Frictionless sharing refers to the transparent or automatic dissemination of user activity across social media platforms, typically without requiring explicit action from the user each time content is shared. The concept gained prominence in 2011 after Mark Zuckerberg announced a series of new features for Facebook at the F8 developers conference, framing the changes as enabling “real-time serendipity in a friction-less experience.” == History and concept == Before 2011, the term “frictionless sharing” was occasionally used in academic and technical contexts to describe sharing of resources with minimal effort, such as through social bookmarking or Creative Commons licensing to reduce barriers to reuse of research data. The concept took on a broader cultural meaning when Facebook introduced its Timeline interface and new “social apps” in 2011. These features enabled third-party applications to automatically publish user activity to the platform—effectively shifting sharing from a deliberate act to a passive process. For example, integrating music streaming service Spotify meant that any song a user listened to could automatically appear in a Facebook “Ticker,” allowing friends to see the activity and click through to play the song themselves. == Zuckerberg’s vision == Zuckerberg articulated a vision of a Web in which sharing occurs by default rather than by choice: “You read, you watch, you listen, you buy—and everyone you know will hear all about it on Facebook.” This “frictionless” model assumes ongoing consent after an initial opt-in. Once users connect an app to their profile, any future activity with that app may be automatically shared. This shift from intentional posting to ambient sharing represented a significant evolution in how personal data is distributed online. == Criticism and debate == Many commentators and users have raised concerns about frictionless sharing. While some criticism centers on online privacy, others focus on how automatic updates can flood news feeds and erode the social value of sharing. Critics argue that when sharing becomes automatic, it dilutes the personal curation that makes social media exchanges meaningful. According to Slate, this approach risks “killing taste,” because users typically choose to share only select content they find worth highlighting, rather than everything they consume. AL.com similarly observed that the frictionless model encourages over-sharing, overwhelming both users and their networks with minor or trivial activities. For example, integrating multiple platforms—such as Twitter, Foursquare, Pinterest, Spotify, and others—can create an incessant stream of updates that some users may find intrusive or irritating. This can lead to what critics describe as “narcissistic” or noisy timelines, potentially undermining the “social” nature of social media. == Business model and data implications == For Facebook, frictionless sharing offers clear business advantages. More frequent and detailed sharing provides valuable data that can be used to refine targeted advertising and personalize content delivery. The model also encourages users to spend more time on the platform, reinforcing its position as a central hub of online social activity. Other technology companies have experimented with similar approaches. Google has introduced forms of cross-platform integration that facilitate automatic activity sharing, though with a more explicit opt-in structure compared to Facebook. This approach has been described as “friction with consent,” allowing users to manually enable or disable integrations on a per-service basis.
Log shipping
Log shipping is the process of automating the backup of transaction log files on a primary (production) database server, and then restoring them onto a standby server. This technique is supported by Microsoft SQL Server, 4D Server, MySQL, and PostgreSQL. Similar to replication, the primary purpose of log shipping is to increase database availability by maintaining a backup server that can replace a production server quickly. Other databases such as Adaptive Server Enterprise and Oracle Database support the technique but require the Database Administrator to write code or scripts to perform the work. Although the actual failover mechanism in log shipping is manual, this implementation is often chosen due to its low cost in human and server resources, and ease of implementation. In comparison, SQL server clusters enable automatic failover, but at the expense of much higher storage costs. Compared to database replication, log shipping does not provide as much in terms of reporting capabilities, but backs up system tables along with data tables, and locks the standby server from users' modifications. A replicated server can be modified (e.g. views) and is therefore unsuitable for failover purposes.
Communication-avoiding algorithm
Communication-avoiding algorithms minimize movement of data within a memory hierarchy for improving its running-time and energy consumption. These minimize the total of two costs (in terms of time and energy): arithmetic and communication. Communication, in this context refers to moving data, either between levels of memory or between multiple processors over a network. It is much more expensive than arithmetic. == Formal theory == === Two-level memory model === A common computational model in analyzing communication-avoiding algorithms is the two-level memory model: There is one processor and two levels of memory. Level 1 memory is infinitely large. Level 0 memory ("cache") has size M {\displaystyle M} . In the beginning, input resides in level 1. In the end, the output resides in level 1. Processor can only operate on data in cache. The goal is to minimize data transfers between the two levels of memory. === Matrix multiplication === Corollary 6.2: More general results for other numerical linear algebra operations can be found in. The following proof is from. == Motivation == Consider the following running-time model: Measure of computation = Time per FLOP = γ Measure of communication = No. of words of data moved = β ⇒ Total running time = γ·(no. of FLOPs) + β·(no. of words) From the fact that β >> γ as measured in time and energy, communication cost dominates computation cost. Technological trends indicate that the relative cost of communication is increasing on a variety of platforms, from cloud computing to supercomputers to mobile devices. The report also predicts that gap between DRAM access time and FLOPs will increase 100× over coming decade to balance power usage between processors and DRAM. Energy consumption increases by orders of magnitude as we go higher in the memory hierarchy. United States president Barack Obama cited communication-avoiding algorithms in the FY 2012 Department of Energy budget request to Congress: New Algorithm Improves Performance and Accuracy on Extreme-Scale Computing Systems. On modern computer architectures, communication between processors takes longer than the performance of a floating-point arithmetic operation by a given processor. ASCR researchers have developed a new method, derived from commonly used linear algebra methods, to minimize communications between processors and the memory hierarchy, by reformulating the communication patterns specified within the algorithm. This method has been implemented in the TRILINOS framework, a highly-regarded suite of software, which provides functionality for researchers around the world to solve large scale, complex multi-physics problems. == Objectives == Communication-avoiding algorithms are designed with the following objectives: Reorganize algorithms to reduce communication across all memory hierarchies. Attain the lower-bound on communication when possible. The following simple example demonstrates how these are achieved. === Matrix multiplication example === Let A, B and C be square matrices of order n × n. The following naive algorithm implements C = C + A B: for i = 1 to n for j = 1 to n for k = 1 to n C(i,j) = C(i,j) + A(i,k) B(k,j) Arithmetic cost (time-complexity): n2(2n − 1) for sufficiently large n or O(n3). Rewriting this algorithm with communication cost labelled at each step for i = 1 to n {read row i of A into fast memory} - n2 reads for j = 1 to n {read C(i,j) into fast memory} - n2 reads {read column j of B into fast memory} - n3 reads for k = 1 to n C(i,j) = C(i,j) + A(i,k) B(k,j) {write C(i,j) back to slow memory} - n2 writes Fast memory may be defined as the local processor memory (CPU cache) of size M and slow memory may be defined as the DRAM. Communication cost (reads/writes): n3 + 3n2 or O(n3) Since total running time = γ·O(n3) + β·O(n3) and β >> γ the communication cost is dominant. The blocked (tiled) matrix multiplication algorithm reduces this dominant term: ==== Blocked (tiled) matrix multiplication ==== Consider A, B and C to be n/b-by-n/b matrices of b-by-b sub-blocks where b is called the block size; assume three b-by-b blocks fit in fast memory. for i = 1 to n/b for j = 1 to n/b {read block C(i,j) into fast memory} - b2 × (n/b)2 = n2 reads for k = 1 to n/b {read block A(i,k) into fast memory} - b2 × (n/b)3 = n3/b reads {read block B(k,j) into fast memory} - b2 × (n/b)3 = n3/b reads C(i,j) = C(i,j) + A(i,k) B(k,j) - {do a matrix multiply on blocks} {write block C(i,j) back to slow memory} - b2 × (n/b)2 = n2 writes Communication cost: 2n3/b + 2n2 reads/writes << 2n3 arithmetic cost Making b as large possible: 3b2 ≤ M we achieve the following communication lower bound: 31/2n3/M1/2 + 2n2 or Ω (no. of FLOPs / M1/2) == Previous approaches for reducing communication == Most of the approaches investigated in the past to address this problem rely on scheduling or tuning techniques that aim at overlapping communication with computation. However, this approach can lead to an improvement of at most a factor of two. Ghosting is a different technique for reducing communication, in which a processor stores and computes redundantly data from neighboring processors for future computations. Cache-oblivious algorithms represent a different approach introduced in 1999 for fast Fourier transforms, and then extended to graph algorithms, dynamic programming, etc. They were also applied to several operations in linear algebra as dense LU and QR factorizations. The design of architecture specific algorithms is another approach that can be used for reducing the communication in parallel algorithms, and there are many examples in the literature of algorithms that are adapted to a given communication topology.
Media aggregation platform
A Media Aggregation Platform or Media Aggregation Portal (MAP) is an over the top service for distributing web-based streaming media content from multiple sources to a large audience. MAPs consist of networks of sources who host their own content which viewers can choose and access directly from a larger variety of content to choose from than a single source can offer. The service is used by content providers, looking to extend the reach of their content. Unlike multichannel video programming distributor (MVPD) or multiple-system operators (MSO), MAPs rely on the Internet rather than cables or satellite. As more network television channels have moved online in the early 21st century, joining web-native channels like Netflix, MAPs aggregate content the way that MSOs and MVPDs have used cable, and to a lesser extent satellite and IPTV infrastructure. There are companies that offer a similar service for free, including Yidio and StreamingMoviesRight, while others charge a subscription fee like as FreeCast Inc's Rabbit TV Plus. When compared with MSOs and MVPDs, MAP networks have much lower costs due to lack of physical infrastructure. The majority of revenue from MAP services are retained by the content creators, and revenue is instead collected from advertisements, pay-per-view, and subscription-based content offerings instead of licensing and reselling content. MAP service consumers interact and purchase content directly from its source, without the markup added by a middleman.
Data drilling
Data drilling (also drilldown) refers to any of various operations and transformations on tabular, relational, and multidimensional data. The term has widespread use in various contexts, but is primarily associated with specialized software designed specifically for data analysis. == Common data drilling operations == There are certain operations that are common to applications that allow data drilling. Among them are: Query operations: tabular query pivot query === Tabular query === Tabular query operations consist of standard operations on data tables. Among these operations are: search sort filter (by value) filter (by extended function or condition) transform (e.g., by adding or removing columns) Consider the following example: Fred and Wilma table (Fig 001): gender, fname, lname, home male, fred, chopin, Poland male, fred, flintstone, bedrock male, fred, durst, usa female, wilma, flintstone, bedrock female, wilma, rudolph, usa female, wilma, webb, usa male, fred, johnson, usa The preceding is an example of a simple flat file table formatted as comma-separated values. The table includes first name, last name, gender and home country for various people named fred or wilma. Although the example is formatted this way, it is important to emphasize that tabular query operations (as well as all data drilling operations) can be applied to any conceivable data type, regardless of the underlying formatting. The only requirement is that the data be readable by the software application in use. === Pivot query === A pivot query allows multiple representations of data according to different dimensions. This query type is similar to tabular query, except it also allows data to be represented in summary format, according to a flexible user-selected hierarchy. This class of data drilling operation is formally, (and loosely) known by different names, including crosstab query, pivot table, data pilot, selective hierarchy, intertwingularity and others. To illustrate the basics of pivot query operations, consider the Fred and Wilma table (Fig 001). A quick scan of the data reveals that the table has redundant information. This redundancy could be consolidated using an outline or a tree structure or in some other way. Moreover, once consolidated, the data could have many different alternate layouts. Using a simple text outline as output, the following alternate layouts are all possible with a pivot query: Summarize by gender (Fig 001): female flintstone, wilma rudolph, wilma webb, wilma male chopin, fred flintstone, fred durst, fred johnson, fred (Dimensions = gender; Tabular fields = lname, fname;) Summarize by home, lname (Fig 001): bedrock flintstone fred wilma Poland chopin fred usa ... (Dimensions = home, lname; Tabular fields = fname;) ==== Uses ==== Pivot query operations are useful for summarizing a corpus of data in multiple ways, thereby illustrating different representations of the same basic information. Although this type of operation appears prominently in spreadsheets and desktop database software, its flexibility is arguably under-utilized. There are many applications that allow only a 'fixed' hierarchy for representing data, and this represents a substantial limitation. == Drillup == Drillup is the opposite of drilldown. For example, if you drilldown to see the revenue of one product, then you might want to drillup to see the revenue of all products.
VieON
VieON is an mobile application for television and video on demand provided by VieON Joint Stock Company (formerly Dzones), a subsidiary of DatVietVAC Media and Entertainment Group in Vietnam. The app was launched in 2020, featuring over 140 domestic and international television channels, original series, popular entertainment programs known nationwide, top-tier sports events and live streaming of major events. Additionally, VieON provides animated films, television series and television programs from various countries such as South Korea and China. == History == The application was planned for development in 2016, with the cooperation of strategic consulting partner BCG Digital Ventures from the United States. Prior to 2020, VieON was a rebranded version of VTVcab ON, a product managed by Vietnam Cable Television Corporation (VTVCab) and DatVietVAC. On June 15, 2020, after four years of research and testing, the new version of VieON was officially released by DatVietVAC Group, with Vie Channel Joint Stock Company as the business entity and service provider. This is considered the official launch date of the application. On July 21, 2023, VieON transitioned its business operations and service provision to VieON Joint Stock Company. In January 2024, VieON officially launched its global version, VieON Global, targeting Vietnamese users living abroad. == Background == According to Kantar Media Vietnam, up to 84% of Vietnamese people aged 15–54 use social media daily, and in a similar survey by Nielsen, 90% of respondents said they watch live TV weekly. Additionally, according to research organization Muvi, Southeast Asia's OTT market revenue could reach $650 million annually starting next year. Understanding this, DatVietVAC Group has planned to research and develop an OTT application, even though the Vietnamese market already has some major players such as FPT Play and the international giant Netflix. Additionally, DatVietVAC does not hide its ambition to make this application the number one entertainment channel for Vietnamese people.
Subject (documents)
In library and information science documents (such as books, articles and pictures) are classified and searched by subject – as well as by other attributes such as author, genre and document type. This makes "subject" a fundamental term in this field. Library and information specialists assign subject labels to documents to make them findable. There are many ways to do this and in general there is not always consensus about which subject should be assigned to a given document. To optimize subject indexing and searching, we need to have a deeper understanding of what a subject is. The question: "what is to be understood by the statement 'document A belongs to subject category X'?" has been debated in the field for more than 100 years (see below) == Theoretical view == === Charles Ammi Cutter (1837–1903) === For Cutter the stability of subjects depends on a social process in which their meaning is stabilized in a name or a designation. A subject "referred [...] to those intellections [...] that had received a name that itself represented a distinct consensus in usage" (Miksa, 1983a, p. 60) and: the "systematic structure of established subjects" is "resident in the public realm" (Miksa, 1983a, p. 69); "[s]ubjects are by their very nature locations in a classificatory structure of publicly accumulated knowledge (Miksa, 1983a, p. 61). Bernd Frohmann adds: "The stability of the public realm in turn relies upon natural and objective mental structures which, with proper education, govern a natural progression from particular to general concepts. Since for Cutter, mind, society, and SKO [Systems of Knowledge Organization] stand one behind the other, each supporting each, all manifesting the same structure, his discursive construction of subjects invites connections with discourses of mind, education, and society. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), by contrast, severs those connections. Melvil Dewey emphasized more than once that his system maps no structure beyond its own; there is neither a "transcendental deduction" of its categories nor any reference to Cutter's objective structure of social consensus. It is content-free: Dewey disdained any philosophical excogitation of the meaning of his class symbols, leaving the job of finding verbal equivalents to others. His innovation and the essence of the system lay in the notation. The DDC is a poorly semiotic system of expanding nests of ten digits, lacking any referent beyond itself. In it, a subject is wholly constituted in terms of its position in the system. The essential characteristic of a subject is a class symbol which refers only to other symbols. Its verbal equivalent is accidental, a merely pragmatic characteristic... .... The conflict of interpretations over "subjects" became explicit in the battles between "bibliography" (an approach to subjects having much in common with Cutter's) and Dewey's "close classification". William Fletcher spoke for the scholarly bibliographer.... Fletcher's "subjects", like Cutter's, referred to the categories of a fantasized, stable social order, whereas Dewey's subjects were elements of a semiological system of standardized, techno-bureaucratic administrative software for the library in its corporate, rather than high culture, incarnation". (Frohmann, 1994, 112–113). Cutter's early view on what a subject is, is probably wiser than most understandings that dominated the 20th century – and also the understanding reflected in the ISO-standard quoted below. The early statements quoted by Frohmann indicate that subjects are somehow shaped in social processes. When that is said, it should be added that they are not particularly detailed or clear. We only get a vague idea of the social nature of subjects. === S. R. Ranganathan (1892–1972) === A classification system with an explicit theoretical foundation is Ranganathan's Colon Classification. Ranganathan provided an explicit definition of the concept of "subject": Subject – an organized body of ideas, whose extension and intension are likely to fall coherently within the field of interests and comfortably within the intellectual competence and the field of inevitable specialization of a normal person. A related definition is given by one of Ranganathan's students: A subject is an organized and systematized body of ideas. It may consist of one idea or a combination of several... Ranganathan's definition of "subject" is strongly influenced by his Colon Classification system. The colon system is based on the combination of single elements from facets to subject designation. This is the reason why the combined nature of subjects are emphasized so strongly. It leads, however, to absurdities such as the claim that gold cannot be a subject (but is alternatively termed "an isolate"). This aspect of the theory has been criticized by Metcalfe (1973, p. 318). Metcalfe's skepticism regarding Ranganathan's theory is formulated in hard words (op. cit., p. 317): "This pseudo-science imposed itself on British disciples from about 1950 on...". It seems unacceptable that Ranganathan defines the word subject in a way that favors his own system. A scientific concept like "subject" should make it possible to compare different ways of establishing access to information. Whether or not subjects are combined or not should be examined once their definition has been given, it should not determined a priori, in the definition. Besides the emphasis on the combined, organizing and systematizing nature of subjects contains Ranganathan's definition of subject the pragmatic demand, that a subject should be determined in a way that suits a normal person's competency or specialization. Again we see a strange kind of wishful thinking mixing a general understanding of a concept with demands put by his own specific system. One thing is what the word subject means, quite another issue is how to provide subject descriptions that fulfill demands such as the specificity of a given information retrieval language which fulfill demands put on the system, such as precision and recall. If researchers too often define terms in ways that favor specific kinds of systems, that are such definitions not useful to provide more general theories about subjects, subject analysis and IR. Among other things are comparative studies of different kinds of systems made difficult. Based on these arguments, as well as additional arguments which have been used in the literature, we may conclude that Ranganathan's definition of the concept "subject" is not suited for scientific use. Like the definition of "subject" given by the ISO-standard for topic maps, may Ranganathan's definition be useful within his own closed system. The purpose of a scientific and scholarly field is, however, to examine the relative fruitfulness of systems such as topic maps and Colon Classification. For such purpose is another understanding of "subject" necessary. === Patrick Wilson (1927–2003) === In his book Wilson (1968) examined – in particular by thought experiments – the suitability of different methods of examining the subject of a document. The methods were: identifying the author's purpose for writing the document, weighing the relative dominance and subordination of different elements in the picture, which the reading imposes on the reader, grouping or count the document's use of concepts and references, construing a set of rules for selecting elements deemed necessary (as opposed to unnecessary) for the work as a whole. Patrick Wilson shows convincingly that each of these methods are insufficient to determine the subject of a document and is led to conclude ( p. 89): "The notion of the subject of a writing is indeterminate..." or, on p. 92 (about what users may expect to find using a particular position in a library classification system): "For nothing definite can be expected of the things found at any given position". In connection to the last quote has Wilson an interesting footnote in which he writes that authors of documents often use terms in ambiguous ways ("hostility" is used as an example). Even if the librarian could personally develop a very precise understanding of a concept, he would be unable to use it in his classification, because none of the documents use the term in the same precise way. Based on this argumentation is Wilson led to conclude: "If people write on what are for them ill-defined phenomena, a correct description of their subjects must reflect the ill-definedness". Wilson's concept of subject was discussed by Hjørland (1992) who found that it is problematic to give up the precise understanding of such a basic term in LIS. Wilson's arguments led him to an agnostic position which Hjørland found unacceptable and unnecessary. Concerning the authors' use of ambiguous terms, the role of the subject analysis is to determine which documents would be fruitful for users to identify whether or not the documents use one or another term or whether a given term i