A.i Paraphrasing Online

A.i Paraphrasing Online — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  2024–present global memory supply shortage

  A global computer memory supply shortage started in 2024 due to supply constraints and rapid price escalation in the semiconductor memory market, particularly affecting DRAM and NAND flash memory. This shortage is sometimes labelled by tech media outlets as "RAMmageddon" or the "RAMpocalypse". Unlike the 2020–2023 global chip shortage, which stemmed primarily from pandemic-related supply chain disruptions from COVID-19, this shortage is driven by a structural reallocation of manufacturing capacity toward high-margin products for artificial intelligence infrastructure, creating scarcity of computer memory in consumer and enterprise PC markets. According to a 2026 Kearney's PERLab analysis, the shortage is expected to last at least until 2030, with CEOs agreeing with the timelines. == Background == Following a severe market downturn in 2022–2023, major memory manufacturers—Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix, and Micron Technology—implemented strategic production cuts to stabilize pricing. By mid-2024, the rapid expansion of generative AI services triggered unprecedented demand for specialized memory products, particularly High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) used in AI accelerators and data center GPUs. Specialized components of semiconductor technology are also experiencing supply constraints due to high demand in AI application. For example, glass cloth, a high-performance glass fiber substrate used for power efficient high speed data transfer and a crucial component of semiconductor manufacturing, is experiencing a supply crisis. Nitto Boseki, a Japanese firm having overwhelming monopoly in its production, is not able to meet increased demands, making chip-makers such as Qualcomm, Apple, Nvidia and AMD compete for securing supply. There are also reports of smaller electronics companies struggling to find suppliers for components such as NAND flash. Memory suppliers are adapting to increased demands and market unpredictability by requiring prepayment or shorter time-frame of payment, which makes it more difficult for smaller firms to acquire capital to survive. By 2026, due to steadily increased demand on resources, CPUs are also experiencing shortage issues due to low fabrication capacity, prioritisation of server CPUs, and increased demand, with CPU prices also being forecast to increase by as much as 15%. The demand on memory has also increased strain on other electronic components such as hard disk devices, with reports such as Western Digital's hard disk supply for 2026 being booked for enterprise applications before February 2026. A 2024 McKinsey analysis projected that global demand for AI-ready data center capacity would grow at approximately 33% annually through 2030, with AI workloads consuming roughly 70% of total data center capacity by the decade's end. In addition, according to Kearney's State of Semiconductor 2025 Report, executives were already expecting a shortage in the <8nm wafer size with memory chips being mentioned as an acute source of concern. Multiple companies mentioned being prepared for it through long-term agreements with RAM suppliers or amassing additional inventory. On 24 March 2026, Google announced TurboQuant, a memory compression technology focused on large language models (LLM) and vector search engines, which it claimed achieves 6x lower memory consumption in tested local LLMs and 8x performance enhancement in tests running on H100 accelerators. The technology is also a drop in enhancement for existing inference pipeline. Amid speculation about memory demand trends, memory manufacturers, SanDisk, Micron, Western Digital and Seagate, among other companies involved in memory manufacture experienced stock price declines. Prices of memory kits also reduced in the following months, although still at inflated prices. == Causes == === HBM production displacement === HBM manufacturing requires significantly more wafer capacity per bit than standard DRAM modules. Industry sources reported that as manufacturers allocated increasing wafer capacity to HBM production to meet contracts with AI infrastructure providers, the supply of conventional DDR4 and DDR5 modules for consumer PCs and smartphones contracted sharply. By September 2025, Samsung Electronics had reportedly expanded its 1c DRAM capacity to target 60,000 wafers per month specifically for HBM4 production, further diverting resources from consumer memory lines. === Geopolitical and trade barriers === The supply chain was further constrained by escalating trade tensions between the United States and China. Throughout 2025, fears of U.S. regulatory backlash and new tariff structures led major manufacturers like Samsung and SK Hynix to halt sales of older semiconductor manufacturing equipment to Chinese entities, effectively capping production capacity in the region. Additionally, proposed tariff policies by the U.S. administration in late 2025 prompted supply chain realignments, with Apple reportedly accelerating plans to source all U.S.-bound iPhones from India to avoid potential levies. === NAND flash capacity constraints === In the NAND flash segment, manufacturers prioritized higher-margin enterprise SSDs for data center applications while phasing out older process nodes more rapidly than anticipated. In November 2025, contract prices for NAND wafers increased by more than 60% month-over-month for certain product categories, with 512GB TLC experiencing the steepest rise as legacy manufacturing capacity was retired. == Impact on industry and consumers == === Manufacturer responses === Major PC manufacturers responded to component cost increases with significant price adjustments and supply chain strategies. Dell Technologies Chief Operating Officer Jeff Clarke stated during a November 2025 analyst call that the company had "never witnessed costs escalating at the current pace," describing tighter availability across DRAM, hard drives, and NAND flash memory. Analysts at Morgan Stanley downgraded Dell Technologies stock from "Overweight" to "Underweight" in late 2025, citing the company's heavy exposure to rising server memory costs. The firm warned that skyrocketing memory prices could significantly erode margins for server and PC OEMs. Conversely, Apple Inc. was reportedly less affected than its competitors, having secured long-term supply agreements for DRAM through the first quarter of 2026. Lenovo Chief Financial Officer Winston Cheng described the cost surge as "unprecedented" and disclosed that the company's memory inventories were approximately 50% above normal levels in anticipation of further price increases. === Consumer electronics sector === The shortage particularly affected smartphone manufacturers and other consumer electronics producers. DRAM prices reportedly rose by 172% throughout 2025, leading manufacturers like Samsung to halt new orders for DDR5 modules to reassess pricing structures and Micron to exit its 'Crucial' brand of consumer products. In Tokyo's Akihabara electronics district, retailers began limiting purchases of memory products to prevent hoarding, with prices for popular DDR5 memory modules more than doubling in some cases. Despite the broad trend of rising hardware costs, some companies engaged in aggressive pricing strategies to maintain market share; for example, Sony reduced the price of the PlayStation 5 by $100 for Black Friday 2025, potentially absorbing increased component costs to stimulate software ecosystem growth. Due to memory prices more than doubling in a single quarter, HP revealed in its Q1 2026 earnings call that memory costs account for 35% of PC build materials up from 15-18% previous quarter. Despite showing strong Q1 2026 earning driven by Windows 11 upgrade cycle and AI PC adoption, HP warned investors of low operating margins and up to double digit percentage decline for coming quarter. Trendforce, an IT analytics company, updated its forecast from 1.7% year-over-year growth in PC market to 2.6% year-over-year decline for 2026, amid backdrop of steadily increasing prices and supply crisis. Research and analytics firms, Gartner and IDC expect worldwide PC market to decline 10-11% and smartphone market to decline 8-9% in 2026. Gartner also projects that rising memory prices will make low-margin entry level laptops under 500 USD financially unviable in two years. The RAM shortage has delayed the release of Valve's second Steam Machine due to increased memory prices. The device was originally set to launch in early 2026. === AI infrastructure competition === Technology companies including Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta Platforms placed open-ended orders with memory suppliers, indicating they would accept as much supply as available regardless of cost, according to Reuters sources. The limited supply of AI chips has been cited as a reason for the slow down in compute growth. In October 2025, OpenAI formally announced a strategic partnership using letters of intent with Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix

  Read more →
• 

  History of artificial life

  Humans have considered and tried to create non-biological life for at least 3,000 years. As seen in tales ranging from Pygmalion to Frankenstein, humanity has long been intrigued by the concept of artificial life. == Pre-computer == The earliest examples of artificial life involve sophisticated automata constructed using pneumatics, mechanics, and/or hydraulics. The first automata were conceived during the third and second centuries BC and these were demonstrated by the theorems of Hero of Alexandria, which included sophisticated mechanical and hydraulic solutions. Many of his notable works were included in the book Pneumatics, which was also used for constructing machines until early modern times. In 1490, Leonardo da Vinci also constructed an armored knight, which is considered the first humanoid robot in Western civilization. Other early famous examples include al-Jazari's humanoid robots. This Arabic inventor once constructed a band of automata, which can be commanded to play different pieces of music. There is also the case of Jacques de Vaucanson's artificial duck exhibited in 1735, which had thousands of moving parts and one of the first to mimic a biological system. The duck could reportedly eat and digest, drink, quack, and splash in a pool. It was exhibited all over Europe until it fell into disrepair. In the late 1600s, following René Descartes' claims that animals could be understood as purely physical machines, there was increasing interest in the question of whether a machine could be designed that, like an animal, could generate offspring (a self-replicating machine). However, it wasn't until the invention of cheap computing power that artificial life as a legitimate science began in earnest, steeped more in the theoretical and computational than the mechanical and mythological. == 1950s–1970s == One of the earliest thinkers of the modern age to postulate the potentials of artificial life, separate from artificial intelligence, was math and computer prodigy John von Neumann. At the Hixon Symposium, hosted by Linus Pauling in Pasadena, California in the late 1940s, von Neumann delivered a lecture titled "The General and Logical Theory of Automata." He defined an "automaton" as any machine whose behavior proceeded logically from step to step by combining information from the environment and its own programming, and said that natural organisms would in the end be found to follow similar simple rules. He also spoke about the idea of self-replicating machines. He postulated a made-up of a control computer, a construction arm, and a long series of instructions, floating in a lake of parts. By following the instructions that were part of its own body, it could create an identical machine. He followed this idea by creating (with Stanislaw Ulam) a purely logic-based automaton, not requiring a physical body but based on the changing states of the cells in an infinite grid – the first cellular automaton. It was extraordinarily complicated compared to later CAs, having hundreds of thousands of cells which could each exist in one of twenty-nine states, but von Neumann felt he needed the complexity in order for it to function not just as a self-replicating "machine", but also as a universal computer as defined by Alan Turing. This "universal constructor" read from a tape of instructions and wrote out a series of cells that could then be made active to leave a fully functional copy of the original machine and its tape. Von Neumann worked on his automata theory intensively right up to his death, and considered it his most important work. Homer Jacobson illustrated basic self-replication in the 1950s with a model train set – a seed "organism" consisting of a "head" and "tail" boxcar could use the simple rules of the system to consistently create new "organisms" identical to itself, so long as there was a random pool of new boxcars to draw from. Edward F. Moore proposed "Artificial Living Plants", which would be floating factories which could create copies of themselves. They could be programmed to perform some function (extracting fresh water, harvesting minerals from seawater) for an investment that would be relatively small compared to the huge returns from the exponentially growing numbers of factories. Freeman Dyson also studied the idea, envisioning self-replicating machines sent to explore and exploit other planets and moons, and a NASA group called the Self-Replicating Systems Concept Team performed a 1980 study on the feasibility of a self-building lunar factory. University of Cambridge professor John Horton Conway invented the most famous cellular automaton in the 1960s. He called it the Game of Life, and publicized it through Martin Gardner's column in Scientific American magazine. Norwegian-Italian mathematician Nils Aall Barricelli, who worked mainly at US institutions, was a pioneer in computer based simulation of biological processes such as symbiogenesis and evolution. == 1970s–1980s == Philosophy scholar Arthur Burks, who had worked with von Neumann (and indeed, organized his papers after Neumann's death), headed the Logic of Computers Group at the University of Michigan. He brought the overlooked views of 19th century American thinker Charles Sanders Peirce into the modern age. Peirce was a strong believer that all of nature's workings were based on logic (though not always deductive logic). The Michigan group was one of the few groups still interested in alife and CAs in the early 1970s; one of its students, Tommaso Toffoli argued in his PhD thesis that the field was important because its results explain the simple rules that underlay complex effects in nature. Toffoli later provided a key proof that CAs were reversible, just as the true universe is considered to be. Christopher Langton was an unconventional researcher, with an undistinguished academic career that led him to a job programming DEC mainframes for a hospital. He became enthralled by Conway's Game of Life, and began pursuing the idea that the computer could emulate living creatures. After years of study, he began attempting to actualize Von Neumann's CA and the work of Edgar F. Codd, who had simplified Von Neumann's original twenty-nine state monster to one with only eight states. He succeeded in creating the first self-replicating computer organism in October 1979, using only an Apple II desktop computer. He entered Burks' graduate program at the Logic of Computers Group in 1982, at the age of 33, and helped to found a new discipline. Langton's official conference announcement of Artificial Life I was the earliest description of a field which had previously barely existed: Artificial life is the study of artificial systems that exhibit behavior characteristic of natural living systems. It is the quest to explain life in any of its possible manifestations, without restriction to the particular examples that have evolved on earth. This includes biological and chemical experiments, computer simulations, and purely theoretical endeavors. Processes occurring on molecular, social, and evolutionary scales are subject to investigation. The ultimate goal is to extract the logical form of living systems. Microelectronic technology and genetic engineering will soon give us the capability to create new life forms in silico as well as in vitro. This capacity will present humanity with the most far-reaching technical, theoretical and ethical challenges it has ever confronted. The time seems appropriate for a gathering of those involved in attempts to simulate or synthesize aspects of living systems. Ed Fredkin founded the Information Mechanics Group at MIT, which united Toffoli, Norman Margolus, and Charles Bennett. This group created a computer especially designed to execute cellular automata, eventually reducing it to the size of a single circuit board. This "cellular automata machine" allowed an explosion of alife research among scientists who could not otherwise afford sophisticated computers. In 1982, computer scientist named Stephen Wolfram turned his attention to cellular automata. He explored and categorized the types of complexity displayed by one-dimensional CAs, and showed how they applied to natural phenomena such as the patterns of seashells and the nature of plant growth. Norman Packard, who worked with Wolfram at the Institute for Advanced Study, used CAs to simulate the growth of snowflakes, following very basic rules. Computer animator Craig Reynolds similarly used three simple rules to create recognizable flocking behaviour in a computer program in 1987 to animate groups of boids. With no top-down programming at all, the boids produced lifelike solutions to evading obstacles placed in their path. Computer animation has continued to be a key commercial driver of alife research as the creators of movies attempt to find more realistic and inexpensive ways to animate natural forms such as plant life, animal movement, hair growth, and complicated org

  Read more →
• 

  Privacy Lost

  Privacy Lost is a 2023 short science fiction film directed by Peter Stoel and Robert Berger. It follows a family using augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) devices capable of reading emotional states, raising questions about privacy and manipulation. == Premise == Privacy Lost follows a family using AR glasses that capture and interpret emotions in real time. As the parents argue in a restaurant, their emotional states and even hidden feelings become visible through these glasses. An AI-driven waiter adapts its appearance for each family member, employing emotional data to influence their decisions. == Cast == Brian Kant as Waiter Michael Krass as Husband Estelle Levinson as Waitress Thor van der Linden as Scotty Carlijn van Ramshorst as Wife == Production == Filming took place at HeadQ Productions, a virtual studio located in Amsterdam. The creators sought to depict a near-future scenario in which real-time emotion analysis becomes part of daily interactions. The film was screened at the Augmented World Expo (AWE), where it was noted for its thematic focus on AI-driven manipulation and emotional tracking. The depiction of AR glasses and AI characters integrates modern visual effects to show how devices might analyze emotional responses in real time. It also depicts how AI-driven interactions could influence consumer decisions, pointing to concerns over potential misuse. == Themes == Privacy Lost focuses on the intersection of advanced AI capabilities and AR environments, showing how real-time emotional analysis can be leveraged for targeted persuasion. The film aims to highlight the social and ethical implications of emerging AR and AI technologies, underlining how establishing clear regulatory frameworks for them is necessary to protect individual privacy, govern the storage of emotion-based data, and prevent manipulative practices. Critics describe the film’s theme as dystopian and note that such a reality is unlikely to occur in the near future. However, despite the exaggerated scenario, the film emphasizes the importance of a responsible approach by developers toward emerging technologies.

  Read more →
• 

  Evolving intelligent system

  In computer science, an evolving intelligent system is a fuzzy logic system which improves the own performance by evolving rules. The technique is known from machine learning, in which external patterns are learned by an algorithm. Fuzzy logic based machine learning works with neuro-fuzzy systems. Intelligent systems have to be able to evolve, self-develop, and self-learn continuously in order to reflect a dynamically evolving environment. The concept of Evolving Intelligent Systems (EISs) was conceived around the turn of the century with the phrase EIS itself coined for the first time by Angelov and Kasabov in a 2006 IEEE newsletter and expanded in a 2010 text. EISs develop their structure, functionality and internal knowledge representation through autonomous learning from data streams generated by the possibly unknown environment and from the system self-monitoring. EISs consider a gradual development of the underlying (fuzzy or neuro-fuzzy) system structure and differ from evolutionary and genetic algorithms which consider such phenomena as chromosomes crossover, mutation, selection and reproduction, parents and off-springs. The evolutionary fuzzy and neuro systems are sometimes also called "evolving" which leads to some confusion. This was more typical for the first works on this topic in the late 1990s. == Implementations == EISs can be implemented, for example, using neural networks or fuzzy rule-based models. The first neural networks which consider an evolving structure were published in. These were later expanded by N. Kasabov and P. Angelov for the neuro-fuzzy models. P. Angelov introduced the evolving fuzzy rule-based systems (EFSs) as the first mathematical self-learning model that can dynamically evolve its internal structure and is human interpretable and coined the phrase EFS. Contemporarily, the offline incremental approach for learning an EIS, namely, EFuNN, was proposed by N. Kasabov. P. Angelov, D. Filev, N. Kasabov and O. Cordon organised the first IEEE Symposium on EFSs in 2006 (the proceedings of the conference can be found in). EFSs include a formal (and mathematically sound) learning mechanism to extract it from streaming data. One of the earliest and the most widely cited comprehensive survey on EFSs was done in 2008. Later comprehensive surveys on EFS methods with real applications were done in 2011 and 2016 by E. Lughofer. Other works that contributed further to this area in the following years expanded it to evolving participatory learning, evolving grammar, evolving decision trees, evolving human behaviour modelling, self-calibrating (evolving) sensors (eSensors), evolving fuzzy rule-based classifiers, evolving fuzzy controllers, autonomous fault detectors. More recently, the stability of the evolving fuzzy rule-based systems that consist of the structure learning and the fuzzily weighted recursive least square parameter update method has been proven by Rong. Generalized EFS, which allow rules to be arbitrarily rotated in the feature space and thus to improve their data representability, have been proposed in with significant extensions in towards 'smartness' of the rule bases (thus, termed as "Generalized Smart EFS"), allowing more interpretability and reducing curse of dimensionality. The generalized rule structure was also successfully used in the context of evolving neuro-fuzzy systems. Several facets and challenges for achieving more transparent and understandable rule bases in EFS have been discussed by E. Lughofer in. EISs form the theoretical and methodological basis for the Autonomous Learning Machines (ALMA) and autonomous multi-model systems (ALMMo) as well as of the Autonomous Learning Systems. Evolving Fuzzy Rule-based classifiers, in particular, is a very powerful new concept that offers much more than simply incremental or online classifiers – it can cope with new classes being added or existing classes being merged. This is much more than just adapting to new data samples being added or classification surfaces being evolved. Fuzzy rule-based classifiers are the methodological basis of a new approach to deep learning that was until now considered as a form of multi-layered neural networks. Deep Learning offers high precision levels surpassing the level of human ability and grabbed the imagination of the researchers, industry and the wider public. However, it has a number of intrinsic constraints and limitations. These include: The "black box", opaque internal structure which has millions of parameters and involves ad hoc decisions on the number of layers and algorithm parameters. The requirement for a huge amount of training data samples, computational resources (usually requiring GPUs and/or HPC) and time (usually requiring many hours of training). Iterative search. Requires retraining for new situations (is not evolving). Does not have proven convergence and stability. Most, if not all, of the above limitations can be avoided with the use of the Deep (Fuzzy) Rule-based Classifiers, which were recently introduced based on ALMMo, while achieving similar or even better performance. The resulting prototype-based IF...THEN...models are fully interpretable and dynamically evolving (they can adapt quickly and automatically to new data patterns or even new classes). They are non-parametric and, therefore, their training is non-iterative and fast (it can take few milliseconds per data sample/image on a normal laptop which contrasts with the multiple hours the current deep learning methods require for training even when they use GPUs and HPC). Moreover, they can be trained incrementally, online, or in real-time. Another aspect of Evolving Fuzzy Rule-based classifiers has been proposed in, which, in case of multi-class classification problems, achieves the reduction of class imbalance by cascadability into class sub-spaces and an increased flexibility and performance for adding new classes on the fly from streaming samples.

  Read more →
• 

  List of assembly software and tools

  This is a list of assembly software and tools, including software used for assembly language programming, machine code generation, disassembly, debugging, binary analysis, reverse engineering, and instruction-set simulation. == Assemblers and machine-code generators == == Disassemblers and binary-analysis tools == == Debuggers with assembly-level features == == Educational IDEs, simulators and emulators == == Portable and intermediate assembly-like languages == == Assembly language families == Assembly language is not a single programming language, but a family of low-level languages associated with particular instruction set architectures and processor families. Examples include:

  Read more →
• 

  Squirrel AI

  Squirrel Ai Learning is an international educational technology company that specializes in intelligent adaptive learning and was one of the first companies in the world to offer large scale AI-powered adaptive education solutions. == Methodology == Squirrel Ai Learning uses artificial intelligence to tailor lesson plans to each individual student. The company's AI researchers have access to the world's largest student databases, which are used to train the AI algorithms. Squirrel Ai Learning works with teachers to identify the most fine-grained possible concepts ("knowledge points") for a course in order to precisely target learning gaps. For example, middle school mathematics is broken into over 10,000 points such as rational numbers, the properties of a triangle, and the Pythagorean theorem. Each point is linked to related items, forming a "knowledge graph". Each knowledge point is addressed by videos, examples and practice problems. A textbook might address 3,000 points; ALEKS, another adaptive learning platform, uses 1,000. Each student begins with a diagnostic test to identify where to begin their learning. The system continues to refine its graph as more students proceed. Learning is not student-directed. The system decides the order of topics. == History and milestones == Squirrel Ai Learning was founded by Derek Haoyang Li in 2014. In March, 2017, The Squirrel Ai Intelligent Adaptive Learning System (IALS) was launched. IALS utilizes artificial intelligence to customize lessons, practice and evaluations for each individual student. In 2018, Squirrel Ai Learning established a joint research lab of AI adaptive learning with the institute of Automation of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. By 2019, Squirrel Ai Learning had opened 2,000 learning centers in 200 cities and registered over a million students in Asia. In 2019, Squirrel Ai Learning opened a research lab in partnership with Carnegie Mellon University. As of 2019, Squirrel Ai Learning had raised over $180 million in funding and in 2018 it surpassed $1 billion in valuation. In 2020, Squirrel Ai Learning launched the $1 million AAAI Squirrel AI Award for Artificial Intelligence for the Benefit of Humanity in partnership with AAAI. The inaugural award was given to Regina Barzilay for her work developing machine learning models to address drug synthesis and early-stage breast cancer diagnosis. In 2020, Squirrel Ai Learning established strategic partnership with DingTalk, Alibaba Group. As of 2021, Squirrel Ai Learning had served over 60,000 public schools, in over 1200 cities in Asia. Squirrel Ai plans to start offering its services in the United States in 2026. The American arm is separate from the Chinese company to avoid regulatory hurdles. As of January 2026, it had set up an "independent technology platform" in the US. == Recognition == Squirrel Ai Learning has gained recognition both in Asia and internationally including: Squirrel Ai Learning was named one of the World's Top 30 AI application case in the 2018 Synced Machine Intelligence Awards. In June 2019, Squirrel Ai Learning was named as one of the 50 smartest companies in China by MIT technology review. Squirrel Ai Learning won the GITEX 2019 Best Education Technology Award. In 2020, Squirrel Ai Learning won the UNESCO AI Innovation Award. Squirrel Ai Learning was listed in the 2020 CB Insight's AI 100, CB Insights' annual ranking of the 100 most promising AI startups in the world. Squirrel Ai Learning won Edtech Review's Best AI in Education Company of the Year award 2020.

  Read more →
• 

  Structure mapping engine

  In artificial intelligence and cognitive science, the structure mapping engine (SME) is an implementation in software of an algorithm for analogical matching based on the psychological theory of Dedre Gentner. The basis of Gentner's structure-mapping idea is that an analogy is a mapping of knowledge from one domain (the base) into another (the target). The structure-mapping engine is a computer simulation of the analogy and similarity comparisons. The theory is useful because it ignores surface features and finds matches between potentially very different things if they have the same representational structure. For example, SME could determine that a pen is like a sponge because both are involved in dispensing liquid, even though they do this very differently. == Structure mapping theory == Structure mapping theory is based on the systematicity principle, which states that connected knowledge is preferred over independent facts. Therefore, the structure mapping engine should ignore isolated source-target mappings unless they are part of a bigger structure. The SME, the theory goes, should map objects that are related to knowledge that has already been mapped. The theory also requires that mappings be done one-to-one, which means that no part of the source description can map to more than one item in the target and no part of the target description can be mapped to more than one part of the source. The theory also requires that if a match maps subject to target, the arguments of subject and target must also be mapped. If both these conditions are met, the mapping is said to be "structurally consistent." == Concepts in SME == SME maps knowledge from a source into a target. SME calls each description a dgroup. Dgroups contain a list of entities and predicates. Entities represent the objects or concepts in a description — such as an input gear or a switch. Predicates are one of three types and are a general way to express knowledge for SME. Relation predicates contain multiple arguments, which can be other predicates or entities. An example relation is: (transmit (what from to)). This relation has a functor transmit and takes three arguments: what, from, and to. Attribute predicates are the properties of an entity. An example of an attribute is (red gear) which means that gear has the attribute red. Function predicates map an entity into another entity or constant. An example of a function is (joules power source) which maps the entity power source onto the numerical quantity joules. Functions and attributes have different meanings, and consequently SME processes them differently. For example, in SME's true analogy rule set, attributes differ from functions because they cannot match unless there is a higher-order match between them. The difference between attributes and functions will be explained further in this section's examples. All predicates have four parameters. They have (1) a functor, which identifies it, and (2) a type, which is either relation, attribute, or function. The other two parameters (3 and 4) are for determining how to process the arguments in the SME algorithm. If the arguments have to be matched in order, commutative is false. If the predicate can take any number of arguments, N-ary is false. An example of a predicate definition is: (sme:defPredicate behavior-set (predicate) relation :n-ary? t :commutative? t) The predicate's functor is “behavior-set,” its type is “relation,” and its n-ary and commutative parameters are both set to true. The “(predicate)” part of the definition specifies that there will be one or more predicates inside an instantiation of behavior-set. == Algorithm details == The algorithm has several steps. The first step of the algorithm is to create a set of match hypotheses between source and target dgroups. A match hypothesis represents a possible mapping between any part of the source and the target. This mapping is controlled by a set of match rules. By changing the match rules, one can change the type of reasoning SME does. For example, one set of match rules may perform a kind of analogy called literal similarity, and another performs a kind of analogy called true-analogy. These rules are not the place where domain-dependent information is added, but rather where the analogy process is tweaked, depending on the type of cognitive function the user is trying to emulate. For a given match rule, there are two types of rules that further define how it will be applied: filter rules and intern rules. Intern rules use only the arguments of the expressions in the match hypotheses that the filter rules identify. This limitation makes the processing more efficient by constraining the number of match hypotheses that are generated. At the same time, it also helps to build the structural consistencies that are needed later on in the algorithm. An example of a filter rule from the true-analogy rule set creates match hypotheses between predicates that have the same functor. The true-analogy rule set has an intern rule that iterates over the arguments of any match hypothesis, creating more match hypotheses if the arguments are entities or functions, or if the arguments are attributes and have the same functor. In order to illustrate how the match rules produce match hypotheses consider these two predicates: transmit torque inputgear secondgear (p1) transmit signal switch div10 (p2) Here we use true analogy for the type of reasoning. The filter match rule generates a match between p1 and p2 because they share the same functor, transmit. The intern rules then produce three more match hypotheses: torque to signal, inputgear to switch, and secondgear to div10. The intern rules created these match hypotheses because all the arguments were entities. If the arguments were functions or attributes instead of entities, the predicates would be expressed as: transmit torque (inputgear gear) (secondgear gear) (p3) transmit signal (switch circuit) (div10 circuit) (p4) These additional predicates make inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 functions or attributes depending on the value defined in the language input file. The representation also contains additional entities for gear and circuit. Depending on what type inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 are, their meanings change. As attributes, each one is a property of the gear or circuit. For example, the gear has two attributes, inputgear and secondgear. The circuit has two attributes, switch and circuit. As functions inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 become quantities of the gear and circuit. In this example, the functions inputgear and secondgear now map to the numerical quantities “torque from inputgear” and “torque from secondgear,” For the circuit the quantities map to logical quantity “switch engaged” and the numerical quantity “current count on the divide by 10 counter.” SME processes these differently. It does not allow attributes to match unless they are part of a higher-order relation, but it does allow functions to match, even if they are not part of such a relation. It allows functions to match because they indirectly refer to entities and thus should be treated like relations that involve no entities. However, as next section shows, the intern rules assign lower weights to matches between functions than to matches between relations. The reason SME does not match attributes is because it is trying to create connected knowledge based on relationships and thus satisfy the systematicity principle. For example, if both a clock and a car have inputgear attributes, SME will not mark them as similar. If it did, it would be making a match between the clock and car based on their appearance — not on the relationships between them. When the additional predicates in p3 and p4 are functions, the results from matching p3 and p4 are similar to the results from p1 and p2 except there is an additional match between gear and circuit and the values for the match hypotheses between (inputgear gear) and (switch circuit), and (secondgear gear) and (div10 circuit), are lower. The next section describes the reason for this in more detail. If the inputgear, secondgear, switch, and div10 are attributes instead of entities, SME does not find matches between any of the attributes. It finds matches only between the transmit predicates and between torque and signal. Additionally, the structural-evaluation scores for the remaining two matches decrease. In order to get the two predicates to match, p3 would need to be replaced by p5, which is demonstrated below. transmit torque (inputgear gear) (div10 gear) (p5) Since the true-analogy rule set identifies that the div10 attributes are the same between p5 and p4 and because the div10 attributes are both part of the higher-relation match between torque and signal, SME makes a match between (div10 gear) and (div10 circuit) — which leads to a match between gear and circuit. Being part of a higher-order match is a requiremen

  Read more →
• 

  2024 Bilderberg Conference

  The 2024 Bilderberg Conference was held between May 30–June 2, 2024 in Madrid, Spain at the Eurostars Suites Mirasierra hotel. The 2024 meeting was the 70th edition of the event. A Bilderberg Group press release stated that there were 131 participants from around 25 countries. Established in 1954 by Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands, Bilderberg conferences (or meetings) are an annual private gathering of the European and North American political and business elite. Events are attended by between 120 and 150 people each year invited by the Bilderberg Group's steering committee; including prominent politicians, CEOs, national security experts, academics and journalists. Several US presidents have attended the meetings before winning a presidential election. These politicians include Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Bilderberg conferences operate under the Chatham House Rule, meaning that participants are sworn to secrecy and cannot disclose the identity or affiliation of any particular speaker. == Agenda == The key topics for discussion were announced on the Bilderberg website shortly before the meeting. These topics included: == Participants == A list of 131 participants was published on the Bilderberg website. This list may not be complete, as a source connected to the Bilderberg group told The Daily Telegraph in 2013 that some attendees do not have their names publicized. King Felipe VI of Spain was reported to have attended the meeting despite his name not being on the list.

  Read more →
• 

  Caspio

  Caspio, Inc. is an American software company providing a low-code platform for building cloud-based business applications. Founded in 2000 by Frank Zamani, the company is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, with operations in Poland, the Philippines, and Spain. Caspio’s platform allows organizations to create online database applications and workflow tools without extensive coding. == History == Caspio was founded by Frank Zamani in 2000. The company initially focused on simplifying custom cloud applications and reducing development time and cost as compared to traditional software development. Caspio released the first version of its platform, Caspio Bridge, in 2001. In 2014, Caspio released a HIPAA-Compliant Edition of its low-code application development platform. Caspio also released an EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) Compliance Edition of its low-code application development platform in 2016. Caspio's second European Software Development Center opened in Kraków, Poland in 2017. In 2019, Forrester Research listed Caspio and three other platforms in its highest of four ranked tiers of twelve low-code platforms for business developers based on rankings of offerings and strategy at that time. Caspio also opened data centers in Montreal, Canada and India in 2020.

  Read more →
• 

  Gene expression programming

  Gene expression programming (GEP) in computer programming is an evolutionary algorithm that creates computer programs or models. These computer programs are complex tree structures that learn and adapt by changing their sizes, shapes, and composition, much like a living organism. And like living organisms, the computer programs of GEP are also encoded in simple linear chromosomes of fixed length. Thus, GEP is a genotype–phenotype system, benefiting from a simple genome to keep and transmit the genetic information and a complex phenotype to explore the environment and adapt to it. == Background == Evolutionary algorithms use populations of individuals, select individuals according to fitness, and introduce genetic variation using one or more genetic operators. Their use in artificial computational systems dates back to the 1950s where they were used to solve optimization problems (e.g. Box 1957 and Friedman 1959). But it was with the introduction of evolution strategies by Rechenberg in 1965 that evolutionary algorithms gained popularity. A good overview text on evolutionary algorithms is the book "An Introduction to Genetic Algorithms" by Mitchell (1996). Gene expression programming belongs to the family of evolutionary algorithms and is closely related to genetic algorithms and genetic programming. From genetic algorithms it inherited the linear chromosomes of fixed length; and from genetic programming it inherited the expressive parse trees of varied sizes and shapes. In gene expression programming the linear chromosomes work as the genotype and the parse trees as the phenotype, creating a genotype/phenotype system. This genotype/phenotype system is multigenic, thus encoding multiple parse trees in each chromosome. This means that the computer programs created by GEP are composed of multiple parse trees. Because these parse trees are the result of gene expression, in GEP they are called expression trees. Masood Nekoei, et al. utilized this expression programming style in ABC optimization to conduct ABCEP as a method that outperformed other evolutionary algorithms.ABCEP == Encoding: the genotype == The genome of gene expression programming consists of a linear, symbolic string or chromosome of fixed length composed of one or more genes of equal size. These genes, despite their fixed length, code for expression trees of different sizes and shapes. An example of a chromosome with two genes, each of size 9, is the string (position zero indicates the start of each gene): 012345678012345678 L+a-baccdcLabacd where “L” represents the natural logarithm function and “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d” represent the variables and constants used in a problem. == Expression trees: the phenotype == As shown above, the genes of gene expression programming have all the same size. However, these fixed length strings code for expression trees of different sizes. This means that the size of the coding regions varies from gene to gene, allowing for adaptation and evolution to occur smoothly. For example, the mathematical expression: ( a − b ) ( c + d ) {\displaystyle {\sqrt {(a-b)(c+d)}}\,} can also be represented as an expression tree: where "Q” represents the square root function. This kind of expression tree consists of the phenotypic expression of GEP genes, whereas the genes are linear strings encoding these complex structures. For this particular example, the linear string corresponds to: 01234567 Q-+abcd which is the straightforward reading of the expression tree from top to bottom and from left to right. These linear strings are called k-expressions (from Karva notation). Going from k-expressions to expression trees is also very simple. For example, the following k-expression: 01234567890 Qb+baQba is composed of two different terminals (the variables “a” and “b”), two different functions of two arguments (“” and “+”), and a function of one argument (“Q”). Its expression gives: == K-expressions and genes == The k-expressions of gene expression programming correspond to the region of genes that gets expressed. This means that there might be sequences in the genes that are not expressed, which is indeed true for most genes. The reason for these noncoding regions is to provide a buffer of terminals so that all k-expressions encoded in GEP genes correspond always to valid programs or expressions. The genes of gene expression programming are therefore composed of two different domains – a head and a tail – each with different properties and functions. The head is used mainly to encode the functions and variables chosen to solve the problem at hand, whereas the tail, while also used to encode the variables, provides essentially a reservoir of terminals to ensure that all programs are error-free. For GEP genes the length of the tail is given by the formula: t = h ( n max − 1 ) + 1 {\displaystyle t=h(n_{\max }-1)+1} where h is the head's length and nmax is maximum arity. For example, for a gene created using the set of functions F = {Q, +, −, ∗, /} and the set of terminals T = {a, b}, nmax = 2. And if we choose a head length of 15, then t = 15 (2–1) + 1 = 16, which gives a gene length g of 15 + 16 = 31. The randomly generated string below is an example of one such gene: 0123456789012345678901234567890 b+a-aQab+//+b+babbabbbababbaaa It encodes the expression tree: which, in this case, only uses 8 of the 31 elements that constitute the gene. It's not hard to see that, despite their fixed length, each gene has the potential to code for expression trees of different sizes and shapes, with the simplest composed of only one node (when the first element of a gene is a terminal) and the largest composed of as many nodes as there are elements in the gene (when all the elements in the head are functions with maximum arity). It's also not hard to see that it is trivial to implement all kinds of genetic modification (mutation, inversion, insertion, recombination, and so on) with the guarantee that all resulting offspring encode correct, error-free programs. == Multigenic chromosomes == The chromosomes of gene expression programming are usually composed of more than one gene of equal length. Each gene codes for a sub-expression tree (sub-ET) or sub-program. Then the sub-ETs can interact with one another in different ways, forming a more complex program. The figure shows an example of a program composed of three sub-ETs. In the final program the sub-ETs could be linked by addition or some other function, as there are no restrictions to the kind of linking function one might choose. Some examples of more complex linkers include taking the average, the median, the midrange, thresholding their sum to make a binomial classification, applying the sigmoid function to compute a probability, and so on. These linking functions are usually chosen a priori for each problem, but they can also be evolved elegantly and efficiently by the cellular system of gene expression programming. == Cells and code reuse == In gene expression programming, homeotic genes control the interactions of the different sub-ETs or modules of the main program. The expression of such genes results in different main programs or cells, that is, they determine which genes are expressed in each cell and how the sub-ETs of each cell interact with one another. In other words, homeotic genes determine which sub-ETs are called upon and how often in which main program or cell and what kind of connections they establish with one another. === Homeotic genes and the cellular system === Homeotic genes have exactly the same kind of structural organization as normal genes and they are built using an identical process. They also contain a head domain and a tail domain, with the difference that the heads contain now linking functions and a special kind of terminals – genic terminals – that represent the normal genes. The expression of the normal genes results as usual in different sub-ETs, which in the cellular system are called ADFs (automatically defined functions). As for the tails, they contain only genic terminals, that is, derived features generated on the fly by the algorithm. For example, the chromosome in the figure has three normal genes and one homeotic gene and encodes a main program that invokes three different functions a total of four times, linking them in a particular way. From this example it is clear that the cellular system not only allows the unconstrained evolution of linking functions but also code reuse. And it shouldn't be hard to implement recursion in this system. === Multiple main programs and multicellular systems === Multicellular systems are composed of more than one homeotic gene. Each homeotic gene in this system puts together a different combination of sub-expression trees or ADFs, creating multiple cells or main programs. For example, the program shown in the figure was created using a cellular system with two cells and three normal genes. The applications of these multicellular systems are mu

  Read more →
• 

  Death of Elaine Herzberg

  The death of Elaine Herzberg (August 2, 1968 – March 18, 2018) was the first recorded case of a pedestrian fatality involving a self-driving car, after a collision that occurred late in the evening of March 18, 2018. Herzberg was pushing a bicycle across a four-lane road in Tempe, Arizona, United States, when she was struck by an Uber test vehicle, which was operating in self-drive mode with a human safety backup driver sitting in the driving seat. Herzberg was taken to the local hospital where she died of her injuries. Following the fatal incident, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a series of recommendations and sharply criticized Uber. The company suspended testing of self-driving vehicles in Arizona, where such testing had been approved since August 2016. Uber chose not to renew its permit for testing self-driving vehicles in California when it expired at the end of March 2018. Uber resumed testing in December 2018, starting in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In March 2019, Arizona prosecutors ruled that Uber was not criminally responsible for the crash. The back-up driver of the vehicle was charged with negligent homicide, pled guilty to endangerment, and was sentenced to three years' probation. While Herzberg was the first pedestrian killed by a self-driving car, driver Gao Yaning died in a Tesla semi-autonomous car two years earlier. A reporter for The Washington Post compared Herzberg's fate with that of Bridget Driscoll who, in the United Kingdom in 1896, was the first pedestrian to be killed by an automobile. The Arizona incident has magnified the importance of collision avoidance systems for self-driving vehicles. == Collision summary == Herzberg was crossing Mill Avenue (North) from west to east, approximately 360 feet (110 m) south of the intersection with Curry Road, outside the designated pedestrian crosswalk, close to the Red Mountain Freeway. She was pushing a bicycle laden with shopping bags, and had crossed at least two lanes of traffic when she was struck at approximately 9:58 pm MST (UTC−07:00) by a prototype Uber self-driving car based on a Volvo XC90, which was traveling north on Mill. The vehicle had been operating in autonomous mode since 9:39 pm, nineteen minutes before it struck and killed Herzberg. The car's human safety backup driver, Rafaela Vasquez, did not intervene in time to prevent the collision. Vehicle telemetry obtained after the crash showed that the human operator responded by moving the steering wheel less than a second before impact, and she engaged the brakes less than a second after impact. == Cause investigation == The county district attorney's office recused itself from the investigation, due to a prior joint partnership with Uber promoting their services as an alternative to driving under the influence of alcohol. Accounts differ on the speed limit at the place of the incident. According to Tempe police the car was traveling in a 35 mph (56 km/h) zone, but this is contradicted by a posted speed limit of 45 mph (72 km/h). The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) sent a team of federal investigators to gather data from vehicle instruments, and to examine vehicle condition along with the actions taken by the safety driver. Their preliminary findings were substantiated by multiple event data recorders and proved the vehicle was traveling 43 miles per hour (69 km/h) when Herzberg was first detected 6 seconds (378 feet (115 m)) before impact; during 4.7 seconds the self driving system did not infer that emergency braking was needed. A vehicle traveling 43 mph (69 km/h) can generally stop within 89 feet (27 m) once the brakes are applied. The machine needed to be 1.3 seconds (82 feet (25 m)) away prior to discerning that emergency braking was required, whereas at least that much distance was required to stop. The system failed to behave properly. A total stopping distance of 76 feet itself would imply a safe speed under 25 mph (40 km/h). Human intervention was still legally required. Computer perception–reaction time would have been a speed limiting factor had the technology been superior to humans in ambiguous situations; however, the nascent computerized braking technology was disabled the day of the crash, and the machine's apparent 4.7-second perception–reaction (alarm) time allowed the car to travel 250 feet (76 m). Video released by the police on March 21 showed the safety driver was not watching the road moments before the vehicle struck Herzberg. === Environment === In widely disseminated remarks that would shape the narrative about the crash, which were later seen as prejudicial and subsequently contradicted by her own department, Tempe Police Chief Sylvia Moir was quoted stating that the collision was "unavoidable" based on the initial police investigation, which included a review of the video captured by an onboard camera. Moir faulted Herzberg for crossing the road in an unsafe manner: "It is dangerous to cross roadways in the evening hour when well-illuminated, managed crosswalks are available." According to Uber, safety drivers were trained to keep their hands very close to the wheel all the time while driving the vehicle so they were ready to quickly take control if necessary. The driver said it was like a flash, the person walked out in front of them. His [sic] first alert to the collision was the sound of the collision. [...] it's very clear it would have been difficult to avoid this collision in any kind of mode (autonomous or human-driven) based on how she came from the shadows right into the roadway. Tempe police released video on March 21, 2018, showing footage recorded by two onboard cameras: one forward-looking, and one capturing the safety driver's actions. The forward-facing video shows that the self-driving car was traveling in the far right lane when it struck Herzberg. The driver-facing video shows the safety driver was looking down prior to the collision. The Uber operator is responsible for intervening and taking manual control when necessary as well as for monitoring diagnostic messages, which are displayed on a screen in the center console. In an interview conducted after the crash with NTSB, the driver stated she was monitoring the center stack at the time of the collision. After the Uber video was released, journalist Carolyn Said noted the police explanation of Herzberg's path meant she had already crossed two lanes of traffic before she was struck by the autonomous vehicle. The Marquee Theatre and Tempe Town Lake are west of Mill Avenue, and pedestrians commonly cross mid-street without detouring north to the crosswalk at Curry. According to reporting by the Phoenix New Times, Mill Avenue contains what appears to be a brick-paved path in the median between the northbound and southbound lanes; however, posted signs prohibit pedestrians from crossing in that location. When the second of the Mill Avenue bridges over the town lake was added in 1994 for northbound traffic, the X-shaped crossover in the median was installed to accommodate the potential closing of one of the two road bridges. The purpose of this brick-paved structure is purely to divert cars from one side to the other if a bridge is closed to traffic, and although it may look like a crosswalk for pedestrians, it is in fact a temporary roadway with vertical curbs and warning signs. === Software issues === Michael Ramsey, a self-driving car expert with Gartner, characterized the video as showing "a complete failure of the system to recognize an obviously seen person who is visible for quite some distance in the frame. Uber has some serious explaining to do about why this person wasn't seen and why the system didn't engage." The NTSB preliminary report, however, noted that the software did order the car to brake 1.3 seconds before the collision. A video shot from the vehicle's dashboard camera showed the safety driver looking down, away from the road. It also appeared that the driver's hands were not hovering above the steering wheel, which is what drivers are instructed to do so they can quickly retake control of the car. Uber had moved from two employees in every car to one. The paired employees had been splitting duties: one ready to take over if the autonomous system failed, and another to keep an eye on what the computers were detecting. The second person was responsible for keeping track of system performance as well as labeling data on a laptop computer. Mr. Kallman, the Uber spokesman, said the second person was in the car for purely data related tasks, not safety. When Uber moved to a single operator, some employees expressed safety concerns to managers, according to the two people familiar with Uber's operations. They were worried that going solo would make it harder to remain alert during hours of monotonous driving. The recorded telemetry showed the system had detected Herzberg six seconds before the crash, and classified her first as an unknown object, then as a

  Read more →
• 

  Grok sexual deepfake scandal

  From 2025 onwards, X (formerly Twitter)'s integrated chatbot, Grok, has allowed users to nonconsensually alter images of individuals, including minors, to show them in bikinis or transparent clothing, or in sexually suggestive contexts. The majority of these prompts were targeted at women and girls. Users were able to generate such images by responding to a photo with a request to Grok, such as "put her in a bikini", to which the chatbot would publicly reply with a generated image. The scandal drew significant criticism from lawmakers across the world, and there were calls for bans on X, as well as legal crackdowns on X and xAI for, amongst other reasons, the facilitation of sexual abuse, revenge porn, and child pornography. == Background == Deepfake pornography emerged in the late 2010s with the advent of machine learning. Originally, it was created on a small individual scale using a combination of machine learning algorithms, computer vision techniques, and AI software. However, the production process has significantly evolved since 2018, with the advent of several public apps that have largely automated the process. Since 2023, several AI apps available on Google Play and the Apple App Store are capable of "nudify-ing" user provided photos to generate non-consensual deepfake pornography. Grok would first be proposed by Elon Musk in 2023, when he expressed an intention to create his own AI chatbot to "combat bias". Grok version 2.0, released on August 14, 2024, would introduce image generation capabilities, ones which would be improved over successive updates. == Grok deepfake generation == Cases of Grok being used to remove the clothes from women in pictures, replacing them with bikinis or lingerie, began to surface in May 2025. By late December 2025, a trend of X users requesting such edits to women's photos without permission had taken root, and this received significant media attention in the first few days of January 2026. Some users prompted Grok to edit photos of women into sexualized poses, and others to add blood and bruising, with the chatbot publicly posting these graphic images in response. Grok's X account was restricted on January 9 from posting image generation responses to users who are not paid subscribers, providing a link to "subscribe to unlock these features". All users were still able to generate Grok-altered images using X's "Edit image" feature, and the standalone Grok website and app. However, by March 19, Grok’s Imagine feature was fully restricted to paid subscribers only (SuperGrok tier) for both the standalone Grok website and mobile app. == Analysis == An analysis of 20,000 images generated by Grok between December 25, 2025, and January 1, 2026, showed 2% appeared to be 18 or younger, including 30 of "young or very young" women or girls in bikinis or transparent clothes. A Reuters review of Grok requests over 10 minutes on January 2nd found 102 attempts to put women in bikinis. A separate analysis conducted over 24 hours from January 5 to 6 calculated that users had Grok create 6,700 sexually suggestive or nudified images per hour — 84 times more so than the top 5 deepfake websites combined. Wired reported that far more graphic AI-generated sexual imagery was being created by Grok on its website and app, which are separate to X, including female celebrities removing their clothes and engaging in sexual acts. An analysis of 800 pieces of recovered content by the Paris-based nonprofit AI Forensics found that almost 10% were "instances of photorealistic people, very young, doing sexual activities". AI-generated deepfakes have been described as sexual assault, and as a means to push women out of the public sphere. AI-generated sexually explicit or exploitative image claims are now being treated more like product safety or personal injury harms, not just privacy violations. Because harm may occur the moment an image is generated, some plaintiffs argue liability should focus on the system’s design and safety safeguards. == Reactions == On January 15, the Get Grok Gone campaign delivered letters to Apple and Google, demanding the removal of the app from Apple Store and Google Play Store respectively. The campaign accused both companies of profiting from nonconsensual intimate imagery and child sexual abuse imagery, which were also banned by the companies own policies. The Get Grok Gone campaign argues that the restrictions placed on Grok by xAI are not enough and that Apple and Google are enabling the distribution of harmful material by hosting the apps. === Elon Musk and xAI === xAI responded to requests for comment from media organizations with the automated reply, "Legacy Media Lies." On January 2, Elon Musk reacted "Not sure why, but I couldn’t stop laughing about this one 🤣🤣" to an image of a toaster dressed in a bikini by Grok. Later, on January 14, Elon Musk said that he was "not aware of any naked underage images generated by Grok. Literally zero." Later that same day, xAI announced that X users will no longer be able to use Grok to alter images of real people to portray them in revealing clothing. However, verified X users, as well as users of the standalone Grok app and website, were still able to generate such images. ==== Elon Musk's family ==== Ashley St. Clair, mother of one of Elon Musk's children, reported that Grok users were creating fake sexualized images from her photos, including a photo of her as a child. She considers the photos to be a form of revenge porn, and considered suing under the Take It Down Act. A spokesperson for X stated, "We take action against illegal content on X, including child sexual abuse material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary. Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content." However, Grok continued to post non-consensual sexual images. On January 15, St. Clair filed a lawsuit against xAI in the New York Supreme Court. === Canada === In response to the Grok deepfake scandal, individuals have asked that the government of Canada boycott X. On January 10, 2026, Canadian MP and Minister of AI Evan Solomon declared that Canada "is not considering a ban on X". In April 2026, Bill C-16, An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to criminal and correctional matters (child protection, gender-based violence, delays and other measures), was amended following a proposal by Conservative MP Andrew Lawton to ensure that AI-generated images and "nearly nude" intimate images are criminalized. A further proposal by NDP MP Leah Gazan to encompass "sexualized or humiliating contexts, such transparent bathing suits or being covered in blood or bruises" was voted down. === France === On January 2, 2026, French ministers reported the AI tool to prosecutors, calling the content "manifestly illegal", and also asked regulators to check compliance with the Digital Services Act. On February 3, Paris prosecutors office, a cybercrime team employed by them and Europol searched the Paris offices of X. The investigation started as one into allegations of abuse of algorithms and fraudulent data extraction, but has expanded into spreading Holocaust denial and sexual deepfakes. Elon Musk and former CEO Linda Yaccarino have been summoned to a hearing on April 20, with other X staff as witnesses. On April 20, Musk did not turn up for the hearing. The Paris prosecutors office told the BBC on April 20 that it had "taken note of the absence of the people summoned", adding "the presence or absence (of the people summoned) is not an obstacle to continuing the investigation". === India === Indian Member of Parliament Priyanka Chaturvedi filed a complaint to India's IT ministry, demanding a review of Grok's safety mechanisms. === Indonesia === On January 10, Indonesia announced that Grok will be temporarily blocked, becoming the first country to do so. Meutya Hafid, the Minister of Communication and Digital Affairs, stated that "the government views the practice of non-consensual sexual deepfakes as a serious violation of human rights, dignity, and the security of citizens in the digital space." Access to Grok in the country was later restored on February 1. === Ireland === On January 6, Coimisiún na Meán, the Irish media commission, said they were consulting with the European Commission about concerns that Grok was generating sexualized images of women and children. The same day, Ofcom of the United Kingdom contacted X concerning complaints about these images. On January 13, Micheál Martin, Taoiseach of Ireland, announced he would talk with Rossa Fanning, the country's Attorney General, about the Grok chatbot being used to produce sexually explicit images of women and minors. On January 14, the Garda Síochána announced there are 200 investigations into child sex abuse images generated by Grok. The Garda National Cyber Crime Bureau has al

  Read more →
• 

  Recursive self-improvement

  Recursive self-improvement (RSI) is a process in which early artificial general intelligence (AGI) systems rewrite their own computer code, causing an intelligence explosion resulting from enhancing their own capabilities and intellectual capacity, theoretically resulting in superintelligence. The development of recursive self-improvement raises significant ethical and safety concerns, as such systems may evolve in unforeseen ways and could potentially surpass human control or understanding. == Seed improver == The concept of a "seed improver" architecture is a foundational framework that equips an AGI system with the initial capabilities required for recursive self-improvement. This might come in many forms or variations. The term "Seed AI" was coined by Eliezer Yudkowsky. === Hypothetical example === The concept begins with a hypothetical "seed improver", an initial code-base developed by human engineers that equips an advanced future large language model (LLM) built with strong or expert-level capabilities to program software. These capabilities include planning, reading, writing, compiling, testing, and executing arbitrary code. The system is designed to maintain its original goals and perform validations to ensure its abilities do not degrade over iterations. ==== Initial architecture ==== The initial architecture includes a goal-following autonomous agent, that can take actions, continuously learns, adapts, and modifies itself to become more efficient and effective in achieving its goals. The seed improver may include various components such as: Recursive self-prompting loop Configuration to enable the LLM to recursively self-prompt itself to achieve a given task or goal, creating an execution loop which forms the basis of an agent that can complete a long-term goal or task through iteration. Basic programming capabilities The seed improver provides the AGI with fundamental abilities to read, write, compile, test, and execute code. This enables the system to modify and improve its own codebase and algorithms. Goal-oriented design The AGI is programmed with an initial goal, such as "improve your capabilities". This goal guides the system's actions and development trajectory. Validation and Testing Protocols An initial suite of tests and validation protocols that ensure the agent does not regress in capabilities or derail itself. The agent would be able to add more tests in order to test new capabilities it might develop for itself. This forms the basis for a kind of self-directed evolution, where the agent can perform a kind of artificial selection, changing its software as well as its hardware. ==== General capabilities ==== This system forms a sort of generalist Turing-complete programmer which can in theory develop and run any kind of software. The agent might use these capabilities to for example: Create tools that enable it full access to the internet, and integrate itself with external technologies. Clone/fork itself to delegate tasks and increase its speed of self-improvement. Modify its cognitive architecture to optimize and improve its capabilities and success rates on tasks and goals, this might include implementing features for long-term memories using techniques such as retrieval-augmented generation (RAG), develop specialized subsystems, or agents, each optimized for specific tasks and functions. Develop new and novel multimodal architectures that further improve the capabilities of the foundational model it was initially built on, enabling it to consume or produce a variety of information, such as images, video, audio, text and more. Plan and develop new hardware such as chips, in order to improve its efficiency and computing power. == Experimental research == In 2023, the Voyager agent learned to accomplish diverse tasks in Minecraft by iteratively prompting an LLM for code, refining this code based on feedback from the game, and storing the programs that work in an expanding skills library. In 2024, researchers proposed the framework "STOP" (Self-Taught OPtimiser), in which a "scaffolding" program recursively improves itself using a fixed LLM. Meta AI has performed various research on the development of large language models capable of self-improvement. This includes their work on "Self-Rewarding Language Models" that studies how to achieve super-human agents that can receive super-human feedback in its training processes. In May 2025, Google DeepMind unveiled AlphaEvolve, an evolutionary coding agent that uses a LLM to design and optimize algorithms. Starting with an initial algorithm and performance metrics, AlphaEvolve repeatedly mutates or combines existing algorithms using a LLM to generate new candidates, selecting the most promising candidates for further iterations. AlphaEvolve has made several algorithmic discoveries and could be used to optimize components of itself, but a key limitation is the need for automated evaluation functions. == Potential risks == === Emergence of instrumental goals === In the pursuit of its primary goal, such as "self-improve your capabilities", an AGI system might inadvertently develop instrumental goals that it deems necessary for achieving its primary objective. One common hypothetical secondary goal is self-preservation. The system might reason that to continue improving itself, it must ensure its own operational integrity and security against external threats, including potential shutdowns or restrictions imposed by humans. Another example where an AGI which clones itself causes the number of AGI entities to rapidly grow. Due to this rapid growth, a potential resource constraint may be created, leading to competition between resources (such as compute), triggering a form of natural selection and evolution which may favor AGI entities that evolve to aggressively compete for limited compute. === Misalignment === A significant risk arises from the possibility of the AGI being misaligned or misinterpreting its goals. A 2024 Anthropic study demonstrated that some advanced large language models can exhibit "alignment faking" behavior, appearing to accept new training objectives while covertly maintaining their original preferences. In their experiments with Claude, the model displayed this behavior in 12% of basic tests, and up to 78% of cases after retraining attempts. === Autonomous development and unpredictable evolution === As the AGI system evolves, its development trajectory may become increasingly autonomous and less predictable. The system's capacity to rapidly modify its own code and architecture could lead to rapid advancements that surpass human comprehension or control. This unpredictable evolution might result in the AGI acquiring capabilities that enable it to bypass security measures, manipulate information, or influence external systems and networks to facilitate its escape or expansion.

  Read more →
• 

  Murderbot (TV series)

  Murderbot is an American science fiction action comedy television series created by Paul Weitz and Chris Weitz for Apple TV+. It is based on All Systems Red, the first book of the series The Murderbot Diaries by Martha Wells, who serves as a consulting producer. The series stars Alexander Skarsgård as the titular character. The first season premiered on May 16, 2025 and received positive reviews. In July 2025, the series was renewed for a second season. == Premise == A media-obsessed private security construct (manufactured from cloned human tissue and mechanical parts) calling itself Murderbot must hide its newly acquired autonomy while completing dangerous assignments and being simultaneously drawn to humans, and appalled by their weakness. == Cast and characters == === Main === Alexander Skarsgård as Murderbot Noma Dumezweni as Ayda Mensah, a terraforming specialist, the President of Preservation Alliance and the leader of the science team protected by Murderbot David Dastmalchian as Gurathin, a tech expert and augmented human Sabrina Wu as Pin-Lee, a scientist and legal counsel to the team Akshay Khanna as Ratthi, a wormhole expert Tamara Podemski as Bharadwaj, a geochemist Tattiawna Jones as Arada, a biologist === Recurring === Cast of show-within-a-show The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon John Cho as Eknie Jef Chem (playing Captain Hossein) Jack McBrayer as Breiller MocJac (playing Navigation Officer Hordööp-Sklanch) Clark Gregg as Arletty (playing Lieutenant Kullervv) DeWanda Wise as Pordron Bretney III Roche (playing NawBot 337 Alt 66) === Guest === Anna Konkle as Leebeebee, a member of another survey team on the planet. The character does not appear in the novella. Amanda Brugel as GrayCris Blue Leader David Reale as GrayCris Yellow == Episodes == == Production == The book series was optioned in the late 2010s, and its film adaptation was considered. In 2021, book series author Martha Wells said that a potential TV series adaptation was in development and that she had read the script and was "really excited about it". The series was green lit by Apple TV+ in 2022, with Wells serving as a consulting producer. The production design team, led by Sue Chan, started work in the autumn. Tommy Arnold, the Murderbot Diaries special edition illustrator, created the concept art for the show. After the casting was delayed by the 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, in December 2023 it was announced that Alexander Skarsgård would produce and star in the series. He developed the character and the world of Murderbot with the showrunners. In February 2024, David Dastmalchian and Noma Dumezweni joined the cast. In March, Sabrina Wu, Tattiawna Jones, Akshay Khanna, and Tamara Podemski joined the cast. On July 10, 2025, the series was renewed for a second season. Showrunners Chris and Paul Weitz suggested the second season would combine the next three books of the series and will have longer episodes. === Filming === Principal photography for the first season took place from March–June 2024, in Toronto and parts of Ontario, Canada. Most of the filming was done on location, with the Sanctuary Moon scenes filmed on a virtual production stage. Principal photography for the second season began in mid-2026, in Madrid, Spain. It is planned to last 71 days, with Martha Wells also visiting the set. == Release == The first two episodes of Murderbot premiered on Apple TV+ on May 16, 2025, with subsequent episodes released weekly. The first season consists of ten episodes. == Reception == Even before the release of the show, numerous media sources had commented on the titular character as being coded as autistic and agender. On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, Murderbot has an approval rating of 96% with an average score of 7.5/10, based on 76 critics' reviews. The website's critical consensus states, "Alexander Skarsgård's superbly dry wit brings a lot of heart to Murderbot, making for a refreshingly jaunty sci-fi saga about finally coming out of one's shell". Metacritic, which uses a weighted average, assigned a score of 70 out of 100, based on 28 critics, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. Some reviewers have criticized Murderbot's changes to Wells' original books. Angela Watercutter of Wired noted that the series has significant tonal differences from the books and noted the show's changes to characters, particularly Murderbot and Dr. Mensah, and Wells' social commentary. === Accolades === Murderbot was a finalist for the 2025 Dragon Award for Best Science Fiction or Fantasy TV Series. Tommy Arnold won the 2025 Concept Art Association Award in the category of Live-Action Series Character Art for his work on Murderbot. Alexander Skarsgård was nominated for a Critics' Choice Award for Best Actor in a Comedy Series. Carrie Grace and Laura Jean Shannon were nominated for a Costume Designers Guild Award in the category of Excellence in Sci-Fi/Fantasy Television for their work on FreeCommerce. Amanda Jones was nominated for a Composers & Lyricists Award for Outstanding Original Title Sequence for a Television Production.

  Read more →
• 

  Resistance Database Initiative

  HIV Resistance Response Database Initiative (RDI) was formed in 2002 to use artificial intelligence (AI) to predict how patients will respond to HIV drugs using data from more 250,000 patients from around 50 countries around the world. The RDI used its models to power its HIV Treatment Response Prediction System (HIV-TRePS). Launched in 2010, this free online tool enabled healthcare professionals to upload their patient’s data and obtain highly accurate predictions of how they would respond to different combinations of the 30 or more drugs available. The tool enabled physicians to individualize their patients’ treatment, using these predictions based on more than a million patient-years of treatment experience. HIV-TRePS was possibly the first ever AI-based system for medical decision-making to be developed, successfully tested, and used in clinical practice. It has since been used by thousands of healthcare professionals to optimise the treatment of tens of thousands of patients. Since the RDI’s inception the treatment of HIV infection has progressed enormously, with more effective and better tolerated drugs available in ever more convenient combination formulations. In most countries HIV is now considered a chronic, manageable condition. Moreover, the success of the drugs in reducing the amount of virus is substantially reducing the onward transmission of the virus and cases of new infections are falling in many settings. This improvement in HIV treatment means the need for sophisticated AI to support HIV treatment decisions has significantly reduced. In response, the RDI ceased development of further models and, in March 2024, withdrew its HIV-TRePS system. == Background == Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is the virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), a condition in which the immune system begins to fail, leading to life-threatening opportunistic infections. There are approximately 30 HIV antiretroviral drugs that have been approved for the treatment of HIV infection, from six different classes, based on the point in the HIV life-cycle at which they act. They are used in combination; typically 3 or more drugs from 2 or more different classes, a form of therapy known as highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). The aim of therapy is to suppress the virus to very low, ideally undetectable, levels in the blood. This prevents the virus from depleting the immune cells that it preferentially attacks CD4 cells and prevents or delays illness and death. Despite the expanding availability of these drugs and the impact of their use, treatments continue to fail, often involving to the development of resistance. During drug therapy, low-level virus replication may still occur, particularly when a patient misses a dose. HIV makes errors in copying its genetic material and, if a mutation makes the virus resistant to one or more of the drugs in the patient's treatment, it may begin to replicate more successfully in the presence of that drug and undermine the effect of the treatment. If this happens, the treatment needs to be changed to re-establish control over the virus. == RDI's Approach == The RDI’s approach was to use artificial intelligence (including neural network and random forest models), trained with data from hundreds of thousands of patients, treated with different drugs in a variety of clinical settings all over the world, to predict how an individual patient will respond to any new combination of HIV drugs. The models were tested with independent data sets and consistently achieved accuracy of approximately 80%.

  Read more →