In computer science, in the field of databases, read–write conflict, also known as unrepeatable reads, is a computational anomaly associated with interleaved execution of transactions. Specifically, a read–write conflict occurs when a "transaction requests to read an entity for which an unclosed transaction has already made a write request." Given a schedule S S = [ T 1 T 2 R ( A ) R ( A ) W ( A ) C o m . R ( A ) W ( A ) C o m . ] {\displaystyle S={\begin{bmatrix}T1&T2\\R(A)&\\&R(A)\\&W(A)\\&Com.\\R(A)&\\W(A)&\\Com.&\end{bmatrix}}} In this example, T1 has read the original value of A, and is waiting for T2 to finish. T2 also reads the original value of A, overwrites A, and commits. However, when T1 reads from A, it discovers two different versions of A, and T1 would be forced to abort, because T1 would not know what to do. This is an unrepeatable read. This could never occur in a serial schedule, in which each transaction executes in its entirety before another begins. Strict two-phase locking (Strict 2PL) or Serializable Snapshot Isolation (SSI) prevent this conflict. == Real-world example == Alice and Bob are using a website to book tickets for a specific show. Only one ticket is left for the specific show. Alice signs on first to see that only one ticket is left, and finds it expensive. Alice takes time to decide. Bob signs on and also finds one ticket left, and orders it instantly. Bob purchases and logs off. Alice decides to buy a ticket, to find there are no tickets. This is a typical read–write conflict situation.
AI alignment
In the field of artificial intelligence (AI), alignment aims to steer AI systems toward a person's or group's intended goals, preferences, or ethical principles. An AI system is considered aligned if it advances the intended objectives. A misaligned AI system pursues unintended objectives. It is often difficult for AI designers to specify the full range of desired and undesired behaviors. Therefore, the designers often use simpler proxy goals, such as gaining human approval. But proxy goals can overlook necessary constraints or reward the AI system for merely appearing aligned. AI systems may also find loopholes that allow them to accomplish their proxy goals efficiently but in unintended, sometimes harmful, ways (reward hacking). Advanced AI systems may develop unwanted instrumental strategies, such as seeking power or self-preservation because such strategies help them achieve their assigned final goals. Furthermore, they might develop undesirable emergent goals that could be hard to detect before the system is deployed and encounters new situations and data distributions. Empirical research showed in 2024 that advanced large language models (LLMs) such as OpenAI o1 or Claude 3 sometimes engage in strategic deception to achieve their goals or prevent them from being changed. Some of these issues affect existing commercial systems such as LLMs, robots, autonomous vehicles, and social media recommendation engines. Some AI researchers argue that more capable future systems will be more severely affected because these problems partially result from high capabilities. Many prominent AI researchers and AI company leaders have argued or asserted that AI is approaching human-like (AGI) and superhuman cognitive capabilities (ASI), and could endanger human civilization if misaligned. These include "AI godfathers" Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Bengio and the CEOs of OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind. These risks remain debated. AI alignment is a subfield of AI safety, the study of how to build safe AI systems. Other subfields of AI safety include robustness, monitoring, and capability control. Research challenges in alignment include instilling complex values in AI, developing honest AI, scalable oversight, auditing and interpreting AI models, and preventing emergent AI behaviors like power-seeking. Alignment research has connections to interpretability research, (adversarial) robustness, anomaly detection, calibrated uncertainty, formal verification, preference learning, safety-critical engineering, game theory, algorithmic fairness, and social sciences. == Objectives in AI == Programmers provide an AI system such as AlphaZero with an "objective function", in which they intend to encapsulate the goal(s) the AI is configured to accomplish. Such a system later populates a (possibly implicit) internal "model" of its environment. This model encapsulates all the agent's beliefs about the world. The AI then creates and executes whatever plan is calculated to maximize the value of its objective function. For example, when AlphaZero is trained on chess, it has a simple objective function of "+1 if AlphaZero wins, −1 if AlphaZero loses". During the game, AlphaZero attempts to execute whatever sequence of moves it judges most likely to attain the maximum value of +1. Similarly, a reinforcement learning system can have a "reward function" that allows the programmers to shape the AI's desired behavior. An evolutionary algorithm's behavior is shaped by a "fitness function". == Alignment problem == In 1960, AI pioneer Norbert Wiener described the AI alignment problem as follows: If we use, to achieve our purposes, a mechanical agency with whose operation we cannot interfere effectively [...] we had better be quite sure that the purpose put into the machine is the purpose which we really desire. AI alignment refers to ensuring that an AI system's objectives match some target. The target is variously defined as the goals of the system's designers or users, widely shared values, objective ethical standards, legal requirements, or the intentions its designers would have if they were more informed and enlightened. In democratic AI alignment, the target is the values and preferences of median voters, which increases political legitimacy. AI alignment is an open problem for modern AI systems and is a research field within AI. Aligning AI involves two main challenges: carefully specifying the purpose of the system (outer alignment) and ensuring that the system adopts the specification robustly (inner alignment). Researchers also attempt to create AI models that have robust alignment, sticking to safety constraints even when users adversarially try to bypass them. === Specification gaming and side effects === To specify an AI system's purpose, AI designers typically provide an objective function, examples, or feedback to the system. But designers are often unable to completely specify all important values and constraints, so they resort to easy-to-specify proxy goals such as maximizing the approval of human overseers, who are fallible. As a result, AI systems can find loopholes that help them accomplish the specified objective efficiently but in unintended, possibly harmful ways. This tendency is known as specification gaming or reward hacking, and is an instance of Goodhart's law. As AI systems become more capable, they are often able to game their specifications more effectively. Specification gaming has been observed in numerous AI systems. OpenAI GPT models for programming—including in real-world cases—have been found to explicitly plan hacking the tests used to evaluate them to falsely appear successful (e.g., explicitly stating "let's hack"). When the company penalized this, many models learned to obfuscate their plans while continuing to hack the tests. Another system was trained to finish a simulated boat race by rewarding the system for hitting targets along the track, but the system achieved more reward by looping and crashing into the same targets indefinitely. A 2025 Palisade Research study found that when tasked to win at chess against a stronger opponent, some reasoning LLMs attempted to hack the game system, for example by modifying or entirely deleting their opponent. Some alignment researchers aim to help humans detect specification gaming and steer AI systems toward carefully specified objectives that are safe and useful to pursue. When a misaligned AI system is deployed, it can have consequential side effects. Social media platforms have been known to optimize their recommendation algorithms for click-through rates, causing user addiction on a global scale. Stanford researchers say that such recommender systems are misaligned with their users because they "optimize simple engagement metrics rather than a harder-to-measure combination of societal and consumer well-being". Explaining such side effects, Berkeley computer scientist Stuart J. Russell said that the omission of implicit constraints can cause harm: "A system [...] will often set [...] unconstrained variables to extreme values; if one of those unconstrained variables is actually something we care about, the solution found may be highly undesirable. This is essentially the old story of the genie in the lamp, or the sorcerer's apprentice, or King Midas: you get exactly what you ask for, not what you want." Some researchers suggest that AI designers specify their desired goals by listing forbidden actions or by formalizing ethical rules (as with Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics). But Russell and Norvig argue that this approach overlooks the complexity of human values: "It is certainly very hard, and perhaps impossible, for mere humans to anticipate and rule out in advance all the disastrous ways the machine could choose to achieve a specified objective." Additionally, even if an AI system fully understands human intentions, it may still disregard them, because following human intentions may not be its objective (unless it is already fully aligned). === Pressure to deploy unsafe systems === Commercial organizations sometimes have incentives to take shortcuts on safety and to deploy misaligned or unsafe AI systems. For example, social media recommender systems have been profitable despite creating unwanted addiction and polarization. Competitive pressure can also lead to a race to the bottom on AI safety standards. For example, OpenAI has been sued for releasing a ChatGPT version that encouraged suicide for some unstable users, a behavior the company had overlooked amid a rushed product release. Similarly, in 2018, a self-driving car killed a pedestrian (Elaine Herzberg) after engineers disabled the emergency braking system because it was oversensitive and slowed development. === Risks from advanced misaligned AI === Some researchers are interested in aligning increasingly advanced AI systems, as progress in AI development is rapid, and industry and governments are trying to build advan
UpScrolled
UpScrolled is an Australian social media platform for microblogging and short-form online video sharing that was launched in June 2025 by Recursive Methods Pty Ltd. It was founded by Issam Hijazi. == History == UpScrolled was launched in June 2025 by Recursive Methods Pty Ltd. It was founded by Issam Hijazi, a Palestinian-Australian app developer. UpScrolled is backed by the Tech for Palestine incubator. In January 2026, UpScrolled saw increased attention and number of downloads after the acquisition of TikTok by a group of pro-Donald Trump US investors, including Larry Ellison, which led to calls to boycott TikTok and migrate to other apps. TikTok was alleged to be suppressing pro-Palestinian content, as well as news surrounding the killing of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis on the platform. UpScrolled subsequently climbed to the top 10 of Apple's App Store list of free apps. The app saw a reported 2,850% increase in downloads between 22 and 24 January 2026. As of 27 January 2026, UpScrolled "had been downloaded about 400,000 times in the US and 700,000 globally since launching in June 2025". The app became the most downloaded app in the Apple App store on 29 January 2026, following allegations that TikTok was suppressing videos and content opposed to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under its new ownership. By 2 February 2026, UpScrolled had reached 2.5 million users. According to the Google Play Store and the Apple App Store, it has become the most downloaded social media app in the United States and Canada, with rising interest in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy. On 14 February, UpScrolled was suspended from the Google Play Store; the suspension was reverted by 15 February. == Founder == Hijazi was born in Jordan. His parents and grandparents are from Safad, a northern Israeli city near the Lebanese border. He worked for IBM and Oracle prior to starting UpScrolled. Hijazi told Rest of World that he launched UpScrolled in response to Israel's genocide in Gaza which followed the October 7 attacks. He said, "I couldn't take it anymore. I lost family members in Gaza, and I didn't want to be complicit. So I was like, I'm done with this, I want to feel useful. I found this gap in the market, with a lot of people asking why there is no alternative to the Big Tech platforms for their content, which was getting censored." Hijazi also alleges that social media accounts that were posting pro-Palestinian content were getting shadow banned on larger platforms, and alleges that even his account was not exempt from being targeted by censors. Hijazi has further elaborated on the importance of social media independence to further the Palestinian cause. In January 2026, Web Summit Qatar announced that Hijazi would be an opening night speaker. Following the announcement, there was a surge in ticket sales for the summit. Hijazi lives in Sydney with his wife and daughter. He lost 60 family members during the Gaza war. == Features == UpScrolled's algorithm allows users to discover posts based on likes, comments, and shares with time decay and some randomness, all chronologically, with "no manipulation" according to the app's website. UpScrolled has an interface resembling a mix of Instagram and Twitter, allowing users to post and view text posts, photos, and videos. It also lets users send private messages to each other. The app is currently available for iOS and Android devices, with plans to upscale. UpScrolled does not include Israel as an option in its location selection menu. Cities such as Tel Aviv are included under "Occupied Territories of Palestine", and Palestine can also be set as the location. UpScrolled says that it is against censorship and shadow banning, and describes itself as "belong[ing] to the people who use it — not to hidden algorithms or outside agendas". Hijazi said, "The other platforms claim to be free speech platforms. But when it comes to anything on Palestine, that's a different story." UpScrolled states that it "does not tolerate hate speech, propaganda, or bad-faith behaviour, but it also refuses to silence voices quietly or without explanation". == User base and content == Al Jazeera reported that posts expressing pro-Palestinian sentiment or depicting the continued suffering in the Gaza Strip were "flooding" the app. Political and global issues such as the Gaza war are prominent. Content includes updates from the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, posts by doctors working in Gaza, video essays about Palantir’s influence within the military and calls for boycotts of Israel. It has been used by Gazans to crowdfund and record daily life. Celebrity users of UpScrolled include American labour activist Chris Smalls and actor Jacob Berger, both of whom were on the July 2025 Gaza Freedom Flotilla. Political figures have also joined UpScrolled, such as South African politician and Economic Freedom Fighters leader Julius Malema, and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Esmail Qaani. One user said that most early users were attracted to the platform for the opportunity to criticize Zionism. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA) reported that UpScrolled was observed to be "flooded" with antisemitic and anti-Israel content, including Holocaust denial and accusations that Israel carried out the 9/11 attacks. In a statement, UpScrolled said, "Our content moderation hasn't been able to keep up with the massive rise of users this week. We're working with digital rights experts to grow our Trust & Safety team and are beefing up our content moderation to prevent this. We apologise to all impacted users, thank you for being part of Upscrolled." The Times reported in February 2026 that UpScrolled was hosting content that could potentially breach UK law, including antisemitic content and posts promoting Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic State and Al-Qaeda, as well as footage of the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings and content praising the perpetrators of the 2019 Halle synagogue shooting and 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting. Antisemitic influencers Lucas Gage, Jake Shields, Stew Peters and Anastasia Maria Loupis have accounts on UpScrolled. UpScrolled’s policies prohibit threats, glorification of harm or support for terrorist or violent groups. Hijazi said harmful content was being uploaded to UpScrolled and the company had expanded its content moderation team and upgraded its technology infrastructure to deal with the issue. In May 2026, Moment magazine said that users had identified some antisemitic content, pornography and extremist videos on the platform. The magazine said there were gaps in content moderation due to the small size of the developer team. == Reception == In January 2026, the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR) praised UpScrolled for "pledging to protect the free flow of ideas on its platform, including both support for and opposition to the Israeli government's human rights abuses." Guy Christensen, a pro-Palestinian social media celebrity, has encouraged his audience to download UpScrolled. Christensen characterized UpScrolled as having "no censorship, no ownership by billionaires who put their interests and biases onto you to control you". He compared the platform to others like TikTok, saying that Israel is behind censorship that wouldn't happen on UpScrolled. Jaigris Hodson, an associate professor of Interdisciplinary Studies at Royal Roads University in Canada, has argued that "Network effects mean that unless UpScrolled continues its explosive growth, people are unlikely to continue to choose it over the more established TikTok. At best, we might see a Twitter/X effect, which is where TikTok will host more pro-U.S. government content creators and those people who want to follow them, and UpScrolled will host more critical content creators and their followers."
Vulnerability assessment (computing)
Vulnerability assessment is a process of defining, identifying and classifying the security holes in information technology systems. An attacker can exploit a vulnerability to violate the security of a system. Some known vulnerabilities are Authentication Vulnerability, Authorization Vulnerability and Input Validation Vulnerability. == Purpose == Before deploying a system, it first must go through from a series of vulnerability assessments that will ensure that the build system is secure from all the known security risks. When a new vulnerability is discovered, the system administrator can again perform an assessment, discover which modules are vulnerable, and start the patch process. After the fixes are in place, another assessment can be run to verify that the vulnerabilities were actually resolved. This cycle of assess, patch, and re-assess has become the standard method for many organizations to manage their security issues. The primary purpose of the assessment is to find the vulnerabilities in the system, but the assessment report conveys to stakeholders that the system is secured from these vulnerabilities. If an intruder gained access to a network consisting of vulnerable Web servers, it is safe to assume that he gained access to those systems as well. Because of assessment report, the security administrator will be able to determine how intrusion occurred, identify compromised assets and take appropriate security measures to prevent critical damage to the system. == Assessment types == Depending on the system a vulnerability assessment can have many types and level. === Host assessment === A host assessment looks for system-level vulnerabilities such as insecure file permissions, application level bugs, backdoor and Trojan horse installations. It requires specialized tools for the operating system and software packages being used, in addition to administrative access to each system that should be tested. Host assessment is often very costly in term of time, and thus is only used in the assessment of critical systems. Tools like COPS and Tiger are popular in host assessment. === Network assessment === In a network assessment one assess the network for known vulnerabilities. It locates all systems on a network, determines what network services are in use, and then analyzes those services for potential vulnerabilities. This process does not require any configuration changes on the systems being assessed. Unlike host assessment, network assessment requires little computational cost and effort. == Vulnerability assessment vs penetration testing == Vulnerability assessment and penetration testing are two different testing methods. They are differentiated on the basis of certain specific parameters. == Regulatory requirements == Vulnerability assessments are mandated or strongly recommended by several regulatory frameworks. In the United States healthcare sector, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule requires covered entities to conduct periodic evaluations of their security posture, and a December 2024 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would explicitly require vulnerability scanning at least every six months for systems containing electronic protected health information. The Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) requires quarterly vulnerability scans for organizations that process credit card transactions, and the NIST Cybersecurity Framework includes vulnerability assessment as a core component of its Identify function.
Sherwood Applied Business Security Architecture
SABSA (Sherwood Applied Business Security Architecture) is a model and methodology for developing a risk-driven enterprise information security architecture and service management, to support critical business processes. It was developed independently from the Zachman Framework, but has a similar structure. The primary characteristic of the SABSA model is that everything must be derived from an analysis of the business requirements for security, especially those in which security has an enabling function through which new business opportunities can be developed and exploited. The process analyzes the business requirements at the outset, and creates a chain of traceability through the strategy and concept, design, implementation, and ongoing ‘manage and measure’ phases of the lifecycle to ensure that the business mandate is preserved. Framework tools created from practical experience further support the whole methodology. The model is layered, with the top layer being the business requirements definition stage. At each lower layer a new level of abstraction and detail is developed, going through the definition of the conceptual architecture, logical services architecture, physical infrastructure architecture and finally at the lowest layer, the selection of technologies and products (component architecture). The SABSA model itself is generic and can be the starting point for any organization, but by going through the process of analysis and decision-making implied by its structure, it becomes specific to the enterprise, and is finally highly customized to a unique business model. It becomes in reality the enterprise security architecture, and it is central to the success of a strategic program of information security management within the organization. SABSA is a particular example of a methodology that can be used both for IT (information technology) and OT (operational technology) environments. == SABSA matrix == Note: The above is the original SABSA Matrix, which is still valid today, but it has been expanded by a comprehensive service management matrix and updated in some detail and terminology areas. In the words of David Lynas, SABSA author, "The SABSA Matrix and the SABSA Service Management Matrix have not been updated since the late 90s. We have redesigned them to deliver the improvements your feedback has requested over the years. We have not fundamentally changed the structure or principles of the matrices (very few elements have changed position) but have focused on terminology update and consistency." The new versions can be downloaded (along with the 2009 revision of the SABSA White Paper and other important documents like the SABSA Certification Roadmap) at the SABSA Members' Web Site.
Tail latency
Tail latency is a term used to describe the high-percentile response times seen in a system. This is usually measured at the 95th, 99th, or 99.9th percentile, not the average latency. In distributed systems, cloud computing, and large-scale web services, even a small number of slow requests can make the user experience and system performance much worse. Tail latency often happens because of things like resource contention, network variability, garbage collection pauses, and hardware heterogeneity. A major problem in system design is managing tail latency, because lowering average latency doesn't always make the worst-case performance better. To lessen its effects, people often use techniques like request hedging, replication, load balancing, and adaptive timeouts. In latency-sensitive applications like search engines, financial systems, and real-time services, where service-level objectives (SLOs) are often based on high-percentile latencies, it is especially important to understand and improve tail latency.
World Database of Happiness
The World Database of Happiness is a web-based archive of research findings on subjective appreciation of life, based in the Erasmus Happiness Economics Research Organization of the Erasmus University Rotterdam in The Netherlands. The database contains both an overview of scientific publications on happiness and a digest of research findings. Happiness is defined as the degree to which an individual judges the quality of his or her life as a whole favorably. Two 'components' of happiness are distinguished: hedonic level of affect (the degree to which pleasant affect dominates) and contentment (perceived realization of wants). == Aims == The World Database of Happiness is a tool to quickly acquire an overview on the ever-growing stream of research findings on happiness Medio 2023 the database covered some 16,000 scientific publications on happiness, from which were extracted 23,000 distributional findings (on how happy people are) and another 24,000 correlational findings (on factors associated with more and less happiness). The first findings date from 1915. == Technique == The World Database of Happiness is a ‘findings archive’, which consists of electronic ‘finding pages’ on which separate research results are described in a standard format and terminology. These finding pages can be selected on various characteristics, such as population studies, the measure of happiness used and observed co-variates. All finding-pages have a specific internet address to which links can be made in scientific review papers or policy recommendations. This allows a concise presentation of many findings in a table, while providing readers with access to detail. == Scientific use == The Database has been cited in 254 scientific papers, for example to access under what conditions economic growth enhances average happiness or to show that rising mean happiness at first raises happiness inequality, but further rise will diminish these differences, or that healthy eating is associated with more happiness, even after controlling for the effect on health Another finding is that relative simple happiness training techniques raise happiness by some 5% == Popular use == The World Database of Happiness is often used by popular media to make lists of the happiest countries around the globe. An example is the Happy Planet Index, which aims to chart sustainable happiness all over the world by combining data on longevity, happiness and the size of the ecological footprint of citizens. == Strengths and weaknesses == The database has a clear conceptual focus, it includes only research findings on subjective enjoyment of one's life as a whole. Thereby it evades the Babel that has haunted the study of happiness for ages. The other side of that coin is that much interesting research is left out. The findings are reported with technical details about measurement and statistical analysis. This detail is welcomed by scholars, but makes the information difficult to digest for lay-persons. Still another limitation is that the determinants of happiness appear to vary considerably across persons and situations, which make it hard to draw general conclusions about the causes of happiness. What is clear is that poor health, separation, unemployment and lack of social contact are all strongly negatively associated with happiness. Another problem for the World database of happiness is that the studies on happiness increase with such a high rate that it gets increasingly difficult to offer a complete overview of all research findings. A further concern is that the Database of Happiness is exclusively focused on hedonic happiness (feeling good) and not on mature happiness that might exist in the face of suffering