Thomas G. Dietterich is emeritus professor of computer science at Oregon State University. He is one of the pioneers of the field of machine learning. He served as executive editor of Machine Learning (journal) (1992–98) and helped co-found the Journal of Machine Learning Research. In response to the media's attention on the dangers of artificial intelligence, Dietterich has been quoted for an academic perspective to a broad range of media outlets including National Public Radio, Business Insider, Microsoft Research, CNET, and The Wall Street Journal. Among his research contributions were the invention of error-correcting output coding to multi-class classification, the formalization of the multiple-instance problem, the MAXQ framework for hierarchical reinforcement learning, and the development of methods for integrating non-parametric regression trees into probabilistic graphical models. == Biography and education == Thomas Dietterich was born in South Weymouth, Massachusetts, in 1954. His family later moved to New Jersey and then again to Illinois, where Tom graduated from Naperville Central High School. Dietterich then entered Oberlin College and began his undergraduate studies. In 1977, Dietterich graduated from Oberlin with a degree in mathematics, focusing on probability and statistics. Dietterich spent the following two years at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. After those two years, he began his doctoral studies in the Department of Computer Science at Stanford University. Dietterich received his Ph.D. in 1984 and moved to Corvallis, Oregon, where he was hired as an assistant professor in computer science. in 2013, he was named "Distinguished Professor". In 2016, Dietterich retired from his position at Oregon State University. Throughout his career, Dietterich has worked to promote scientific publication and conference presentations. For many years, he was the editor of the MIT Press series on Adaptive Computation and Machine Learning. He also held the position of co-editor of the Morgan Claypool Synthesis Series on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. He has organized several conferences and workshops including serving as Technical Program Co-Chair of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90), Technical Program Chair of the Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS-2000) and General Chair of NIPS-2001. He served as founding President of the International Machine Learning Society and he has been a member of the IMLS Board since its founding. He is currently also a member of the Steering Committee of the Asian Conference on Machine Learning. == Research interests == Professor Dietterich is interested in all aspects of machine learning. There are three major strands of his research. First, he is interested in the fundamental questions of artificial intelligence and how machine learning can provide the basis for building integrated intelligent systems. Second, he is interested in ways that people and computers can collaborate to solve challenging problems. And third, he is interested in applying machine learning to problems in the ecological sciences and ecosystem management as part of the emerging field of computational sustainability. Over his career, he has worked on a wide variety of problems ranging from drug design to user interfaces to computer security. His current focus is on ways that computer science methods can help advance ecological science and improve our management of the Earth's ecosystems. This passion has led to several projects including research in wildfire management, invasive vegetation and understanding the distribution and migration of birds. For example, Dietterich's research is helping scientists at the Cornell Lab of Ornithology answer questions like: How do birds decide to migrate north? How do they know when to land and stopover for a few days? How do they choose where to make a nest? Tens of thousands of volunteer birdwatchers (citizen scientists) all over the world contribute data to the study by submitting their bird sightings to the eBird website. The amount of data is overwhelming – in March 2012 they had over 3.1 million bird observations. Machine learning can uncover patterns in data to model the migration of species. But there are many other applications for the same techniques which will allow organizations to better manage our forests, oceans, and endangered species, as well as improve traffic flow, water systems, the electrical power grid, and more. I realized I wanted to have an impact on something that really mattered – and certainly the whole Earth's ecosystem, of which we are a part, is under threat in so many ways. And so if there's some way that I can use my technical skills to improve both the science base and the tools needed for policy and management decisions, then I would like to do that. I am passionate about that. == Dangers of AI: an academic perspective == Dietterich has argued that the most realistic risks about the dangers of artificial intelligence are basic mistakes, breakdowns and cyberattacks, and the fact that it simply may not always work, rather than machines that become super powerful or destroy the human race. Dietterich considers machines becoming self-aware and trying to exterminate humans to be more science fiction than scientific fact. But to the extent that computer systems are given increasingly dangerous tasks, and asked to learn from and interpret their experiences, he said they may simply make mistakes. Instead, much of the work done in the AI safety community does indeed focus around accidents and design flaws. == Positions held == 2014–2016: President, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI). 2013–present: Distinguished Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 2011–present: Chief Scientist, BigML, Corvallis, OR. 2005–present: Director of Intelligent Systems Research, School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Oregon State University. 2006–2008: Chief Scientist, Smart Desktop, Inc., Seattle, WA. 2004–2005: Chief Scientist, MyStrands, Inc., Corvallis, OR. 1995-2013: Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 1998–1999: Visiting Senior Scientist, Institute for the Investigation of Artificial Intelligence, Barcelona, Spain. (Sabbatical leave position) 1988–1995: Associate Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 1991–1993: Senior Scientist, Arris Pharmaceutical Corporation, S. San Francisco, CA. 1985–1988: Assistant Professor of computer science, Oregon State University. 1979–1984: Research Assistant, Heuristic Programming Project, Department of Computer Science, Stanford University. 1979 (Summer): Member of Technical Staff, Bell Telephone Laboratories, Naperville, Illinois. Computer-to-computer file transfer and micro-code distribution to remote switching systems. 1977 (Summer): Assistant to the Director of Planning and Research, Oberlin College, Oberlin, Ohio. Developed institutional planning database. == Awards and honors == Thomas Dietterich was honored by Oregon State University in the spring of 2013 as a "Distinguished Professor" for his work as a pioneer in the field of machine learning and being one of the mostly highly cited scientists in his field. He has also earned exclusive "Fellow" status in the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Association for Computing Machinery. Over his career, he obtained more than $30 million in research grants, helped build a world-class research group at Oregon State, and created three software companies. He also co-founded two of the field's leading journals and was elected first president of the International Machine Learning Society. His other awards and honors include: ACM Distinguished Lecturer, 2012-2013 Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science, 2007 Oregon State University, College of Engineering Collaboration Award, 2004 Winner, JAIR Award for Best Paper in Previous Five Years, 2003 Fellow, Association for Computing Machinery, elected 2003 Oregon State University, College of Engineering Research Award, 1998 Fellow, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, elected 1994 NSF Presidential Young Investigator, 1987-92 Nominated for Carter Award for Graduate Teaching, 1987, 1988 IBM Graduate Fellow, 1982, 1983 Upsilon Pi Epsilon, 1996 Sigma Xi, 1979–present State Farm Companies Foundation Fellowship, 1978 Member, Board of Trustees, Oberlin College, 1977-1980 Graduation with Honors in Mathematics, Oberlin College, 1977 Phi Beta Kappa, 1977 National Merit Scholar, 1973 == Selected publications == Liping Liu, Thomas G. Dietterich, Nan Li, Zhi-Hua Zhou (2016). Transductive Optimization of Top k Precision. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-2016). pp. 1781–1787. New York, NY Md. Amran Siddiqui, Alan Fern, Thomas G. Dietterich, Shubhomoy Da
Granular computing
Granular computing is an emerging computing paradigm of information processing that concerns the processing of complex information entities called "information granules", which arise in the process of data abstraction and derivation of knowledge from information or data. Generally speaking, information granules are collections of entities that usually originate at the numeric level and are arranged together due to their similarity, functional or physical adjacency, indistinguishability, coherency, or the like. At present, granular computing is more a theoretical perspective than a coherent set of methods or principles. As a theoretical perspective, it encourages an approach to data that recognizes and exploits the knowledge present in data at various levels of resolution or scales. In this sense, it encompasses all methods which provide flexibility and adaptability in the resolution at which knowledge or information is extracted and represented. == Types of granulation == As mentioned above, granular computing is not an algorithm or process; there is no particular method that is called "granular computing". It is rather an approach to looking at data that recognizes how different and interesting regularities in the data can appear at different levels of granularity, much as different features become salient in satellite images of greater or lesser resolution. On a low-resolution satellite image, for example, one might notice interesting cloud patterns representing cyclones or other large-scale weather phenomena, while in a higher-resolution image, one misses these large-scale atmospheric phenomena but instead notices smaller-scale phenomena, such as the interesting pattern that is the streets of Manhattan. The same is generally true of all data: At different resolutions or granularities, different features and relationships emerge. The aim of granular computing is to try to take advantage of this fact in designing more effective machine-learning and reasoning systems. There are several types of granularity that are often encountered in data mining and machine learning, and we review them below: === Value granulation (discretization/quantization) === One type of granulation is the quantization of variables. It is very common that in data mining or machine-learning applications the resolution of variables needs to be decreased in order to extract meaningful regularities. An example of this would be a variable such as "outside temperature" (temp), which in a given application might be recorded to several decimal places of precision (depending on the sensing apparatus). However, for purposes of extracting relationships between "outside temperature" and, say, "number of health-club applications" (club), it will generally be advantageous to quantize "outside temperature" into a smaller number of intervals. ==== Motivations ==== There are several interrelated reasons for granulating variables in this fashion: Based on prior domain knowledge, there is no expectation that minute variations in temperature (e.g., the difference between 80–80.7 °F (26.7–27.1 °C)) could have an influence on behaviors driving the number of health-club applications. For this reason, any "regularity" which our learning algorithms might detect at this level of resolution would have to be spurious, as an artifact of overfitting. By coarsening the temperature variable into intervals the difference between which we do anticipate (based on prior domain knowledge) might influence number of health-club applications, we eliminate the possibility of detecting these spurious patterns. Thus, in this case, reducing resolution is a method of controlling overfitting. By reducing the number of intervals in the temperature variable (i.e., increasing its grain size), we increase the amount of sample data indexed by each interval designation. Thus, by coarsening the variable, we increase sample sizes and achieve better statistical estimation. In this sense, increasing granularity provides an antidote to the so-called curse of dimensionality, which relates to the exponential decrease in statistical power with increase in number of dimensions or variable cardinality. Independent of prior domain knowledge, it is often the case that meaningful regularities (i.e., which can be detected by a given learning methodology, representational language, etc.) may exist at one level of resolution and not at another. For example, a simple learner or pattern recognition system may seek to extract regularities satisfying a conditional probability threshold such as p ( Y = y j | X = x i ) ≥ α . {\displaystyle p(Y=y_{j}|X=x_{i})\geq \alpha .} In the special case where α = 1 , {\displaystyle \alpha =1,} this recognition system is essentially detecting logical implication of the form X = x i → Y = y j {\displaystyle X=x_{i}\rightarrow Y=y_{j}} or, in words, "if X = x i , {\displaystyle X=x_{i},} then Y = y j {\displaystyle Y=y_{j}} ". The system's ability to recognize such implications (or, in general, conditional probabilities exceeding threshold) is partially contingent on the resolution with which the system analyzes the variables. As an example of this last point, consider the feature space shown to the right. The variables may each be regarded at two different resolutions. Variable X {\displaystyle X} may be regarded at a high (quaternary) resolution wherein it takes on the four values { x 1 , x 2 , x 3 , x 4 } {\displaystyle \{x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},x_{4}\}} or at a lower (binary) resolution wherein it takes on the two values { X 1 , X 2 } . {\displaystyle \{X_{1},X_{2}\}.} Similarly, variable Y {\displaystyle Y} may be regarded at a high (quaternary) resolution or at a lower (binary) resolution, where it takes on the values { y 1 , y 2 , y 3 , y 4 } {\displaystyle \{y_{1},y_{2},y_{3},y_{4}\}} or { Y 1 , Y 2 } , {\displaystyle \{Y_{1},Y_{2}\},} respectively. At the high resolution, there are no detectable implications of the form X = x i → Y = y j , {\displaystyle X=x_{i}\rightarrow Y=y_{j},} since every x i {\displaystyle x_{i}} is associated with more than one y j , {\displaystyle y_{j},} and thus, for all x i , {\displaystyle x_{i},} p ( Y = y j | X = x i ) < 1. {\displaystyle p(Y=y_{j}|X=x_{i})<1.} However, at the low (binary) variable resolution, two bilateral implications become detectable: X = X 1 ↔ Y = Y 1 {\displaystyle X=X_{1}\leftrightarrow Y=Y_{1}} and X = X 2 ↔ Y = Y 2 {\displaystyle X=X_{2}\leftrightarrow Y=Y_{2}} , since every X 1 {\displaystyle X_{1}} occurs iff Y 1 {\displaystyle Y_{1}} and X 2 {\displaystyle X_{2}} occurs iff Y 2 . {\displaystyle Y_{2}.} Thus, a pattern recognition system scanning for implications of this kind would find them at the binary variable resolution, but would fail to find them at the higher quaternary variable resolution. ==== Issues and methods ==== It is not feasible to exhaustively test all possible discretization resolutions on all variables in order to see which combination of resolutions yields interesting or significant results. Instead, the feature space must be preprocessed (often by an entropy analysis of some kind) so that some guidance can be given as to how the discretization process should proceed. Moreover, one cannot generally achieve good results by naively analyzing and discretizing each variable independently, since this may obliterate the very interactions that we had hoped to discover. A sample of papers that address the problem of variable discretization in general, and multiple-variable discretization in particular, is as follows: Chiu, Wong & Cheung (1991), Bay (2001), Liu et al. (2002), Wang & Liu (1998), Zighed, Rabaséda & Rakotomalala (1998), Catlett (1991), Dougherty, Kohavi & Sahami (1995), Monti & Cooper (1999), Fayyad & Irani (1993), Chiu, Cheung & Wong (1990), Nguyen & Nguyen (1998), Grzymala-Busse & Stefanowski (2001), Ting (1994), Ludl & Widmer (2000), Pfahringer (1995), An & Cercone (1999), Chiu & Cheung (1989), Chmielewski & Grzymala-Busse (1996), Lee & Shin (1994), Liu & Wellman (2002), Liu & Wellman (2004). === Variable granulation (clustering/aggregation/transformation) === Variable granulation is a term that could describe a variety of techniques, most of which are aimed at reducing dimensionality, redundancy, and storage requirements. We briefly describe some of the ideas here, and present pointers to the literature. ==== Variable transformation ==== A number of classical methods, such as principal component analysis, multidimensional scaling, factor analysis, and structural equation modeling, and their relatives, fall under the genus of "variable transformation." Also in this category are more modern areas of study such as dimensionality reduction, projection pursuit, and independent component analysis. The common goal of these methods in general is to find a representation of the data in terms of new variables, which are a linear or nonlinear transformation of the original variables, and in which important stati
Pamphlet war
A pamphlet war is a protracted argument or discussion through printed media, especially between the time the printing press became common, and when state intervention like copyright laws made such public discourse more difficult. The purpose was to defend or attack a certain perspective or idea. Pamphlet wars have occurred multiple times throughout history, as both social and political platforms. Pamphlet wars became viable platforms for this protracted discussion with the advent and spread of the printing press. Cheap printing presses, and increased literacy made the late 17th century a key stepping stone for the development of pamphlet wars, a period of prolific use of this type of debate. Over 2200 pamphlets were published between 1600–1715 alone. Pamphlet wars are generally credited for powering many key social changes of the era, including the Reformation and the Revolution Controversy, the English philosophical debate set off by the French Revolution. == History of the pamphlet in England == Throughout Europe in the 16th century, printed tracts were used to argue religious doctrine and foment support for religious causes. In England, Henry VIII used print literature to justify his break from the Catholic Church. During the subsequent reigns of Edward and Mary, print polemics escalated into propaganda warfare, as print media gained enormous potential to sway common opinion. By the 1560s, print was widely used to convey news. In 1562, the first pamphlets appeared, which discussed the English forces sent to aid the Protestant French Huguenots. In 1569, pamphlets reported the revolt of the Northern Earls and the subsequent Rebellion of the same year. In the 1580s, pamphlets began to replace broadsheet ballads as the means to convey information to the general public. Over the next century, the pamphlet became the principal means of garnering support for a cause or an idea, and was particularly influential during the English Civil Wars (1642-1651) and the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Through the ensuing decades, the pamphlet lost some popularity due to the emergence of newspapers and journals, but continued to be an important medium of public debate, as illustrated by the Revolution Controversy a full century later in the 1790s. == Pamphlet printing == Coming from a Latin word, "pamphlet" literally means "small book." In the early days of printing, the format of the book or pamphlet depended on the size of the paper used and the number of times it was folded. If a page was only folded once, it was called a folio. If it was folded twice, it was known as a quarto. An octave was a paper folded three times. A pamphlet was usually 1-12 sheets of paper folded in quarto, or 8-96 pages. It was sold for one or two pennies apiece. The printing of a pamphlet involved many people: the author, the printer, suppliers, print-makers, compositor, correctors, pressmen, binders, and distributors. Once the pamphleteer had written the pamphlet, it was sent to the printing house to be corrected, set into type, and printed. The papers were then given to the printer's warehouse-keeper, who bundled the copies and sent them to the bookseller, who was probably the one financing the printing. He was responsible to bind the pamphlets, usually by sewing them, and then sold them wholesale to individual bookselling vendors. The booksellers then sold them from a stall in the marketplace. == Pamphlet subjects == Pamphlets began as the means of conveyance for religious debates, and therefore religious topics were one of the main subjects they dealt with. The definition of a pamphlet came to mean a short work dealing with social, political, or religious issues. Typical topics included the Civil war, Church of England doctrines, Acts of Parliament, the Popish Plot (see below), the Stuart Era, and Cromwell propaganda. In addition, pamphlets were also used for romantic fiction, autobiography, scurrilous personal abuse, and social criticism. They contained much of the propaganda of the 17th century in the midst of the religious and political turmoil. They were also used for debates between the Puritans and the Anglican. During the Glorious Revolution, pamphlets were political weapons. == Authors == There were many authors of pamphlets. However some of the more popular authors include Daniel Defoe, Thomas Hobbes, Jonathan Swift, John Milton, and Samuel Pepys. Also included in the midst are Thomas Nashe, Joseph Addison, Richard Steele, and Matthew Prior. In 1591–1592, Robert Greene released a series of pamphlets which later inspired many other authors including Thomas Middleton and Thomas Dekker. == Critics == Pamphlets, along with their vast popularity, received criticism. There were many in the time period who believed that pamphlets were full of foolishness. They thought the pamphlets were not good enough literature and that they would turn people from "good" writing. They believed that pamphlets would be the end of the great volumes of literature and that great writing would be forgotten. == News reporting == Pamphlets made a great difference in the way news was reported to the general public. With the publication of pamphlets, it was no longer difficult for people to hear of events taking place far away. The closer the occurrence was to London, the easier and faster people heard of it. For example, the Battle of Edgehill took place on 23 October 1642. The first pamphlet reporting the incident was printed on 25 October 24 hours after some of the orders reported had been given. While not entirely accurate, and hurriedly made, the pamphlet nonetheless was able to tell the general public what had happened in the battle. A more accurate, specific, and readable account was available in a pamphlet printed on 26 October, and the "authorized" version was available only five days after the battle took place. == Marprelate pamphlets == In 1588, a series of pamphlets marked a turning point for the Puritans, dividing them from other Protestants in the country. The authors wrote under the pseudonym of Martin Marprelate and his two sons of the same name. The true identities of the authors were never discovered. The pamphlets aimed to provoke authorities to take action against censorship. The series was among the first to ask questions directly of its readers. == Early pamphlet wars == === Elizabethan pamphlet wars === As a means of forming or swaying public opinion, pamphlets like these had a part in influencing society, even as the content was itself influenced by society. During the 16th century and continuing for a short while in the early 17th century in England there was rise in the use of pamphlet wars to discuss a myriad of issues spanning from the civil war, to religious freedoms and the roles of women in society. The Queen herself participated in these discussions, making sure that she was widely read and understood by her people in order to gain favour and establish herself as the monarch despite being a woman. Examples of her use of this medium appear in To the Troops at Tilbury written in 1588, On Mary's Execution written in 1586, and many more. Another famous writer of this period to take advantage of the pamphlet was Emilia Lanier, famous for her arguments about the role of women. A common idea promoted by many literary works and the general attitude towards women, Lanier's work "Eve's Apology in Defence of Women" refuted the belief that Eve is responsible for the fall of man. A very uncommon and unpopular stance to take, Lanier accomplishes her defence through structuring it as an apology, one of the earliest subversive feminist texts. Similarly, Francis Bacon wrote his Essays to promote his idea of morality and other complicated social issues. For example, his work, "Of Love" examines the various understandings of the concept of love, particularly as it was perceived during the Elizabethan era. === Eikon Series === From 1649 until 1651, some five pamphlets were published in a debate about the execution of King Charles I of England (1600-1649). Prior to his execution, King Charles wrote the first pamphlet in the discussion, Eikon Basilike’’ (from the Greek “eikon” for image and “basileus” for king). The subtitle of this work - Portraiture of His Sacred Majesty in His Solitudes and Sufferings - indicates that Charles sought to portray himself as a martyr to the cause of regal prerogative. In the following months, several response pamphlets were published (collectively known as the "Eikon" series), including: Eikon Alethine, Eikon e Pistes, Eikonoklastes, and Eikon Aklastos,” alternately attacking or defending the king, his regicide, and his self-portrait in “Eikon Basilike.” == Popish Plot and Elizabeth Cellier == In the 1680s, after being acquitted of the "Meal-Tub Plot" for which she was accused, Elizabeth Cellier wrote Malice Defeated, which, along with The Matchless Picaro, sparked a pamphlet war surrounding debate of the ascension of a Catholic king to the thro
Social media and identity
Social media can have both positive and negative impacts on a user's identity. Scholars within the fields of psychology and communication study the relationship between social media and identity in order to understand individual behavior, psychological impacts, and social patterns. Communication within political or social groups online can result in practice application, real-world implementation of a concept, of those found identities or the adoption of them as a whole. Young people, defined as emerging adults in or entering college, are especially found to have their identities shaped through social media. Sometimes it seems as though social media is taking over and changing us for the worse. Social media is always changing and can be hard to keep up with. Platforms come and go trends change everyday. What was cool yesterday is lame today. The biggest change from recent years that users are still adjusting to is the name change of Twitter now called X. Since Elon Musk purchased the platform he changed the name but nothing else about the app. Users now feel the need to explain when talking about X. Now it is often referred to as ‘X(Twitter)’ to clarify. == Social Media Usage and Demographics == We know what social media is and how it is used but who uses it? The Pew Research center conducted a 10 year study from 2005-2015 about the demographics of social media usage. While this article is 10 years old the statistics in it are from a very formative time in social media. This is when most people joined and were consistently using social media. Age: While it is no surprise that 90% of young adults use social media they are the main demographic of users. Older adults (65 and older) really hit a boom on social media. In 2005 only 2% of older adults used any form of social media. By 2015 35% of older adults used social media. We can infer that that percentage has grown even more since 2015. Gender: It is known that women tend to use social media more than men. In 2015 it was noted that 65% of women used social media. Men were not far behind, 62% of men were reported to use social media. There are no notable differences of users from various races and ethnicities. The research also shows that more suburban and urban residents use social media over those who live in rural areas. == Young adults == Young adults are especially influenced by social media, where they find social groups to belong to. Research shows that nearly half of teens believe social media platforms has a negative impact on people their age. Psychologists believe that at a time when young adults are coming into adolescence, they are more likely to be influenced by what they see on sites like Instagram or Twitter. Most young adults will widely share, with varying degrees of accuracy, honesty, and openness, information that in the past would have been private or reserved for select individuals. Key questions include whether they accurately portray their identities online and whether the use of social media might impact young adults' identity development. Media Imagery, in particular, is said to be a major influence on the minds of young men and women. Studies have shown that it is even more relevant when it comes to the issue of body image. Social media, in part, has been created to host a safe haven for those who do not claim a solid identity in the material world, but past identities are not easy to escape from since the Internet preserves much of the information that was shared. Social media is an essential part of the social lives of young adults. They rely on it to maintain relationships, create new relationships, and stay up to date with the world around them. Adolescents find social media to be extremely helpful when changing environments, like moving off to university for example. Social media provides students, especially first year students, the opportunity to create the identity they want the world to see. However, it has been seen that these students create online personas that may not reflect their true selves bringing up the issues of impression management. Social media provides young adults with the opportunity to present themselves as something other than their authentic self. Social media providers can help build relationships and community on their platforms. This is something that will create a more positive impact from social media. When young adults interact with each other using social media they are creating something called a social self-identity. Social self identity is what individuals create when they assimilate to being in a group. Social media has gained the reputation of being isolating. If these platforms encourage community then they can help grow users' social self-identity. == Media literacy == The definition of media literacy has evolved over time to encompass a range of experiences that can occur in social media or other digital spaces. The definition of media literacy is also broad and wide ranging in its context. Currently, media literacy is the idea that one is able to analyze, evaluate, and interact with media content in a meaningful way. Educators teach media literacy skills because of the vulnerable relationship that young adults can have with social media. Some examples of media literacy practices, particularly on Twitter, include using hashtags, live tweeting, and sharing information. One of the overall goals of media literacy within the context of social media is to keep young adults aware of potentially violent, graphic, or dangerous content that they may come across on the internet, and how to determine if the content is credible while engaging responsibly with it. In order to be considered media-literate, a person must be able to take in media from online and social platforms and have the correct competencies and context to be able to organize the information. In order to be considered media-literate, the digital information must be given to the user in a way that it can be put into the correct perspective and analyzed, deducted and synthesized.Teenagers and young adults can be vulnerable to specific content online outside of their age-range. Media literacy campaigns and education research shows that targeting those who fall into this age category would be the best way to understand and target their needs as young online users. There are multiple individual studies investigating social media identity relating to media literacy online, however there is a need for much more conclusive information that analyzes multiple studies at a time. Social media literacy is still considered an under-researched topic. Many scholars in media literacy research emphasize the impact of training young adults to consume media in a safe way is the major solution for furthering internet education in children and young adults. The more information the young adults are given on media literacy, the better prepared they are to enter the digital world confidently. One scientific model that has been proposed, known as The Social Media Literacy (SMILE) model is a framework that hypothesizes that at the core of this model it is helping young adults truly know the meaning and display the actions of media literacy online. SMILE is also meant to inspire more research on the subject of media literacy as it relates to social media effects and young adult learning abilities. The model was applied through the lens of a social media positivity bias among adolescents and puts forth five different assumptions about social media and media literacy; Social media literacy as a moderator (what is seen on social media) Social media literacy as a predictor (what is seen for specific individuals on social media) Media literacy within social media is a reciprocal process The development of social media literacy depends on a conditional process of variables affecting other variables Media literacy within social media is a differential learning process, and who teaches it is highly affective of the outcome This model also stresses that human beings learn media literacy (and social media literacy) naturally as they go through life. Research suggests that having young adults taught media literacy from an educator may make them less interested (and therefore less careful) of threats on social media. == Self Presentation == People create images of themselves to present to the public, a process called self presentation. Depending on the demographic, presenting oneself as authentic can result in identity clarity. Methods of self presentation can also be influenced by geography. The framework for this relationship between a user's location and their social media presentation is called the spatial self. Users depict their spatial self in order to include their physical space as a part of their self presentation to an audience. According to a 2018 research paper, patients of plastic surgeons have gone in and asked for specific snapchat "filter" features. This led to a theory of Snap
Unknown key-share attack
As defined by Blake-Wilson & Menezes (1999), an unknown key-share (UKS) attack on an authenticated key agreement (AK) or authenticated key agreement with key confirmation (AKC) protocol is an attack whereby an entity A {\displaystyle A} ends up believing she shares a key with B {\displaystyle B} , and although this is in fact the case, B {\displaystyle B} mistakenly believes the key is instead shared with an entity E ≠ A {\displaystyle E\neq A} . In other words, in a UKS, an opponent, say Eve, coerces honest parties Alice and Bob into establishing a secret key where at least one of Alice and Bob does not know that the secret key is shared with the other. For example, Eve may coerce Bob into believing he shares the key with Eve, while he actually shares the key with Alice. The “key share” with Alice is thus unknown to Bob.
Commitment ordering
Commitment ordering (CO) is a class of interoperable serializability techniques in concurrency control of databases, transaction processing, and related applications. It allows optimistic (non-blocking) implementations. With the proliferation of multi-core processors, CO has also been increasingly utilized in concurrent programming, transactional memory, and software transactional memory (STM) to achieve serializability optimistically. CO is also the name of the resulting transaction schedule (history) property, defined in 1988 with the name dynamic atomicity. In a CO compliant schedule, the chronological order of commitment events of transactions is compatible with the precedence order of the respective transactions. CO is a broad special case of conflict serializability and effective means (reliable, high-performance, distributed, and scalable) to achieve global serializability (modular serializability) across any collection of database systems that possibly use different concurrency control mechanisms (CO also makes each system serializability compliant, if not already). Each not-CO-compliant database system is augmented with a CO component (the commitment order coordinator—COCO) which orders the commitment events for CO compliance, with neither data-access nor any other transaction operation interference. As such, CO provides a low overhead, general solution for global serializability (and distributed serializability), instrumental for global concurrency control (and distributed concurrency control) of multi-database systems and other transactional objects, possibly highly distributed (e.g., within cloud computing, grid computing, and networks of smartphones). An atomic commitment protocol (ACP; of any type) is a fundamental part of the solution, utilized to break global cycles in the conflict (precedence, serializability) graph. CO is the most general property (a necessary condition) that guarantees global serializability, if the database systems involved do not share concurrency control information beyond atomic commitment protocol (unmodified) messages and have no knowledge of whether transactions are global or local (the database systems are autonomous). Thus CO (with its variants) is the only general technique that does not require the typically costly distribution of local concurrency control information (e.g., local precedence relations, locks, timestamps, or tickets). It generalizes the popular strong strict two-phase locking (SS2PL) property, which in conjunction with the two-phase commit protocol (2PC), is the de facto standard to achieve global serializability across (SS2PL based) database systems. As a result, CO compliant database systems (with any different concurrency control types) can transparently join such SS2PL based solutions for global serializability. In addition, locking based global deadlocks are resolved automatically in a CO based multi-database environment, a vital side-benefit (including the special case of a completely SS2PL based environment; a previously unnoticed fact for SS2PL). Furthermore, strict commitment ordering (SCO; Raz 1991c), the intersection of Strictness and CO, provides better performance (shorter average transaction completion time and resulting in better transaction throughput) than SS2PL whenever read-write conflicts are present (identical blocking behavior for write-read and write-write conflicts; comparable locking overhead). The advantage of SCO is especially during lock contention. Strictness allows both SS2PL and SCO to use the same effective database recovery mechanisms. Two major generalizing variants of CO exist, extended CO (ECO; Raz 1993a) and multi-version CO (MVCO; Raz 1993b). They also provide global serializability without local concurrency control information distribution, can be combined with any relevant concurrency control, and allow optimistic (non-blocking) implementations. Both use additional information for relaxing CO constraints and achieving better concurrency and performance. Vote ordering (VO or Generalized CO (GCO); Raz 2009) is a container schedule set (property) and technique for CO and all its variants. Local VO is necessary for guaranteeing global serializability if the atomic commitment protocol (ACP) participants do not share concurrency control information (have the generalized autonomy property). CO and its variants inter-operate transparently, guaranteeing global serializability and automatic global deadlock resolution together in a mixed, heterogeneous environment with different variants. == Overview == The Commitment ordering (CO; Raz 1990, 1992, 1994, 2009) schedule property has been referred to also as Dynamic atomicity (since 1988), commit ordering, commit order serializability, and strong recoverability (since 1991). The latter is a misleading name since CO is incomparable with recoverability, and the term "strong" implies a special case. This means that a substantial recoverability property does not necessarily have the CO property and vice versa. In 2009 CO has been characterized as a major concurrency control method, together with the previously known (since the 1980s) three major methods: Locking, Time-stamp ordering, and Serialization graph testing, and as an enabler for the interoperability of systems using different concurrency control mechanisms. In a federated database system or any other more loosely defined multidatabase system, which are typically distributed in a communication network, transactions span multiple and possibly Distributed databases. Enforcing global serializability in such system is problematic. Even if every local schedule of a single database is still serializable, the global schedule of a whole system is not necessarily serializable. The massive communication exchanges of conflict information needed between databases to reach conflict serializability would lead to unacceptable performance, primarily due to computer and communication latency. The problem of achieving global serializability effectively had been characterized as open until the public disclosure of CO in 1991 by its inventor Yoav Raz (Raz 1991a; see also Global serializability). Enforcing CO is an effective way to enforce conflict serializability globally in a distributed system since enforcing CO locally in each database (or other transactional objects) also enforces it globally. Each database may use any, possibly different, type of concurrency control mechanism. With a local mechanism that already provides conflict serializability, enforcing CO locally does not cause any other aborts, since enforcing CO locally does not affect the data access scheduling strategy of the mechanism (this scheduling determines the serializability related aborts; such a mechanism typically does not consider the commitment events or their order). The CO solution requires no communication overhead since it uses (unmodified) atomic commitment protocol messages only, already needed by each distributed transaction to reach atomicity. An atomic commitment protocol plays a central role in the distributed CO algorithm, which enforces CO globally by breaking global cycles (cycles that span two or more databases) in the global conflict graph. CO, its special cases, and its generalizations are interoperable and achieve global serializability while transparently being utilized together in a single heterogeneous distributed environment comprising objects with possibly different concurrency control mechanisms. As such, Commitment ordering, including its special cases, and together with its generalizations (see CO variants below), provides a general, high performance, fully distributed solution (no central processing component or central data structure are needed) for guaranteeing global serializability in heterogeneous environments of multidatabase systems and other multiple transactional objects (objects with states accessed and modified only by transactions; e.g., in the framework of transactional processes, and within Cloud computing and Grid computing). The CO solution scales up with network size and the number of databases without any negative impact on performance (assuming the statistics of a single distributed transaction, e.g., the average number of databases involved with a single transaction, are unchanged). With the proliferation of Multi-core processors, Optimistic CO (OCO) has also been increasingly utilized to achieve serializability in software transactional memory, and numerous STM articles and patents utilizing "commit order" have already been published (e.g., Zhang et al. 2006). == The commitment ordering solution for global serializability == === General characterization of CO === Commitment ordering (CO) is a special case of conflict serializability. CO can be enforced with non-blocking mechanisms (each transaction can complete its task without having its data-access blocked, which allows optimistic concurrency control; however, commitment could be blo
Social television
Social television is the union of television and social media. Millions of people now share their TV experience with other viewers on social media such as Twitter and Facebook using smartphones and tablets. TV networks and rights holders are increasingly sharing video clips on social platforms to monetise engagement and drive tune-in. The social TV market covers the technologies that support communication and social interaction around TV as well as companies that study television-related social behavior and measure social media activities tied to specific TV broadcasts – many of which have attracted significant investment from established media and technology companies. The market is also seeing numerous tie-ups between broadcasters and social networking players such as Twitter and Facebook. The market is expected to be worth $256bn by 2017. Social TV was named one of the 10 most important emerging technologies by the MIT Technology Review on Social TV in 2010. And in 2011, David Rowan, the editor of Wired magazine, named Social TV at number three of six in his peek into 2011 and what tech trends to expect to get traction. Ynon Kreiz, CEO of the Endemol Group told the audience at the Digital Life Design (DLD) conference in January 2011: "Everyone says that social television will be big. I think it's not going to be big—it's going to be huge". Much of the investment in the earlier years of social TV went into standalone social TV apps. The industry believed these apps would provide an appealing and complimentary consumer experience which could then be monetized with ads. These apps featured TV listings, check-ins, stickers and synchronised second-screen content but struggled to attract users away from Twitter and Facebook. Most of these companies have since gone out of business or been acquired amid a wave of consolidation and the market has instead focused on the activities of the social media channels themselves – such as Twitter Amplify, Facebook Suggested Videos and Snapchat Discover – and the technologies that support them. == Twitter == Twitter and Facebook are both helping users connect around media, which can provoke strong debate and engagement. Both social platforms want to be the 'digital watercooler' and host conversation around TV because the engagement and data about what media people consume can then be used to generate advertising revenue. As an open platform, conversation on Twitter is closely aligned with real-time events. In May 2013, it launched Twitter Amplify – an advertising product for media and consumer brands. With Amplify, Twitter runs video highlights from major live broadcasts, with advertisers' names and messages playing before the clip. By February 2014, all four major U.S. TV networks had signed up to the Amplify program, bringing a variety of premium TV content onto the social platform in the form of in-tweet real-time video clips. In June 2014, Twitter acquired its Twitter Amplify partner in the U.S. SnappyTV, a company that was helping broadcasters and rights holders to share video content both organically across social and via Twitter's Amplify program. Twitter continues to rely on Grabyo, which has also struck numerous deals with some of the largest broadcasters and rights holders in Europe and North America to share video content across Facebook and Twitter. == Facebook == Facebook made significant changes to its platform in 2014 including updates to its algorithm to enhance how it serves video in users' feeds. It also launched video autoplay to get users to watch the videos in their feeds. It rapidly surpassed Twitter and by the end of 2014 it was enjoying three billion video views a day on its platform and had announced a partnership with the NFL, one of Twitter's most active Twitter Amplify partners. In April 2015, at its F8 Developer Conference, it revealed it was working with Grabyo among other technology partners to bring video onto its platform. Then in July it announced it would be launching Facebook Suggested Videos, bringing related videos and ads to anyone that clicks on a video – a move that not only competed with Twitter's commercial video offering but also put it in direct competition with YouTube. == TV Time == TV Time is a television dedicated social network that allows users to keep track of the television series they watch, as well as films. It also allows them to express their reaction to the media they have seen with episode specific voting for favorite characters and emotional reaction to episodes, as well as commenting in episode restrictive pages. This way users are able to avoid spoilers while also finding a precise audience and community for each of their interactions, as opposed to bigger, non-television dedicated social medias such as Facebook and Twitter where the likelihood of unintentionally reading spoilers is much higher. TV Time offers an analytics service called "TVLytics" where the votes and reactions collected from users can be studied for research and television production purposes. == Advertising == According to Businessinsider.com, there are variety of applications for social TV, including support for TV ad sales, optimizing TV ad buys, making ad buys more efficient, as a complement to audience measurement, and eventually, audience forecasting and real-time optimization. Social TV data can ease access to focus groups and may create a positive feedback loop for generating ultra-sticky TV programming and multi-screen ad campaigns. == In numbers == Viewers share their TV experience on social media in real-time as events unfold: between 88-100m Facebook users login to the platform during the primetime hours of 8pm – 11pm in the US. The volume of social media engagement in TV is also rising – according to Nielsen SocialGuide, there was a 38% increase in tweets about TV in 2013 to 263m. For the 2014 Super Bowl, Twitter reported that a record 24.9 million tweets about the game were sent during the telecast, peaking at 381,605 tweets per minute. Facebook reported that 50 million people discussed the Super Bowl, generating 185 million interactions. The 2014 Oscars generated 5m tweets, viewed by an audience of 37m unique Twitter users and delivering 3.3bn impressions globally as conversation and key moments were shared virally across the platform. In 2014 the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC), hosts of Wimbledon, used Grabyo to share video content across social. The videos were viewed 3.5 million times across Facebook and Twitter. In partnered with Grabyo again in 2015 and the videos generated over 48 million views across Facebook and Twitter. == Television shows with social integration == Here are some examples of how TV executives are integrating social elements with TV shows: C-SPAN streamed tweets from US Senators and Representatives during the quorum call The Voice had the judges of the program tweet during the show and the posts scrolls on the bottom of the screen. The use of Twitter also led to an increase in viewers. "Glee" Entertainment Weekly created a second screen viewing platform for the Glee season 3 premiere. == Related publications == Erika Jonietz. "Making TV Social, Virtually" MIT Technology Review. (January 11, 2010) AmigoTV (Alcatel-Lucent; Coppens et al.) – 2004 www.ist-ipmedianet.org/Alcatel_EuroiTV2004_AmigoTV_short_paper_S4-2.pdf Nextream (MIT Media Lab, Martin et al.) – 2010 Social Interactive Television: Immersive Shared Experiences and Perspectives (P. Cesar, D. Geerts, and K. Chorianopoulos (eds.)) – 2009 Social TV and the Emergence of Interactive TV – Multimedia Research Group – November 2010 Interactive Social TV on Service Oriented Environments: Challenges and Enablers (May 2011) == Systems == Boxee – acquired by Samsung GetGlue – acquired by i.TV Grabyo KIT digital Miso TV Tank Top TV WiO Xbox Live