Blue check

A blue check is used on social media platforms, notably X (formerly known as Twitter), to indicate the authenticity of an account. Since November 2022, Twitter users whose accounts are at least 90 days old and have a verified phone number receive verification upon subscribing to X Premium or Verified Organizations; this status persists as long as the subscription remains active. When introduced in June 2009, the system provided the site's readers with a means to distinguish genuine notable account holders, such as celebrities and organizations, from impostors or parodies. Until November 2022, a blue checkmark displayed against an account name indicated that Twitter had taken steps to ensure that the account was actually owned by the person or organization whom it claimed to represent. The checkmark does not imply endorsement from Twitter, and does not mean that tweets from a verified account are necessarily accurate or truthful in any way. People with verified accounts on Twitter are often colloquially referred to as "blue checks" on social media and by reporters. In November 2022, the verification program was modified heavily by new owner Elon Musk, extending verification to any account with a verified phone number and an active subscription to an eligible X Premium (formerly Twitter Blue) plan. These changes faced criticism from users and the media, who believed that the changes would ease impersonation, and allow accounts spreading misleading information to feign credibility. In a related change, Twitter introduced additional gold and gray checkmarks, used by Verified Organizations and government-affiliated accounts, respectively. Twitter claims that the changes to verification are required to "reduce fraudulent accounts and bots". Twitter users who had been verified through the previous system were known as "legacy verified" accounts; legacy verification was deprecated in April 2023, and stripped from accounts who do not meet the new payment requirements. Musk later implied that he had been personally paying for the X Premium subscriptions of several notable celebrities. == Until November 2022 == In June 2009, after being criticized by Kanye West and sued by Tony La Russa over unauthorized accounts run by impersonators, the company launched their "Verified Accounts" program. Twitter stated that an account with a "blue tick" verification badge indicates "we've been in contact with the person or entity the account is representing and verified that it is approved". After the beta period, the company stated in their FAQ that it "proactively verifies accounts on an ongoing basis to make it easier for users to find who they're looking for" and that they "do not accept requests for verification from the general public". Originally, Twitter took on the responsibility of reaching out to celebrities and other notable people to confirm their identities in order to establish a verified account. In July 2016, Twitter announced a public application process to grant verified status to an account "if it is determined to be of public interest" and that verification "does not imply an endorsement". In 2016, the company began accepting requests for verification, but it was discontinued the same year. Twitter explained that the volume of requests for verified accounts had exceeded its ability to cope; rather, Twitter determines on its own whom to approach about verified accounts, limiting verification to accounts which are "authentic, notable, and active". In November 2020, Twitter announced a relaunch of its verification system in 2021. According to the new policy, Twitter verifies six different types of accounts; for three of them (companies, brands, and influential individuals like activists), the existence of a Wikipedia page will be one criterion for showing that the account has "Off Twitter Notability". === Controversy === On June 21, 2014, actor William Shatner raised an issue with several Engadget editorial staff and their verification status on Twitter. Besides the site's social media editor, John Colucci, Shatner also targeted several junior members of the staff for being "nobodies", unlike some of his actor colleagues who did not bear such distinction. Shatner claimed Colucci and the team were bullying him when giving a text interview to Mashable. Over a month later, Shatner continued to discuss the issue on his Tumblr page, to which Engadget replied by defending its team and discussing the controversy surrounding the social media verification. Twitter's practice and process for verifying accounts came under scrutiny again in 2017 after the company verified the account of white supremacist and far-right political activist, Jason Kessler. Many who criticized Twitter's decision to verify Kessler's account saw this as a political act on the company's behalf. In response, Twitter put its verification process on hold. The company tweeted, "Verification was meant to authenticate identity & voice but it is interpreted as an endorsement or an indicator of importance. We recognize that we have created this confusion and need to resolve it. We have paused all general verifications while we work and will report back soon." As of November 2017, Twitter continued to deny verification of Julian Assange's account following his requests. In November 2019, Dalit activists of India alleged that higher-caste people get Twitter verification easily and trended hashtags #CancelAllBlueTicksInIndia and #CasteistTwitter. Critics have said that the company's verification process is not transparent and causes digital marginalisation of already marginalised communities. Twitter India rejected the allegations, calling them "impartial" and working on a "case-by-case" policy. == Since November 2022 == On April 20, 2023, Twitter (known as X since July 2023) began removing verification status for users of public interest, causing a controversy among Twitter users. The website's system was altered, allowing any individual to receive verification for a monthly fee, an act which saw significant criticism. Following the acquisition of Twitter by Elon Musk on October 28, 2022, Musk told Twitter employees to introduce paid verification by November 7 through Twitter Blue. The Verge reported that the updated Blue subscription would cost $19.99 per month, and users would lose their verification status if they did not join within 90 days. Following backlash, Musk tweeted, in response to author Stephen King, a lowered $8 price on November 1, 2022. Twitter confirmed the new price of $7.99 per month on November 5, 2022. The new verification system began rollout on November 9, 2022, a day after the 2022 United States elections. The decision to delay its rollout was to address concerns about users potentially spreading misinformation about voting results by posing as news outlets and lawmakers. At the same time, Twitter introduced a secondary gray "Official" label on some high-profile accounts, but removed them hours after launch. Less than 48 hours later, Twitter reinstated the gray "Official" label, after multiple users were suspended for deliberately impersonating reporters and high-profile athletes like LeBron James. A viral tweet from an account purporting to be the pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly and Company caused the company's stock to fall after announcing "insulin is free now". As a result, Twitter disabled new Blue subscriptions on November 11, 2022. === Announcement === In October 2022, Casey Newton of Platformer reported that executives at Twitter began discussing the possibility of users being forced to pay for Twitter Blue in order to keep their verification status. Musk publicly announced that verification was "being revamped right now" after Newton's article; according to The Verge, Twitter planned to increase the price of Twitter Blue from US$4.99 per month to US$19.99 per month. Users would have had 90 days to subscribe or face losing their verification status, and employees were told to implement paid verification by November 9 or risk getting fired. Upon the news that Twitter Blue would cost US$19.99 per month, author Stephen King expressed displeasure towards Twitter and stated that he would leave. Musk, replying to King's tweet, proposed that the service should cost US$7.99 instead. In a separate tweet, Musk wrote that Twitter Blue subscribers would receive priority in replies, mentions, and search, fewer advertisements, and longer audio and video. Although paid verification was expected to be launched by November 7, the reintroduction of Twitter Blue was delayed until after the 2022 United States elections on November 9, according to a memo obtained by The New York Times. The announcement of paid verification resulted in several accounts facetiously impersonating Musk, such as those of comedians Kathy Griffin and Sarah Silverman, being suspended. In response, Musk announced that impersonators using Twitter Blue "will be permanently suspended". An "official

Gödel machine

A Gödel machine is a hypothetical self-improving computer program that solves problems in an optimal way. It uses a recursive self-improvement protocol in which it rewrites its own code when it can prove the new code provides a better strategy. The machine was invented by Jürgen Schmidhuber (first proposed in 2003), but is named after Kurt Gödel who inspired the mathematical theories. The Gödel machine is often discussed when dealing with issues of meta-learning, also known as "learning to learn." Applications include automating human design decisions and transfer of knowledge between multiple related tasks, and may lead to design of more robust and general learning architectures. Though theoretically possible, no full implementation has been created. The Gödel machine is often compared with Marcus Hutter's AIXI, another formal specification for an artificial general intelligence. Schmidhuber points out that the Gödel machine could start out by implementing AIXItl as its initial sub-program, and self-modify after it finds proof that another algorithm for its search code will be better. == Limitations == Traditional problems solved by a computer only require one input and provide some output. Computers of this sort had their initial algorithm hardwired. This does not take into account the dynamic natural environment, and thus was a goal for the Gödel machine to overcome. The Gödel machine has limitations of its own, however. According to Gödel's First Incompleteness Theorem, any formal system that encompasses arithmetic is either flawed or allows for statements that cannot be proved in the system. Hence even a Gödel machine with unlimited computational resources must ignore those self-improvements whose effectiveness it cannot prove. == Variables of interest == There are three variables that are particularly useful in the run time of the Gödel machine. At some time t {\displaystyle t} , the variable time {\displaystyle {\text{time}}} will have the binary equivalent of t {\displaystyle t} . This is incremented steadily throughout the run time of the machine. Any input meant for the Gödel machine from the natural environment is stored in variable x {\displaystyle x} . It is likely the case that x {\displaystyle x} will hold different values for different values of variable time {\displaystyle {\text{time}}} . The outputs of the Gödel machine are stored in variable y {\displaystyle y} , where y ( t ) {\displaystyle y(t)} would be the output bit-string at some time t {\displaystyle t} . At any given time t {\displaystyle t} , where ( 1 ≤ t ≤ T ) {\displaystyle (1\leq t\leq T)} , the goal is to maximize future success or utility. A typical utility function follows the pattern u ( s , E n v ) : S × E → R {\displaystyle u(s,\mathrm {Env} ):S\times E\rightarrow \mathbb {R} } : u ( s , E n v ) = E μ [ ∑ τ = time T r ( τ ) ∣ s , E n v ] {\displaystyle u(s,\mathrm {Env} )=E_{\mu }{\Bigg [}\sum _{\tau ={\text{time}}}^{T}r(\tau )\mid s,\mathrm {Env} {\Bigg ]}} where r ( t ) {\displaystyle r(t)} is a real-valued reward input (encoded within s ( t ) {\displaystyle s(t)} ) at time t {\displaystyle t} , E μ [ ⋅ ∣ ⋅ ] {\displaystyle E_{\mu }[\cdot \mid \cdot ]} denotes the conditional expectation operator with respect to some possibly unknown distribution μ {\displaystyle \mu } from a set M {\displaystyle M} of possible distributions ( M {\displaystyle M} reflects whatever is known about the possibly probabilistic reactions of the environment), and the above-mentioned time = time ⁡ ( s ) {\displaystyle {\text{time}}=\operatorname {time} (s)} is a function of state s {\displaystyle s} which uniquely identifies the current cycle. Note that we take into account the possibility of extending the expected lifespan through appropriate actions. == Instructions used by proof techniques == The nature of the six proof-modifying instructions below makes it impossible to insert an incorrect theorem into proof, thus trivializing proof verification. === get-axiom(n) === Appends the n-th axiom as a theorem to the current theorem sequence. Below is the initial axiom scheme: Hardware Axioms formally specify how components of the machine could change from one cycle to the next. Reward Axioms define the computational cost of hardware instruction and the physical cost of output actions. Related Axioms also define the lifetime of the Gödel machine as scalar quantities representing all rewards/costs. Environment Axioms restrict the way new inputs x are produced from the environment, based on previous sequences of inputs y. Uncertainty Axioms/String Manipulation Axioms are standard axioms for arithmetic, calculus, probability theory, and string manipulation that allow for the construction of proofs related to future variable values within the Gödel machine. Initial State Axioms contain information about how to reconstruct parts or all of the initial state. Utility Axioms describe the overall goal in the form of utility function u. === apply-rule(k, m, n) === Takes in the index k of an inference rule (such as Modus tollens, Modus ponens), and attempts to apply it to the two previously proved theorems m and n. The resulting theorem is then added to the proof. === delete-theorem(m) === Deletes the theorem stored at index m in the current proof. This helps to mitigate storage constraints caused by redundant and unnecessary theorems. Deleted theorems can no longer be referenced by the above apply-rule function. === set-switchprog(m, n) === Replaces switchprog S pm:n, provided it is a non-empty substring of S p. === check() === Verifies whether the goal of the proof search has been reached. A target theorem states that given the current axiomatized utility function u (Item 1f), the utility of a switch from p to the current switchprog would be higher than the utility of continuing the execution of p (which would keep searching for alternative switchprogs). === state2theorem(m, n) === Takes in two arguments, m and n, and attempts to convert the contents of Sm:n into a theorem. == Example applications == === Time-limited NP-hard optimization === The initial input to the Gödel machine is the representation of a connected graph with a large number of nodes linked by edges of various lengths. Within given time T it should find a cyclic path connecting all nodes. The only real-valued reward will occur at time T. It equals 1 divided by the length of the best path found so far (0 if none was found). There are no other inputs. The by-product of maximizing expected reward is to find the shortest path findable within the limited time, given the initial bias. === Fast theorem proving === Prove or disprove as quickly as possible that all even integers > 2 are the sum of two primes (Goldbach’s conjecture). The reward is 1/t, where t is the time required to produce and verify the first such proof. === Maximizing expected reward with bounded resources === A cognitive robot that needs at least 1 liter of gasoline per hour interacts with a partially unknown environment, trying to find hidden, limited gasoline depots to occasionally refuel its tank. It is rewarded in proportion to its lifetime, and dies after at most 100 years or as soon as its tank is empty or it falls off a cliff, and so on. The probabilistic environmental reactions are initially unknown but assumed to be sampled from the axiomatized Speed Prior, according to which hard-to-compute environmental reactions are unlikely. This permits a computable strategy for making near-optimal predictions. One by-product of maximizing expected reward is to maximize expected lifetime.

Mycin

MYCIN was an early backward chaining expert system that used black box to identify bacteria causing severe infections, such as bacteremia and meningitis, and to recommend antibiotics, with the dosage adjusted for patient's body weight — the name derived from the antibiotics themselves, as many antibiotics have the suffix "-mycin". The Mycin system was also used for the diagnosis of blood clotting diseases. MYCIN was developed over five or six years in the early 1970s at Stanford University. It was written in Lisp as the doctoral dissertation of Edward Shortliffe under the direction of Bruce G. Buchanan, Stanley N. Cohen and others. MYCIN emerged from the Stanford Heuristic Programming Project. MYCIN demonstrated the potential for expert systems in building high-performance medical reasoning programs. MYCIN is often viewed as a pioneer in the field of expert systems, even being referred to as the "grandaddy of them all-the one that launched the field" by Dr. Allen Newell. MYCIN led to the EMYCIN expert system shell ("essential MYCIN") for acquiring knowledge, reasoning with it, and explaining the results, without the specific medical knowledge. It can be described as "EMYCIN = Prolog + uncertainty + caching + questions + explanations + contexts - variables". An introduction is in Chapter 16 of Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming (PAIP). == Method == MYCIN operated using a fairly simple inference engine and a knowledge base of ~600 rules by obtaining individual inferential facts identified by experts and encoding such facts as individual production rules. No other AI program at the time contained as much domain-specific knowledge clearly separated from its inference procedures as MYCIN. It would query the physician running the program via a long series of simple yes/no or textual questions. At the end, it provided a list of possible culprit bacteria ranked from high to low based on the probability of each diagnosis, its confidence in each diagnosis' probability, the reasoning behind each diagnosis (that is, MYCIN would also list the questions and rules which led it to rank a diagnosis a particular way), and its recommended course of drug treatment. MYCIN could additionally respond to queries by physicians related to why it asked the user a certain question, how it arrived at a conclusion, and why it did not consider certain factors. The developers performed studies showing that MYCIN's performance was minimally affected by perturbations in the uncertainty metrics associated with individual rules, suggesting that the power in the system was related more to its knowledge representation and reasoning scheme than to the details of its numerical uncertainty model. Some observers felt that it should have been possible to use classical Bayesian statistics. MYCIN's developers argued that this would require either unrealistic assumptions of probabilistic independence, or require the experts to provide estimates for an unfeasibly large number of conditional probabilities. Subsequent studies later showed that the certainty factor model could indeed be interpreted in a probabilistic sense, and highlighted problems with the implied assumptions of such a model. However the modular structure of the system would prove very successful, leading to the development of graphical models such as Bayesian networks. === Context === A context in MYCIN determines what types of objects can be reasoned about. They are similar to variables in Prolog, or environment variables in operating systems. === Evidence combination === In MYCIN it was possible that two or more rules might draw conclusions about a parameter with different weights of evidence. For example, one rule may conclude that the organism in question is E. Coli with a certainty of 0.8 whilst another concludes that it is E. Coli with a certainty of 0.5 or even −0.8. In the event the certainty is less than zero the evidence is actually against the hypothesis. In order to calculate the certainty factor MYCIN combined these weights using the formula below to yield a single certainty factor: C F ( x , y ) = { X + Y − X Y if X , Y > 0 X + Y + X Y if X , Y < 0 X + Y 1 − min ( | X | , | Y | ) otherwise {\displaystyle CF(x,y)={\begin{cases}X+Y-XY&{\text{if }}X,Y>0\\X+Y+XY&{\text{if }}X,Y<0\\{\frac {X+Y}{1-\min(|X|,|Y|)}}&{\text{otherwise}}\end{cases}}} Where X and Y are the certainty factors. This formula can be applied more than once if more than two rules draw conclusions about the same parameter. It is commutative, so it does not matter in which order the weights were combined. The combination formula was designed to have the following desirable properties: −1 can be interpreted as "false", +1 as "true", and 0 as "uncertain". Combining unknown with anything leaves it unchanged. Combining true with anything (except false) gives true. Similarly for false. Combining true and false is a division-by-zero error. Combining +x and -x gives unknown. Combining two positives (except true) gives a larger positive. Similarly for negatives. Combining a positive and a negative gives something in between. === Examples === The following examples come from Chapter 16 of PAIP, which contains an implementation in Common Lisp of a modified and simplified version of MYCIN for pedagogical purposes. A rule, and an English paraphrase generated by the system: == Results == An evaluation of MYCIN was conducted at the Stanford Medical School. The first phase of the evaluation consisted of 10 test cases of diverse origin, chosen by a physician who was not acquainted with MYCIN's methods or knowledge base. These cases were presented to 7 physicians and 1 senior medical student. 10 prescriptions were compiled for each of the cases, 1 recommended by MYCIN, 1 prescribed by the treating physician at the county hospital, and 8 by the aforementioned individuals. The second phase of the evaluation consisted of eight infectious disease specialists being provided the clinical summary and set of 10 prescriptions for each of the 10 cases and tasked to provide their own recommendations for each case and assess the 10 prescriptions. MYCIN received an acceptability rating of 65%, which was comparable to the 42.5% to 62.5% rating of five faculty members. This study is often cited as showing the potential for disagreement about therapeutic decisions, even among experts, when there is no "gold standard" for correct treatment. == Practical use == MYCIN was never actually used in practice. This wasn't because of any weakness in its performance. Some observers raised ethical and legal issues related to the use of computers in medicine, regarding the responsibility of the physicians in case the system gave wrong diagnosis. However, the greatest problem, and the reason that MYCIN was not used in routine practice, was the state of technologies for system integration, especially at the time it was developed. MYCIN was a stand-alone system that required a user to enter all relevant information about a patient by typing in responses to questions MYCIN posed. MYCIN ran on the DEC KI10 PDP-10, supporting a large time-shared system available over the early Internet (ARPANet), before personal computers were developed. MYCIN's greatest influence was accordingly its demonstration of the power of its representation and reasoning approach. Rule-based systems in many non-medical domains were developed in the years that followed MYCIN's introduction of the approach. In the 1980s, expert system "shells" were introduced (including one based on MYCIN, known as E-MYCIN (followed by Knowledge Engineering Environment - KEE)) and supported the development of expert systems in a wide variety of application areas. A difficulty that rose to prominence during the development of MYCIN and subsequent complex expert systems has been the extraction of the necessary knowledge for the inference engine to use from the human expert in the relevant fields into the rule base (the so-called "knowledge acquisition bottleneck").

Knowledge Engineering Environment

Knowledge Engineering Environment (KEE) is a frame-based development tool for expert systems. It was developed and sold by IntelliCorp, and was first released in 1983. It ran on Lisp machines, and was later ported to Lucid Common Lisp with the CLX library, an X Window System (X11) interface for Common Lisp. This version was available on several different UNIX workstations. On KEE, several extensions were offered: Simkit, a frame-based simulation library KEEconnection, database connection between the frame system and relational databases In KEE, frames are called units. Units are used for both individual instances and classes. Frames have slots and slots have facets. Facets can describe, for example, a slot's expected values, its working value, or its inheritance rule. Slots can have multiple values. Behavior can be implemented using a message passing model. KEE provides an extensive graphical user interface (GUI) to create, browse, and manipulate frames. KEE also includes a frame-based rule system. In the KEE knowledge base, rules are frames. Both forward chaining and backward chaining inference are available. KEE supports non-monotonic reasoning through the concepts of worlds. Worlds allow providing alternative slot-values of frames. Through an assumption-based truth or reason maintenance system, inconsistencies can be detected and analyzed. ActiveImages allows graphical displays to be attached to slots of Units. Typical examples are buttons, dials, graphs, and histograms. The graphics are also implemented as Units via KEEPictures, a frame-based graphics library.

Goal node (computer science)

In computer science, a goal node is a node in a graph that meets defined criteria for success or termination. Heuristical artificial intelligence algorithms, like A and B, attempt to reach such nodes in optimal time by defining the distance to the goal node. When the goal node is reached, A defines the distance to the goal node as 0 and all other nodes' distances as positive values.

Collabora Online

Collabora Online (often abbreviated as COOL) is an open-source online office suite developed by Collabora, based on LibreOffice Online, the web-based edition of the LibreOffice office suite. It enables real-time collaborative editing of documents, spreadsheets, presentations, and vector graphics in a web browser. Optional applications are available for offline use on Android, ChromeOS, iOS, iPadOS, Linux distributions, macOS, and Windows. It supports the OpenDocument format and is compatible with other major formats, including those used by Microsoft Office. The Document Foundation (TDF), the nonprofit organization behind LibreOffice, states that a majority of the LibreOffice software development is done by its partners like Collabora. Collabora Online is an open-source alternative to proprietary cloud office platforms such as Google Workspace and Microsoft 365. Unlike these services, it can be self-hosted or hosted by third-party providers. The platform is marketed particularly toward enterprises and public institutions seeking greater digital sovereignty and independence from U.S.-based "big tech" companies. Collabora also develops Collabora Office, a standalone desktop and mobile app suite based on LibreOffice. Although Collabora Online has increasingly taken on a central role, both products may be used in parallel, similar to Microsoft Office and Microsoft 365. In November 2025, Collabora released Collabora Office Desktop and renamed the previous product Collabora Office Classic. The new product shares code with Collabora Online and brings the same user interface to the desktop on Linux, Windows and MacOS. A separate version, the Collabora Online Development Edition (CODE), is offered free of charge and is recommended for individuals, small teams, and developers. CODE provides early access to new features and serves as a testing and development platform for open-source community contributors. As TDF does not offer a free version of LibreOffice Online, CODE represents the primary freely available option for organizations and individuals interested in deploying LibreOffice in a web-based, collaborative setting. == Applications == Collabora Online includes several applications for document editing, available through the web-based interface and optional desktop and mobile apps: Collabora Writer – A word processor based on LibreOffice Writer, comparable to Microsoft Word and Google Docs. It supports WYSIWYG editing, styles, formatting tools, comment threads, and change tracking. Collabora Calc – A spreadsheet editor based on LibreOffice Calc, similar to Microsoft Excel and Google Sheets. Features include pivot tables, formulas, data validation, conditional formatting, advanced sorting and filtering, charts, and support for up to 16,000 columns. Compatible with some macros written in VBA. Collabora Impress – A presentation program based on LibreOffice Impress, comparable to Microsoft PowerPoint and Google Slides. It supports master slides, transitions, speaker notes, and multimedia elements. Collabora Draw is not a separate application, most of the functionality of the Draw application is now integrated in Writer and Impress – vector graphics editor based on LibreOffice Draw, comparable to Microsoft Visio and Google Drawings. == Features == Collabora Online can be accessed from modern web browsers without the need for plug-ins or add-ons. It supports real-time collaborative editing of word processing documents, spreadsheets, presentations, and vector graphics. Collaboration features include commenting, version tracking with document comparison and restoration, and integration with communication tools such as chat or video calls. These functions are often enabled through integration with enterprise open-source cloud platforms like Nextcloud, ownCloud, Seafile, EGroupware, GroupOffice and others. Collabora Online can also be embedded or integrated into a variety of third-party applications. Although client apps are not required to use the web-based suite, optional applications are available for offline use on Android, ChromeOS, iOS, iPadOS, Linux distributions, macOS, and Windows. These apps share the same LibreOffice-based core as the server version, ensuring document compatibility across platforms. Development of the LibreOffice core benefits both the online server and the client applications simultaneously. The mobile apps offer touch-optimized interfaces that adapt to different screen sizes and can be used offline, with optional integration into cloud storage services. Collabora Online supports OpenDocument formats (ODF; .odt, .odp, .ods, .odg) in accordance with ISO/IEC 26300. It is also compatible with Microsoft Office formats, including Office Open XML (.docx, .pptx, .xlsx) and legacy binary formats (.doc, .ppt, .xls). Additional supported formats include PDF, PNG, CSV, TSV, RTF, EPUB, and others. The suite can import a range of formats supported by LibreOffice, including Microsoft Visio and Publisher files, Apple Keynote, Numbers, and Pages files, as well as legacy formats used by Lotus 1-2-3, Microsoft Works, and Quattro Pro. The core of Collabora Online is written in C++ and utilizes LibreOfficeKit, a programming interface that enables reuse of much of LibreOffice's existing code for document saving, loading, and rendering. Collabora Online operates on the principle that documents remain on the server, with users viewing tile-rendered images of the document and sending their edits back to the server. The user interface is implemented in JavaScript. For file access and authentication with file hosting services, Collabora Online uses Microsoft's WOPI protocol, allowing compatibility with any service supporting Microsoft 365 integration. == Server == The server component can be self-hosted or deployed through third-party enterprise open-source cloud platforms, allowing organizations to maintain control over data and infrastructure. It is available for various Linux distributions and as a Docker image. The server enables features such as in-browser document editing, file synchronization, and real-time communication. These third-party cloud platforms typically offer additional functionality comparable to services such as Dropbox, Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, or Zoom, including file sharing, calendars, email, contacts, chat, and video conferencing. Collabora Online can be integrated into these applications, as well as with other services such as learning management systems and enterprise content platforms, through open APIs and an SDK. == Reception == Various online and print publications have discussed Collabora Online. In December 2016 the technology website Softpedia mentioned the availability of collaborative editing in version 2.0 and the integration with ownCloud, Nextcloud, and other file synchronization and sharing solutions. In June 2020, ZDNET reported that Collabora Online would be included as the standard office suite in Nextcloud version 19, noting that direct document editing was added to the native video conferencing software Talk. The technology blog OMG! Ubuntu! covered the release of Collabora's Android and iOS apps, emphasizing their offline functionality. In September 2020, Linux Magazine compared Collabora Online with OnlyOffice, noting the flexibility and platform independence of both tools and highlighting Collabora's extensive feature set derived from LibreOffice. === Digital sovereignty === Collabora Online's open-source design and support for self-hosting have made it notable in discussions about digital sovereignty—the ability of users and organizations to control their own data. This is particularly relevant in Europe, where concerns about dependence on U.S.-based "big tech" companies and data privacy have grown in recent years. On 10th June 2025, Microsoft executives under oath in the French Senate admitted that they cannot guarantee data sovereignty and would be compelled to pass French (and by implication the wider European Union) information to the US administration if requested via a warrant or subpoena. The Cloud Act is a law that gives the US government authority to obtain digital data held by US-based tech corporations, irrespective of whether that data is stored on servers at home or on foreign soil. A 2020 briefing by the European Parliament highlighted risks associated with reliance on major technology companies that collect and exploit user data. Legal decisions such as the Schrems II ruling have further underscored these concerns. Several European government agencies have adopted private cloud solutions using Collabora Online and related platforms to enhance data security and maintain control over sensitive information. == History == The former LibreOffice development team from SUSE joined Collabora in September 2013, forming the subsidiary Collabora Productivity. In 2015 Collabora and IceWarp announced the development of an enterprise-ready version of LibreOffice Online to compete wi

Strategic Computing Initiative

The United States government's Strategic Computing Initiative funded research into advanced computer hardware and artificial intelligence from 1983 to 1993. The initiative was designed to support various projects that were required to develop machine intelligence in a prescribed ten-year time frame, from chip design and manufacture, computer architecture to artificial intelligence software. The Department of Defense spent a total of $1 billion on the project. The inspiration for the program was Japan's fifth generation computer project, an enormous initiative that set aside billions for research into computing and artificial intelligence. As with Sputnik in 1957, the American government saw the Japanese project as a challenge to its technological dominance. The British government also funded a program of their own around the same time, known as Alvey, and a consortium of U.S. companies funded another similar project, the Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation. The goal of SCI, and other contemporary projects, was nothing less than full machine intelligence. "The machine envisioned by SC", according to Alex Roland and Philip Shiman, "would run ten billion instructions per second to see, hear, speak, and think like a human. The degree of integration required would rival that achieved by the human brain, the most complex instrument known to man." The initiative was conceived as an integrated program, similar to the Apollo moon program, where different subsystems would be created by various companies and academic projects and eventually brought together into a single integrated system. Roland and Shiman wrote that "While most research programs entail tactics or strategy, SC boasted grand strategy, a master plan for an entire campaign." The project was funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and directed by the Information Processing Technology Office (IPTO). By 1985 it had spent $100 million, and 92 projects were underway at 60 institutions: half in industry, half in universities and government labs. Robert Kahn, who directed IPTO in those years, provided the project with its early leadership and inspiration. Clint Kelly managed the SC Initiative for three years and developed many of the specific application programs for DARPA, such as the Autonomous Land Vehicle. By the late 1980s, it was clear that the project would fall short of realizing the hoped-for levels of machine intelligence. Program insiders pointed to issues with integration, organization, and communication. When Jack Schwarz ascended to the leadership of IPTO in 1987, he cut funding to artificial intelligence research (the software component) "deeply and brutally", "eviscerating" the program (wrote Pamela McCorduck). Schwarz felt that DARPA should focus its funding only on those technologies which showed the most promise. In his words, DARPA should "surf", rather than "dog paddle", and he felt strongly AI was not "the next wave". The project was superseded in the 1990s by the Accelerated Strategic Computing Initiative and then by the Advanced Simulation and Computing Program. These later programs did not include artificial general intelligence as a goal, but instead focused on supercomputing for large scale simulation, such as atomic bomb simulations. The Strategic Computing Initiative of the 1980s is distinct from the 2015 National Strategic Computing Initiative—the two are unrelated. == Results == Although the program failed to meet its goal of high-level machine intelligence, it did meet some of its specific technical objectives, for example those of autonomous land navigation. The Autonomous Land Vehicle program and its sister Navlab project at Carnegie Mellon University, in particular, laid the scientific and technical foundation for many of the driverless vehicle programs that came after it, such as the Demo II and III programs (ALV being Demo I), Perceptor, and the DARPA Grand Challenge. The use of video cameras plus laser scanners and inertial navigation units pioneered by the SCI ALV program form the basis of almost all commercial driverless car developments today. It also helped to advance the state of the art of computer hardware to a considerable degree. On the software side, the initiative funded development of the Dynamic Analysis and Replanning Tool (DART), a program that handled logistics using artificial intelligence techniques. This was a huge success, saving the Department of Defense billions during Desert Storm. Introduced in 1991, DART had by 1995 offset the monetary equivalent of all funds DARPA had channeled into AI research for the previous 30 years combined.