AI Face Animator

AI Face Animator — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

Colour banding

Colour banding is a subtle form of posterisation in digital images, caused by the colour of each pixel being rounded to the nearest of the digital colour levels. While posterisation is often done for artistic effect, colour banding is an undesired artefact. In 24-bit colour modes, 8 bits per channel is usually considered sufficient to render images in Rec. 709 or sRGB. However the eye can see the difference between the colour levels, especially when there is a sharp border between two large areas of adjacent colour levels. This will happen with gradual gradients (like sunsets, dawns or clear blue skies), and also when blurring an image a large amount. Colour banding is more noticeable with fewer bits per pixel (BPP) at 16–256 colours (4–8 BPP), where there are fewer shades with a larger difference between them. The appearance of colour banding is exaggerated by the Mach bands effect. Possible solutions include the introduction of dithering and increasing the number of bits per colour channel. Because the banding comes from limitations in the presentation of the image, blurring the image does not fix this unless the image BPP is higher than the original.
Read more →
Business intelligence

Business intelligence (BI) consists of strategies, methodologies, and technologies used by enterprises for data analysis and management of business information to inform business strategies and business operations. Common functions of BI technologies include reporting, online analytical processing, analytics, dashboard development, data mining, process mining, complex event processing, business performance management, benchmarking, text mining, predictive analytics, and prescriptive analytics. BI tools can handle large amounts of structured and sometimes unstructured data to help organizations identify, develop, and otherwise create new strategic business opportunities. They aim to allow for the easy interpretation of these big data. Identifying new opportunities and implementing an effective strategy based on insights is assumed to potentially provide businesses with a competitive market advantage and long-term stability, and help them take strategic decisions. Business intelligence can be used by enterprises to support a wide range of business decisions ranging from operational to strategic. Basic operating decisions include product positioning or pricing. Strategic business decisions involve priorities, goals, and directions at the broadest level. In all cases, business intelligence is considered most effective when it combines data from the market in which a company operates (external data) with data from internal company sources, such as financial and operational information. When integrated, external and internal data provide a comprehensive view that creates ‘intelligence’ not possible from any single data source alone. Among their many uses, business intelligence tools empower organizations to gain insight into new markets, to assess demand and suitability of products and services for different market segments, and to gauge the impact of marketing efforts. BI applications use data gathered from a data warehouse (DW) or from a data mart, and the concepts of BI and DW combine as "BI/DW" or as "BIDW". A data warehouse contains a copy of analytical data that facilitates decision support. == History == The earliest known use of the term business intelligence is in Richard Millar Devens' Cyclopædia of Commercial and Business Anecdotes (1865). Devens used the term to describe how the banker Sir Henry Furnese gained profit by receiving and acting upon information about his environment, prior to his competitors: Throughout Holland, Flanders, France, and Germany, he maintained a complete and perfect train of business intelligence. The news of the many battles fought was thus received first by him, and the fall of Namur added to his profits, owing to his early receipt of the news. The ability to collect and react accordingly based on the information retrieved, Devens says, is central to business intelligence. When Hans Peter Luhn, a researcher at IBM, used the term business intelligence in an article published in 1958, he employed the Webster's Dictionary definition of intelligence: "the ability to apprehend the interrelationships of presented facts in such a way as to guide action towards a desired goal." In 1989, Howard Dresner (later a Gartner analyst) proposed business intelligence as an umbrella term to describe "concepts and methods to improve business decision making by using fact-based support systems." It was not until the late 1990s that this usage was widespread. == Definition == According to Solomon Negash and Paul Gray, business intelligence (BI) can be defined as systems that combine: Data gathering Data storage Knowledge management with analysis to evaluate complex corporate and competitive information for presentation to planners and decision makers, with the objective of improving the timeliness and the quality of the input to the decision process." According to Forrester Research, business intelligence is "a set of methodologies, processes, architectures, and technologies that transform raw data into meaningful and useful information used to enable more effective strategic, tactical, and operational insights and decision-making." Under this definition, business intelligence encompasses information management (data integration, data quality, data warehousing, master-data management, text- and content-analytics, et al.). Therefore, Forrester refers to data preparation and data usage as two separate but closely linked segments of the business-intelligence architectural stack. Some elements of business intelligence are: Multidimensional aggregation and allocation Denormalization, tagging, and standardization Realtime reporting with analytical alert A method of interfacing with unstructured data sources Group consolidation, budgeting, and rolling forecasts Statistical inference and probabilistic simulation Key performance indicators optimization Version control and process management Open item management Forrester distinguishes this from the business-intelligence market, which is "just the top layers of the BI architectural stack, such as reporting, analytics, and dashboards." === Compared with competitive intelligence === Though the term business intelligence is sometimes a synonym for competitive intelligence (because they both support decision making), BI uses technologies, processes, and applications to analyze mostly internal, structured data and business processes while competitive intelligence gathers, analyzes, and disseminates information with a topical focus on company competitors. If understood broadly, competitive intelligence can be considered as a subset of business intelligence. === Compared with business analytics === Business intelligence and business analytics are sometimes used interchangeably, but there are alternate definitions. Thomas Davenport, professor of information technology and management at Babson College argues that business intelligence should be divided into querying, reporting, Online analytical processing (OLAP), an "alerts" tool, and business analytics. In this definition, business analytics is the subset of BI focusing on statistics, prediction, and optimization, rather than the reporting functionality. == Unstructured data == Business operations can generate a very large amount of data in the form of emails, memos, notes from call centers, news, user groups, chats, reports, web pages, presentations, image files, video files, and marketing material. According to Merrill Lynch, more than 85% of all business information exists in these forms; a company might only use such a document a single time. Because of the way it is produced and stored, this information is either unstructured or semi-structured. The management of semi-structured data is an unsolved problem in the information technology industry. According to projections from Gartner (2003), white-collar workers spend 30–40% of their time searching, finding, and assessing unstructured data. BI uses both structured and unstructured data. The former is easy to search, and the latter contains a large quantity of the information needed for analysis and decision-making. Because of the difficulty of properly searching, finding, and assessing unstructured or semi-structured data, organizations may not draw upon these vast reservoirs of information, which could influence a particular decision, task, or project. This can ultimately lead to poorly informed decision-making. Therefore, when designing a business intelligence/DW solution, the specific problems associated with semi-structured and unstructured data must be accommodated, as well as those associated with structured data. === Limitations of semi-structured and unstructured data === There are several challenges to developing BI with semi-structured data. According to Inmon & Nesavich, some of those are: Physically accessing unstructured textual data – unstructured data is stored in a huge variety of formats. Terminology – Among researchers and analysts, there is a need to develop standardized terminology. Volume of data – As stated earlier, up to 85% of all data exists as semi-structured data. Couple that with the need for word-to-word and semantic analysis. Searchability of unstructured textual data – A simple search on some data, e.g. apple, results in links where there is a reference to that precise search term. (Inmon & Nesavich, 2008) gives an example: "a search is made on the term felony. In a simple search, the term felony is used, and everywhere there is a reference to felony, a hit to an unstructured document is made. But a simple search is crude. It does not find references to crime, arson, murder, embezzlement, vehicular homicide, and such, even though these crimes are types of felonies". === Metadata === To solve problems with searchability and assessment of data, it is necessary to know something about the content. This can be done by adding context through the use of metadata. Many systems already capture some metadata (e.g. filename, author, size, etc.), but more usef
Read more →
Ciphertext

In cryptography, ciphertext or cyphertext is the result of encryption performed on plaintext using an algorithm, called a cipher. Ciphertext is also known as encrypted or encoded information because it contains a form of the original plaintext that is unreadable by a human or computer without the proper cipher to decrypt it. This process prevents the loss of sensitive information via hacking. Decryption, the inverse of encryption, is the process of turning ciphertext into readable plaintext. Ciphertext is not to be confused with codetext, because the latter is a result of a code, not a cipher. == Conceptual underpinnings == Let m {\displaystyle m\!} be the plaintext message that Alice wants to secretly transmit to Bob and let E k {\displaystyle E_{k}\!} be the encryption cipher, where k {\displaystyle _{k}\!} is a cryptographic key. Alice must first transform the plaintext into ciphertext, c {\displaystyle c\!} , in order to securely send the message to Bob, as follows: c = E k ( m ) . {\displaystyle c=E_{k}(m).\!} In a symmetric-key system, Bob knows Alice's encryption key. Once the message is encrypted, Alice can safely transmit it to Bob (assuming no one else knows the key). In order to read Alice's message, Bob must decrypt the ciphertext using E k − 1 {\displaystyle {E_{k}}^{-1}\!} which is known as the decryption cipher, D k : {\displaystyle D_{k}:\!} D k ( c ) = D k ( E k ( m ) ) = m . {\displaystyle D_{k}(c)=D_{k}(E_{k}(m))=m.\!} Alternatively, in a non-symmetric key system, everyone, not just Alice and Bob, knows the encryption key; but the decryption key cannot be inferred from the encryption key. Only Bob knows the decryption key D k , {\displaystyle D_{k},} and decryption proceeds as D k ( c ) = m . {\displaystyle D_{k}(c)=m.} == Types of ciphers == The history of cryptography began thousands of years ago. Cryptography uses a variety of different types of encryption. Earlier algorithms were performed by hand and are substantially different from modern algorithms, which are generally executed by a machine. === Historical ciphers === Historical pen and paper ciphers used in the past are sometimes known as classical ciphers. They include: Substitution cipher: the units of plaintext are replaced with ciphertext (e.g., Caesar cipher and one-time pad) Polyalphabetic substitution cipher: a substitution cipher using multiple substitution alphabets (e.g., Vigenère cipher and Enigma machine) Polygraphic substitution cipher: the unit of substitution is a sequence of two or more letters rather than just one (e.g., Playfair cipher) Transposition cipher: the ciphertext is a permutation of the plaintext (e.g., rail fence cipher) Historical ciphers are not generally used as a standalone encryption technique because they are quite easy to crack. Many of the classical ciphers, with the exception of the one-time pad, can be cracked using brute force. === Modern ciphers === Modern ciphers are more secure than classical ciphers and are designed to withstand a wide range of attacks. An attacker should not be able to find the key used in a modern cipher, even if they know any specifics about the plaintext and its corresponding ciphertext. Modern encryption methods can be divided into the following categories: Private-key cryptography (symmetric key algorithm): one shared key is used for encryption and decryption Public-key cryptography (asymmetric key algorithm): two different keys are used for encryption and decryption In a symmetric key algorithm (e.g., DES, AES), the sender and receiver have a shared key established in advance: the sender uses the shared key to perform encryption; the receiver uses the shared key to perform decryption. Symmetric key algorithms can either be block ciphers or stream ciphers. Block ciphers operate on fixed-length groups of bits, called blocks, with an unvarying transformation. Stream ciphers encrypt plaintext digits one at a time on a continuous stream of data, with the transformation of successive digits varying during the encryption process. In an asymmetric key algorithm (e.g., RSA), there are two different keys: a public key and a private key. The public key is published, thereby allowing any sender to perform encryption. The private key is kept secret by the receiver, thereby allowing only the receiver to correctly perform decryption. == Cryptanalysis == Cryptanalysis (also referred to as codebreaking or cracking the code) is the study of applying various methodologies to obtain the meaning of encrypted information, without having access to the cipher required to correctly decrypt the information. This typically involves gaining an understanding of the system design and determining the cipher. Cryptanalysts can follow one or more attack models to crack a cipher, depending upon what information is available and the type of cipher being analyzed. Ciphertext is generally the most easily obtained part of a cryptosystem and therefore is an important part of cryptanalysis. === Attack models === Ciphertext-only: the cryptanalyst has access only to a collection of ciphertexts or code texts. This is the weakest attack model because the cryptanalyst has limited information. Modern ciphers rarely fail under this attack. Known-plaintext: the attacker has a set of ciphertexts to which they know the corresponding plaintext Chosen-plaintext attack: the attacker can obtain the ciphertexts corresponding to an arbitrary set of plaintexts of their own choosing Batch chosen-plaintext attack: where the cryptanalyst chooses all plaintexts before any of them are encrypted. This is often the meaning of an unqualified use of "chosen-plaintext attack". Adaptive chosen-plaintext attack: where the cryptanalyst makes a series of interactive queries, choosing subsequent plaintexts based on the information from the previous encryptions. Chosen-ciphertext attack: the attacker can obtain the plaintexts corresponding to an arbitrary set of ciphertexts of their own choosing Adaptive chosen-ciphertext attack Indifferent chosen-ciphertext attack Related-key attack: similar to a chosen-plaintext attack, except the attacker can obtain ciphertexts encrypted under two different keys. The keys are unknown, but the relationship between them is known (e.g., two keys that differ in the one bit). == Famous ciphertexts == The Babington Plot ciphers The Shugborough inscription The Zimmermann Telegram The Magic Words are Squeamish Ossifrage The cryptogram in "The Gold-Bug" Beale ciphers Kryptos Zodiac Killer ciphers
Read more →
POODLE

POODLE (which stands for "Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption") is a security vulnerability which takes advantage of the fallback to SSL 3.0. If attackers successfully exploit this vulnerability, on average, they only need to make 256 SSL 3.0 requests to reveal one byte of encrypted messages. Bodo Möller, Thai Duong and Krzysztof Kotowicz from the Google Security Team discovered this vulnerability; they disclosed the vulnerability publicly on October 14, 2014 (despite the paper being dated "September 2014"). On December 8, 2014, a variation of the POODLE vulnerability that affected TLS was announced. The CVE-ID associated with the original POODLE attack is CVE-2014-3566. F5 Networks filed for CVE-2014-8730 as well, see POODLE attack against TLS section below. == Prevention == To mitigate the POODLE attack, one approach is to completely disable SSL 3.0 on the client side and the server side. However, some old clients and servers do not support TLS 1.0 and above. Thus, the authors of the paper on POODLE attacks also encourage browser and server implementation of TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV, which will make downgrade attacks impossible. Another mitigation is to implement "anti-POODLE record splitting". It splits the records into several parts and ensures none of them can be attacked. However the problem of the splitting is that, though valid according to the specification, it may also cause compatibility issues due to problems in server-side implementations. A full list of browser versions and levels of vulnerability to different attacks (including POODLE) can be found in the article Transport Layer Security. Opera 25 implemented this mitigation in addition to TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. Google's Chrome browser and their servers had already supported TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. Google stated in October 2014 it was planning to remove SSL 3.0 support from their products completely within a few months. Fallback to SSL 3.0 has been disabled in Chrome 39, released in November 2014. SSL 3.0 has been disabled by default in Chrome 40, released in January 2015. Mozilla disabled SSL 3.0 in Firefox 34 and ESR 31.3, which were released in December 2014, and added support of TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV in Firefox 35. Microsoft published a security advisory to explain how to disable SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer and Windows OS, and on October 29, 2014, Microsoft released a fix which disables SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer on Windows Vista / Server 2003 and above and announced a plan to disable SSL 3.0 by default in their products and services within a few months. Microsoft disabled fallback to SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer 11 for Protect Mode sites on February 10, 2015, and for other sites on April 14, 2015. Apple's Safari (on OS X 10.8, iOS 8.1 and later) mitigated against POODLE by removing support for all CBC protocols in SSL 3.0, however, this left RC4 which is also completely broken by the RC4 attacks in SSL 3.0. POODLE was completely mitigated in OS X 10.11 (El Capitan 2015) and iOS 9 (2015). To prevent the POODLE attack, some web services dropped support of SSL 3.0. Examples include CloudFlare and Wikimedia. Network Security Services version 3.17.1 (released on October 3, 2014) and 3.16.2.3 (released on October 27, 2014) introduced support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV, and NSS will disable SSL 3.0 by default in April 2015. OpenSSL versions 1.0.1j, 1.0.0o and 0.9.8zc, released on October 15, 2014, introduced support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. LibreSSL version 2.1.1, released on October 16, 2014, disabled SSL 3.0 by default. == POODLE attack against TLS == A new variant of the original POODLE attack was announced on December 8, 2014. This attack exploits implementation flaws of CBC encryption mode in the TLS 1.0 - 1.2 protocols. Even though TLS specifications require servers to check the padding, some implementations fail to validate it properly, which makes some servers vulnerable to POODLE even if they disable SSL 3.0. SSL Pulse showed "about 10% of the servers are vulnerable to the POODLE attack against TLS" before this vulnerability was announced. The CVE-ID for F5 Networks' implementation bug is CVE-2014-8730. The entry in NIST's NVD states that this CVE-ID is to be used only for F5 Networks' implementation of TLS, and that other vendors whose products have the same failure to validate the padding mistake in their implementations like A10 Networks and Cisco Systems need to issue their own CVE-IDs for their implementation errors because this is not a flaw in the protocol but in the implementation. The POODLE attack against TLS was found to be easier to initiate than the initial POODLE attack against SSL. There is no need to downgrade clients to SSL 3.0, meaning fewer steps are needed to execute a successful attack.
Read more →
Secure environment

In computing, a secure environment is any system which implements the controlled storage and use of information. In the event of computing data loss, a secure environment is used to protect personal or confidential data. It may also be known as a trusted execution environment (TEE). Often, secure environments employ cryptography as a means to protect information. This is typically used for processing confidential or restricted information. Some secure environments employ cryptographic hashing, simply to verify that the information has not been altered since it was last modified.
Read more →
Frame (networking)

A frame is a digital data transmission unit in computer networking and telecommunications. In packet switched systems, a frame is a simple container for a single network packet. In other telecommunications systems, a frame is a repeating structure supporting time-division multiplexing. A frame typically includes frame synchronization features consisting of a sequence of bits or symbols that indicate to the receiver the beginning and end of the payload data within the stream of symbols or bits it receives. If a receiver is connected to the system during frame transmission, it ignores the data until it detects a new frame synchronization sequence. == Packet switching == In the OSI model of computer networking, a frame is the protocol data unit at the data link layer. Frames are the result of the final layer of encapsulation before the data is transmitted over the physical layer. A frame is "the unit of transmission in a link layer protocol, and consists of a link layer header followed by a packet." Each frame is separated from the next by an interframe gap. A frame is a series of bits generally composed of frame synchronization bits, the packet payload, and a frame check sequence. Examples are Ethernet frames, Wi-Fi frames, 4G frames, Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) frames, Fibre Channel frames, and V.42 modem frames. Often, frames of several different sizes are nested inside each other. For example, when using Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) over asynchronous serial communication, the eight bits of each individual byte are framed by start and stop bits, the payload data bytes in a network packet are framed by the header and footer, and several packets can be framed with frame boundary octets. == Time-division multiplex == In telecommunications, specifically in time-division multiplex (TDM) and time-division multiple access (TDMA) variants, a frame is a cyclically repeated data block that consists of a fixed number of time slots, one for each logical TDM channel or TDMA transmitter. In this context, a frame is typically an entity at the physical layer. TDM application examples are SONET/SDH and the ISDN circuit-switched B-channel, while TDMA examples are Circuit Switched Data used in early cellular voice services. The frame is also an entity for time-division duplex, where the mobile terminal may transmit during some time slots and receive during others.
Read more →
Social Media Working Group Act of 2014

The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 (H.R. 4263) is a bill that would direct the United States Secretary of Homeland Security to establish within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a social media working group (the Group) to provide guidance and best practices to the emergency preparedness and response community on the use of social media technologies before, during, and after a terrorist attack. The bill was introduced into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress. == Background == === Social media === Social media is the social interaction among people in which they create, share or exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks. Andreas Kaplan and Michael Haenlein define social media 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, social media depend on mobile and web-based technologies to create highly interactive platforms through which individuals and communities share, co-create, discuss, and modify user-generated content. They introduce substantial and pervasive changes to communication between organizations, communities, and individuals. Social media differ from traditional or industrial media in many ways, including quality, reach, frequency, usability, immediacy, and permanence. === Virtual Social Media Working Group === First responders have increasingly used social media in emergency response and recovery operations. Social media tools are used to connect with citizens after a disaster and share information. The Virtual Social Media Working group (VSMWG) is an online platform that gives advice to first responders on how to safely and effectively use social media in emergency response operations. The working group is made up of subject matter experts from across the U.S. It was created by DHS in December 2010 and gives first responders guidance and best practices regarding the use of social media during emergencies. The DHS S&T and the VSMWG work with local and state governments, academics and nonprofits. Meetings of the VSMWG are chaired by the Under Secretary of Homeland Security for Science and Technology. == Provisions of the bill == This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Research Service, a public domain source. The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to direct the United States Secretary of Homeland Security to establish within the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a social media working group (the Group) to provide guidance and best practices to the emergency preparedness and response community on the use of social media technologies before, during, and after a terrorist attack. The bill would require the Group to submit an annual report that includes: (1) a review of current and emerging social media technologies being used to support preparedness and response activities related to terrorist attacks, of best practices and lessons learned on the use of social media during the response to terrorist attacks that occurred during the period covered by the report, and of available training for government officials on the use of social media in response to a terrorist attack; (2) recommendations to improve DHS's use of social media and to improve information sharing among DHS and its components and among state and local governments; and (3) a summary of coordination efforts with the private sector to discuss and resolve legal, operational, technical, privacy, and security concerns. == Congressional Budget Office report == This summary is based largely on the summary provided by the Congressional Budget Office, as ordered reported by the House Committee on Homeland Security on June 11, 2014. This is a public domain source. H.R. 4263 would direct the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to establish a working group to provide guidance and best practices on the use of social media technologies, specifically during a terrorist attack or other emergency. The group would prepare guidance for the emergency preparedness and response community. The bill would define the membership of the working group, which would include more than 20 experts from federal, state, local, and tribal governments along with nongovernmental organizations. The working group would be exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act and would be authorized to hold virtual meetings to fulfill the requirement to meet twice a year. The working group would be required to submit an annual report on emerging trends and best practices for emergency response through social media. Based on the cost of similar activities carried out under the DHS Acquisition and Accountability Efficiency Act and the Critical Infrastructure Research and Development Advancement Act of 2013, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that the new DHS responsibilities and the annual report required by H.R. 4263 would cost a total of less than $500,000 annually, assuming the availability of appropriated funds. Enacting the legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. H.R. 4263 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. == Procedural history == The Social Media Working Group Act of 2014 was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on March 14, 2014, by Rep. Susan W. Brooks (R, IN-5). It was referred to the United States House Committee on Homeland Security and the United States House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications. On June 19, 2014, it was reported (amended) alongside House Report 113-480. On July 8, 2014, the House voted in Roll Call Vote 369 to pass the bill 375–19. == Debate and discussion == Nate Elliott, a social media expert at Forrester Research, explains that "the hope is when government or another authority tweets something, people will share it for them," but that this often doesn't happen. This problem, that "messages wash away very quickly," is the reason that the federal government is trying to formulate a better social media strategy. Rep. Steven Palazzo (R-MS), who co-sponsored the bill, stated that "social media has played a crucial role in emergency preparedness and response in Mississippi, including during disasters like Hurricane Isaac and the tornadoes that hit the Hattiesburg area a little over a year ago." He said that their goal with the bill was to "build upon existing public-private partnerships and use social media in a more strategic way in order to help save lives and property."
Read more →
Social search

Social search is a behavior of retrieving and searching on a social searching engine that mainly searches user-generated content such as news, videos and images related search queries on social media like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram and Flickr. It is an enhanced version of web search that combines traditional algorithms. The idea behind social search is that instead of ranking search results purely based on semantic relevance between a query and the results, a social search system also takes into account social relationships between the results and the searcher. The social relationships could be in various forms. For example, in LinkedIn people search engine, the social relationships include social connections between searcher and each result, whether or not they are in the same industries, work for the same companies, belong the same social groups, and go the same schools, etc. Social search may not be demonstrably better than algorithm-driven search. In the algorithmic ranking model that search engines used in the past, relevance of a site is determined after analyzing the text and content on the page and link structure of the document. In contrast, search results with social search highlight content that was created or touched by other users who are in the Social Graph of the person conducting a search. It is a personalized search technology with online community filtering to produce highly personalized results. Social search takes many forms, ranging from simple shared bookmarks or tagging of content with descriptive labels to more sophisticated approaches that combine human intelligence with computer algorithms. Depending on the feature-set of a particular search engine, these results may then be saved and added to community search results, further improving the relevance of results for future searches of that keyword. The principle behind social search is that human network oriented results would be more meaningful and relevant for the user, instead of computer algorithms deciding the results for specific queries. == Research and implementations == Over the years, there have been different studies, researches and some implementations of Social Search. In 2008, there were a few startup companies that focused on ranking search results according to one's social graph on social networks. Companies in the social search space include Sproose, Mahalo, Jumper 2.0, Scour, Wink, Eurekster, and Delver. Former efforts include Wikia Search. In 2008, a story on TechCrunch showed Google potentially adding in a voting mechanism to search results similar to Digg's methodology. This suggests growing interest in how social groups can influence and potentially enhance the ability of algorithms to find meaningful data for end users. There are also other services like Sentiment that turn search personal by searching within the users' social circles. In 2009, a startup project called HeyStaks (www.heystaks.com) developed a web browser plugin "HayStaks". HeyStaks applies social search through collaboration in web search as a way that leads to better search results. The main motivation for HeyStaks to work on this idea is to provide the user with features that search engines didn't provide at that time. For instance, different searches have indicated that about 70% of the time when user search for something, a friend or a coworker have found it already. Also, studies have shown that approximately, 30% of people who use online search, search for something that they have found before. The startup believe that they help avoid these kind of issues by providing a shared and rich search experience through a list of recommendations that get generated based on search results. In October 2009, Google rolled out its "Social Search"; after a time in beta, the feature was expanded to multiple languages in May 2011. Before the expansion however in 2010 Bing and Google were already taking into account re-tweets and Likes when providing search results. However, after a search deal with Twitter ended without renewal, Google began to retool its Social Search. In January 2012, Google released "Search plus Your World", a further development of Social Search. The feature, which is integrated into Google's regular search as an opt-out feature, pulls references to results from Google+ profiles. The goal was to deliver better, more relevant and personalized search results with this integration. This integration however had some problems in which Google+ still is not wildly adopted or has much usage among many users. Later on, Google was criticized by Twitter for the perceived potential impact of "Search plus Your World" upon web publishers, describing the feature's release to the public as a "bad day for the web", while Google replied that Twitter refused to allow deep search crawling by Google of Twitter's content. By Google integrating Google+, the company was encouraging users to switch to Google's social networking site in order to improve search results. One famous example occurred when Google showed a link to Mark Zuckerberg's dormant Google+ account rather than the active Facebook profile. In November 2014 these accusations started to die down because Google's Knowledge Graph started to finally show links to Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites. In December 2008, Twitter had re-introduced their people search feature. While the interface had since changed significantly, it allows you to search either full names or usernames in a straight-forward search engine. In January 2013, Facebook announced a new search engine called Graph Search still in the beta stages. The goal was to allow users to prioritize results that were popular with their social circle over the general internet. Facebook's Graph search utilized Facebook's user generated content to target users. Although there have been different researches and studies in social search, social media networks have not vested enough interest in working with search engines. LinkedIn for example has taken steps to improve its own individual search functions in order to stray users from external search engines. Even Microsoft started working with Twitter in order to integrate some tweets into Bing's search results in November 2013. Yet Twitter has its own search engine which points out how much value their data has and why they would like to keep it in house. In the end though social search will never be truly comprehensive of the subjects that matter to people unless users opt to be completely public with their information. == Social discovery == Social discovery is the use of social preferences and personal information to predict what content will be desirable to the user. Technology is used to discover new people and sometimes new experiences shopping, meeting friends or even traveling. The discovery of new people is often in real-time, enabled by mobile apps. However, social discovery is not limited to meeting people in real-time, it also leads to sales and revenue for companies via social media. An example of retail would be the addition of social sharing with music, through the iTunes music store. There is a social component to discovering new music Social discovery is at the basis of Facebook's profitability, generating ad revenue by targeting the ads to users using the social connections to enhance the commercial appeal. == Social search engines == A social search engine in an aspect can be thought of as a search engine that provides an answer for a question from another answer by identifying a person in the answer. That can happen by retrieving a user submitted query and determining that the query is related to the question; and provides an answer, including the link to the resource, as part of search results that are responsive to the query. Few social search engines depend only on online communities. Depending on the feature-set of a particular search engine, these results may then be saved and added to community search results, further improving the relevance of results for future searches of that keyword. Social search engines are considered a part of Web 2.0 because they use the collective filtering of online communities to elevate particularly interesting or relevant content using tagging. These descriptive tags add to the meta data embedded in Web pages, theoretically improving the results for particular keywords over time. A user will generally see suggested tags for a particular search term, indicating tags that have previously been added. An implementation of a social search engine is Aardvark. Aardvark is a social search engine that is based on the "village paradigm" which is about connecting the user who has a question with friends or friends of friends whom can answer his or her question. In Aadvark, a user ask a question in different ways that mostly involves online ways such as instant messaging, email, web input or other non-online ways such as text message or voice. The Aar
Read more →
Umoove

Umoove is a high tech startup company that has developed and patented a software-only face and eye tracking technology. The idea was first conceived as an attempt to aid people with disabilities but has since evolved. The only compatibility qualification for tablet computers and smartphones to run Umoove software is a front-facing camera. Umoove headquarters are in Israel on Jerusalem’s Har Hotzvim. Umoove has 15 employees and received two million dollars in financing in 2012. The company's original founders invested around $800,000 to start the business in 2010. In 2013 Umoove was named one of the top three most promising Israeli start ups by Newsgeeks magazine. The company also participated in the 2013 LeWeb conference in Paris, France, where innovative technology startups are showcased. == Technology == The technology uses information extracted from previous frames, such as the angle of the user's head to predict where to look for facial targets in the next frame. This anticipation minimizes the amount of computation needed to scan each image. Umoove accounts for variances in environment, lighting conditions and user hand shake/movement. The technology is designed to provide a consistent experience, whether you're in a brightly lit area or a darkened basement, and to work fluidly between them by adapting its processing when it detects color and brightness shifts. It uses an active stabilization technique to filter out natural body movements from an unstable camera in order to minimize false-positive motion detection. Running the Umoove software on a Samsung Galaxy S3 is said to take up only 2% CPU. Umoove works exclusively with software and there is no hardware add-on necessary. It can be run on any smartphone or tablet computer that has a front-facing camera. Umoove claims that even a low-quality camera on an old device will run their software flawlessly. == Umoove Experience == In January 2014 Umoove released its first game onto the app store. The Umoove Experience game lets users control where they are 'flying' in the game through simple gestures and motions with their head. The avatar will basically go toward wherever the user looks. The game was created to showcase the technology for game developers but that did not stop some from criticizing its simplicity. Umoove also announced that they raised another one million dollars and that they are opening offices in Silicon Valley, California. In February 2014, Umoove announced that their face-tracking software development kit is available for Android developers as well as iOS. == Reviews == The Umoove Experience garnered mostly positive reviews from bloggers and mainstream media with some predicting that it could be the future of mobile gaming. Mashable wrote that Umoove's technology could be the emergence of gesture recognition technology in the mobile space, similar to Kinect with console gaming and what Leap Motion has done with desktop computers. Some, however, remain skeptical. CNET, for example, did not give the game a positive review and called the eye tracking technology 'freaky but cool'. They also noted that pioneering technologies have been known to fall short of expectations, citing Apple Inc’s Siri as an example. The technology blog GigaOM said that the Umoove Experience is ’awesome’ and technology evangelist Robert Scoble has called Umoove "brilliant". == uHealth == In January 2015, Umoove released uHealth, a mobile application that uses eye tracking game-like exercise to challenge the user's ability to be attentive, continuously focus, follow commands and avoid distractions. The app is designed in the form of two games, one to improve attention and another that hones focus. uHealth is a training tool, not a diagnostic. Umoove has stated that they want to use their technology for diagnosing neurological disorders but this will depend on clinical tests and FDA approval. The company cites the direct relationship between eye movements and brain activity as well as various vision-based therapies have been backed by many scientific studies conducted over the past decades. uHealth is the first time this type of therapy is delivered right to the end user through a simple download. == Collaboration rumors == In March 2013 there were rumors on the internet that Umoove would be the functioning software embedded into the Samsung Galaxy S4, which was due to launch that month. This rumor was perpetrated by, among others, New York Times, Techcrunch and Yahoo. Once Samsung launched without the Umoove technology rumors about a potential collaboration with Apple Inc hit the web. It has been said that due to the fact that Apple Inc is losing market share and stock value to Samsung they will be more aggressive and eye tracking is a logical place to make that move.
Read more →
Transparent decryption

Transparent decryption is a method of decrypting data which unavoidably produces evidence that the decryption operation has taken place. The idea is to prevent the covert decryption of data. In particular, transparent decryption protocols allow a user Alice to share with Bob the right to access data, in such a way that Bob may decrypt at a time of his choosing, but only while simultaneously leaving evidence for Alice of the fact that decryption occurred. Transparent decryption supports privacy, because this evidence alerts data subjects to the fact that information about them has been decrypted and disincentivises data misuse. Recent work further formalizes transparent decryption and explores practical implementations based on cryptographic protocols and blockchain systems. == Applications == Transparent decryption has been proposed for several systems where there is a need to simultaneously achieve accountability and secrecy. For example: In lawful interception, law enforcement agencies can access private messages and emails. Transparent decryption can make such accesses accountable, giving citizens guarantees about how their private information is accessed. Data arising from vehicles and IoT devices may contain personal information about the vehicle or device owners and their activities. Nevertheless, the data is typically processed in order to provide user functionality and also to investigate and fight crime. Transparent decryption can be used to help users monitor when and how data about them is being accessed and used. == Implementation == In transparent decryption, the decryption key is distributed among a set of agents (called trustees); they use their key share only if the required transparency conditions have been satisfied. Typically, the transparency condition can be formulated as the presence of the decryption request in a distributed ledger. == Alternative solutions == Besides transparent decryption, some other techniques have been proposed for achieving law enforcement while preserving privacy. Solutions that allow competing parties to unify their data access policies. Attribute-based encryption with oblivious attribute translation (OTABE) is an extension of attribute-based encryption that allows translation between proprietary attributes belonging to different organisations, and it has been applied to the problem of law-enforcement access to phone call metadata. Solutions that rely on sophisticated cryptography, such as zero-knowledge proofs that the actions of law enforcement is consistent with judge rulings and the actions of companies, and multi-party computation to compute results.
Read more →
Social media as a news source

Social media as a news source is defined as the use of online social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook rather than the use of traditional media platforms like the newspaper or live TV to obtain news. Television had just begun to turn a nation of people who once listened to media content into watchers of media content between the 1950s and the 1980s when the popularity of social media had also begun creating a nation of media content creators. Almost half of Americans use social media as a news source, according to the Pew Research Center. As social media's role in news consumption grows, questions have emerged about its impact on knowledge, the formation of echo chambers, and the effectiveness of fact-checking efforts in combating misinformation. Social media platforms allow user-generated content and sharing content within one's own virtual network. Using social media as a news source allows users to engage with news in a variety of ways including: Consuming and discovering news Sharing or reposting news Posting one's own photos, videos, or reports of news (i.e., engage in citizen or participatory journalism) Commenting on news posts Using social media as a news source has become an increasingly popular way for people of all age groups to obtain current and important information. Just like many other new forms of technology there are going to be pros and cons. There are ways that social media positively affects the world of news and journalism but it is important to acknowledge that there are also ways in which social media has a negative effect on the news. With this accessibility, people now have more ways to consume false news, biased news, and even disturbing content. In 2019, the Pew Research Center created a poll that reported Americans are wary about the ways that social media sites share news and certain content. This wariness of accuracy grew as awareness that social media sites could be exploited by bad actors who concoct false narratives and fake news. == Relationship to traditional news sources == Unlike traditional news platforms such as newspapers and news shows, social media platforms allow people without professional journalistic backgrounds to create news and cover events that news agencies might not cover. Social media users may read a set of news that differs slightly from what newspaper editors prioritize in the print press. A 2019 study found that Facebook and Twitter users are more likely to share politics, public affairs, and visual media news. Typically social media users circulate more towards posting about negative news. A study of tweets found that while optimistic-sounding and neutral-sounding tweets were equally likely to express certainty or uncertainty, the pessimistic tweets were nearly twice as likely to appear certain of an outcome than uncertain. These results could imply that posts of a more pessimistic nature that are also written with an air of certainty are more likely to be shared or otherwise permeate groups on Twitter. A similar bias towards negativity has developed on Facebook, where internal memos revealed that an algorithm built to promote "meaningful social interaction" actually incentivized publishers to promote negative and sensational news. Biases towards negativity need to be considered when the utility of new media is addressed, as the potential for human opinion to overemphasize any particular news story is greater despite general improvement. In order to compete in this rapidly changing technological environment, there has been an upheaval of traditional news sources onto online spaces. The production and circulation of newspaper prints have continued to globally decline in accordance with the increasing presence of news outlets on social media. Prominent platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been key in engaging users through the integration of journalistic news into their newsfeeds. This feature has now become a foundational part of these apps' interfaces. Social media incentivizes both legacy news brands and individual professional journalists to share their reporting and interact with audiences on social platforms to boost engagement. However, most people who consume news on social media report that accessing news is not their main motivation for being on social media, but rather, they see and consume news incidentally. Nonetheless, informational interviews reveal that these consumers rely on being informed through social media. Some news consumers attest that a news brand's participation in social media does not improve their trust in the brand and that more in-depth reporting and more transparency about biases would improve trust instead. == Use as a news source == Globally, data from 2020 shows that over 70% of adult participants from Kenya, South Africa, Chile, Bulgaria, Greece, and Argentina utilized social media for news while those from France, the UK, the Netherlands, Germany, and Japan were reportedly less than 40 percent. According to the Pew Research Center, 20% of adults in the United States in 2018 said they get their news from social media "often," compared to 16% who said they often get news from print newspapers, 26% who often get it from the radio, 33% who often get it from news websites, and 49% who often get it from TV. The same survey found that social media was the most popular way for American adults age 18–29 to get news, the second-to-last most popular way for Americans age 20–49 to get news, and the least popular way for American adults age 50-64 and 65+ to get the news. In 2019, the Pew Research Center found that over half of Americans (54%) either got their news "sometimes" or "often" from social media, and Facebook was the most popular social media site where American adults got their news. However, at least 50% off all respondents reported that the following were either a "very big problem" or a "moderately big problem" for getting news on social media: One-sided news (83%) Inaccurate news (81%) Censorship of the news (69%) Uncivil discussions about the news (69%) Harassment of journalists (57%) News organizations or personalities being banned (53%) Violent or disturbing news images or videos (51%) In a later survey from the same year, the Pew Research Center reported that 18% of American adults reported that the most common way they get news about politics and the election was from social media. Additional source information shows that from politics and the United States presidential election in 2016, the popularity of fake news had grown to global attention. With this information, the study explains that more than 60 percent of adults receive their news from social media, the most popular being Facebook. With the increase of fake news, and the large amount of adult participation on these social media sites, it made it much harder for those who were searching for news to find a source that they could find credible. Another study found that adult participants found their own friends on Facebook to be a more reliable source of information online compared to a professional news organization. Although, when news was posted by a news organization online, they were then found more reliable compared to when they are shared by their online friends. Showing that adult participants found that the news that was only posted on Facebook and social media was much more credible to them than compared to other forms of information spreading. The study further states that these outcomes have the potential explanation that the topic of the news article played a part in the ways they were affected. This could have affected the way adult participants interacted with the different news sources, such as their online friends compared to a news organization, prominently because depending on the story, they want to have the correct information about the news from the most credible source. === By young people === Social media platforms are some of the most easily accessible forms of news and with the growing generations, the technology is only going to grow. With that, the use of social media in younger generations is also going to grow alongside it. Technology in the hands of young kids can be a concern moving into the future. Globally, there is evidence that through social media, youth have become more directly involved in protests, social campaigns and generally, in the sharing of news across multiple platforms. The number of people who use social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, or Snapchat as ways to seek information has increased significantly in recent years especially for people who are part of the younger generation.TikTok is a rapidly expanding platform that young adults can use to find news content on social media. TikTok is one of the sites that young adults and teens utilize to get news about trending themes and controversial topics. The younger generation accepts without hesitation the information that thei
Read more →
Squeaky Dolphin

Squeaky Dolphin is a program developed by the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), a British intelligence and security organization, to collect and analyze data from social media networks. The program was first revealed to the general public on NBC on 27 January 2014 based on documents previously leaked by Edward Snowden. == Scope of surveillance == According to a document of the GCHQ dated August 2012, the program enables broad, real-time surveillance of the following items: YouTube video views The Like button on Facebook. Facebook has since then encrypted the data. Blogspot/Blogger visits Twitter, which has however encrypted its communications since this presentation was made The program can be supplemented with commercially available analytic software to determine which videos are popular among residents of specific cities. The dashboard software chosen was made by Splunk. The presentation, which was originally shown to an NSA audience and was made public by the NBC, contains a note saying the program was "Not interested in individuals just broad trends!". However, "according to other Snowden documents" obtained by NBC, in 2010, "GCHQ exploited unencrypted data from Twitter to identify specific users around the world and target them with propaganda."
Read more →
Bring your own encryption

Bring your own encryption (BYOE), also known as bring your own key (BYOK), is a cloud computing security model that allows cloud service customers to use their own encryption software and manage their own encryption keys. == Overview == BYOE enables cloud service customers to utilize a virtual instance of their encryption software alongside their cloud-hosted business applications to encrypt their data. In this model, hosted business applications are configured to process all data through the encryption software. This software then writes the ciphertext version of the data to the cloud service provider's physical data store and decrypts ciphertext data upon retrieval requests. This approach provides enterprises with control over their keys and the ability to generate their own master key using internal hardware security modules (HSM), which are then transmitted to the cloud provider's HSM. When the data is no longer needed, such as when users discontinue the cloud service, the keys can be deleted, rendering the encrypted data permanently inaccessible. This practice is known as crypto-shredding. == Potential Advantages == Organizations can store data with unique encryption that only they can access. Multiple organizations can share the same hardware infrastructure via cloud services like Amazon Web Services (AWS) or Google Cloud while maintaining encryption to comply with regulations such as HIPAA. == Potential Challenges == Resource utilization may be higher compared to traditional encryption practices when multiple users share the same hardware and use their own encryption. Efforts to minimize resource utilization issues may potentially impact security benefits.
Read more →
Social search

Social search is a behavior of retrieving and searching on a social searching engine that mainly searches user-generated content such as news, videos and images related search queries on social media like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram and Flickr. It is an enhanced version of web search that combines traditional algorithms. The idea behind social search is that instead of ranking search results purely based on semantic relevance between a query and the results, a social search system also takes into account social relationships between the results and the searcher. The social relationships could be in various forms. For example, in LinkedIn people search engine, the social relationships include social connections between searcher and each result, whether or not they are in the same industries, work for the same companies, belong the same social groups, and go the same schools, etc. Social search may not be demonstrably better than algorithm-driven search. In the algorithmic ranking model that search engines used in the past, relevance of a site is determined after analyzing the text and content on the page and link structure of the document. In contrast, search results with social search highlight content that was created or touched by other users who are in the Social Graph of the person conducting a search. It is a personalized search technology with online community filtering to produce highly personalized results. Social search takes many forms, ranging from simple shared bookmarks or tagging of content with descriptive labels to more sophisticated approaches that combine human intelligence with computer algorithms. Depending on the feature-set of a particular search engine, these results may then be saved and added to community search results, further improving the relevance of results for future searches of that keyword. The principle behind social search is that human network oriented results would be more meaningful and relevant for the user, instead of computer algorithms deciding the results for specific queries. == Research and implementations == Over the years, there have been different studies, researches and some implementations of Social Search. In 2008, there were a few startup companies that focused on ranking search results according to one's social graph on social networks. Companies in the social search space include Sproose, Mahalo, Jumper 2.0, Scour, Wink, Eurekster, and Delver. Former efforts include Wikia Search. In 2008, a story on TechCrunch showed Google potentially adding in a voting mechanism to search results similar to Digg's methodology. This suggests growing interest in how social groups can influence and potentially enhance the ability of algorithms to find meaningful data for end users. There are also other services like Sentiment that turn search personal by searching within the users' social circles. In 2009, a startup project called HeyStaks (www.heystaks.com) developed a web browser plugin "HayStaks". HeyStaks applies social search through collaboration in web search as a way that leads to better search results. The main motivation for HeyStaks to work on this idea is to provide the user with features that search engines didn't provide at that time. For instance, different searches have indicated that about 70% of the time when user search for something, a friend or a coworker have found it already. Also, studies have shown that approximately, 30% of people who use online search, search for something that they have found before. The startup believe that they help avoid these kind of issues by providing a shared and rich search experience through a list of recommendations that get generated based on search results. In October 2009, Google rolled out its "Social Search"; after a time in beta, the feature was expanded to multiple languages in May 2011. Before the expansion however in 2010 Bing and Google were already taking into account re-tweets and Likes when providing search results. However, after a search deal with Twitter ended without renewal, Google began to retool its Social Search. In January 2012, Google released "Search plus Your World", a further development of Social Search. The feature, which is integrated into Google's regular search as an opt-out feature, pulls references to results from Google+ profiles. The goal was to deliver better, more relevant and personalized search results with this integration. This integration however had some problems in which Google+ still is not wildly adopted or has much usage among many users. Later on, Google was criticized by Twitter for the perceived potential impact of "Search plus Your World" upon web publishers, describing the feature's release to the public as a "bad day for the web", while Google replied that Twitter refused to allow deep search crawling by Google of Twitter's content. By Google integrating Google+, the company was encouraging users to switch to Google's social networking site in order to improve search results. One famous example occurred when Google showed a link to Mark Zuckerberg's dormant Google+ account rather than the active Facebook profile. In November 2014 these accusations started to die down because Google's Knowledge Graph started to finally show links to Facebook, Twitter, and other social media sites. In December 2008, Twitter had re-introduced their people search feature. While the interface had since changed significantly, it allows you to search either full names or usernames in a straight-forward search engine. In January 2013, Facebook announced a new search engine called Graph Search still in the beta stages. The goal was to allow users to prioritize results that were popular with their social circle over the general internet. Facebook's Graph search utilized Facebook's user generated content to target users. Although there have been different researches and studies in social search, social media networks have not vested enough interest in working with search engines. LinkedIn for example has taken steps to improve its own individual search functions in order to stray users from external search engines. Even Microsoft started working with Twitter in order to integrate some tweets into Bing's search results in November 2013. Yet Twitter has its own search engine which points out how much value their data has and why they would like to keep it in house. In the end though social search will never be truly comprehensive of the subjects that matter to people unless users opt to be completely public with their information. == Social discovery == Social discovery is the use of social preferences and personal information to predict what content will be desirable to the user. Technology is used to discover new people and sometimes new experiences shopping, meeting friends or even traveling. The discovery of new people is often in real-time, enabled by mobile apps. However, social discovery is not limited to meeting people in real-time, it also leads to sales and revenue for companies via social media. An example of retail would be the addition of social sharing with music, through the iTunes music store. There is a social component to discovering new music Social discovery is at the basis of Facebook's profitability, generating ad revenue by targeting the ads to users using the social connections to enhance the commercial appeal. == Social search engines == A social search engine in an aspect can be thought of as a search engine that provides an answer for a question from another answer by identifying a person in the answer. That can happen by retrieving a user submitted query and determining that the query is related to the question; and provides an answer, including the link to the resource, as part of search results that are responsive to the query. Few social search engines depend only on online communities. Depending on the feature-set of a particular search engine, these results may then be saved and added to community search results, further improving the relevance of results for future searches of that keyword. Social search engines are considered a part of Web 2.0 because they use the collective filtering of online communities to elevate particularly interesting or relevant content using tagging. These descriptive tags add to the meta data embedded in Web pages, theoretically improving the results for particular keywords over time. A user will generally see suggested tags for a particular search term, indicating tags that have previously been added. An implementation of a social search engine is Aardvark. Aardvark is a social search engine that is based on the "village paradigm" which is about connecting the user who has a question with friends or friends of friends whom can answer his or her question. In Aadvark, a user ask a question in different ways that mostly involves online ways such as instant messaging, email, web input or other non-online ways such as text message or voice. The Aar
Read more →
Serge Belamant

Serge Belamant (born 1953) is a French-born South African entrepreneur best known for designing the Universal Electronic Payment System (UEPS) and the Chip Offline Pre-authorised Card (COPAC). He founded the cash-payments company Net1 UEPS Technologies in 1989, led it through dual listings on the NASDAQ and the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, and oversaw the contentious welfare-payments contract with the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) until his retirement in 2017. Since 2018 he has been non-executive chair of London-based buy-now-pay-later fintech Zilch. == Early life and education == Belamant moved from France to South Africa with his family in 1967 and matriculated from Highlands North Boys' High School, Johannesburg. In 1972 he entered the University of the Witwatersrand to study civil engineering but switched to computer science and applied mathematics in his second year. He left the university without a degree and later took short courses in information systems at the University of South Africa (UNISA). == Early career and SASWITCH (1981–1989) == Belamant worked for Control Data Corporation as a systems analyst for a decade before joining SASWITCH Ltd in 1985. Economic sanctions had left the consortium's national ATM network dependent on unsupported Christian Rovsing computers. Belamant led a rebuild on fault-tolerant Stratus hardware and wrote protocol-translation software that allowed fourteen banks to connect without altering their host systems. By 1988 SASWITCH was handling about three million ATM transactions a month, according to the Competition Commission. The switch—now run by BankservAfrica—remains the backbone of South Africa's shared ATM network. == Net1 UEPS Technologies (1989–2017) == === Founding and UEPS === In 1989, Serge Belamant developed the Universal Electronic Payment System (UEPS), enabling secure, real-time transactions even in areas with limited connectivity. In the same year, he founded NET1 UEPS Technologies Inc., serving as its CEO and Director. === COPAC for VISA === In 1995, VISA tasked Belamant with designing the Chip Offline Pre-authorized Card (COPAC), a technology still widely used in chip-enabled credit and debit cards. A year later, he listed his company APLITEC (Applied Technology Holdings Limited) on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange. === Listings and acquisitions === In 1999, Belamant acquired Cash Payment Services (CPS) from First National Bank of South Africa, modernizing its welfare payment system to serve millions in rural areas. In 2005, he led NET1 Technologies to an IPO, listing it as NET1 UEPS Technologies Inc. on the Nasdaq. A secondary listing on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) followed in 2008. === SASSA contract === Under Belamant's leadership, NET1 managed welfare payments for the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA), handling payments for over 10 million beneficiaries monthly. Despite criticism over handling the SASSA contract, investigations by the U.S. Department of Justice and the South African Constitutional Court found no wrongdoing. == Zilch (2018–present) == Belamant co-founded London-based "buy-now-pay-later" firm Zilch Technology in 2018 and serves as non-executive chair. Zilch reported £145 million in annual-recurring revenue and 4.5 million customers in January 2025. == Patents == Belamant is listed as inventor on more than a dozen payment-security patents, including: "Funds transfer system" (US RE36,788, 2000) – the basis for UEPS. "Financial transactions with a varying PIN" (WO 2014/037869, 2014).
Read more →