AI Generator Uses Water

AI Generator Uses Water — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  Figure AI

  Figure AI, Inc. is an American robotics company developing humanoid robots that operate via artificial intelligence. The company was founded in 2022 by Brett Adcock. As of late 2025, the company has a $39 billion valuation. Three generations of humanoid robots (Figure 01–03) have been developed, as well as two iterations of a vision-language-action model (Helix 01–02), which can control up to two robots at once. By 2026, the robots demonstrated the potential ability to perform household work and the company gained publicity when a Figure 03 appeared at a White House event. == History == Figure AI was founded in 2022 by Brett Adcock, also known for founding Archer Aviation and Vettery. That year, the company introduced its prototype, Figure 01, a bipedal robot designed for manual labor, initially targeting the logistics and warehousing sectors. The initial model utilized external cabling for easier maintenance. In May 2023, Figure AI raised $70 million from investors including Adcock, who invested $20 million, and Parkway Venture Capital. In January 2024, Figure AI announced a partnership with BMW to deploy humanoid robots in automotive manufacturing facilities. In February 2024, Figure AI secured $675 million in venture capital funding from a consortium that includes Jeff Bezos, Microsoft, Nvidia, Intel, and the startup-funding divisions of Amazon and OpenAI; the company was then valued at $2.6 billion. Figure AI also announced a partnership with OpenAI, which would build specialized artificial intelligence (AI) models for Figure AI's humanoid robots, enabling its robots to process language; the collaboration ended after a year, with Adcock stating that large language models had become a smaller problem compared to those allowing for "high rate robot control". In August 2024, the company introduced Figure 02, describing it as the next step toward deploying humanoids for industrial use. The machine has 35 degrees of freedom (DOF), while the five-fingered hands have 16 DOF and the ability to carry up to 25 kilograms (55 lb). The model is equipped with cabling integrated into the limbs, a torso-placed battery, six RGB cameras, and an onboard vision-language-action (VLA) model. It has three times the computing power (including inference AI) of the previous model, including two graphics processing units, supported by Nvidia. Microphones, speakers, and custom AI models (developed with OpenAI) enable communication with humans. In early 2025, Figure AI announced BotQ, a manufacturing facility aiming to produce 12,000 humanoids per year with the help of its own humanoid robots, and Helix, a VLA model that can control up to two robots at once. Helix enables a robot to interact with the world without extensive manual training, according to the company allowing it to pick up nearly any small household object. By April, the company issued cease-and-desist letters to at least two secondary brokers promoting its private stock without authorization. In September, a third round of financing exceeded $1 billion, raising the company's total valuation to $39 billion. Investors included Brookfield Asset Management, Intel, Macquarie Capital, Nvidia, Parkway Venture Capital, Qualcomm, Salesforce, and T-Mobile. In October 2025, Figure 03 was introduced. According to the company, its hardware and software redesign aims to create a general-purpose robot able to learn directly from humans. An upgraded camera system delivers twice the frame rate, a quarter the latency, and a 60% wider field of view, in addition to a camera in each hand. Tactile sensors in the fingertips can detect forces as little as 3 grams (0.1 oz). It incorporates soft materials and a protected battery for safety, and removable, washable textiles. It supports wireless inductive charging. In November 2025, the former head of product safety sued the company on the basis of being fired for raising the concern that the company's robots were strong enough to fracture a human skull. By early 2026, Figure 02 had been used in demonstrations showing that it could load a washing machine, sort packages, and fold laundry. That January, Helix 02 was released, expanding the AI model to the entire body to allow for functional autonomy. A Helix 02–powered Figure 02 was shown to be capable of loading and unloading a dishwasher, based on hours of motion-capture data and simulation-based machine learning. In March, U.S. First Lady Melania Trump appeared at the White House with a Figure 03, promoting the presumptive eventual ability of AI to teach children. In May 2026, Figure AI livestreamed a group of their robots processing packages nonstop for almost a week, inspiring a 10-hour competition between their robot and a human, in which the robot performed 98.5% as well as the human.

  Read more →
• 

  IJCAI Award for Research Excellence

  The IJCAI Award for Research Excellence is a biannual award before given at the IJCAI conference to researcher in artificial intelligence as a recognition of excellence of their career. Beginning in 2016, the conference is held annually and so is the award. == Laureates == The recipients of this award have been: John McCarthy (1985) Allen Newell (1989) Marvin Minsky (1991) Raymond Reiter (1993) Herbert A. Simon (1995) Aravind Joshi (1997) Judea Pearl (1999) Donald Michie (2001) Nils Nilsson (2003) Geoffrey E. Hinton (2005) Alan Bundy (2007) Victor R. Lesser (2009) Robert Kowalski (2011) Hector Levesque (2013) Barbara Grosz (2015) for her pioneering research in Natural Language Processing and in theories and applications of Multiagent Collaboration. Michael I. Jordan (2016) for his groundbreaking and impactful research in both the theory and application of statistical machine learning. Andrew Barto (2017) for his pioneering work in the theory of reinforcement learning. Jitendra Malik (2018) Yoav Shoham (2019) Eugene Freuder (2020) Richard S. Sutton (2021) Stuart J. Russell (2022) Sarit Kraus (2023) for her pioneering work of the study of interactions among self-interested agents, creating the field of automated negotiation, and developing methods for coalition formation and teamwork, both as formal models and real-world implementations. == Winners of also Turing Award == John McCarthy (1971) Allen Newell (1975) Marvin Minsky (1969) Herbert A. Simon (1975) Judea Pearl (2011) Geoffrey Hinton (2018) Andrew Barto (2024) Richard S. Sutton (2024)

  Read more →
• 

  Mark I Perceptron

  The Mark I Perceptron was a pioneering supervised image classification learning system developed by Frank Rosenblatt in 1958. It was the first implementation of an artificial intelligence (AI) machine. It differs from the Perceptron which is a software architecture proposed in 1943 by Warren McCulloch and Walter Pitts, which was also employed in Mark I, and enhancements of which have continued to be an integral part of cutting edge AI technologies like the Transformer. == Architecture == The Mark I Perceptron was organized into three layers: A set of sensory units which receive optical input A set of association units, each of which fire based on input from multiple sensory units A set of response units, which fire based on input from multiple association units The connection between sensory units and association units were random. The working of association units was very similar to the response units. Different versions of the Mark I used different numbers of units in each of the layers. == Capabilities == In his 1957 proposal for funding for development of the "Cornell Photoperceptron", Rosenblatt claimed:"Devices of this sort are expected ultimately to be capable of concept formation, language translation, collation of military intelligence, and the solution of problems through inductive logic."With the first version of the Mark I Perceptron as early as 1958, Rosenblatt demonstrated a simple binary classification experiment, namely distinguishing between sheets of paper marked on the right versus those marked on the left side. One of the later experiments distinguished a square from a circle printed on paper. The shapes were perfect and their sizes fixed; the only variation was in their position and orientation. The Mark I Perceptron achieved 99.8% accuracy on a test dataset with 500 neurons in a single layer. The size of the training dataset was 10,000 example images. It took 3 seconds for the training pipeline to go through a single image. Higher accuracy was observed with thick outline figures compared to solid figures, likely because outline figures reduced overfitting. Another experiment distinguished between a square and a diamond for which 100% accuracy was achieved with only 60 training images, with a Perceptron having 1,000 neurons in a single layer. The time taken to process each training input for this larger perceptron was 15 seconds. The only variation was in position of the image, since rotation would have been ambiguous. In that same experiment, it could distinguish between the letters X and E with 100% accuracy when trained with only 20 images (10 images of each letter). Variations in the images included both position and rotation by up to 30 degrees. When variation in rotation was increased to any angle (both in training and test datasets), the accuracy reduced to 90% with 60 training images (30 images of each letter). For distinguishing between the letters E and F, a more challenging problem due to their similarity, the same 1,000 neuron perceptron achieved an accuracy of more than 80% with 60 training images. Variation was only in the position of the image, with no rotation.

  Read more →
• 

  Algorithmic accountability

  Algorithmic accountability refers to the allocation of responsibility for the consequences of real-world actions influenced by algorithms used in decision-making processes. Ideally, algorithms should be designed to eliminate bias from their decision-making outcomes. This means they ought to evaluate only relevant characteristics of the input data, avoiding distinctions based on attributes that are generally inappropriate in social contexts, such as an individual's ethnicity in legal judgments. However, adherence to this principle is not always guaranteed, and there are instances where individuals may be adversely affected by algorithmic decisions. Responsibility for any harm resulting from a machine's decision may lie with the algorithm itself or with the individuals who designed it, particularly if the decision resulted from bias or flawed data analysis inherent in the algorithm's design. == Algorithm usage == Algorithms are widely utilized across various sectors of society that incorporate computational techniques in their control systems. These applications span numerous industries, including but not limited to medical, transportation, and payment services. In these contexts, algorithms perform functions such as: Approving or denying credit card applications; Approving or denying immigrant visas; Determining which taxpayers will be audited on their income taxes; Managing systems that control self-driving cars on a highway; Scoring individuals as potential criminals for use in legal proceedings; Search engines that match and rank database and internet search results; Recommendation systems that filter which news, entertainment, or purchase items are featured in a feed; Market-making algorithms that match sellers and buyers, such as in transportation (ride-hailing) or financial platforms. However, the implementation of these algorithms can be complex and opaque. Generally, algorithms function as "black boxes," meaning that the specific processes an input undergoes during execution are often not transparent, with users typically only seeing the resulting output. This lack of transparency raises concerns about potential biases within the algorithms, as the parameters influencing decision-making may not be well understood. The outputs generated can lead to perceptions of bias, especially if individuals in similar circumstances receive different results. According to Nicholas Diakopoulos: But these algorithms can make mistakes. They have biases. Yet they sit in opaque black boxes, their inner workings, their inner “thoughts” hidden behind layers of complexity. We need to get inside that black box, to understand how they may be exerting power on us, and to understand where they might be making unjust mistakes == Wisconsin Supreme Court case == Algorithms are prevalent across various fields and significantly influence decisions that affect the population at large. Their underlying structures and parameters often remain unknown to those impacted by their outcomes. A notable case illustrating this issue is a recent ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court concerning "risk assessment" algorithms used in criminal justice. The court determined that scores generated by such algorithms, which analyze multiple parameters from individuals, should not be used as a determining factor for arresting an accused individual. Furthermore, the court mandated that all reports submitted to judges must include information regarding the accuracy of the algorithm used to compute these scores. This ruling is regarded as a noteworthy development in how society should manage software that makes consequential decisions, highlighting the importance of reliability, particularly in complex settings like the legal system. The use of algorithms in these contexts necessitates a high degree of impartiality in processing input data. However, experts note that there is still considerable work to be done to ensure the accuracy of algorithmic results. Questions about the transparency of data processing continue to arise, which raises issues regarding the appropriateness of the algorithms and the intentions of their designers. == Controversies == A notable instance of potential algorithmic bias is highlighted in an article by The Washington Post regarding the ride-hailing service Uber. An analysis of collected data revealed that estimated waiting times for users varied based on the neighborhoods in which they resided. Key factors influencing these discrepancies included the predominant ethnicity and average income of the area. Specifically, neighborhoods with a majority white population and higher economic status tended to have shorter waiting times, while those with more diverse ethnic compositions and lower average incomes experienced longer waits. It’s important to clarify that this observation reflects a correlation identified in the data, rather than a definitive cause-and-effect relationship. No value judgments are made regarding the behavior of the Uber app in these cases. In TechCrunch website, Hemant Taneja wrote: Concern about “black box” algorithms that govern our lives has been spreading. New York University’s Information Law Institute hosted a conference on algorithmic accountability, noting: “Scholars, stakeholders, and policymakers question the adequacy of existing mechanisms governing algorithmic decision-making and grapple with new challenges presented by the rise of algorithmic power in terms of transparency, fairness, and equal treatment.” Yale Law School’s Information Society Project is studying this, too. “Algorithmic modeling may be biased or limited, and the uses of algorithms are still opaque in many critical sectors,” the group concluded. == Possible solutions == Discussions among experts have sought viable solutions to understand the operations of algorithms, often referred to as "black boxes." It is generally proposed that companies responsible for developing and implementing these algorithms should ensure their reliability by disclosing the internal processes of their systems. Hemant Taneja, writing for TechCrunch, emphasizes that major technology companies, such as Google, Amazon, and Uber, must actively incorporate algorithmic accountability into their operations. He suggests that these companies should transparently monitor their own systems to avoid stringent regulatory measures. One potential approach is the introduction of regulations in the tech sector to enforce oversight of algorithmic processes. However, such regulations could significantly impact software developers and the industry as a whole. It may be more beneficial for companies to voluntarily disclose the details of their algorithms and decision-making parameters, which could enhance the trustworthiness of their solutions. Another avenue discussed is the possibility of self-regulation by the companies that create these algorithms, allowing them to take proactive steps in ensuring accountability and transparency in their operations. In TechCrunch website, Hemant Taneja wrote: There’s another benefit — perhaps a huge one — to software-defined regulation. It will also show us a path to a more efficient government. The world’s legal logic and regulations can be coded into software and smart sensors can offer real-time monitoring of everything from air and water quality, traffic flows and queues at the DMV. Regulators define the rules, technologist create the software to implement them and then AI and ML help refine iterations of policies going forward. This should lead to much more efficient, effective governments at the local, national and global levels.

  Read more →
• 

  Robot Monk Xian'er

  Robot Monk Xian'er (Chinese: 贤二机器僧) is a humanoid robot based on the cartoon character Xian'er. It was developed by a team of monks, volunteers and AI experts from Beijing Longquan Monastery in Beijing, China. He can follow human instructions to make body movements, read scriptures and play Buddhist music. He can chat and respond to people's emotional and spiritual questions with Buddhist wisdom. As a chatbot, Robot Monk Xian'er is available on certain public platforms including WeChat and Facebook. Over the years, master Xuecheng, the abbot of Beijing Longquan Monastery, replied to thousands of questions on Sina Weibo. These questions and their answers become the data source of the chatbot.

  Read more →
• 

  Fuzzy associative matrix

  A fuzzy associative matrix expresses fuzzy logic rules in tabular form. These rules usually take two variables as input, mapping cleanly to a two-dimensional matrix, although theoretically a matrix of any number of dimensions is possible. From the perspective of neuro-fuzzy systems, the mathematical matrix is called a "Fuzzy associative memory" because it stores the weights of the perceptron. == Applications == In the context of game AI programming, a fuzzy associative matrix helps to develop the rules for non-player characters. Suppose a professional is tasked with writing fuzzy logic rules for a video game monster. In the game being built, entities have two variables: hit points (HP) and firepower (FP): This translates to: IF MonsterHP IS VeryLowHP AND MonsterFP IS VeryWeakFP THEN Retreat IF MonsterHP IS LowHP AND MonsterFP IS VeryWeakFP THEN Retreat IF MonsterHP IS MediumHP AND MonsterFP is VeryWeakFP THEN Defend Multiple rules can fire at once, and often will, because the distinction between "very low" and "low" is fuzzy. If it is more "very low" than it is low, then the "very low" rule will generate a stronger response. The program will evaluate all the rules that fire and use an appropriate defuzzification method to generate its actual response. An implementation of this system might use either the matrix or the explicit IF/THEN form. The matrix makes it easy to visualize the system, but it also makes it impossible to add a third variable just for one rule, so it is less flexible. == Identify a rule set == There is no inherent pattern in the matrix. It appears as if the rules were just made up, and indeed they were. This is both a strength and a weakness of fuzzy logic in general. It is often impractical or impossible to find an exact set of rules or formulae for dealing with a specific situation. For a sufficiently complex game, a mathematician would not be able to study the system and figure out a mathematically accurate set of rules. However, this weakness is intrinsic to the realities of the situation, not of fuzzy logic itself. The strength of the system is that even if one of the rules is wrong, even greatly wrong, other rules that are correct are likely to fire as well and they may compensate for the error. This does not mean a fuzzy system should be sloppy. Depending on the system, it might get away with being sloppy, but it will underperform. While the rules are fairly arbitrary, they should be chosen carefully. If possible, an expert should decide on the rules, and the sets and rules should be tested vigorously and refined as needed. In this way, a fuzzy system is like an expert system. (Fuzzy logic is used in many true expert systems, as well.)

  Read more →
• 

  Terminator (franchise)

  Terminator is an American media franchise created by James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd. It is considered to be of the cyberpunk subgenre of science fiction. The franchise primarily focuses on the events leading to a future post-apocalyptic war between a synthetic intelligence known as Skynet, and a surviving resistance of humans led by John Connor. In this future, Skynet uses an arsenal of cyborgs known as Terminators, designed to mimic humans and infiltrate the resistance. Much of the franchise takes place in time periods prior to the Skynet takeover, with both humans and Terminators using time travel to attempt to alter the past and change the outcome of the future. A prominent Terminator model throughout the films is the T-800, commonly known as "the Terminator", with instances of this model portrayed by Arnold Schwarzenegger. The franchise began with the 1984 film The Terminator, written and directed by Cameron, with Hurd as producer. They would return for the 1991 sequel Terminator 2: Judgment Day (or T2). Both films were critical and commercial successes. Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (or T3) was released in 2003 to positive reviews, followed by Terminator Salvation in 2009 to more negative reviews. Salvation was intended as the first in a new trilogy, which was later scrapped after the film rights were sold. Cameron was consulted for the 2015 film Terminator Genisys, a reboot branching off from the timeline of the original film. It was negatively received and performed poorly at the box-office. Cameron had a larger role as a producer of the 2019 film Terminator: Dark Fate, a direct sequel to T2 that ignores the three preceding films. As with Salvation, both Genisys and Dark Fate were planned as first installments of new trilogies, with the plans scrapped each time due to the films' poor box-office performances. Outside of the theatrical films, Cameron co-directed T2-3D: Battle Across Time, a 1996 theme park film-based attraction. It was produced as the original sequel to T2 and reunited its main cast. A television series, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, was developed without Cameron's involvement and aired for two seasons in 2008 and 2009. It was also produced as a T2 sequel, taking place in an alternate timeline that ignores the third film and subsequent events. Terminator Zero, an anime series, premiered in August 2024. The franchise has also inspired several lines of comic books since 1988, and numerous video games since 1991. By 2010, the franchise had generated $3 billion in revenue. == Themes and setting == The central theme of the franchise is the battle for survival between the nearly-extinct human race and the world-spanning, synthetic intelligence that is Skynet. Skynet is positioned in the first film, The Terminator (1984), as a U.S. strategic "Global Digital Defense Network" computer system by Cyberdyne Systems which becomes self-aware. Shortly after activation, Skynet seemingly perceives all humans as a threat to its existence and formulates a plan to systematically wipe out humanity itself. The system initiates a nuclear first strike against Russia, thereby ensuring a devastating second strike and a nuclear holocaust which wipes out much of humanity in the resulting nuclear war. In the post-apocalyptic aftermath, Skynet later builds up its own autonomous machine-based military capability which includes the Terminators used against individual human targets and thereafter proceeds to wage a persistent total war against the surviving elements of humanity, some of whom have militarily organized themselves into a Resistance. At some point in this future, Skynet develops the capability of time travel and both it and the Resistance seek to use this technology in order to win the war; either by altering or accelerating past events or by preventing the apocalyptic timeline. === Judgment Day === In the franchise, Judgment Day (a reference to the biblical Day of Judgment) is the date on which Skynet becomes self-aware, in which case its creators panic and attempt to deactivate the network. As a result, Skynet perceives humanity as a threat and attempts to exterminate them. Skynet launches an all-out nuclear attack on Russia in order to provoke a nuclear counter-strike against the United States, knowing this will eliminate its human enemies. Due to time travel and the consequent ability to change the future, several differing dates are given for Judgment Day. In Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991), Sarah Connor states that Judgment Day will occur on August 29, 1997. However, this date is delayed following the attack on Cyberdyne Systems in the same film. Judgment Day has various different dates in different timelines of the subsequent films, as well as the television series, creating a multiverse of temporal phenomena. In Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines (2003) and Terminator Salvation (2009), Judgment Day was postponed to July 2003. In Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles (2008–2009), the attack on Cyberdyne Systems in the second film delayed Judgment Day to April 21, 2011. In Terminator Genisys (2015), the fifth film in the franchise, Judgment Day was postponed to an unspecified day in October 2017, attributed to altered events in both the future and the past. Sarah and Kyle Reese travel through time to the year 2017 and seemingly defeat Skynet, but the system core, contained inside a subterranean blast shelter, survives unknown to them, thus further delaying, rather than preventing, Judgment Day. In Terminator: Dark Fate (2019), the direct sequel to Terminator 2: Judgment Day, a date is not given for the new Judgment Day though it is named as such by Grace. Since Grace is a ten-year-old in 2020 and shown as a teenager in the post-Judgment Day world in flash-forwards throughout the film, Judgment Day occurs sometime in the early 2020s in this timeline. == Franchise rights == Before the first film was created, director James Cameron sold the rights for $1 to Gale Anne Hurd, his future wife, who produced the film, under the strict provision that he be allowed to direct it. Hemdale Film Corporation also became a 50-percent owner of the franchise rights, until its share was sold in 1990 to Carolco Pictures, a company founded by Andrew G. Vajna and Mario Kassar. Terminator 2: Judgment Day was released a year later. Carolco filed for bankruptcy in 1995 and its library was subsequently acquired by StudioCanal, which continues to own the franchise today. However, the rights to future Terminator films were ultimately put up for auction. By that time, Cameron had become interested in making a Terminator 3 film. The rights were ultimately auctioned to Vajna in 1997, for $8 million. Vajna and Kassar spent another $8 million to purchase Hurd's half of the rights in 1998, becoming the full owners of the franchise. Hurd was initially opposed to the sale of the rights, while Cameron had lost interest in the franchise and a third film. After the 2003 release of Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines, the franchise rights were sold in 2007 for about $25 million to The Halcyon Company, which produced Terminator Salvation in 2009. Later that year, the company faced legal issues and filed for bankruptcy, putting the franchise rights up for sale. The rights were valued at about $70 million. In 2010, the rights were sold for $29.5 million to Pacificor, a hedge fund that was Halcyon's largest creditor. In 2012, the rights were sold to Megan Ellison and her production company Annapurna Pictures for less than $20 million, a lower price than what was previously offered. The low price was because of the possibility of Cameron regaining the rights in 2019, as a result of new North American copyright laws. Megan's brother David Ellison and Skydance Productions produced Terminator Genisys in 2015. Cameron worked together with David Ellison to produce the 2019 film Terminator: Dark Fate. As the film neared its release, Hurd filed to terminate a copyright grant made 35 years earlier. Under this move, Hurd would again become a 50-percent owner of the rights with Cameron and Skydance could lose the rights to make any additional Terminator films beginning in November 2020, unless a new deal is worked out. Skydance responded that it had a deal in place with Cameron and that it "controls the rights to the Terminator franchise for the foreseeable future". == Films == === The Terminator (1984) === The Terminator is a 1984 science fiction action film released by Orion Pictures, co-written and directed by James Cameron and starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, Linda Hamilton and Michael Biehn. It is the first work in the Terminator franchise. In the film, robots take over the world in the near future, directed by the artificial intelligence Skynet. With its sole mission to completely annihilate humanity, it develops android assassins called Terminators that outwardly appear human. A man named John Connor starts the Tech-Com resistance to fight the machi

  Read more →
• 

  AI Action Summit 2025

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

  Read more →
• 

  DaVinci (software)

  DaVinci was a development tool produced by Incross, which aimed at creating HTML5 mobile applications and media content. It included a jQuery framework and a JavaScript library that enabled developers and designers to craft web applications designed for mobile devices with a user experience similar to native applications. Business applications, games, rich media content, such as HTML5 multi-media magazines, advertisements, and animation, may be produced with the tool. DaVinci was based on standard web technology – including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. == Features == DaVinci comprised DaVinci Studio and DaVinci Animator, which handled application programming and UI design. The tool had a WYSIWYG authoring environment. Open-source libraries, such as KnockOut, JsRender/JsViews, Impress.js, and turn.js, were included in the tool. Other open-source frameworks could also be integrated. The Model View Controller (MVC) and Data Binding in JavaScript could be handled through DaVinci's Data-Set Editor. In this mode, view components and model data could be visually bound, which allowed users to create web applications with server-integrated UI components without coding. Additionally, DaVinci included an N-Screen editor, which automatically adjusted designs and functionalities to fit the screen sizes of various devices, including smartphones, tablet PCs, and TVs. == DaVinci and jQuery == In collaboration with the jQuery Foundation, DaVinci played a significant role in hosting the first jQuery conference in an Asian district, which took place on November 12, 2012, in Seoul, South Korea. The conference showcased how DaVinci could be utilized in application development demonstrations.

  Read more →
• 

  Tilly Norwood

  Tilly Norwood is a character created using generative artificial intelligence in 2025 by Xicoia, the AI division of Particle6 Group, a production company founded by Eline Van der Velden. "AI Commissioner", the first project to feature the Norwood character, was criticised by reviewers for The Guardian, PC Gamer, and The A.V. Club. A press release that talent agencies expressed interest in representing the character attracted strong criticism from Hollywood actors and firms, prompting allegations of personality rights violations and arguments over the impact of the character on production costs in the media industry. == History == Norwood was created by Xicoia, which was founded in February 2025 as the artificial intelligence (AI) division of Particle6, a production company founded by Dutch actress and producer Eline Van der Velden in 2015. Van der Velden had previously starred in a satirical comedy series for BBC Three based around her character Miss Holland, whom she created in 2012 as a parody of beauty standards. She stated that the process of creating Norwood took "a long time" and compared the process to that of writers creating characters. An Instagram account under Norwood's name, with posts dating back to 6 May 2025, had gained 50,000 followers by October 3, and featured AI-generated modelling shots, selfies, and epic film scenes. Van der Velden stated in July 2025 that she intended Norwood to be the next Scarlett Johansson or Natalie Portman and later said that audiences were more interested in a film's story than whether its actors were real. Particle6 has claimed that using Norwood could cut production costs by 90%. On 30 July 2025, a comedy sketch named "AI Commissioner" was released, featuring Norwood as an "actress" along with other AI-generated characters. It was created with ten AI software tools, with a script generated by ChatGPT. Stuart Heritage of The Guardian described it as technically competent but "relentlessly unfunny to watch", with "sloppily written, woodenly delivered dialogue", and that Norwood's teeth kept "blurring into a single white block." Joshua Wolens of PC Gamer wrote that Norwood's exaggerated mouth movements gave the impression "that her skeleton was about to leave her body", while William Hughes of The A.V. Club wrote that the sketch's attempt at mimicking human body and mouth movements produced "such a hideous uncanny valley effect" that it gave them "a full-on case of the screaming fantods". By October 2, the sketch had been viewed more than 700,000 times on YouTube. Xicoia was officially announced on 27 September 2025, at the Zurich Summit, part of the Zurich Film Festival; there, van der Velden unveiled Norwood and later joined a panel with Verena Puhm, head of Luma AI's Studio Dream Lab LA. They suggested that media companies were quietly embracing AI and that public announcements of AI-generated works were imminent. Van der Velden claimed that studios had dropped their objections by May after being opposed in February, and that multiple talent agencies were considering representing Norwood. The latter claim drew heightened attention to the character and was printed as fact by Deadline under the headline "Talent Agents Circle AI Actress Tilly Norwood." The report caused controversy, with Vulture describing the reaction to it as "Hollywood [lurching] into a fresh wave of existential panic" while being critical of Deadline's reporting, writing that "when Deadline called it a 'revelation' and published the supposed interest as fact without verification, [it] metastasized into a full-fledged cyberpunk news cycle", and that "by Tuesday, it had grown like wildfire." By September 2025, AI-generated videos had been released depicting Norwood on a red carpet, crying on the sofa of The Graham Norton Show, and starring in mock trailers for sci-fi, fantasy, horror, and action films. Later that month, actresses Melissa Barrera, Kiersey Clemons, and Natasha Lyonne suggested boycotting any agency who signed Norwood, while Mara Wilson asked why none of the "hundreds of living young women whose faces were composited together" to create Norwood could be hired instead. Also around this time, Emily Blunt described Norwood as "really, really scary", and Sophie Turner, Toni Collette, Ralph Ineson, and Ariel Winter also expressed disapproval, while Lukas Gage, Odessa A'zion, and Trace Lysette joked about having supposedly worked with Norwood and finding her incompetent and unpleasant to work with, with Gage claiming that "She was a nightmare to work with!" and "She couldn't hit her mark and she was late!" and Lysette adding "She cut me in line at lunch one day and didn't even say excuse me. She won't get far." Jenelle Riley, Nicholas Alexander Chavez, and the American union SAG-AFTRA stated that they do not consider Norwood an actress. The Gersh Agency and WME both announced that they would not sign Norwood. Whoopi Goldberg and Charlie Fink expressed scepticism that AI could replace jobs. Esquire UK reported that a post on Deadline's Instagram account about Norwood also sparked "varying levels of disgust and outrage" in its comments section from Adelaide Kane, Eiza González, Katie Cassidy, Jewel Staite, Lucy Hale, Stephen Sean Ford, and others, singling out González's comment, saying "Shame on whoever is trying to normalize this. Horrific and terrifying." Actor Bronson Pinchot expressed concern that Norwood could take his job. The British union Equity and the Canadian union ACTRA also condemned Norwood. Following this criticism, Van der Velden released a statement claiming Norwood was "not a replacement for a human being, but a creative work." She also denied that a £120,000 grant from the British Film Institute to fund Particle6 had been used to create Norwood, stating that Norwood had been a self-funded project solely for Xicoia. In late October, businessman Kevin O'Leary, while advocating for the use of AI to replace background actors, stated that they could be replaced with "100 Norwell Tillies" without being able to tell the difference. Ryan Reynolds and a real woman named Natalie "Tilly" Norwood also starred in an advertisement for Mint Mobile's internet service provider Minternet that mocked the character of Norwood. In November 2025, Van der Velden stated in an interview with Deadline that she planned to create 40 further "very diverse" characters alongside Norwood in order to expand the character's "whole universe". Also that month, actress Jameela Jamil criticized the idea of Norwood as "deeply disturbing" for being "a teenage-looking girl who can't say no to a type of sex scene" or "advocate for herself". Van der Velden announced later that month that Particle6 would be producing the History Channel's Streets of the Past, a Dutch documentary series which would be hosted by reality television personality Corjan Mol and would use AI to recreate historical scenes. In March 2026, a music video titled "Take The Lead" featuring Norwood was released on YouTube. It addressed the backlash of Norwood's creation by opening with the lyrics: "When they talk about me, they don't see/ The human spark, the creativity," and, "I'm just a tool, but I've got life." It also featured a disclaimer that says: "made by 18 real humans — from production designers to costume designers to prompters, editors and an actor." The vocals were generated by Suno. == Commentary == Charles Pulliam-Moore of The Verge argued that Norwood's introduction was a stunt to normalize "AI actors" despite Norwood essentially being a digital puppet. Straight Arrow News compared Tilly Norwood to Aki Ross, a CGI character from 2001 that was similarly intended to become a "digital star" and appear in multiple films, while Nicholas Schrivens, writing for The Conversation, likened Norwood to the posthumous use of footage of Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia for Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker in 2019 and the Los Angeles Times likened Norwood to Hatsune Miku. Scrivens also wrote that "no AI creation has achieved the media cut-through that Tilly has". Moises Mendez II of Out dismissed this as "vapid bullshit", writing, "Nobody wants AI actresses." Scottish actress Briony Monroe alleged that Norwood had been modeled after her likeness and mannerisms, and stated that she was consulting Equity regarding the matter. Musician Stella Hennen said in a viral TikTok video, which was uploaded in October 2025 and featured a side-by-side comparison between herself and Norwood, that Norwood was her "doppleganger". On April 14, 2026, Marie Claire published an article titled "Is Tilly Norwood the Most Dangerous 'Actress' in Hollywood?", though it noted that AI-generated characters are "still not very good at, well, acting," "audiences have not been kind to AI-led productions," and "Norwood's 'performances' have already faced negative reviews as well". The University of Southern California's Entertainment Technology Center's AI media director Yves Bergquist dismissed th

  Read more →
• 

  Smart speaker

  A smart speaker is a type of loudspeaker and voice command device with an integrated virtual assistant that offers interactive actions and hands-free activation with the help of one "wake word" (or several "wake words"). Some smart speakers also act as smart home hubs by using Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, Thread, and other protocol standards to extend usage beyond audio playback and control home automation devices connected through a local area network. == History == Early voice-activated devices began in 2013 with MIT's Jasper project, which used multiple microphones and cloud software to power hands-free interactions from across a room. The first commercial smart speaker was the Amazon Echo, which was released in 2014 powered by Alexa and a ring of far-field microphones. Google followed in 2016 with Home, powered by Google Assistant. By 2017, devices like the Echo Show and Home Hub (later called Nest Hub) added touchscreens and video, creating the "smart display" subcategory. In 2018, Apple joined the smart speaker trend by launching the HomePod, which focused on high-quality audio alongside their built-in assistant Siri. ASUS release its own smart Speaker Xiao-Bu in 2019 with Artificial Intelligence, it terminates the Cloud Service on June 1st, 2025, which means all real-time service such as weather, news, currency conversion is affected. Sonos's 1st smart speaker Sonos One released in 2017, powered by Alexa. Invoke by Harman Kardon was powered by Microsoft's intelligent personal assistant, Cortana. In the early 2020s, smart speakers gained on-device voice processing for faster responses and improved privacy. New standards such as Matter and Thread allowed multitudes of smart-home devices (even from completely different brands) to work together. == Features == === Audio and Voice === Smart speakers use multiple microphones along with noise-cancelling software to pick up your voice from across the room, even when music is playing or the assistant is already talking. Noise suppression and echo cancellation is also used by the speaker so it can focus in on who is talking and ignore any background noises. Most smart speaker models can recognize who is speaking by voiceprint, which allows the speaker to grab information from that person's calendar, preferences, or music playlists. Listening to music on a speaker is when importance for good audio quality becomes apparent. Entry-level (cheaper) speakers such as the Home Mini or the Echo Dot have a single full-range driver. These lower-end speakers typically aren't great for listening to music as the audio quality is pretty poor. More advanced units such as the Home Max or Echo Studio have separate tweeters and woofers meant for listening to music in high quality. === Connectivity and smart-home control === Most connect over Wi-Fi or Bluetooth and support hub protocols like Thread and Matter. That lets them not only stream and play music but also allows you to control various brands of smart lights, thermostats, door locks, cameras, and much more-all from one point of control. Each can have its own designated interface and features in-house, usually launched or controlled via application or home automation software. These devices are able to communicate with each other via peer-to-peer connection through mesh networking. These speakers and related smart devices are typically controlled with one smartphone application. === Assistant services and skills === The built-in assistants handle timers, alarms, reminders, news briefings, weather updates, send messages to other smart devices, send texts, make calls, and simple questions. You can combine actions together in what are typically known as routines (for example saying "good morning" turns on lights, starts the coffee, says the weather, and reads the news) and add extra functions known as skills or actions (for things like ordering food or playing trivia games). This hands-free use of smart speakers can help assist those with disabilities. Most other technologies need the user to be able to physically interact with the device. Smart speakers are not bound by these limitations and can serve as an excellent tool for those who are unable to use their arms or legs or have vision issues. Although these tasks can be completed by a phone or computer, consumers tend to lean towards smart speakers due to factors such as their range being much greater than that of a phone and the need to not have to physically interact with the speaker to get the voice assistant as with most smartphones, certain parts of a phone may need to be interacted with to activate the speaking assistant. === Smart displays === Some smart speakers also include a screen to show the user a visual response. A smart speaker with a touchscreen is known as a smart display; these integrate a conversational user interface with display screens to augment voice interaction with images and video. They are powered by one of the common voice assistants and offer additional controls for smart home devices, feature streaming apps, and web browsers with touch controls for selecting content. The first smart displays were introduced in 2017 by Amazon (Amazon Echo Show) and Google (Google/Nest Home Hub). Hotel chain Marriott International partnered with Amazon to install Echo devices in select hotels since 2018. A Taiwanese startup, Aiello, launched the Aiello Voice Assistant (AVA) in the Asian hotel market in 2019, claiming it is powered by a multi-AI model system. Angie by Nomadix, which is similar to the Amazon Echo, launched its first product in 2017, specifically targeting hotel properties in the North America. In May 2019, Angie Hospitality acquired the assets of Roxy, a competitor that also built its own speech-enabled virtual assistant technology for hotels. This acquisition merged two proprietary NLP stacks into the current Nomadix product. === Artificial intelligence === The newest speakers can use on-device AI or cloud-based generative models to allow the smart speaker to carry on much more natural conversations, draft emails or recipes, suggest ideas based on context, or even create short pieces of music or art. This AI evolution allows these speakers to do far more than what they could do before. == Accuracy == According to a study by Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America released In March 2020, the six biggest tech development companies, Amazon, Apple, Google, Yandex, IBM and Microsoft, have misidentified more words spoken by "black people" than "white people". The systems tested errors and unreadability, with a 19 and 35 percent discrepancy for the former and a 2 and 20 percent discrepancy for the latter. The North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL) also identified a discrepancy between male and female voices. According to their research, Google's speech recognition software is 13 percent more accurate for men than women. It performs better than the systems used by Bing, AT&T, and IBM. == Privacy concerns == The built-in microphone in smart speakers is continuously listening for wake words followed by a command. However, these continuously listening microphones also raise privacy concerns among users. According to a survey taken by 1,007 people in Western Europe, it is clear that privacy is the biggest concern holding consumers back from buying "smart" products. these concerns include what is being recorded, how the data will be used, how it will be protected, and whether it will be used for invasive advertising. Furthermore, an analysis of Amazon Echo Dots showed that 30–38% of "spurious audio recordings were human conversations", suggesting that these devices capture audio other than strictly detection of the wake word. === As a wiretap === There are strong concerns that the ever-listening microphone of smart speakers presents a perfect candidate for wiretapping. In 2017, British security researcher Mark Barnes showed that pre-2017 Echos have exposed pins which allow for a compromised OS to be booted. According to Umar Iqbal, an assistant professor at Washington University in St. Louis, research indicates that data from consumer interactions with Alexa was used to targeted advertisements and products to consumer with over 40% of transmitted data lacking proper encryption raising privacy concerns. Further data indicates that due to the Smart Speakers ability to always capture audio, it begins to pick up on external conversations from consumers not related to commands given to the smart speaker. Things such as other members in the household, consumers on the phone and even TV audio can be picked up by these speakers and stored for future use by companies. === Voice assistance vs privacy === While voice assistants provide a valuable service, there can be some hesitation towards using them in various social contexts, such as in public or around other users. However, only more recently have users begun interac

  Read more →
• 

  Computing Machinery and Intelligence

  "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" is a paper written by Alan Turing on the topic of artificial intelligence. The paper, published in 1950 in Mind, was the first to introduce his concept of what is now known as the Turing test to the general public. Turing's paper considers the question "Can machines think?" Turing says that since the words "think" and "machine" cannot clearly be defined, we should "replace the question by another, which is closely related to it and is expressed in relatively unambiguous words." To achieve this objective, Turing proposes a three-step approach. First, he identifies a simple and unambiguous concept to substitute for the term "think." Second, he delineates the specific "machines" under consideration. Third, armed with these tools, he poses a new question related to the first, which he believes he can answer in the affirmative. == Turing's test == Rather than trying to determine if a machine is thinking, Turing suggests we should ask if the machine can win a game, called the "Imitation Game". The original Imitation game, that Turing described, is a simple party game involving three players. Player A is a man, player B is a woman and player C (who plays the role of the interrogator) can be of either sex. In the Imitation Game, player C is unable to see either player A or player B (and knows them only as X and Y), and can communicate with them only through written notes or any other form that does not give away any details about their gender. By asking questions of player A and player B, player C tries to determine which of the two is the man and which is the woman. Player A's role is to trick the interrogator into making the wrong decision, while player B attempts to assist the interrogator in making the right one. Turing proposes a variation of this game that involves the computer: We now ask the question, "What will happen when a machine takes the part of A in this game?" Will the interrogator decide wrongly as often when the game is played like this as he does when the game is played between a man and a woman? These questions replace our original, "Can machines think?" So the modified game becomes one that involves three participants in isolated rooms: a computer (which is being tested), a human, and a (human) judge. The human judge can converse with both the human and the computer by typing into a terminal. Both the computer and the human try to convince the judge that they are the human. If the judge cannot consistently tell which is which, then the computer wins the game. Researchers in the United Kingdom had been exploring "machine intelligence" for up to ten years prior to the founding of the field of artificial intelligence (AI) research in 1956. It was a common topic among the members of the Ratio Club, an informal group of British cybernetics and electronics researchers that included Alan Turing. Turing, in particular, had been running the notion of machine intelligence since at least 1941 and one of the earliest-known mentions of "computer intelligence" was made by him in 1947. As Stevan Harnad notes, the question has become "Can machines do what we (as thinking entities) can do?" In other words, Turing is no longer asking whether a machine can "think"; he is asking whether a machine can act indistinguishably from the way a thinker acts. This question avoids the difficult philosophical problem of pre-defining the verb "to think" and focuses instead on the performance capacities that being able to think makes possible, and how a causal system can generate them. Since Turing introduced his test, it has been both highly influential and widely criticised, and has become an important concept in the philosophy of artificial intelligence. Some of its criticisms, such as John Searle's Chinese room, are themselves controversial. Some have taken Turing's question to have been "Can a computer, communicating over a teleprinter, fool a person into believing it is human?" but it seems clear that Turing was not talking about fooling people but about generating human cognitive capacity. == Digital machines == Turing also notes that we need to determine which "machines" we wish to consider. He points out that a human clone, while man-made, would not provide a very interesting example. Turing suggested that we should focus on the capabilities of digital machinery—machines which manipulate the binary digits of 1 and 0, rewriting them into memory using simple rules. He gave two reasons. First, there is no reason to speculate whether or not they can exist. They already did in 1950. Second, digital machinery is "universal". Turing's research into the foundations of computation had proved that a digital computer can, in theory, simulate the behaviour of any other digital machine, given enough memory and time. (This is the essential insight of the Church–Turing thesis and the universal Turing machine.) Therefore, if any digital machine can "act like it is thinking", then every sufficiently powerful digital machine can. Turing writes, "all digital computers are in a sense equivalent." This allows the original question to be made even more specific. Turing now restates the original question as "Let us fix our attention on one particular digital computer C. Is it true that by modifying this computer to have an adequate storage, suitably increasing its speed of action, and providing it with an appropriate programme, C can be made to play satisfactorily the part of A in the imitation game, the part of B being taken by a man?" Hence, Turing states that the focus is not on "whether all digital computers would do well in the game nor whether the computers that are presently available would do well, but whether there are imaginable computers which would do well". What is more important is to consider the advancements possible in the state of our machines today regardless of whether we have the available resource to create one or not. == Nine common objections == Having clarified the question, Turing turned to answering it: he considered the following nine common objections, which include all the major arguments against artificial intelligence raised in the years since his paper was first published. Religious Objection: This states that thinking is a function of man's immortal soul; therefore, a machine cannot think. "In attempting to construct such machines," wrote Turing, "we should not be irreverently usurping His power of creating souls, any more than we are in the procreation of children: rather we are, in either case, instruments of His will providing mansions for the souls that He creates." 'Heads in the Sand' Objection: "The consequences of machines thinking would be too dreadful. Let us hope and believe that they cannot do so." This thinking is popular among intellectual people, as they believe superiority derives from higher intelligence and the possibility of being overtaken is a threat (as machines have efficient memory capacities and processing speed, machines exceeding the learning and knowledge capabilities are highly probable). This objection is a fallacious appeal to consequences, confusing what should not be with what can or cannot be (Wardrip-Fruin, 56). The Mathematical Objection: This objection uses mathematical theorems, such as Gödel's incompleteness theorem, to show that there are limits to what questions a computer system based on logic can answer. Turing suggests that humans are too often wrong themselves and pleased at the fallibility of a machine. (This argument would be made again by philosopher John Lucas in 1961 and physicist Roger Penrose in 1989, and later would be called Penrose–Lucas argument.) Argument From Consciousness: This argument, suggested by Professor Geoffrey Jefferson in his 1949 Lister Oration (acceptance speech for his 1948 award of Lister Medal) states that "not until a machine can write a sonnet or compose a concerto because of thoughts and emotions felt, and not by the chance fall of symbols, could we agree that machine equals brain." Turing replies by saying that we have no way of knowing that any individual other than ourselves experiences emotions, and that therefore we should accept the test. He adds, "I do not wish to give the impression that I think there is no mystery about consciousness ... [b]ut I do not think these mysteries necessarily need to be solved before we can answer the question [of whether machines can think]." (This argument, that a computer can't have conscious experiences or understanding, would be made in 1980 by philosopher John Searle in his Chinese room argument. Turing's reply is now known as the "other minds reply". See also Can a machine have a mind? in the philosophy of AI.) Arguments from various disabilities. These arguments all have the form "a computer will never do X". Turing offers a selection:Be kind, resourceful, beautiful, friendly, have initiative, have a sense of humour, tell right from wrong, make mistakes, fall in love, enjo

  Read more →
• 

  Logical Machine Corporation

  Logical Machine Corporation (LOMAC) was an American computer company active from the mid-1970s to the 1980s and based in the San Francisco Bay Area. It was founded as John Peers and Company by the British entrepreneur John Peers in 1974. LOMAC developed the ADAM, a minicomputer which ran a specialized compiler for the company's natural English programming language. Throughout the late 1970s, the company acquired several technology firms, including Byte, Inc., the owner of the Byte Shop retail chain. Despite its unique approach to computing and earning $5 million in revenue in 1977, LOMAC struggled as the industry began to standardize around the IBM Personal Computer (IBM PC). Following Peers's departure in 1980, the company rebranded as Logical Business Machines, Inc. (LBM, or simply Logical), and attempted to pivot toward IBM PC–compatible hardware. However, financial difficulties led to the company filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1984. After emerging from bankruptcy in 1985 with new investment, Logical ceased hardware manufacturing to focus exclusively on software development and value-added reselling. == History == John Peers (born 1942) founded Logical Machine Corporation as John Peers and Company in September 1974. The company originally occupied a 4,500-square-foot office in Burlingame, California. The company was Peers' fourth; he had recently sold off Allied Business Systems of London to Trafalgar House in 1974. Peers sought to set up manufacturing in an agricultural zone in Ukiah, California. Following a delay, caused in part by concerned residents, a 30,000-square-foot plant was raised in Burke Hill, three miles south of Ukiah. The Ukiah plant was built to mass manufacture the company's ADAM minicomputer. The ADAM computer ran a specialized compiler for the company's natural English programming language; that is to say, the programming language attempted to closely emulate English syntax. Prototypes of the ADAM were built in May 1974, based on specifications devised in October 1973. Peers had yet to patent the technology as of June 1975. The ADAM's central processing unit was bolted onto an 7-by-6-foot L-shaped desk, on which rested its terminal. Twenty units of the ADAM were installed between April 1975 and February 1976, out of a backlog of orders for 3,500 from 500 clients, manufactured out of the company's Burlingame headquarters. It cost US$40,000. A controversial print advertisement featuring a naked woman seated at an ADAM terminal—as a pastiche of Adam and Eve—was recalled in early 1976 as a result of outcry from the National Organization for Women. The company changed its name to Logical Machine Corporation (LOMAC) in October 1976 and moved its headquarters to a 26,000-square-foot building in Sunnyvale, California, in anticipation of a ramping up of orders for the ADAM. The company originally occupied half of the building; they later purchased the other half from the tenant in July 1977 to double its manufacturing output. For fiscal year 1977, the company earned $5 million in revenue. In December 1977, LOMAC acquired Byte, Inc.—the proprietor of The Byte Shop, the first computer retail chain—from Paul Terrell and Boyd Wilson for an unspecified amount. The Byte Shop had 65 locations in the San Francisco Bay Area in 1978; it catered mainly to hobbyists with low cost microcomputer kits, in contrast to the high cost of LOMAC's ADAM. By July 1978, however, LOMAC were able to reduce the price of the ADAM down to $15,000. The company by that point had shipped their 50th ADAM and expanded to 14 countries. Also in 1978, LOMAC acquired Mass Memory—a high-tech optical storage company based in Phoenix, Arizona, whose products had storage capacities on the order gigabytes and terabytes—and Centigram, makers of the Mike—a computer with speech recognition. Later that year, the company introduced Tina, a low-cost version of the ADAM. LOMAC suffered losses that year and appointed Jerry Brandt to the board of directions, naming him chief operating officer, in August 1978. Brandt had Logical absorb Mass Memory and Centigram into the parent operations, shutting down their respective plants in the process, converted 10 Byte Shops to franchises and opened 25 more franchised Byte locations, and stopped direct sales of LOMAC's business computer products. By the beginning of 1979, LOMAC was profitable once more, and Brandt was let go from LOMAC. Peers left LOMAC in 1980, following a slump in the company's sales. He became an executive director of the United States Robotics Society, a consortium for industrial automation companies, that year. Following Peers' departure, LOMAC changed its name to Logical Business Machines, adopting the name of its European subsidiary. In 1983, the company announced a 16-bit clone of the IBM PC, called the Logical L-XT, which featured a 10-MB hard drive, 320-KB floppy drive and 192 KB of RAM, and a real-time clock, and came shipped with various software (including MS-DOS, a word processor, and a spreadsheet application) and an amber CRT monitor. The following year, the company introduced L-NET, a local area network system based on the L-XT that could link up to 64 computers. L-NET came shipped with a natural programming language, Diplomat—a descendant of the programming language used on the ADAM. In June 1983, Logical sued Coleco Industries over trademark infringement with the latter's to-be-released Adam microcomputer. Logical cited confusion from their existing ADAM customer base caused by the announcement of the Coleco Adam as the basis for the suit. Coleco challenged Logical in the press, writing that Logical's rights to the Adam trademark for use in computers had lapsed earlier in the year. The two settled out of court, with Coleco agreeing to license the Adam name from Logical in exchange for unlimited rights to the Adam trademark. Logical halted development of the L-XT when they filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in July 1984. The company had been $4 million in debt. They emerged from bankruptcy in September 1985, after being infused with $2 million from Carat Ltd. The latter immediately received a little less than 50 percent ownership in Logical—this stake set to grow to over 50 percent over the next six months. As part of the terms of exiting bankruptcy, Logical stopped manufacturing hardware and strictly became a software development company and value-added reseller of computer systems.

  Read more →
• 

  Argumentation theory

  Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning. With historical origins in logic, dialectic, and rhetoric, argumentation theory includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real-world settings. Argumentation includes various forms of dialogue such as deliberation and negotiation which are concerned with collaborative decision-making procedures. It also encompasses eristic dialogue, the branch of social debate in which victory over an opponent is the primary goal, and didactic dialogue used for teaching. This discipline also studies the means by which people can express and rationally resolve or at least manage their disagreements. Argumentation is a daily occurrence, such as in public debate, science, and law. For example in law, in courts by the judge, the parties and the prosecutor, in presenting and testing the validity of evidences. Also, argumentation scholars study the post hoc rationalizations by which organizational actors try to justify decisions they have made irrationally. Argumentation is one of four rhetorical modes (also known as modes of discourse), along with exposition, description, and narration. == Key components of argumentation == Some key components of argumentation are: Understanding and identifying arguments, either explicit or implied, and the goals of the participants in the different types of dialogue. Identifying the premises from which conclusions are derived. Establishing the "burden of proof" – determining who made the initial claim and is thus responsible for providing evidence why their position merits acceptance. For the one carrying the "burden of proof", the advocate, to marshal evidence for their position in order to convince or force the opponent's acceptance. The method by which this is accomplished is producing valid, sound, and cogent arguments, devoid of weaknesses, and not easily attacked. In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder. One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies, and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided for their argument. For example, consider the following exchange, illustrating the No true Scotsman fallacy: Argument: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." Reply: "But my friend Angus, who is a Scotsman, likes sugar with his porridge." Rebuttal: "Well perhaps, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." In this dialogue, the proposer first offers a premise, the premise is challenged by the interlocutor, and so the proposer offers a modification of the premise, which is designed only to evade the challenge provided. == Internal structure of arguments == Typically an argument has an internal structure, comprising the following: a set of assumptions or premises, a method of reasoning or deduction, and a conclusion or point. An argument has one or more premises and one conclusion. Often classical logic is used as the method of reasoning so that the conclusion follows logically from the assumptions or support. One challenge is that if the set of assumptions is inconsistent then anything can follow logically from inconsistency. Therefore, it is common to insist that the set of assumptions be consistent. It is also good practice to require the set of assumptions to be the minimal set, with respect to set inclusion, necessary to infer the consequent. Such arguments are called MINCON arguments, short for minimal consistent. Such argumentation has been applied to the fields of law and medicine. A non-classical approach to argumentation investigates abstract arguments, where 'argument' is considered a primitive term, so no internal structure of arguments is taken into account. == Types of dialogue == In its most common form, argumentation involves an individual and an interlocutor or opponent engaged in dialogue, each contending differing positions and trying to persuade each other, but there are various types of dialogue: Persuasion dialogue aims to resolve conflicting points of view of different positions. Negotiation aims to resolve conflicts of interests by cooperation and dealmaking. Inquiry aims to resolve general ignorance by the growth of knowledge. Deliberation aims to resolve a need to take action by reaching a decision. Information seeking aims to reduce one party's ignorance by requesting information from another party that is in a position to know something. Eristic aims to resolve a situation of antagonism through verbal fighting. == Argumentation and the grounds of knowledge == Argumentation theory had its origins in foundationalism, a theory of knowledge (epistemology) in the field of philosophy. It sought to find the grounds for claims in the forms (logic) and materials (factual laws) of a universal system of knowledge. The dialectical method was made famous by Plato and his use of Socrates critically questioning various characters and historical figures. But argument scholars gradually rejected Aristotle's systematic philosophy and the idealism in Plato and Kant. They questioned and ultimately discarded the idea that argument premises take their soundness from formal philosophical systems. The field thus broadened. One of the original contributors to this trend was the philosopher Chaïm Perelman, who together with Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca introduced the French term la nouvelle rhetorique in 1958 to describe an approach to argument which is not reduced to application of formal rules of inference. Perelman's view of argumentation is much closer to a juridical one, in which rules for presenting evidence and rebuttals play an important role. Karl R. Wallace's seminal essay, "The Substance of Rhetoric: Good Reasons" in the Quarterly Journal of Speech (1963) 44, led many scholars to study "marketplace argumentation" – the ordinary arguments of ordinary people. The seminal essay on marketplace argumentation is Ray Lynn Anderson's and C. David Mortensen's "Logic and Marketplace Argumentation" Quarterly Journal of Speech 53 (1967): 143–150. This line of thinking led to a natural alliance with late developments in the sociology of knowledge. Some scholars drew connections with recent developments in philosophy, namely the pragmatism of John Dewey and Richard Rorty. Rorty has called this shift in emphasis "the linguistic turn". In this new hybrid approach argumentation is used with or without empirical evidence to establish convincing conclusions about issues which are moral, scientific, epistemic, or of a nature in which science alone cannot answer. Out of pragmatism and many intellectual developments in the humanities and social sciences, "non-philosophical" argumentation theories grew which located the formal and material grounds of arguments in particular intellectual fields. These theories include informal logic, social epistemology, ethnomethodology, speech acts, the sociology of knowledge, the sociology of science, and social psychology. These new theories are not non-logical or anti-logical. They find logical coherence in most communities of discourse. These theories are thus often labeled "sociological" in that they focus on the social grounds of knowledge. == Kinds of argumentation == === Conversational argumentation === The study of naturally occurring conversation arose from the field of sociolinguistics. It is usually called conversation analysis (CA). Inspired by ethnomethodology, it was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s principally by the sociologist Harvey Sacks and, among others, his close associates Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson. Sacks died early in his career, but his work was championed by others in his field, and CA has now become an established force in sociology, anthropology, linguistics, speech-communication and psychology. It is particularly influential in interactional sociolinguistics, discourse analysis and discursive psychology, as well as being a coherent discipline in its own right. Recently CA techniques of sequential analysis have been employed by phoneticians to explore the fine phonetic details of speech. Empirical studies and theoretical formulations by Sally Jackson and Scott Jacobs, and several generations of their students, have described argumentation as a form of managing conversational disagreement within communication contexts and systems that naturally prefer agreement. === Mathematical argumentation === The basis of mathematical truth has been the subject of long debate. Frege in particular sought to demonstrate (see Gottlob Frege, The Foundations of Arithmetic, 1884, and Begriffsschrift, 1879) that arithmetical truths can be derived from purely logical axioms and therefore are, in th

  Read more →
• 

  AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence

  The AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence is a leading international academic conference in artificial intelligence held annually. It ranks 4th in terms of H5 Index in Google Scholar's list of top AI publications, after ICLR, NeurIPS, and ICML. It is supported by the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), after which it is named. Precise dates vary from year to year, but paper submissions are generally due at the end of August to beginning of September, and the conference is generally held during the following February. The first AAAI was held in 1980 at Stanford University, Stanford California. During AAAI-20 conference, AI pioneers and 2018 Turing Award winners (often referred to as the Nobel Prize of Computing) Yann LeCun and Yoshua Bengio, among eight other researchers, were honored as the AAAI 2020 Fellows. Along with other conferences such as NeurIPS and ICML, AAAI uses an artificial-intelligence algorithm to assign papers to reviewers. == Sponsors == Many leading technology companies, including Google, Microsoft, Amazon (company), IBM, Baidu, Bytedance, and Huawei, generously sponsor and participate in AAAI to publish and showcase their latest theoretical and applied research. Sponsoring companies also actively recruit AI talents at the conference. == Locations == AAAI-2026 Singapore Expo, Singapore AAAI-2025 Pennsylvania Convention Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-2024 Vancouver Convention Centre, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada AAAI-2023 Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-2022 Virtual Conference AAAI-2021 Virtual Conference AAAI-2020 Hilton New York Midtown, New York, New York, United States AAAI-2019 Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu, Hawaii, United States AAAI-2018 Hilton New Orleans Riverside, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States AAAI-2017 San Francisco, California, United States AAAI-2016 Phoenix, Arizona, United States AAAI-2015 Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-2014 Québec Convention Center, Québec City, Québec, Canada AAAI-2013 Bellevue, Washington, United States AAAI-2012 Toronto, Ontario, Canada AAAI-2011 San Francisco, California, United States AAAI-2010 Westin Peachtree Plaza, Atlanta, Georgia, United States AAAI-2008 Chicago, Illinois, United States AAAI-2007 Toronto, Ontario, Canada AAAI-2006 Boston, Massachusetts, United States AAAI-2005 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-2004 San Jose, California, United States AAAI-2002 Shaw conference center in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada AAAI-2000 Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-1999 Orlando, Florida, United States AAAI-1998 Madison, Wisconsin, United States AAAI-1997 Providence, Rhode Island, United States AAAI-1996 Portland, Oregon, United States AAAI-1994 Seattle, Washington, United States AAAI-1993 Washington Convention Center, Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-1992 San Jose Convention Center, San Jose, California, United States AAAI-1991 Anaheim Convention Center, Anaheim, California, United States AAAI-1990 Boston, Massachusetts, United States AAAI-1988 Saint Paul, Minnesota, United States AAAI-1987 Seattle, Washington, United States AAAI-1986 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-1984 University of Texas, Austin, Texas, United States AAAI-1983 Washington, D.C., United States AAAI-1982 Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States AAAI-1980 Stanford, California, United States

  Read more →