The G7 Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) is an initiative introduced in the "Charlevoix Commitment on Defending Democracy from Foreign Threats", issued by the leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) countries—United States, Canada, Japan, United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy—on June 9, 2018, during their summit in Charlevoix, Quebec. The RRM's mandate is to strengthen the coordination of G7 member countries, as well as "to identify and respond to diverse and evolving threats to our democracies, including through sharing information and analysis, and identifying opportunities for coordinated response" The G7 is an informal international intergovernmental economic organization that meets annually, whose members represent the seven wealthiest advanced economies in the world, as measured by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). == Constituents == The following countries and organisations are members and observers (associate members) of the G7 Rapid Response Mechanism: Australia Canada France Germany Italy Japan Netherlands New Zealand Poland Sweden United Kingdom United States European Union North Atlantic Treaty Organization == Mandate == The RRM was mandated to "strengthen coordination to prevent, thwart and respond to malign and evolving threats to G7 democracies." It "will share information and threat analysis related to various threats to democracy, and is an established mechanism to identify opportunities for coordinated response." According to the Institute for Research on Public Policy's Policy Options magazine, the "RRM initiative seeks to strengthen the leading democracies' coordination to identify and respond to diverse and evolving threats…including through sharing information and analysis, and identifying opportunities for a coordinated response." == Administration == The RRM initiative is led by Canada through Global Affairs Canada's Centre for International Digital Policy. Tara Denham, Director of the Centre for International Digital Policy at Global Affairs Canada, directed the team responsible for setting up the RRM Coordination Unit. Global Affairs Canada—the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development—is the federal Canadian ministry responsible for diplomatic and consular relations, international trade, and international development and humanitarian assistance. The Centre for International Digital Policy includes the Digital Inclusion Lab and the RRM. Denham is also the RRM's Canadian Focal Point. At a briefing on "the security and intelligence threats to elections" of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, the chair Bob Zimmer (CPC), said that the 2019 general election "may be different" from past elections in Canada. as the "tools that were used to strengthen civic engagement are being used to undermine, disrupt and destabilize democracy." "Democracies around the world have entered a new era—an era of heightened threat and heightened vigilance—and 2019 will see a number of countries brace for volleys of attempted disruption: India, Australia, Ukraine, Switzerland, Belgium, the EU and, of course, Canada. Evidence has confirmed that the most recent Canadian general election, in 2015, was unencumbered by interference, although there were some relatively primitive attempts to disrupt, misinform and divide. These efforts were few in number and uncoordinated, and had no visible impact on the voter, either online or in line." Zimmer described the initiative's three pillars. "enhancing citizen preparedness" through the "digital citizen initiative" "improving organizational readiness" with national security and intelligence agencies supporting Elections Canada "ensure a comprehensive understanding of and response to any threats to Canada's democratic process." by establishing the Security and Intelligence Threats to Elections Task Force (SITE) which works as a team with the Communications Security Establishment (CSE), the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), as well as Global Affairs Canada Zimmer said that as part of the third pillar, "We have activated the G7 rapid response mechanism, announced at the G7 leaders' summit in Charlevoix, to strengthen coordination among our G7 allies and to ensure that there is international collaboration and coordination in responding to foreign threats to democracy." == Background == === Charlevoix summit === The G7 met from June 8 to 9, 2018 during their summit at the Manoir Richelieu in Charlevoix, in La Malbaie, Quebec. The Charlevoix Summit was the 44th G7 summit. The group issued eight "Commitments" at the summit. They included: Commitment on Defending Democracy from Foreign Threats Commitment on Equality and Economic Growth Commitment to End Sexual and Gender-Based Violence, Abuse and Harassment in Digital Contexts Declaration on Quality Education for Girls, Adolescent Girls and Women in Developing Countries Commitment on Innovative Financing for Development. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced five themes for Canada's G7 presidency which began in January 2018. === Defending Democracy from Foreign Threats === "We commit to take concerted action in responding to foreign actors who seek to undermine our democratic societies and institutions, our electoral processes, our sovereignty and our security as outlined in the Charlevoix Commitment on Defending Democracy from Foreign Threats. We recognize that such threats, particularly those originating from state actors, are not just threats to G7 nations, but to international peace and security and the rules-based international order. We call on others to join us in addressing these growing threats by increasing the resilience and security of our institutions, economies and societies, and by taking concerted action to identify and hold to account those who would do us harm." They committed to "cooperate in defending democracies from foreign threats and establish a response mechanism for that purpose". "Democracy and the rules-based international order are increasingly being challenged by authoritarianism and the defiance of international norms. In particular, foreign actors seek to undermine our democratic societies and institutions, our electoral processes, our sovereignty and our security. These malicious, multi-faceted and ever-evolving tactics constitute a serious strategic threat which we commit to confront together, working with other governments that share our democratic values." The Charlevoix Commitment states that "foreign actors seek to undermine our democratic societies and institutions, our electoral processes, our sovereignty and our security. These malicious, multi-faceted and ever-evolving tactics constitute a serious strategic threat which we commit to confront together, working together with other governments that share our democratic values." The Charlevoix Summit resolved to "establish a G7 Rapid Response Mechanism to strengthen our coordination to identify and respond to diverse and evolving threats to our democracies, including through sharing information and analysis, and identifying opportunities for coordinated response." == Monitored elections == === 2019 European Parliament election === RRM Canada's comprehensive report on the 2019 European Parliament election analyzed open data "related to foreign interference during and leading up to the 2019 European Union Parliamentary Elections, May 23–26, 2019". RRM Canada did not find "significant evidence of state-based foreign interference, or any large-scale, organized and coordinated efforts by non-state actors". They did find that "national or international non-state actors" used tactics based on those used by the Russian sponsored Internet Research Agency (IRA) in previous elections, "such as the 2016 U.S. Elections". For example, blogs, webpages, and social media accounts on Twitter, Facebook and Reddit "were used to spread divisive and false information to damage and negatively impact social cohesion and trust in democratic processes and institutions" in coordinated networks of Facebook groups. === 2019 Alberta general election === RRM Canada's analyz report on the 2019 Alberta general election was intended to "identify any emerging tactics in foreign interference and draw lessons learned for the Canadian general elections scheduled to take place in October 2019." No foreign activity was detected, although the data revealed ""suspicious account creation pattern that is indicative of troll or bot activity". They found "automated inauthentic behaviour and trolling activities" but concluded that they were "very likely domestic". The data showed "suspicious account creation pattern that is indicative of troll or bot activity", and "spikes in account creation" which suggested the "presence of accounts developed for a specific purpose." The accounts were very likely domestic and were "mainly comprised of supporters of the United Conservative Party (UCP)." A seco
TinEye
TinEye is a reverse image search engine developed and offered by Idée, Inc., a company based in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. It was the first image search engine on the web to use image identification technology rather than keywords, metadata or watermarks. TinEye allows users to search not using keywords but with images. Upon submitting an image, TinEye creates a "unique and compact digital signature or fingerprint" of the image and matches it with other indexed images. This procedure is able to match even heavily edited versions of the submitted image, but will not usually return similar images in the results. == History == Idée, Inc. was founded by Leila Boujnane and Paul Bloore in 1999. Idée launched the service on May 6, 2008 and went into open beta in August that year. While computer vision and image identification research projects began as early as the 1980s, the company claims that TinEye is the first web-based image search engine to use image identification technology. The service was created with copyright owners and brand marketers as the intended user base, to look up unauthorized use and track where the brands are showing up respectively. In June 2014, TinEye claimed to have indexed more than five billion images for comparisons. However, this is a relatively small proportion of the total number of images available on the World Wide Web. As of September 2025, TinEye's search results claim to have over 77.6 billion images indexed for comparison. == Technology == A user uploads an image to the search engine (the upload size is limited to 20 MB) or provides a URL for an image or for a page containing the image. The search engine will look up other usage of the image in the internet, including modified images based upon that image, and report the date and time at which they were posted. TinEye does not recognize outlines of objects or perform facial recognition, but recognizes the entire image, and some altered versions of that image. This includes smaller, larger, and cropped versions of the image. TinEye has shown itself capable of retrieving different images from its database of the same subject, such as famous landmarks. TinEye is capable of searching for images in JPEG, PNG, WebP, GIF, BMP and TIFF format. Results generated from TinEye include the total number of matches in their database, a preview image, and the URL to each match. TinEye can sort results by best match, most changed, biggest image, newest, and oldest. User registration is optional and offers storage of the user's previous queries. Other features include embeddable widgets and bookmarklets. TinEye has also released their commercial API. == Usage == TinEye's ability to search the web for specific images (and modifications of those images) makes it a potential tool for the copyright holders of visual works to locate infringements on their copyright. It also creates a possible avenue for people who are looking to make use of imagery under orphan works to find the copyright holders of that imagery. Being that orphan works can be defined as "copyrighted works whose owners are difficult or impossible to identify and/or locate," the use of TinEye could potentially remove the orphan work status from online images that can be found in its database. === Fact-checking === It has been recommended by fact-checkers as a useful resource in attempts to verify the origin of images. As of 2019, TinEye specialized in copyright violations and finding exact versions of images online.
OpenIO
OpenIO offered object storage for a wide range of high-performance applications. OpenIO was founded in 2015 by Laurent Denel (CEO), Jean-François Smigielski (CTO) and five other co-founders; it leveraged open source software, developed since 2006, based on a grid technology that enabled dynamic behaviour and supported heterogenous hardware. In October 2017 OpenIO was completed a $5 million funding rounds. In July 2020 OpenIO had been acquired by OVH and withdrawn from the market to become the core technology of OVHcloud object storage offering. == Software == OpenIO is a software-defined object store that supports S3 and can be deployed on-premises, cloud-hosted or at the edge, on any hardware mix. It has been designed from the beginning for performance and cost-efficiency at any scale, and it has been optimized for Big Data, HPC and AI. OpenIO stores objects within a flat structure within a massively distributed directory with indirections, which allows the data query path to be independent of the number of nodes and the performance not to be affected by the growth of capacity. Servers are organized as a grid of nodes massively distributed, where each node takes part in directory and storage services, which ensures that there is no single point of failure and that new nodes are automatically discovered and immediately available without the need to rebalance data. The software is built on top of a technology that ensures optimal data placement based on real-time metrics and allows the addition or removal of storage devices with automatic performance and load impact optimization. For data protection OpenIO has synchronous and asynchronous replication with multiple copies, and an erasure coding implementation based on Reed-Solomon that can be deployed in one data center or geo-distributed or stretched clusters. The software has a feature that catches all events that occur in the cluster and can pass them up in the stack or to applications running on OpenIO nodes. This enables event-driven computing directly into the storage infrastructure. The open source code is available on Github and it is licensed under AGPL3 for server code and LGPL3 for client code. == Performance == OpenIO claimed in 2019 to have reached 1.372 Tbit/s write speed (171 GB/s) on a cluster of 350 physical machines. The benchmark scenario, conducted under production conditions with standard hardware (commodity servers with 7200 rpm HDDs), consisted in backing up a 38 PB Hadoop datalake via the DistCp command. This level of performance marked, according to analysts, the arrival of a new generation of object storage technologies oriented toward high performance and hyper-scalability.
Deblurring
Deblurring is the process of removing blurring artifacts from images. Deblurring recovers a sharp image S from a blurred image B, where S is convolved with K (the blur kernel) to generate B. Mathematically, this can be represented as B = S ∗ K {\displaystyle B=SK} (where represents convolution). While this process is sometimes known as unblurring, deblurring is the correct technical word. The blur K is typically modeled as point spread function and is convolved with a hypothetical sharp image S to get B, where both the S (which is to be recovered) and the point spread function K are unknown. This is an example of an inverse problem. In almost all cases, there is insufficient information in the blurred image to uniquely determine a plausible original image, making it an ill-posed problem. In addition the blurred image contains additional noise which complicates the task of determining the original image. This is generally solved by the use of a regularization term to attempt to eliminate implausible solutions. This problem is analogous to echo removal in the signal processing domain. Nevertheless, when coherent beam is used for imaging, the point spread function can be modeled mathematically. By proper deconvolution of the point spread function K and the blurred image B, the blurred image B can be deblurred (unblur) and the sharp image S can be recovered.
Serverless computing
Serverless computing is "a cloud service category where the customer can use different cloud capability types without the customer having to provision, deploy and manage either hardware or software resources, other than providing customer application code or providing customer data. Serverless computing represents a form of virtualized computing", according to ISO/IEC 22123-2. Serverless computing is a broad ecosystem that includes the cloud provider, function as a service (FaaS), managed services, tools, frameworks, engineers, stakeholders, and other interconnected elements. == Overview == Serverless is a misnomer in the sense that servers are still used by cloud service providers to execute code for developers. The definition of serverless computing has evolved over time, leading to varied interpretations. According to Ben Kehoe, serverless represents a spectrum rather than a rigid definition. Emphasis should shift from strict definitions and specific technologies to adopting a serverless mindset, focusing on leveraging serverless solutions to address business challenges. Serverless computing does not eliminate complexity but shifts much of it from the operations team to the development team. However, this shift is not absolute, as operations teams continue to manage aspects such as identity and access management (IAM), networking, security policies, and cost optimization. Additionally, while breaking down applications into finer-grained components can increase management complexity, the relationship between granularity and management difficulty is not strictly linear. There is often an optimal level of modularization where the benefits outweigh the added management overhead. According to Yan Cui, serverless techniques should be adopted only when they help to deliver customer value faster. And while adopting, organizations should take small steps and de-risk along the way. == Challenges == Serverless applications are prone to fallacies of distributed computing. In addition, they are prone to the following fallacies: Versioning is simple Compensating transactions always work Observability is optional === Monitoring and debugging === Monitoring and debugging serverless applications can present unique challenges due to their distributed, event-driven nature and proprietary environments. Traditional tools may fall short, making it difficult to track execution flows across services. However, modern solutions such as distributed tracing tools (e.g., AWS X-Ray, Datadog), centralized logging, and cloud-agnostic observability platforms are mitigating these challenges. Emerging technologies like OpenTelemetry, AI-powered anomaly detection, and serverless-specific frameworks are further improving visibility and root cause analysis. While challenges persist, advancements in monitoring and debugging tools are steadily addressing these limitations. === Security === According to OWASP, serverless applications are vulnerable to variations of traditional attacks, insecure code, and some serverless-specific attacks (like denial of wallet). So, the risks have changed and attack prevention requires a shift in mindset. === Vendor lock-in === Serverless computing is provided as a third-party service. Applications and software that run in the serverless environment are by default locked to a specific cloud vendor. This issue is exacerbated in serverless computing, as with its increased level of abstraction, public vendors only allow customers to upload code to a FaaS platform without the authority to configure underlying environments. More importantly, when considering a more complex workflow that includes backend-as-a-service (BaaS), a BaaS offering can typically only natively trigger a FaaS offering from the same provider. This makes the workload migration in serverless computing virtually impossible. Therefore, considering how to design and deploy serverless workflows from a multi-cloud perspective could mitigate this. == High-performance computing == Serverless computing may not be ideal for certain high-performance computing (HPC) workloads due to resource limits often imposed by cloud providers, including maximum memory, CPU, and runtime restrictions. For workloads requiring sustained or predictable resource usage, bulk-provisioned servers can sometimes be more cost-effective than the pay-per-use model typical of serverless platforms. However, serverless computing is increasingly capable of supporting specific HPC workloads, particularly those that are highly parallelizable and event-driven, by leveraging its scalability and elasticity. The suitability of serverless computing for HPC continues to evolve with advancements in cloud technologies. == Anti-patterns == The grain of sand anti-pattern refers to the creation of excessively small components (e.g., functions) within a system, often resulting in increased complexity, operational overhead, and performance inefficiencies. Lambda pinball is a related anti-pattern that can occur in serverless architectures when functions (e.g., AWS Lambda, Azure functions) excessively invoke each other in fragmented chains, leading to latency, debugging and testing challenges, and reduced observability. These anti-patterns are associated with the formation of a distributed monolith. These anti-patterns are often addressed through the application of clear domain boundaries, which distinguish between public and published interfaces. Public interfaces are technically accessible interfaces, such as methods, classes, API endpoints, or triggers, but they do not come with formal stability guarantees. In contrast, published interfaces involve an explicit stability contract, including formal versioning, thorough documentation, a defined deprecation policy, and often support for backward compatibility. Published interfaces may also require maintaining multiple versions simultaneously and adhering to formal deprecation processes when breaking changes are introduced. Fragmented chains of function calls are often observed in systems where serverless components (functions) interact with other resources in complex patterns, sometimes described as spaghetti architecture or a distributed monolith. In contrast, systems exhibiting clearer boundaries typically organize serverless components into cohesive groups, where internal public interfaces manage inter-component communication, and published interfaces define communication across group boundaries. This distinction highlights differences in stability guarantees and maintenance commitments, contributing to reduced dependency complexity. Additionally, patterns associated with excessive serverless function chaining are sometimes addressed through architectural strategies that emphasize native service integrations instead of individual functions, a concept referred to as the functionless mindset. However, this approach is noted to involve a steeper learning curve, and integration limitations may vary even within the same cloud vendor ecosystem. Reporting on serverless databases presents challenges, as retrieving data for a reporting service can either break the bounded contexts, reduce the timeliness of the data, or do both. This applies regardless of whether data is pulled directly from databases, retrieved via HTTP, or collected in batches. Mark Richards refers to this as the reach-in reporting anti-pattern. A possible alternative to this approach is for databases to asynchronously push the necessary data to the reporting service instead of the reporting service pulling it. While this method requires a separate contract between services and the reporting service and can be complex to implement, it helps preserve bounded contexts while maintaining a high level of data timeliness. == Principles == Adopting DevSecOps practices can help improve the use and security of serverless technologies. In serverless applications, the distinction between infrastructure and business logic is often blurred, with applications typically distributed across multiple services. To maximize the effectiveness of testing, integration testing is emphasized for serverless applications. Additionally, to facilitate debugging and implementation, orchestration is used within the bounded context, while choreography is employed between different bounded contexts. Ephemeral resources are typically kept together to maintain high cohesion. However, shared resources with long spin-up times, such as AWS RDS clusters and landing zones, are often managed in separate repositories, deployment pipeline, and stacks.
Color vision
Color vision (CV), a feature of visual perception, is an ability to perceive differences between light composed of different frequencies independently of light intensity. Color perception is a part of the larger visual system and is mediated by a complex process between neurons that begins with differential stimulation of different types of photoreceptors by light entering the eye. Those photoreceptors then emit outputs that are propagated through many layers of neurons ultimately leading to higher cognitive functions in the brain. Color vision is found in many animals and is mediated by similar underlying mechanisms with common types of biological molecules and a complex history of the evolution of color vision within different animal taxa. In primates, color vision may have evolved under selective pressure for a variety of visual tasks including the foraging for nutritious young leaves, ripe fruit, and flowers, as well as detecting predator camouflage and emotional states in other primates. == Wavelength == Isaac Newton discovered that white light after being split into its component colors when passed through a dispersive prism could be recombined to make white light by passing them through a different prism. The visible light spectrum ranges from about 380 to 740 nanometers. Spectral colors (colors that are produced by a narrow band of wavelengths) such as red, orange, yellow, green, cyan, blue, and violet can be found in this range. These spectral colors do not refer to a single wavelength, but rather to a set of wavelengths: red, 625–740 nm; orange, 590–625 nm; yellow, 565–590 nm; green, 500–565 nm; cyan, 485–500 nm; blue, 450–485 nm; violet, 380–450 nm. Wavelengths longer or shorter than this range are called infrared or ultraviolet, respectively. Humans cannot generally see these wavelengths, but other animals may. === Hue detection === Sufficient differences in wavelength cause a difference in the perceived hue; the just-noticeable difference in wavelength varies from about 1 nm in the blue-green and yellow wavelengths to 10 nm and more in the longer red and shorter blue wavelengths. Although the human eye can distinguish up to a few hundred hues, when those pure spectral colors are mixed together or diluted with white light, the number of distinguishable chromaticities can be much higher. In very low light levels, vision is scotopic: light is detected by rod cells of the retina. Rods are maximally sensitive to wavelengths near 500 nm and play little, if any, role in color vision. In brighter light, such as daylight, vision is photopic: light is detected by cone cells which are responsible for color vision. Cones are sensitive to a range of wavelengths, but are most sensitive to wavelengths near 555 nm. Between these regions, mesopic vision comes into play and both rods and cones provide signals to the retinal ganglion cells. The shift in color perception from dim light to daylight gives rise to differences known as the Purkinje effect. The perception of "white" is formed by the entire spectrum of visible light, or by mixing colors of just a few wavelengths in animals with few types of color receptors. In humans, white light can be perceived by combining wavelengths such as red, green, and blue, or just a pair of complementary colors such as blue and yellow. === Non-spectral colors === There are a variety of colors in addition to spectral colors and their hues. These include grayscale colors, shades of colors obtained by mixing grayscale colors with spectral colors, violet-red colors, impossible colors, and metallic colors. Grayscale colors include white, gray, and black. Rods contain rhodopsin, which reacts to light intensity, providing grayscale coloring. Shades include colors such as pink or brown. Pink is obtained from mixing red and white. Brown may be obtained from mixing orange with gray or black. Navy is obtained from mixing blue and black. Violet-red colors include hues and shades of magenta. The light spectrum is a line on which violet is one end and the other is red, and yet we see hues of purple that connect those two colors. Impossible colors are a combination of cone responses that cannot be naturally produced. For example, medium cones cannot be activated completely on their own; if they were, we would see a 'hyper-green' color. == Dimensionality == Color vision is categorized foremost according to the dimensionality of the color gamut, which is defined by the number of primaries required to represent the color vision. This is generally equal to the number of photopsins expressed: a correlation that holds for vertebrates but not invertebrates. The common vertebrate ancestor possessed four photopsins (expressed in cones) plus rhodopsin (expressed in rods), so was tetrachromatic. However, many vertebrate lineages have lost one or many photopsin genes, leading to lower-dimension color vision. The dimensions of color vision range from 1-dimensional and up: == Physiology of color perception == Perception of color begins with specialized retinal cells known as cone cells. Cone cells contain different forms of opsin – a pigment protein – that have different spectral sensitivities. Humans contain three types, resulting in trichromatic color vision. Each individual cone contains pigments composed of opsin apoprotein covalently linked to a light-absorbing prosthetic group: either 11-cis-hydroretinal or, more rarely, 11-cis-dehydroretinal. The cones are conventionally labeled according to the ordering of the wavelengths of the peaks of their spectral sensitivities: short (S), medium (M), and long (L) cone types. These three types do not correspond well to particular colors as we know them. Rather, the perception of color is achieved by a complex process that starts with the differential output of these cells in the retina and which is finalized in the visual cortex and associative areas of the brain. For example, while the L cones have been referred to simply as red receptors, microspectrophotometry has shown that their peak sensitivity is in the greenish-yellow region of the spectrum. Similarly, the S cones and M cones do not directly correspond to blue and green, although they are often described as such. The RGB color model, therefore, is a convenient means for representing color but is not directly based on the types of cones in the human eye. The peak response of human cone cells varies, even among individuals with typical color vision; in some non-human species this polymorphic variation is even greater, and it may well be adaptive. === Theories === Two complementary theories of color vision are the trichromatic theory and the opponent process theory. The trichromatic theory, or Young–Helmholtz theory, proposed in the 19th century by Thomas Young and Hermann von Helmholtz, posits three types of cones preferentially sensitive to blue, green, and red, respectively. Others have suggested that the trichromatic theory is not specifically a theory of color vision but a theory of receptors for all vision, including color but not specific or limited to it. Equally, it has been suggested that the relationship between the phenomenal opponency described by Ewald Hering and the physiological opponent processes are not straightforward (see below), making of physiological opponency a mechanism that is relevant to the whole of vision, and not just to color vision alone. Hering proposed the opponent process theory in 1872. It states that the visual system interprets color in an antagonistic way: red vs. green, blue vs. yellow, black vs. white. Both theories are generally accepted as valid, describing different stages in visual physiology, visualized in the adjacent diagram. Green–magenta and blue–yellow are scales with mutually exclusive boundaries. In the same way that there cannot exist a "slightly negative" positive number, a single eye cannot perceive a bluish-yellow or a reddish-green. Although these two theories are both currently widely accepted theories, past and more recent work has led to criticism of the opponent process theory, stemming from a number of what are presented as discrepancies in the standard opponent process theory. For example, the phenomenon of an after-image of complementary color can be induced by fatiguing the cells responsible for color perception, by staring at a vibrant color for a length of time, and then looking at a white surface. This phenomenon of complementary colors shows that cyan, rather than green, is the complement of red, and that magenta, rather than red, is the complement of green. It therefore also shows that the reddish-green color supposed to be impossible by opponent process theory is actually the color yellow. Although this phenomenon is more readily explained by the trichromatic theory, explanations for the discrepancy may include alterations to the opponent process theory, such as redefining the opponent colors as red vs. cyan, to reflect this effect. Despite such criticis
Too Good To Go
Too Good To Go is a service with a mobile application that connects customers to restaurants and stores that have surplus unsold food. The service covers major European cities, and in October 2020 started operations in North America. As part of the initiatives taken on the International Day of Awareness of Food Loss and Waste to reduce food loss and waste, the app is suggested alongside OLIO among many others. In 2023 Too Good To Go was the fastest-growing sustainable food app startup by number of downloads. As of August 2023, it claimed 164,000 businesses, serving 62 million users, have saved 155 million bags of food. As of March 2023, it claimed to have saved over 200 million meals. == History == The company was created in 2015 in Denmark by Thomas Bjørn Momsen, Klaus Bagge Pedersen, Adam Sigbrand and Brian Christensen. In 2017, Mette Lykke (co-founder of Endomondo) joined as CEO. In February 2019, the company raised an additional 6 million euros in a new round of investment. In August 2019, Too Good To Go was re-launched in Austria. In September 2019, Too Good To Go acquired the Spanish startup weSAVEeat and merged it into its own brand. In November 2019, the offer of Too Good To Go extended to plants through a partnership with the French retail plants company Jardiland. In December 2019, Too Good To Go partnered with the French grocery retail stores Intermarché, and donated 60K euros to the French charity Restaurants du Cœur. In October 2021, Bonnie Wright teamed up with Too Good To Go to drive the initiative to reduce food waste. == Corporate affairs == The key trends for the Danish entity Too Good To Go ApS are (as of the financial year ending December 31): == International expansion == As of March 2026 the company serves the European countries Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Denmark, the Faroe Islands, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom. Outside of Europe the service is available in Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and the United States. == Purpose == The purpose of Too Good To Go is to reduce food waste worldwide. It developed a mobile application that connects restaurants and stores that have unsold, surplus food, with customers who can then buy whatever food the outlet considers surplus to requirements—without being able to choose—at a much lower price than normal. The food on the app is priced at one-third its original price. The company claims this reduces the waste of food that would otherwise be discarded; food waste is a global problem that affects the environment. In three years active, the app reached more than 9.5 million users. As of 2022, more than 57.7 million users and 154,000 establishments have signed up, and 139 million meals have been collected. In 2019, the company had 350 employees in Europe. As of June 2023 the company was estimated to have 1,289 employees. == Use == Food outlets must notify the TGTG company about what they have available on each day, stating what sort of food they have (baked foods, meals, produce, vegan food), and the price for a 'surprise bag', whose contents they determine; the user cannot choose, but the original prices will be three or more times the TGTG price. Notification is made early based upon the quantity predicted to be left over, not at the end of a selling period. Users must register to use the service. A mobile phone with an Internet connection running Android or iOS is needed. The user runs the TGTG app, which lists outlets available within a chosen distance and time range. The customer can then order and pay for a 'surprise bag'. The supplier can cancel an order at any time if the expected surplus is not available—the purchaser is notified by text message—and the purchaser can cancel with two hours' notice. The phone must be taken to the food supplier in a specified pickup time window, often 30 or 60 minutes long, and the transaction is finalised by swiping the app—connected to the Internet—to confirm collection.