Aurora is an exascale supercomputer that was sponsored by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) and designed by Intel and Cray for Argonne National Laboratory. It was briefly the second fastest supercomputer in the world from November 2023 to June 2024. The cost was estimated in 2019 to be US$500 million. Olivier Franza is the chief architect and principal investigator of this design. == History == In 2013 DOE presented a proposal for an "exascale" supercomputer, capable of speeds in the neighborhood of 1 exaFLOP (1018 floating point mathematical operations per second) with a maximum power consumption of 20 megawatts (MW) by 2020. Aurora was first announced in 2015 and to be finished in 2018. It was expected to have a speed of 180 petaFLOPS which would be around the speed of Summit. Aurora was meant to be the most powerful supercomputer at the time of its launch and to be built by Cray with Intel processors. Later, in 2017, Intel announced that Aurora would be delayed to 2021 but scaled up to 1 exaFLOP. In March 2019, DOE said that it would build the first supercomputer with a performance of one exaFLOP in the United States in 2021. In October 2020, DOE said that Aurora would be delayed again for a further six months, and would no longer be the first exascale computer in the US. In late October 2021 Intel announced that Aurora would now exceed 2 exaFLOPS in peak double-precision compute – That claim however never was realized. The system was fully installed on June 22, 2023. In May 2024, Aurora appeared at number two on the Top500 supercomputer list, with a performance of 1.012 exaFLOPS, marking the second entry of an exascale capable system on the Top500. == Usage == Functions include research on brain structure, nuclear fusion, low carbon technologies, subatomic particles, cancer and cosmology. It will also develop new materials that will be useful for batteries and more efficient solar cells. It is to be available to the general scientific community. == Architecture == Aurora has 10,624 nodes, with each node being composed of two Intel Xeon Max processors, six Intel Max series GPUs and a unified memory architecture, providing a maximum computing power of 130 teraFLOPS per node. It has around 10 petabytes of memory and 230 petabytes of storage. The machine is stated to consume around 39 MW of power. For comparison, the fastest computer in the world today, El Capitan uses 30 MW, while another Top 500 System, Frontier uses 24 MW.
DABUS
DABUS (Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience) is an artificial intelligence (AI) system created by Stephen Thaler. It reportedly conceived of two novel products — a food container constructed using fractal geometry, which enables rapid reheating, and a flashing beacon for attracting attention in an emergency. The filing of patent applications designating DABUS as inventor has led to decisions by patent offices and courts on whether a patent can be granted for an invention reportedly made by an AI system. == History in different jurisdictions == === Australia === On 17 September 2019, Thaler filed an application to patent a "Food container and devices and methods for attracting enhanced attention," naming DABUS as the inventor. On 21 September 2020, IP Australia found that section 15(1) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) is inconsistent with an artificial intelligence machine being treated as an inventor, and Thaler's application had lapsed. Thaler sought judicial review, and on 30 July 2021, the Federal Court set aside IP Australia's decision and ordered IP Australia to reconsider the application. On 13 April 2022, the Full Court of the Federal Court set aside that decision, holding that only a natural person can be an inventor for the purposes of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) and the Patents Regulations 1991 (Cth), and that such an inventor must be identified for any person to be entitled to a grant of a patent. On 11 November 2022, Thaler was refused special leave to appeal to the High Court. === European Patent Office === On 17 October 2018 and 7 November 2018, Thaler filed two European patent applications with the European Patent Office. The first claimed invention was a "Food Container" and the second was "Devices and Methods for Attracting Enhanced Attention." On 27 January 2020, the EPO rejected the applications on the grounds that the application listed an AI system named DABUS, and not a human, as the inventor, based on Article 81 and Rule 19(1) of the European Patent Convention (EPC). On 21 December 2021, the Board of Appeal of the EPO dismissed Thaler's appeal from the EPO's primary decision. The Board of Appeal confirmed that "under the EPC the designated inventor has to be a person with legal capacity. This is not merely an assumption on which the EPC was drafted. It is the ordinary meaning of the term inventor." === United Kingdom === Similar applications were filed by Thaler to the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office on 17 October and 7 November 2018. The Office asked Thaler to file statements of inventorship and of right of grant to a patent (Patent Form 7) in respect of each invention within 16 months of the filing date. Thaler filed those forms naming DABUS as the inventor and explaining in some detail why he believed that machines should be regarded as inventors in the circumstances. His application was rejected on the grounds that: (1) naming a machine as inventor did not meet the requirements of the Patents Act 1977; and (2) the IPO was not satisfied as to the manner in which Thaler had acquired rights that would otherwise vest in the inventor. Thaler was not satisfied with the decision and asked for a hearing before an official known as the "hearing officer". By a decision dated 4 December 2019 the hearing officer rejected Thaler's appeal. Thaler appealed against the hearing officer's decision to the Patents Court (a specialist court within the Chancery Division of the High Court of England and Wales that determines patent disputes). On 21 September 2020, Mr Justice Marcus Smith upheld the decision of the hearing officer. On 21 September 2021, Thaler's further appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed by Arnold LJ and Laing LJ (Birss LJ dissenting). On 20 December 2023, the UK Supreme Court dismissed a further appeal by Thaler. In its judgment, the court held that an "inventor" under the Patents Act 1977 must be a natural person. === United States === The patent applications on the inventions were refused by the USPTO, which held that only natural persons can be named as inventors in a patent application. Thaler first fought this result by filing a complaint under the Administrative Procedure Act alleging that the decision was "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion and not in accordance with the law; unsupported by substantial evidence, and in excess of Defendants’ statutory authority." A month later on August 19, 2019, Thaler filed a petition with the USPTO as allowed in 37 C.F.R. § 1.181 stating that DABUS should be the inventor. The judge and Thaler agreed in this case that Thaler himself is unable to receive the patent on behalf of DABUS. In their August 5, 2022, Thaler decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that only a natural person could be an inventor, which means that the AI that invents any other type of invention is not addressed by the "who" mentioned in the legislation. === New Zealand === On January 31, 2022, the Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand (IPONZ) decided that a patent application (776029) filed by Stephen Thaler was void, on the basis that no inventor was identified on the patent application. IPONZ determined that DABUS could not be "an actual devisor of the invention" as required by the Patents Act 2013, and that this must be a natural person as held by the previous patent offices above. The High Court of New Zealand confirmed the decision in 2023. === South Africa === On 24 June 2021, the South African Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) accepted Dr Thaler's Patent Cooperation Treaty, for a patent in respect of inventions generated by DABUS. In July 2021, the CIPC released a notice of issuance for the patent. It is the first patent granted for an AI invention. === Switzerland === On June 26, 2025, the Swiss Federal Administrative Court ruled that artificial intelligence systems such as DABUS cannot be listed as inventors in patent applications. The court upheld the existing practice of the Swiss Federal Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI), which requires that only natural persons can be recognized as inventors under Swiss patent law. The case concerned a patent application, which sought to designate DABUS as the sole inventor of a food container designed with a fractal geometry to enhance heat distribution. The IPI had rejected the application, arguing that both the absence of a human inventor and the attribution of inventorship to an AI system were inadmissible. While the court dismissed Thaler's main request, it accepted a subsidiary request: if a human applicant recognizes and files a patent based on an AI-generated invention, that person may be considered the inventor. As a result, the application may proceed with Thaler listed as the inventor. The decision (B-2532/2024) can still be appealed to the Swiss Federal Supreme Court.
European Cloud Partnership
The European Cloud Partnership (ECP) is an advisory group set up by the European Commission as part of the European Cloud Computing Strategy to provide guidance on the development of cloud computing in the European Union. The ECP is led by a steering board composed of representatives of the IT and telecom industry as well as European government policymakers. == History == After publishing a document, "Unleashing the Potential of Cloud Computing in Europe", the European Commission set up the European Cloud Partnership in 2012, with a steering board including both government and industry representatives. The ECP's first meeting was held on 19 November 2012; it was chaired by the President of Estonia Toomas Hendrik Ilves. In 2013 the ECP began drafting its charter. That year, as information about the PRISM scandal came to light, the ECP emphasized the need for Europe to develop its own cloud infrastructure, rather than depend on that of the United States. It completed a report titled "Trusted Cloud Europe" in February 2014 defining its policy, and outlining a process for effective public and private sector participation in cloud computing development in Europe. The report recommended that the commission identify technical, legal and operational best practices, and promote these through certifications and guidelines, and facilitate recognition across national boundaries. The report also recommended that the commission identify cloud computing stakeholders and help them work together through consultations and workshops. In March 2014, the European Commission invited external parties to submit opinions, take part in a discussion forum and complete an online survey in response to the report.
Application Lifecycle Framework
The Application Lifecycle Framework (ALF) was a project by the Eclipse Foundation that aimed to create a standardized, open-source system to allow different application lifecycle management (ALM) tools to work together more easily. The goal was to provide common protocols and integration services that would let software development tools from different vendors communicate and share data. However, the project failed to gain sufficient support from major industry players and was terminated in 2008.
Tute Genomics
Tute Genomics was an American genomics startup that provided a cloud-based web application for rapid and accurate annotation of human genomic data. It was built on the expertise of ANNOVAR. Tute Genomics assisted researchers in identifying disease genes and biomarkers, and assisted clinicians/labs in performing genetic diagnosis. Based in Provo, Utah, Tute was co-founded by Dr. Kai Wang, an assistant professor at the University of Southern California (USC); and Dr. Reid J. Robison, a board-certified psychiatrist with fellowship training in both neurodevelopmental genetics and bioinformatics. Tute Genomics was acquired by PierianDX in 2016. == History == The word "tute" means "personal" in the Na’vi language created for the 2009 film Avatar by Paul Frommer, a linguist and communications professor at the USC Marshall School of Business. === Timeline === 2013 Tute Genomics launched in 2013 and entered the accelerator, BoomStartup. By "demo day" of BoomStartup, Tute had raised their seed round of funding and expanded the round to include angel investors from SLC Angels, Park City Angels, Life Science Angels. Tute was the tenth ever online syndicate for AngelList and in all raised a seed round of $1.5 million. 2014 In March 2014, the company announced that Affiliated Genetics, a Utah-based CLIA-certified laboratory, selected Tute Genomics for its next-generation sequencing (NGS) analytics pipeline. In May 2014, the company announced joining the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health. In June 2014, Advanced Biological Laboratories (ABL), S.A., announced a licensing and collaboration agreement with Tute Genomics and the commercial launch of OncoChek for managing and analysing genomics data in the field of oncology. In July 2014, the company announced an agreement with Lineagen, Inc., to provide next-generation sequencing analytics for Lineagen’s NextStepDx Plus assay. Also, Brigham Young University selected the Tute Genomics genome annotation and discovery platform for analysis and interpretation of 1,000 exomes and genomes. In November 2014, the company announced addition of the Tute platform to Illumina’s BaseSpace. The company announced a Series A1 funding round of $2.3 million in December 2014. The round was led by UK-based Eurovestech. Peak Ventures and a number of angel investors also participated in this round. 2015 Tute recruits David Mittelman, founder of Arpeggi, Inc. and former CSO at FamilyTreeDNA, to Tute Genomics as Chief Scientific Officer. Tute acquires Knome and integrates the KnoSys platform into its software product. 2016 Reid Robison, Tute CEO, launches a Kickstarter campaign to sell Tute interpreted whole genome and whole exome sequencing directly to consumers. The campaign was suspended within the same month after receiving a letter from the United States Food and Drug Administration. Tute is acquired by PierianDX.
IT baseline protection
The IT baseline protection (German: IT-Grundschutz) approach from the German Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) is a methodology to identify and implement computer security measures in an organization. The aim is the achievement of an adequate and appropriate level of security for IT systems. To reach this goal the BSI recommends "well-proven technical, organizational, personnel, and infrastructural safeguards". Organizations and federal agencies show their systematic approach to secure their IT systems (e.g. Information Security Management System) by obtaining an ISO/IEC 27001 Certificate on the basis of IT-Grundschutz. == Overview baseline security == The term baseline security signifies standard security measures for typical IT systems. It is used in various contexts with somewhat different meanings. For example: Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer: Software tool focused on Microsoft operating system and services security Cisco security baseline: Vendor recommendation focused on network and network device security controls Nortel baseline security: Set of requirements and best practices with a focus on network operators ISO/IEC 13335-3 defines a baseline approach to risk management. This standard has been replaced by ISO/IEC 27005, but the baseline approach was not taken over yet into the 2700x series. There are numerous internal baseline security policies for organizations, The German BSI has a comprehensive baseline security standard, that is compliant with the ISO/IEC 27000-series == BSI IT baseline protection == The foundation of an IT baseline protection concept is initially not a detailed risk analysis. It proceeds from overall hazards. Consequently, sophisticated classification according to damage extent and probability of occurrence is ignored. Three protection needs categories are established. With their help, the protection needs of the object under investigation can be determined. Based on these, appropriate personnel, technical, organizational and infrastructural security measures are selected from the IT Baseline Protection Catalogs. The Federal Office for Security in Information Technology's IT Baseline Protection Catalogs offer a "cookbook recipe" for a normal level of protection. Besides probability of occurrence and potential damage extents, implementation costs are also considered. By using the Baseline Protection Catalogs, costly security analyses requiring expert knowledge are dispensed with, since overall hazards are worked with in the beginning. It is possible for the relative layman to identify measures to be taken and to implement them in cooperation with professionals. The BSI grants a baseline protection certificate as confirmation for the successful implementation of baseline protection. In stages 1 and 2, this is based on self declaration. In stage 3, an independent, BSI-licensed auditor completes an audit. Certification process internationalization has been possible since 2006. ISO/IEC 27001 certification can occur simultaneously with IT baseline protection certification. (The ISO/IEC 27001 standard is the successor of BS 7799-2). This process is based on the new BSI security standards. This process carries a development price which has prevailed for some time. Corporations having themselves certified under the BS 7799-2 standard are obliged to carry out a risk assessment. To make it more comfortable, most deviate from the protection needs analysis pursuant to the IT Baseline Protection Catalogs. The advantage is not only conformity with the strict BSI, but also attainment of BS 7799-2 certification. Beyond this, the BSI offers a few help aids like the policy template and the GSTOOL. One data protection component is available, which was produced in cooperation with the German Federal Commissioner for Data Protection and Freedom of Information and the state data protection authorities and integrated into the IT Baseline Protection Catalog. This component is not considered, however, in the certification process. == Baseline protection process == The following steps are taken pursuant to the baseline protection process during structure analysis and protection needs analysis: The IT network is defined. IT structure analysis is carried out. Protection needs determination is carried out. A baseline security check is carried out. IT baseline protection measures are implemented. Creation occurs in the following steps: IT structure analysis (survey) Assessment of protection needs Selection of actions Running comparison of nominal and actual. === IT structure analysis === An IT network includes the totality of infrastructural, organizational, personnel, and technical components serving the fulfillment of a task in a particular information processing application area. An IT network can thereby encompass the entire IT character of an institution or individual division, which is partitioned by organizational structures as, for example, a departmental network, or as shared IT applications, for example, a personnel information system. It is necessary to analyze and document the information technological structure in question to generate an IT security concept and especially to apply the IT Baseline Protection Catalogs. Due to today's usually heavily networked IT systems, a network topology plan offers a starting point for the analysis. The following aspects must be taken into consideration: The available infrastructure, The organizational and personnel framework for the IT network, Networked and non-networked IT systems employed in the IT network. The communications connections between IT systems and externally, IT applications run within the IT network. === Protection needs determination === The purpose of the protection needs determination is to investigate what protection is sufficient and appropriate for the information and information technology in use. In this connection, the damage to each application and the processed information, which could result from a breach of confidentiality, integrity or availability, is considered. Important in this context is a realistic assessment of the possible follow-on damages. A division into the three protection needs categories "low to medium", "high" and "very high" has proved itself of value. "Public", "internal" and "secret" are often used for confidentiality. === Modelling === Heavily networked IT systems typically characterize information technology in government and business these days. As a rule, therefore, it is advantageous to consider the entire IT system and not just individual systems within the scope of an IT security analysis and concept. To be able to manage this task, it makes sense to logically partition the entire IT system into parts and to separately consider each part or even an IT network. Detailed documentation about its structure is prerequisite for the use of the IT Baseline Protection Catalogs on an IT network. This can be achieved, for example, via the IT structure analysis described above. The IT Baseline Protection Catalogs' components must ultimately be mapped onto the components of the IT network in question in a modelling step. === Baseline security check === The baseline security check is an organisational instrument offering a quick overview of the prevailing IT security level. With the help of interviews, the status quo of an existing IT network (as modelled by IT baseline protection) relative to the number of security measures implemented from the IT Baseline Protection Catalogs are investigated. The result is a catalog in which the implementation status "dispensable", "yes", "partly", or "no" is entered for each relevant measure. By identifying not yet, or only partially, implemented measures, improvement options for the security of the information technology in question are highlighted. The baseline security check gives information about measures, which are still missing (nominal vs. actual comparison). From this follows what remains to be done to achieve baseline protection through security. Not all measures suggested by this baseline check need to be implemented. Peculiarities are to be taken into account! It could be that several more or less unimportant applications are running on a server, which have lesser protection needs. In their totality, however, these applications are to be provided with a higher level of protection. This is called the (cumulation effect). The applications running on a server determine its need for protection. Several IT applications can run on an IT system. When this occurs, the application with the greatest need for protection determines the IT systems protection category. Conversely, it is conceivable that an IT application with great protection needs does not automatically transfer this to the IT system. This may happen because the IT system is configured redundantly, or because only an inconsequential part is running on it. This is called the (distribution effect). This is the case, fo
Protocol Builder
Protocol Builder is a tool in programming languages to generate code to build protocols in a fast and reliable way. Network programming for all kinds of protocols (such as TCP, UDP, and SNMP) includes converting data to be transferred to raw bytes in the sending side and parsing these bytes in the receiving side. Protocol builders facilitate this stage, usually by automatically generating the code. Protocol Programming has many components to be developed, these are: server listener, server connection, client connection, packets, and loggers. Most protocol builders implement these components automatically so developers save time and money. Currently, there are two Protocol Builders in the market, one for C++ from UpRedSun which is for TCP and UDP protocols. The second one is for .Net languages which generates the code in C# for TCP Protocols, this tool is called .Net Protocol Builder.