AI Content Improver

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

• 

  InciWeb

  InciWeb is an interagency all-risk incident web information management system provided by the United States Forest Service released in 2004. It was originally developed for wildland fire emergencies, but can be also used for other emergency incidents (natural disasters, such as earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes). == Introduction == It was developed with two primary missions: 1. Provide the public a single source of incident related information 2. Provide a standardized reporting tool for the Public Affairs community Official announcements include evacuations, road closures, news releases, maps, photographs, and basic info and current situation about the incident. Incident information can be accessed by: web browser at https://inciweb.wildfire.gov/ Twitter RSS web feed == Technical == The original application was hosted at the United States Forest Service - Wildland Fire Training and Conference Center, at McClellan Airfield, California, comprising three servers: Database server Administrative server Load balancer for the public content which routes traffic to a pool of eight servers. Web traffic averages 2 million plus hits daily during the fire season with the ability to handle 3.5 million hits. The servers were moved to the National information Technology Center (NITC), Kansas City, Missouri on July 16, 2008, along with the release of version 2.0; the current version is 2.2. == Availability issues == InciWeb was having technical difficulties due to the high volume of Internet users trying to access the site during the September–October 2006 Day Fire and the Summer 2008 California wildfires. == Participating agencies == United States Forest Service Bureau of Land Management Bureau of Indian Affairs Fish and Wildlife Service National Park Service National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Department of the Interior Office of Aircraft Services National Association of State Foresters United States Fire Administration These same agencies are also in the National Interagency Fire Center.

  Read more →
• 

  Cryptovirology

  Cryptovirology refers to the study of cryptography use in malware, such as ransomware and asymmetric backdoors. Traditionally, cryptography and its applications are defensive in nature, and provide privacy, authentication, and security to users. Cryptovirology employs a twist on cryptography, showing that it can also be used offensively. It can be used to mount extortion based attacks that cause loss of access to information, loss of confidentiality, and information leakage, tasks which cryptography typically prevents. The field was born with the observation that public-key cryptography can be used to break the symmetry between what an antivirus analyst sees regarding malware and what the attacker sees. The antivirus analyst sees a public key contained in the malware, whereas the attacker sees the public key contained in the malware as well as the corresponding private key (outside the malware) since the attacker created the key pair for the attack. The public key allows the malware to perform trapdoor one-way operations on the victim's computer that only the attacker can undo. == Overview == The field encompasses covert malware attacks in which the attacker securely steals private information such as symmetric keys, private keys, PRNG state, and the victim's data. Examples of such covert attacks are asymmetric backdoors. An asymmetric backdoor is a backdoor (e.g., in a cryptosystem) that can be used only by the attacker, even after it is found. This contrasts with the traditional backdoor that is symmetric, i.e., anyone that finds it can use it. Kleptography, a subfield of cryptovirology, is the study of asymmetric backdoors in key generation algorithms, digital signature algorithms, key exchanges, pseudorandom number generators, encryption algorithms, and other cryptographic algorithms. The NIST Dual EC DRBG random bit generator has an asymmetric backdoor in it. The EC-DRBG algorithm utilizes the discrete-log kleptogram from kleptography, which by definition makes the EC-DRBG a cryptotrojan. Like ransomware, the EC-DRBG cryptotrojan contains and uses the attacker's public key to attack the host system. The cryptographer Ari Juels indicated that NSA effectively orchestrated a kleptographic attack on users of the Dual EC DRBG pseudorandom number generation algorithm and that, although security professionals and developers have been testing and implementing kleptographic attacks since 1996, "you would be hard-pressed to find one in actual use until now." Due to public outcry about this cryptovirology attack, NIST rescinded the EC-DRBG algorithm from the NIST SP 800-90 standard. Covert information leakage attacks carried out by cryptoviruses, cryptotrojans, and cryptoworms that, by definition, contain and use the public key of the attacker is a major theme in cryptovirology. In "deniable password snatching," a cryptovirus installs a cryptotrojan that asymmetrically encrypts host data and covertly broadcasts it. This makes it available to everyone, noticeable by no one (except the attacker), and only decipherable by the attacker. An attacker caught installing the cryptotrojan claims to be a virus victim. An attacker observed receiving the covert asymmetric broadcast is one of the thousands, if not millions of receivers, and exhibits no identifying information whatsoever. The cryptovirology attack achieves "end-to-end deniability." It is a covert asymmetric broadcast of the victim's data. Cryptovirology also encompasses the use of private information retrieval (PIR) to allow cryptoviruses to search for and steal host data without revealing the data searched for even when the cryptotrojan is under constant surveillance. By definition, such a cryptovirus carries within its own coding sequence the query of the attacker and the necessary PIR logic to apply the query to host systems. == History == The first cryptovirology attack and discussion of the concept was by Adam L. Young and Moti Yung, at the time called "cryptoviral extortion" and it was presented at the 1996 IEEE Security & Privacy conference. In this attack, a cryptovirus, cryptoworm, or cryptotrojan contains the public key of the attacker and hybrid encrypts the victim's files. The malware prompts the user to send the asymmetric ciphertext to the attacker who will decipher it and return the symmetric decryption key it contains for a fee. The victim needs the symmetric key to decrypt the encrypted files if there is no way to recover the original files (e.g., from backups). The 1996 IEEE paper predicted that cryptoviral extortion attackers would one day demand e-money, long before Bitcoin even existed. Many years later, the media relabeled cryptoviral extortion as ransomware. In 2016, cryptovirology attacks on healthcare providers reached epidemic levels, prompting the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to issue a Fact Sheet on Ransomware and HIPAA. The fact sheet states that when electronic protected health information is encrypted by ransomware, a breach has occurred, and the attack therefore constitutes a disclosure that is not permitted under HIPAA, the rationale being that an adversary has taken control of the information. Sensitive data might never leave the victim organization, but the break-in may have allowed data to be sent out undetected. California enacted a law that defines the introduction of ransomware into a computer system with the intent of extortion as being against the law. == Examples == === Tremor virus === While viruses in the wild have used cryptography in the past, the only purpose of such usage of cryptography was to avoid detection by antivirus software. For example, the tremor virus used polymorphism as a defensive technique in an attempt to avoid detection by anti-virus software. Though cryptography does assist in such cases to enhance the longevity of a virus, the capabilities of cryptography are not used in the payload. The One-half virus was amongst the first viruses known to have encrypted affected files. === Tro_Ransom.A virus === An example of a virus that informs the owner of the infected machine to pay a ransom is the virus nicknamed Tro_Ransom.A. This virus asks the owner of the infected machine to send $10.99 to a given account through Western Union. Virus.Win32.Gpcode.ag is a classic cryptovirus. This virus partially uses a version of 660-bit RSA and encrypts files with many different extensions. It instructs the owner of the machine to email a given mail ID if the owner desires the decryptor. If contacted by email, the user will be asked to pay a certain amount as ransom in return for the decryptor. === CAPI === It has been demonstrated that using just 8 different calls to Microsoft's Cryptographic API (CAPI), a cryptovirus can satisfy all its encryption needs. == Other uses of cryptography-enabled malware == Apart from cryptoviral extortion, there are other potential uses of cryptoviruses, such as deniable password snatching, cryptocounters, private information retrieval, and in secure communication between different instances of a distributed cryptovirus.

  Read more →
• 

  Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act

  Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act also known as California SB 976 is a law that was enacted in September 2024 that is meant to address problematic social media usage among minors. The law prohibitions minors to have "addictive feeds" unless they have verifiable parental consent, minor's notifications are also restricted between 12 am to 6 am and during school hours between 8 am and 3 pm it also well requires minors to have default privacies settings and have social media companies to publicly disclose certain metrics about their users. The law was set to take effect in two steps the first being the restrictions on social media feeds, notifications, disclosures from social media companies and default settings which would have taken effect on January 1, 2025, and the age verification provision which would have taken effect on January 1, 2027. However, has faced legal challenges since its enactment delaying its enactment. == Legal Challenges == In November 2024 NetChoice a trade association representing many of the biggest social media companies such as YouTube, Facebook and Instagram sued the attorney general of California Rob Bonta hoping to get an injunction before the first set of the law's provisions would take effect in January of the next year. However, judge Edward Davila would only grant Netchoice's request as to the restrictions on notifications and public disclosures and would deny their request as to the rest of the law. The law was later fully enjoined temporarily by the District Court and Appellant Court pending appeal, and the case is now in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and is pending a decision. === Social media platforms challenges to law === In November 2025 Meta, Google and TikTok filed lawsuits against the law arguing it violates the first amendment.

  Read more →
• 

  Data marketplace

  Data marketplace is an online platform for sharing and consuming data in the form of data assets or data products. Part of the data management stack, it aims to bring together data producers and data consumers (including business users and AI) in a single space, with the objective of increasing access to understandable, high-quality data. Included within its Data Marketplaces and Exchange (DME) category by Gartner, data marketplaces can provide data internally within an organization, externally with partners, or as open data. == Concept == Digitization has dramatically increased data volumes within organizations, with IDC predicting that by 2025 the world will contain 175 zettabytes of data. This has created a need to both manage this data and provide access to it to enable business intelligence and data analysis. However, data is often scattered within multiple systems (such as data warehouses and data lakes), and is in formats that are only understandable by technical experts, such as data scientists. According to IDC, 81% of IT leaders cite data silos as a major barrier to digital transformation. This means that data is not freely available to business users or external audiences such as partners or citizens, limiting its value, and holding back AI deployments. Data marketplaces solve this issue, providing seamless, self-service access to high-quality data in an understandable, secure and auditable manner. They break down data silos, reduce friction in data access, and enable a broader range of users, including non-technical profiles, to find, understand, and consume data autonomously. Data assets on the marketplace can be raw data, data visualizations or data products. Data marketplaces combine data management functions such as data governance with the user-friendly experience offered by e-commerce marketplaces in order to increase the usage of data. These include features such as powerful search engines, feedback, ratings, subscriptions and product description sheets. According to Gartner, data marketplaces provide infrastructure, transactional capabilities, and services for both consumers and providers of data assets. == History and timeline == Data marketplaces have evolved since they first emerged in terms of both their scope and usage. === 2000s === With the rise of the internet, data brokers began collecting, aggregating, distributing and selling personal, financial and marketing data to third parties online. Data marketplaces were deployed to monetize this data, making it discoverable and accessible to users, either through subscriptions or one-off purchases. At the same time, regulations, such as the US Open Government Initiative of 2009 and others around the world mandated greater transparency and data sharing with the public. Data sharing portals were created by public and government bodies to make this information available through self-service to all users. === 2010s === Due to the growth of big data and cloud platforms, cloud-based data exchange platforms emerged. These were offered by major infrastructure providers, and included Amazon Web Services (AWS) Data Exchange, Snowflake Data Marketplace, and the Google Cloud Platform. These platforms moved beyond simple data brokerage or open data by providing structured, catalogued data sharing between organizations. === 2020s === Driven by a need to increase internal data sharing with both business users and AI, organizations are now looking to adopt internal data marketplaces. These aim to democratize data consumption by providing seamless access for all employees and AI to trusted data, including data products, through an intuitive, e-commerce style experience. According to Gartner analyst Richa Jha, "by providing a single, governed platform for discovering, sharing, and scaling data products, data marketplaces drive productivity, collaboration, and ROI across the enterprise." == Data marketplaces within the overall data architecture == Data marketplaces provide a consumption and collaboration layer for data. That means they complement and integrate with other parts of the overall data architecture, including: === Data warehouses and data lakes === Data marketplaces connect to data sources, such as data warehouses or data lakes, to provide intuitive access to the data stored within them, enabling data to be shared and distributed to non-technical audiences. Access can be direct, with data and data products stored within the data marketplace or virtualized. === Data catalog === A data catalog provides a technical inventory of an organization's data estate. It collects technical information on all available data assets within an organization, based on metadata descriptions. This ensures traceability, and supports compliance and governance requirements. Unlike a data marketplace, a data catalog does not provide access to data, and is designed to be used by data professionals, rather than the business. This means it lacks an intuitive, understandable interface and is consequently not easily accessible by business users. === Data mesh === Data mesh is an architecture and framework for data management, first defined by Zhamak Dehghani in 2019. It aims to decentralize data ownership to delegate responsibility, empowering teams and focusing on delivering data to users in the form of self-service data products. The data marketplace is a central pillar of data mesh, providing intuitive access to these data products, and creating a collaboration space for data owners and data consumers. === Data product === Data products are high-value, consumable data assets that package high-quality data and associated tools to enable seamless usage by business users at scale. First defined by McKinsey in 2022, they have an identified owner, a service level agreement (SLA), and a reusability logic. == Core components of a data marketplace == A data marketplace typically includes specific core components: === E-commerce style interface === An e-commerce style experience that engages non-technical users, minimizes the need for training and builds confidence and trust in data. Look and feel should be customizable to incorporate corporate design guidelines to ensure consistency with other organizational applications. === Built-in data catalog === As in a standalone data catalog, this indexes all available data, based on metadata that includes type, source, owner, freshness, and quality level. === Discovery and search engine === This enables users to search, filter, explore and discover available data intuitively. As in an e-commerce marketplace, it should be intelligent, and provide relevant results based on natural language queries. === Access control and security management === Data marketplaces will contain data that needs to be protected under regulations such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States, and sector-specific frameworks in industries such as finance and healthcare. To ensure both security and compliance while maximizing data consumption, the data marketplace should include granular access management and a full audit trail. === Semantic layer and business glossary === Different parts of the business are likely to use different terms to describe data. This leads to inconsistencies and an inability to share data across systems and teams. The semantic layer and business glossary standardize a shared vocabulary and common definitions of business indicators and concepts, providing a single language for data across the business and for AI agents. === Data governance mechanisms === These enforce corporate data governance policies, ensuring data traceability through data lineage, quality certification, usage monitoring, and continuous improvement through user feedback loops. === Collaboration features === As on an e-commerce website, a data marketplace should provide collaboration features that bring together data users and data owners. This includes the ability to rate data products, share use cases, and provide feedback to data owners, creating a community around data and supporting a data-driven culture. == Types of data marketplace == While they share the same underlying technology, data marketplaces can be deployed in three broad ways: === Internal data marketplaces === These bring together data from across an organization and make it available via self-service to employees from across the business. They aim to widen access to data and consequently to improve decision-making and reporting, increase performance and maximize efficiency. === Ecosystem data marketplaces === These extend sharing beyond a single organization, enabling multiple partners (public institutions, industry players, research bodies) to share and consume data within a governed framework. Data can be provided by all parties or simply by one organization and consumed by others. Ecosystem data marketplaces are particularly relevant in

  Read more →
• 

  Fyuse

  Fyuse is a spatial photography app which lets users capture and share interactive 3D images. By tilting or swiping one's smartphone, one can view such "fyuses" from various angles — as if one were walking around an object or subject. The app blends photography and video to create an interactive medium and was first published for iOS in April 2014. The Android version was released at the end of 2014. == The app == Fyuse lets users capture panoramas, selfies, and full 360° views of objects and allows one to view captured moments from different angles. It has its own personal gallery, social network and standalone web integration. With the app, Fyusion also created a social networking platform similar to Instagram. Fyuses can be shared, commented on, liked and re-shared to one's followers (called Echoes). One can build a network of followers and with engagement tracking, one can see how many times an image has been interacted with The images can also be saved for private, offline view, or shared to other social networks, like Facebook or Twitter, or embedded on a website where the images can be interacted with by desktop users via dragging the mouse. Furthermore, in the compass tab other fyuses can be discovered using the app's system of tags and categories. One's Fyuse feed is prepopulated with top users, and one can follow people to see when they post a new fyuse. The app will also find one's friends if one signs up with Facebook or connects it with one's Twitter account. To create a fyuse one moves around a person or object with one's phone's camera in one direction or moving/tilting one's phone around while holding one's finger on the screen. By combining photography and video the app allows one to capture moments that one may not have otherwise been able to capture by recording not one moment in time but stitched together little moments. According to Fyusion CEO Radu Rusu, a photo freezes a moment in time, while a video captures moments in a linear timeline — both still flat, when viewed. A fyuse image captures a moment in space, where one can not only see one side of something, but also around it. When it is done rendering, fyuses can also be edited – one can trim the fyuse for length and edit the brightness, contrast, exposure, saturation and sharpness. One can also add a vignette and apply a filters, with options to adjust their intensity. After editing, one can write a description, add hashtags, and tag parts of the fyuse before one can (voluntarily) publish and share it. Version 1.0 has been described as "alpha prototype" and version 2.0 was released on 17 December 2014. Version 3.0 introduced 3D tagging by which users can layer 3D graphic that animate accordingly with each interaction to add some context to the content. Version 4.0 was released on December 21, 2016 for iOS. Since January 2016 (v3.2) the app allows the export of fyuses as Live Photos. The app has also been described as a more sophisticated version of 3D stickers and flip images. == Applications == The app has many applications for e-commerce such as for fashion designers who want to showcase a garment from every angle, or real estate listings and Airbnb-type sites that want to make their rental properties seem as enticing as possible. The app can also be used for interactive art, 360° panoramas and selfies. == History == San Francisco-based Fyusion Inc.'s three founders — Radu B. Rusu, CTO Stefan Holzer, and VP of Engineering Stephen Miller — worked together at Willow Garage, the robotics research lab started by early Google employee Scott Hassan in the area of "personal robotics" — Hassan decided to turn the lab into more of an incubator, suggesting that the members spin off their technologies into consumer-facing enterprises. Rusu first set out with an open-source 3D perception software startup called Open Perception. Fyusion was officially founded in 2013, and soon after Rusu and his cofounders patented the technology for spatial photography. The company closed a seed funding round at the end of May, raising $3.35 million from investors, including an angel investment from Sun Microsystems cofounder Andreas Bechtolsheim. In 2014 the Fyuse team consisted of 13 employees, mostly engineers and designers, recruited from around the globe. In March 2015 the team displayed their app at Katy Perry's premiere for the movie "Prismatic World Tour on Epix" where Perry also took Fyuse for a test run. == Augmented reality == In September 2016 Fyusion unveiled its platform for creating augmented reality content using ones smartphone. It takes the images from ones smartphone and converts them into 3D holographic images, which one can then view on an AR headset. According to Rusu "by making it easy for people to capture their surroundings on any mobile device, [Fyusion is] revolutionizing the way that people view the world around them" and also states that for "AR to be successful, anyone should be able to create content for it" opposed to the current "small number of content creators and an even smaller number of hardware players". According to him "the applications of [Fyusion's] technology for consumers and businesses are incredibly limitless". The platform uses the company's patented 3D spatio-temporal platform that uses advanced sensor fusion, machine learning and computer vision algorithms and part of the platform is built into the Fyuse app. Before committing to releasing a separate consumer product the company intends to wait until the HoloLens device becomes available to the public. Until then any Fyuse representation created using Fyuse is AR ready and will be able to be shown in HoloLens in the future. == Fyuse - Point of No Return == Fyuse - Point of No Return is a science fiction short advert for Fyuse 3.0 in which Fyuse's digital medium is extrapolated into the future. In the film a woman uses a mini scanning-drone to 3D scan a tree with Fyuse and later recreate it as an augmented reality object at another place.

  Read more →
• 

  Opinion Space

  Developed at UC Berkeley, "Opinion Space" (also known as The Collective Discovery Engine) is a social media technology designed to help communities generate and exchange ideas about important issues and policies. Version 1.0 was launched on April 4, 2009, at UC Berkeley, and explored the question "Do you think legalizing marijuana is a good idea?" It has since undergone 4 different iterations, and been used in partnership with various organizations including The Occupy movement (Version 4.0, 5/24/2013) and the African Robots Network (Version 4.0, 5/25/2013). Opinion Space has also been used in collaboration with the United States State Department and the University of California's Berkeley Center for New Media (Version 2.0, 12/1/2009 and Version 3.0, 2/25/2012) to gain public perspective on foreign policy issues. Then U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton explained, "Opinion Space will harness the power of connection technologies to provide a unique forum for international dialogue. This is...an opportunity to extend our engagement beyond the halls of government directly to the people of the world" (2010). The website uses data visualization and statistical analysis to present and develop public opinion and ideas. Opinion Space is a self-organizing system that uses an intuitive graphical "map" that displays patterns, trends, and insights as they emerge and employs the wisdom of crowds to identify and highlight the most insightful ideas. The system uses a game model that incorporates techniques from deliberative polling, collaborative filtering, and multidimensional visualization.

  Read more →
• 

  Localhost

  In computer networking, localhost is a hostname that refers to the current computer used to access it. The name localhost is reserved for loopback purposes. It is used to access the network services that are running on the host via the loopback network interface. Using the loopback interface bypasses any local network interface hardware. == Loopback == The local loopback mechanism may be used to run a network service on a host without requiring a physical network interface, or without making the service accessible from the networks the computer may be connected to. For example, a locally installed website may be accessed from a Web browser by the URL http://localhost to display its home page. IPv4 network standards reserve the entire address block 127.0.0.0/8 (more than 16 million addresses) for loopback purposes. That means any packet sent to any of those addresses is looped back. The address 127.0.0.1 is the standard address for IPv4 loopback traffic; the rest are not supported by all operating systems. However, they can be used to set up multiple server applications on the host, all listening on the same port number. In the IPv6 addressing architecture there is only a single address assigned for loopback: ::1. The standard precludes the assignment of that address to any physical interface, as well as its use as the source or destination address in any packet sent to remote hosts. == Name resolution == The name localhost normally resolves to the IPv4 loopback address 127.0.0.1, and to the IPv6 loopback address ::1. This resolution is normally configured by the following lines in the operating system's hosts file: 127.0.0.1 localhost ::1 localhost The name may also be resolved by Domain Name System (DNS) servers, but there are special considerations governing the use of this name: An IPv4 or IPv6 address query for the name localhost must always resolve to the respective loopback address. Applications may resolve the name to a loopback address themselves, or pass it to the local name resolver mechanisms. When a name resolver receives an address (A or AAAA) query for localhost, it should return the appropriate loopback addresses, and negative responses for any other requested record types. Queries for localhost should not be sent to caching name servers. To avoid burdening the Domain Name System root servers with traffic, caching name servers should never request name server records for localhost, or forward resolution to authoritative name servers. When authoritative name servers receive queries for 'localhost' in spite of the provisions mentioned above, they should resolve them appropriately. In addition to the mapping of localhost to the loopback addresses (127.0.0.1 and ::1), localhost may also be mapped to other IPv4 (loopback) addresses and it is also possible to assign other, or additional, names to any loopback address. The mapping of localhost to addresses other than the designated loopback address range in the hosts file or in DNS is not guaranteed to have the desired effect, as applications may map the name internally. In the Domain Name System, the name .localhost is reserved as a top-level domain name, originally set aside to avoid confusion with the hostname localhost. Domain name registrars are precluded from delegating domain names in the top-level .localhost domain. == Historical notes == In 1981, the block 127.0.0.0/8 got a 'reserved' status, as not to assign it as a general purpose class A IP network. This block was officially assigned for loopback purposes in 1986. Its purpose as a Special Use IPv4 Address block was confirmed in 1994,, 2002, 2010,, and last in 2013. From the outset, in 1995, the single IPv6 loopback address ::1 was defined. Its purpose and definition was unchanged in 1998,, 2003,, and up to the current definition, in 2006. == Packet processing == The processing of any packet sent to a loopback address, is implemented in the link layer of the TCP/IP stack. Such packets are never passed to any network interface controller (NIC) or hardware device driver and must not appear outside of a computing system, or be routed by any router. This permits software testing and local services, even in the absence of any hardware network interfaces. Looped-back packets are distinguished from any other packets traversing the TCP/IP stack only by the special IP address they were addressed to. Thus, the services that ultimately receive them respond according to the specified destination. For example, an HTTP service could route packets addressed to 127.0.0.99:80 and 127.0.0.100:80 to different Web servers, or to a single server that returns different web pages. To simplify such testing, the hosts file may be configured to provide appropriate names for each address. Packets received on a non-loopback interface with a loopback source or destination address must be dropped. Such packets are sometimes referred to as Martian packets. As with any other bogus packets, they may be malicious and any problems they might cause can be avoided by applying bogon filtering. == Special cases == The releases of the MySQL database differentiate between the use of the hostname localhost and the use of the addresses 127.0.0.1 and ::1. When using localhost as the destination in a client connector interface of an application, the MySQL application programming interface connects to the database using a Unix domain socket, while a TCP connection via the loopback interface requires the direct use of the explicit address. One notable exception to the use of the 127.0.0.0/8 addresses is their use in Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) traceroute error detection, in which their property of not being routable provides a convenient means to avoid delivery of faulty packets to end users.

  Read more →
• 

  Tokenization (data security)

  Tokenization, when applied to data security, is the process of substituting a sensitive data element with a non-sensitive equivalent, referred to as a token, that has no intrinsic or exploitable meaning or value. The token is a reference (i.e. identifier) that maps back to the sensitive data through a tokenization system. The mapping from original data to a token uses methods that render tokens infeasible to reverse in the absence of the tokenization system, for example using tokens created from random numbers. A one-way cryptographic function is used to convert the original data into tokens, making it difficult to recreate the original data without obtaining entry to the tokenization system's resources. To deliver such services, the system maintains a vault database of tokens that are connected to the corresponding sensitive data. Protecting the system vault is vital to the system, and improved processes must be put in place to offer database integrity and physical security. The tokenization system must be secured and validated using security best practices applicable to sensitive data protection, secure storage, audit, authentication and authorization. The tokenization system provides data processing applications with the authority and interfaces to request tokens, or detokenize back to sensitive data. The security and risk reduction benefits of tokenization require that the tokenization system is logically isolated and segmented from data processing systems and applications that previously processed or stored sensitive data replaced by tokens. Only the tokenization system can tokenize data to create tokens, or detokenize back to redeem sensitive data under strict security controls. The token generation method must be proven to have the property that there is no feasible means through direct attack, cryptanalysis, side channel analysis, token mapping table exposure or brute force techniques to reverse tokens back to live data. Replacing live data with tokens in systems is intended to minimize exposure of sensitive data to those applications, stores, people and processes, reducing risk of compromise or accidental exposure and unauthorized access to sensitive data. Applications can operate using tokens instead of live data, with the exception of a small number of trusted applications explicitly permitted to detokenize when strictly necessary for an approved business purpose. Tokenization systems may be operated in-house within a secure isolated segment of the data center, or as a service from a secure service provider. Tokenization may be used to safeguard sensitive data involving, for example, bank accounts, financial statements, medical records, criminal records, driver's licenses, loan applications, stock trades, voter registrations, and other types of personally identifiable information (PII). Tokenization is often used in credit card processing. The PCI Council defines tokenization as "a process by which the primary account number (PAN) is replaced with a surrogate value called a token. A PAN may be linked to a reference number through the tokenization process. In this case, the merchant simply has to retain the token and a reliable third party controls the relationship and holds the PAN. The token may be created independently of the PAN, or the PAN can be used as part of the data input to the tokenization technique. The communication between the merchant and the third-party supplier must be secure to prevent an attacker from intercepting to gain the PAN and the token. De-tokenization is the reverse process of redeeming a token for its associated PAN value. The security of an individual token relies predominantly on the infeasibility of determining the original PAN knowing only the surrogate value". The choice of tokenization as an alternative to other techniques such as encryption will depend on varying regulatory requirements, interpretation, and acceptance by respective auditing or assessment entities. This is in addition to any technical, architectural or operational constraint that tokenization imposes in practical use. == Concepts and origins == The concept of tokenization, as adopted by the industry today, has existed since the first currency systems emerged centuries ago as a means to reduce risk in handling high value financial instruments by replacing them with surrogate equivalents. In the physical world, coin tokens have a long history of use replacing the financial instrument of minted coins and banknotes. In more recent history, subway tokens and casino chips found adoption for their respective systems to replace physical currency and cash handling risks such as theft. Exonumia and scrip are terms synonymous with such tokens. In the digital world, similar substitution techniques have been used since the 1970s as a means to isolate real data elements from exposure to other data systems. In databases for example, surrogate key values have been used since 1976 to isolate data associated with the internal mechanisms of databases and their external equivalents for a variety of uses in data processing. More recently, these concepts have been extended to consider this isolation tactic to provide a security mechanism for the purposes of data protection. In the payment card industry, tokenization is one means of protecting sensitive cardholder data in order to comply with industry standards and government regulations. Tokenization was applied to payment card data by Shift4 Corporation and released to the public during an industry Security Summit in Las Vegas, Nevada in 2005. The technology is meant to prevent the theft of the credit card information in storage. Shift4 defines tokenization as: "The concept of using a non-decryptable piece of data to represent, by reference, sensitive or secret data. In payment card industry (PCI) context, tokens are used to reference cardholder data that is managed in a tokenization system, application or off-site secure facility." To protect data over its full lifecycle, tokenization is often combined with end-to-end encryption to secure data in transit to the tokenization system or service, with a token replacing the original data on return. For example, to avoid the risks of malware stealing data from low-trust systems such as point of sale (POS) systems, as in the Target breach of 2013, cardholder data encryption must take place prior to card data entering the POS and not after. Encryption takes place within the confines of a security hardened and validated card reading device and data remains encrypted until received by the processing host, an approach pioneered by Heartland Payment Systems as a means to secure payment data from advanced threats, now widely adopted by industry payment processing companies and technology companies. The PCI Council has also specified end-to-end encryption (certified point-to-point encryption—P2PE) for various service implementations in various PCI Council Point-to-point Encryption documents. == The tokenization process == The process of tokenization consists of the following steps: The application sends the tokenization data and authentication information to the tokenization system. It is stopped if authentication fails and the data is delivered to an event management system. As a result, administrators can discover problems and effectively manage the system. The system moves on to the next phase if authentication is successful. Using one-way cryptographic or random generation techniques, a token is generated and kept in a highly secure data vault. The new token is provided to the application for further use, replacing the sensitive data for processing and storage. Tokenization systems share several components according to established standards. Token generation is the process of producing a token using any means, such as one-way nonreversible cryptographic functions (e.g., a hash function with a strong, secret salt) or assignment via a randomly generated number. Random number generator (RNG) techniques are often the best choice for generating token values. Token mapping – this is the process of assigning the created token value to its original value. To enable permitted look-ups of the original value using the token as the index, a secure cross-reference database must be constructed. Token data store – this is a central repository for the token mapping process that holds the original sensitive values and their related token values. Sensitive data and token values must be securely kept in an encrypted format. Management of cryptographic keys. Strong key management procedures are required for sensitive data encryption on token data stores. == Difference from encryption == Tokenization and "classic" encryption effectively protect data if implemented properly, and a computer security system may use both. While similar in certain regards, tokenization and classic encryption differ in a few key aspects. Both are cryptographic data security methods and the

  Read more →
• 

  Artificial brain

  An artificial brain (or artificial mind) is software and hardware with cognitive abilities similar to those of the animal or human brain. Research investigating "artificial brains" and brain emulation plays three important roles in science: An ongoing attempt by neuroscientists to understand how the human brain works, known as cognitive neuroscience. A thought experiment in the philosophy of artificial intelligence, demonstrating that it is possible, at least in theory, to create a machine that has all the capabilities of a human being. A long-term project to create machines exhibiting behavior comparable to those of animals with complex central nervous system such as mammals and most particularly humans. The ultimate goal of creating a machine exhibiting human-like behavior or intelligence is sometimes called strong AI. An example of the first objective is the project reported by Aston University in Birmingham, England where researchers are using biological cells to create "neurospheres" (small clusters of neurons) in order to develop new treatments for diseases including Alzheimer's, motor neurone and Parkinson's disease. The second objective is a reply to arguments such as John Searle's Chinese room argument, Hubert Dreyfus's critique of AI or Roger Penrose's argument in The Emperor's New Mind. These critics argued that there are aspects of human consciousness or expertise that can not be simulated by machines. One reply to their arguments is that the biological processes inside the brain can be simulated to any degree of accuracy. This reply was made as early as 1950, by Alan Turing in his classic paper "Computing Machinery and Intelligence". The third objective is generally called artificial general intelligence by researchers. However, Ray Kurzweil prefers the term "strong AI". In his book The Singularity is Near, he focuses on whole brain emulation using conventional computing machines as an approach to implementing artificial brains, and claims (on grounds of computer power continuing an exponential growth trend) that this could be done by 2025. Henry Markram, director of the Blue Brain project (which is attempting brain emulation), made a similar claim (2020) at the Oxford TED conference in 2009. == Approaches to brain simulation == W. Ross Ashby's pioneering work in cybernetics provided an early mathematical framework for understanding adaptive brain-like systems. In his 1952 book Design for a Brain, Ashby proposed that the brain could be modeled as an ultrastable system that maintains equilibrium through continuous adaptation to environmental perturbations. His approach used differential equations and state-space models to describe how neural systems could exhibit purposeful behavior through feedback mechanisms. Ashby's homeostat, a physical machine built in 1948, demonstrated these principles through an electromechanical device with four interconnected units that automatically adjusted their parameters to maintain stability when disturbed. The homeostat represented one of the first attempts to build an artificial system exhibiting brain-like adaptive behavior, influencing subsequent work in adaptive systems, neural networks, and artificial intelligence. Although direct human brain emulation using artificial neural networks on a high-performance computing engine is a commonly discussed approach, there are other approaches. An alternative artificial brain implementation could be based on Holographic Neural Technology (HNeT) non linear phase coherence/decoherence principles. The analogy has been made to quantum processes through the core synaptic algorithm which has strong similarities to the quantum mechanical wave equation. EvBrain is a form of evolutionary software that can evolve "brainlike" neural networks, such as the network immediately behind the retina. In November 2008, IBM received a US$4.9 million grant from the Pentagon for research into creating intelligent computers. The Blue Brain project is being conducted with the assistance of IBM in Lausanne. The project is based on the premise that it is possible to artificially link the neurons "in the computer" by placing thirty million synapses in their proper three-dimensional position. Some proponents of strong AI speculated in 2009 that computers in connection with Blue Brain and Soul Catcher may exceed human intellectual capacity by around 2015, and that it is likely that we will be able to download the human brain at some time around 2050. While Blue Brain is able to represent complex neural connections on the large scale, the project does not achieve the link between brain activity and behaviors executed by the brain. In 2012, project Spaun (Semantic Pointer Architecture Unified Network) attempted to model multiple parts of the human brain through large-scale representations of neural connections that generate complex behaviors in addition to mapping. Spaun's design recreates elements of human brain anatomy. The model, consisting of approximately 2.5 million neurons, includes features of the visual and motor cortices, GABAergic and dopaminergic connections, the ventral tegmental area (VTA), substantia nigra, and others. The design allows for several functions in response to eight tasks, using visual inputs of typed or handwritten characters and outputs carried out by a mechanical arm. Spaun's functions include copying a drawing, recognizing images, and counting. There are good reasons to believe that, regardless of implementation strategy, the predictions of realising artificial brains in the near future are optimistic. In particular brains (including the human brain) and cognition are not currently well understood, and the scale of computation required is unknown. Another near term limitation is that all current approaches for brain simulation require orders of magnitude larger power consumption compared with a human brain. The human brain consumes about 20 W of power, whereas current supercomputers may use as much as 1 MW—i.e., an order of 100,000 more. == Artificial brain thought experiment == Some critics of brain simulation believe that it is simpler to create general intelligent action directly without imitating nature. Some commentators have used the analogy that early attempts to construct flying machines modeled them after birds, but that modern aircraft do not look like birds.

  Read more →
• 

  Trust federation

  A trust federation is part of the evolving Identity Metasystem that will bring a new layer of persistent identity and trusted data sharing to the Internet. Although the concept of trust federations is technology neutral, several protocols like SAML, OpenID, Information Card, XDI can handle the challenges of technical interoperability. The challenge of business and social interoperability requires a new type of cooperative association similar to a credit card association. Instead of banks, however, a trust federation is an alliance of i-brokers and their customers who agree to abide by a common set of agreements in the care and handling of customer data. A model for trust federations is offered by Open Identity Exchange and Kantara Initiative, which is applied in the U.S. Government ICAM Trust Framework. Some operational trust federations are: InCommon (academic, USA) REFEDs (Research and Education Federations, Europe) IGTF Interoperable Global Trust Federation Portalverbund Government Portal Federation, Austria Trust federations are not limited to the social web use case, but apply to all federations where trust in identity and compliance to other objectives of information security such as confidentiality, integrity and privacy is brokered.

  Read more →
• 

  Smart-ID

  Smart-ID is an electronic authentication tool developed by SK ID Solutions, an Estonian company. Users can log in to various electronic services and sign documents with an electronic signature. Smart-ID meets the European Union's eIDAS Regulation and the European Central Bank's standards for a secure authentication solution. Smart-ID is a Qualified Signature Creator Device (QSCD) that can issue a Qualified Electronic Signature (QES). The Smart-ID app is compatible with both iOS and Android devices and does not require a SIM card. By 2021, the Smart-ID application was launched in the Huawei AppGallery. As of May 2023, Smart-ID has 3,298,969 active users across the Baltic States (Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia). Every month, the Smart-ID processes 79 million transactions. In March 2023, Smart-ID users made an exceptional 85 million transactions. == History == In November 2016, SK ID Solutions debuted the Smart-ID tool for the first time at its annual conference. In February 2017, eKool, Starman, and Tallinn Kaubamaja Grupp were the first to implement Smart-ID authentication in their e-services. In March 2017, Smart-ID was added as an authentication option to SEB bank and Swedbank's online banking in all three Baltic States. Dokobit, previously known as DigiDoc, began offering its clients the ability to use e-services using Smart-ID in April 2017. More than 100 service providers had implemented Smart-ID as an authentication solution for their services by November 2019. At its annual conference on November 8, 2018, SK ID Solutions revealed that Smart-ID had been certified as compatible with the QSCD[8] level, the highest level of qualified electronic signature in the European Union, following a rigorous certification process. As a result, the Smart-QES-level ID's electronic signature, the digital counterpart of a handwritten signature, is now available to all users who have registered with the tool. This signature is accepted by all European Union member states. On August 26, 2019, Estonian Information Systems Supervisory Authority experts reviewed Smart-ID (ISSA). Based on the methods provided in the eIDAS Regulation, the expert committee concluded that Smart-ID offers a high level of electronic identification assurance. SK ID Solutions and RIA struck an agreement in September 2019 that allows Smart-ID to authenticate Estonian state e-services via RIA's central authentication service, which is used by over 60 public authorities. Smart-ID accounts created three years ago have expired in January 2020. Therefore, renewing them and performing mandatory updates was necessary. In February 2020, SK ID Solutions announced that Smart-ID could be used to give digital signatures in the national digital signature software DigiDoc4, which up until this moment was only possible with ID cards via Mobile-ID. Users must have at least version 4.2.4.71 or later of the DigiDoc4 software installed on their computers to use this feature. Since February 2020, Smart-ID accounts can now be created with biometric information from an ID card or passport, but only by users who have previously used a Smart-ID account. Since October 2022, 13–17 years old minors in Lithuania are able to create a Smart-ID account using biometric information too. A parent or legal guardian must approve the registration. SK ID Solutions collaborated on the new solution with iProov from the United Kingdom and InnoValor from the Netherlands. TÜV Informationstechnik GmbH, a German certification company, assessed it. Since May 2023, Smart-ID can be used to submit company's annual reports in Estonia and digitally sign anything in the e-business register using your PIN2. == Overview == The Smart-ID app is available for download on Google Play and Apple's App Store. Android 4.4 and iOS 11 are the oldest supported operating system versions for Smart-ID. Smart-ID works on the premise of two-factor authentication, combining an intelligent device (something the user owns) with PINs (something the user knows). A new user must first authenticate themselves with an ID card or a mobile phone number and then confirm a PIN1 and PIN2 code, either manually or automatically produced. The first PIN is used to authenticate a person's identity when accessing e-banking or e-services, while the second PIN is used to support electronic signatures and authenticate transactions (e.g., transfers). The PIN1 code must be four digits long, while the PIN2 code must be five digits long. To log in to an e-service, the user must use Smart-ID as the authentication method and enter their unique Smart-ID user ID. A notification will open on the user's smart device where the software is installed and display a verification code. If the code matches the code presented to the user by the e-service, then the user can confirm the match by entering their PIN1 code. The user must verify the action with their PIN2 code when giving digital signatures. A Smart-ID account is valid for three years. The report can be updated, changed, and deleted at any given time, free of charge. Smart-ID is available in five languages: Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Russian, and English. An international survey conducted in 2021 revealed that Smart-ID is the most reliable authentication solution in Baltic countries. In January 2023, the number of times Smart-ID was used to access State Authentication Service (TARA) in Estonia has surpassed those of Mobile-ID and ID-cards for the first time since July 2022. == Security == Smart-ID is based on Cybernetica's SplitKey authentication and digital signature platform technology, for which the company has filed a patent application. Public key cryptography, digital signature methods, and critical public infrastructures are all used in the technology. The user's PIN is not saved on the device and is only needed to decrypt the private key in the Smart-ID app. When the user inputs the PIN, the private key is cracked, and the answer is transmitted to the Smart-ID server, where a portion of the key given by the app is joined with the server's encrypted key. The app will block the user from accessing it for three hours if they input the incorrect PIN three times in a row. If this happens once again, the app will lock for 24 hours. If this happens a third time, the account will be permanently disabled. PINs cannot be changed or recovered once an account has been created. The user must create a new account if the account is permanently blocked. Smart-ID uses the Apple and Google messaging networks to notify the app when new data is saved on its servers. == Phishing == In February 2019, unknown criminals attempted to create Smart-ID accounts with stolen IDs obtained via phishing customers' text messages and website addresses, according to a monthly report by the Estonian Information System Manager in April 2019. The Latvian Information Technology Security Incident Assessment Body Cert was also notified of these intrusions on March 1. Fraudsters sent emails to potential victims pretending to be bank representatives. The mails linked users to a phishing page after redirecting them to a phony bank login page. Victims were asked to log in using their identification information and PIN1 code. The fraudsters then began the process of generating a new Smart-ID account. As a result, the victim had to input a PIN2 number, which permitted the fraudster to finish setting up a new tab with the victim's personal information. Fraudsters in Estonia were able to log in to multiple e-services utilizing Smart-ID using a Smart-ID account and the victim's data. On behalf of the victims, fraudsters also employed online banking services. Later, the Estonian Information System Manager identified several victims, some of whom had also experienced financial losses. The Estonian Information System Manager requested a full report on the event from SK ID Solutions. The organization opted not to criticize the corporation after receiving the information, although it did propose that the procedure of creating Smart-ID accounts be reviewed. According to the Estonian Banking Association, Estonian banks have not discontinued using Smart-ID and do not think it is required. Smart-ID was exposed to a thorough review process in September 2019 to determine this authentication instrument's level of security. Reviewers discovered no flaws, and SK ID Solutions and the Estonian Information System Manager signed a contract. Estonia later introduced Smart-ID and other authentication mechanisms to the central public services portal.

  Read more →
• 

  Data custodian

  In data governance groups, responsibilities for data management are increasingly divided between the business process owners and information technology (IT) departments. Two functional titles commonly used for these roles are data steward and data custodian. Data Stewards are commonly responsible for data content, context, and associated business rules. Data custodians are responsible for the safe custody, transport, storage of the data and implementation of business rules. Simply put, Data Stewards are responsible for what is stored in a data field, while data custodians are responsible for the technical environment and database structure. Common job titles for data custodians are database administrator (DBA), data modeler, ETL developer and data engineer. == Data custodian responsibilities == A data custodian ensures: Access to the data is authorized and controlled Data stewards are identified for each data set Technical processes sustain data integrity Processes exist for data quality issue resolution in partnership with data stewards Technical controls safeguard data Data added to data sets are consistent with the common data model Versions of master data are maintained along with the history of changes Change management practices are applied in maintenance of the database Data content and changes can be audited

  Read more →
• 

  Manifold regularization

  In machine learning, manifold regularization is a technique for using the shape of a dataset to constrain the functions that should be learned on that dataset. In many machine learning problems, the data to be learned do not cover the entire input space. For example, a facial recognition system may not need to classify any possible image, but only the subset of images that contain faces. The technique of manifold learning assumes that the relevant subset of data comes from a manifold, a mathematical structure with useful properties. The technique also assumes that the function to be learned is smooth: data with different labels are not likely to be close together, and so the labeling function should not change quickly in areas where there are likely to be many data points. Because of this assumption, a manifold regularization algorithm can use unlabeled data to inform where the learned function is allowed to change quickly and where it is not, using an extension of the technique of Tikhonov regularization. Manifold regularization algorithms can extend supervised learning algorithms in semi-supervised learning and transductive learning settings, where unlabeled data are available. The technique has been used for applications including medical imaging, geographical imaging, and object recognition. == Manifold regularizer == === Motivation === Manifold regularization is a type of regularization, a family of techniques that reduces overfitting and ensures that a problem is well-posed by penalizing complex solutions. In particular, manifold regularization extends the technique of Tikhonov regularization as applied to Reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces (RKHSs). Under standard Tikhonov regularization on RKHSs, a learning algorithm attempts to learn a function f {\displaystyle f} from among a hypothesis space of functions H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} . The hypothesis space is an RKHS, meaning that it is associated with a kernel K {\displaystyle K} , and so every candidate function f {\displaystyle f} has a norm ‖ f ‖ K {\displaystyle \left\|f\right\|_{K}} , which represents the complexity of the candidate function in the hypothesis space. When the algorithm considers a candidate function, it takes its norm into account in order to penalize complex functions. Formally, given a set of labeled training data ( x 1 , y 1 ) , … , ( x ℓ , y ℓ ) {\displaystyle (x_{1},y_{1}),\ldots ,(x_{\ell },y_{\ell })} with x i ∈ X , y i ∈ Y {\displaystyle x_{i}\in X,y_{i}\in Y} and a loss function V {\displaystyle V} , a learning algorithm using Tikhonov regularization will attempt to solve the expression arg min f ∈ H 1 ℓ ∑ i = 1 ℓ V ( f ( x i ) , y i ) + γ ‖ f ‖ K 2 {\displaystyle {\underset {f\in {\mathcal {H}}}{\arg \!\min }}{\frac {1}{\ell }}\sum _{i=1}^{\ell }V(f(x_{i}),y_{i})+\gamma \left\|f\right\|_{K}^{2}} where γ {\displaystyle \gamma } is a hyperparameter that controls how much the algorithm will prefer simpler functions over functions that fit the data better. Manifold regularization adds a second regularization term, the intrinsic regularizer, to the ambient regularizer used in standard Tikhonov regularization. Under the manifold assumption in machine learning, the data in question do not come from the entire input space X {\displaystyle X} , but instead from a nonlinear manifold M ⊂ X {\displaystyle M\subset X} . The geometry of this manifold, the intrinsic space, is used to determine the regularization norm. === Laplacian norm === There are many possible choices for the intrinsic regularizer ‖ f ‖ I {\displaystyle \left\|f\right\|_{I}} . Many natural choices involve the gradient on the manifold ∇ M {\displaystyle \nabla _{M}} , which can provide a measure of how smooth a target function is. A smooth function should change slowly where the input data are dense; that is, the gradient ∇ M f ( x ) {\displaystyle \nabla _{M}f(x)} should be small where the marginal probability density P X ( x ) {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}_{X}(x)} , the probability density of a randomly drawn data point appearing at x {\displaystyle x} , is large. This gives one appropriate choice for the intrinsic regularizer: ‖ f ‖ I 2 = ∫ x ∈ M ‖ ∇ M f ( x ) ‖ 2 d P X ( x ) {\displaystyle \left\|f\right\|_{I}^{2}=\int _{x\in M}\left\|\nabla _{M}f(x)\right\|^{2}\,d{\mathcal {P}}_{X}(x)} In practice, this norm cannot be computed directly because the marginal distribution P X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}_{X}} is unknown, but it can be estimated from the provided data. === Graph-based approach of the Laplacian norm === When the distances between input points are interpreted as a graph, then the Laplacian matrix of the graph can help to estimate the marginal distribution. Suppose that the input data include ℓ {\displaystyle \ell } labeled examples (pairs of an input x {\displaystyle x} and a label y {\displaystyle y} ) and u {\displaystyle u} unlabeled examples (inputs without associated labels). Define W {\displaystyle W} to be a matrix of edge weights for a graph, where W i j {\displaystyle W_{ij}} is a similarity built from distance measure between the data points x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} and x j {\displaystyle x_{j}} (so that more close implies higher W i j {\displaystyle W_{ij}} ). Define D {\displaystyle D} to be a diagonal matrix with D i i = ∑ j = 1 ℓ + u W i j {\displaystyle D_{ii}=\sum _{j=1}^{\ell +u}W_{ij}} and L {\displaystyle L} to be the Laplacian matrix D − W {\displaystyle D-W} . Then, as the number of data points ℓ + u {\displaystyle \ell +u} increases, L {\displaystyle L} converges to the Laplace–Beltrami operator Δ M {\displaystyle \Delta _{M}} , which is the divergence of the gradient ∇ M {\displaystyle \nabla _{M}} . Then, if f {\displaystyle \mathbf {f} } is a vector of the values of f {\displaystyle f} at the data, f = [ f ( x 1 ) , … , f ( x l + u ) ] T {\displaystyle \mathbf {f} =[f(x_{1}),\ldots ,f(x_{l+u})]^{\mathrm {T} }} , the intrinsic norm can be estimated: ‖ f ‖ I 2 = 1 ( ℓ + u ) 2 f T L f {\displaystyle \left\|f\right\|_{I}^{2}={\frac {1}{(\ell +u)^{2}}}\mathbf {f} ^{\mathrm {T} }L\mathbf {f} } As the number of data points ℓ + u {\displaystyle \ell +u} increases, this empirical definition of ‖ f ‖ I 2 {\displaystyle \left\|f\right\|_{I}^{2}} converges to the definition when P X {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}_{X}} is known. === Solving the regularization problem with graph-based approach === Using the weights γ A {\displaystyle \gamma _{A}} and γ I {\displaystyle \gamma _{I}} for the ambient and intrinsic regularizers, the final expression to be solved becomes: arg min f ∈ H 1 ℓ ∑ i = 1 ℓ V ( f ( x i ) , y i ) + γ A ‖ f ‖ K 2 + γ I ( ℓ + u ) 2 f T L f {\displaystyle {\underset {f\in {\mathcal {H}}}{\arg \!\min }}{\frac {1}{\ell }}\sum _{i=1}^{\ell }V(f(x_{i}),y_{i})+\gamma _{A}\left\|f\right\|_{K}^{2}+{\frac {\gamma _{I}}{(\ell +u)^{2}}}\mathbf {f} ^{\mathrm {T} }L\mathbf {f} } As with other kernel methods, H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} may be an infinite-dimensional space, so if the regularization expression cannot be solved explicitly, it is impossible to search the entire space for a solution. Instead, a representer theorem shows that under certain conditions on the choice of the norm ‖ f ‖ I {\displaystyle \left\|f\right\|_{I}} , the optimal solution f ∗ {\displaystyle f^{}} must be a linear combination of the kernel centered at each of the input points: for some weights α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} , f ∗ ( x ) = ∑ i = 1 ℓ + u α i K ( x i , x ) {\displaystyle f^{}(x)=\sum _{i=1}^{\ell +u}\alpha _{i}K(x_{i},x)} Using this result, it is possible to search for the optimal solution f ∗ {\displaystyle f^{}} by searching the finite-dimensional space defined by the possible choices of α i {\displaystyle \alpha _{i}} . === Functional approach of the Laplacian norm === The idea beyond the graph-Laplacian is to use neighbors to estimate the Laplacian. This method is akin to local averaging methods, that are known to scale poorly in high-dimensional problems. Indeed, the graph Laplacian is known to suffer from the curse of dimensionality. Luckily, it is possible to leverage expected smoothness of the function to estimate thanks to more advanced functional analysis. This method consists of estimating the Laplacian operator using derivatives of the kernel reading ∂ 1 , j K ( x i , x ) {\displaystyle \partial _{1,j}K(x_{i},x)} where ∂ 1 , j {\displaystyle \partial _{1,j}} denotes the partial derivatives according to the j-th coordinate of the first variable. This second approach to the Laplacian norm is to put in relation with meshfree methods, that contrast with the finite difference method in PDE. == Applications == Manifold regularization can extend a variety of algorithms that can be expressed using Tikhonov regularization, by choosing an appropriate loss function V {\displaystyle V} and hypothesis space H {\displaystyle {\mathcal {H}}} . Two commonly used examples are the families of support vector machines and regularized least squares algorithm

  Read more →
• 

  Computer network

  In computer science, computer engineering, and telecommunications, a network is a group of communicating computers and peripherals known as hosts, which communicate data to other hosts via communication protocols, as facilitated by networking hardware. Within a computer network, hosts are identified by network addresses, which allow networking hardware to locate and identify hosts. Hosts may also have hostnames, memorable labels for the host nodes, which can be mapped to a network address using a hosts file or a name server such as Domain Name Service. The physical medium that supports information exchange includes wired media like copper cables, optical fibers, and wireless radio-frequency media. The arrangement of hosts and hardware within a network architecture is known as the network topology. The first computer network was created in 1940 when George Stibitz connected a terminal at Dartmouth to his Complex Number Calculator at Bell Labs in New York. Today, almost all computers are connected to a computer network, such as the global Internet or embedded networks such as those found in many modern electronic devices. Many applications have only limited functionality unless they are connected to a network. Networks support applications and services, such as access to the World Wide Web, digital video and audio, application and storage servers, printers, and email and instant messaging applications. == History == === Early origins (1940 – 1960s) === In 1940, George Stibitz of Bell Labs connected a teletype at Dartmouth to a Bell Labs computer running his Complex Number Calculator to demonstrate the use of computers at long distance. This was the first real-time, remote use of a computing machine. In the late 1950s, a network of computers was built for the U.S. military Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) radar system using the Bell 101 modem. It was the first commercial modem for computers, released by AT&T Corporation in 1958. The modem allowed digital data to be transmitted over regular unconditioned telephone lines at a speed of 110 bits per second (bit/s). In 1959, Christopher Strachey filed a patent application for time-sharing in the United Kingdom and John McCarthy initiated the first project to implement time-sharing of user programs at MIT. Strachey passed the concept on to J. C. R. Licklider at the inaugural UNESCO Information Processing Conference in Paris that year. McCarthy was instrumental in the creation of three of the earliest time-sharing systems (the Compatible Time-Sharing System in 1961, the BBN Time-Sharing System in 1962, and the Dartmouth Time-Sharing System in 1963). In 1959, Anatoly Kitov proposed to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union a detailed plan for the re-organization of the control of the Soviet armed forces and of the Soviet economy on the basis of a network of computing centers. Kitov's proposal was rejected, as later was the 1962 OGAS economy management network project. During the 1960s, Paul Baran and Donald Davies independently invented the concept of packet switching for data communication between computers over a network. Baran's work addressed adaptive routing of message blocks across a distributed network, but did not include routers with software switches, nor the idea that users, rather than the network itself, would provide the reliability. Davies' hierarchical network design included high-speed routers, communication protocols and the essence of the end-to-end principle. The NPL network, a local area network at the National Physical Laboratory (United Kingdom), pioneered the implementation of the concept in 1968-69 using 768 kbit/s links. Both Baran's and Davies' inventions were seminal contributions that influenced the development of computer networks. === ARPANET (1969 – 1974) === In 1962 and 1963, J. C. R. Licklider sent a series of memos to office colleagues discussing the concept of the "Intergalactic Computer Network", a computer network intended to allow general communications among computer users. This ultimately became the basis for the ARPANET, which began in 1969. That year, the first four nodes of the ARPANET were connected using 50 kbit/s circuits between the University of California at Los Angeles, the Stanford Research Institute, the University of California, Santa Barbara, and the University of Utah. Designed principally by Bob Kahn, the network's routing, flow control, software design and network control were developed by the IMP team working for Bolt Beranek & Newman. In the early 1970s, Leonard Kleinrock carried out mathematical work to model the performance of packet-switched networks, which underpinned the development of the ARPANET. His theoretical work on hierarchical routing in the late 1970s with student Farouk Kamoun remains critical to the operation of the Internet today. In 1973, Peter Kirstein put internetworking into practice at University College London (UCL), connecting the ARPANET to British academic networks, the first international heterogeneous computer network. That same year, Robert Metcalfe wrote a formal memo at Xerox PARC describing Ethernet, a local area networking system he created with David Boggs. It was inspired by the packet radio ALOHAnet, started by Norman Abramson and Franklin Kuo at the University of Hawaii in the late 1960s. Metcalfe and Boggs, with John Shoch and Edward Taft, also developed the PARC Universal Packet for internetworking. That year, the French CYCLADES network, directed by Louis Pouzin was the first to make the hosts responsible for the reliable delivery of data, rather than this being a centralized service of the network itself. === The internet (1974 – present) === In 1974, Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn published their seminal 1974 paper on internetworking, A Protocol for Packet Network Intercommunication. Later that year, Cerf, Yogen Dalal, and Carl Sunshine wrote the first Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) specification, RFC 675, coining the term Internet as a shorthand for internetworking. In July 1976, Metcalfe and Boggs published their paper "Ethernet: Distributed Packet Switching for Local Computer Networks" and in December 1977, together with Butler Lampson and Charles P. Thacker, they received U.S. patent 4063220A for their invention. In 1976, John Murphy of Datapoint Corporation created ARCNET, a token-passing network first used to share storage devices. In 1979, Robert Metcalfe pursued making Ethernet an open standard. In 1980, Ethernet was upgraded from the original 2.94 Mbit/s protocol to the 10 Mbit/s protocol, which was developed by Ron Crane, Bob Garner, Roy Ogus, Hal Murray, Dave Redell and Yogen Dalal. In 1986, the National Science Foundation (NSF) launched the National Science Foundation Network (NSFNET) as a general-purpose research network connecting various NSF-funded sites to each other and to regional research and education networks. In 1995, the transmission speed capacity for Ethernet increased from 10 Mbit/s to 100 Mbit/s. By 1998, Ethernet supported transmission speeds of 1 Gbit/s. Subsequently, higher speeds of up to 800 Gbit/s were added (as of 2025). The scaling of Ethernet has been a contributing factor to its continued use. In the 1980s and 1990s, as embedded systems were becoming increasingly important in factories, cars, and airplanes, network protocols were developed to allow the embedded computers to communicate. In the late 1990s and 2000s, ubiquitous computing and an Internet of Things became popular. === Commercial usage === In 1960, the commercial airline reservation system semi-automatic business research environment (SABRE) went online with two connected mainframes. In 1965, Western Electric introduced the first widely used telephone switch that implemented computer control in the switching fabric. In 1972, commercial services were first deployed on experimental public data networks in Europe. Public data networks in Europe, North America and Japan began using X.25 in the late 1970s and interconnected with X.75. This underlying infrastructure was used for expanding TCP/IP networks in the 1980s. In 1977, the first long-distance fiber network was deployed by GTE in Long Beach, California. == Hardware == === Network links === The transmission media used to link devices to form a computer network include electrical cable, optical fiber, and free space. In the OSI model, the software to handle the media is defined at layers 1 and 2 — the physical layer and the data link layer. Common examples of networking technologies include: Ethernet is a widely adopted family of networking technologies that use copper and fiber media in local area networks (LAN). The media and protocol standards that enable communication between networked devices over Ethernet are defined by IEEE 802.3. Wireless LAN standards, which use radio waves. Some standards use infrared signals as a transmission medium. Power line communication uses a building's power cabling to transmit

  Read more →
• 

  Social media as a public utility

  Social media as a public utility is a theory postulating that social networking sites (such as Meta - ie:Facebook & Instagram or Alphabet - ie: YouTube & Google, but also independent sites such as Twitter, Tumblr, Snapchat etc.) are essential public services that should be regulated by the government, in a manner similar to how electric and phone utilities are typically government regulated. It is based on the notion that social media platforms have monopoly power and broad social influence. == Background == === Definitions === Social media is defined as "a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content." Furthermore, the New Zealand Government of Internal Affairs describes it as "a set of online technologies, sites, and practices which are used to share opinions, experiences and perspectives. Fundamentally it is about the conversation. In contrast with traditional media, the nature of social media is to be highly interactive." Moreover, the term social media is described as online tools that let people interact and communicate with each other. This has become a standard word for online cultural exchange and a dominant way for individuals to engage on the internet. By using social media individuals become more closely and strongly connected than ever before. The traditional definition of the term public utility is "an infrastructural necessity for the general public where the supply conditions are such that the public may not be provided with a reasonable service at reasonable prices because of monopoly in the area." Conventional public utilities include water, natural gas, and electricity. In order to secure the interests of the public, utilities are regulated. Public utilities can also be seen as natural monopolies implying that the highest degree of efficiency is accomplished under one operator in the marketplace. Public utility regulation for social media has been largely criticized because people believe it would produce undesirable and indirect effects. However, others say that truly effective government regulation would produce valuable results. Social media as a public utility is a crucial debate because utilities get regulated, so marking social media websites as utilities would require government regulation of various social media websites and platforms such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter. Applying the term public utility to social media implies that social media websites are public necessities, and, consequently, should be regulated by the government. While social media are not as essential for survival as traditional public utilities such as electricity, water, and natural gas, many people believe it has become vital for living in an interconnected world and without it, living a successful life would be difficult. Therefore, many people believe that social media has reached utility status and should be treated as a public utility. However, others believe that this is not true because social media are constantly revolutionizing and giving such platforms "utility status" would result in government regulation, which would consequently hinder innovation. Over the past decade many have debated and questioned whether or not "Internet service providers should be considered essential facilities or natural monopolies and regulated as public utilities." === Monopoly === A monopoly is defined as "a firm that is the only seller of a product or service having no close substitutes." A natural monopoly is when the entire demand within a relevant market can be satisfied at lowest cost by one firm rather than by two or more, and if such a market contains more than one firm then the firms will "quickly shake down to one through mergers or failures, or production will continue to consume more resources than necessary." In a monopoly competition is said to be short-lived, and in a natural monopoly it is said to produce inefficient results." Public utility companies can be regulated to prevent them from gaining monopolistic control. In November 2011 AT&T's proposal for merging with T-Mobile was rejected because it would have "diminished competition," and have led to the company having monopolistic power within the telephone industry. Such regulation is permitted because the telephone industry is a public utility. Similarly, Microsoft has also been prevented from taking various business actions that could result in the company gaining monopolistic power. If social media were a public utility then regulation of Google and Facebook would similarly dictate what they could and could not do. The possibility was raised in 2018 by U.S. Representative Steve King during a House Judiciary hearing on social media filtering practices. == Arguments == Advocates of this theory believe that social media websites already act like public utilities, and therefore regulation is needed. Additionally, advocates say that in the 21st century, using such websites are as necessary for communication as using traditional public utilities such as telephone, water, electricity, and natural gas are for other everyday uses. Specifically, advocates note that Google search should be treated as a public utility and needs to be regulated because it dominates the search engine market and no website can afford to ignore it. There is the position that a social media website such as Google "is a common carrier and should be regulated as such (Newman 2011)." These are reinforced by a perception that social media companies fail to properly maintain fair platforms for discourse. === Individual level === Advocates of regulating social media as a public utility believe that having an Internet presence using social media websites is imperative for individuals to adequately take part in the 21st century. Consequently, they argue that these sites are public utilities that need to be regulated to ensure that the constitutional rights of users are protected. For example, regulation may be needed to protect freedom of speech against risks such as Internet censorship and deplatforming. Social media affects people's behavior. For instance, it plays an important role in shaping its users' decisions and actions pertaining to health. This is demonstrated in a Pew Research Center research, which showed that 72 percent of American adults turned to social media for health information in 2011. Around 70 percent of people with chronic illnesses also use the platform to find cure, diagnoses, and other health answers. This development becomes a public issue as social media are likely to provide wrong medical information. Additionally, social media sites can also facilitate deleterious health behavior such as smoking, drug use, and harmful sexual behavior. === Business level === Advocates of social media as a public utility maintain that social media services dominate the Internet and are mainly owned by three or four companies that have unparalleled power to shape user interaction, and because of this power such businesses need to be regulated as public utilities. Zeynep Tufekci, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, claims that services on the Internet such as Google, eBay, Facebook, Amazon.com, are all natural monopolies. She has stated that these services "benefit greatly from network externalities[,] which means that the more people on the service, the more useful it is for everyone," and thus it is difficult to replace the market leader. === Government level === Advocates of social media as a public utility believe that the government should impose restrictions on social media websites, such as Google, that are designed to benefit its rivals. Due to the recent substantial growth of social media websites such as Google, advocates claim that such a website "might need search neutrality regulation modeled after net neutrality regulation and that a Federal Search Commission might be needed to enforce such a regime." danah boyd expresses a future issue which the government may have to deal with in her research: Facebook is becoming an international social media website, specifically prevalent in Canada and Europe which are "two regions that love to regulate their utilities." Furthermore, recent books by New America Foundation Senior Fellow Rebecca MacKinnon and law professor Lori Andrews advise society to start considering Facebook and Google as nation-states or the "sovereigns of cyberspace." Overall, advocates of social media as a public utility believe that due to the immense popularity and necessity of social media websites, it is imperative that the Government imposes regulations in the same manner they do for electricity, water, and natural gas. == Counterarguments == Opponents of this theory say that social media websites should not be treated as public utilities because these platforms are changing every year, and because they are not essential services for s

  Read more →