Umoove is a high tech startup company that has developed and patented a software-only face and eye tracking technology. The idea was first conceived as an attempt to aid people with disabilities but has since evolved. The only compatibility qualification for tablet computers and smartphones to run Umoove software is a front-facing camera. Umoove headquarters are in Israel on Jerusalem’s Har Hotzvim. Umoove has 15 employees and received two million dollars in financing in 2012. The company's original founders invested around $800,000 to start the business in 2010. In 2013 Umoove was named one of the top three most promising Israeli start ups by Newsgeeks magazine. The company also participated in the 2013 LeWeb conference in Paris, France, where innovative technology startups are showcased. == Technology == The technology uses information extracted from previous frames, such as the angle of the user's head to predict where to look for facial targets in the next frame. This anticipation minimizes the amount of computation needed to scan each image. Umoove accounts for variances in environment, lighting conditions and user hand shake/movement. The technology is designed to provide a consistent experience, whether you're in a brightly lit area or a darkened basement, and to work fluidly between them by adapting its processing when it detects color and brightness shifts. It uses an active stabilization technique to filter out natural body movements from an unstable camera in order to minimize false-positive motion detection. Running the Umoove software on a Samsung Galaxy S3 is said to take up only 2% CPU. Umoove works exclusively with software and there is no hardware add-on necessary. It can be run on any smartphone or tablet computer that has a front-facing camera. Umoove claims that even a low-quality camera on an old device will run their software flawlessly. == Umoove Experience == In January 2014 Umoove released its first game onto the app store. The Umoove Experience game lets users control where they are 'flying' in the game through simple gestures and motions with their head. The avatar will basically go toward wherever the user looks. The game was created to showcase the technology for game developers but that did not stop some from criticizing its simplicity. Umoove also announced that they raised another one million dollars and that they are opening offices in Silicon Valley, California. In February 2014, Umoove announced that their face-tracking software development kit is available for Android developers as well as iOS. == Reviews == The Umoove Experience garnered mostly positive reviews from bloggers and mainstream media with some predicting that it could be the future of mobile gaming. Mashable wrote that Umoove's technology could be the emergence of gesture recognition technology in the mobile space, similar to Kinect with console gaming and what Leap Motion has done with desktop computers. Some, however, remain skeptical. CNET, for example, did not give the game a positive review and called the eye tracking technology 'freaky but cool'. They also noted that pioneering technologies have been known to fall short of expectations, citing Apple Inc’s Siri as an example. The technology blog GigaOM said that the Umoove Experience is ’awesome’ and technology evangelist Robert Scoble has called Umoove "brilliant". == uHealth == In January 2015, Umoove released uHealth, a mobile application that uses eye tracking game-like exercise to challenge the user's ability to be attentive, continuously focus, follow commands and avoid distractions. The app is designed in the form of two games, one to improve attention and another that hones focus. uHealth is a training tool, not a diagnostic. Umoove has stated that they want to use their technology for diagnosing neurological disorders but this will depend on clinical tests and FDA approval. The company cites the direct relationship between eye movements and brain activity as well as various vision-based therapies have been backed by many scientific studies conducted over the past decades. uHealth is the first time this type of therapy is delivered right to the end user through a simple download. == Collaboration rumors == In March 2013 there were rumors on the internet that Umoove would be the functioning software embedded into the Samsung Galaxy S4, which was due to launch that month. This rumor was perpetrated by, among others, New York Times, Techcrunch and Yahoo. Once Samsung launched without the Umoove technology rumors about a potential collaboration with Apple Inc hit the web. It has been said that due to the fact that Apple Inc is losing market share and stock value to Samsung they will be more aggressive and eye tracking is a logical place to make that move.
Artificial intelligence content detection
Artificial intelligence detection software aims to determine whether some content (text, image, video, or audio) was generated using artificial intelligence (AI). This software is often unreliable. == Accuracy issues == Many AI detection tools have been shown to be unreliable in detecting AI-generated text. In a 2023 study conducted by Weber-Wulff et al., researchers evaluated 14 detection tools including Turnitin and GPTZero and found that "all scored below 80% of accuracy and only 5 over 70%." They also found that these tools tend to have a bias for classifying texts more as human than as AI, and that accuracy of these tools worsens upon paraphrasing. === False positives === In AI content detection, a false positive is when human-written work is incorrectly flagged as AI-written. Many AI detection platforms claim to have a minimal level of false positives, with Turnitin claiming a less than 1% false positive rate. However, later research by The Washington Post produced much higher rates of 50%, though they used a smaller sample size. False positives in an academic setting frequently lead to accusations of academic misconduct, which can have serious consequences for a student's academic record. Additionally, studies have shown evidence that many AI detection models are prone to give false positives to work written by people whose first language is not English, and also to neurodivergent people. In June 2023, Janelle Shane wrote that portions of her book You Look Like a Thing and I Love You were flagged as AI-generated. === False negatives === A false negative is a failure to identify documents with AI-written text. False negatives often happen as a result of a detection software's sensitivity level or because evasive techniques were used when generating the work to make it sound more human. False negatives are less of a concern academically, since they aren't likely to lead to accusations and ramifications. Notably, Turnitin stated they have a 15% false negative rate. == Text detection == For text, this is usually done to prevent alleged plagiarism, often by detecting repetition of words as telltale signs that a text was AI-generated (including hallucinations). Detection systems may also rely on stylistic and structural regularities associated with LLM output, such as unusually consistent grammar, formulaic transitions, repeated discourse markers, and recurring rhetorical templates. Some tools are designed less to establish authorship provenance than to flag prose that resembles common LLM-generated style patterns. They are often used by teachers marking their students, usually on an ad hoc basis. Following the release of ChatGPT and similar AI text generative software, many educational establishments have issued policies against the use of AI by students. AI text detection software is also used by those assessing job applicants, as well as online search engines, hiring, online moderation and publishing. Current detectors may sometimes be unreliable and have incorrectly marked work by humans as originating from AI while failing to detect AI-generated work in other instances. MIT Technology Review said that the technology "struggled to pick up ChatGPT-generated text that had been slightly rearranged by humans and obfuscated by a paraphrasing tool". AI text detection software has also been shown to discriminate against non-native speakers of English. Two students from the University of California, Davis, were referred to the university's Office of Student Success and Judicial Affairs (OSSJA) after their professors scanned their essays with positive results; the first with an AI detector called GPTZero, and the second with an AI detector integration in Turnitin. However, following media coverage, and a thorough investigation, the students were cleared of any wrongdoing. In April 2023, Cambridge University and other members of the Russell Group of universities in the United Kingdom opted out of Turnitin's AI text detection tool, after expressing concerns it was unreliable. The University of Texas at Austin opted out of the system six months later. In May 2023, a professor at Texas A&M University–Commerce used ChatGPT to detect whether his students' content was written by it, which ChatGPT said was the case. As such, he threatened to fail the class despite ChatGPT not being able to detect AI-generated writing. No students were prevented from graduating because of the issue, and all but one student (who admitted to using the software) were exonerated from accusations of having used ChatGPT in their content. In July 2023, a paper titled "GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers" was released, reporting that GPTs discriminate against non-native English authors. The paper compared seven GPT detectors against essays from both non-native English speakers and essays from United States students. The essays from non-native English speakers had an average false positive rate of 61.3%. An article by Thomas Germain, published on Gizmodo in June 2024, reported job losses among freelance writers and journalists due to AI text detection software mistakenly classifying their work as AI-generated. In September 2024, Common Sense Media reported that generative AI detectors had a 20% false positive rate for Black students, compared to 10% of Latino students and 7% of White students. To improve the reliability of AI text detection, researchers have explored digital watermarking techniques. A 2023 paper titled "A Watermark for Large Language Models" presents a method to embed imperceptible watermarks into text generated by large language models (LLMs). This watermarking approach allows content to be flagged as AI-generated with a high level of accuracy, even when text is slightly paraphrased or modified. The technique is designed to be subtle and hard to detect for casual readers, thereby preserving readability, while providing a detectable signal for those employing specialized tools. However, while promising, watermarking faces challenges in remaining robust under adversarial transformations and ensuring compatibility across different LLMs. == Anti text detection == There is software available designed to bypass AI text detection. In practice, evasion may not require specialized bypass tools. Paraphrasing, style editing, and removal of repeated discourse markers can substantially reduce the effectiveness of detectors that rely on recognizable surface patterns. A study published in August 2023 analyzed 20 abstracts from papers published in the Eye Journal, which were then paraphrased using GPT-4.0. The AI-paraphrased abstracts were examined for plagiarism using QueText and for AI-generated content using Originality.AI. The texts were then re-processed through an adversarial software called Undetectable.ai in order to reduce the AI-detection scores. The study found that the AI detection tool, Originality.AI, identified text generated by GPT-4 with a mean accuracy of 91.3%. However, after reprocessing by Undetectable.ai, the detection accuracy of Originality.ai dropped to a mean accuracy of 27.8%. Some experts also believe that techniques like digital watermarking are ineffective because they can be removed or added to trigger false positives. "A Watermark for Large Language Models" paper by Kirchenbauer et al. (2023) also addresses potential vulnerabilities of watermarking techniques. The authors outline a range of adversarial tactics, including text insertion, deletion, and substitution attacks, that could be used to bypass watermark detection. These attacks vary in complexity, from simple paraphrasing to more sophisticated approaches involving tokenization and homoglyph alterations. The study highlights the challenge of maintaining watermark robustness against attackers who may employ automated paraphrasing tools or even specific language model replacements to alter text spans iteratively while retaining semantic similarity. Experimental results show that although such attacks can degrade watermark strength, they also come at the cost of text quality and increased computational resources. == Image, video, and audio detection == Several purported AI image detection software exist, to detect AI-generated images (for example, those originating from Midjourney or DALL-E). They are not completely reliable. Industry analyses have also noted that AI-driven image recognition systems often struggle in real-world environments, where inconsistent lighting, noise and variable visual inputs reduce detection reliability, a challenge highlighted in modern agricultural quality-control research. Others claim to identify video and audio deepfakes, but this technology is also not fully reliable yet either. Despite debate around the efficacy of watermarking, Google DeepMind is actively developing a detection software called SynthID, which works by inserting a digital watermark that is invisible to the human eye into the pixels of an image.
Squeaky Dolphin
Squeaky Dolphin is a program developed by the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), a British intelligence and security organization, to collect and analyze data from social media networks. The program was first revealed to the general public on NBC on 27 January 2014 based on documents previously leaked by Edward Snowden. == Scope of surveillance == According to a document of the GCHQ dated August 2012, the program enables broad, real-time surveillance of the following items: YouTube video views The Like button on Facebook. Facebook has since then encrypted the data. Blogspot/Blogger visits Twitter, which has however encrypted its communications since this presentation was made The program can be supplemented with commercially available analytic software to determine which videos are popular among residents of specific cities. The dashboard software chosen was made by Splunk. The presentation, which was originally shown to an NSA audience and was made public by the NBC, contains a note saying the program was "Not interested in individuals just broad trends!". However, "according to other Snowden documents" obtained by NBC, in 2010, "GCHQ exploited unencrypted data from Twitter to identify specific users around the world and target them with propaganda."
Social media background check
A social media background check is an investigative technique that involves scrutinizing the social media profiles and activities of individuals, primarily for pre-employment screening and other official verifications. These checks are performed to review people's online behavioral history on social media websites such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Social media background checks have become a common part of recruitment processes, among other verification procedures. == History == In the early 21st century, with the rapid expansion of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn, employers began to use these channels to gather additional information about prospective employees. Initially, social media background checks were an informal aspect of recruitment, but they have gradually gained formal recognition as a crucial element in candidate screening. Proponents of social media background checks argue that such reviews provide insight into a candidate's professional interests and networks, though the reliability of such assessments remains contested among researchers. == Rise in society == The practice of social media background checks has seen a significant surge in the last decade. This rise can be attributed to the exponential increase in social media users and the growing awareness among organizations regarding the importance of hiring individuals who align with their values and culture. Various platforms provide services explicitly designed to conduct social media background checks efficiently, simplifying the process for businesses. Companies providing social media background check services, such as Ferretly and Certn, have received venture capital funding, reflecting investor interest in the sector. The incorporation of artificial intelligence into conducting AI-powered social media background checks also illustrates its continued popularity and that businesses are looking to ramp up and even automate their use. High-profile cases in which individuals faced employment or admission consequences for past social media posts have raised awareness of social media background checking practices. For example, director James Gunn faced termination from Marvel Studios in 2018 over past offensive tweets, though he was later rehired. Additionally, multiple college admissions officers have acknowledged reviewing applicants' social media profiles, though such practices vary by institution. == Evolution of ethical considerations == Social media background checks are not without controversy, raising significant ethical considerations that have evolved in recent years. Privacy advocates argue that social media background checks raise concerns about data use and discrimination, particularly given the use of personal information that may not reflect job-relevant behavior. Legal scholars debate whether reviewing publicly posted information constitutes a privacy violation under U.S. law. Researchers and critics note that social media profiles often present curated representations of users' lives and may not reflect workplace behavior or professional competence. Moreover, the accuracy of social media background checks has been called into question, with critics pointing out that these checks may not always yield reliable or comprehensive results. Critics also warn about potential misuse of information obtained from social media, including cyberbullying and harassment. A 2023 study by found that approximately 90% of employers incorporate social media into hiring processes, with over half of those surveyed reporting they had rejected candidates based on social media content. This informal approach operates largely outside federal compliance frameworks. Critics argue that without regulation, candidates lack dispute mechanisms available under regulatory frameworks like the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires compliance when background checks formally influence employment decisions. In a hiring environment where the practice is already performed often on an individual basis, the introduction of systematic, regulated screening practices that meet federal compliance standards can present a better, fairer alternative for both employers and candidates. == Business considerations == From a business perspective, social media background checks can be a valuable tool in protecting an organization's reputation and maintaining a safe and respectful workplace environment. A well-conducted social media background check can identify potential red flags, helping to prevent instances of workplace harassment or other negative behaviors. However, businesses also face potential legal repercussions if social media background checks are conducted improperly, such as non-compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in the United States. Critics argue that over-reliance on social media data may exclude qualified candidates whose professional competence is not reflected in their online presence. The proliferation of social media screening services has prompted legal and industry experts to emphasize the importance of compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act and relevant state privacy laws when conducting such checks.
Social media as a public utility
Social media as a public utility is a theory postulating that social networking sites (such as Meta - ie:Facebook & Instagram or Alphabet - ie: YouTube & Google, but also independent sites such as Twitter, Tumblr, Snapchat etc.) are essential public services that should be regulated by the government, in a manner similar to how electric and phone utilities are typically government regulated. It is based on the notion that social media platforms have monopoly power and broad social influence. == Background == === Definitions === Social media is defined as "a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content." Furthermore, the New Zealand Government of Internal Affairs describes it as "a set of online technologies, sites, and practices which are used to share opinions, experiences and perspectives. Fundamentally it is about the conversation. In contrast with traditional media, the nature of social media is to be highly interactive." Moreover, the term social media is described as online tools that let people interact and communicate with each other. This has become a standard word for online cultural exchange and a dominant way for individuals to engage on the internet. By using social media individuals become more closely and strongly connected than ever before. The traditional definition of the term public utility is "an infrastructural necessity for the general public where the supply conditions are such that the public may not be provided with a reasonable service at reasonable prices because of monopoly in the area." Conventional public utilities include water, natural gas, and electricity. In order to secure the interests of the public, utilities are regulated. Public utilities can also be seen as natural monopolies implying that the highest degree of efficiency is accomplished under one operator in the marketplace. Public utility regulation for social media has been largely criticized because people believe it would produce undesirable and indirect effects. However, others say that truly effective government regulation would produce valuable results. Social media as a public utility is a crucial debate because utilities get regulated, so marking social media websites as utilities would require government regulation of various social media websites and platforms such as Facebook, Google, and Twitter. Applying the term public utility to social media implies that social media websites are public necessities, and, consequently, should be regulated by the government. While social media are not as essential for survival as traditional public utilities such as electricity, water, and natural gas, many people believe it has become vital for living in an interconnected world and without it, living a successful life would be difficult. Therefore, many people believe that social media has reached utility status and should be treated as a public utility. However, others believe that this is not true because social media are constantly revolutionizing and giving such platforms "utility status" would result in government regulation, which would consequently hinder innovation. Over the past decade many have debated and questioned whether or not "Internet service providers should be considered essential facilities or natural monopolies and regulated as public utilities." === Monopoly === A monopoly is defined as "a firm that is the only seller of a product or service having no close substitutes." A natural monopoly is when the entire demand within a relevant market can be satisfied at lowest cost by one firm rather than by two or more, and if such a market contains more than one firm then the firms will "quickly shake down to one through mergers or failures, or production will continue to consume more resources than necessary." In a monopoly competition is said to be short-lived, and in a natural monopoly it is said to produce inefficient results." Public utility companies can be regulated to prevent them from gaining monopolistic control. In November 2011 AT&T's proposal for merging with T-Mobile was rejected because it would have "diminished competition," and have led to the company having monopolistic power within the telephone industry. Such regulation is permitted because the telephone industry is a public utility. Similarly, Microsoft has also been prevented from taking various business actions that could result in the company gaining monopolistic power. If social media were a public utility then regulation of Google and Facebook would similarly dictate what they could and could not do. The possibility was raised in 2018 by U.S. Representative Steve King during a House Judiciary hearing on social media filtering practices. == Arguments == Advocates of this theory believe that social media websites already act like public utilities, and therefore regulation is needed. Additionally, advocates say that in the 21st century, using such websites are as necessary for communication as using traditional public utilities such as telephone, water, electricity, and natural gas are for other everyday uses. Specifically, advocates note that Google search should be treated as a public utility and needs to be regulated because it dominates the search engine market and no website can afford to ignore it. There is the position that a social media website such as Google "is a common carrier and should be regulated as such (Newman 2011)." These are reinforced by a perception that social media companies fail to properly maintain fair platforms for discourse. === Individual level === Advocates of regulating social media as a public utility believe that having an Internet presence using social media websites is imperative for individuals to adequately take part in the 21st century. Consequently, they argue that these sites are public utilities that need to be regulated to ensure that the constitutional rights of users are protected. For example, regulation may be needed to protect freedom of speech against risks such as Internet censorship and deplatforming. Social media affects people's behavior. For instance, it plays an important role in shaping its users' decisions and actions pertaining to health. This is demonstrated in a Pew Research Center research, which showed that 72 percent of American adults turned to social media for health information in 2011. Around 70 percent of people with chronic illnesses also use the platform to find cure, diagnoses, and other health answers. This development becomes a public issue as social media are likely to provide wrong medical information. Additionally, social media sites can also facilitate deleterious health behavior such as smoking, drug use, and harmful sexual behavior. === Business level === Advocates of social media as a public utility maintain that social media services dominate the Internet and are mainly owned by three or four companies that have unparalleled power to shape user interaction, and because of this power such businesses need to be regulated as public utilities. Zeynep Tufekci, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, claims that services on the Internet such as Google, eBay, Facebook, Amazon.com, are all natural monopolies. She has stated that these services "benefit greatly from network externalities[,] which means that the more people on the service, the more useful it is for everyone," and thus it is difficult to replace the market leader. === Government level === Advocates of social media as a public utility believe that the government should impose restrictions on social media websites, such as Google, that are designed to benefit its rivals. Due to the recent substantial growth of social media websites such as Google, advocates claim that such a website "might need search neutrality regulation modeled after net neutrality regulation and that a Federal Search Commission might be needed to enforce such a regime." danah boyd expresses a future issue which the government may have to deal with in her research: Facebook is becoming an international social media website, specifically prevalent in Canada and Europe which are "two regions that love to regulate their utilities." Furthermore, recent books by New America Foundation Senior Fellow Rebecca MacKinnon and law professor Lori Andrews advise society to start considering Facebook and Google as nation-states or the "sovereigns of cyberspace." Overall, advocates of social media as a public utility believe that due to the immense popularity and necessity of social media websites, it is imperative that the Government imposes regulations in the same manner they do for electricity, water, and natural gas. == Counterarguments == Opponents of this theory say that social media websites should not be treated as public utilities because these platforms are changing every year, and because they are not essential services for s
Framebuffer
A framebuffer (frame buffer, or sometimes framestore) is a portion of random-access memory (RAM) containing a bitmap that drives a video display. It is a memory buffer containing data representing all the pixels in a complete video frame. Modern video cards contain framebuffer circuitry in their cores. This circuitry converts an in-memory bitmap into a video signal that can be displayed on a computer monitor. In computing, a screen buffer is a part of computer memory used by a computer application for the representation of the content to be shown on the computer display. The screen buffer may also be called the video buffer, the regeneration buffer, or regen buffer for short. The phrase "screen buffer” refers to a logical function, while video memory refers to a hardware storage location. In particular, the screen buffer may be placed in the main RAM, the video memory, or some other hardware location. To reduce latency and avoid screen tearing, multiple frames can be buffered, and this technique is called multiple buffering. When this is so, at any time, only one frame would be visible, and the others would not be. The currently invisible frames are located in the off-screen buffer. The information in the buffer typically consists of color values for every pixel to be shown on the display. Color values are commonly stored in 1-bit binary (monochrome), 4-bit palettized, 8-bit palettized, 16-bit high color and 24-bit true color formats. An additional alpha channel is sometimes used to retain information about pixel transparency. The total amount of memory required for the framebuffer depends on the resolution of the output signal, and on the color depth or palette size. == History == Computer researchers had long discussed the theoretical advantages of a framebuffer but were unable to produce a machine with sufficient memory at an economically practicable cost. In 1947, the Manchester Baby computer used a Williams tube, later the Williams-Kilburn tube, to store 1024 bits on a cathode-ray tube (CRT) memory and displayed on a second CRT. Other research labs were exploring these techniques with MIT Lincoln Laboratory achieving a 4096 display in 1950. A color-scanned display was implemented in the late 1960s, called the Brookhaven RAster Display (BRAD), which used a drum memory and a television monitor. In 1969, A. Michael Noll of Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc. implemented a scanned display with a frame buffer, using magnetic-core memory. A year or so later, the Bell Labs system was expanded to display an image with a color depth of three bits on a standard color TV monitor. The vector graphics used in the computer had to be converted for the scanned graphics of a TV display. In the early 1970s, the development of MOS memory (metal–oxide–semiconductor memory) integrated-circuit chips, particularly high-density DRAM (dynamic random-access memory) chips with at least 1 kb memory, made it practical to create, for the first time, a digital memory system with framebuffers capable of holding a standard video image. This led to the development of the SuperPaint system by Richard Shoup at Xerox PARC in 1972. Shoup was able to use the SuperPaint framebuffer to create an early digital video-capture system. By synchronizing the output signal to the input signal, Shoup was able to overwrite each pixel of data as it shifted in. Shoup also experimented with modifying the output signal using color tables. These color tables allowed the SuperPaint system to produce a wide variety of colors outside the range of the limited 8-bit data it contained. This scheme would later become commonplace in computer framebuffers. In 1974, Evans & Sutherland released the first commercial framebuffer, the Picture System, costing about $15,000. It was capable of producing resolutions of up to 512 by 512 pixels in 8-bit grayscale, and became a boon for graphics researchers who did not have the resources to build their own framebuffer. The New York Institute of Technology would later create the first 24-bit color system using three of the Evans & Sutherland framebuffers. Each framebuffer was connected to an RGB color output (one for red, one for green and one for blue), with a Digital Equipment Corporation PDP 11/04 minicomputer controlling the three devices as one. In 1975, the UK company Quantel produced the first commercial full-color broadcast framebuffer, the Quantel DFS 3000. It was first used in TV coverage of the 1976 Montreal Olympics to generate a picture-in-picture inset of the Olympic flaming torch while the rest of the picture featured the runner entering the stadium. The rapid improvement of integrated-circuit technology made it possible for many of the home computers of the late 1970s to contain low-color-depth framebuffers. Today, nearly all computers with graphical capabilities utilize a framebuffer for generating the video signal. Amiga computers, created in the 1980s, featured special design attention to graphics performance and included a unique Hold-And-Modify framebuffer capable of displaying 4096 colors. Framebuffers also became popular in high-end workstations and arcade system boards throughout the 1980s. SGI, Sun Microsystems, HP, DEC and IBM all released framebuffers for their workstation computers in this period. These framebuffers were usually of a much higher quality than could be found in most home computers, and were regularly used in television, printing, computer modeling and 3D graphics. Framebuffers were also used by Sega for its high-end arcade boards, which were also of a higher quality than on home computers. == Display modes == Framebuffers used in personal and home computing often had sets of defined modes under which the framebuffer can operate. These modes reconfigure the hardware to output different resolutions, color depths, memory layouts and refresh rate timings. In the world of Unix machines and operating systems, such conveniences were usually eschewed in favor of directly manipulating the hardware settings. This manipulation was far more flexible in that any resolution, color depth and refresh rate was attainable – limited only by the memory available to the framebuffer. An unfortunate side-effect of this method was that the display device could be driven beyond its capabilities. In some cases, this resulted in hardware damage to the display. More commonly, it simply produced garbled and unusable output. Modern CRT monitors fix this problem through the introduction of protection circuitry. When the display mode is changed, the monitor attempts to obtain a signal lock on the new refresh frequency. If the monitor is unable to obtain a signal lock or if the signal is outside the range of its design limitations, the monitor will ignore the framebuffer signal and possibly present the user with an error message. LCD monitors tend to contain similar protection circuitry, but for different reasons. Since the LCD must digitally sample the display signal (thereby emulating an electron beam), any signal that is out of range cannot be physically displayed on the monitor. == Color palette == Framebuffers have traditionally supported a wide variety of color modes. Due to the expense of memory, most early framebuffers used 1-bit (2 colors per pixel), 2-bit (4 colors), 4-bit (16 colors) or 8-bit (256 colors) color depths. The problem with such small color depths is that a full range of colors cannot be produced. The solution to this problem was indexed color, which adds a lookup table to the framebuffer. Each color stored in framebuffer memory acts as a color index. The lookup table serves as a palette with a limited number of different colors, while the rest is used as an index table. Here is a typical indexed 256-color image and its own palette (shown as a rectangle of swatches): In some designs, it was also possible to write data to the lookup table (or switch between existing palettes) on the fly, allowing dividing the picture into horizontal bars with their own palette and thus rendering an image that had a far wider palette. For example, viewing an outdoor shot photograph, the picture could be divided into four bars: the top one with emphasis on sky tones, the next with foliage tones, the next with skin and clothing tones, and the bottom one with ground colors. This required each palette to have overlapping colors, but, carefully done, allowed great flexibility. == Memory access == While framebuffers are commonly accessed via a memory mapping directly to the CPU memory space, this is not the only method by which they may be accessed. Framebuffers have varied widely in the methods used to access memory. Some of the most common are: Mapping the entire framebuffer to a given memory range. Port commands to set each pixel, range of pixels or palette entry. Mapping a memory range smaller than the framebuffer memory, then bank switching as necessary. The framebuffer organization may be packed pixel or planar. The framebuffer may be all
SocialIQ
Social IQ (formerly Soovox Inc.) was a San Diego-based influencer marketing platform that measured users' online social influence and connected them with brands for word-of-mouth marketing campaigns. The company was founded in 2009 by Akram Benmbarek and was headquartered in San Diego, California. == History == Akram Benmbarek, who had previously worked in technology finance at Advanced Equities Financial Corp and in wealth management at Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, and UBS, founded the company in mid-2009 under the name Soovox. In October 2011, Benmbarek rebranded the company as SocialIQ. At that time, the company was seeking a Series A round of venture capital, having raised under $1 million in angel seed funding. == Similar metrics == Klout PeerIndex