Algorithmic Puzzles is a book of puzzles based on computational thinking. It was written by computer scientists Anany and Maria Levitin, and published in 2011 by Oxford University Press. == Topics == The book begins with a "tutorial" introducing classical algorithm design techniques including backtracking, divide-and-conquer algorithms, and dynamic programming, methods for the analysis of algorithms, and their application in example puzzles. The puzzles themselves are grouped into three sets of 50 puzzles, in increasing order of difficulty. A final two chapters provide brief hints and more detailed solutions to the puzzles, with the solutions forming the majority of pages of the book. Some of the puzzles are well known classics, some are variations of known puzzles making them more algorithmic, and some are new. They include: Puzzles involving chessboards, including the eight queens puzzle, knight's tours, and the mutilated chessboard problem Balance puzzles River crossing puzzles The Tower of Hanoi Finding the missing element in a data stream The geometric median problem for Manhattan distance == Audience and reception == The puzzles in the book cover a wide range of difficulty, and in general do not require more than a high school level of mathematical background. William Gasarch notes that grouping the puzzles only by their difficulty and not by their themes is actually an advantage, as it provides readers with fewer clues about their solutions. Reviewer Narayanan Narayanan recommends the book to any puzzle aficionado, or to anyone who wants to develop their powers of algorithmic thinking. Reviewer Martin Griffiths suggests another group of readers, schoolteachers and university instructors in search of examples to illustrate the power of algorithmic thinking. Gasarch recommends the book to any computer scientist, evaluating it as "a delight".
Database virtualization
Database virtualization is the decoupling of the database layer, which lies between the storage and application layers within the application stack. Virtualization of the database layer enables a shift away from the physical, toward the logical or virtual. Virtualization enables compute and storage resources to be pooled and allocated on demand. This enables both the sharing of single server resources for multi-tenancy, as well as the pooling of server resources into a single logical database or cluster. In both cases, database virtualization provides increased flexibility, more granular and efficient allocation of pooled resources, and more scalable computing. == Virtual data partitioning == The act of partitioning data stores as a database grows has been in use for several decades. There are two primary ways that data has been partitioned inside legacy data management systems: Shared-data databases: an architecture that assumes all database cluster nodes share a single partition. Inter-node communications are used to synchronize update activities performed by different nodes on the cluster. Shared-data data management systems are limited to single-digit node clusters. Shared-nothing databases: an architecture in which all data is segregated to internally managed partitions with clear, well-defined data location boundaries. Shared-nothing databases require manual partition management. In virtual partitioning, logical data is abstracted from physical data by autonomously creating and managing large numbers of data partitions (100s to 1000s). Because they are autonomously maintained, the resources required to manage the partitions are minimal. This kind of massive partitioning results in: Partitions that are small, efficiently managed, and load-balanced. Systems that do not require re-partitioning events to define additional partitions, even when the hardware is changed. “Shared-data” and “shared-nothing” architectures allow scalability through multiple data partitions and cross-partition querying and transaction processing without full partition scanning. == Horizontal data partitioning == Partitioning database sources from consumers is a fundamental concept. With greater numbers of database sources, inserting a horizontal data virtualization layer between the sources and consumers helps address this complexity. Rick van der Lans, the author of multiple books on SQL and relational databases, has defined data virtualization as "the process of offering data consumers a data access interface that hides the technical aspects of stored data, such as location, storage structure, API, access language, and storage technology." == Advantages == Added flexibility and agility for existing computing infrastructure. Enhanced database performance. Pooling and sharing computing resources, either splitting them (multi-tenancy) or combining them (clustering). Simplification of administration and management. Increased fault tolerance.
Bandhan Tod
Bandhan Tod is a mobile app to stop child marriage in India's Bihar state through SOS button in the app. When the SOS on Bandhan Tod is activated, the nearest small NGO will attempt to resolve the issue. If the family resists, then the police gets notified. Till now so many child marriages has been cancelled through Bandhan Tod interventions. Bandhan Tod is an initiative of Gender Alliance managed by Prashanti Tiwari to support the state government's efforts to end child marriage and dowry.
Captions (app)
Mirage (formerly known as Captions) is a video-generating, video-editing and AI research company headquartered in New York City. Their first app, Captions, is available on iOS, Android, and Web and offers a suite of tools aimed at streamlining the creation and editing of videos. Their enterprise platform, Mirage Studio, generates AI actors and videos for marketing assets and video campaigns. == History == Mirage was co-founded by Gaurav Misra and Dwight Churchill. During Misra's time leading design engineering at Snap Inc., he followed the rise of a new category of video, the "talking video." In 2021, Misra left Snap to found Mirage with his former colleague Churchill. Later that year, the Captions app launched with early backing from venture capital firms Sequoia Capital and Andreessen Horowitz as well as individual investors. In 2023, the company released Lipdub, an Al dubbing app which translates any video with spoken audio into 28 languages. In October 2023, Captions shared that it maintained over 100,000 daily active users with "about a million" videos being created monthly. In November 2024, Captions acquired AlpacaML, a generative AI company that focused on art and other images. In June 2025, Captions launched Mirage Studio, for marketers and advertising agencies. In September 2025, Captions rebranded their company to Mirage. This change reflects the company's focus on developing their proprietary foundation model and future video products. == Products == The Captions app offers features to automate common production tasks including captioning, editing, dubbing, script creation, and music integration. Mirage Studio allows users to generate AI avatars and create short-form videos from prompts or audio. == Awards == In 2023, the company was recognized as part of Fast Company's "Next Big Things In Tech" series. In 2024, the company won 2 Webby Awards for Best Use of AI & Machine Learning and Creative Production.
Tensor operator
In pure and applied mathematics, quantum mechanics and computer graphics, a tensor operator generalizes the notion of operators which are scalars and vectors. A special class of these are spherical tensor operators which apply the notion of the spherical basis and spherical harmonics. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. The coordinate-free generalization of a tensor operator is known as a representation operator. == The general notion of scalar, vector, and tensor operators == In quantum mechanics, physical observables that are scalars, vectors, and tensors, must be represented by scalar, vector, and tensor operators, respectively. Whether something is a scalar, vector, or tensor depends on how it is viewed by two observers whose coordinate frames are related to each other by a rotation. Alternatively, one may ask how, for a single observer, a physical quantity transforms if the state of the system is rotated. Consider, for example, a system consisting of a molecule of mass M {\displaystyle M} , traveling with a definite center of mass momentum, p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} , in the z {\displaystyle z} direction. If we rotate the system by 90 ∘ {\displaystyle 90^{\circ }} about the y {\displaystyle y} axis, the momentum will change to p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} , which is in the x {\displaystyle x} direction. The center-of-mass kinetic energy of the molecule will, however, be unchanged at p 2 / 2 M {\displaystyle p^{2}/2M} . The kinetic energy is a scalar and the momentum is a vector, and these two quantities must be represented by a scalar and a vector operator, respectively. By the latter in particular, we mean an operator whose expected values in the initial and the rotated states are p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} and p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} . The kinetic energy on the other hand must be represented by a scalar operator, whose expected value must be the same in the initial and the rotated states. In the same way, tensor quantities must be represented by tensor operators. An example of a tensor quantity (of rank two) is the electrical quadrupole moment of the above molecule. Likewise, the octupole and hexadecapole moments would be tensors of rank three and four, respectively. Other examples of scalar operators are the total energy operator (more commonly called the Hamiltonian), the potential energy, and the dipole-dipole interaction energy of two atoms. Examples of vector operators are the momentum, the position, the orbital angular momentum, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} , and the spin angular momentum, S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} . (Fine print: Angular momentum is a vector as far as rotations are concerned, but unlike position or momentum it does not change sign under space inversion, and when one wishes to provide this information, it is said to be a pseudovector.) Scalar, vector and tensor operators can also be formed by products of operators. For example, the scalar product L ⋅ S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }\cdot {\mathbf {S} }} of the two vector operators, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} and S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} , is a scalar operator, which figures prominently in discussions of the spin–orbit interaction. Similarly, the quadrupole moment tensor of our example molecule has the nine components Q i j = ∑ α q α ( 3 r α , i r α , j − r α 2 δ i j ) . {\displaystyle Q_{ij}=\sum _{\alpha }q_{\alpha }\left(3r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}-r_{\alpha }^{2}\delta _{ij}\right).} Here, the indices i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} can independently take on the values 1, 2, and 3 (or x {\displaystyle x} , y {\displaystyle y} , and z {\displaystyle z} ) corresponding to the three Cartesian axes, the index α {\displaystyle \alpha } runs over all particles (electrons and nuclei) in the molecule, q α {\displaystyle q_{\alpha }} is the charge on particle α {\displaystyle \alpha } , and r α , i {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}} is the i {\displaystyle i} -th component of the position of this particle. Each term in the sum is a tensor operator. In particular, the nine products r α , i r α , j {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}} together form a second rank tensor, formed by taking the outer product of the vector operator r α {\displaystyle {\mathbf {r} }_{\alpha }} with itself. == Rotations of quantum states == === Quantum rotation operator === The rotation operator about the unit vector n (defining the axis of rotation) through angle θ is U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = exp ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right)} where J = (Jx, Jy, Jz) are the rotation generators (also the angular momentum matrices): J x = ℏ 2 ( 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 ) J y = ℏ 2 ( 0 i 0 − i 0 i 0 − i 0 ) J z = ℏ ( − 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ) {\displaystyle J_{x}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&1&0\\1&0&1\\0&1&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{y}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&i&0\\-i&0&i\\0&-i&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{z}=\hbar {\begin{pmatrix}-1&0&0\\0&0&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}} and let R ^ = R ^ ( θ , n ^ ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {R}}={\widehat {R}}(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})} be a rotation matrix. According to the Rodrigues' rotation formula, the rotation operator then amounts to U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = 1 1 − i sin θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J − 1 − cos θ ℏ 2 ( n ^ ⋅ J ) 2 . {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=1\!\!1-{\frac {i\sin \theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} -{\frac {1-\cos \theta }{\hbar ^{2}}}({\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} )^{2}.} An operator Ω ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}} is invariant under a unitary transformation U if Ω ^ = U † Ω ^ U ; {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U;} in this case for the rotation U ^ ( R ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {U}}(R)} , Ω ^ = U ( R ) † Ω ^ U ( R ) = exp ( i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) Ω ^ exp ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) . {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U(R)}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U(R)=\exp \left({\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right){\widehat {\Omega }}\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right).} === Angular momentum eigenkets === The orthonormal basis set for total angular momentum is | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |j,m\rangle } , where j is the total angular momentum quantum number and m is the magnetic angular momentum quantum number, which takes values −j, −j + 1, ..., j − 1, j. A general state within the j subspace | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}|j,m\rangle } rotates to a new state by: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =U(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}U(R)|j,m\rangle } Using the completeness condition: I = ∑ m ′ | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | {\displaystyle I=\sum _{m'}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|} we have | ψ ¯ ⟩ = I U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =IU(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } Introducing the Wigner D matrix elements: D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) = ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle {D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}=\langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } gives the matrix multiplication: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m D m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ ⇒ | ψ ¯ ⟩ = D ( j ) | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}D_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle \quad \Rightarrow \quad |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =D^{(j)}|\psi \rangle } For one basis ket: | j , m ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m ′ D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\overline {j,m}}\rangle =\sum _{m'}{D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle } For the case of orbital angular momentum, the eigenstates | ℓ , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\ell ,m\rangle } of the orbital angular momentum operator L and solutions of Laplace's equation on a 3d sphere are spherical harmonics: Y ℓ m ( θ , ϕ ) = ⟨ θ , ϕ | ℓ , m ⟩ = ( 2 ℓ + 1 ) 4 π ( ℓ − m ) ! ( ℓ + m ) ! P ℓ m ( cos θ ) e i m ϕ {\displaystyle Y_{\ell }^{m}(\theta ,\phi )=\langle \theta ,\phi |\ell ,m\rangle ={\sqrt {{(2\ell +1) \over 4\pi }{(\ell -m)! \over (\ell +m)!}}}\,P_{\ell }^{m}(\cos {\theta })\,e^{im\phi }} where Pℓm is an associated Legendre polynomial, ℓ is the orbital angular momentum quantum number, and m is the orbital magnetic quantum number which takes the values −ℓ, −ℓ + 1, ... ℓ − 1, ℓ The formalism of spherical harmonics have wide applications in applied mathematics, and are closely related to the formalism of spherical tensors, as shown below. Spherical harmonics are functions of the polar and azimuthal angles, ϕ and θ respectively, which can be conveniently collected into a unit vector n(θ, ϕ) pointing in the direction of those angles, in the Cartesian basis it is: n ^ ( θ , ϕ ) = cos ϕ sin θ e x + s
CHAOS (chess)
CHAOS (Chess Heuristics and Other Stuff) is a chess playing program that was developed by programmers working at the RCA Systems Programming division in the late 1960s. It played competitively in computer chess competitions in the 1970s and 1980s. It differed from other programs of that era in its look-ahead philosophy, choosing to use chess knowledge to evaluate fewer positions and continuations as opposed to simple evaluations that relied on deep look-ahead to avoid bad moves. == Introduction == CHAOS was originally developed by Ira Ruben, Fred Swartz, Victor Berman, Joe Winograd and William Toikka while working at RCA in Cinnaminson, NJ. Its name is an acronym for 'Chess Heuristics and Other Stuff.' Program development moved to the Computing Center of the University of Michigan when Swartz changed jobs, and Mike Alexander joined the development group. Swartz, Alexander and Berman were continuously group members from that point onward in CHAOS' evolution, as others of the original authors left and new members contributed episodically. Chess Senior Master Jack O'Keefe contributed to CHAOS' development from about 1980 onwards. CHAOS was written in Fortran, except for low-level board representation manipulations written in assembly language or C. Due to this portability, it ran on RCA, Univac and IBM-compatible mainframes in its lifetime. CHAOS heralds from the mainframe computing era when only machines of that capacity were able to play at a high level. Consequently, development and testing could only take place at off-peak times for production use of the machine. In a competition, CHAOS had to run on a dedicated mainframe with a telephone link to the match venue. In its later years, CHAOS ran on computers on the machine assembly floor of Amdahl Corporation on MTS. == Background == === Chess and artificial intelligence === Mathematicians Claude Shannon and Alan Turing, working separately, were the first to view playing chess as a challenge to machines. Working for AT&T / Bell Labs with its access to telephone switching equipment, Shannon built a relay-based machine that learned how to work its way through a two-dimensional, 5x5 cell maze in 1949. Shannon viewed this as an analogue of the way that organisms learn things about their natural environment. There is a random element to searching it, a memory element to benefit from the search outcome, and a reward element that reinforces learning when the global outcome is favorable to the organism. Soon afterward, Shannon wrote a mathematical analysis of the game of chess, published in 1950. Like with the maze, he broke down game play into the necessary elements for reinforcement learning. Associated with each board configuration a move will be made from, there is a numerical score. To decide what move to make, a player wants to maximize their own position's score after the move and to minimize their opponent's score (a minimax view). Since there are about 32 possible moves at each of the early stages of the game, and about 40 moves and responses in each game, then there are about 32 80 {\displaystyle 32^{80}} or about 10 120 {\displaystyle 10^{120}} possible games - an impossibly large set to evaluate completely. Therefore, there must be a way to limit the number of moves to look ahead for to find the best one. Reducing the game to these few key elements provided a way to think about human intelligence in general. Shannon became part of a wider group using computing machines to mimic aspects of human intelligence that grew into the general idea of artificial intelligence. (Other members of this group were John McCarthy, Herbert Simon, Allen Newell, Alan Kotok, Alex Bernstein and Richard Greenblatt.) The paradigm that evolved was that there was a quantification of the position on the board into a score, an evaluation method to find favorable outcomes (minimax, later alpha-beta pruning), and a strategy to manage the combinatorial explosion of the look-ahead possibilities. By the early 1960s, there were computer programs that played chess at a rudimentary level. They used very simple evaluation functions for each position and tried to search as far forward as was practical given the time constraints and available compute power. Naturally, programmers optimized their code to use the available computing resources. This led to a major philosophical divide among chess programs: those that tried to evaluate as many positions as possible, and those that tried to evaluate the most promising move sequences as deeply as possible. CHAOS was firmly in the camp believing only the most promising moves should be evaluated in depth. Said Swartz, "The 'brute force people' ... look at every (possible move) no matter what garbage it is. Most moves are just terrible, terrible moves, and most computing time is being spent on pure garbage." The program spent more time evaluating each board position in the expectation that it would find the most promising lines of play to explore in depth. In 1983, the then-fastest chess program (Belle) evaluated 110,000 positions per second, and typical programs 1000–50,000 per second, whereas CHAOS evaluated about 50-100 per second. === Machine learning and strategies to manage search === From about 1949 onward, Arthur Samuel began work for IBM on machine learning, culminating in a checkers-playing program in 1952 and publications on the topic. Concurrently, Christopher Strachey created Checkers, a program to play the board game of checkers in 1951, but it had no capacity to learn from its play. Checkers was chosen by both authors because it was simpler than chess yet contained the basic characteristics of an intellectual activity, and, in Samuel's view, was a test-bed in which heuristic procedures and learning processes could be evaluated quickly. Checker playing programs introduced the notion of the game tree and evaluating play to various depths to choose the best move. The complexity of chess, however, promoted it to the status of an analogue for human intelligence, and it attracted computer scientists' attention, who referred to it as research into artificial intelligence (AI). Like checkers, it required a numerical assessment of each arrangement of chess pieces on a board. It also required looking ahead to future moves to decide how to play the present position. Due to the enormous number of possible moves, there had to be a way to confine the look-ahead search to the most promising lines of play. From these factors, the notion of minimax score evaluation developed and, later, alpha-beta tree pruning to abandon looking at positions worse than any that have already been examined. === Chess search strategies === The AI community viewed artificial intelligence as comprising two parts: a way to symbolically quantify the knowledge in hand (a chess board position), and a set of heuristics to limit look-ahead to the consequences of a move. The early chess playing programs attempted to look forward as far as possible, perhaps to 3 moves ahead by each player, and to choose the best outcome. This led to the horizon effect, whereby a key move 4 or more moves ahead would be unexamined and therefore missed. Consequently, the programs were quite weak and heuristics to manage the search became important in their development. CHAOS used a selective search strategy with iterative widening. As chess programs evolved, they incorporated books of opening lines of play from historic sources. Nowadays, book moves are catalogued in machine-readable form, but originally programmers had to type them in. CHAOS had an extensive book for its time of around 10,000 moves that O'Keefe helped to develop. A problem with play from an opening book is the behavior of the program when the play leaves the book: the positional advantage may be so subtle that the evaluation scheme may be unable to understand it, leading to very wide and shallow searches to establish a line of play. The horizon effect again plagues move selection after leaving the book. CHAOS mitigated these problems by only using book lines that it could understand, and by relying on cached analyses of continuations out of the book made while the opponent's clock was running. == Game Play History == CHAOS played in twelve ACM computer chess tournaments and four World Computer Chess Championships (WCCC). Its debut was the ACM computer chess tournament in 1973, taking 2nd place. In 1974, it again won 2nd place in the WCCC, defeating the tournament favorite Chess 4.0 but losing to Kaissa. CHAOS was close to winning the 1980 WCCC, but lost to Belle in a playoff. The 1985 ACM computer chess tournament was CHAOS' last competition. One of CHAOS' notable victories was over Chess 4.0 at the 1974 WCCC tournament. Chess 4.0 was unbeaten by any other program up until then. Playing as white, CHAOS made a knight sacrifice (16 Nd4-e6!!) that traded material for open lines of attack and eventually won the game. CHAOS’ authors thought the move was due to a
Bump (application)
Bump was an iOS and Android mobile app that enabled smartphone users to transfer contact information, photos and files between devices. In 2011, it was #8 on Apple's list of all-time most popular free iPhone apps, and by February 2013 it had been downloaded 125 million times. Its developer, Bump Technologies, shut down the service and discontinued the app on January 31, 2014, after being acquired by Google for Google Photos and Android Camera. == Features == Bump sent contact information, photos and files to another device over the internet. Before activating the transfer, each user confirmed what they want to send to the other user. To initiate a transfer, two people physically bumped their phones together. A screen appeared on both users' smartphone displays, allowing them to confirm what they want to send to each other. When two users bumped their phones, software on the phones send a variety of sensor data to an algorithm running on Bump servers, which included the location of the phone, accelerometer readings, IP address, and other sensor readings. The algorithm figured out which two phones felt the same physical bump and then transfers the information between those phones. Bump did not use Near Field Communication. February 2012 release of Bump 3.0 for iOS, the company streamlined the app to focus on its most frequently used features: contact and photo sharing. Bump 3.0 for Android maintained the features eliminated from the iOS version but moved them behind swipeable layers. In May 2012, a Bump update enabled users to transfer photos from their phone to their computer via a web service. To initiate a transfer, the user goes to the Bump website on their computer and bumps the smartphone on the computer keyboard's space bar. By December 2012, various Bump updates for iOS and Android had added the abilities to share video, audio, and any files. Users swipe to access those features. In February 2013, an update to the Bump iOS and Android apps enabled users to transfer photos, videos, contacts and other files from a computer to a smartphone and vice versa via a web service. To perform the transfer, users went to the Bump website on their computer and bump the smartphone on the computer keyboard's space bar. == History == The underlying idea of a synchronous gesture like bumping two devices for content transfer or pairing them was first conceived by Ken Hinkley of Microsoft Research in 2003. This idea was presented at a user interface and technology conference that same year. The paper proposed the use of accelerometers and a bumping gesture of two devices to enable communication, screen sharing and content transfer between them. Similar to this original concept, the idea for Bump app was conceived by David Lieb, a former employee of Texas Instruments, while he was attending the University of Chicago Booth School of Business for his MBA. While going through the orientation and meeting process of business school, he became frustrated by constantly entering contact information into his iPhone and felt that the process could be improved. His fellow Texas Instruments employees Andy Huibers and Jake Mintz, who was a classmate of Lieb's at the University of Chicago's MBA program, joined Lieb to form Bump Technologies. Bump Technologies launched in 2008 and is located in Mountain View, CA. Early funding for the project was provided by startup incubator Y Combinator, Sequoia Capital and other angel investors. It gained attention at the CTIA international wireless conference, due to its accessibility and novelty factor. In October 2009, Bump received $3.4m in Series A funding followed in January 2011 with a $16m series B financing round led by Andreessen Horowitz. Silicon Valley venture capitalist Marc Andreessen sits on the company's board. The Bump app debuted in the Apple iOS App Store in March 2009 and was “one of the apps that helped to define the iPhone” (Harry McCracken, Technologizer). It soon became the billionth download on Apple's App Store. An Android version launched in November 2009. By the time Bump 3.0 for iOS was released in February 2012, the app had been installed 77 million times, with users sharing more than 2 million photos daily. As of February 2013, there had been 125 million Bump app downloads. == Other apps created by Bump Technologies == Bump Technologies worked with PayPal in March 2010 to create a PayPal iPhone application. The application, which allows two users to automatically activate an Internet transfer of money between their accounts, found widespread adoption. A similar version was released for Android in August 2010. The Bump capability in PayPal's apps was removed in March 2012. At that time, Bump Technologies released Bump Pay, an iOS app that lets users transfer money via PayPal by physically bumping two smartphones together. The tool was originally created for the Bump team to use when splitting up restaurant bills. The payment feature was not added to the Bump app because the company “wanted to make it as simple as possible so people understand how this works,” Lieb told ABC News. Bump Pay was the first app from the company's Bump Labs initiative. A goal of Bump Labs is to test new app ideas that may not fit within the main Bump app. ING Direct added a feature to its iPhone app in 2011 that lets users transfer money to each other using Bump's technology. The feature was later added to its Android app, now called Capital One 360. In July 2012, Bump Technologies released Flock, an iPhone photo sharing app. An Android version was released in December 2012. Using geolocation data embedded in photos and a user's Facebook connections, Flock finds pictures the user takes while out with friends and family and puts everyone's photos from that event into a single shared album. Users receive a push notification after the event, asking if they want to share their photos with friends who were there in the moment. The app will also scan previous photos in the iPhone camera roll and uncover photos that have yet to be shared. If location services were enabled at the time a photo was taken, Flock allows users to create an album of photos from the past with the friends who were there with them. == Acquisition by Google == On September 16, 2013, Bump Technologies announced that it had been acquired by Google. On December 31, 2013, they broke the news that both Bump and Flock would be discontinued so that the team could focus on new projects at Google. The apps were removed from the App Store and Google Play on January 31, 2014. The company subsequently deleted all user data and shut down their servers, thus rendering existing installations of the apps inoperable.