AI Content Editor

AI Content Editor — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  The Outliner of Giants

  The Outliner of Giants was commercial outlining software. Like other outliners, it allowed the user to create a document consisting of a series of nested lists. It was one of a number of browser-based outliners that are delivered as a web application, used through a web browser, rather than being installed as a stand-alone application. The Outliner of Giants was released in 2009. The service was shut down on December 31, 2017 and only exports are allowed at this time. == Feature set == Unlike most other browser-based outliners - which often focus on providing a minimum viable product - the Outliner of Giants had much of the functionality typically associated with a desktop outliner, such as the ability to use of columns to structure information. However, The Outliner of Giants did not support offline editing, requiring an active internet connection in order to make changes to an outline document. === Outlining === Like all outliners, The Outliner of Giants supported the creation of a hierarchy of items, with users modifying the parent-child relationship between items in order to structure a document. This included the ability to promote or demote items up or down the hierarchy, or move an item up or down a list of siblings on the same level. The Outliner of Giants did not support the true cloning of items (where an item can appear to be in multiple places within the hierarchy at the same time), although it did support the copying of single or multiple nodes. === Import === The Outliner of Giants could import both plain text and the OPML XML format, which is commonly used to transfer data between outlining applications. === Editing === Outline documents could be edited using a WYSIWYG editor, as well as the Markdown, and Textile markup languages. === Annotation === The Outliner of Giants supported functions to annotate an outline, such as the ability to add colored labels, highlights and text, as well as tags and hashtags. === Collaboration === The Outliner of Giants supported real-time collaboration, where multiple users could edit the same document, and can see the changes made by another user as they happened. === Publication === Outlines created through The Outliner of Giants could be published directly online through the service, either as outlines, pages or in a blog format. === Export === The Outliner of Giants can export outline data as plain text, HTML, as well as directly to the Google Docs word processor.

  Read more →
• 

  Revelation Space series

  The Revelation Space series is a book series created by Alastair Reynolds. The fictional universe is used as the setting for a number of his novels and stories. Its fictional history follows the human species through various conflicts from the relatively near future (roughly 2200) to approximately 40,000 AD (all the novels to date are set between 2427 and 2858, although certain stories extend beyond this period). It takes its name from Revelation Space (2000), which was the first published novel set in the universe. == Universe == The Revelation Space universe is a fictional universe set in a future version of our world, with the addition of a number of extraterrestrial species and advanced technologies that are not necessarily grounded in current science. It is, nonetheless, somewhat "harder" than most examples of space opera, relying to a considerable extent on science Reynolds believes to be possible; in particular, faster-than-light travel is largely absent. Reynolds has said he prefers to keep the science in his fiction plausible, but he will adopt science he believes to be impossible when it is necessary for the story. The name "Revelation Space universe" has been used by Alastair Reynolds in both the introductory text in the collections Diamond Dogs, Turquoise Days and Galactic North, and also on several editions of the novels set in the universe. He considered calling it the "Exordium universe" after a key plot device, but found that the name was already in use. While a great deal of science fiction reflects either very optimistic or dystopian visions of the human future, the Revelation Space universe is notable in that human societies have not developed to either positive or negative extremes. Instead, despite their dramatically advanced technology, they are similar to those of today in terms of their moral ambiguity and mixture of cruelty and decency, corruption and opportunity. The Revelation Space universe contains elements of Lovecraftian horror, with one posthuman entity stating explicitly that some things in the universe are fundamentally beyond human or transhuman understanding. Nevertheless, the main storyline is essentially optimistic, with humans continuing to survive even in a universe that seems fundamentally hostile to intelligent life. The name "Revelation Space" appears in the novel of the same name during Philip Lascaille's account of his visit to Lascaille's Shroud, an anomalous region of the local universe. Lascaille says that "the key" to something momentous "was explained to me [. . .] while I was in Revelation Space." === Chronology === The chronology of the Revelation Space universe extends to roughly one billion years into the past, when the "Dawn War" — a galaxy-spanning conflict over the availability of various natural resources — resulted in almost all sentient life in the galaxy being wiped out. One race of survivors, later termed the Inhibitors, having converted itself to machine form, predicted that the impending Andromeda–Milky Way collision, roughly 3 billion years in our future, may severely damage the capacity of either galaxy to support life. Consequently, they planned to adjust the positions of stars in order to limit the damage the collision would cause. Also central to the Inhibitor project was the eradication of all species above a certain technological level until the crisis was over, as they believed no organic species would be capable of co-operating on such a large-scale project (an in-universe solution to the Fermi paradox). Whilst they were relatively successful, certain advanced species were able to hide from Inhibitor forces, or even fight back. In human history, during the 21st and 22nd centuries, numerous wars occurred, and a flotilla of generation ships was deployed to colonise a planet orbiting the star 61 Cygni (which becomes a major segment of the plot of Chasm City). The flotilla later reached a planet termed Sky's Edge, which was to be embroiled in war until human civilisation there was eradicated. Meanwhile, in the Solar System in 2190, a faction known as the Conjoiners emerged as a result of increased experimentation with neural implants. In response, the Coalition for Neural Purity was formed, opposed to the Conjoiners. Nevil Clavain, one of the series's primary protagonists, fought on the side of the Coalition in the ensuing war, but defected later on after being betrayed. Clavain, and the Conjoiners, succeeded in escaping the Solar System and left for surrounding stars. For the next few centuries, the so-called Belle Epoque, humanity enjoyed a period of relative peace and prosperity, with several planets being colonised. The most successful planet of all was Yellowstone, a planet orbiting the star Epsilon Eridani, site of the Glitter Band / Rust Belt and Chasm City. Technologies developed included the Conjoiner Drive, a gift from the Conjoiners (who resumed contact with humanity at an unknown time), advanced nanotechnology, and numerous other devices. With the exception of an attempted takeover of the Glitter Band, no major incidents affected humanity during this time. The Belle Epoque was terminated by the advent of the Melding Plague in 2510, a nanotechnological virus that destroyed all other nanotechnology it came into contact with. Only the Conjoiners were unaffected by this disaster, which devastated the civilisation around Yellowstone. War between the Conjoiners and the Demarchists, a rival faction, erupted as a result of the plague. Meanwhile, activities around a far-flung human colony on the planet Resurgam, orbiting the star Delta Pavonis, inadvertently attracted the attention of the Inhibitors. The Conjoiners, also made aware of this event, sent Clavain to recover the exceedingly powerful "Cache Weapons" from this system (said weapons having been stolen from the Conjoiners centuries before) so that they could be used to fend off the Inhibitors while the Conjoiners escaped. Clavain instead defected from the Conjoiners, intending to use the weapons to protect all of humanity. Skade, another Conjoiner, was sent to stop him and recover the weapons. They fought around the Resurgam system, with Clavain and his allies eventually obtaining the weapons. Clavain's ally Remontoire agreed to seek out alien assistance from the Hades Matrix, a nearby alien computer disguised as a neutron star, whilst Clavain sheltered refugees from Resurgam on another planet, later termed Ararat. Remontoire returned in 2675, only a few days after Clavain's death at the hands of Skade, who had arrived with him. Remontoire and his allies were now at war with the Inhibitors, assisted by alien technology obtained from Hades. Even so, it was realised that the humans would not last indefinitely, and Clavain's people, now led by Scorpio, decided to seek out the mysterious "Shadows": a race believed to be near a moon called Hela, site of a theocracy. Aura, daughter of Ana Khouri (an ally of Remontoire) infiltrated the theocracy under the pseudonym Rashmika Els. After considerable conflict, Scorpio and Aura realised that contacting the Shadows was inadvisable. With the later assistance of the Conjoiner known as Glass, and of Clavain's estranged brother Warren, Scorpio and Aura (now going by the name Lady Arek) instead succeeded in contacting the Nestbuilders, an alien race who provided them with weapons capable of defeating the Inhibitors. As such, the Inhibitors were effectively eradicated from human space, with buffer zones and frontiers established to keep them at bay. Humanity then enjoyed a second, 400-year-long golden age. After this, however, came the Greenfly outbreak, in which human civilisation was destroyed by a rogue terraforming system of human origin that destroyed planets and converted them to millions of orbiting, vegetation-filled habitats. The Greenfly began to subsume most of human space, with all efforts to stop them failing, due to the Greenfly having assimilated aspects of both the Melding Plague and Inhibitor technology. The storyline of the Revelation Space universe thus far concludes with humanity leaving the Milky Way galaxy in an attempt to set up a new civilisation elsewhere. == Books and stories set in the universe == All short stories and novellas in this universe to date are collected in Galactic North and Diamond Dogs, Turquoise Days, with the exception of "Monkey Suit", "The Last Log of the Lachrimosa", "Night Passage", "Open and Shut", and "Plague Music". === The Inhibitor Sequence === Revelation Space. London: Gollancz, 2000. ISBN 978-0-575-06875-9. Redemption Ark. London: Gollancz, 2002. ISBN 978-0-575-06879-7. Absolution Gap. London: Gollancz, 2003. ISBN 978-0-575-07434-7. Inhibitor Phase. London: Gollancz, 2021. ISBN 978-0-575-09075-0. === Prefect Dreyfus Emergencies === The Prefect. London: Gollancz, 2007, ISBN 978-0-575-07716-4. (Re-released as Aurora Rising in 2017, ISBN 978-1-473-22336-3) Elysium Fire. London: Gollancz, 2018, ISBN 978-0-575-09059-0.

  Read more →
• 

  Deep learning speech synthesis

  Deep learning speech synthesis refers to the application of deep learning models to generate natural-sounding human speech from written text (text-to-speech) or spectrum (vocoder). Deep neural networks are trained using large amounts of recorded speech and, in the case of a text-to-speech system, the associated labels and/or input text. == Formulation == Given an input text or some sequence of linguistic units Y {\displaystyle Y} , the target speech X {\displaystyle X} can be derived by X = arg ⁡ max P ( X | Y , θ ) {\displaystyle X=\arg \max P(X|Y,\theta )} where θ {\displaystyle \theta } is the set of model parameters. Typically, the input text will first be passed to an acoustic feature generator, then the acoustic features are passed to the neural vocoder. For the acoustic feature generator, the loss function is typically L1 loss (Mean Absolute Error, MAE) or L2 loss (Mean Square Error, MSE). These loss functions impose a constraint that the output acoustic feature distributions must be Gaussian or Laplacian. In practice, since the human voice band ranges from approximately 300 to 4000 Hz, the loss function will be designed to have more penalty on this range: l o s s = α loss human + ( 1 − α ) loss other {\displaystyle loss=\alpha {\text{loss}}_{\text{human}}+(1-\alpha ){\text{loss}}_{\text{other}}} where loss human {\displaystyle {\text{loss}}_{\text{human}}} is the loss from human voice band and α {\displaystyle \alpha } is a scalar, typically around 0.5. The acoustic feature is typically a spectrogram or Mel scale. These features capture the time-frequency relation of the speech signal, and thus are sufficient to generate intelligent outputs. The Mel-frequency cepstrum feature used in the speech recognition task is not suitable for speech synthesis, as it reduces too much information. == History == In September 2016, DeepMind released WaveNet, which demonstrated that deep learning-based models are capable of modeling raw waveforms and generating speech from acoustic features like spectrograms or mel-spectrograms. Although WaveNet was initially considered to be computationally expensive and slow to be used in consumer products at the time, a year after its release, DeepMind unveiled a modified version of WaveNet known as "Parallel WaveNet," a production model 1,000 faster than the original. This was followed by Google AI's Tacotron 2 in 2018, which demonstrated that neural networks could produce highly natural speech synthesis but required substantial training data—typically tens of hours of audio—to achieve acceptable quality. Tacotron 2 used an autoencoder architecture with attention mechanisms to convert input text into mel-spectrograms, which were then converted to waveforms using a separate neural vocoder. When trained on smaller datasets, such as 2 hours of speech, the output quality degraded while still being able to maintain intelligible speech, and with just 24 minutes of training data, Tacotron 2 failed to produce intelligible speech. In 2019, Microsoft Research introduced FastSpeech, which addressed speed limitations in autoregressive models like Tacotron 2. FastSpeech utilized a non-autoregressive architecture that enabled parallel sequence generation, significantly reducing inference time while maintaining audio quality. Its feedforward transformer network with length regulation allowed for one-shot prediction of the full mel-spectrogram sequence, avoiding the sequential dependencies that bottlenecked previous approaches. The same year saw the release of HiFi-GAN, a generative adversarial network (GAN)-based vocoder that improved the efficiency of waveform generation while producing high-fidelity speech. In 2020, the release of Glow-TTS introduced a flow-based approach that allowed for fast inference and voice style transfer capabilities. In March 2020, the free text-to-speech website 15.ai was launched. 15.ai gained widespread international attention in early 2021 for its ability to synthesize emotionally expressive speech of fictional characters from popular media with minimal amount of data. The creator of 15.ai (known pseudonymously as 15) stated that 15 seconds of training data is sufficient to perfectly clone a person's voice (hence its name, "15.ai"), a significant reduction from the previously known data requirement of tens of hours. 15.ai is credited as the first platform to popularize AI voice cloning in memes and content creation. 15.ai used a multi-speaker model that enabled simultaneous training of multiple voices and emotions, implemented sentiment analysis using DeepMoji, and supported precise pronunciation control via ARPABET. The 15-second data efficiency benchmark was later corroborated by OpenAI in 2024. == Semi-supervised learning == Currently, self-supervised learning has gained much attention through better use of unlabelled data. Research has shown that, with the aid of self-supervised loss, the need for paired data decreases. == Zero-shot speaker adaptation == Zero-shot speaker adaptation is promising because a single model can generate speech with various speaker styles and characteristic. In June 2018, Google proposed to use pre-trained speaker verification models as speaker encoders to extract speaker embeddings. The speaker encoders then become part of the neural text-to-speech models, so that it can determine the style and characteristics of the output speech. This procedure has shown the community that it is possible to use only a single model to generate speech with multiple styles. == Neural vocoder == In deep learning-based speech synthesis, neural vocoders play an important role in generating high-quality speech from acoustic features. The WaveNet model proposed in 2016 achieves excellent performance on speech quality. Wavenet factorised the joint probability of a waveform x = { x 1 , . . . , x T } {\displaystyle \mathbf {x} =\{x_{1},...,x_{T}\}} as a product of conditional probabilities as follows p θ ( x ) = ∏ t = 1 T p ( x t | x 1 , . . . , x t − 1 ) {\displaystyle p_{\theta }(\mathbf {x} )=\prod _{t=1}^{T}p(x_{t}|x_{1},...,x_{t-1})} where θ {\displaystyle \theta } is the model parameter including many dilated convolution layers. Thus, each audio sample x t {\displaystyle x_{t}} is conditioned on the samples at all previous timesteps. However, the auto-regressive nature of WaveNet makes the inference process dramatically slow. To solve this problem, Parallel WaveNet was proposed. Parallel WaveNet is an inverse autoregressive flow-based model which is trained by knowledge distillation with a pre-trained teacher WaveNet model. Since such inverse autoregressive flow-based models are non-auto-regressive when performing inference, the inference speed is faster than real-time. Meanwhile, Nvidia proposed a flow-based WaveGlow model, which can also generate speech faster than real-time. However, despite the high inference speed, parallel WaveNet has the limitation of needing a pre-trained WaveNet model, so that WaveGlow takes many weeks to converge with limited computing devices. This issue has been solved by Parallel WaveGAN, which learns to produce speech through multi-resolution spectral loss and GAN learning strategies.

  Read more →
• 

  Herbrand Award

  The Herbrand Award for Distinguished Contributions to Automated Reasoning is an award given by the Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE), Inc., (although it predates the formal incorporation of CADE) to honour persons or groups for important contributions to the field of automated deduction. The award is named after the French scientist Jacques Herbrand and given at most once per CADE or International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR). It comes with a prize of US$1,000. Anyone can be nominated, the award is awarded after a vote among CADE trustees and former recipients, usually with input from the CADE/IJCAR programme committee. == Recipients == Past award recipients are: === 1990s === Larry Wos (1992) Woody Bledsoe (1994) John Alan Robinson (1996) Wu Wenjun (1997) Gérard Huet (1998) Robert S. Boyer and J Strother Moore (1999) === 2000s === William W. McCune (2000) Donald W. Loveland (2001) Mark E. Stickel (2002). Peter B. Andrews (2003) Harald Ganzinger (2004) Martin Davis (2005) Wolfgang Bibel (2006) Alan Bundy (2007) Edmund M. Clarke (2008) Deepak Kapur (2009) === 2010s === David Plaisted (2010) Nachum Dershowitz (2011) Melvin Fitting (2012) C. Greg Nelson (2013) Robert L. Constable (2014) Andrei Voronkov (2015) Zohar Manna and Richard Waldinger (2016) Lawrence C. Paulson (2017) Bruno Buchberger (2018) Nikolaj Bjørner and Leonardo de Moura (2019) === 2020s === Franz Baader (2020) Tobias Nipkow (2021) Natarajan Shankar (2022) Moshe Vardi (2023) Armin Biere (2024) Aart Middeldorp (2025)

  Read more →
• 

  Affinity (software)

  Affinity is a graphics editor developed by Serif, a subsidiary of Canva. It is simultaneously a vector graphics editor, a raster graphics editor and a desktop publishing application. It was first released in 2025 as a successor to Serif's Affinity Designer, Affinity Photo and Affinity Publisher, uniting the three editors into one application. While the previous versions competed individually against Adobe's Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign, Affinity 3.0 integrates their functionality into a single application. It uses a freemium model monetized by AI features exclusive to Canva Pro subscribers. == Functionality == Affinity is divided into a number of workspaces ("studios"), which are equivalent to the previous suite of Affinity applications: "vector" for vector graphics (Designer), "pixel" for raster editing (Photo), and "layout" for desktop publishing (Publisher). Additionally, it introduces the ability to create custom workspaces. The application supports real-time previews and non-destructive editing, which are based on GPU acceleration. Supported file formats include Adobe Photoshop, InDesign and Illustrator files, PDF, SVG, and TIFF, as well as a custom .af file format. === Vector editing === === Raster editing === Affinity includes photo editing tools including adjustments, masks, blend modes, batch processing, and retouching facilities. Additionally, the application can develop RAW files, similar to Adobe Lightroom. === Desktop publishing === Publishing features include master pages, text styles, and advanced typography. === AI features === The application supports Canva's existing AI features, such as background removal and generative fill. This requires a Canva subscription. == Development == === Background and acquisition (2014–2024) === Serif launched the original Affinity suite starting with Affinity Designer in 2014, followed by Photo (2015) and Publisher (2019). The software gained popularity for its one-time purchase model, contrasting with Adobe's subscription-based Creative Cloud. In November 2022, Serif released Version 2 of the suite, introducing a "Universal License" that covered all three apps across all platforms. In March 2024, Canva acquired Serif for approximately A$580 million (£300 million). Following user backlash regarding a potential shift to subscriptions, Canva and Serif issued a joint "Pledge" committing to four key principles: fair pricing, no mandatory subscriptions, perpetual licenses for existing products, and continued development of Affinity as a standalone suite. === Unified release (2025) === In September 2025, Serif pulled all existing versions of Affinity Designer, Affinity Photo and Affinity Publisher from sale ahead an upcoming announcement on 30 October; also ahead of the announcement, the iPadOS versions of the Affinity suite became free on App Store. During a "Creative Freedom" keynote on 30 October 2025, Canva released a new version now simply branded as "Affinity" (also known as "Affinity by Canva"), and referred to internally as version 3.0. Version 3 drops the separate applications and integrates their functionality into a singular application, and adds the ability to export directly to the Canva platform. It also adds a Canva AI studio, including background removal, "Expand & Edit", and generative fill. As of version 3, Affinity has switched to a freemium model; it is now available at no charge to users, although access to Canva AI features are locked behind the existing Canva Pro subscription service. Serif stated that the perpetually-licensed version 2 will remain available to existing owners, although it will no longer be actively maintained. The new version is currently available for macOS and Windows only, with an iPadOS version to be released soon. == Reception == The change in business model by Canva in 2025 was met with mixed reception, including concerns about its incorporation of AI features. Some users were concerned that their projects would be used for machine learning purposes, or that future versions would suffer from a lack of maintenance or become adware. Additionally, some felt it turned Affinity into fundamentally subscription-based software, given the prevalence of these features in professional contexts. Affinity publicly stated on social media that it would remain "free forever", users' projects would not be used to train AI models, and that "Canva has built a sustainable business model that allows this kind of generosity. And when more professionals use Affinity, Canva can sell more seats into businesses."

  Read more →
• 

  Generative AI pornography

  Generative AI pornography or simply AI pornography is a digitally created pornography produced through generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies. Unlike traditional pornography, which involves real actors and cameras, this content is synthesized entirely by AI algorithms. These algorithms, including generative adversarial networks (GANs) and text-to-image models, generate lifelike images, videos, or animations from textual descriptions or datasets. == Functions and production strategies == AI pornography platforms, beyond account creation and social media linking, primarily enable users to generate sexual images through feature selection or text prompting. Users can customize bodies, clothing, and sociodemographic traits, and browse categorized galleries of user‑generated content. Several sites also support short pornographic videos or GIFs and modification tools such as nudifiers, deepfakes, and facemorphing. Platforms often allow fine‑tuning of parameters such as settings, style, or theme, and provide prompt enhancers or suggestions to improve outputs. Users may edit generated images, refine prior prompts, modify others’ work, or upload personal material as a basis, with iterative and collaborative content creation. Some websites additionally host interactive “erobots,” customizable in real time for appearance, personality, memories, speech, and profession, enabling tailored sexual and non‑sexual interactions. Less common features include VR integration, AI porn games, audio or doodle prompts, and consensual replication of individuals with verification. == History == The use of generative AI in the adult industry began in the late 2010s, initially focusing on AI-generated art, music, and visual content. This trend accelerated in 2022 with Stability AI's release of Stable Diffusion (SD), an open-source text-to-image model that enables users to generate images, including NSFW content, from text prompts using the LAION-Aesthetics subset of the LAION-5B dataset. Despite Stability AI's warnings against sexual imagery, SD's public release led to dedicated communities exploring both artistic and explicit content, sparking ethical debates over open-access AI and its use in adult media. By 2020, AI tools had advanced to generate highly realistic adult content, amplifying calls for regulation. === AI-generated influencers === One application of generative AI technology is the creation of AI-generated influencers on platforms such as OnlyFans and Instagram. These AI personas interact with users in ways that can mimic real human engagement, offering an entirely synthetic but convincing experience. While popular among niche audiences, these virtual influencers have prompted discussions about authenticity, consent, and the blurring line between human and AI-generated content, especially in adult entertainment. === The growth of AI porn sites === By 2023, websites dedicated to AI-generated adult content had gained traction, catering to audiences seeking customizable experiences. These platforms allow users to create or view AI-generated pornography tailored to their preferences. These platforms enable users to create or view AI-generated adult content appealing to different preferences through prompts and tags, customizing body type, facial features, and art styles. Tags further refine the output, creating niche and diverse content. Many sites feature extensive image libraries and continuous content feeds, combining personalization with discovery and enhancing user engagement. AI porn sites, therefore, attract those seeking unique or niche experiences, sparking debates on creativity and the ethical boundaries of AI in adult media. == Ethical concerns and misuse == The growth of generative AI pornography has also attracted some cause for criticism. AI technology can be exploited to create non-consensual pornographic material, posing risks similar to those seen with deepfake revenge porn and AI-generated NCII (Non-Consensual Intimate Image). A 2023 analysis found that 98% of deepfake videos online are pornographic, with 99% of the victims being women. Some famous celebrities victims of deepfake include Scarlett Johansson, Taylor Swift, and Maisie Williams. OpenAI is exploring whether NSFW content, such as erotica, can be responsibly generated in age-appropriate contexts while maintaining its ban on deepfakes. This proposal has attracted criticism from child safety campaigners who argue it undermines OpenAI's mission to develop "safe and beneficial" AI. Additionally, the Internet Watch Foundation has raised concerns about AI being used to generate sexual abuse content involving children. === AI-generated non-consensual intimate imagery (AI Undress) === Generative AI have extensively been used to produce pornography images and videos of non-consenting individuals. 404 Media reported a particular AI generated porn bot on Telegram has more than 100,000 monthly users. Alibaba, the Chinese tech company, released an AI video generation model in 2025 called Wan 2.1, which was modified to produce non-consensual pornography. Several US states are taking actions against using deepfake apps and sharing them on the internet. In 2024, San Francisco filed a landmark lawsuit to shut down "undress" apps that allow users to generate non-consensual AI nude images, citing violations of state laws. The case aligns with California's recent legislation—SB 926, SB 942, and SB 981—championed by Senators Aisha Wahab and Josh Becker and signed by Governor Gavin Newsom. These bills aim to protect individuals from AI-generated explicit images by criminalizing non-consensual distribution, mandating disclosures, and empowering victims to report and remove harmful content from platforms. === Differences from deepfake pornography === While both generative AI pornography and deepfake pornography rely on synthetic media, they differ in their methods and ethical considerations. Deepfake pornography typically involves altering existing footage of real individuals, often without their consent, using AI to superimpose faces, undress said persons, or modify scenes. In contrast, generative AI pornography is created using algorithms, producing hyper-realistic content without the need to upload real pictures of people. Hany Farid, digital image analysis expert, also described the difference between "AI porn" and "deepfake porn." == Legality == The legality of generative AI pornography varies widely by jurisdiction and remains an evolving issue. In some countries, laws addressing digital impersonation, obscenity, or deepfake technologies may indirectly apply, particularly when AI-generated content involves the likeness of real individuals without consent. The absence of a physical performer further complicates traditional regulatory frameworks, which are often grounded in performer protection and distribution laws. In the United States, legal responses have primarily focused on non-consensual deepfakes and impersonation. Some states, such as Virginia, California, and Texas, have enacted legislation criminalising the creation or distribution of non-consensual explicit deepfake content. However, there is no comprehensive federal law addressing AI-generated pornography, leaving a patchwork of legal interpretations and enforcement standards across different jurisdictions. According to a 2023 report, South Korea accounts for approximately 53% of global deepfake pornography production. In September 2024, South Korea's National Assembly amended the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes, introducing two significant reforms related to deepfake content. The first criminalises the possession, viewing, purchase, and storage of non-consensual deepfake material, with penalties of up to three years in prison or fines of up to 30 million won (approximately USD 20,000). The second reform specifically addresses the exploitation of minors, establishing that individuals who use deepfakes to threaten or blackmail minors face a minimum of three years' imprisonment, and at least five years if they coerce minors into unwanted acts. In England and Wales the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 has legislated against the creation, or the request for creation, of intimate images by nudifying software or websites of another person who has not consented to this. However as of January 2026 this has not yet been brought into force.

  Read more →
• 

  AI-assisted targeting in the Gaza Strip

  As part of the Gaza war, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have used artificial intelligence to rapidly and automatically perform much of the process of determining what to bomb. Israel has greatly expanded the bombing of the Gaza Strip, which in previous wars had been limited by the Israeli Air Force running out of targets. These tools include the Gospel, an AI which automatically reviews surveillance data looking for buildings, equipment and people thought to belong to the enemy, and upon finding them, recommends bombing targets to a human analyst who may then decide whether to pass it along to the field. Another is Lavender, an "AI-powered database" which lists tens of thousands of Palestinian men linked by AI to Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and which is also used for target recommendation. Critics have argued the use of these AI tools puts civilians at risk, blurs accountability, and results in militarily disproportionate violence in violation of international humanitarian law. == The Gospel == Israel uses an AI system dubbed "Habsora", "the Gospel", to determine which targets the Israeli Air Force would bomb. It automatically provides a targeting recommendation to a human analyst, who decides whether to pass it along to soldiers in the field. The recommendations can be anything from individual fighters, rocket launchers, Hamas command posts, to private homes of suspected Hamas or Islamic Jihad members. AI can process military intelligence far faster than humans. Retired Lt Gen. Aviv Kohavi, head of the IDF until 2023, stated that the system could produce 100 bombing targets in Gaza a day, with real-time recommendations which ones to attack, where human analysts might produce 50 a year. A lecturer interviewed by NPR estimated these figures as 50–100 targets in 300 days for 20 intelligence officers, and 200 targets within 10–12 days for the Gospel. === Technological background === The Gospel uses machine learning, where an AI is tasked with identifying commonalities in vast amounts of data (e.g. scans of cancerous tissue, photos of a facial expression, surveillance of Hamas members identified by human analysts), then looking for those commonalities in new material. What information the Gospel uses is not known, but it is thought to combine surveillance data from diverse sources in enormous amounts. Recommendations are based on pattern-matching. A person with enough similarities to other people labeled as enemy combatants may be labelled a combatant themselves. Regarding the suitability of AIs for the task, NPR cited Heidy Khlaaf, engineering director of AI Assurance at the technology security firm Trail of Bits, as saying "AI algorithms are notoriously flawed with high error rates observed across applications that require precision, accuracy, and safety." Bianca Baggiarini, lecturer at the Australian National University's Strategic and Defence Studies Centre wrote AIs are "more effective in predictable environments where concepts are objective, reasonably stable, and internally consistent." She contrasted this with telling the difference between a combatant and non-combatant, which even humans frequently can't do. Khlaaf went on to point out that such a system's decisions depend entirely on the data it's trained on, and are not based on reasoning, factual evidence or causation, but solely on statistical probability. === Operation === The IAF ran out of targets to strike in the 2014 war and 2021 crisis. In an interview on France 24, investigative journalist Yuval Abraham of +972 Magazine stated that to maintain military pressure, and due to political pressure to continue the war, the military would bomb the same places twice. Since then, the integration of AI tools has significantly sped up the selection of targets. In early November, the IDF stated more than 12,000 targets in Gaza had been identified by the target administration division that uses the Gospel. NPR wrote on December 14 that it was unclear how many targets from the Gospel had been acted upon, but that the Israeli military said it was currently striking as many as 250 targets a day. The bombing, too, has intensified to what the December 14 article called an astonishing pace: the Israeli military stated at the time it had struck more than 22,000 targets inside Gaza, at a daily rate more than double that of the 2021 conflict, more than 3,500 of them since the collapse of the truce on December 1. Early in the offensive the head of the Air Force stated his forces only struck military targets, but added: "We are not being surgical." Once a recommendation is accepted, another AI, Fire Factory, cuts assembling the attack down from hours to minutes by calculating munition loads, prioritizing and assigning targets to aircraft and drones, and proposing a schedule, according to a pre-war Bloomberg article that described such AI tools as tailored for a military confrontation and proxy war with Iran. One change that The Guardian noted is that since senior Hamas leaders disappear into tunnels at the start of an offensive, systems such as the Gospel have allowed the IDF to locate and attack a much larger pool of more junior Hamas operatives. It cited an official who worked on targeting decisions in previous Gaza operations as saying that while the homes of junior Hamas members had previously not been targeted for bombing, the official believes the houses of suspected Hamas operatives were now targeted regardless of rank. In the France 24 interview, Abraham, of +972 Magazine, characterized this as enabling the systematization of dropping a 2000 lb bomb into a home to kill one person and everybody around them, something that had previously been done to a very small group of senior Hamas leaders. NPR cited a report by +972 Magazine and its sister publication Local Call as asserting the system is being used to manufacture targets so that Israeli military forces can continue to bombard Gaza at an enormous rate, punishing the general Palestinian population. NPR noted it had not verified this; it was unclear how many targets are being generated by AI alone, but there had been a substantial increase in targeting, with an enormous civilian toll. In principle, the combination of a computer's speed to identify opportunities and a human's judgment to evaluate them can enable more precise attacks and fewer civilian casualties. Israeli military and media have emphasized this capacity to minimize harm to non-combatants. Richard Moyes, researcher and head of the NGO Article 36, pointed to "the widespread flattening of an urban area with heavy explosive weapons" to question these claims, while Lucy Suchman, professor emeritus at Lancaster University, described the bombing as "aimed at maximum devastation of the Gaza Strip". The Guardian wrote that when a strike was authorized on private homes of those identified as Hamas or Islamic Jihad operatives, target researchers knew in advance the expected number of civilians killed, each target had a file containing a collateral damage score stipulating how many civilians were likely to be killed in a strike, and according to a senior Israeli military source, operatives use a "very accurate" measurement of the rate of civilians evacuating a building shortly before a strike. "We use an algorithm to evaluate how many civilians are remaining. It gives us a green, yellow, red, like a traffic signal." ==== 2021 use ==== Kohavi compared the target division using the Gospel to a machine and stated that once the machine was activated in the war of May 2021, it generated 100 targets a day, with half of them being attacked, in contrast with 50 targets in Gaza per year beforehand. Approximately 200 targets came from the Gospel out of the 1,500 targets Israel struck in Gaza in the war, including both static and moving targets according to the military. The Jewish Institute for National Security of America's after action report identified an issue, stating the system had data on what was a target, but lacked data on what wasn't. The system depends entirely on training data, and intel that human analysts had examined and deemed didn't constitute a target had been discarded, risking bias. The vice president expressed his hopes this had since been rectified. === Organization === The Gospel is used by the military's target administration division (or Directorate of Targets or Targeting Directorate), which was formed in 2019 in the IDF's intelligence directorate to address the air force running out of targets to bomb, and which Kohavi described as "powered by AI capabilities" and including hundreds of officers of soldiers. In addition to its wartime role, The Guardian wrote it'd helped the IDF build a database of between 30,000 and 40,000 suspected militants in recent years, and that systems such as the Gospel had played a critical role in building lists of individuals authorized to be assassinated. The Gospel was developed by Unit 8200 of the Israeli Intelligence C

  Read more →
• 

  AI Snake Oil

  AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can't, and How to Tell the Difference is a 2024 non-fiction book written by scholars Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor. It is a critique of the tech industry's overly inflated promises and capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) as well as a debunking of the flawed science fueling AI hype while attempting to outline both the potential positives and negatives that come with different modes of the technology. == Contents == === Publication === The book was published in September 2024 by the Princeton University Press. AI Snake Oil consists of 360 pages and features eight chapters, and sections for acknowledgements, references, and an index. An updated edition with a new preface and epilogue by the authors was published in September 2025. The authors use the term "AI snake oil" derived from the U.S. idiom for a fraudulent remedy, to describe overhyped AI systems. === Chapter one: Introduction === Narayanan and Kapoor argue that many individuals do not yet have the literacy to detect functioning aspects of AI compared to potential snake oil, which they identify as "AI that does not and cannot work as advertised". Some of the major examples utilized by the authors include Allstate's 2013 use of predictive AI, as well as the concern surrounding actors and AI attempting to replicate or use their likeness. Important discussions regarding discrimination are brought up and explored in the first chapter, including the false arrests of six Black individuals due to errors with AI facial recognition tools. The chapter concludes with a comparison to the Industrial Revolution, where Narayanan and Kapoor highlight the extensive human labour that is necessary for artificial intelligence technologies to function. === Chapter two: How Predictive AI Goes Wrong === Chapter two focuses on predictive artificial intelligence, and criticizes the overestimation of the capabilities of the technology. === Chapter three: Why Can't AI Predict the Future? === Chapter three works to inform the reader about the history of early computational prediction attempts, with examples from companies like Simulatics. === Chapter four: The Long Road to Generative AI === The fourth chapter goes in more in-depth in explorations of generative AI. Generative AI software examples include ChatGPT, Midjourney, and DALL-E. The section begins with a positive example of generative AI. As the chapter progresses, the authors begin to provide examples of harm produced by generative AI, including the suicide of a Belgian man after connecting with Chai, a generative chatbot. Issues of deepfakes and preservation of artistic property are also discussed. The use of generative AI to create non-consensual pornographic deepfake content is discussed in relation to female celebrities. === Chapter five: Is Advanced AI an Existential Threat? === The fifth chapter draws attention the AGI, or Artificial General Intelligence. The authors describe AGI as "AI that can perform most or economically relevant tasks as effectively as any human". They summarize that many contributors to the field of artificial intelligence believe AGI to be an impending threat that demands attention. However, they argue that the perceived threat of AGI would only exist if the technology continually functioned reliably. In order to better illustrate the hype surrounding AGI, Narayanan and Kapoor use the Ladder of Generality, which is described as a visual tool in which "each rung represents a way of computing that is more flexible, and more general, than the previous one". They note that we are not yet aware of the next rungs on the ladder, or if the ladder will eventually result in a dead end. The rungs that have been identified so far are as follows: (0, or floor) special purpose hardware, (1) programmable computers, (2) stored program computers, (3) machine learning, (4) deep learning, (5) pretrained models, and, finally, (6) instruction-tuned models. The potential for future rungs and what those rungs might be are currently undetermined. The chapter also discusses the ELIZA effect, which Lawrence Switzky discusses in his article "ELIZA Effects". Switzky attributes the coined term ELIZA Effect to Sherry Turke, who defined it as "our more general tendency to treat responsive computer programs as more intelligent than they really are". === Chapter six: Why Can't AI Fix Social Media? === The sixth chapter focuses on content moderation, why it is important, and how it has been and could be affected by artificial automation. The first issue raised in regard to AI-driven content moderation is the inability for computers and machines to understand context and nuance, resulting in potential for discriminatory moderation and shadow banning. While they note that there are issues with automating content moderation, Narayanan and Kapoor also highlight the psychological impact on human content moderators and their labour. They indicate the hidden labour behind moderation, which is often outsourced to less developed countries, where labourers sort through potentially traumatizing content for pay. However, the discussion focuses more heavily on why automated moderation can be problematic, including discriminatory algorithms and lack of nuance. To balance their argument, issues of discrimination and bias are also discussed in relation the human content moderators. To automate moderation, there are two types of AI used, which are fingerprint matching and machine learning. === Chapter seven: Why Do Myths about AI Persist? === The seventh chapter outlines possible factors that contribute to hype surrounding AI. Narayanan and Kapoor explain how companies often promote their new AI models without properly disclosing how the model works, and what it is learning from. They attribute hype to several different groups, including journalists, researchers, and companies. They explain the impact of companies and the misplaced hype that they spread can be attributed to greed and a desire to grow corporate funds. For journalists, one of the stated sources of hype, they argue that news media has a tendency to prioritize financial incentives over validity and quality of writing. As well, Narayanan and Kapoor point out the emergence of company statement regurgitation in news media, leading to clickbait. Hype from researchers is potentially linked to lack of reproducibility in studies as well as leakage, which occurs when AI models are tested on their training data. === Chapter eight: Where do we go from here? === The final chapter, chapter eight, turns its attention to the future. The authors express their ideas and predictions for how the technology will evolve and be utilized in the upcoming years. == Authors == Author Narayanan is a computer science professor at Princeton University. Kapoor is a doctoral candidate at the same university, and both scholars are located at the Center for Information Technology at Princeton. In 2023, Narayanan and Kapoor appeared on the TIME100 Artificial Intelligence list, which features influential figures in the field. == Reception == Nature, a science and technology peer-reviewed journal, released an article highlighting the top "10 essential reads from the past year", listing Arvind Narayanan and Sayash Kapoor's AI Snake Oil. The article states the that text is "one of the best on this controversial subject". Elizabeth Quill, in her review of the text in Science News, writes that the authors "squarely achieve their stated goal: to empower people to distinguish AI that works well from AI snake oil". Joshua Rothman of The New Yorker writes that "compared with many technologists, Narayanan, Kapoor, and Vallor [Shannon Vallor, University of Edinburgh], are deeply skeptical about today's A.I. technology and what it can achieve. Perhaps they shouldn't be". Rothman argues, following an interview with prominent computer scientist Geoffrey Hinton of University of Toronto, that the potential for AI to replicate complexity is already here and continues to be heavily funded, enhancing the prospective capabilities of the technology. However, he does praise the author's ability to address questions regarding the existential human experience. Alexya Martinez discusses the text in a book review for Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, critiquing AI Snake Oil for its extensive focus on the West. Martinez writes that Narayanan and Kapoor "do not fully explore how AI impacts other countries", and suggests more focus on countries outside of the United States to enhance their argument.

  Read more →
• 

  ArcSoft ShowBiz

  ShowBiz is a video editor by ArcSoft for the Windows operating system. It can create VCD and DVDs and can also export to the formats AVI, MPEG, WMV, and MOV. ShowBiz also contains a DVD burning and menu building feature. As of 2003, it was one of the three most dominant bundled titles. == Reception == PC Magazine reviewer Jan Ozer states: "ArcSoft's ShowBiz has evolved into a competent editor that's generally more usable than Dazzle's MovieStar program, providing more configuration controls, better preview features, and a much greater range of fun effects." John Virata, senior editor of Digital Media Online, says in his three page review of ShowBiz DVD 2, "It is an easy editor to work with and has a logically laid out interface that takes you step by step through the video creation and DVD creation process"

  Read more →
• 

  Vagueness

  In linguistics and philosophy, a vague predicate is one which gives rise to borderline cases. For example, the English adjective "tall" is vague since it is not clearly true or false for someone of middling height. By contrast, the word "prime" is not vague since every number is definitively either prime or not. Vagueness is commonly diagnosed by a predicate's ability to give rise to the sorites paradox. Vagueness is separate from ambiguity, in which an expression has multiple denotations. For instance the word "bank" is ambiguous since it can refer either to a river bank or to a financial institution, but there are no borderline cases between both interpretations. Vagueness is a major topic of research in philosophical logic, where it serves as a potential challenge to classical logic. Work in formal semantics has sought to provide a compositional semantics for vague expressions in natural language. Work in philosophy of language has addressed implications of vagueness for the theory of meaning, while metaphysicists have considered whether reality itself is vague. == Importance == The concept of vagueness has philosophical importance. Suppose one wants to come up with a definition of "right" in the moral sense. One wants a definition to cover actions that are clearly right and exclude actions that are clearly wrong, but what does one do with the borderline cases? Surely, there are such cases. Some philosophers say that one should try to come up with a definition that is itself unclear on just those cases. Others say that one has an interest in making his or her definitions more precise than ordinary language, or his or her ordinary concepts, themselves allow; they recommend one advances precising definitions. === In law === Vagueness is also a problem which arises in law, and in some cases, judges have to arbitrate regarding whether a borderline case does, or does not, satisfy a given vague concept. Examples include disability (how much loss of vision is required before one is legally blind?), human life (at what point from conception to birth is one a legal human being, protected for instance by laws against murder?), adulthood (most familiarly reflected in legal ages for driving, drinking, voting, consensual sex, etc.), race (how to classify someone of mixed racial heritage), etc. Even such apparently unambiguous concepts such as biological sex can be subject to vagueness problems, not just from transsexuals' gender transitions but also from certain genetic conditions which can give an individual mixed male and female biological traits (see intersex). In the common law system, vagueness is a possible legal defence against by-laws and other regulations. The legal principle is that delegated power cannot be used more broadly than the delegator intended. Therefore, a regulation may not be so vague as to regulate areas beyond what the law allows. Any such regulation would be "void for vagueness" and unenforceable. This principle is sometimes used to strike down municipal by-laws that forbid "explicit" or "objectionable" contents from being sold in a certain city; courts often find such expressions to be too vague, giving municipal inspectors discretion beyond what the law allows. In the US this is known as the vagueness doctrine and in Europe as the principle of legal certainty. === In science === Many scientific concepts are of necessity vague, for instance species in biology cannot be precisely defined, owing to unclear cases such as ring species. Nonetheless, the concept of species can be clearly applied in the vast majority of cases. As this example illustrates, to say that a definition is "vague" is not necessarily a criticism. Consider those animals in Alaska that are the result of breeding huskies and wolves: are they dogs? It is not clear: they are borderline cases of dogs. This means one's ordinary concept of doghood is not clear enough to let us rule conclusively in this case. == Approaches == The philosophical question of what the best theoretical treatment of vagueness is—which is closely related to the problem of the paradox of the heap, a.k.a. sorites paradox—has been the subject of much philosophical debate. === Fuzzy logic === One theoretical approach is that of fuzzy logic, developed by American mathematician Lotfi Zadeh. Fuzzy logic proposes a gradual transition between "perfect falsity", for example, the statement "Bill Clinton is bald", to "perfect truth", for, say, "Patrick Stewart is bald". In ordinary logics, there are only two truth-values: "true" and "false". The fuzzy perspective differs by introducing an infinite number of truth-values along a spectrum between perfect truth and perfect falsity. Perfect truth may be represented by "1", and perfect falsity by "0". Borderline cases are thought of as having a "truth-value" anywhere between 0 and 1 (for example, 0.6). Advocates of the fuzzy logic approach have included K. F. Machina (1976) and Dorothy Edgington (1993). === Supervaluationism === Another theoretical approach is known as "supervaluationism". This approach has been defended by Kit Fine and Rosanna Keefe. Fine argues that borderline applications of vague predicates are neither true nor false, but rather are instances of "truth value gaps". He defends an interesting and sophisticated system of vague semantics, based on the notion that a vague predicate might be "made precise" in many alternative ways. This system has the consequence that borderline cases of vague terms yield statements that are neither true, nor false. Given a supervaluationist semantics, one can define the predicate "supertrue" as meaning "true on all precisifications". This predicate will not change the semantics of atomic statements (e.g. "Frank is bald", where Frank is a borderline case of baldness), but does have consequences for logically complex statements. In particular, the tautologies of sentential logic, such as "Frank is bald or Frank is not bald", will turn out to be supertrue, since on any precisification of baldness, either "Frank is bald" or "Frank is not bald" will be true. Since the presence of borderline cases seems to threaten principles like this one (excluded middle), the fact that supervaluationism can "rescue" them is seen as a virtue. === Subvaluationism === Subvaluationism is the logical dual of supervaluationism, and has been defended by Dominic Hyde (2008) and Pablo Cobreros (2011). Whereas the supervaluationist characterises truth as 'supertruth', the subvaluationist characterises truth as 'subtruth', or "true on at least some precisifications". Subvaluationism proposes that borderline applications of vague terms are both true and false. It thus has "truth-value gluts". According to this theory, a vague statement is true if it is true on at least one precisification and false if it is false under at least one precisification. If a vague statement comes out true under one precisification and false under another, it is both true and false. Subvaluationism ultimately amounts to the claim that vagueness is a truly contradictory phenomenon. Of a borderline case of "bald man" it would be both true and false to say that he is bald, and both true and false to say that he is not bald. === Epistemicist view === A fourth approach, known as "the epistemicist view", has been defended by Timothy Williamson (1994), R. A. Sorensen (1988) and (2001), and Nicholas Rescher (2009). They maintain that vague predicates do, in fact, draw sharp boundaries, but that one cannot know where these boundaries lie. One's confusion about whether some vague word does or does not apply in a borderline case is due to one's ignorance. For example, in the epistemicist view, there is a fact of the matter, for every person, about whether that person is old or not old; some people are ignorant of this fact. === As a property of objects === One possibility is that one's words and concepts are perfectly precise, but that objects themselves are vague. Consider Peter Unger's example of a cloud (from his famous 1980 paper, "The Problem of the Many"): it is not clear where the boundary of a cloud lies; for any given bit of water vapor, one can ask whether it is part of the cloud or not, and for many such bits, one will not know how to answer. Hence, perhaps such a term as 'cloud' is not itself vague, but rather precisely denotes a vague object. This strategy has occasionally been poorly received; most notably, in Gareth Evans' short paper "Can There Be Vague Objects?" (1978), wherein an argument is examined which appears to show that vague identity-statements are impossible (i.e., result in logical incoherence). David Lewis explains that the reader is intended to conclude, with Evans, that—since there clearly are, in fact, meaningful vague identities—any purported proof to the contrary cannot be right; and as the proof relies upon the premise that vague terms precisely denote vague objects, but fails under the view that vague terms reflect a merel

  Read more →
• 

  CogX Festival

  CogX Festival is a global festival focusing on the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) and emerging technology on industry, government, and society. It takes place annually, usually in September, in London, England. Founded by Charlie Muirhead and Tabitha Goldstaub in 2017, CogX aims to facilitate dialogue and understanding about AI and its implications across various sectors. CogX Festival 2023 was held from September 12 to September 14 across multiple sites in London. == History == The inaugural CogX event took place in 2017, intending to bring together experts from diverse fields to discuss the role and impact of AI and emerging technologies. Since then, it has evolved to include a broader range of topics and attract a diverse audience. In 2018, the first CogX Awards festival was hosted. That year, over 50 awards were shown to 300 guests. In 2021, CogX and Hopin, a video conferencing software, signed an agreement lasting 4 years to make CogX a hybrid conference due to the COVID-19 pandemic. CogX 2021 attracted over 5,000 attendees in-person and over 100,000 virtually. In 2022, they returned to a live event format after two years of hybrid events and controlled physical attendance. They also launched the CogX app, which curated insights from the world's top podcasts. In 2023, after he had delivered the keynote address guest speaker Stephen Fry fell off the stage and subsequently broke his leg, hip, pelvis and a "bunch of ribs". A court filing in 2026 revealed that Fry was seeking £100,000 in damages from CogX Festival Ltd and creative agency Blonstein Events. == Programming == The festival features sessions, discussions, workshops, and exhibitions, encompassing various domains of AI and technology. In recent CogX Festivals, they have featured summits encompassing topics like global leadership and industry transformation.

  Read more →
• 

  Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems

  The Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (abbreviated as NeurIPS and formerly NIPS) is a machine learning and computational neuroscience conference held annually in December. Along with ICLR and ICML, it is one of the three primary conferences of high impact in machine learning and artificial intelligence research. The conference includes three days of invited talks along with oral and poster presentations of refereed papers, followed by two days of workshops and competitions. == History == The NeurIPS meeting was first proposed in 1986 at the annual invitation-only Snowbird Meeting on Neural Networks for Computing organized by The California Institute of Technology and Bell Laboratories. NeurIPS was designed as a complementary open interdisciplinary meeting for researchers exploring biological and artificial Neural Networks. Reflecting this multidisciplinary approach, NeurIPS began in 1987 with information theorist Ed Posner as the conference president and learning theorist Yaser Abu-Mostafa as program chairman. Research presented in the early NeurIPS meetings included a wide range of topics from efforts to solve purely engineering problems to the use of computer models as a tool for understanding biological nervous systems. Since then, the biological and artificial systems research streams have diverged, and recent NeurIPS proceedings have been dominated by papers on machine learning, artificial intelligence and statistics. From 1987 until 2000 NeurIPS was held in Denver, United States. Since then, the conference was held in Vancouver, Canada (2001–2010), Granada, Spain (2011), and Lake Tahoe, United States (2012–2013). In 2014 and 2015, the conference was held in Montreal, Canada, in Barcelona, Spain in 2016, in Long Beach, United States in 2017, in Montreal, Canada in 2018 and Vancouver, Canada in 2019. Reflecting its origins at Snowbird, Utah, the meeting was accompanied by workshops organized at a nearby ski resort up until 2013, when it outgrew ski resorts. The first NeurIPS Conference was sponsored by the IEEE. The following NeurIPS Conferences have been organized by the NeurIPS Foundation, established by Ed Posner. Terrence Sejnowski has been the president of the NeurIPS Foundation since Posner's death in 1993. The board of trustees consists of previous general chairs of the NeurIPS Conference. The first proceedings was published in book form by the American Institute of Physics in 1987, and was entitled Neural Information Processing Systems, then the proceedings from the following conferences have been published by Morgan Kaufmann (1988–1993), MIT Press (1994–2004) and Curran Associates (2005–present) under the name Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. The conference was originally abbreviated as "NIPS". By 2018 a few commentators were criticizing the abbreviation as encouraging sexism due to its association with the word nipples, and as being a slur against Japanese. The board changed the abbreviation to "NeurIPS" in November 2018. == Topics == Along with machine learning and neuroscience, other fields represented at NeurIPS include cognitive science, psychology, computer vision, statistical linguistics, and information theory. Over the years, NeurIPS became a premier conference on machine learning and although the 'Neural' in the NeurIPS acronym had become something of a historical relic, the resurgence of deep learning in neural networks since 2012, fueled by faster computers and big data, has led to achievements in speech recognition, object recognition in images, image captioning, language translation and world championship performance in the game of Go, based on neural architectures inspired by the hierarchy of areas in the visual cortex (ConvNet) and reinforcement learning inspired by the basal ganglia (Temporal difference learning). Notable affinity groups have emerged from the NeurIPS conference and displayed diversity, including Black in AI (in 2017), Queer in AI (in 2016), and others. === Named lectures === In addition to invited talks and symposia, NeurIPS also organizes two named lectureships to recognize distinguished researchers. The NeurIPS Board introduced the Posner Lectureship in honor of NeurIPS founder Ed Posner; two Posner Lectures were given each year up to 2015. Past lecturers have included: 2010 – Josh Tenenbaum and Michael I. Jordan 2011 – Rich Sutton and Bernhard Schölkopf 2012 – Thomas Dietterich and Terry Sejnowski 2013 – Daphne Koller and Peter Dayan 2014 – Michael Kearns and John Hopfield 2015 – Zoubin Ghahramani and Vladimir Vapnik 2016 – Yann LeCun 2017 – John Platt 2018 – Joëlle Pineau 2019 – Yoshua Bengio 2020 – Christopher Bishop 2021 – Peter Bartlett In 2015, the NeurIPS Board introduced the Breiman Lectureship to highlight work in statistics relevant to conference topics. The lectureship was named for statistician Leo Breiman, who served on the NeurIPS Board from 1994 to 2005. Past lecturers have included: 2015 – Robert Tibshirani 2016 – Susan Holmes 2017 – Yee Whye Teh 2018 – David Spiegelhalter 2019 – Bin Yu 2020 – Marloes Maathuis 2021 – Gabor Lugosi 2022 – Emmanuel Candes 2023 – Susan Murphy 2024 – Arnaud Doucet == NeurIPS consistency experiment == In NIPS 2014, the program chairs duplicated 10% of all submissions and sent them through separate reviewers to evaluate randomness in the reviewing process. Several researchers interpreted the result. Regarding whether the decision in NIPS is completely random or not, John Langford writes: "Clearly not—a purely random decision would have arbitrariness of ~78%. It is, however, quite notable that 60% is much closer to 78% than 0%." He concludes that the result of the reviewing process is mostly arbitrary. In NeurIPS 2021, the program chairs repeated the 2014 experiment and found similar levels of review inconsistency; 23% of duplicated submissions received different accept/reject decisions, and 50.6% of accepted papers would have been rejected under re-review. == Locations == 1987–2000: Denver, Colorado, United States 2001–2010: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 2011: Granada, Spain 2012 & 2013: Stateline, Nevada, United States 2014 & 2015: Montréal, Quebec, Canada 2016: Barcelona, Spain 2017: Long Beach, California, United States 2018: Montréal, Quebec, Canada 2019: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 2020: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (virtual conference) 2021: Virtual conference 2022 & 2023: New Orleans, Louisiana, United States 2024: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 2025: San Diego, California, United States and Mexico City, Mexico 2026: Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, with satellite events in Atlanta and Paris

  Read more →
• 

  Contextual image classification

  Contextual image classification, a topic of pattern recognition in computer vision, is an approach of classification based on contextual information in images. "Contextual" means this approach is focusing on the relationship of the nearby pixels, which is also called neighbourhood. The goal of this approach is to classify the images by using the contextual information. == Introduction == Similar as processing language, a single word may have multiple meanings unless the context is provided, and the patterns within the sentences are the only informative segments we care about. For images, the principle is same. Find out the patterns and associate proper meanings to them. As the image illustrated below, if only a small portion of the image is shown, it is very difficult to tell what the image is about. Even try another portion of the image, it is still difficult to classify the image. However, if we increase the contextual of the image, then it makes more sense to recognize. As the full images shows below, almost everyone can classify it easily. During the procedure of segmentation, the methods which do not use the contextual information are sensitive to noise and variations, thus the result of segmentation will contain a great deal of misclassified regions, and often these regions are small (e.g., one pixel). Compared to other techniques, this approach is robust to noise and substantial variations for it takes the continuity of the segments into account. Several methods of this approach will be described below. == Applications == === Functioning as a post-processing filter to a labelled image === This approach is very effective against small regions caused by noise. And these small regions are usually formed by few pixels or one pixel. The most probable label is assigned to these regions. However, there is a drawback of this method. The small regions also can be formed by correct regions rather than noise, and in this case the method is actually making the classification worse. This approach is widely used in remote sensing applications. === Improving the post-processing classification === This is a two-stage classification process: For each pixel, label the pixel and form a new feature vector for it. Use the new feature vector and combine the contextual information to assign the final label to the === Merging the pixels in earlier stages === Instead of using single pixels, the neighbour pixels can be merged into homogeneous regions benefiting from contextual information. And provide these regions to classifier. === Acquiring pixel feature from neighbourhood === The original spectral data can be enriched by adding the contextual information carried by the neighbour pixels, or even replaced in some occasions. This kind of pre-processing methods are widely used in textured image recognition. The typical approaches include mean values, variances, texture description, etc. === Combining spectral and spatial information === The classifier uses the grey level and pixel neighbourhood (contextual information) to assign labels to pixels. In such case the information is a combination of spectral and spatial information. === Powered by the Bayes minimum error classifier === Contextual classification of image data is based on the Bayes minimum error classifier (also known as a naive Bayes classifier). Present the pixel: A pixel is denoted as x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} . The neighbourhood of each pixel x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} is a vector and denoted as N ( x 0 ) {\displaystyle N(x_{0})} . The values in the neighbourhood vector is denoted as f ( x i ) {\displaystyle f(x_{i})} . Each pixel is presented by the vector ξ = ( f ( x 0 ) , f ( x 1 ) , … , f ( x k ) ) {\displaystyle \xi =\left(f(x_{0}),f(x_{1}),\ldots ,f(x_{k})\right)} x i ∈ N ( x 0 ) ; i = 1 , … , k {\displaystyle x_{i}\in N(x_{0});\quad i=1,\ldots ,k} The labels (classification) of pixels in the neighbourhood N ( x 0 ) {\displaystyle N(x_{0})} are presented as a vector η = ( θ 0 , θ 1 , … , θ k ) {\displaystyle \eta =\left(\theta _{0},\theta _{1},\ldots ,\theta _{k}\right)} θ i ∈ { ω 0 , ω 1 , … , ω k } {\displaystyle \theta _{i}\in \left\{\omega _{0},\omega _{1},\ldots ,\omega _{k}\right\}} ω s {\displaystyle \omega _{s}} here denotes the assigned class. A vector presents the labels in the neighbourhood N ( x 0 ) {\displaystyle N(x_{0})} without the pixel x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} η ^ = ( θ 1 , θ 2 , … , θ k ) {\displaystyle {\hat {\eta }}=\left(\theta _{1},\theta _{2},\ldots ,\theta _{k}\right)} The neighbourhood: Size of the neighbourhood. There is no limitation of the size, but it is considered to be relatively small for each pixel x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} . A reasonable size of neighbourhood would be 3 × 3 {\displaystyle 3\times 3} of 4-connectivity or 8-connectivity ( x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} is marked as red and placed in the centre). The calculation: Apply the minimum error classification on a pixel x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} , if the probability of a class ω r {\displaystyle \omega _{r}} being presenting the pixel x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} is the highest among all, then assign ω r {\displaystyle \omega _{r}} as its class. θ 0 = ω r if P ( ω r ∣ f ( x 0 ) ) = max s = 1 , 2 , … , R P ( ω s ∣ f ( x 0 ) ) {\displaystyle \theta _{0}=\omega _{r}\quad {\text{ if }}\quad P(\omega _{r}\mid f(x_{0}))=\max _{s=1,2,\ldots ,R}P(\omega _{s}\mid f(x_{0}))} The contextual classification rule is described as below, it uses the feature vector x 1 {\displaystyle x_{1}} rather than x 0 {\displaystyle x_{0}} . θ 0 = ω r if P ( ω r ∣ ξ ) = max s = 1 , 2 , … , R P ( ω s ∣ ξ ) {\displaystyle \theta _{0}=\omega _{r}\quad {\text{ if }}\quad P(\omega _{r}\mid \xi )=\max _{s=1,2,\ldots ,R}P(\omega _{s}\mid \xi )} Use the Bayes formula to calculate the posteriori probability P ( ω s ∣ ξ ) {\displaystyle P(\omega _{s}\mid \xi )} P ( ω s ∣ ξ ) = p ( ξ ∣ ω s ) P ( ω s ) p ( ξ ) {\displaystyle P(\omega _{s}\mid \xi )={\frac {p(\xi \mid \omega _{s})P(\omega _{s})}{p\left(\xi \right)}}} The number of vectors is the same as the number of pixels in the image. For the classifier uses a vector corresponding to each pixel x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} , and the vector is generated from the pixel's neighbourhood. The basic steps of contextual image classification: Calculate the feature vector ξ {\displaystyle \xi } for each pixel. Calculate the parameters of probability distribution p ( ξ ∣ ω s ) {\displaystyle p(\xi \mid \omega _{s})} and P ( ω s ) {\displaystyle P(\omega _{s})} Calculate the posterior probabilities P ( ω r ∣ ξ ) {\displaystyle P(\omega _{r}\mid \xi )} and all labels θ 0 {\displaystyle \theta _{0}} . Get the image classification result. == Algorithms == === Template matching === The template matching is a "brute force" implementation of this approach. The concept is first create a set of templates, and then look for small parts in the image match with a template. This method is computationally high and inefficient. It keeps an entire templates list during the whole process and the number of combinations is extremely high. For a m × n {\displaystyle m\times n} pixel image, there could be a maximum of 2 m × n {\displaystyle 2^{m\times n}} combinations, which leads to high computation. This method is a top down method and often called table look-up or dictionary look-up. === Lower-order Markov chain === The Markov chain also can be applied in pattern recognition. The pixels in an image can be recognised as a set of random variables, then use the lower order Markov chain to find the relationship among the pixels. The image is treated as a virtual line, and the method uses conditional probability. === Hilbert space-filling curves === The Hilbert curve runs in a unique pattern through the whole image, it traverses every pixel without visiting any of them twice and keeps a continuous curve. It is fast and efficient. === Markov meshes === The lower-order Markov chain and Hilbert space-filling curves mentioned above are treating the image as a line structure. The Markov meshes however will take the two dimensional information into account. === Dependency tree === The dependency tree is a method using tree dependency to approximate probability distributions.

  Read more →
• 

  AI Action Summit 2025

  The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit (French: Sommet pour l'action sur l'intelligence artificielle or Sommet pour l'action sur l'IA, SAIA) was held at the Grand Palais in Paris, France, from 10 to 11 February 2025. The summit was co-chaired by French President Emmanuel Macron and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The 2025 AI Action Summit followed the 2023 AI Safety Summit hosted at Bletchley Park in the UK, and the 2024 AI Seoul Summit in South Korea. This series of AI summits continued with the AI Impact Summit in Delhi, which was hosted by India in February 2026. Whereas the 2023 AI Safety Summit was attended by representatives from 29 governments and executives from only a handful of AI companies, over 1,000 participants from more than 100 countries attended the 2025 Paris AI Summit, representing government leaders, international organisations, the academic and research community, the private sector, and civil society. == Background == The First International AI Safety Report was published on 29 January 2025. Commissioned after the Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit, the report focused on the risks and threats posed by general-purpose AI, and was slated for discussion at the Paris summit as part of the "Trust in AI" pillar. Whereas the first summit was focused on the catastrophic risks of AI and their mitigation, the Paris meeting was recast as an "AI Action Summit" emphasising innovation, practical implementation, and potential economic opportunities of AI, while also exploring a broader range of risks including its environmental impact and disruptions to the labour market. In the weeks leading up to the Paris summit, government leaders had also started to rally around "national champions" in AI, partly in response to Chinese AI startup DeepSeek, which had released a new model rivalling OpenAI o1. On Sunday 9 February, French President Emmanuel Macron posted a compilation of AI-generated deepfake video clips of himself on Instagram to help publicise the start of the 2025 AI Action Summit the following day. While acknowledging the humour of the deepfakes, the real Macron states in the video that using artificial intelligence, "we can do some very big things: change healthcare, energy, life in our society". == Proceedings == === Day 1 === In her opening address, French special envoy Anne Bouverot discussed the environmental impact of AI, acknowledging the technology's "current trajectory is unsustainable". General secretary Christy Hoffman of the UNI Global Union said that "AI-driven productivity gains risk turning the technology into yet another engine of inequality, further straining our democracies". Chinese Vice Premier Zhang Guoqing made a speech expressing China's willingness "to work with other countries to promote development, safeguard security, and share achievements in the field of artificial intelligence". Google CEO Sundar Pichai said in his speech that while the rise of AI brings many risks, "The biggest risk is missing out". He discussed Google's long track record of AI research and said that the company is investing further into "deep research" agents that can autonomously search the Internet and compile a full analysis for users. A new coalition, the Robust Open Online Safety Tools (ROOST) initiative, debuted at the summit. Supported by Google, Discord, OpenAI, and Roblox, and incubated at the Institute of Global Politics at Columbia University, the organisation is developing free, open-source tools to detect and report child sexual abuse material (CSAM). In his speech closing the first day, President Emmanuel Macron emphasized that France has the capability to deliver the power required by AI companies, thanks to its production of nuclear energy. While declaring that Europe was "back in the race" for AI, Macron said that the region was "too slow" for investors, and called on the EU to "simplify regulation" and "resynchronize with the rest of the world". === Day 2 === On 11 February 2025, the French government announced its $400 million endowment of Current AI, a new foundation to support the creation of AI "public goods" including high-quality datasets and open-source tools and infrastructure. Launched by President Macron, Current AI is backed by nine governments – Finland, France, Germany, Chile, India, Kenya, Morocco, Nigeria, Slovenia, and Switzerland – plus various philanthropic organisations such as the Omidyar Group and the McGovern Foundation, and private companies such as Google and Salesforce. Another initiative launched at the summit was the Coalition for Sustainable AI. Led by France, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), the coalition has the support of 11 countries, five international organisations, and 37 tech companies including EDF, IBM, Nvidia, and SAP. The Summit of Heads of State and Government took place with a plenary session in the Grand Palais. Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India stressed the need to "democratise technology" and "[ensure] access to all, especially in the Global South". Vice President JD Vance of the United States used his speech to warn against "excessive regulation of the AI" which "could kill a transformative sector just as it's taking off". Vance also warned other leaders against cooperating with "authoritarian regimes" on AI, a comment widely interpreted as a reference to China. == Investments == At the summit, the European Union made several announcements related to planned investments supporting AI development. President Ursula von der Leyen of the European Commission launched InvestAI, a €200 billion initiative, including €20 billion to build four AI gigafactories to train highly complex, very large models. In addition, a coalition of more than 60 European companies launched the EU AI Champions Initiative. Led by venture capital firm General Catalyst, the coalition plans to invest €150 billion in AI-related businesses and infrastructure in Europe over five years. President Emmanuel Macron announced that private investors had pledged to invest nearly €110 billion in the AI sector in France. Financing of between €30 and €50 billion is expected from the United Arab Emirates to build a very large data centre campus, with another €20 billion from the Canadian investment firm Brookfield Corporation. French startup Mistral AI and Helsing, a German-British company, announced their partnership in developing vision-language-action models helping soldiers use AI on the battlefield. == Reactions == The Financial Times editorial board noted that the Paris summit "highlighted a shift in the dynamics towards geopolitical competition", which it characterised as "a new AI arms race" between the US and China, with Europe "trying to carve out its role". Fortune.com AI editor Jeremy Kahn described the 2025 Paris Summit as an "AI festival, complete with glitzy corporate side events and even a late night dance party", contrasting it with the "decidedly sober" mood of the inaugural AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park. Many experts of the AI Safety Community expressed disappointment that the Paris Summit did not do enough to address AI risks, with Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calling it a "missed opportunity". Others voicing similar concerns included David Leslie of the Alan Turing Institute and Max Tegmark of the Future of Life Institute. Reporting from Paris, technology columnist Kevin Roose of The New York Times wrote, "The biggest surprise of the Paris summit, for me, has been that policymakers can't seem to grasp how soon powerful AI systems could arrive, or how disruptive they could be." == Statement on inclusive and sustainable AI == At the summit, 58 countries, including France, China, and India, signed a joint declaration, the Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence for People and the Planet. The statement outlines general principles such as accessibility and overcoming the digital divide; developing AI that is open, transparent, ethical, safe, and trustworthy; avoiding market concentration of AI development to encourage innovation; positive outcomes for labour markets; making AI sustainable; and promoting international cooperation and governance. The US and UK refused to sign the declaration on inclusive and sustainable AI. The UK government said in a brief statement that the international agreement did not go far enough in defining global governance of AI and addressing concerns about its impact on national security. === Signatories === The list of signatory countries to the statement for inclusive and sustainable AI in alphabetical order: Additional signatories included the following international bodies and research institutes: ALAI (Latin American Association on Internet) African Union (AU) Commission BEUC The European Consumer Organisation Center for Democracy and Technology Council of Europe European Commission (and the 27 member states) Hugging Face INRIA Institute of Advanced Study OEC

  Read more →
• 

  Really Simple Licensing

  Really Simple Licensing (RSL) is an open content licensing standard that allows web publishers to set terms for web crawlers gathering training data for generative AI use. It was launched on September 10, 2025 and is managed by the nonprofit RSL Collective, co-founded by RSS co-creator Eckart Walther and former Ask.com CEO Doug Leeds. Participating companies at launch include Reddit, Yahoo, and Medium. Publishers can implement the RSL standard by adding licensing terms to their robots.txt files.

  Read more →