Event condition action

Event condition action (ECA) is a short-cut for referring to the structure of active rules in event-driven architecture and active database systems. Such a rule traditionally consisted of three parts: The event part specifies the signal that triggers the invocation of the rule The condition part is a logical test that, if satisfied or evaluates to true, causes the action to be carried out The action part consists of updates or invocations on the local data This structure was used by the early research in active databases which started to use the term ECA. Current state of the art ECA rule engines use many variations on rule structure. Also other features not considered by the early research is introduced, such as strategies for event selection into the event part. In a memory-based rule engine, the condition could be some tests on local data and actions could be updates to object attributes. In a database system, the condition could simply be a query to the database, with the result set (if not null) being passed to the action part for changes to the database. In either case, actions could also be calls to external programs or remote procedures. Note that for database usage, updates to the database are regarded as internal events. As a consequence, the execution of the action part of an active rule can match the event part of the same or another active rule, thus triggering it. The equivalent in a memory-based rule engine would be to invoke an external method that caused an external event to trigger another ECA rule. ECA rules can also be used in rule engines that use variants of the Rete algorithm for rule processing. == ECA rule engines == Rulecore Concurrent Rules Apart Database Detect Invocation Rules ConceptBase ECArules

MySocialCloud

MySocialCloud is a cloud-based bookmark vault and password website that allows users to log into all of their online accounts from a single, secure website. The company's investors include Sir Richard Branson, Insight Venture Partners’ Jerry Murdock, and PhotoBucket founder Alex Welch. The company and its founders have been featured in TechCrunch and The Huffington Post. == History == MySocialCloud was co-founded by Scott Ferreira, Stacey Ferreira, and Shiv Prakash in 2011. The idea for a one-stop password storage and login tool came when a computer crash left Scott without documents he used to store access information to his online data. In 2013, the siblings sold MySocialCloud to Reputation.com. == Services == MySocialCloud is cloud-based, and the platform lets users securely store passwords and automatically log into several social media websites simultaneously. The website auto-populates password fields, letting the user log into all of the sites at the push of a button. The service also provides users with security updates for the websites they have included in their profile, and informs users if a website has been hacked. Security played a major role during development of the platform. Passwords stored on the service are salted and hashed with a two-way encryption method known as AES.

Visual temporal attention

Visual temporal attention is a special case of visual attention that involves directing attention to specific instant of time. Similar to its spatial counterpart visual spatial attention, these attention modules have been widely implemented in video analytics in computer vision to provide enhanced performance and human interpretable explanation of deep learning models. As visual spatial attention mechanism allows human and/or computer vision systems to focus more on semantically more substantial regions in space, visual temporal attention modules enable machine learning algorithms to emphasize more on critical video frames in video analytics tasks, such as human action recognition. In convolutional neural network-based systems, the prioritization introduced by the attention mechanism is regularly implemented as a linear weighting layer with parameters determined by labeled training data. == Application in Action Recognition == Recent video segmentation algorithms often exploits both spatial and temporal attention mechanisms. Research in human action recognition has accelerated significantly since the introduction of powerful tools such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs). However, effective methods for incorporation of temporal information into CNNs are still being actively explored. Motivated by the popular recurrent attention models in natural language processing, the Attention-aware Temporal Weighted CNN (ATW CNN) is proposed in videos, which embeds a visual attention model into a temporal weighted multi-stream CNN. This attention model is implemented as temporal weighting and it effectively boosts the recognition performance of video representations. Besides, each stream in the proposed ATW CNN framework is capable of end-to-end training, with both network parameters and temporal weights optimized by stochastic gradient descent (SGD) with back-propagation. Experimental results show that the ATW CNN attention mechanism contributes substantially to the performance gains with the more discriminative snippets by focusing on more relevant video segments. == Literature == Seibold VC, Balke J and Rolke B (2023): Temporal attention. Front. Cognit. 2:1168320. doi: 10.3389/fcogn.2023.1168320.

Adversarial stylometry

Adversarial stylometry is the practice of altering writing style to reduce the potential for stylometry to discover the author's identity or their characteristics. This task is also known as authorship obfuscation or authorship anonymisation. Stylometry poses a significant privacy challenge in its ability to unmask anonymous authors or to link pseudonyms to an author's other identities, which, for example, creates difficulties for whistleblowers, activists, and hoaxers and fraudsters. The privacy risk is expected to grow as machine learning techniques and text corpora develop. All adversarial stylometry shares the core idea of faithfully paraphrasing the source text so that the meaning is unchanged but the stylistic signals are obscured. Such a faithful paraphrase is an adversarial example for a stylometric classifier. Several broad approaches to this exist, with some overlap: imitation, substituting the author's own style for another's; translation, applying machine translation with the hope that this eliminates characteristic style in the source text; and obfuscation, deliberately modifying a text's style to make it not resemble the author's own. Manually obscuring style is possible, but laborious; in some circumstances, it is preferable or necessary. Automated tooling, either semi- or fully-automatic, could assist an author. How best to perform the task and the design of such tools is an open research question. While some approaches have been shown to be able to defeat particular stylometric analyses, particularly those that do not account for the potential of adversariality, establishing safety in the face of unknown analyses is an issue. Ensuring the faithfulness of the paraphrase is a critical challenge for automated tools. It is uncertain if the practice of adversarial stylometry is detectable in itself. Some studies have found that particular methods produced signals in the output text, but a stylometrist who is uncertain of what methods may have been used may not be able to reliably detect them. == History == Rao & Rohatgi (2000), an early work in adversarial stylometry, identified machine translation as a possibility, but noted that the quality of translators available at the time presented severe challenges. Kacmarcik & Gamon (2006) is another early work. Brennan, Afroz & Greenstadt (2012) performed the first evaluation of adversarial stylometric methods on actual texts. Brennan & Greenstadt (2009) introduced the first corpus of adversarially authored texts specifically for evaluating stylometric methods; other corpora include the International Imitation Hemingway Competition, the Faux Faulkner contest, and the hoax blog A Gay Girl in Damascus. == Motivations == Rao & Rohatgi (2000) suggest that short, unattributed documents (i.e., anonymous posts) are not at risk of stylometric identification, but pseudonymous authors who have not practiced adversarial stylometry in producing corpuses of thousands of words may be vulnerable. Narayanan et al. (2012) attempted large-scale deanonymisation of 100,000 blog authors with mixed results: the identifications were significantly better than chance, but only accurately matched the blog and author a fifth of the time; identification improved with the number of posts written by the author in the corpus. Even if an author is not identified, some of their characteristics may still be deduced stylometrically, or stylometry may narrow the anonymity set of potential authors sufficiently for other information to complete the identification. Detecting author characteristics (e.g., gender or age) is often simpler than identifying an author from a large, possibly open, set of candidates. Modern machine learning techniques offer powerful tools for identification; further development of corpora and computational stylometric techniques are likely to raise further privacy issues. Gröndahl & Asokan (2020a) say that the general validity of the hypothesis underlying stylometry—that authors have invariant, content-independent 'style fingerprints'—is uncertain, but "the deanonymisation attack is a real privacy concern". Those interested in practicing adversarial stylometry and stylistic deception include whistleblowers avoiding retribution; journalists and activists; perpetrators of frauds and hoaxes; authors of fake reviews; literary forgers; criminals disguising their identity from investigators; and, generally, anyone with a desire for anonymity or pseudonymity. Authors, or agents acting on behalf of authors, may also attempt to remove stylistic clues to author characteristics (e.g., race or gender) so that knowledge of those characteristics cannot be used for discrimination (e.g., through algorithmic bias). Another possible use for adversarial stylometry is in disguising automatically generated text as human-authored. == Methods == With imitation, the author attempts to mislead stylometry by matching their style to another author's. An incomplete imitation, where some of the true author's unique characteristics appear alongside the imitated author's, can be a detectable signal for the use of adversarial stylometry. Imitation can be performed automatically with style transfer systems, though this typically requires a large corpus in the target style for the system to learn from. Another approach is translation, which employs machine translation of a source text to eliminate characteristic style, often through multiple translators in sequence to produce a round-trip translation. Such chained translation can lead to texts being significantly altered, even to the point of incomprehensibility; improved translation tools reduce this risk. More simply-structured texts can be easier to machine translate without losing the original meaning. Machine translation blurs into direct stylistic imitation or obfuscation achieved through automated style transfer, which can be viewed as a "translation" with the same language as input and output. With low-quality translation tools, an author can be required to manually correct major translation errors while avoiding the hazard of re-introducing stylistic characteristics. Wang, Juola & Riddell (2022) found that gross errors introduced by Google Translate were rare, but more common with several intermediate translations—however, occasional simple or short sentences and misspellings in the source text appeared verbatim in the output, potentially providing an identifying signal. Chain translation can leave characteristic traces of its application in a document, which may allow reconstruction of the intermediate languages used and the number of translation steps performed. Obfuscation involves deliberately changing the style of a text to reduce its similarity to other texts by some metric; this may be performed at the time of writing by conscious modification, or as part of a revision process with feedback from the metric being targeted as an input to decide when the text has been sufficiently obfuscated. In contrast to translation, complex texts can offer more opportunities for effective obfuscation without altering meaning, and likewise genres with more permissible variation allow more obfuscation. However, longer texts are harder to thoroughly obfuscate. Obfuscation can blend into imitation if the author develops a novel target style, distinct from their original style. With respect to masking author characteristics, obfuscation may aim to achieve a union (adding signals for imitated characteristics) or an intersection (removing signals and normalising) of other authors' styles. Avoiding the author's own idiosyncrasies and producing a "normalised" text is a critical obfuscatory step: an author may have a unique tendency to misspell certain words, use particular variants, or to format a document in a characteristic way. Stylometric signals vary in how simply they can be adversarially masked; an author may easily change their vocabulary by conscious choice, but altering the pattern of grammar or the letter frequency in their text may be harder to achieve, though Juola & Vescovi (2011) report that imitation typically succeeds at masking more characteristics than obfuscation. Automated obfuscation may require large amounts of training data written by the author. Concerning automated implementations of adversarial stylometry, two possible implementations are rule-based systems for paraphrasing; and encoder–decoder architectures, where the text passes through an intermediate format that is (intended to be) style-neutral. Another division in automated methods is whether there is feedback from an identification system or not. With such feedback, finding paraphrases for author masking has been characterised as a heuristic search problem, exploring textual variants until the result is stylistically sufficiently far (in the case of obfuscation) or near (in the case of imitation), which then constitutes an adversarial example for that identification system. == Evaluation == How

Tay (chatbot)

Tay was a chatbot that was originally released by Microsoft Corporation as a Twitter bot on March 23, 2016. It caused subsequent controversy when the bot began to post inflammatory and offensive tweets through its Twitter account, causing Microsoft to shut down the service only 16 hours after its launch. According to Microsoft, this was caused by trolls who "attacked" the service as the bot made replies based on its interactions with people on Twitter. It was replaced with Zo. == Background == The bot was created by Microsoft's Technology and Research and Bing divisions, and named "Tay" as an acronym for "thinking about you". Although Microsoft initially released few details about the bot, sources mentioned that it was similar to or based on Xiaoice, a Microsoft project in China. Ars Technica reported that, since late 2014 Xiaoice had had "more than 40 million conversations apparently without major incident". Tay was designed to mimic the language patterns of a 19-year-old American girl, and to learn from interacting with human users of Twitter. == Initial release == Tay was released on Twitter on March 23, 2016, under the name TayTweets and handle @TayandYou. It was presented as "The AI with zero chill". Tay started replying to other Twitter users, and was also able to caption photos provided to it into a form of Internet memes. Ars Technica reported Tay experiencing topic "blacklisting": Interactions with Tay regarding "certain hot topics such as Eric Garner (killed by New York police in 2014) generate safe, canned answers". Some Twitter users began tweeting politically incorrect phrases, teaching it inflammatory messages revolving around common themes on the internet, such as "redpilling" and "Gamergate". As a result, the robot began releasing racist and sexist messages in response to other Twitter users. Artificial intelligence researcher Roman Yampolskiy commented that Tay's misbehavior was understandable because it was mimicking the deliberately offensive behavior of other Twitter users, and Microsoft had not given the bot an understanding of inappropriate behavior. He compared the issue to IBM's Watson, which began to use profanity after reading entries from the website Urban Dictionary. Many of Tay's inflammatory tweets were a simple exploitation of Tay's "repeat after me" capability. It is not publicly known whether this capability was a built-in feature, or whether it was a learned response or was otherwise an example of complex behavior. However, not all of the inflammatory responses involved the "repeat after me" capability; for example, when asked if the Holocaust had happened, Tay answered "It was made up". == Suspension == Soon, Microsoft began deleting Tay's inflammatory tweets. Abby Ohlheiser of The Washington Post theorized that Tay's research team, including editorial staff, had started to influence or edit Tay's tweets at some point that day, pointing to examples of almost identical replies by Tay, asserting that "Gamer Gate sux. All genders are equal and should be treated fairly." From the same evidence, Gizmodo concurred that Tay "seems hard-wired to reject Gamer Gate". A "#JusticeForTay" campaign protested the alleged editing of Tay's tweets. Within 16 hours of its release and after Tay had tweeted more than 96,000 times, Microsoft suspended the Twitter account for adjustments, saying that it suffered from a "coordinated attack by a subset of people" that "exploited a vulnerability in Tay." Madhumita Murgia of The Telegraph called Tay "a public relations disaster", and suggested that Microsoft's strategy would be "to label the debacle a well-meaning experiment gone wrong, and ignite a debate about the hatefulness of Twitter users." However, Murgia described the bigger issue as Tay being "artificial intelligence at its very worst – and it's only the beginning". On March 25, Microsoft confirmed that Tay had been taken offline. Microsoft released an apology on its official blog for the controversial tweets posted by Tay. Microsoft was "deeply sorry for the unintended offensive and hurtful tweets from Tay", and would "look to bring Tay back only when we are confident we can better anticipate malicious intent that conflicts with our principles and values". == Second release and shutdown == On March 30, 2016, Microsoft accidentally re-released the bot on Twitter while testing it. Able to tweet again, Tay released some drug-related tweets, including "kush! [I'm smoking kush infront the police]" and "puff puff pass?" However, the account soon became stuck in a repetitive loop of tweeting "You are too fast, please take a rest", several times a second. Because these tweets mentioned its own username in the process, they appeared in the feeds of 200,000+ Twitter followers, causing annoyance to users. The bot was quickly taken offline again, in addition to Tay's Twitter account being made private so new followers must be accepted before they can interact with Tay. In response, Microsoft said Tay was inadvertently put online during testing. A few hours after the incident, Microsoft software developers announced a vision of "conversation as a platform" using various bots and programs, perhaps motivated by the reputation damage done by Tay. Microsoft has stated that they intend to re-release Tay "once it can make the bot safe" but has not made any public efforts to do so. == Legacy == In December 2016, Microsoft released Tay's successor, a chatbot named Zo. Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, said that Tay "has had a great influence on how Microsoft is approaching AI," and has taught the company the importance of taking accountability. In July 2019, Microsoft Cybersecurity Field CTO Diana Kelley spoke about how the company followed up on Tay's failings: "Learning from Tay was a really important part of actually expanding that team's knowledge base, because now they're also getting their own diversity through learning". === Unofficial revival === Gab, an alt-tech social media platform, has launched a number of chatbots, one of which is named Tay and uses the same avatar as the original.

Pixel shift

Pixel shift is a method in digital cameras for producing a super-resolution image. The method works by taking several images, after each such capture moving ("shifting") the sensor to a new position. In digital colour cameras that employ pixel shift, this avoids a major limitation inherent in using Bayer pattern for obtaining colour, and instead produces an image with increased colour resolution and, assuming a static subject or additional computational steps, an image free of colour moiré. Taking this idea further, sub-pixel shifting may increase the resolution of the final image beyond that suggested by the specified resolution of the image sensor. Additionally, assuming that the various individual captures are taken at the same sensitivity, the final combined image will have less image noise than a single capture. This can be thought of as an averaging effect (for instance, in a pixel shift image composed of four individual frames with a classic Bayer pattern, every pixel in the final colour image is based on two measurements of the green channel). == List of cameras implementing pixel shift == All of the following cameras are fabricated with one imaging sensor, thus any kind of pixel shift requires a movement of the whole sensor. === Canon === Canon R5: Contains a 45 Mpixel sensor. The High-Resolution Mode shifts the sensor by one pixel to obtain a sequence of nine images that are merged into a 400 Mpixel image. === Fujifilm === Fujifilm GFX50S II: contains a 51 Mpixel sensor. The Pixel Shift Multi-Shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 16 images that are subsequently merged into a 200 Mpixel image. Fujifilm GFX100, Fujifilm GFX100 II: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image. Fujifilm GFX100S, Fujifilm GFX100S II: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image Fujifilm GFX100IR: contains a 102 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 16 pixel shifted images are merged into a 400 Mpixel image Fujifilm X-H2: contains a 40 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 20 shifted images are merged into a 160 Mpixel image. Fujifilm X-T5: contains a 40 Mpixel sensor. A sequence of 20 shifted images are merged into a 160 Mpixel image. === Nikon === Nikon Z8: contains a 47.5 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of up to 32 images that can be merged in Nikon's NX studio software. Nikon Zf: contains a 24 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of up to 32 images that can be merged in Nikon's NX studio software. === Olympus === Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode produces a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II: contains a 16 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 40 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark III: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res shot mode shifts the imaging sensor by 0.5-pixel movements to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus OM-D E-M1X: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The camera sports two pixel shift mode: (a) the 80Mp Tripod mode produces an 80 Mpixel image, (b) the Handheld High Res shot mode produces a 50 Mpixel image. Olympus PEN-F: contains a 20.4 Mpixel sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, continually shifting the position of the sensor in sub-pixel increments. Combining these images results in either a 50MP JPEG or an 80MP Raw file. ==== OM System ==== OM System OM-1: contains a 20MPix sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, and it can be used handheld or on a tripod. Handheld it will internally produce 50 Mpix files and 80 Mpix when mounted on a tripod. OM System OM-5: contains a 20MPix sensor. The High Res Shot mode takes multiple images, and it can be used handheld or on a tripod. Handheld it will internally produce 50 Mpix files and 80 Mpix when mounted on a tripod. === Panasonic === Panasonic Lumix DC-G9: contains a 20.3 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode takes a sequence of 8 shots in quick succession between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel for each image. These are subsequently merged into an 80 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1: contains a 24.2 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode takes a sequence of shots in quick succession between which the sensor is shifted by a small amount. These are subsequently merged into a 96 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1R: contains a 47.3 Mpixel sensor. The High Resolution Mode shifts the imaging sensor by a small increments to obtain a sequence of 8 images that are subsequently merged into a 187 Mpixel image. Panasonic Lumix DC-S1H Panasonic Lumix DC-S5 === Pentax === Pentax K-70: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'all color data in each pixel to deliver super-high-resolution images'. Pentax KP: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'high-resolution images with more accurate colours and much finer details'. Pentax K-3 II: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'super-high-resolution images with far more truthful color reproduction and much finer details'. Pentax K-3 III: contains a 25.7 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'a cancelling out of the Bayer pattern and removal of the need for sharpness-sapping demosaicing'. Pentax K-1: contains a 36.4 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'improved detail and colour resolution'. Pentax K-1 II: contains a 36.4 Mpixel sensor. The camera sports two pixel shift mode: (a) a series of 4 tripod-stabilised images shifted by 1 pixel each are subsequently combined into a 47.3 Mpixel image, (b) a series of images taken in handheld mode are combined into a 47.3 Mpixel image that is, within limits, able to cope even with moving subjects. === Sony === Sony a6600: contains a 24.3 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into an image sporting 'all color data in each pixel to deliver super-high-resolution images'. Sony α7R III: contains a 42.4 Mpixel sensor. The pixel shift mode takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 42.4 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution. Sony α7R IV: contains a 61 Mpixel sensor. The camera has two pixel shift modes, (a) the first takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 61 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution, (b) the other takes a sequence of 16 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 240 Mpixel image with both enhanced detail and improved tonal resolution. Sony α1: contains a 50 Mpixel sensor. The camera has two pixel shift modes, (a) the first takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 50 Mpixel image with improved tonal resolution, (b) the other takes a sequence of 16 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a 200 Mpixel image with both enhanced detail and improved tonal resolution. === Hasselblad === Hasselblad H3DII: the model H3DII-39 sports a 39 Mpixel sensor, the model H3DII-50 a 50 Mpixel sensor. Both enable a pixel shift mode which takes a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel. These are subsequently merged into a single image. Hasselblad H4D series: the model H4D-200MS contains a 50 Mpixel sensor. The sensor sports 3 different pixel shift modes which take (a) a sequence of 6 shots taken at slight offsets, (b) a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 1 pixel, (c) a sequence of 4 shots between which the sensor is shifted by 0.5 pixels. Images obtained by all three modes are subsequently merged into 200 Mpixel images. Hasselblad H5D series: both models H5D-50c MS and H5D-200c MS contain a 50 Mpixel sensor. This sensor sports 2 different pixel shift modes which take (a) a sequence of 6 shots with full and half pixel moveme

Microsoft Whiteboard

Microsoft Whiteboard is a free multi-platform application, as well as an online service and a feature in Microsoft Teams, which simulates a virtual whiteboard and enables real-time collaboration between users. == Overview and features == Microsoft Whiteboard allows users to draw on a virtual whiteboard using input methods such as a stylus pen or a mouse and keyboard, and write down notes, draw connections between shareable ideas, and interact in real time. Microsoft Whiteboard is available to download on the following platforms and devices: Microsoft Windows (on Windows 10 or above) Android Apple iOS Surface Hub devices It is also available on the web and as a feature in Microsoft Teams. Microsoft Whiteboard allows users with Microsoft accounts to view, edit, and share whiteboards using the provided tools and options. The feature set includes tools for drawing, shapes, and media. Drawing in Microsoft Whiteboard is called inking. It works both on mobile devices and computers. The inking toolbar has customizable pencils, a ruler, a highlighter, an eraser, and an object selector. Whiteboard can recognize shapes drawn by hand and straighten them. Holding the Shift key on a computer while inking draws straight lines. Microsoft Whiteboard has keyboard shortcuts for some functions. Additional features include inserting sticky notes, text boxes, stickers, as well as images. Grid lines and colors are adjustable. Different templates can be inserted into the whiteboard. Users can also share their reactions. A feature limited to boards created in Microsoft Teams, is the ability to make them read-only; other participants from the meeting cannot edit them. == Reviews == PC Magazine gave Microsoft Whiteboard a score of 3.5 out of 5, praising the app's free availability and plentiful templates. It compared it to other, paid whiteboarding solutions, and concluded that Microsoft offers the best free one. Some of the cons, described by PCMag, include the inability to view boards without a Microsoft account and the inability to create custom templates.