looked into wider areas of semantics, such as Semantic Roles (technically known as Theta roles in formal semantics), Logic Form Transformation (commonly semantics of phrases, clauses or sentences were represented
Read more →
Johns Hopkins Beast

The Johns Hopkins Beast was a mobile automaton, an early pre-robot, built in the 1960s at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. The machine had a rudimentary intelligence and the ability to survive on its own. As it wandered through the white halls of the laboratory, it would seek black wall outlets. When it found one it would plug in and recharge. The robot was cybernetic. It did not use a computer. Its control circuitry consisted of dozens of transistors controlling analog voltages. It used photocell optics and sonar to navigate. The 2N404 transistors were used to create NOR logic gates that implemented the Boolean logic to tell it what to do when a specific sensor was activated. The 2N404 transistors were also used to create timing gates to tell it how long to do something. 2N1040 Power transistors were used to control the power to the motion treads, the boom, and the charging mechanism. The original sensors in Mod I were physical touch only. The wall socket was detected by physical switches on the arm that followed the wall. Once detected, two electrical prongs were extended until they entered the wall socket and made the electrical connection to charge the vehicle. The stairway, doors, and pipes on the hall wall were also detected by physical switches and recognized by appropriate logic. The sonar guidance system was developed for Mod I and improved for Mod II. It used two ultrasonic transducers to determine distance, location within the halls, and obstructions in its path. This provided "The Beast" with bat-like guidance. At this point, it could detect obstructions in the hallway, such as people. Once an obstruction was detected, the Beast would slow down and then decide whether to stop or divert around the obstruction. It could also ultrasonically recognize the stairway and doorways to take appropriate action. An optical guidance system was added to Mod II. This provided, among other capabilities, the ability to optically identify the black wall sockets that contrasted with the white wall. The Hopkins Beast Autonomous Robot Mod II link below was written by Dr. Ronald McConnell, at that time a co-op student and one of the designers for Mod II.
Read more →
Project Maven

Project Maven (officially Algorithmic Warfare Cross Functional Team) is a United States Department of Defense initiative launched in 2017 to accelerate the adoption of machine learning and data integration across U.S. military intelligence workflows, specifically in intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance as well as in geospatial intelligence. It initially focused on applying computer vision for processing images and videos for intelligence purposes. Currently, the program operates under the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and encompasses multiple applications across the Department of Defense spanning military operation targeting support, data integration and visualization for analysts, and training machine learning models on labeled datasets of military assets and infrastructure. It integrates data from drones, satellites, and other sensors to flag potential targets, present findings to human analysts, and relay their decisions to operational systems. The program originated under Deputy Secretary Robert O. Work after he raised concerns about China's advances in defense applications of artificial intelligence. Project leaders, Colonel Drew Cukor, USMC, and Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan, framed the program as human-in-the-loop decision support inside the Department of Defense rather than as an autonomous weapons platform. Contractors supporting Maven have included Google, which withdrew in 2018 after internal protests, and follow-on integrators such as Palantir, Anduril, Amazon Web Services, and Anthropic (withdrew in 2026). The Pentagon credits Maven with providing 2024 targeting support for U.S. airstrikes in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, along with locating hostile maritime assets in the Red Sea. == Administrative history == Initially, the effort was led by Robert O. Work who was concerned about China's military use of the emerging technology. Reportedly, Pentagon development stops short of acting as an AI weapons system capable of firing on self-designated targets. The project was established in a memo by the U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense on 26 April 2017 proposing an "Algorithmic Warfare Cross-Functional Team". With the help of Defense Innovation Unit, the project obtained the support of top talents in AI outside of the traditional defense contracting base. It was initially funded for $70 million. Jack Shanahan was the director of the project during April 2017 to December 2018. At the second Defense One Tech Summit in July 2017, Cukor said that the investment in a "deliberate workflow process" was funded by the Department [of Defense] through its "rapid acquisition authorities" for about "the next 36 months". In the defense industry, the standard procedure for the military to acquire hardware is by way of research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), followed by production and sustainment. In 2017, acquiring software was done in the same way as hardware. This created a problem, since software is constantly updated. Project Maven procured software using Broad Agency Announcements, a flexible contracting vehicle that categorized software as consistently RDT&E, allowing constant updating. Another issue was that the government usually acquired the intellectual property (IP) for procured software, and with the project, only parts of the IP of the software was acquired. Cukor used the principle of "platform IP belongs to the vendor, configurations on top are the customer's". For example, Palantir retained IP to their core platform, while the government obtained the IP to Maven-specific logic configured on top of it. According to US Air Force Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan in November 2017, it is "designed to be that pilot project, that pathfinder, that spark that kindles the flame front of artificial intelligence across the rest of the [Defense] Department". Its chief, U.S. Marine Corps Col. Drew Cukor, said: "People and computers will work symbiotically to increase the ability of weapon systems to detect objects." Project Maven has been noted by allies, such as Australia's Ian Langford, for the ability to identify adversaries by harvesting data from sensors on UAVs and satellites. As of 2017 December, 150,000 images had been manually labelled to establish the first training data sets, and it was projected to reach one million by January 2018. Project Maven was funded for $221 million in fiscal 2020. In 2020, the House and Senate conferees on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, agreed to the Senate's recommendation to fund the Pentagon's $250 million request for Project Maven. At the GEOINT Symposium of 2022, it was announced that Project Maven was transferred from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security to the NGA, under President Biden’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2023. It became a Program of Record on 2023 November 7. Frank "Trey" Whitworth, vice admiral, was the director of NGA from June 2022 to November 2025. Whitworth was initially skeptical of the program, suspecting it was incautious about the targeting principles, but later regarded it as "important work". As of 2024, the project is jointly administered by the NGA and the CDAO, and its director is Rachel Martin. Before 2025, Biden appointees within CDAO had held back AI development for safety and reliability concerns, though as of 2025, this has stopped. As of 2024, Maven provided the cloud infrastructure, software capabilities, and AI for CDAO's Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control initiatives. As of summer 2025, there were eight Maven initiatives. Of these, five were in the NGA, including analyzing drone feeds and satellite imagery. On 18 September 2025, the UK government announced a new partnership with Palantir to develop AI-powered military capabilities for decision-making and targeting, identifying opportunities worth up to £750 million over five years. On 25 March 2025, the NATO Communications and Information Agency and Palantir finalized the acquisition of the Palantir Maven Smart System NATO (MSS NATO) for employment within NATO's Allied Command Operations. It was planned to be used within 30 days of acquisition. In a letter to Pentagon on 9 March 2026, Steve Feinberg stated that Project Maven will become an official program of record by September 2026, the close of the current fiscal year. The project would transfer from the NGA to the CDAO within 30 days. Future contracting with Palantir would be handled by the US Army. In 2026-03, it was announced that the US Army Combined Arms Command would integrate Maven into its training. == Technology == Project Maven uses machine learning algorithms to analyze and fuse vast amounts of surveillance data from multiple sources made possible through data integration using Palantir Technologies. The data sources include photographs, satellite imagery, geolocation data (IP address, geotag, metadata, etc) from communications intercepts, infrared sensors, synthetic-aperture radar, and more. The system is mainly used for assisting analysts in intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance. Machine learning systems, including object recognition systems, process the data and identify potential targets, such as enemy tanks or location of new military facility. The training dataset included at least 4 million images of military objects such as warships, labelled by humans. The user interface is called Maven Smart System. It could display information such as aircraft movements, logistics, locations of key personnel, locations on the no-strike list, ships, etc. Yellow-outlined boxes show potential targets. Blue-outlined boxes show friendly forces or no-strike zones. It could also transmit, directly to weapons, a human decision to fire weapons. Internal documentation referred to "Maven ATR: automatic target recognition". Initially the project focused on applications of computer vision. The project's leaders were particularly impressed by model performance on ImageNet. As of 2018, the purpose of the system was AI-enabled analysis of full-motion video. In 2022 it expanded to combatant commands under the AI and Data Acceleration Initiative. In 2022, it was reported that the project expanded to non-image data, including captured enemy material, maritime intelligence, and publicly available information. In 2024, it was stated that Maven's key technical contribution was data management: Maven standardizes heterogeneous data through an ontology layer so data can be fused, exchanged across cloud and edge systems, and used by multiple applications. The system was presented as a broader data-centric warfighting system that feeds apps for planning, preparing, and executing operations. In 2024, the Broad Area Surveillance-Targeting (BAS-T) is a part of Maven. The system detects objects in images and uses data fusion to produce a common operational picture containing "priority based, in-depth assessment of the enemy systems pre
Read more →
PyTorch

PyTorch is an open-source deep learning library, originally developed by Meta Platforms and currently developed with support from the Linux Foundation. The successor to Torch, PyTorch provides a high-level API that builds upon optimised, low-level implementations of deep learning algorithms and architectures, such as the Transformer, or SGD. Notably, this API simplifies model training and inference to a few lines of code. PyTorch allows for automatic parallelization of training and, internally, implements CUDA bindings that speed training further by leveraging GPU resources. PyTorch utilises the tensor as a fundamental data type, similarly to NumPy. Training is facilitated by a reversed automatic differentiation system, Autograd, that constructs a directed acyclic graph of the operations (and their arguments) executed by a model during its forward pass. With a loss, backpropagation is then undertaken. As of 2025, PyTorch remains one of the most popular deep learning libraries, alongside others such as TensorFlow and Keras. It can be installed using Anaconda package managers. A number of commercial deep learning architectures are built on top of PyTorch, including ChatGPT, Tesla Autopilot, Uber's Pyro, and Hugging Face's Transformers. == History == In 2001, Torch was written and released under a GPL. It was a machine-learning library written in C++ and CUDA, supporting methods including neural networks, support vector machines (SVM), hidden Markov models, etc. Around 2010, it was rewritten by Ronan Collobert, Clement Farabet and Koray Kavuckuoglu. This was known as Torch7 or LuaTorch. This was written so that the backend was in C and the frontend was in Lua. In mid-2016, some developers refactored it to decouple the frontend and the backend, with strong influence from torch-autograd and Chainer. In turn, torch-autograd was influenced by HIPS/autograd. Development on Torch7 ceased in 2018 and was subsumed by the PyTorch project. Meta (formerly known as Facebook) operates both PyTorch and Convolutional Architecture for Fast Feature Embedding (Caffe2), but models defined by the two frameworks were mutually incompatible. The Open Neural Network Exchange (ONNX) project was created by Meta and Microsoft in September 2017 to decouple deep learning frameworks from hardware-specific runtimes, allowing models to be converted between frameworks and optimized for execution providers like NVIDIA’s TensorRT. Caffe2 was merged into PyTorch at the end of March 2018. In September 2022, Meta announced that PyTorch would be governed by the independent PyTorch Foundation, a newly created subsidiary of the Linux Foundation. PyTorch 2.0 was released on 15 March 2023, introducing TorchDynamo, a Python-level compiler that makes code run up to two times faster, along with significant improvements in training and inference performance across major cloud platforms. == PyTorch tensors == PyTorch defines a class called Tensor (torch.Tensor) to store and operate on homogeneous multidimensional rectangular arrays of numbers. PyTorch supports various sub-types of multi-dimensional arrays, or Tensors. PyTorch Tensors are similar to NumPy Arrays, but can also be operated on by a CUDA-capable NVIDIA GPU. PyTorch has also been developing support for other GPU platforms, for example, AMD's ROCm and Apple's Metal Framework. == PyTorch neural networks == PyTorch defines a module called nn (torch.nn) to describe neural networks and to support training. This module offers a comprehensive collection of building blocks for neural networks, including various layers and activation functions, enabling the construction of complex models. Networks are built by inheriting from the torch.nn module and defining the sequence of operations in the forward() function. == PyTorch Serialized File Format == Pytorch can save and load models using its own file format, which is a ZIP64 archive containing the model weights in a Python pickle file, and other information such as the byte order. The file extensions .pt and .pth are commonly used for these files. == Example == The following program shows the low-level functionality of the library with a simple example. The following code block defines a neural network with linear layers using the nn module.
Read more →
Speculative decoding

Speculative decoding is an inference-time optimization for autoregressive large language models (LLMs) that generates multiple tokens per decoding step instead of one. A smaller draft model proposes a sequence of candidate tokens, and the larger target model verifies them in a single forward pass through a modified rejection sampling scheme. The verification preserves the target model's original output distribution, so the technique produces the same results as standard decoding while cutting latency by roughly two to three times. The name is an analogy to speculative execution in CPU design, where a processor runs instructions along a predicted branch before the outcome is known. == Background == Standard autoregressive decoding in large language models generates one token at a time. The model computes a probability distribution over its vocabulary, samples the next token, and feeds that token back as input. For large models, this process is bottlenecked by memory bandwidth rather than arithmetic throughput: loading the model's parameters from high-bandwidth memory (HBM) to the processor takes up most of the wall-clock time at each step. Because of this, a forward pass over one token and a forward pass over several tokens in a batch take roughly the same time. Speculative decoding relies on this property. == Mechanism == The technique alternates between two phases: drafting and verification. During drafting, a fast approximation model generates a short run of K candidate tokens, typically between 3 and 12. The draft model is usually a much smaller version of the target model or a lightweight auxiliary network. During verification, the target model scores the entire draft sequence in one batched forward pass. A modified rejection sampling algorithm compares the draft and target probabilities at each position. If the target model would have been at least as likely to produce a given token, that token is accepted; the first token that fails is resampled from a corrected distribution, and everything after it is thrown out. The result is that the output distribution is the same as if each token had been generated one at a time. How many tokens get accepted per cycle depends on how well the draft model matches the target. For common words and predictable continuations the match tends to be good, so the target model can confirm several tokens at once. == History == An early precursor was blockwise parallel decoding, proposed in 2018 by Stern, Shazeer, and Uszkoreit. Their method predicted multiple future tokens through auxiliary prediction heads and validated them against the autoregressive model, but it only worked with greedy decoding and did not preserve the full sampling distribution. The modern form of the technique came from Yaniv Leviathan, Matan Kalman, and Yossi Matias at Google Research, who posted "Fast Inference from Transformers via Speculative Decoding" on arXiv in November 2022. Separately and at about the same time, Charlie Chen and colleagues at DeepMind arrived at a closely related method they called speculative sampling, published in February 2023. Both papers introduced the use of rejection sampling to guarantee that the output distribution is unchanged. Leviathan et al. showed roughly 2–3x speedup on T5-XXL (11 billion parameters); Chen et al. reported 2–2.5x on the Chinchilla model (70 billion parameters). The Leviathan et al. paper was presented as an oral at the International Conference on Machine Learning in July 2023. == Variants == SpecInfer (Miao et al., 2024) uses multiple small language models to jointly build a tree of candidate continuations rather than a single chain. The target model verifies the whole tree in parallel and keeps the longest valid path, with reported speedups of 1.5–3.5x. Medusa (Cai et al., 2024) takes a different approach by not using a separate draft model at all. Extra lightweight decoding heads are attached to the target model itself, and each one predicts a token at a different future position. The candidates are evaluated through a tree-structured attention mechanism. The authors measured 2.2–3.6x speedup. EAGLE (Li et al., 2024) performs autoregression on the target model's internal feature representations (specifically the second-to-top layer) rather than on tokens directly. On LLaMA 2 Chat 70B, this gave a 2.7–3.5x latency reduction. Later versions added dynamic draft trees (EAGLE-2) and further optimizations (EAGLE-3), reaching 3–6.5x speedup. == Adoption == By 2024, speculative decoding had become a standard part of production LLM serving. Google uses it in the AI Overviews feature of Google Search. Open-source inference frameworks such as vLLM, NVIDIA's TensorRT-LLM, and SGLang all include built-in support for speculative decoding and its variants. Apple, AWS, and Meta have also published research extending the method or deploying it at scale.
Read more →
Cognitive tutor

A cognitive tutor is a particular kind of intelligent tutoring system that utilizes a cognitive model to provide feedback to students as they are working through problems. This feedback will immediately inform students of the correctness, or incorrectness, of their actions in the tutor interface; however, cognitive tutors also have the ability to provide context-sensitive hints and instruction to guide students towards reasonable next steps. == Introduction == The name of Cognitive Tutor now usually refers to a particular type of intelligent tutoring system produced by Carnegie Learning for high school mathematics based on John Anderson's ACT-R theory of human cognition. However, cognitive tutors were originally developed to test ACT-R theory for research purposes since the early 1980s and they are developed also for other areas and subjects such as computer programming and science. Cognitive Tutors can be implemented into classrooms as a part of blended learning that combines textbook and software activities. The Cognitive Tutor programs utilize cognitive model and are based on model tracing and knowledge tracing. Model tracing means that the cognitive tutor checks every action performed by students such as entering a value or clicking a button, while knowledge tracing is used to calculate the required skills students learned by measuring them on a bar chart called Skillometer. Model tracing and knowledge tracing are essentially used to monitor students' learning progress, guide students to correct path to problem solving, and provide feedback. The Institute of Education Sciences published several reports regarding the effectiveness of Carnegie Cognitive Tutor. A 2013 report concluded that Carnegie Learning Curricula and Cognitive Tutor was found to have mixed effects on mathematics achievement for high school students. The report identified 27 studies that investigate the effectiveness of Cognitive Tutor, and the conclusion is based on 6 studies that meet What Works Clearinghouse standards. Among the 6 studies included, 5 of them show intermediate to significant positive effect, while 1 study shows statistically significant negative effect. Another report published by Institute of Education Sciences in 2009 found that Cognitive Tutor Algebra I to have potentially positive effects on math achievement based on only 1 study out of 14 studies that meets What Works Clearinghouse standards. It should be understood that What Works Clearinghouse standards call for relatively large numbers of participants, true random assignments to groups, and for a control group receiving either no treatment or a different treatment. Such experimental conditions are difficult to meet in schools, and thus only a small percentage of studies in education meet the standards of this clearinghouse, even though they may still be of value. == Theoretical foundations == === Four-component architecture === Intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) have a four-component architecture: a domain model, a student model, a tutoring model and an interface component. The domain model contains the rules, concepts, and knowledge related to the domain to be learned. It helps to evaluate students' performance and detect students' errors by setting a standard of domain expertise. The student model, the central component of an ITS, is expected to contain knowledge about the students: their cognitive and affective states, and their progress as they learn. The function of the student model is threefold: to gather data from and about the learner, to represent the learner's knowledge and learning process, and to perform diagnostics of a student's knowledge and select optimal pedagogical strategies. The tutoring model uses the data gained from the domain model and student model to make decisions about tutoring strategies such as whether or not to intervene, or when and how to intervene. Functions of the tutoring model include instruction delivery and content planning. The interface component reflects the decisions made by the tutoring model in different forms such as Socratic dialogs, feedback and hints. Students interact with the tutor through the learning interface, also known as communication. The interface provides domain knowledge elements. === Cognitive model === A cognitive model replicates the domain knowledge and skills comparable to that of a human expert or an advanced student of the domain. A cognitive model enables intelligent tutoring systems to respond to problem-solving situations in a way similar to a human tutor. A tutoring system adopting a cognitive model is called a cognitive tutor. A cognitive model is an expert system that generates a multitude of solutions to the problems presented to students. The cognitive model is used to trace each student's solution through complex alternative solution paths, enabling the tutor to provide step-by-step feedback and advice, and to maintain a targeted model of the student's knowledge based on student performance. === Cognitive Tutors === Cognitive Tutors provide step-by-step guidance as a learner develops a complex problem-solving skill through practice. Typically, cognitive tutors provide such forms of support as: (a) a problem-solving environment that is designed rich and "thinking visible"; (b) step-by-step feedback on student performance; (c) feedback messages specific to errors; (d) context-specific next-step hints at student's request, and (e) individualized problem selection. Cognitive Tutors accomplish two of the principal tasks characteristic of human tutoring: (1) monitors the student's performance and providing context-specific individual instruction, and (2) monitors the student's learning and selects appropriate problem-solving activities. Both cognitive model and two underlying algorithms, model tracing and knowledge tracing, are used to monitor the student's learning. In model tracing, the cognitive tutor uses the cognitive model in complex problems to follow the student's individual path and provide prompt accuracy feedback and context-specific advice. In knowledge tracing, the cognitive tutor uses a Bayesian Knowledge Tracing method of evaluating the student's knowledge and uses this student model to select appropriate problems for each student. === Cognitive architecture === Cognitive tutor development is guided by ACT-R cognitive architecture, which specifies the underlying framework developing the cognitive model or expert component of a cognitive tutor. ACT-R, a member of the ACT family, is the most recent cognitive architecture, devoted primarily to modelling human behavior. ACT-R includes a declarative memory of factual knowledge and a procedural memory of production rules. The architecture functions by matching productions on perceptions and facts, mediated by the real-valued activation levels of objects, and executing them to affect the environment or alter declarative memory. ACT-R has been used to model psychological aspects such as memory, attention, reasoning, problem solving, and language processing. == Application and utilization == The first real world applications of cognitive tutors were in the 1980s and involved a geometry proof tutor used by high school students and a LISP programming tutor used by college students in a mini course in introductory programming course at Carnegie Mellon University. Since then, cognitive tutors have been used in a variety of scenarios, with a few organizations developing their own cognitive tutor programs. These programs have been used with students spanning elementary school through university level, though primarily in the subject areas of Computer Programming, Mathematics, and Science. One of the first organizations to develop a system for use within the school system was the PACT Center at Carnegie Mellon University. Their aim was to "...develop systems that provide individualized assistance to students as they work on challenging real-world problems in complex domains such as computer programming, algebra and geometry". PACT's most successful product was the Cognitive Tutor Algebra course. Originally created in the early 1990s, this course was in use in 75 schools through the U.S. by 1999, and then its spin-off company, Carnegie Learning, now offers tutors to thousands of schools in the U.S. The Carnegie Mellon Cognitive Tutor has been shown to raise students' math test scores in high school and middle-school classrooms, and their Algebra course was designated one of five exemplary curricula for K-12 mathematics educated by the US Department of Education. There were several research projects conducted by the PACT Center to utilize Cognitive tutor for courses in Excel and to develop an intelligent tutoring system for algebra expression writing, called Ms. Lindquist. Further, in 2005, Carnegie Learning released Bridge to Algebra, a product intended for middle schools that was piloted in over 100 schools. Cognitive tutoring software is continuing to be used.
Read more →
ITU-WHO Focus Group on Artificial Intelligence for Health

The ITU-WHO Focus Group on Artificial Intelligence for Health (AI for Health) was an inter-agency collaboration from 2018 between the World Health Organization and the ITU, which in 2019 created a benchmarking framework to assess the accuracy of AI in health. The organization convened an international network of experts and stakeholders from fields like research, practice, regulation, ethics, public health, etc, that developed guideline documentation and code. The documents have addressed ethics, assessment/evaluation, handling, and regulation of AI for health solutions, covering specific use cases including AI in ophthalmology, histopathology, dentistry, malaria detection, radiology, symptom checker applications, etc. FG-AI4H has established an ad hoc group concerned with digital technologies for health emergencies, including COVID-19. All documentation is public. The idea for the Focus Group came out of the Health Track of the 2018 AI for Good Global Summit. Administratively, FG-AI4H was created by ITU-T Study Group 16. Under ITU-T's framework, participation in Focus Groups is open to anyone from an ITU Member State. The secretariat is provided by the Telecommunication Standardization Bureau (under Director Chaesub Lee). It was first created at the July 2018 meeting with a lifetime of two years, at the July 2020 meeting, this was extended for another two years, where the focus group also submitted its deliverables to its parent body. It was also presented at the NeurIPS 2020 health workshop. In July 2023 "the work was grandfathered in the Global Initiative on AI for Health (GI-AI4H)". == AI for Health Framework == The outline of the benchmarking framework was published in a 2019 commentary in The Lancet. The output of the Focus Group AI for Health were structured in the AI for Health Framework. Depending on their primary domain being health or ICT, the individual components of the AI for Health Framework were ratified by the corresponding United Nations Specialized Agency, as WHO Guidelines and ITU Recommendations respectively. Standards drawn up by FG-AI4H were titled as: AI4H ethics considerations AI4H regulatory [best practices | considerations] AI4H requirements specification AI software life cycle specification Data specification AI training best practices specification AI4H evaluation considerations AI4H scale-up and adoption AI4H applications and platforms Use cases of the ITU-WHO Focus Group on AI for Health
Read more →
AI Futures Project

The AI Futures Project is a nonprofit research organization based in the United States that specializes in forecasting the development and societal impact of advanced artificial intelligence. The organization is best known for its 2025 scenario forecast, AI 2027, which examines the potential near-term emergence of artificial general intelligence (AGI) and its possible global consequences. == History == The AI Futures Project was founded in 2025 by Daniel Kokotajlo, a former researcher in the governance division of OpenAI. Kokotajlo resigned from OpenAI in April 2024, expressing concerns that the company prioritized rapid product development over AI safety and was advancing without sufficient safeguards. He founded the nonprofit to conduct independent forecasting and policy research. The organization is registered as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit in the United States and is funded through donations. It operates with a small research staff and network of advisors drawn from fields including AI policy, forecasting, and risk analysis. == Activities == The mission of the AI Futures Project is to develop detailed scenario forecasts of the trajectory of advanced AI systems to inform policymakers, researchers, and the public. In addition to written reports, the group has conducted tabletop exercises and workshops based on its scenarios, involving participants from academia, technology, and public policy. == AI 2027 == In April 2025, the AI Futures Project released AI 2027, a detailed scenario forecast describing possible developments in AI between 2025 and 2027. The report was authored by Daniel Kokotajlo along with Eli Lifland, Thomas Larsen, and Romeo Dean, with editing assistance from blogger Scott Alexander. The scenario depicts very rapid progress in AI capabilities, including the development of autonomous AI systems capable of recursive self-improvement. AI 2027 presents two alternative endings: one in which international competition over advanced AI leads to catastrophic loss of human control, and another in which coordinated global action slows down development and averts imminent disaster. The authors emphasize that the narratives are hypothetical and intended as planning tools rather than literal forecasts. == Reception == AI 2027 attracted attention from technology journalists and AI researchers. Some commentators praised the report for its level of detail and its usefulness as a strategic planning exercise, while others criticized the scenario as implausibly aggressive in its timelines. The report was cited in policy discussions about AI governance. U.S. Vice President JD Vance reportedly read AI 2027 and referenced its warnings in conversations about international AI coordination. More recent reporting noted that the authors of AI 2027 had publicly revised some of their timelines. According to Kokotajlo, developments since the report's original publication suggested a slower path toward fully autonomous AI research systems than initially forecasted.
Read more →
Breakup Notifier

Breakup Notifier was a web application written by product developer and programmer Dan Loewenherz that enabled its registered users to track the relationship status of their Facebook friends. An email notification was sent to the user when one of their Facebook friends changed their relationship status. The app was one of the most viral Facebook app's at the time of its release. It was mentioned in a skit on The Jay Leno Show and news of its popularity was published in Time magazine, The New York Post, CNET, and The Globe and Mail. == Popularity and Facebook controversy == Breakup Notifier gathered 100,000 users in less than 24 hours of its launch and reached a user base of more than 3,000,000 in February 2011. Facebook then blocked the app. Loewenherz later created an app named Crush Notifier, which differs from the original app in that users can check if they have a mutual crush. Breakup Notifier was later unblocked by Facebook and monetized.
Read more →
Automatic1111

AUTOMATIC1111 Stable Diffusion Web UI (SD WebUI, A1111, or Automatic1111) is an open source generative artificial intelligence program that allows users to generate images from a text prompt. It uses Stable Diffusion as the base model for its image capabilities together with a large set of extensions and features to customize its output. == History == SD WebUI was released on GitHub on August 22, 2022, by AUTOMATIC1111, 1 month after the initial release of Stable Diffusion. At the time, Stable Diffusion could only be run via the command line. SD WebUI quickly rose in popularity and has been described as "the most popular tool for running diffusion models locally." SD WebUI is one of the most popular user interfaces for Stable Diffusion, together with ComfyUI. In February 2024, a book was published by ja:Gijutsu Hyoronsha on using Stable Diffusion with SD WebUI in Japanese. As of July 2024, the project had 136,000 stars on GitHub. == Features == SD WebUI uses Gradio for its user interface. Each parameter in the Stable Diffusion program is exposed via a UI interface within SD WebUI. SD WebUI contains additional parameters not included in Stable Diffusion itself, such as support for Low-rank adaptations, ControlNet and custom variational autoencoders. SD WebUI supports prompt weighting, image-to-image based generation, inpainting, outpainting and image scaling. It supports over 20 samplers including DDIM, Euler, Euler a, DPM++ 2M Karras, and UniPC. It is also used for its various optimizations over the base Stable Diffusion. == Stable Diffusion WebUI Forge == Stable Diffusion WebUI Forge (Forge) is a notable fork of SD WebUI started by Lvmin Zhang, who is also the creator of ControlNet and Fooocus. The initial goal of Forge was to improve the performance and features of SD WebUI with the intention to upstream changes back to SD WebUI. One of Forge's optimizations allowed users with low VRAM to generate images faster on some versions of Stable Diffusion. It improved generation speed for users with 8GB and 6GB VRAM by 30-45% and 60-75%, respectively. Forge also includes extra features such as support for more samplers than standard SD WebUI. Some of Forge's optimizations were borrowed from ComfyUI, and others were developed by the Forge team. In August 2024, Forge added support for the Flux diffusion model developed by Black Forest Labs, which is not yet supported by SD WebUI.
Read more →
The Machine Question

The Machine Question: Critical Perspectives on AI, Robots, and Ethics is a 2012 nonfiction book by David J. Gunkel that discusses the evolution of the theory of human ethical responsibilities toward non-human things and to what extent intelligent, autonomous machines can be considered to have legitimate moral responsibilities and what legitimate claims to moral consideration they can hold. The book was awarded as the 2012 Best Single Authored Book by the Communication Ethics Division of the National Communication Association. == Content == The book is spread across three chapters, with the first two chapters focusing on an overall review of the history of philosophy and its discussion of moral agency, moral rights, human rights, and animal rights and the third chapter focusing on what defines "thingness" and why machines have been excluded from moral and ethical consideration due to a misuse of the patient/agent binary. The first chapter, titled Moral Agency, breaks down the history of said agency based on what it included and excluded in various parts of history. Gunkel also raises the conflict between discussing the morality of humans toward objects and the theory of the philosophy of technology that "technology is merely a tool: a means to an end". The main issue, he explains, in defining what constitutes an appropriate moral agent is that there will be things left outside of what is included, as the definition is based on a set of characteristics that will inherently not be all-encompassing. The subject of consciousness is broached and subsequently derided by Gunkel because of it being one of the main arguments against machine rights, while Gunkel points out that no "settled definition" of the term exists and that he considers it no better than a synonym used for "the occultish soul". In addition, the issue of the other minds problem entails that no proper understanding of consciousness can come to pass due to the inability to properly understand the mind of a being that is not oneself. The second chapter, titled Moral Patiency, focuses on the patient end of the topic and discusses the expansion of the fields of animal studies and environmental studies. Gunkel describes moral patients as the ones that are to be the object of moral consideration and deserve such consideration even if they lack their own agency, such as animals, thus allowing moral consideration itself to be broader and more inclusive. The topic of other minds is discussed again when examining the question of whether animals can suffer, a question that Gunkel ultimately abandons because it encounters the same problems that the topic of consciousness does. Especially because the subject of animal rights is often only afforded for the animals deemed to be "cute", but often not including "reptiles, insects, or microbes". Gunkel continues on to examine environmental ethics and information ethics, but finds them to be too anthropocentric, just as all the other examined models have been. The third chapter, titled Thinking Otherwise, proposes a combination of Heideggerian ontology and Levinasian ethics to properly discuss the otherness of technology and machines, but finds that the patient/agent binary is unable to be properly extended to confine the extent of "the machine question". In discussing the land ethic philosophy espoused by Aldo Leopold, Gunkel proposes that it is the entire relationship between agent and patient that should have moral consideration and not a specific definition based on either side, as each part contributes to the relationship as a whole and cannot be removed without breaking that relationship. == Critical reception == Choice: Current Reviews for Academic Libraries writer R. S. Stansbury explained that the book is able to use simple examples to discuss difficult topics and separate ideas and that it would be "useful for philosophy students, and for engineering students interested in exploring the ethical implications of their work". Dominika Dzwonkowska, writing for International Philosophical Quarterly, stated that the "unprecedented value of the book is that Gunkel not only analyzes important aspects of the immediate problem but also that he places his discussion in the context of philosophical discussions on such related issues as rights discourse." Mark Coeckelbergh in Ethics and Information Technology noted that focusing on the question itself of the machine question allows further exploration of machine ethics and the expansion of general ethics and that the book's questions point out that "good, critical philosophical reflection on machines is not only about how we should cope with machines, but also about how we (should) think and what role technology plays (and should play) in this thinking." A review in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews by Colin Allen criticized some of Gunkel's methodology and the indecisiveness of his ultimate answer to the machine question, but also acknowledged that the book "succeeded in connecting the ethics of robots and AI to a much broader ethical discussion than has been represented in the literature on machine ethics to date". Blay Whitby, in a review for AISB Quarterly, lauded The Machine Question for its "clear exposition" and wide range of references to other works, concluding that the book is "essential reading for philosophers interested in AI, robot ethics, or animal ethics". In a twin review of The Machine Question and Robot Ethics: The Ethical and Social Implications of Robots by Patrick Lin, Keith Abney, and George A. Bekey, Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology reviewer Jeff Shaw called Gunkel's book a good introduction to the "complex field of robot ethics" and that both books are "highly recommended to both the general reader as well as to experts in the field of robotics, philosophy, and ethics." In a 2017 paper for Ethics and Information Technology, Katharyn Hogan investigated whether the machine question presented by Gunkel in the book is any different from the longstanding animal question. She concludes that the real question that is revealed from this discussion is whether humans deserve any moral preference over artificial life in the first place.
Read more →