Invoicera is an online invoicing software. The software was created by a company with the same name that was founded in 2006, had 125 employees, and is based in India. It allows users to monitor, dispatch, and accept invoices in one web service. After signing up for the service, users are assigned a personal subdomain to set up their invoice configuration. It allows users to add clients' data to the service through uploading a Microsoft Excel file. Invoicera is compatible with businesses of varying sizes, including freelancers, small businesses, and large businesses. It is compatible with Basecamp, a project-management tool, so Invoicera can upload data from Basecamp. The software interfaces with more than 25 payment gateways. It supports subscriptions and repeated invoices and allows clients to schedule late fees when payments have not been made on time. Invoicera uses freemium model, letting users dispatch an unrestricted number of invoices to at most three customers. Chelsea Krause wrote in a 2019 review for Merchant Maverick, "Unfortunately, the software isn't as developed as it could be. Time tracking and reporting are limited and there are no live bank feeds — which is surprising for a company so focused on automation (especially since even many of the worst invoicing options out there still offer live bank feeds)." She further criticized Invoicera for having bad customer service and the software for not having recent changes. Brian Turner wrote in TechRadar that Invoicera had fewer templates compared to the other services he reviewed but "the ones offered are fully customizable". Rob Clymo wrote in TechRadar that "Invoicera lets you automate your invoicing and billing needs without too much in the way of hassle" and that although it "isn't a complete accounts solution ... it's a powerful supplement".
Psychology in cybersecurity
The psychology of cybersecurity (often intersecting with usable security and cyberpsychology) is an interdisciplinary field studying how human behavior, cognitive biases, and social dynamics influence information security. While traditional cybersecurity focuses on hardware and software vulnerabilities, this discipline addresses the "human factor," which is exploited in cyberattacks. Psychology in cybersecurity draws from cognitive psychology and human–computer interaction. == History and evolution == The challenge of human behavior in computing was noted as early as the 1960s with multi-user mainframes like the Compatible Time-Sharing System (CTSS). In 1966, a software error on CTSS caused the system's master password file to be displayed to every user upon login—one of the earliest documented security incidents attributable to a combination of system design and human factors. These behaviors gained broader significance in the 1990s as the Internet became widely accessible. High-profile incidents involving figures like Kevin Mitnick demonstrated how human trust could be exploited through social engineering such as pretexting over the phone. == Cognitive and behavioral factors == Much of the psychology of cybersecurity focuses on decision-making under stress or uncertainty. Researchers apply frameworks like dual process theory to explain why humans fall for phishing or business email compromise. Threat actors design malicious communications to trigger fast, emotional "System 1" thinking—using urgency, authority, or panic, which prompts users to click a link or wire funds before their analytical "System 2" can assess the situation's legitimacy. Industry research has consistently documented the effectiveness of these techniques at scale, pointing to several recurring psychological phenomena that influence daily security practices: Cognitive biases: The optimism bias leads users to believe they are unlikely to be targeted by cybercriminals, resulting in lax password practices or delayed software updates. The availability heuristic causes individuals to focus on highly publicized, sophisticated threats while ignoring common, statistically probable risks like credential reuse. Social influence: Attackers leverage established principles of persuasion, such as those categorized by Robert Cialdini. Impersonating a CEO leverages the psychological trigger of authority, while fake tech support scams use reciprocity (offering to fix a problem before asking for network credentials). == Neurological and pre-cognitive factors == Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies show that neural activation in visual and attentional regions decreases with repeated exposure to the same stimulus, a phenomenon termed repetition suppression. Experiments have confirmed this effect in the context of security warnings: static warning designs produce declines in user attention and adherence. Information processing research on phishing indicates that affective cues, such as artificial urgency or fear, increase cognitive load and elicit automatic heuristic processing, reducing the likelihood of analytical evaluation and facilitating compliance with malicious requests. == Security fatigue and organizational dynamics == Aggressive cybersecurity postures can sometimes lead to mental and emotional exhaustion, a phenomenon known as security fatigue. === Alert fatigue === One example is alert fatigue, which most frequently affects both end-users and security operations center analysts. Continuous exposure to browser warnings or antivirus pop-ups, particularly those that are false positives, conditions users to dismiss alerts automatically due to the volume of notifications rather than their repetitive appearance (see § Neurological and pre-cognitive factors). The scale of this problem is significant in enterprise: SOC teams in large organizations receive thousands of alerts daily, and a survey published in ACM Computer Surveys found that analysts spend over 25% of their time handling false positives, meaning that malicious indicators can be buried in the noise. === Password fatigue === Similarly, password fatigue is the feeling experienced by many people who are required to remember an excessive number of passwords as part of their daily routine, such as to log in to a computer at work. Users cope with the memory burden by making predictable, iterative changes to their passwords (such as updating "Password01!" to "Password02!"), which decreases password security.
Tactical NAV
Tactical NAV, also known as TACNAV-X, is a location-based tracking app designed for use by military personnel. The app is primarily designed to assist in pinpointing enemy fire and mapping waypoints. Tactical NAV also helps users efficiently relay critical information to tactical operations centers for prompt decision-making regarding airstrikes or medical evacuations. The TACNAV-X platform is intended to enhance situational awareness, refine navigation capabilities, and assist in tactical decision-making across various operational environments. == Overview == Tactical NAV allows users to pinpoint enemy fire. == History == Tactical NAV was designed by U.S. Army Captain Jonathan J. Springer, a Field Artillery officer serving as a Battalion Fire Support Officer (FSO) in the 101st Airborne Division. Springer conceived the idea for the app during his third tour in Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. On June 25, 2010, after a rocket attack by the Taliban killed two soldiers in his battalion, he was inspired to create an app that would prevent similar losses in the future, enhance situational awareness, and assist soldiers serving on combat deployments. In 2010, Springer founded TacNav Systems (formerly AppDaddy Technologies) to develop mobile applications for use by military personnel. He tested the app during combat operations in eastern Afghanistan and verified TACNAV-X's accuracy using DAGRs, AFATDS, Falcon View, CPOF, ATAK, and other approved Department of Defense (DoD) systems. As of 2012, the app had been downloaded 8,000 times.
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
MovieRide FX
MovieRide FX is a patented automated special visual effects video compositing engine used in the MovieRide FX mobile application for Android (requires Android 2.3 or later) and iOS (compatible with iPhone 4 and up, iPad, and iPod Touch (new generation), requires iOS 7 or later). MovieRide FX allows the user to personalize a "Hollywood-style" movie clip by inserting themself into the clip as the "actor". == Features == The MovieRide FX app uses the relevant mobile device's camera to record a video of the user and insert it into a pre-packaged "Hollywood style" movie clip. The "actor" is extracted from their recorded video clip through various known effects such as masking, keying, and motion tracking. The "actor" is then inserted into one of the pre-packaged movie clips created by the MovieRide FX visual effects artists. This is done through an automated process requiring little or no artistic or technical skill from the user. The custom movie clips pre-packaged with MovieRide FX offer the user a variety of movie scenarios. Additional clips based on popular television and movie themes are continually being developed and are available on a freemium basis. == Sharing == Once the user's footage has automatically been composited into a movie clip and rendered as an .mp4 file, it can be shared via social media, such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, and by e-mail. == History == === 2012 === MovieRide FX was created by Grant Waterston and Johann Mynhardt, who started development in 2012. === 2013 === The beta version was released on Google Play in July 2013. In August 2013 MovieRide FX was a New Media Award winner in the "New Media" category of the Accolade International Awards in Los Angeles. In October 2013 MovieRide FX was awarded exhibitor space in the ‘start-up village’ at the Apps-World Expo in London. === 2014 === MovieRide FX reached the 100 000 – 500 000 downloads category on the Google Play Store in June 2014. The official Android version was launched in July 2014. iOS version released in August 2014. MovieRide FX was selected as one of the "Top 150" startups at the Pioneer Festival in Vienna in September 2014. In November 2014 MovieRide FX was shortlisted for the Appster Awards in the "Best Entertainment App" and "Most Innovative App" categories and was awarded exhibitor space at the ‘start-up village’ at the Apps-World Expo in London. Patent applications were filed in South Africa, the EU and USA in April 2014. === 2015 === In September 2015 MovieRide FX was shortlisted for "Best Software innovation" at The Technology Expo Awards in London. === 2016 === In April 2016 MovieRide FX was nominated for a National Science and Technology Forum (NSTF) award for 'Research leading to Innovation by a corporate organization' In August 2016 Movie Ride FX won two Gold Awards at the 2016 Mobile Marketing Awards (MMA Smarties SA). These two Gold awards were for the 'Innovation' and 'Best in Show’ categories. In December 2016 FlicJam Inc. was formed in the US to access the larger global market. EU patent application was published in March 2016. === 2017 === South African patent was granted in February 2017. === 2018 === US patent was granted in March 2018.
Construction robots
Construction robots are a subset of industrial robots used for building and infrastructure construction on site, or in the production of materials and components offsite. A 2021 survey said 55% of construction companies in the United States, Europe, and China used robots in some form. This figure, however, reflects reported use across the construction value chain rather than widespread deployment of robots on active construction sites. Real-world adoption remains limited, with many robotic systems confined to pilot projects, controlled environments, or specific task applications rather than continuous on-site construction use. One of the main challenges in deploying robots on construction sites is the unstructured and variable nature of the environment, which differs fundamentally from controlled factory settings where industrial robots have traditionally operated. Some robots currently deployed on job sites assist with physically demanding or repetitive tasks: excavating, lifting heavy materials, surveying, laying out markers, tying rebar, and installing drywall. More advanced systems are being developed for exterior finishing, steel placement, masonry, and reinforced concrete work. In practice, rather than autonomous systems performing core building tasks, the most widely adopted robot applications on construction sites involve technologies such as aerial drones (or, less frequently, robot 'dogs' - for example, Boston Dynamics' Spot - or humanoid robots) used for surveying, inspection, and progress monitoring (the robots typically carry video and/or 360-degree cameras, LiDar scanners or other data capture devices, with data analysed using artificial intelligence and machine learning). Some emerging systems are designed as multifunctional construction robots, integrating multiple tools and capabilities within a single robotic platform to perform different stages of the construction process. These systems aim to improve operational flexibility and increase automation in complex construction environments. Experimental projects using robotic construction technologies and additive manufacturing have been demonstrated in several countries as part of broader efforts to industrialize the construction sector and improve productivity through automation and digitalization. == Features == Construction robots are generally required to meet the following criteria: Mobility: the ability to navigate around a construction site, including uneven terrain and confined spaces. Adaptability: the ability to handle components of variable size, weight, and shape. Environmental awareness: the ability to sense and respond to changing on-site conditions. Interactivity: the ability to operate alongside human workers and other equipment. Multitasking: the ability to perform several different operations within a single deployment. == Capabilities == Construction robots have been developed and tested for a range of on-site tasks, including: Progress monitoring — robots equipped with cameras and sensors can track construction progress and identify deviations from plans. Inspection — robots are used to investigate infrastructure at dangerous or inaccessible locations, reducing risk to human workers and eliminating human error. Wall construction — robotic systems can lay bricks and blocks with greater speed and consistency than manual labour. Earthmoving and material handling — autonomous excavators and haul trucks use GPS, lidar, and motion sensors to perform digging, trenching, and loading tasks with minimal human input. Grading and dozing — autonomous bulldozers use GPS, gyroscopes, and laser sensors to control blade angle and depth, improving surface finish accuracy and reducing material overuse. 3D printing — additive manufacturing systems can construct walls and structural elements directly from digital models. == Notable construction-related activities undertaken by robots == The distribution of robotic applications in construction varies across the project lifecycle. Most applications are concentrated in structural construction tasks such as masonry, concrete work, and assembly, while other phases, including planning, maintenance, and demolition, remain less represented. === Automated building systems === The Nisseki Yokohama Building (also known as Rail City Yokohama), a 30-storey office building in Yokohama, Japan, was constructed between 1994 and 1997 using the SMART system (Shimizu Manufacturing system by Advanced Robotics Technology), developed by Shimizu Corporation and a consortium of seven other Japanese companies. The system used automated horizontal hoists and vertical lifts to position steel beams, columns, precast concrete floor slabs, and prefabricated facade panels, with welding robots connecting structural elements under laser-guided precision. Each component was tracked by barcode to monitor progress and coordinate just-in-time delivery of materials. Obayashi Corporation developed the Advanced Building Construction System (ABCS), a similar automated platform used in several high-rise projects in Japan in the 1990s, including the NEC Head Office in Kanagawa (1997–2000). === Progress monitoring, inspection === Boston Dynamics' Spot was used in February 2024 to inspect sections of the M5 motorway in England for National Highways. A £15,000 humanoid robot (a G1 model from Chinese manufacturer Unitree) was deployed to capture 360-degree imagery and progress reports to support health and safety monitoring and reporting for UK contractor Tilbury Douglas in April 2026. In the US, Virginia Tech's ARCADE research lab is developing MARIO (Multi-Agent Robotic system for Inspection On-site), a heterogenous robotic system deploying multiple robots capable of different locomotion to perform remote real-time construction progress monitoring in complex construction sites. === Earthmoving === === Concrete works === Obayashi Corporation developed and deployed a robotic system for placing concrete layers in dam construction in Japan. A concrete floor finishing robot was deployed by Kajima and Tokimec in Japan. The MARK series were designed in 1984 to automate the levelling and trowelling of concrete slabs on construction sites, providing consistent finishing accuracy, improved efficiency, and reduced dependence on skilled labour === Masonry === SAM100 (Semi-Automated Mason), developed by Construction Robotics, is one of the first commercially available bricklaying robots for on-site masonry construction. In 2018, it was used in the construction of the University Arts Building at the University of Nevada, Reno — a $35.5 million facility — where it laid over 60,000 of the 100,000 bricks required, reducing the brick veneer installation time by approximately 50%. Hadrian X, developed by the Australian company Fastbrick Robotics, is a fully autonomous mobile bricklaying robot. In November 2022, it completed its first commercial project — five four-bedroom houses in Wellard, Western Australia. In February 2025, PulteGroup, one of the largest homebuilders in the United States, piloted Hadrian X on a site in Florida, constructing an entire house in a single day. === 3D printing === In May 2025, a residential building in Arinaga, Gran Canaria, Spain, was completed using 3D printing construction technology, as part of broader efforts to demonstrate robotic and additive manufacturing methods in the housing sector. In 2026, a three-storey apartment block in France was constructed using concrete 3D printing technology, three months faster than conventional building methods. Finland's Hyperion Robotics has opened a UK factory and used 3D printing with concrete to produce foundations for pipelines and for electricity substation bases, reducing time-consuming and weather-dependent onsite construction processes. == Social impact == The adoption of construction robots varies significantly by region and is shaped by labour market conditions, cultural attitudes, and regulatory frameworks. In Japan, construction robots have been embraced as a response to an ageing workforce and chronic labour shortages, and are generally viewed positively by the industry. In the United States, adoption has historically been slower, partly due to resistance from labour unions concerned about job displacement. Research suggests that the impact of automation on workers is uneven: while robots can create a productivity effect that benefits some workers, displacement effects are most pronounced among younger, less-educated workers in manufacturing-heavy regions. More than 60% of construction firms now report difficulty finding skilled operators, which has increased openness to automation as a practical solution to workforce shortages rather than a replacement for workers. In the UK, during onsite deployment of a humanoid robot for monitoring purposes, there were concerns that staff might think they were being watched ("It's not there to spy on people.... So, we insist that everyone is blurred out. N
Trigger list
Trigger list in its most general meaning refers to a list whose items are used to initiate ("trigger") certain actions. == United States: Private financial information == In the United States, when a person applies for a mortgage loan, the lender makes a credit inquiry about the potential borrower from the national credit bureaus, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion. Unless the borrower is opted out, the credit bureaus put the applicants onto a "trigger list" of "leads" about persons who are interested in new loans. These lists are sold to numerous lenders all over the United States, and soon after the application the applicant starts receiving offers from all parts of the country. The trigger lists contain a significant amount of personal financial information. Among the buyers of trigger lists are "lead generators" which resell filtered information to borrowers, e.g., of people who live in a certain area and have a certain credit score. While the Federal Trade Commission considers the market of "trigger lists" to be a legal business, many people and organizations (such as the National Association of Mortgage Brokers) consider this a serious breach of privacy and lobby for putting this practice under regulatory controls. As of now, American consumers may opt-out from "trigger lists" by calling 1-888-5-OPTOUT (1-888-567-8688). == Nuclear non-proliferation == The Zangger Committee and the Nuclear Suppliers Group maintain lists of items that may contribute to nuclear proliferation; The nuclear non-proliferation treaty forbids its members to export such items to non-treaty members. these items are said to trigger the countries' responsibilities under the NPT, hence the name.