Gundam Build Divers Re:Rise (Japanese: ガンダムビルドダイバーズRe:RISE, Hepburn: Gandamu Birudo Daibāzu Re:Raizu) is a Japanese original net animation anime series produced by Sunrise Beyond, and the fourth series within the Gundam Build Series sub-series. A sequel to the 2018 anime Gundam Build Divers, it is the first Gundam anime series to be released in the Reiwa period, released to celebrate the franchise's 40th anniversary. The series is directed by Shinya Watada and written by Yasuyuki Muto. Initially announced at the Gundam 40th anniversary video, the series aired on its Gundam Channel YouTube channel from October 10 to December 26, 2019. A TV airing of the ONA began on BS11 on October 12, 2019, and on January 28, 2020, on Tokyo MX. A second season aired from April 9 to August 27, 2020. Two spinoffs of the series were later serialized in Kadokawa's Gundam Ace magazine and Hobby Japan. == Plot == Two years have passed since the EL-Diver Incident, an event that almost destroyed the Gunpla Battle Nexus Online (GBN) game until it was resolved by the force group known as "Build Divers", and soon after more EL-Divers were discovered. In order to make the game more secure, a newer version of the game was rolled out in order to prevent the same incident from happening again and with newer experiences that would make the gameplay more immersive to players. The story focuses on Hiroto Kuga, a high schooler who is a rogue mercenary Gunpla Diver in GBN, who goes in the game and wanders throughout its countless dimensions while helping out other Divers whether it is on insistence or by hire. Despite his selfless act, he chooses to remain unaffiliated with anyone and refuses rewards and Force (Diver parties) group invites, isolating himself from other people even in real life. His primary goal as a Diver is to be reunited with a mysterious girl from his past named Eve, who was in fact the very first EL-Diver to appear in the game. But after a special request mission, Hiroto is united with three other active Divers in a strange world named "Eldora" and forms the Force group "BUILD DiVERS" in what appears to be just another GBN gamespace event, until they learn the truth about Eldora and its consequences not only for GBN, but for the entire world. == Characters == === BUILD DiVERS === Hiroto Kuga (クガ・ヒロト, Kuga Hiroto) / Hiroto (ヒロト, Hiroto) Voiced by: Chiaki Kobayashi (Japanese); Billy Kametz (English) The main protagonist of the series and a high-school builder, veteran diver, and a former ace member of the Force group Avalon, who lives in Yokohama. He was one of the first minors to make it to the deep end of GBN, due to his conviction of being a person who does his best to help others. He was active prior and during the events of the previous series. Now working as a rogue diver for hire after leaving Avalon, he wanders the GBN gamespace alone, harboring regrets, resentments, and suffering from trauma after the death of his close friend and lover, the EL-Diver Eve. He is very calm and a man of few words, usually refusing others' reward and help, especially on joining other forces, but this stoic persona is a mental mask to hide his condition from everyone, including his parents. But when a special mission done by Freddie united him with Kazami, May and Parviz, they accidentally formed the force team named "BUILD DiVERS" to protect the Eldorans from the One-Eyes army. Currently he is the ace of his unit and the leader of the overall force. Hiroto uses the PFF-X7 Core Gundam as his main Gunpla, based on the RX-78-2 Gundam from the original Mobile Suit Gundam series. Its special armament system called the "core-change" gimmick and his first theme invented from that gimmick is the "Planets System". This allows the Core Gundam to be equipped with various types of armor and weapons, each for a different situation named after the eight planets. Hiroto later upgrades his Gunpla into the PFF-X7II Core Gundam II. This new Core Gundam can transform into the "Core Flyer", in a similar fashion to the original Gundam's FF-X7 Core Fighter for increased mobility and like its predecessor, it can also use the Planets System: Earth Armor (PFF-X7/E3 Earthree Gundam): Core Gundam's default blue armor, focused on traditional all-around combat. Mars Armor (PFF-X7/M4 Marsfour Gundam): A red armor whose focus is on fragments of four styles of close combat, hence "Cross-Combat". Venus Armor (PFF-X7/V2 Veetwo Gundam): A green armor whose focus is commando style ranged and bombardment combat, additionally with option works. Mercury Armor (PFF-X7/M1 Mercuone Gundam): A navy armor whose focus is underwater combat. Jupiter Armor (PFF-X7/J5 Jupitive Gundam): A white armor whose focus is fast orbital combat. Uranus Armor (PFF-X7II/U7 Uraven Gundam): An indigo armor focused on reconnaissance and high powered sniping. Saturn Armor (PFF-X7II/S6 Saturnix Gundam): An orange armor focused in demolition style close combat without beam weapons, originally developed to counter Gundam Frames. Neptune Armor (PFF-X7II/N8 Nepteight Gundam): An aqua-green armor equipped with a customized Volture Lumiere system similar to the one from Mobile Suit Gundam SEED C.E. 73: Stargazer, intended to be used for traveling through GBN's space in a short amount of time, but was used for launching into orbit instead of maneuvering in deep space. It is ultimately discarded in Eldora's orbit due to the strain of leaving Eldora's gravitational field. Pluto Armor (PFF-X7II+/P9 Plutine Gundam): Appearing only on Gundam Build Metaverse, the black colored armor is used for close combat and dueling purposes with its color scheme reminiscent of that of EcoPla. PFF-X7II/BUILD DiVERS Re:Rising Gundam: A special combination of the Core Gundam II with the WoDom Pod + and parts from the Gundam Aegis Knight and the EX Valkylander, armed with two giant beam sabers, eight miracle wings born from Eve's blessings, and the "Grand Cross Cannon", Hiroto's first special move, made with the help of his team. In one occasion, Hiroto changes his avatar to a Haro to pilot the Mobile Builder Haro Loader to help with the repairs on Cuadorn by making a prosthetic wing out of gunpla parts. During the Gunpla Battle Royal, he pilots an unmodified ASW-G-08 Gundam Barbatos Lupus Rex from Mobile Suit Gundam: Iron-Blooded Orphans. In Battlelogue, it is revealed that he has made a second Core Gundam II that he leaves on Eldora with the colors of the Gundam MK-II Titan. Another variant of this Gunpla sports the old "Gundam G3" colors with his team's personal crest, which is most likely to represent Sarah since the color of her hair, eyes, and dress embody Hiroto's time with Eve before they joined Avalon and to symbolize how he has officially befriended the original Build Divers. Each of the two units have unique advancements, the Titan color specializes in ground and underwater combat and the G3 color specializes in aerial and space combat. May (メイ, Mei) Voiced by: Mai Fuchigami (Japanese); Lauren Landa (English) A seemingly late teens female diver who prefers to play solo, she is a very calm and no-nonsense girl whose interest is in battles alone. However, she is not a fan of those who engage their opponents head on and prefers to implement a strategic approach. She is mature and has a strong sense of justice, and can be impulsive rushing into situations, especially for those in danger. Later in the series, she is revealed to be one of the 87 EL-Divers, however she was not one of those who were saved after the EL-Diver incident two years ago, she was born shortly after. After she was born she was given her own Mobile Doll body similar to Sarah, that is when she first met her, Koichi, Tsukasa, and Nanami. During the Lotus Challenge Eldoran style rehearsal battle it is revealed that she, as a new sister of Sarah, addresses the latter as the older since Sarah is chronologically older, regardless of her maturity. In the final episode, she is revealed to have been born with the remnant data originating from Eve, the first born EL-Diver who Hiroto befriended and fell in love with several years ago, and carries Eve's earring on her armband. In Battlelogue, it's implied that she is currently living with Hiroto IRL and in GBN is his attendant. May uses the JMA0530-MAY WoDom Pod as her main Gunpla, which is a customized JMA-0530 Walking Dome from Turn A Gundam. In the later episodes, the mobile suit is revealed to be a disguise for its true form, the HER-SELF Mobile Doll May. May later upgrades her WoDom Pod into the JMA0530-MAYBD WoDom Pod +. During the Gunpla Battle Royal, she uses her Mobile Doll (albeit with a new color scheme and the Gundam Base logo) along with an unmodified NZ-999 II Neo Zeong mobile armor from Mobile Suit Gundam Narrative. Kazami Torimachi (トリマチ・カザミ, Torimachi Kazami) / Kazami (カザミ, Kazami) Voiced by: Masaaki Mizunaka (Japanese); Ray Chase (English) A diver who was a former member of the diver group "Mu Dish". He is a very energet
Avizo (software)
Avizo (pronounce: 'a-VEE-zo') is a general-purpose commercial software application for scientific and industrial data visualization and analysis. Avizo is developed by Thermo Fisher Scientific and was originally designed and developed by the Visualization and Data Analysis Group at Zuse Institute Berlin (ZIB) under the name Amira. Avizo was commercially released in November 2007. For the history of its development, see the Wikipedia article about Amira. == Overview == Avizo is a software application which enables users to perform interactive visualization and computation on 3D data sets. The Avizo interface is modelled on the visual programming. Users manipulate data and module components, organized in an interactive graph representation (called Pool), or in a Tree view. Data and modules can be interactively connected together, and controlled with several parameters, creating a visual processing network whose output is displayed in a 3D viewer. With this interface, complex data can be interactively explored and analyzed by applying a controlled sequence of computation and display processes resulting in a meaningful visual representation and associated derived data. == Application areas == Avizo has been designed to support different types of applications and workflows from 2D and 3D image data processing to simulations. It is a versatile and customizable visualization tool used in many fields: Scientific visualization Materials Research Tomography, Microscopy, etc. Nondestructive testing, Industrial Inspection, and Visual Inspection Computer-aided Engineering and simulation data post-processing Porous medium analysis Civil Engineering Seismic Exploration, Reservoir Engineering, Microseismic Monitoring, Borehole Imaging Geology, Digital Rock Physics (DRP), Earth Sciences Archaeology Food technology and agricultural science Physics, Chemistry Climatology, Oceanography, Environmental Studies Astrophysics == Features == Data import: 2D and 3D image stack and volume data: from microscopes (electron, optical), X-ray tomography (CT, micro-/nano-CT, synchrotron), neutron tomography and other acquisition devices (MRI, radiography, GPR) Geometric models (such as point sets, line sets, surfaces, grids) Numerical simulation data (such as Computational fluid dynamics or Finite element analysis data) Molecular data Time series and animations Seismic data Well logs 4D Multivariate Climate Models 2D/3D data visualization: Volume rendering Digital Volume Correlation Visualization of sections, through various slicing and clipping methods Isosurface rendering Polygonal meshes Scalar fields, Vector fields, Tensor representations, Flow visualization (Illuminated Streamlines, Stream Ribbons) Image processing: 2D/3D Alignment of image slices, Image registration Image filtering Mathematical Morphology (erode, dilate, open, close, tophat) Watershed Transform, Distance Transform Image segmentation 3D models reconstruction: Polygonal surface generation from segmented objects Generation of tetrahedral grids Surface reconstruction from point clouds Skeletonization (reconstruction of dendritic, porous or fracture network) Surface model simplification Quantification and analysis: Measurements and statistics Analysis spreadsheet and charting Material properties computation, based on 3D images: Absolute permeability Thermal conductivity Molecular diffusivity Electrical resistivity/formation factor 3D image-based meshing for CFD and FEA: From 3D imaging modalities (CT, micro-CT, MRI, etc.) Surface and volume meshes generation Export to FEA and CFD solvers for simulation Post-processing for simulation analysis Presentation, automation: MovieMaker, Multiscreen, Video wall, collaboration, and VR support TCL Scripting, C++ extension API Avizo is based on Open Inventor 3D graphics toolkits (FEI Visualization Sciences Group).
Science Fiction Thinking Machines
Science Fiction Thinking Machines: Robots, Androids, Computers is an anthology of science fiction short stories edited by American anthologist Groff Conklin. It was first published in hardcover by Vanguard Press in May 1954. An abridged paperback edition titled, Selections from Science Fiction Thinking Machines was later published by Bantam Books in August 1955 and was reprinted in September 1964. The book consists of twenty-two novelettes and short stories by various science fiction authors, together with an introduction and bibliography by the editor. The stories were previously published from 1899-1954, in various science fiction and other magazines. == Contents == Note: stories also appearing in the abridged edition annotated A. "Introduction" (Groff Conklin) "Automata: I" (S. Fowler Wright) "Moxon's Master" (Ambrose Bierce) "Robbie" (Isaac Asimov) A "The Scarab" (Raymond Z. Gallun) "The Mechanical Bride" (Fritz Leiber) "Virtuoso" (Herbert Goldstone) A "Automata: II" (S. Fowler Wright) "Boomerang" (Eric Frank Russell) A "The Jester" (William Tenn) A "R. U. R." (Karel Čapek) "Skirmish" (Clifford D. Simak) A "Soldier Boy" (Michael Shaara) "Automata: III" (S. Fowler Wright) "Men Are Different" (Alan Bloch) A "Letter to Ellen" (Chan Davis) A "Sculptors of Life" (Wallace West) "The Golden Egg" (Theodore Sturgeon) A "Dead End" (Wallace Macfarlane) A "Answer" (Hal Clement) "Sam Hall" (Poul Anderson) A "Dumb Waiter" (Walter M. Miller Jr.) A "Problem for Emmy" (Robert Sherman Townes) A "Selected List of Tales About Robots, Androids, and Computers" (Groff Conklin)
AI Safety Summit 2023
The AI Safety Summit 2023 was an international conference on the safety and regulation of artificial intelligence. Organized by the British government, it was held in November 2023 at Bletchley Park, Milton Keynes, England. The event was the first ever global summit on artificial intelligence. The event led to the release of the Bletchley Declaration, which focused on "identifying AI safety risks of shared concern" and "building respective risk-based policies" to "ensure that the benefits of the technology can be harnessed responsibly for good and for all." == Background == The prime minister of the United Kingdom at the time, Rishi Sunak, made AI one of the priorities of his government, announcing that the UK would host a global AI Safety conference in autumn 2023. == Venue == Bletchley Park was a World War II codebreaking facility established by the British government on the site of a Victorian manor and is in the British city of Milton Keynes. It has played an important role in the history of computing, with some of the first modern computers being built at the facility. == Outcomes == 28 countries at the summit, including the United States, China, Australia, and the European Union, have issued an agreement known as the Bletchley Declaration, calling for international co-operation to manage the challenges and risks of artificial intelligence. The Bletchley Declaration affirms that AI should be designed, developed, deployed, and used in a manner that is safe, human-centric, trustworthy and responsible. Emphasis has been placed on regulating "Frontier AI", a term for the latest and most powerful AI systems. Concerns that have been raised at the summit include the potential use of AI for terrorism, criminal activity, and warfare, as well as existential risk posed to humanity as a whole.The president of the United States, Joe Biden, signed an executive order requiring AI developers to share safety results with the US government. The US government also announced the creation of an American AI Safety Institute, as part of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The tech entrepreneur Elon Musk and Sunak did a live interview on AI safety on 2 November on X. == Notable attendees == The following individuals attended the summit: Rishi Sunak, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States Charles III, King of the United Kingdom (attending virtually) Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla, owner of X, SpaceX, Neuralink, and xAI Giorgia Meloni, Prime Minister of Italy Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI Nick Clegg, former British politician and president of global affairs at Meta Platforms Mustafa Suleyman, co-founder of DeepMind Michelle Donelan, UK secretary of state for Science, Innovation and Technology Věra Jourová, the European Commission’s vice-president for Values and Transparency Gina Raimondo, United States secretary of commerce Wu Zhaohui, Chinese vice-minister of science and technology == Global AI Summit series ==
Computational law
Computational law is the branch of legal informatics concerned with the automation of legal reasoning. What distinguishes Computational Law systems from other instances of legal technology is their autonomy, i.e. the ability to answer legal questions without additional input from human legal experts. While there are many possible applications of Computational Law, the primary focus of work in the field today is compliance management, i.e. the development and deployment of computer systems capable of assessing, facilitating, or enforcing compliance with rules and regulations. Some systems of this sort already exist. TurboTax is a good example. And the potential is particularly significant now due to recent technological advances – including the prevalence of the Internet in human interaction and the proliferation of embedded computer systems (such as smart phones, self-driving cars, and robots). There are also applications that do not involve governmental laws. The regulations can just as well be the terms of contracts (e.g. delivery schedules, insurance covenants, real estate transactions, financial agreements). They can be the policies of corporations (e.g. constraints on travel, expenditure reporting, pricing rules). They can even be the rules of games (embodied in computer game playing systems). == History == Speculation about potential benefits to legal practice through applying methods from computational science and AI research to automate parts of the law date back at least to the middle 1940s. Further, AI and law and computational law do not seem easily separable, as perhaps most of AI research focusing on the law and its automation appears to utilize computational methods. The forms that speculation took are multiple and not all related in ways to readily show closeness to one another. This history will sketch them as they were, attempting to show relationships where they can be found to have existed. By 1949, a minor academic field aiming to incorporate electronic and computational methods to legal problems had been founded by American legal scholars, called jurimetrics. Though broadly said to be concerned with the application of the "methods of science" to the law, these methods were actually of a quite specifically defined scope. Jurimetrics was to be "concerned with such matters as the quantitative analysis of judicial behavior, the application of communication and information theory to legal expression, the use of mathematical logic in law, the retrieval of legal data by electronic and mechanical means, and the formulation of a calculus of legal predictability". These interests led in 1959 to the founding a journal, Modern Uses of Logic in Law, as a forum wherein articles would be published about the applications of techniques such as mathematical logic, engineering, statistics, etc. to the legal study and development. In 1966, this Journal was renamed as Jurimetrics. Today, however, the journal and meaning of jurimetrics seems to have broadened far beyond what would fit under the areas of applications of computers and computational methods to law. Today the journal not only publishes articles on such practices as found in computational law, but has broadened jurimetrical concerns to mean also things like the use of social science in law or the "policy implications [of] and legislative and administrative control of science". Independently in 1958, at the Conference for the Mechanization of Thought held at the National Physical Laboratory in Teddington, Middlesex, UK, the French jurist Lucien Mehl presented a paper both on the benefits of using computational methods for law and on the potential means to use such methods to automate law for a discussion that included AI luminaries like Marvin Minsky. Mehl believed that the law could by automated by two basic distinct, though not wholly separable, types of machine. These were the "documentary or information machine", which would provide the legal researcher quick access to relevant case precedents and legal scholarship, and the "consultation machine", which would be "capable of answering any question put to it over a vast field of law". The latter type of machine would be able to basically do much of a lawyer's job by simply giving the "exact answer to a [legal] problem put to it". By 1970, Mehl's first type of machine, one that would be able to retrieve information, had been accomplished but there seems to have been little consideration of further fruitful intersections between AI and legal research. There were, however, still hopes that computers could model the lawyer's thought processes through computational methods and then apply that capacity to solve legal problems, thus automating and improving legal services via increased efficiency as well as shedding light on the nature of legal reasoning. By the late 1970s, computer science and the affordability of computer technology had progressed enough that the retrieval of "legal data by electronic and mechanical means" had been achieved by machines fitting Mehl's first type and were in common use in American law firms. During this time, research focused on improving the goals of the early 1970s occurred, with programs like Taxman being worked on in order to both bring useful computer technology into the law as practical aids and to help specify the exact nature of legal concepts. Nonetheless, progress on the second type of machine, one that would more fully automate the law, remained relatively inert. Research into machines that could answer questions in the way that Mehl's consultation machine would picked up somewhat in the late 1970s and 1980s. A 1979 convention in Swansea, Wales marked the first international effort solely to focus upon applying artificial intelligence research to legal problems in order to "consider how computers can be used to discover and apply the legal norms embedded within the written sources of the law". Considerable progress on the development of the second type of machine was made in the following decade, with the development of a variety of expert systems. According to Thorne McCarty, "these systems all have the following characteristics: They do backward chaining inference from a specified goal; they ask questions to elicit information from the user; and they produce a suggested answer along with a trace of the supporting legal rules." According to Prakken and Sartor the representation of the British Nationality Act as a logic program, which introduced this approach, was "hugely influential for the development of computational representations of legislation, showing how logic programming enables intuitively appealing representations that can be directly deployed to generate automatic inferences". In 2021, this work received the Inaugural CodeX Prize as "one of the first and best-known works in computational law, and one of the most widely cited papers in the field." In a 1988 review of Anne Gardner's book An Artificial Intelligence Approach to Legal Reasoning (1987), the Harvard academic legal scholar and computer scientist Edwina Rissland wrote that "She plays, in part, the role of pioneer; artificial intelligence ("AI") techniques have not yet been widely applied to perform legal tasks. Therefore, Gardner, and this review, first describe and define the field, then demonstrate a working model in the domain of contract offer and acceptance." Eight years after the Swansea conference had passed, and still AI and law researchers merely trying to delineate the field could be described by their own kind as "pioneer[s]". In the 1990s and early 2000s more progress occurred. Computational research generated insights for law. The First International Conference on AI and the Law occurred in 1987, but it is in the 1990s and 2000s that the biannual conference began to build up steam and to delve more deeply into the issues involved with work intersecting computational methods, AI, and law. Classes began to be taught to undergraduates on the uses of computational methods to automating, understanding, and obeying the law. Further, by 2005, a team largely composed of Stanford computer scientists from the Stanford Logic group had devoted themselves to studying the uses of computational techniques to the law. Computational methods in fact advanced enough that members of the legal profession began in the 2000s to both analyze, predict and worry about the potential future of computational law and a new academic field of computational legal studies seems to be now well established. As insight into what such scholars see in the law's future due in part to computational law, here is quote from a recent conference about the "New Normal" for the legal profession: "Over the last 5 years, in the fallout of the Great Recession, the legal profession has entered the era of the New Normal. Notably, a series of forces related to technological change, globalization, and the pressure to do more with less (in both corpo
Sarpa (snakebite app)
Sarpa or SARPA (Snake Awareness, Rescue and Protection app) is a snakebite app, an application for mobile devices developed in India to provide rapid, life-saving help for victims of snakebite, which kill an estimated 58,000 people a year in India. The app provides information about snakes, gets fast aid for people bitten, and helps in the development of antivenoms. Similar systems developed in India include SnakeHub, Snake Lens, Snakepedia, Serpent and the Big Four Mapping Project. The apps provide rapid response to snakebite incidents, often in remote areas, using a network of volunteers managed by local wildlife departments; their use can save human lives by providing rapid medical care, and also snakes, by helping to avoid interaction between the species. In 2026, it was announced that the app had plans to offer real-time contact from doctors directly from the app to provide users with decision-making advice.
Algorithmic accountability
Algorithmic accountability refers to the allocation of responsibility for the consequences of real-world actions influenced by algorithms used in decision-making processes. Ideally, algorithms should be designed to eliminate bias from their decision-making outcomes. This means they ought to evaluate only relevant characteristics of the input data, avoiding distinctions based on attributes that are generally inappropriate in social contexts, such as an individual's ethnicity in legal judgments. However, adherence to this principle is not always guaranteed, and there are instances where individuals may be adversely affected by algorithmic decisions. Responsibility for any harm resulting from a machine's decision may lie with the algorithm itself or with the individuals who designed it, particularly if the decision resulted from bias or flawed data analysis inherent in the algorithm's design. == Algorithm usage == Algorithms are widely utilized across various sectors of society that incorporate computational techniques in their control systems. These applications span numerous industries, including but not limited to medical, transportation, and payment services. In these contexts, algorithms perform functions such as: Approving or denying credit card applications; Approving or denying immigrant visas; Determining which taxpayers will be audited on their income taxes; Managing systems that control self-driving cars on a highway; Scoring individuals as potential criminals for use in legal proceedings; Search engines that match and rank database and internet search results; Recommendation systems that filter which news, entertainment, or purchase items are featured in a feed; Market-making algorithms that match sellers and buyers, such as in transportation (ride-hailing) or financial platforms. However, the implementation of these algorithms can be complex and opaque. Generally, algorithms function as "black boxes," meaning that the specific processes an input undergoes during execution are often not transparent, with users typically only seeing the resulting output. This lack of transparency raises concerns about potential biases within the algorithms, as the parameters influencing decision-making may not be well understood. The outputs generated can lead to perceptions of bias, especially if individuals in similar circumstances receive different results. According to Nicholas Diakopoulos: But these algorithms can make mistakes. They have biases. Yet they sit in opaque black boxes, their inner workings, their inner “thoughts” hidden behind layers of complexity. We need to get inside that black box, to understand how they may be exerting power on us, and to understand where they might be making unjust mistakes == Wisconsin Supreme Court case == Algorithms are prevalent across various fields and significantly influence decisions that affect the population at large. Their underlying structures and parameters often remain unknown to those impacted by their outcomes. A notable case illustrating this issue is a recent ruling by the Wisconsin Supreme Court concerning "risk assessment" algorithms used in criminal justice. The court determined that scores generated by such algorithms, which analyze multiple parameters from individuals, should not be used as a determining factor for arresting an accused individual. Furthermore, the court mandated that all reports submitted to judges must include information regarding the accuracy of the algorithm used to compute these scores. This ruling is regarded as a noteworthy development in how society should manage software that makes consequential decisions, highlighting the importance of reliability, particularly in complex settings like the legal system. The use of algorithms in these contexts necessitates a high degree of impartiality in processing input data. However, experts note that there is still considerable work to be done to ensure the accuracy of algorithmic results. Questions about the transparency of data processing continue to arise, which raises issues regarding the appropriateness of the algorithms and the intentions of their designers. == Controversies == A notable instance of potential algorithmic bias is highlighted in an article by The Washington Post regarding the ride-hailing service Uber. An analysis of collected data revealed that estimated waiting times for users varied based on the neighborhoods in which they resided. Key factors influencing these discrepancies included the predominant ethnicity and average income of the area. Specifically, neighborhoods with a majority white population and higher economic status tended to have shorter waiting times, while those with more diverse ethnic compositions and lower average incomes experienced longer waits. It’s important to clarify that this observation reflects a correlation identified in the data, rather than a definitive cause-and-effect relationship. No value judgments are made regarding the behavior of the Uber app in these cases. In TechCrunch website, Hemant Taneja wrote: Concern about “black box” algorithms that govern our lives has been spreading. New York University’s Information Law Institute hosted a conference on algorithmic accountability, noting: “Scholars, stakeholders, and policymakers question the adequacy of existing mechanisms governing algorithmic decision-making and grapple with new challenges presented by the rise of algorithmic power in terms of transparency, fairness, and equal treatment.” Yale Law School’s Information Society Project is studying this, too. “Algorithmic modeling may be biased or limited, and the uses of algorithms are still opaque in many critical sectors,” the group concluded. == Possible solutions == Discussions among experts have sought viable solutions to understand the operations of algorithms, often referred to as "black boxes." It is generally proposed that companies responsible for developing and implementing these algorithms should ensure their reliability by disclosing the internal processes of their systems. Hemant Taneja, writing for TechCrunch, emphasizes that major technology companies, such as Google, Amazon, and Uber, must actively incorporate algorithmic accountability into their operations. He suggests that these companies should transparently monitor their own systems to avoid stringent regulatory measures. One potential approach is the introduction of regulations in the tech sector to enforce oversight of algorithmic processes. However, such regulations could significantly impact software developers and the industry as a whole. It may be more beneficial for companies to voluntarily disclose the details of their algorithms and decision-making parameters, which could enhance the trustworthiness of their solutions. Another avenue discussed is the possibility of self-regulation by the companies that create these algorithms, allowing them to take proactive steps in ensuring accountability and transparency in their operations. In TechCrunch website, Hemant Taneja wrote: There’s another benefit — perhaps a huge one — to software-defined regulation. It will also show us a path to a more efficient government. The world’s legal logic and regulations can be coded into software and smart sensors can offer real-time monitoring of everything from air and water quality, traffic flows and queues at the DMV. Regulators define the rules, technologist create the software to implement them and then AI and ML help refine iterations of policies going forward. This should lead to much more efficient, effective governments at the local, national and global levels.