AI Email Reply Free

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

• 

  Security switch

  A security switch is a hardware device designed to protect computers, laptops, smartphones and similar devices from unauthorized access or operation, distinct from a virtual security switch which offers software protection. Security switches should be operated by an authorized user only; for this reason, it should be isolated from other devices, in order to prevent unauthorized access, and it should not be possible to bypass it, in order to prevent malicious manipulation. The primary purpose of a security switch is to provide protection against surveillance, eavesdropping, malware, spyware, and theft of digital devices. Unlike other protections or techniques, a security switch can provide protection even if security has already been breached, since it does not have any access from other components and is not accessible by software. It can additionally disconnect or block peripheral devices, and perform "man in the middle" operations. A security switch can be used for human presence detection since it can only be initiated by a human operator. It can also be used as a firewall. == Types == === Hardware kill switch === A hardware kill switch (HKS) is a physical switch that cuts the signal or power line to the device or disable the chip running them. == Examples == A cellphone is compromised by malicious software, and the device initiates video and audio recording. When the user activates the “prevent capture of audio/video” mode of the security switch, that either physically disconnects or cut the power to the microphone and the camera, which stops the recording. A laptop that has an embedded security switch is stolen. The security switch detects a lack of communication from a specific external source for 12 hours, and responds by disconnecting the screen, keyboard and other key components, rendering the laptop useless, with no possibility of recovery, even with a full format. A user wishes to prevent tracking of their location. The user then activates geolocation protection and the security switch disables all GPS communication, eliminating the possibility of tracking the device's location. A user desires to eliminate the possibility of their PIN being copied from their smartphone. They can activate the secure input function, causing the security switch to disconnect the touch screen from the operating system, so input signals are not available to any devices except the switch. A security switch performs scheduled monitoring and finds that a program is attempting to download malicious content from the internet. It then activates internet security function and disables internet access, interrupting the download. If laptop software is compromised by air-gap malware, the user may activate the security switch and disconnect the speaker and microphone, so it can not establish communication with the device. == History == Google started to work on a hardware kill switch for AI in 2016. In 2019, Apple, and Google, along with a handful of smaller players, are designing “kill switches” that cut the power to the microphones or cameras in their devices. Googles first product that implemented this is Nest Hub Max. Hardware kill switches are already available and widely tested on the PinePhone, Librem, Shiftphone, to cut power to the input peripherals (microphone, camera) but also the network connectivity modules (wifi, cellular network).

  Read more →
• 

  Cloud9 (service provider)

  Cloud9 is a mobile network operator focussed on providing mobile subscriptions over the air to programmable SIM cards, SoftSIMs and eSIMs. Their service is used in both smartphones and IoT devices. The company is privately held with headquarters in the United Kingdom. == History == Cloud9, originally owned by Wire9 Telecom Plc, funded and established by investor and telecom specialist, Lee Jones, before being sold for an undisclosed sum by Jones to billionaire Romain Zaleski. It established in the UK, Gibraltar, and Isle of Man as a domestic Mobile Network Operator. Cloud9 obtained spectrum licenses in the Isle of Man in 2007 and Gibraltar in 2010. Around 2011, Cloud9 decided to focus on supplying global SIM cards to save roaming charges. The Gibraltar spectrum licence was sold to another company. The business relocated its core network to Telehouse in London and became a subsidiary of BlueMango Technologies Ltd. Later the company was acquired by Wireless Logic Ltd. In 2013, Cloud9 acquired the IPR of Zynetix Ltd. Through this acquisition, the company achieved sales as an MVNE. In 2014, the company was voted as a Red Herring Top 100 Europe finalist. == Features == Cloud9 has shipped several million 'Travel SIMs'; all SIM cards have been branded with the logo of these resellers. Additionally, the company provides the digital signatures ('profiles' or 'IMSIs') that provide a SIM card with the ability to register with a network and function. These can be provisioned over the air to dynamic SIM cards such as programmable removable UICCs, SoftSIMs and eSIMs. They are members of the GSM Association and are involved in the GSMA remote SIM provisioning standard for eSIMs that will be released soon. The Cloud9 core network also supports 4G (HSS/PDG). Its Mobile Country Code is 234 and its Mobile Network Code is 18. TADIG code is GBRC9. The company has been allocated the following UK number ranges by Ofcom: 4478722, 4477000, 4474409, 4479782, 4479783 and 4475588 The core network is hosted on Cloud9 servers at Telehouse near Canary Wharf in London. Additional components are hosted in Amazon Web Services facilities around the world in order to minimise latency and provide scalability.

  Read more →
• 

  Democratization of technology

  Democratization of technology is the process by which access to technology rapidly extends to an ever-broader audience, especially from a select group of people to the average public. New technologies and improved user experiences have empowered those outside of the technical industry to access and use technological products and services. At an increasing scale, consumers have greater access to use and purchase technologically sophisticated products, as well as to participate meaningfully in the development of these products. Industry innovation and user demand have been associated with more affordable, user-friendly products. This is an ongoing process, beginning with the development of mass production and increasing dramatically as digitization became commonplace. Thomas Friedman argued that the era of globalization has been characterized by the democratization of technology, democratization of finance, and democratization of information. Technology has been critical in the latter two processes, facilitating the rapid expansion of access to specialized knowledge and tools, as well as changing the way that people view and demand such access. A counter argument is that this is just a process of 'massification' - more people can use banks, technology, have access to information, but it does not mean there is any more democratic influence over its production, or that this massification promotes Democracy. == History == Scholars and social critics often cite the invention of the printing press as a major invention that changed the course of history. The force of the printing press rested not in its impact on the printing industry or inventors, but on its ability to transmit information to a broader public by way of mass production. This event is so widely recognized because of its social impact – as a democratizing force. The printing press is often seen as the historical counterpart to the Internet. After the development of the Internet in 1969, its use remained limited to communications between scientists and within government, although use of email and boards gained popularity among those with access. It did not become a popular means of communication until the 1990s. In 1993 the US federal government opened the Internet to commerce and the creation of HTML formed the basis for universal accessibility. === Major innovations === The Internet has played a critical role in modern life as a typical feature of most Western households, and has been key in the democratization of knowledge. It not only constitutes arguably the most critical innovation in this trend thus far; it has also allowed users to gain knowledge of and access to other technologies. Users can learn of new developments more quickly, and purchase high-tech products otherwise only actively marketed to recognized experts. Social media has also empowered and emboldened users to become contributors and critics of technological developments. Some have argued that cloud computing is having a major effect by allowing users greater access through mobility and pay-as-you-use capacity. The open-source model allows users to participate directly in development of software, rather than indirect participation, through contributing opinions. By being shaped by the user, development is directly responsive to user demand and can be obtained for free or at a low cost. In a comparable trend, arduino and littleBits have made electronics more accessible to users of all backgrounds and ages. The development of 3D printers has the potential to increasingly democratize production. Generative artificial intelligence tools have the potential to democratize the process of innovation by improving the ability of individuals to specify and visualize ideas. The democratization of artificial intelligence refers to the transition from AI as a high-cost, specialized field to one accessible to non-experts and smaller organizations. This process is driven by the release of open-weights models, the availability of cloud computing for model training, and the emergence of no-code development platforms. While early AI development was concentrated within Big Tech firms and elite research universities, the 2020s saw a proliferation of public tools like ChatGPT and repositories such as Hugging Face, which lowered the technical barriers to entry. However, the trend has faced criticism as the "illusion of democratization," as the underlying GPU hardware remains concentrated among a few global providers. == Cultural impact == This trend is linked to the spread of knowledge of and ability to perform high-tech tasks, challenging previous conceptions of expertise. Widespread access to technology, including lower costs, was critical to the transition to the new economy. Similarly, democratization of technology was also fuelled by this economic transition, which produced demands for technological innovation and optimism in technology-driven progress. Since the 1980s, a spreading constructivist conception of technology has emphasized that the social and technical domains are critically intertwined. Scholars have argued that technology is non-neutral, defined contextually and locally by a certain relationship with society. Andrew Feenberg, a central thinker in the philosophy of technology, argued that democratizing technology means expanding technological design to include alternative interests and values. When successful in doing so, this can be a tool for increasing inclusiveness. This also suggests an important participatory role for consumers if technology is to be truly democratic. Feenberg asserts that this must be achieved by consumer intervention in a liberated design process. Improved access to specialized knowledge and tools has been associated with an increase in the "do it yourself" (DIY) trend. This has also been associated with consumerization, whereby personal or privately owned devices and software are also used for business purposes. Some have argued that this is linked to reduced dependence on traditional information technology departments. Astra Taylor, the author of the book The People's Platform: Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age, argues, "The promotion of Internet-enabled amateurism is a lazy substitute for real equality of opportunity." === Industry impact === In some ways, democratization of technology has strengthened this industry. Markets have broadened and diversified. Consumer feedback and input is available at a very low or no cost. However, related industries are experiencing decreased demand for qualified professionals as consumers are able to fill more of their demands themselves. Users of a range of types and status have access to increasingly similar technology. Because of the decreased costs and expertise necessary to use products and software, professionals (e.g. in the audio industry) may experience loss of work. In some cases, technology is accessible but sufficiently complex that most users without specialized training are able to operate it without necessarily understanding how it works. Additionally, the process of consumerization has led to an influx in the number of devices in businesses and accessing private networks that IT departments cannot control or access. While this can lead to lowered operating costs and increased innovation, it is also associated with security concerns that most businesses are unable to address at the pace of the spread of technology. === Political impact === Some scholars have argued that technological change will bring about a third wave of democracy. The Internet has been recognized for its role in promoting increased citizen advocacy and government transparency. Jesse Chen, a leading thinker in democratic engagement technologies, distinguishes the democratizing effects of technology from democracy itself. Chen has argued that, while the Internet may have democratizing effects, the Internet alone cannot deliver democracy at all levels of society unless technologies are purposely designed for the nuances of democracy, specifically the engagement of large groups of people in between elections in and beyond government. The spread of the Internet and other forms of technology has led to increased global connectivity. Many scholars believe that it has been associated in the developing world not only with increased Western influence, but also with the spread of democracy through increased communication, efficiency, and access to information. Scholars have drawn associations between the level of technological connectedness and democracy in many nations. Technology can enhance democracy in the developed world as well. In addition to increased communication and transparency, some electorates have implemented online voting to accommodate an increased number of citizens.

  Read more →
• 

  NexDock

  NexDock is a series of lapdock devices (containing a laptop screen, keyboard, trackpad, and battery connected to a phone or other device) sold by Nex Computer LLC. The product can be used with mobile desktop environments, including Samsung DeX and the former Windows Continuum. Critical reception for the series has been mixed, with reviewers praising the concept's utility for mobile productivity while noting hardware limitations and its niche appeal. == History == The first NexDock was introduced in 2016 through a successful Indiegogo campaign. Its development coincided with interest in smartphone-powered desktop interfaces, and it was marketed as a companion for Windows 10 Mobile's Continuum feature. Subsequent models, often launched via Kickstarter, added features like higher-resolution displays, touchscreens, and convertible hinges to adapt to the growing capabilities of smartphones. == Models == === NexDock (Original, 2016) === The first model featured a 14.1-inch 1366x768 display and connected primarily via a mini HDMI port. === NexDock 2 (2019) === This model introduced a 13.3-inch 1080p IPS display and a USB-C port, improvements aimed at better supporting platforms like Samsung DeX. === NexDock Touch (2020) === A touchscreen was added to the 13.3-inch display, allowing for more direct interaction with the connected device's operating system. === NexDock 360 (2021) === This version incorporated a 360-degree hinge, allowing the device to be used in laptop, tablet, tent, or stand modes. === NexDock Wireless (2023) === Wireless display connectivity was the key feature of this model, offering a cable-free connection to compatible phones and computers. === NexDock XL (2023) === The screen size was increased to 15.6 inches. It retained the 360-degree hinge and also offered a version with wireless charging for a connected phone. == Reception == Reviews of NexDock products have been mixed, generally praising the concept while pointing out execution flaws. The devices are often lauded for their utility with Samsung DeX, turning a high-end Samsung phone into a viable portable workstation. A review of the NexDock 2 from ZDNet concluded it was a "great companion for the modern road warrior," and Digital Trends called the original a "no-brainer shell" for expanding a phone's capability. However, reviewers have consistently highlighted hardware limitations. In its review of the NexDock Touch, TechRadar stated that while it was a "compelling package for a very specific niche," the "trackpad and keyboard are a bit of a letdown and the screen could be brighter." This sentiment was echoed in other reviews, with criticism often aimed at the trackpad's performance and feel. A review of the NexDock 2 from Android Authority described the experience as being "janky at times," concluding that the device "delivers on its promise — sort of." A common point across many reviews is that the overall performance is entirely dependent on the power of the connected phone, and the experience is often best suited for light productivity tasks rather than replacing a dedicated laptop.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithm selection

  Algorithm selection (sometimes also called per-instance algorithm selection or offline algorithm selection) is a meta-algorithmic technique to choose an algorithm from a portfolio on an instance-by-instance basis. It is motivated by the observation that on many practical problems, different algorithms have different performance characteristics. That is, while one algorithm performs well in some scenarios, it performs poorly in others and vice versa for another algorithm. If we can identify when to use which algorithm, we can optimize for each scenario and improve overall performance. This is what algorithm selection aims to do. The only prerequisite for applying algorithm selection techniques is that there exists (or that there can be constructed) a set of complementary algorithms. == Definition == Given a portfolio P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} of algorithms A ∈ P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}} , a set of instances i ∈ I {\displaystyle i\in {\mathcal {I}}} and a cost metric m : P × I → R {\displaystyle m:{\mathcal {P}}\times {\mathcal {I}}\to \mathbb {R} } , the algorithm selection problem consists of finding a mapping s : I → P {\displaystyle s:{\mathcal {I}}\to {\mathcal {P}}} from instances I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} to algorithms P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} such that the cost ∑ i ∈ I m ( s ( i ) , i ) {\displaystyle \sum _{i\in {\mathcal {I}}}m(s(i),i)} across all instances is optimized. == Examples == === Boolean satisfiability problem (and other hard combinatorial problems) === A well-known application of algorithm selection is the Boolean satisfiability problem. Here, the portfolio of algorithms is a set of (complementary) SAT solvers, the instances are Boolean formulas, the cost metric is for example average runtime or number of unsolved instances. So, the goal is to select a well-performing SAT solver for each individual instance. In the same way, algorithm selection can be applied to many other N P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {NP}}} -hard problems (such as mixed integer programming, CSP, AI planning, TSP, MAXSAT, QBF and answer set programming). Competition-winning systems in SAT are SATzilla, 3S and CSHC === Machine learning === In machine learning, algorithm selection is better known as meta-learning. The portfolio of algorithms consists of machine learning algorithms (e.g., Random Forest, SVM, DNN), the instances are data sets and the cost metric is for example the error rate. So, the goal is to predict which machine learning algorithm will have a small error on each data set. == Instance features == The algorithm selection problem is mainly solved with machine learning techniques. By representing the problem instances by numerical features f {\displaystyle f} , algorithm selection can be seen as a multi-class classification problem by learning a mapping f i ↦ A {\displaystyle f_{i}\mapsto {\mathcal {A}}} for a given instance i {\displaystyle i} . Instance features are numerical representations of instances. For example, we can count the number of variables, clauses, average clause length for Boolean formulas, or number of samples, features, class balance for ML data sets to get an impression about their characteristics. === Static vs. probing features === We distinguish between two kinds of features: Static features are in most cases some counts and statistics (e.g., clauses-to-variables ratio in SAT). These features ranges from very cheap features (e.g. number of variables) to very complex features (e.g., statistics about variable-clause graphs). Probing features (sometimes also called landmarking features) are computed by running some analysis of algorithm behavior on an instance (e.g., accuracy of a cheap decision tree algorithm on an ML data set, or running for a short time a stochastic local search solver on a Boolean formula). These feature often cost more than simple static features. === Feature costs === Depending on the used performance metric m {\displaystyle m} , feature computation can be associated with costs. For example, if we use running time as performance metric, we include the time to compute our instance features into the performance of an algorithm selection system. SAT solving is a concrete example, where such feature costs cannot be neglected, since instance features for CNF formulas can be either very cheap (e.g., to get the number of variables can be done in constant time for CNFs in the DIMACs format) or very expensive (e.g., graph features which can cost tens or hundreds of seconds). It is important to take the overhead of feature computation into account in practice in such scenarios; otherwise a misleading impression of the performance of the algorithm selection approach is created. For example, if the decision which algorithm to choose can be made with perfect accuracy, but the features are the running time of the portfolio algorithms, there is no benefit to the portfolio approach. This would not be obvious if feature costs were omitted. == Approaches == === Regression approach === One of the first successful algorithm selection approaches predicted the performance of each algorithm m ^ A : I → R {\displaystyle {\hat {m}}_{\mathcal {A}}:{\mathcal {I}}\to \mathbb {R} } and selected the algorithm with the best predicted performance a r g min A ∈ P m ^ A ( i ) {\displaystyle arg\min _{{\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}}{\hat {m}}_{\mathcal {A}}(i)} for an instance i {\displaystyle i} . === Clustering approach === A common assumption is that the given set of instances I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} can be clustered into homogeneous subsets and for each of these subsets, there is one well-performing algorithm for all instances in there. So, the training consists of identifying the homogeneous clusters via an unsupervised clustering approach and associating an algorithm with each cluster. A new instance is assigned to a cluster and the associated algorithm selected. A more modern approach is cost-sensitive hierarchical clustering using supervised learning to identify the homogeneous instance subsets. === Pairwise cost-sensitive classification approach === A common approach for multi-class classification is to learn pairwise models between every pair of classes (here algorithms) and choose the class that was predicted most often by the pairwise models. We can weight the instances of the pairwise prediction problem by the performance difference between the two algorithms. This is motivated by the fact that we care most about getting predictions with large differences correct, but the penalty for an incorrect prediction is small if there is almost no performance difference. Therefore, each instance i {\displaystyle i} for training a classification model A 1 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}_{1}} vs A 2 {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}_{2}} is associated with a cost | m ( A 1 , i ) − m ( A 2 , i ) | {\displaystyle |m({\mathcal {A}}_{1},i)-m({\mathcal {A}}_{2},i)|} . == Requirements == The algorithm selection problem can be effectively applied under the following assumptions: The portfolio P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {P}}} of algorithms is complementary with respect to the instance set I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} , i.e., there is no single algorithm A ∈ P {\displaystyle {\mathcal {A}}\in {\mathcal {P}}} that dominates the performance of all other algorithms over I {\displaystyle {\mathcal {I}}} (see figures to the right for examples on complementary analysis). In some application, the computation of instance features is associated with a cost. For example, if the cost metric is running time, we have also to consider the time to compute the instance features. In such cases, the cost to compute features should not be larger than the performance gain through algorithm selection. == Application domains == Algorithm selection is not limited to single domains but can be applied to any kind of algorithm if the above requirements are satisfied. Application domains include: hard combinatorial problems: SAT, Mixed Integer Programming, CSP, AI Planning, TSP, MAXSAT, QBF and Answer Set Programming combinatorial auctions in machine learning, the problem is known as meta-learning software design black-box optimization multi-agent systems numerical optimization linear algebra, differential equations evolutionary algorithms vehicle routing problem power systems For an extensive list of literature about algorithm selection, we refer to a literature overview. == Variants of algorithm selection == === Online selection === Online algorithm selection refers to switching between different algorithms during the solving process. This is useful as a hyper-heuristic. In contrast, offline algorithm selection selects an algorithm for a given instance only once and before the solving process. === Computation of schedules === An extension of algorithm selection is the per-instance algorithm scheduling problem, in which we do not select only one solver, but we select a time budget for each algorithm

  Read more →
• 

  Hashtag

  A hashtag is a metadata tag operator that is prefaced by the hash symbol, #. On social media, hashtags are used on microblogging and photo-sharing services–especially Twitter and Tumblr–as a form of user-generated tagging that enables cross-referencing of content by topic or theme. For example, a search within Instagram for the hashtag #flowers returns all posts that have been tagged with that term. After the initial hash symbol, a hashtag may include letters, numerals or other punctuation. The use of hashtags was first proposed by American blogger and product consultant Chris Messina in a 2007 tweet. Messina made no attempt to patent the use because he felt that "they were born of the internet, and owned by no one". Hashtags became entrenched in the culture of Twitter and soon emerged across Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. In June 2014, hashtag was added to the Oxford English Dictionary as "a word or phrase with the symbol # in front of it, used on social media websites and apps so that you can search for all messages with the same subject". == Origin and acceptance == The number sign or hash symbol, #, has long been used in information technology to highlight specific pieces of text. In 1970, the number sign was used to denote immediate address mode in the assembly language of the PDP-11 when placed next to a symbol or a number, and around 1973, '#' was introduced in the C programming language to indicate special keywords that the C preprocessor had to process first. The pound sign was adopted for use within IRC (Internet Relay Chat) networks around 1988 to label groups and topics. Channels or topics that are available across an entire IRC network are prefixed with a hash symbol # (as opposed to those local to a server, which uses an ampersand '&'). The use of the pound sign in IRC inspired Chris Messina to propose a similar system on Twitter to tag topics of interest on the microblogging network. He proposed the usage of hashtags on Twitter: How do you feel about using # (pound) for groups. As in #barcamp [msg]? According to Messina, he suggested use of the hashtag to make it easy for lay users without specialized knowledge of search protocols to find specific relevant content. Therefore, the hashtag "was created organically by Twitter users as a way to categorize messages". The first published use of the term "hash tag" was in a blog post "Hash Tags = Twitter Groupings" by Stowe Boyd, on August 26, 2007, according to lexicographer Ben Zimmer, chair of the American Dialect Society's New Words Committee. Messina's suggestion to use the hashtag was not immediately adopted by Twitter, but the convention gained popular acceptance when hashtags were used in tweets relating to the 2007 San Diego forest fires in Southern California. The hashtag gained international acceptance during the 2009–2010 Iranian election protests; Twitter users used both English- and Persian-language hashtags in communications during the events. Hashtags have since played critical roles in recent social movements such as #jesuischarlie, #BLM, and #MeToo. Beginning July 2, 2009, Twitter began to hyperlink all hashtags in tweets to Twitter search results for the hashtagged word (and for the standard spelling of commonly misspelled words). In 2010, Twitter introduced "Trending Topics" on the Twitter front page, displaying hashtags that are rapidly becoming popular, and the significance of trending hashtags has become so great that the company makes significant efforts to foil attempts to spam the trending list. During the 2010 World Cup, Twitter explicitly encouraged the use of hashtags with the temporary deployment of "hashflags", which replaced hashtags of three-letter country codes with their respective national flags. Other platforms such as YouTube and Gawker Media followed in officially supporting hashtags, and real-time search aggregators such as Google Real-Time Search began supporting hashtags. == Format == A hashtag must begin with a hash (#) character followed by other characters, and is terminated by a space or the end of the line. Some platforms may require the # to be preceded with a space. Most or all platforms that support hashtags permit the inclusion of letters (without diacritics), numerals, and underscores. Other characters may be supported on a platform-by-platform basis. Some characters, such as "&", are generally not supported as they may already serve other search functions. Hashtags are not case sensitive (a search for "#hashtag" will match "#HashTag" as well), but the use of embedded capitals (i.e., CamelCase) increases legibility and improves accessibility. Languages that do not use word dividers handle hashtags differently. In China, microblogs Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo use a double-hashtag-delimited #HashName# format, since the lack of spacing between Chinese characters necessitates a closing tag. Twitter uses a different syntax for Chinese characters and orthographies with similar spacing conventions: the hashtag contains unspaced characters, separated from preceding and following text by spaces (e.g., '我 #爱 你' instead of '我#爱你') or by zero-width non-joiner characters before and after the hashtagged element, to retain a linguistically natural appearance (displaying as unspaced '我‌#爱‌你', but with invisible non-joiners delimiting the hashtag). === Etiquette and regulation === Some communities may limit, officially or unofficially, the number of hashtags permitted on a single post. Misuse of hashtags can lead to account suspensions. Twitter warns that adding hashtags to unrelated tweets, or repeated use of the same hashtag without adding to a conversation can filter an account from search results, or suspend the account. Individual platforms may deactivate certain hashtags either for being too generic to be useful, such as #photography on Instagram, or due to their use to facilitate illegal activities. === Alternate formats === In 2009, StockTwits began using ticker symbols preceded by the dollar sign (e.g., $XRX). In July 2012, Twitter began supporting the tag convention and dubbed it the "cashtag". The convention has extended to national currencies, and Cash App has implemented the cashtag to mark usernames. == Function == Hashtags are particularly useful in unmoderated forums that lack a formal ontological organization. Hashtags help users find content similar interest. Hashtags are neither registered nor controlled by any one user or group of users. They do not contain any set definitions, meaning that a single hashtag can be used for any number of purposes, and that the accepted meaning of a hashtag can change with time. Hashtags intended for discussion of a particular event tend to use an obscure wording to avoid being caught up with generic conversations on similar subjects, such as a cake festival using #cakefestival rather than simply #cake. However, this can also make it difficult for topics to become "trending topics" because people often use different spelling or words to refer to the same topic. For topics to trend, there must be a consensus, whether silent or stated, that the hashtag refers to that specific topic. Hashtags may be used informally to express context around a given message, with no intent to categorize the message for later searching, sharing, or other reasons. Hashtags may thus serve as a reflexive meta-commentary. This can help express contextual cues or offer more depth to the information or message that appears with the hashtag. "My arms are getting darker by the minute. #toomuchfaketan". AnoHashtags can also be used to express personal feelings and emotions. ther function of the hashtag can be used to express personal feelings and emotions. For example, with "It's Monday!! #excited #sarcasm" in which the adjectives are directly indicating the emotions of the speaker. Verbal use of the word hashtag is sometimes used in informal conversations. Use may be humorous, such as "I'm hashtag confused!" By August 2012, use of a hand gesture, sometimes called the "finger hashtag", in which the index and middle finger both hands are extended and arranged perpendicularly to form the hash, was documented. === Co-optation by other industries === Companies, businesses, and advocacy organizations have taken advantage of hashtag-based discussions for promotion of their products, services or campaigns. In the early 2010s, some television broadcasters began to employ hashtags related to programs in digital on-screen graphics, to encourage viewers to participate in a backchannel of discussion via social media prior to, during, or after the program. Television commercials have sometimes contained hashtags for similar purposes. The increased usage of hashtags as brand promotion devices has been compared to the promotion of branded "keywords" by AOL in the late 1990s and early 2000s, as such keywords were also promoted at the end of television commercials and series episodes. Organized real-world events have used hashta

  Read more →
• 

  Errored second

  In telecommunications and data communication systems, an errored second is an interval of a second during which any error whatsoever has occurred, regardless of whether that error was a single bit error or a complete loss of communication for that entire second. The type of error is not important for the purpose of counting errored seconds. In communication systems with very low uncorrected bit error rates, such as modern fiber-optic transmission systems, or systems with higher low-level error rates that are corrected using large amounts of forward error correction, errored seconds are often a better measure of the effective user-visible error rate than the raw bit error rate. For many modern packet-switched communication systems, even a single uncorrected bit error is enough to cause the loss of a data packet by causing its CRC check to fail; whether that packet loss was caused by a single bit error or a hundred-bit-long error burst is irrelevant. For systems using large amounts of forward error correction, the reverse applies; a single low-level bit error will almost never occur, since any small errors will almost always be corrected, but any error sufficiently large to cause the forward error correction to fail will almost always result in a large burst error. More specialist and precise definitions of errored seconds exist in standards such as the T1 and DS1 transport systems.

  Read more →
• 

  The Holocaust and social media

  The representation of the Holocaust on social media has been a subject of scholarly inquiry and media attention. == Selfies at Holocaust memorial sites == Some visitors take selfies at Holocaust memorials, which has been the subject of controversy. In 2018, Rhian Sugden, a British model, received criticism after posting a selfie at the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin with the caption "ET phone home". She later removed the caption, but defended taking the photograph. Other celebrities have also been criticised for photographs at the Berlin memorial, including Indian actress Priyanka Chopra and US politician Pete Buttigieg, whose husband posted a photograph of him at the memorial on a personal social media account. The Israeli artist and satirist Shahak Shapira set up the website yolocaust.de in 2017 to expose people who take inappropriate selfies at the Holocaust memorial in Berlin. Shapira went through thousands of selfies posted to social media sites such as Facebook, Instagram, Tinder, and Grindr, choosing the twelve that he found most offensive. When the images were moused over, the website replaces the memorial backdrop with black and white images of Nazi victims. "Yolocaust" is a portmanteau of "Holocaust" and YOLO, an acronym for "you only live once". The website went viral, receiving 1.2 million views in the first 24 hours after its launch. Shapira honored requests to take down all of the photographs, which he had used without permission, and the website remains with only a textual documentation of the project. In an analysis of comments by Internet users on the project, Christoph Bareither estimated that 75% were positive. However, the memorial's architect, Peter Eisenman, criticized the website. In his 2018 book Postcards from Auschwitz, Grinnell professor Daniel P. Reynolds defends the practice of selfie-taking at Holocaust sites. In 2019, the Auschwitz-Birkenau State Museum requested that visitors not take inappropriate selfies, although the museum's staff acknowledged that other visitors take selfies in a thoughtful and respectful manner, which they did not criticize. In an academic paper, Gemma Commane and Rebekah Potton analyze the use of Instagram to share tourist photographs at Holocaust sites and conclude that "Instagram encourages conversation and empathy, keeping the Holocaust visible in youth discourses". According to their analysis, most images are tagged with respectful hashtags such as #tragic, #remembrance, and #sadness. The Auschwitz museum has an official Instagram account, auschwitzmemorial, which it uses to share selected appropriate Instagram posts. However, the image feed for the hashtag "Auschwitz" includes potentially offensive images such as an image of "Nazi Vs. Jews #beerpong". This image, according to the authors, expresses "mockery and contempt" for Holocaust victims. They also document offensive memes using images of Holocaust atrocities and shared on Instagram. Some social media users post in order to criticize what they see as inappropriate behavior at Holocaust sites, with one commenting, "Taking photos posing next to razor wire, selfies with victim's hair in the background, and even group shots in front of the crematoria had to be seen to be believed." == Assessment of tourism == Social media posts have been used by researchers to analyze the phenomenon of Holocaust-related tourism. == Social media groups == People have created groups on Facebook to discuss issues related to the Holocaust. One paper analyses two such groups, "The Holocaust and My Family" and "The Descendants of the Victims and Survivors of the Holocaust" in which people engage in collective trauma processing. == Eva.stories == In 2019, Israeli high-tech entrepreneur Mati Kochavi created a fictitious Instagram account for Eva Heyman, a Hungarian-Jewish girl who was murdered in Auschwitz concentration camp. The project met with mixed reception. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the project, saying that it "exposes the immense tragedy of our people through the story of one girl". == Holocaust denial == The issue of Holocaust denial on social media has also attracted attention. In October 2020, Facebook reversed its policy and banned Holocaust denial from the platform. Founder Mark Zuckerberg had previously argued that such content should not be banned on freedom of speech grounds.

  Read more →
• 

  Mojito (framework)

  Mojito is an environment agnostic, Model-View-Controller (MVC) web application framework. It was designed by Yahoo. == Features == Mojito supports agile development of web applications. Mojito has built-in support for unit testing, Internationalization, syntax and coding convention checks. Both server and client components are written in JavaScript. Mojito allows developers designing web applications to leverage the utilities of both configuration and MVC framework. Mojito is capable of running on both JavaScript-enabled web browsers and servers using Node.js because they both utilize JavaScript. Mojito applications mainly consist of two components: JSON Configuration files: these define relationships between code components, assets, routing paths, and framework defaults and are available at the application and mojit level. Directories: these reflect MVC architecture and are used to separate resources such as assets, libraries, middleware, etc. == Architecture == In Mojito, both server and "client" side scripting is done in JavaScript, allowing it to run on both client and server thereby breaking the "front-end back-end barrier." It has both client and server runtimes. === Server runtime === This block houses operations needed by server side components. Services include: Routing rules, HTTP Server, config loader and disk-based loader. === Client runtime === This block houses operations called upon while running client sides components. Services include local storage/cache access and JSON based /URL based loader === Core === Core function can be accessed on client or server. Services include Registry, Dispatcher, Front controller, Resource store. === Container === mojit object comes into the picture. This container also include the services used by mojits. API and Mojito services are the blocks which caters to services needed for execution of mojits. === API (Action Context) === Mojito services are a customizable service block. It offers mojits a range of services which might be needed by mojit to carry out certain actions. These services can be availed at both client and server side. Reusable services can be created and aggregated to the core here. == Mojits == Mojits are the modules of a Mojito application. An application consists of one or more mojits. A mojit encompasses a Model, Views and a Controller defined by JSON configuration files. It includes a View factory where views are created according to the model and a View cache that holds frequently requested views to aid performance. === Application Architecture === A Mojito application is a set of mojits facilitated by configurable JSON files which define the code for model, view and controller. This MVC structure works with API block and Mojito services, and can be deployed at both client and server side. While the application is deployed at client side, it can call server-side modules using binders. Binders are mojit codes that let mojits request services from each other. Mojit Proxy acts as an intermediary between binders and mojit's API (application context) block and other mojits. Controllers are command-issuing units of mojits. Models mirror the core logic and hold data. Applications can have multiple models. They can be centrally accessed from controllers. View files are created in accordance with controllers and models, and are marked-up before they are sent to users as output. === Application Directory Structure === Directory structure of a Mojito application with one mojit: [mojito_app]/ |-- application.json |-- assets/ | `-- favicon.icon |-- yui_modules/ | `-- .{affinity}.js |-- index.js |-- mojits/ | `-- [mojit_name | |-- assets/ | |-- yui_modules/ | | `-- .{affinity}.js | |-- binders/ | | `-- {view_name}.js | |-- controller.{affinity}.js | |-- defaults.json | |-- definition.json | |-- lang/ | | `-- {mojit_name}_{lang}.js | |-- models/ | | `-- {model_name}.{affinity}.js | |-- tests/ | | |-- yui_modules/ | | | `-- {module_name}.{affinity}-tests.js | | |-- controller.{affinity}-tests.js | | `-- models/ | | `-- {model_name}.{affinity}-tests.js | `-- views/ | |-- {view_name}.{view_engine}.html | `-- {view_name}.{device}.{view_engine}.html |-- package.json |-- routes.json (deprecated) |-- server.js == Model, View and Controller == The Model hosts data, which is accessed by the Controller and presented to the View. Controller also handles any client requests for data, in which case controller fetches data from the model and passes the data to the client. All three components are clustered in the mojit. Mojits are physically illustrated by directory structures and an application can have multiple mojits. Every mojit can have one controller, one or more views and zero or more models. === Model === The model it represents the application data and is independent of view or controller. Model contains code to manipulate the data. They are found in the models directory of each mojit. Functions include: Storing information for access by controller. Validation and error handling. Metadata required by the view === Controller === The controller acts like a connecting agent between model and view. It supplies input to Model and after fetching data from model, passes it to View. Functions include Redirection Monitors authentication Web safety Encoding === View === The view acts as a presentation filter by highlighting some model attributes and suppressing others. A view can be understood as a visual permutation of the model. The view renders data received from controller and displays it to the end user.

  Read more →
• 

  Anti-social Media Bill (Nigeria)

  Anti-social Media Bill was introduced by the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on 5 November 2019 to criminalise the use of the social media in peddling false or malicious information. The original title of the bill is Protection from Internet Falsehood and Manipulations Bill 2019. It was sponsored by Senator Mohammed Sani Musa from the largely conservative northern Nigeria. After the bill passed second reading on the floor of the Nigeria Senate and its details were made public, information emerged on the social media accusing the sponsor of the bill of plagiarising a similar law in Singapore which is at the bottom of global ranking in the freedom of speech and of the press. But the senator denied that he plagiarised Singaporean law. == Opposition to the bill == Angry reactions trailed the introduction of the bill, and a number of civil society organisations, human rights activists, and Nigerian citizens unanimously opposed the bill. International rights group, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch condemned the proposed legislation saying it is aimed at gagging freedom of speech which is a universal right in a country of over two hundred million people. Opposition political parties are very critical of the bill and accused the government of attempting to strip bare, Nigerian citizens of their rights to free speech and destroying same social media on whose power and influence the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC came to power in 2015. Nigeria Information Minister, Lai Mohammed has been at the center of public criticism because he is suspected to be the brain behind the proposed act. Lai was a former spokesman of then opposition All Progressives Congress. A "Stop the Social Media Bill! You can no longer take our rights from us" online petition campaign to force the Nigeria parliament to drop the bill received over 90,000 signatures within 24 hours. In November 2019, after the bill passed second reading in the senate, Akon Eyakenyi, a senator from Akwa Ibom State publicly said he would resist the bill. === Support for the bill === Those who support the proposed act especially Senators have often argued that the law would help curtail hate speech. President Muhammad Buhari who is seen as a beneficiary of the influence and power of the social media and free speech has been mute about it. But the president's senior aides and family members have publicly spoken in support of the bill. In November 2019, the wife of the president, Aisha Buhari, told a gathering at the Nigeria's National Mosque in the capital, Abuja that if China with over one billion people could regulate the social media, Nigeria should do same. But Nigerians reacted saying Nigeria is not a one-party communist state like China. Days later, a daughter to the president, Zahra Indimi told a gathering of young people in Abuja that social media had become a potent weapon for bullying those they thought were doing better than them in terms of social class and called for a critical regulation. == Key provisions of the bill == === Title === Protection from Internet Falsehoods, Manipulations and Other Related Matters Bill 2019. === Explanatory memorandum === This Act is to prevent Falsehoods and Manipulations in Internet transmission and correspondences in Nigeria. To suppress falsehoods and manipulations and counter the effects of such communications and transmissions and to sanction offenders with a view to encouraging and enhancing transparency by Social Media Platforms using the internet correspondences. === Objectives === One objective of the bill is to prevent the transmission of false statements or declaration of facts in Nigeria. Another objective of the bill is to end the financing of online mediums that transmit false statements. Measures will be taken to detect and control inauthentic behaviour and misuse of online accounts (parody accounts). When paid content is posted towards a political end, there will be measures to ensure the poster discloses such information. There will be sanction for offenders. === Transmission of false statement === According to the bill, a person must not: Transmit a statement that is false or, Transmit a statement that might: i. Affect the security or any part of Nigeria. ii. Affect public health, public safety or public finance. iii. Affect Nigeria's relationship with other countries. iv. influence the outcome of an election to any office in a general election. v. Cause enmity or hatred towards a person or group of persons. Anyone guilty of the above is liable to a fine of N300,000 or three years' imprisonment or both (for individual); and a fine not exceeding ten million naira (for corporate organisations). Same punishment applies for fake online accounts that transmit statements listed above. === Parody accounts === The bill says a person shall not open an account to transmit false statement. Anyone found guilty will be fined N200,000 or three years' imprisonment or both (for an individual) or five million naira (for corporate organisations). If such accounts transmit a statement that will affect security or influence the outcome of an election, such a person will be fined N300,000 or three years' imprisonment or both. If a person receives payment or reward to help another to transmit false statements knowingly, he/she is liable to a fine of N150,000 or three years' imprisonment or both. If a person receives payment or reward to help another to transmit a statement affects security or influence the outcome of an election, the fine is N300,000 or three years' imprisonment or both (for individual) and ten million naira for organisations. === Declaration === According to the bill, a law enforcement department can issue a "declaration" to offenders. And this declaration will be issued even if the "false statement" has been corrected or pulled down. The offender will be required to publish a "correction notice" in a specified newspaper, online location or other printed publication of Nigeria. Failure to comply, a person is liable to N200,000 or 12 months' imprisonment or both (for individual) and five million naira for organisations. === Access blocking order === The bill says the law enforcement department will also issue an access blocking order to offenders. The law enforcement department may direct the NCC to order the internet access service provider to disable access by users in Nigeria to the online location and the NCC must give the internet access service provider an access blocking order. An internet access service provider that does not comply with any access blocking order is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding ten million naira for each day during any part of which that order is not fully complied with, up to a total of five million naira.

  Read more →
• 

  Event cinema

  Event cinema sometimes called alternative content cinema or livecasts refers to the use of movie theaters to display a varied range of live and recorded entertainment excluding traditional films, such as sport, opera, musicals, ballet, music, one-off TV specials, current affairs, comedy and religious services. == History and development == Event Cinema was set up at the start of the century with rock concerts by Bon Jovi (2001), David Bowie (2003), and Robbie Williams (2005) bringing non-film audiences into cinemas that had newly installed digital equipment. The Metropolitan Opera in New York through their partnership with Fathom Events is acknowledged as the trailblazer in this area, aggressively seeking out new markets and setting high standards for live broadcasts via satellite. Emulated by other opera houses worldwide such as the Royal Opera House following a close second, Glyndebourne, La Scala and the Sydney Opera House the genre of opera within the 'Event Cinema' industry has been a huge success, and has brought new, younger audiences into cash-strapped opera houses depended on state funding and wealthy benefactors for the first time - an unforeseen and happy consequence of digitisation. Ballet and theater have also been very successful, as have rock concerts, both live and recorded. The UK's National Theatre has been a huge success here with their season of live broadcasts under the banner 'NT Live', featuring big name casts such as Helen Mirren, whose recent turn as Queen Elizabeth II in The Audience was a sell out everywhere. (This was in partnership with another West End theatre and the NT are keen to help other theatres maximise their potential through live broadcasts). The Globe and the Royal Shakespeare Company are also producing work for live broadcast and recorded exhibition. As digitisation of cinemas matures, the Event Cinema industry is growing. The strongest territory is the US, followed by the UK and mainland European territories. Latin America is also a very strong market. Recent additions include Pompeii Live, a unique exhibition by the UK's British Museum, featuring celebrities and curators taking the audience on a live tour around the recreated set of Pompeii within the museum itself, and they are also exploring the schools market for the first time, following the live broadcast on June 18 with a daytime broadcast aimed at UK schools for the first time. If successful this will no doubt prove a model for future museums to emulate. An added incentive for exhibitors is the ability to show alternative content, i.e. alternative to mainstream, studio-driven content, such as live special events, sports, pre-show advertising and other digital or video content. In industry terms this has become known as 'Alternative Content', but has recently become known more widely as 'Event Cinema'. === Expanding markets === Some low-budget films that would normally not have a theatrical release because of distribution costs might be shown in smaller engagements than the typical large release studio pictures. The cost of duplicating a digital "print" is very low, so adding more theaters to a release has a small additional cost to the distributor. Movies that start with a small release could scale to a much larger release quickly if they were sufficiently successful, opening up the possibility that smaller movies could achieve box office success previously out of their reach. ==== Technical specifications ==== Event Cinema is also finding a market in 3rd world countries in which the higher costs and quality of DCI equipment are not yet affordable, as crucially there are no DCI specifications for Alternative Content as there is in mainstream [studio] content. This has led to an explosion in the variety of content on offer, but a lack of standardisation has led to questionable quality at times. As the industry matures, this lack of regulation is expected to change and there are moves afoot to introduce codes of practice and technical specifications. Recorded content complements mainstream studio content by maximising the 'downtime' that plagues the cinema industry, where screens worldwide spend a large proportion of their time in darkness and cinemas empty. Some cinema chains have targeted pensioners in particular, offering free tea and coffee for afternoon matinees of recorded opera, for example. Digital Cinema Packages (DCPs) have been useful to cinemas not yet equipped with satellite broadcasting capability and has enabled exhibitors to build their Event Cinema audience, which is not generally the 18-24 demographic that multiplexes are targeting. ==== New Audiences ==== Event Cinema has seen a return of an older, affluent audience, previously turned off by the multiplex experience, and cinemas are starting to capitalise on this by offering waiter-serviced, high class finger food and alcoholic beverages, complete with bars and restaurants, a world away from the traditional popcorn/soft drink model; art house cinemas are increasingly marketing themselves as 'destination' venues for an evening's entertainment, somewhere to spend an entire evening, rather than just a couple of hours. As exhibition admissions have plateau'd in recent years due to the explosion in VOD, tablet and mobile content technology, this new revenue stream has been a surprise and welcome addition to the cinema industry, though the US studios have been cautious in embracing the change as yet. The thrill of Live broadcasts means they are generally regarded as more popular than recorded events, but there are exceptions; artists with a loyal cult or teenage following tend to do particularly well in this area, as concert films featuring artists such as the Grateful Dead, Pearl Jam, JLS, Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones have shown. ==== The Future ==== As more and more distributors are emerging, offering an increasingly broad range of content to cinemas worldwide, the landscape itself is shifting: screen advertising companies, technical providers, and exhibitors themselves are reinventing themselves as Alternative Content or Event Cinema distributors, and the industry is witnessing a re-evaluation of business models and practices worldwide. Predictions are that this industry could be work in excess of US$1bn by 2015. An illustration of the growth of this industry is the news the establishment of a European trade association promoting the industry to the general public and supporting those involved in it and the Event Cinema Association.

  Read more →
• 

  Randomized benchmarking

  Randomized benchmarking is an experimental method for measuring the average error rates of quantum computing hardware platforms. The protocol estimates the average error rates by implementing long sequences of randomly sampled quantum gate operations. Randomized benchmarking is the industry-standard protocol used by quantum hardware developers such as IBM and Google to test the performance of the quantum operations. The original theory of randomized benchmarking, proposed by Joseph Emerson and collaborators, considered the implementation of sequences of Haar-random operations, but this had several practical limitations. The now-standard protocol for randomized benchmarking (RB) relies on uniformly random Clifford operations, as proposed in 2006 by Dankert et al. as an application of the theory of unitary t-designs. In current usage randomized benchmarking sometimes refers to the broader family of generalizations of the 2005 protocol involving different random gate sets that can identify various features of the strength and type of errors affecting the elementary quantum gate operations. Randomized benchmarking protocols are an important means of verifying and validating quantum operations and are also routinely used for the optimization of quantum control procedures. == Overview == Randomized benchmarking offers several key advantages over alternative approaches to error characterization. For example, the number of experimental procedures required for full characterization of errors (called tomography) grows exponentially with the number of quantum bits (called qubits). This makes tomographic methods impractical for even small systems of just 3 or 4 qubits. In contrast, randomized benchmarking protocols are the only known approaches to error characterization that scale efficiently as number of qubits in the system increases. Thus RB can be applied in practice to characterize errors in arbitrarily large quantum processors. Additionally, in experimental quantum computing, procedures for state preparation and measurement (SPAM) are also error-prone, and thus quantum process tomography is unable to distinguish errors associated with gate operations from errors associated with SPAM. In contrast, RB protocols are robust to state-preparation and measurement errors Randomized benchmarking protocols estimate key features of the errors that affect a set of quantum operations by examining how the observed fidelity of the final quantum state decreases as the length of the random sequence increases. If the set of operations satisfies certain mathematical properties, such as comprising a sequence of twirls with unitary two-designs, then the measured decay can be shown to be an invariant exponential with a rate fixed uniquely by features of the error model. == History == Randomized benchmarking was proposed in Scalable noise estimation with random unitary operators, where it was shown that long sequences of quantum gates sampled uniformly at random from the Haar measure on the group SU(d) would lead to an exponential decay at a rate that was uniquely fixed by the error model. Emerson, Alicki and Zyczkowski also showed, under the assumption of gate-independent errors, that the measured decay rate is directly related to an important figure of merit, the average gate fidelity and independent of the choice of initial state and any errors in the initial state, as well as the specific random sequences of quantum gates. This protocol applied for arbitrary dimension d and an arbitrary number n of qubits, where d=2n. The SU(d) RB protocol had two important limitations that were overcome in a modified protocol proposed by Dankert et al., who proposed sampling the gate operations uniformly at random from any unitary two-design, such as the Clifford group. They proved that this would produce the same exponential decay rate as the random SU(d) version of the protocol proposed in Emerson et al.. This follows from the observation that a random sequence of gates is equivalent to an independent sequence of twirls under that group, as conjectured in and later proven in. This Clifford-group approach to Randomized Benchmarking is the now standard method for assessing error rates in quantum computers. A variation of this protocol was proposed by NIST in 2008 for the first experimental implementation of an RB-type for single qubit gates. However, the sampling of random gates in the NIST protocol was later proven not to reproduce any unitary two-design. The NIST RB protocol was later shown to also produce an exponential fidelity decay, albeit with a rate that depends on non-invariant features of the error model In recent years a rigorous theoretical framework has been developed for Clifford-group RB protocols to show that they work reliably under very broad experimental conditions. In 2011 and 2012, Magesan et al. proved that the exponential decay rate is fully robust to arbitrary state preparation and measurement errors (SPAM). They also proved a connection between the average gate fidelity and diamond norm metric of error that is relevant to the fault-tolerant threshold. They also provided evidence that the observed decay was exponential and related to the average gate fidelity even if the error model varied across the gate operations, so-called gate-dependent errors, which is the experimentally realistic situation. In 2018, Wallman and Dugas et al., showed that, despite concerns raised in, even under very strong gate-dependence errors the standard RB protocols produces an exponential decay at a rate that precisely measures the average gate-fidelity of the experimentally relevant errors. The results of Wallman. in particular proved that the RB error rate is so robust to gate-dependent errors models that it provides an extremely sensitive tool for detecting non-Markovian errors. This follows because under a standard RB experiment only non-Markovian errors (including time-dependent Markovian errors) can produce a statistically significant deviation from an exponential decay The standard RB protocol was first implemented for single qubit gate operations in 2012 at Yale on a superconducting qubit. A variation of this standard protocol that is only defined for single qubit operations was implemented by NIST in 2008 on a trapped ion. The first implementation of the standard RB protocol for two-qubit gates was performed in 2012 at NIST for a system of two trapped ions

  Read more →
• 

  Dynamic epistemic logic

  Dynamic epistemic logic (DEL) is a logical framework dealing with knowledge and information change. Typically, DEL focuses on situations involving multiple agents and studies how their knowledge changes when events occur. These events can change factual properties of the actual world (they are called ontic events): for example a red card is painted in blue. They can also bring about changes of knowledge without changing factual properties of the world (they are called epistemic events): for example, a card is revealed publicly (or privately) to be red. Originally, DEL focused on epistemic events. Only some of the basic ideas are present in this entry of the original DEL framework; more details about DEL in general can be found in the references. Due to the nature of its object of study and its abstract approach, DEL is related and has applications to numerous research areas, such as computer science (artificial intelligence), philosophy (formal epistemology), economics (game theory) and cognitive science. In computer science, DEL is for example very much related to multi-agent systems, which are systems where multiple intelligent agents interact and exchange information. As a combination of dynamic logic and epistemic logic, dynamic epistemic logic is a young field of research. It really started in 1989 with Plaza's logic of public announcement. Independently, Gerbrandy and Groeneveld proposed a system dealing moreover with private announcement and that was inspired by the work of Veltman. Another system was proposed by van Ditmarsch whose main inspiration was the Cluedo game. But the most influential and original system was the system proposed by Baltag, Moss and Solecki. This system can deal with all the types of situations studied in the works above and its underlying methodology is conceptually grounded. This entry will present some of its basic ideas. Formally, DEL extends ordinary epistemic logic by the inclusion of event models to describe actions, and a product update operator that defines how epistemic models are updated as the consequence of executing actions described through event models. Epistemic logic will first be recalled. Then, actions and events will enter into the picture and we will introduce the DEL framework. == Epistemic logic == Epistemic logic is a modal logic dealing with the notions of knowledge and belief. As a logic, it is concerned with understanding the process of reasoning about knowledge and belief: which principles relating the notions of knowledge and belief are intuitively plausible? Like epistemology, it stems from the Greek word ϵ π ι σ τ η μ η {\displaystyle \epsilon \pi \iota \sigma \tau \eta \mu \eta } or ‘episteme’ meaning knowledge. Epistemology is nevertheless more concerned with analyzing the very nature and scope of knowledge, addressing questions such as “What is the definition of knowledge?” or “How is knowledge acquired?”. In fact, epistemic logic grew out of epistemology in the Middle Ages thanks to the efforts of Burley and Ockham. The formal work, based on modal logic, that inaugurated contemporary research into epistemic logic dates back only to 1962 and is due to Hintikka. It then sparked in the 1960s discussions about the principles of knowledge and belief and many axioms for these notions were proposed and discussed. For example, the interaction axioms K p → B p {\displaystyle Kp\rightarrow Bp} and B p → K B p {\displaystyle Bp\rightarrow KBp} are often considered to be intuitive principles: if an agent Knows p {\displaystyle p} then (s)he also Believes p {\displaystyle p} , or if an agent Believes p {\displaystyle p} , then (s)he Knows that (s)he Believes p {\displaystyle p} . More recently, these kinds of philosophical theories were taken up by researchers in economics, artificial intelligence and theoretical computer science where reasoning about knowledge is a central topic. Due to the new setting in which epistemic logic was used, new perspectives and new features such as computability issues were then added to the research agenda of epistemic logic. === Syntax === In the sequel, A G T S = { 1 , … , n } {\displaystyle AGTS=\{1,\ldots ,n\}} is a finite set whose elements are called agents and P R O P {\displaystyle PROP} is a set of propositional letters. The epistemic language is an extension of the basic multi-modal language of modal logic with a common knowledge operator C A {\displaystyle C_{A}} and a distributed knowledge operator D A {\displaystyle D_{A}} . Formally, the epistemic language L EL C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\textsf {EL}}^{C}} is defined inductively by the following grammar in BNF: L EL C : ϕ ::= p ∣ ¬ ϕ ∣ ( ϕ ∧ ϕ ) ∣ K j ϕ ∣ C A ϕ ∣ D A ϕ {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{\textsf {EL}}^{C}:\phi ~~::=~~p~\mid ~\neg \phi ~\mid ~(\phi \land \phi )~\mid ~K_{j}\phi ~\mid ~C_{A}\phi ~\mid ~D_{A}\phi } where p ∈ P R O P {\displaystyle p\in PROP} , j ∈ A G T S {\displaystyle j\in {AGTS}} and A ⊆ A G T S {\displaystyle A\subseteq {AGTS}} . The basic epistemic language L E L {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{EL}} is the language L E L C {\displaystyle {\mathcal {L}}_{EL}^{C}} without the common knowledge and distributed knowledge operators. The formula ⊥ {\displaystyle \bot } is an abbreviation for ¬ p ∧ p {\displaystyle \neg p\land p} (for a given p ∈ P R O P {\displaystyle p\in PROP} ), ⟨ K j ⟩ ϕ {\displaystyle \langle K_{j}\rangle \phi } is an abbreviation for ¬ K j ¬ ϕ {\displaystyle \neg K_{j}\neg \phi } , E A ϕ {\displaystyle E_{A}\phi } is an abbreviation for ⋀ j ∈ A K j ϕ {\displaystyle \bigwedge \limits _{j\in A}K_{j}\phi } and C ϕ {\displaystyle C\phi } an abbreviation for C A G T S ϕ {\displaystyle C_{AGTS}\phi } . Group notions: general, common and distributed knowledge. In a multi-agent setting there are three important epistemic concepts: general knowledge, distributed knowledge and common knowledge. The notion of common knowledge was first studied by Lewis in the context of conventions. It was then applied to distributed systems and to game theory, where it allows to express that the rationality of the players, the rules of the game and the set of players are commonly known. General knowledge. General knowledge of ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } means that everybody in the group of agents A G T S {\displaystyle {AGTS}} knows that ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } . Formally, this corresponds to the following formula: E ϕ := ⋀ j ∈ A G T S K j ϕ . {\displaystyle E\phi :={\underset {j\in {AGTS}}{\bigwedge }}K_{j}\phi .} Common knowledge. Common knowledge of ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } means that everybody knows ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } but also that everybody knows that everybody knows ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } , that everybody knows that everybody knows that everybody knows ϕ {\displaystyle \phi } , and so on ad infinitum. Formally, this corresponds to the following formula C ϕ := E ϕ ∧ E E ϕ ∧ E E E ϕ ∧ … {\displaystyle C\phi :=E\phi \land EE\phi \land EEE\phi \land \ldots } As we do not allow infinite conjunction the notion of common knowledge will have to be introduced as a primitive in our language. Before defining the language with this new operator, we are going to give an example introduced by Lewis that illustrates the difference between the notions of general knowledge and common knowledge. Lewis wanted to know what kind of knowledge is needed so that the statement p {\displaystyle p} : “every driver must drive on the right” be a convention among a group of agents. In other words, he wanted to know what kind of knowledge is needed so that everybody feels safe to drive on the right. Suppose there are only two agents i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} . Then everybody knowing p {\displaystyle p} (formally E p {\displaystyle Ep} ) is not enough. Indeed, it might still be possible that the agent i {\displaystyle i} considers possible that the agent j {\displaystyle j} does not know p {\displaystyle p} (formally ¬ K i K j p {\displaystyle \neg K_{i}K_{j}p} ). In that case the agent i {\displaystyle i} will not feel safe to drive on the right because he might consider that the agent j {\displaystyle j} , not knowing p {\displaystyle p} , could drive on the left. To avoid this problem, we could then assume that everybody knows that everybody knows that p {\displaystyle p} (formally E E p {\displaystyle EEp} ). This is again not enough to ensure that everybody feels safe to drive on the right. Indeed, it might still be possible that agent i {\displaystyle i} considers possible that agent j {\displaystyle j} considers possible that agent i {\displaystyle i} does not know p {\displaystyle p} (formally ¬ K i K j K i p {\displaystyle \neg K_{i}K_{j}K_{i}p} ). In that case and from i {\displaystyle i} ’s point of view, j {\displaystyle j} considers possible that i {\displaystyle i} , not knowing p {\displaystyle p} , will drive on the left. So from i {\displaystyle i} ’s point of view, j {\displaystyle j} might drive on the left as well (by the same argument as abov

  Read more →
• 

  Media Auxiliary Memory

  Media Auxiliary Memory or Medium Auxiliary Memory (MAM) refers to a chip embedded into a digital media device (usually a tape cartridge) that stores a small amount of data or metadata that a computer can read without having to read the actual tape. MAMs can be used by the tape driver to increase efficiency, or by custom software to store & retrieve custom data. Some examples of MAM's are Cartridge Memory (HP/Seagate/IBM LTO) and MIC (Sony AIT).

  Read more →
• 

  Packard Bell Statesman

  The Packard Bell Statesman was an economy line of notebook-sized laptops introduced in 1993 by Packard Bell. They were slower in performance and lacked features compared to most competitor products, but they were lower in price. It was created in a collaboration between Packard Bell and Zenith Data Systems. The Statesman series was essentially a rebrand of Zenith Data Systems Z-Star 433 series, with the only notable difference of the logo in the middle and text on the front bezel. == History == In June 1993 Zenith Data Systems announced an alliance with Packard Bell. Zenith acquired about 20% of Packard Bell and they would both now work together to design and build PC's. Zenith would also provide Packard Bell with private-label versions of their portable PC's. The Packard Bell Statesman was a rebrand of the Zenith Z-Star notebook computer series. While the Statesman was being advertised by Packard Bell, the Z-Star series was also still being sold by Zenith. The Statesman was first introduced on October 4, 1993. Prices started at $1,500 for a monochrome or color DSTN model with a 33 MHz Cyrix Cx486SLC, 4 MB of RAM, 200 MB hard disk drive, internal 1.44 MB floppy disk drive, and MS-DOS 6.0 with Windows 3.1 for the included software. A "J mouse" pointing device was included, similar to the TrackPoint. The Statesman was expected to begin shipping within the next few weeks. == Specifications == === Hardware === CPU The first two models, the 200M and 200C, used the Cyrix Cx486SLC. This was Cyrix's first processor, which was a 386SX pin-compatible chip with on-board L1 cache and 486 instructions, being known as a "hybrid chip". The processor was clocked at 33 MHz and had 1 KB of L1 cache. It was a 16-bit processor and was pin compatible with the Intel 80386SX. On the bottom of the unit, the motherboard had an empty socket for a Cyrix FasMath co-processor, which could improve floating-point math performance. The 200M and 200C plus models had a Cyrix Cx486SLC2 clocked at 50 MHz, which was 50% faster than the original 486SLC. The SLC2 similarly had 1 KB of on-board cache and was pin compatible with the previous model. Graphics & Display For video all models used three versions of the Chips & Technologies 655xx, the CT65520, 65525, and 65530. The 65520 was first introduced in early 1992 as the first controller with Super VGA resolution. It supported resolutions up to 1024x768 in 16 colors or shades of gray. If in 800x600 resolution, it can display up to 256 colors. All 3 chips were the same, with the CT65525 identifying as a CT65530. The CT65530 had an ability of 5V and 3.3V mixed operation and linear video memory addressing. All models used a 9.5in 800x600 resolution DSTN LCD. The 200M and 200M Plus had a monochrome display, while the 200C and 200C Plus had a color display. Audio All models had only basic audio available, with just a piezo speaker soldered onto the motherboard and no sound controller. Memory Standard RAM included was 4-8 MB of EDO RAM. The RAM was on a proprietary SIPP package that could only be upgraded to 12 MB maximum if the user had compatible modules. Storage For storage all models used a hard drive with a size of 100 or 200 MB, and all models had an internal 1.44 MB floppy disk drive located on the side of the unit. The maximum capacity hard drive compatible if the user wanted to upgrade was 500 MB.Ports & Expansion For ports all models had 1x serial, 1x parallel, 1x VGA output, and 1x PS/2 keyboard/mouse input. For expansion all models only had one PCMCIA type II slot. Keyboard & Mouse All models used a small-scale keyboard with control keys. One interesting feature of the keyboard is that the J key also acted as a mouse, working similar to IBM's ThinkPad TrackPoint. On some models additional keys such as S, D, F, G and space let you do other mouse actions such as right click, left click, double click, and middle mouse click. === Software === The series shipped with MS-DOS and Windows 3.1 as the included operating system. == Model Comparison == Statesman 200M — The first Statesman model, it came with a DSTN monochrome screen, and a Nickel-cadmium battery pack which could last up to 4 hours. It weighed 7.4 lb and was $1500. Statesman 200C — The second Statesman model, it was the same as the 200M with the only notable differences of a DSTN color display rather than monochrome and a slightly decreased battery life of about 3 hours. It cost $700 more than the 200M at $2200. Statesman 200M/200C Plus — The 200M/200C Plus were both identical to their previous base models, with the only difference of them having a Cx486SLC2 running at 50 MHz. In 1994 it cost around $2,295 for the 200C plus with 4 MB of ram, with 8 MB costing an extra $400. == Reception == The Statesman received fair reception, with most reviewers giving positivity for the low price and high battery life, but mainly criticizing the performance and screen quality of the model line. A review by PC World writer Rex Farrance and Owen Linderholm said the 200M had a good price, being only $1500, and a good battery life which lasted about 4 hours. In benchmarks however, the 200M performed "noticeably below the average". It was noted that the 200M's worst feature was its monochrome display, being "cloudy and a bit dim for our tastes". The J mouse was considered a decent choice, and was said to be "highly usable" after some practice. The 200M was listed as number 3 on PC World's top 20 budget PC list. PC World also reviewed the 200C, saying the color display is only a "marginal, although an improvement on the monochrome version". The 200C placed 9 on the PC World top 20 budget PC list. Compute! Magazine reviewed the 200C Plus in September 1994 stating it "lagged far behind the others, especially the DXs, but then speed isn't everything". It was given pros for low cost and good display, but criticized for its low performance, not having a trackball, and poor external monitor support.

  Read more →