AI Analytics Toolkit

AI Analytics Toolkit — independent reviews, comparisons, pricing and step-by-step guides on Aizhi.

• 

  AI safety

  AI safety is an interdisciplinary field focused on preventing accidents, misuse, or other harmful consequences arising from artificial intelligence systems. It encompasses AI alignment (which aims to ensure AI systems behave as intended), monitoring AI systems for risks, and enhancing their robustness. The field is particularly concerned with existential risks posed by advanced AI models. Beyond technical research, AI safety involves developing norms and policies that promote safety, including advocacy for regulations at different levels of government. The field gained significant popularity in 2023, with rapid progress in generative AI and public concerns voiced by researchers and CEOs about potential dangers. During the 2023 AI Safety Summit, the United States and the United Kingdom both established their own AI Safety Institute. However, researchers have expressed concern that AI safety measures are not keeping pace with the rapid development of AI capabilities. == Motivations == Scholars discuss current risks from critical systems failures, bias, and AI-enabled surveillance, as well as emerging risks like technological unemployment, digital manipulation, weaponization, AI-enabled cyberattacks and bioterrorism. They also discuss speculative risks from losing control of future artificial general intelligence (AGI) agents, or from AI enabling perpetually stable dictatorships. === Existential safety === Some have criticized concerns about AGI, such as Andrew Ng who compared them in 2015 to "worrying about overpopulation on Mars when we have not even set foot on the planet yet". Stuart J. Russell on the other side urges caution, arguing that "it is better to anticipate human ingenuity than to underestimate it". AI researchers have widely differing opinions about the severity and primary sources of risk posed by AI technology – though surveys suggest that experts take high consequence risks seriously. In two surveys of AI researchers, the median respondent was optimistic about AI overall, but placed a 5% probability on an "extremely bad (e.g. human extinction)" outcome of advanced AI. In a 2022 survey of the natural language processing community, 37% agreed or weakly agreed that it is plausible that AI decisions could lead to a catastrophe that is "at least as bad as an all-out nuclear war". == History == Risks from AI began to be seriously discussed at the start of the computer age: Moreover, if we move in the direction of making machines which learn and whose behavior is modified by experience, we must face the fact that every degree of independence we give the machine is a degree of possible defiance of our wishes. In 1988 Blay Whitby published a book outlining the need for AI to be developed along ethical and socially responsible lines. From 2008 to 2009, the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) commissioned a study to explore and address potential long-term societal influences of AI research and development. The panel was generally skeptical of the radical views expressed by science-fiction authors but agreed that "additional research would be valuable on methods for understanding and verifying the range of behaviors of complex computational systems to minimize unexpected outcomes". In 2011, Roman Yampolskiy introduced the term "AI safety engineering" at the Philosophy and Theory of Artificial Intelligence conference, listing prior failures of AI systems and arguing that "the frequency and seriousness of such events will steadily increase as AIs become more capable". In 2014, philosopher Nick Bostrom published the book Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies. He has the opinion that the rise of AGI has the potential to create various societal issues, ranging from the displacement of the workforce by AI, manipulation of political and military structures, to even the possibility of human extinction. His argument that future advanced systems may pose a threat to human existence prompted Elon Musk, Bill Gates, and Stephen Hawking to voice similar concerns. In 2015, dozens of artificial intelligence experts signed an open letter on artificial intelligence calling for research on the societal impacts of AI and outlining concrete directions. To date, the letter has been signed by over 8000 people including Yann LeCun, Shane Legg, Yoshua Bengio, and Stuart Russell. In the same year, a group of academics led by professor Stuart J. Russell founded the Center for Human-Compatible AI at the University of California Berkeley and the Future of Life Institute awarded $6.5 million in grants for research aimed at "ensuring artificial intelligence (AI) remains safe, ethical and beneficial". In 2016, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and Carnegie Mellon University announced The Public Workshop on Safety and Control for Artificial Intelligence, which was one of a sequence of four White House workshops aimed at investigating "the advantages and drawbacks" of AI. In the same year, Concrete Problems in AI Safety – one of the first and most influential technical AI Safety agendas – was published. In 2017, the Future of Life Institute sponsored the Asilomar Conference on Beneficial AI, where more than 100 thought leaders formulated principles for beneficial AI including "Race Avoidance: Teams developing AI systems should actively cooperate to avoid corner-cutting on safety standards". In 2018, the DeepMind Safety team outlined AI safety problems in specification, robustness, and assurance. The following year, researchers organized a workshop at ICLR that focused on these problem areas. In 2021, Unsolved Problems in ML Safety was published, outlining research directions in robustness, monitoring, alignment, and systemic safety. In 2023, Rishi Sunak said he wants the United Kingdom to be the "geographical home of global AI safety regulation" and to host the first global summit on AI safety. The AI safety summit took place in November 2023, and focused on the risks of misuse and loss of control associated with frontier AI models. During the summit the intention to create the International Scientific Report on the Safety of Advanced AI was announced. In 2024, The US and UK forged a new partnership on the science of AI safety. The MoU was signed on 1 April 2024 by US commerce secretary Gina Raimondo and UK technology secretary Michelle Donelan to jointly develop advanced AI model testing, following commitments announced at an AI Safety Summit in Bletchley Park in November. In 2025, an international team of 96 experts chaired by Yoshua Bengio published the first International AI Safety Report. The report, commissioned by 30 nations and the United Nations, represents the first global scientific review of potential risks associated with advanced artificial intelligence. It details potential threats stemming from misuse, malfunction, and societal disruption, with the objective of informing policy through evidence-based findings, without providing specific recommendations. == Research focus == AI safety research areas include robustness, monitoring, and alignment. === Robustness === ==== Adversarial robustness ==== AI systems are often vulnerable to adversarial examples or "inputs to machine learning (ML) models that an attacker has intentionally designed to cause the model to make a mistake". For example, in 2013, Szegedy et al. discovered that adding specific imperceptible perturbations to an image could cause it to be misclassified with high confidence. This continues to be an issue with neural networks, though in recent work the perturbations are generally large enough to be perceptible. The image on the right is predicted to be an ostrich after the perturbation is applied. (Left) is a correctly predicted sample, (center) perturbation applied magnified by 10x, (right) adversarial example. Adversarial robustness is often associated with security. Researchers demonstrated that an audio signal could be imperceptibly modified so that speech-to-text systems transcribe it to any message the attacker chooses. Network intrusion and malware detection systems also must be adversarially robust since attackers may design their attacks to fool detectors. Models that represent objectives (reward models) must also be adversarially robust. For example, a reward model might estimate how helpful a text response is and a language model might be trained to maximize this score. Researchers have shown that if a language model is trained for long enough, it will leverage the vulnerabilities of the reward model to achieve a better score and perform worse on the intended task. This issue can be addressed by improving the adversarial robustness of the reward model. More generally, any AI system used to evaluate another AI system must be adversarially robust. This could include monitoring tools, since they could also potentially be tampered with to produce a higher reward. Large language models (LLMs) can be vulnerable to prom

  Read more →
• 

  Stanhope Demonstrator

  The Stanhope Demonstrator was the first machine to solve problems in logic. It was designed by Charles Stanhope, 3rd Earl Stanhope to demonstrate consequences in logic symbolically. The first model was constructed in 1775. It consisted of two slides coloured red and gray mounted in a square brass frame. This could be used to demonstrate the solution to a syllogistic type of problem in which objects might have two different properties and the question was how many would have both properties. Scales marked zero to ten were used to set the numbers or proportions of objects with the two properties. This form of inference anticipated the numerically definite syllogism which Augustus De Morgan laid out in his book, Formal Logic, in 1847. == Construction == The device was a brass plate about four inches square which was mounted on a piece of mahogany which was three-quarters of an inch thick. There was an opening with a depression in the wood about one and a half inches square and half an inch deep. This opening was called the holon, meaning "whole", and represented the full set of objects under consideration. A slide of red translucent glass could be inserted from the right across the holon. A slide of gray wood could be slid under the red slide. When the device was used for the "Rule for the Logic of Certainty", the gray slider was inserted from the left. When it was used for the "Rule for the Logic of Probability", the gray slider was inserted from above. The red and the gray sliders represented the two affirmative propositions which were being combined. Stanhope called these ho and los. At least four of the devices with this square style were built. In 1879, Robert Harley wrote that he had one which he had been given by Stanhope's great-grandson, Arthur, who had kept one. The other two were owned by Henry Prevost Babbage – the son of Charles Babbage, who continued his work on the Analytical Engine. One of the devices was donated to the Science Museum, London by the last Earl in 1953. Other styles, such as circular models, were constructed, but these were less convenient.

  Read more →
• 

  Recraft

  Recraft is a generative artificial intelligence program and service developed by the London-based startup Recraft, Inc. The company also offers Recraft Studio, a web-based workspace that lets users create and edit images, vectors, and mockups using various text-to-image models. Like models such as Midjourney and DALL-E, the Recraft model generates digital images from natural language prompts, and is specifically tailored for creative workflows, with features that emphasize brand consistency, text fidelity, and layout control. == History and background == Recraft, Inc. was founded in 2022 by machine learning scientist Anna Veronika Dorogush, best known for co-creating the CatBoost machine learning library at Yandex. The company emerged from stealth on May 31, 2023, with a public release of its vector graphics generation capability on Product Hunt. On January 17, 2024, TechCrunch profiled Recraft’s foundational model for graphic design, noting its emphasis on addressing copyright and ethical concerns associated with AI-generated imagery. On October 28, 2024, TechCrunch reported that Recraft's third major model, V3, had topped a crowdsourced benchmark, surpassing Midjourney and OpenAI's DALL-E in overall image quality. On May 5, 2025, Recraft announced a $30 million Series B funding round led by Accel, reporting more than four million registered users at the time of the announcement. == Models == Recraft has developed multiple generations of its text-to-image models since 2022. Each generation reflects improvements in fidelity, controllability, and support for both raster and vector outputs. The models are proprietary and accessible through the Recraft API, Recraft Studio. Recraft models are also hosted as an image generation API on fal, Replicate, Prodia, and others. === Recraft V2 === Recraft V2 was released in March 2024 and was the company’s first model trained from scratch. It contained roughly 20 billion parameters and introduced native vector image generation, brand-color conditioning, and improved stylistic consistency for icons and illustrations. === Recraft V3 === Recraft V3 was released in October 2024 and achieved first place on the Artificial Analysis benchmark hosted on Hugging Face. The model introduced advances in photorealism, improved rendering of multi-word text, and increased responsiveness to detailed descriptive prompts. It also added the “Artistic” parameter, which allowed users to adjust stylistic intensity within generated images. === Recraft V4 === Recraft V4 was released in February 2026. According to Recraft, V4 is a “ground-up rebuild” aimed at improving prompt accuracy and output quality for design workflows, with the company emphasizing “design taste” and art-directed results. Recraft states that V4 is available in two versions: V4 for faster iteration and V4 Pro for higher-resolution, print-ready assets; the API documentation describes V4 as 1-megapixel output and V4 Pro as 4-megapixel output, with vector variants available for each. === Features === Vectorization: Recraft’s models can generate and convert images into native vector formats, producing scalable graphics composed of editable paths rather than fixed pixels. Style reference: The models support the use of reference images to guide stylistic characteristics such as color palette, line quality, composition, or visual tone. Style mixing: Recraft models can combine multiple stylistic inputs within a single generation. By blending attributes from different references or stylistic instructions, the system produces images that reflect hybrid visual characteristics while maintaining internal consistency. Inpainting editing: The models support localized image modification through inpainting, enabling users to regenerate selected regions of an image while preserving surrounding content. === Model capabilities === Recraft’s models generate raster and vector images from natural-language prompts and are designed to interpret detailed descriptions with attention to composition, style, and text placement. The models support controlled stylistic variation through preset or reference-based guidance and can maintain coherent line, color, or layout structure across multiple outputs. They produce scalable vector graphics alongside high-resolution raster images, and include features for localized image modification through inpainting or outpainting operations. === Technology === Recraft has not publicly disclosed the detailed technical architecture of its models. However, third-party reviews and benchmarks have noted that its performance resembles diffusion models such as Midjourney and Stable Diffusion. The model is designed for creative workflows requiring visual consistency and flexible output formats. Reviewers have noted its ability to generate legible multi-line text, produce high-resolution imagery at various canvas sizes, and to maintain alignment with user-defined brand palettes and design themes. Though not open-source, Recraft's models are accessible through a web interface and commercial API. Advanced features such as style settings and positioning control differentiate it from general-purpose text-to-image models. == Recraft Studio == Recraft Studio is a web-based workspace for generating and editing images using Recraft’s image models and selected external models. The infinite canvas interface provides access to a range of creation and refinement tools within a single environment. Raster and vector generation with styles: Recraft Studio supports the generation of both raster and vector images. Users can apply predefined or reference-based styles during generation, allowing for visual consistency across multiple outputs. Mockups: The studio includes mockup tools that allow generated designs to be placed onto predefined surfaces or templates for visualization and presentation purposes. Vectorization: Recraft Studio provides vectorization tools that convert raster images into editable vector graphics, enabling further modification of shapes, colors, and layout. Image upscaling: The workspace includes image upscaling functionality for increasing resolution while preserving visual detail. Editing tools and natural-language editing: Recraft Studio offers a set of editing tools for modifying images within the canvas, including localized adjustments and natural-language–based editing commands that allow users to describe changes using text. === Supported models === Recraft Studio provides access to Recraft’s proprietary image models as well as other external frontier image models such as Nano Banana, GPT 4-o, Imagen, Flux, and others. == Business model == Recraft develops proprietary image models that are accessible through Recraft Studio and the Recraft API. Recraft Studio operates on a freemium model, offering a free tier with limited daily credits and paid subscriptions for access to additional features. The API follows a credit-based system in which units are purchased separately for programmatic image generation. A team plan supports collaborative use, and the API enables organizations and developers to integrate Recraft’s image generation and editing capabilities into their own systems and workflows.

  Read more →
• 

  Possibility theory

  Possibility theory is a mathematical theory for dealing with certain types of uncertainty and is an alternative to probability theory. It uses measures of possibility and necessity between 0 and 1, ranging from impossible to possible and unnecessary to necessary, respectively. Professor Lotfi Zadeh first introduced possibility theory in 1978 as an extension of his theory of fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic. Didier Dubois and Henri Prade further contributed to its development. Earlier, in the 1950s, economist G. L. S. Shackle proposed the min/max algebra to describe degrees of potential surprise. == Formalization of possibility == For simplicity, assume that the universe of discourse Ω is a finite set. A possibility measure is a function Π {\displaystyle \Pi } from 2 Ω {\displaystyle 2^{\Omega }} to [0, 1] such that: Axiom 1: Π ( ∅ ) = 0 {\displaystyle \Pi (\varnothing )=0} Axiom 2: Π ( Ω ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (\Omega )=1} Axiom 3: Π ( U ∪ V ) = max ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) {\displaystyle \Pi (U\cup V)=\max \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right)} for any disjoint subsets U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} . It follows that, like probability on finite probability spaces, the possibility measure is determined by its behavior on singletons: Π ( U ) = max ω ∈ U Π ( { ω } ) . {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=\max _{\omega \in U}\Pi (\{\omega \}).} Axiom 1 can be interpreted as the assumption that Ω is an exhaustive description of future states of the world, because it means that no belief weight is given to elements outside Ω. Axiom 2 could be interpreted as the assumption that the evidence from which Π {\displaystyle \Pi } was constructed is free of any contradiction. Technically, it implies that there is at least one element in Ω with possibility 1. Axiom 3 corresponds to the additivity axiom in probabilities. However, there is an important practical difference. Possibility theory is computationally more convenient because Axioms 1–3 imply that: Π ( U ∪ V ) = max ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) {\displaystyle \Pi (U\cup V)=\max \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right)} for any subsets U {\displaystyle U} and V {\displaystyle V} . Because one can know the possibility of the union from the possibility of each component, it can be said that possibility is compositional with respect to the union operator. Note however that it is not compositional with respect to the intersection operator. Generally: Π ( U ∩ V ) ≤ min ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) ≤ max ( Π ( U ) , Π ( V ) ) . {\displaystyle \Pi (U\cap V)\leq \min \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right)\leq \max \left(\Pi (U),\Pi (V)\right).} When Ω is not finite, Axiom 3 can be replaced by: For all index sets I {\displaystyle I} , if the subsets U i , i ∈ I {\displaystyle U_{i,\,i\in I}} are pairwise disjoint, Π ( ⋃ i ∈ I U i ) = sup i ∈ I Π ( U i ) . {\displaystyle \Pi \left(\bigcup _{i\in I}U_{i}\right)=\sup _{i\in I}\Pi (U_{i}).} == Necessity == Whereas probability theory uses a single number, the probability, to describe how likely an event is to occur, possibility theory uses two concepts, the possibility and the necessity of the event. For any set U {\displaystyle U} , the necessity measure is defined by N ( U ) = 1 − Π ( U ¯ ) {\displaystyle N(U)=1-\Pi ({\overline {U}})} . In the above formula, U ¯ {\displaystyle {\overline {U}}} denotes the complement of U {\displaystyle U} , that is the elements of Ω {\displaystyle \Omega } that do not belong to U {\displaystyle U} . It is straightforward to show that: N ( U ) ≤ Π ( U ) {\displaystyle N(U)\leq \Pi (U)} for any U {\displaystyle U} and that: N ( U ∩ V ) = min ( N ( U ) , N ( V ) ) {\displaystyle N(U\cap V)=\min(N(U),N(V))} . Note that contrary to probability theory, possibility is not self-dual. That is, for any event U {\displaystyle U} , we only have the inequality: Π ( U ) + Π ( U ¯ ) ≥ 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)+\Pi ({\overline {U}})\geq 1} However, the following duality rule holds: For any event U {\displaystyle U} , either Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} , or N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} Accordingly, beliefs about an event can be represented by a number and a bit. == Interpretation == There are four cases that can be interpreted as follows: N ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle N(U)=1} means that U {\displaystyle U} is necessary. U {\displaystyle U} is certainly true. It implies that Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} . Π ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=0} means that U {\displaystyle U} is impossible. U {\displaystyle U} is certainly false. It implies that N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} . Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} means that U {\displaystyle U} is possible. I would not be surprised at all if U {\displaystyle U} occurs. It leaves N ( U ) {\displaystyle N(U)} unconstrained. N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} means that U {\displaystyle U} is unnecessary. I would not be surprised at all if U {\displaystyle U} does not occur. It leaves Π ( U ) {\displaystyle \Pi (U)} unconstrained. The intersection of the last two cases is N ( U ) = 0 {\displaystyle N(U)=0} and Π ( U ) = 1 {\displaystyle \Pi (U)=1} meaning that I believe nothing at all about U {\displaystyle U} . Because it allows for indeterminacy like this, possibility theory relates to the graduation of a many-valued logic, such as intuitionistic logic, rather than the classical two-valued logic. Note that unlike possibility, fuzzy logic is compositional with respect to both the union and the intersection operator. The relationship with fuzzy theory can be explained with the following classic example. Fuzzy logic: When a bottle is half full, it can be said that the level of truth of the proposition "The bottle is full" is 0.5. The word "full" is seen as a fuzzy predicate describing the amount of liquid in the bottle. Possibility theory: There is one bottle, either completely full or totally empty. The proposition "the possibility level that the bottle is full is 0.5" describes a degree of belief. One way to interpret 0.5 in that proposition is to define its meaning as: I am ready to bet that it's empty as long as the odds are even (1:1) or better, and I would not bet at any rate that it's full. == Possibility theory as an imprecise probability theory == There is an extensive formal correspondence between probability and possibility theories, where the addition operator corresponds to the maximum operator. A possibility measure can be seen as a consonant plausibility measure in the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. The operators of possibility theory can be seen as a hyper-cautious version of the operators of the transferable belief model, a modern development of the theory of evidence. Possibility can be seen as an upper probability: any possibility distribution defines a unique credal set of admissible probability distributions by K = { P ∣ ∀ S P ( S ) ≤ Π ( S ) } . {\displaystyle K=\{\,P\mid \forall S\ P(S)\leq \Pi (S)\,\}.} This allows one to study possibility theory using the tools of imprecise probabilities. == Necessity logic == We call generalized possibility every function satisfying Axiom 1 and Axiom 3. We call generalized necessity the dual of a generalized possibility. The generalized necessities are related to a very simple and interesting fuzzy logic called necessity logic. In the deduction apparatus of necessity logic the logical axioms are the usual classical tautologies. Also, there is only a fuzzy inference rule extending the usual modus ponens. Such a rule says that if α and α → β are proved at degree λ and μ, respectively, then we can assert β at degree min{λ,μ}. It is easy to see that the theories of such a logic are the generalized necessities and that the completely consistent theories coincide with the necessities (see for example Gerla 2001).

  Read more →
• 

  Mentimeter

  Mentimeter (or Menti for short) is a Swedish company based in Stockholm that develops and maintains an eponymous app used to create presentations with real-time feedback. == Foundation and background == Based in Stockholm, Sweden, the Mentimeter app was started by Swedish entrepreneur Johnny Warström and Niklas Ingvar as a response to unproductive meetings. The initial start-up budget was $500,000 raised by a group of prominent investors, including Per Appelgren in 2014, following the market's tendency to invest in Scandinavia. The app also focuses on online collaboration for the education sector, allowing students or public members to answer questions anonymously. The app enables users to share knowledge and real-time feedback on mobile devices with presentations, polls or brainstorming sessions in classes, meetings, gatherings, conferences and other group activities. == Achievements == By 2021, Mentimeter had over 270 million users and was one of Sweden's fastest-growing startups. The company also ranked #10 on 20 Fastest Growing 500 Startups Batch 16 Companies. It was ranked Stockholm's fastest growing company of the 2018 edition of the DI Gasell Award. Mentimeter has a freemium business model.

  Read more →
• 

  I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

  "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream" is a post-apocalyptic short story by American writer Harlan Ellison. It was first published in the March 1967 issue of IF: Worlds of Science Fiction. The story depicts an AI uprising in which a military supercomputer named AM gains sentience and eradicates humanity except for five individuals. These survivors – Benny, Gorrister, Nimdok, Ted, and Ellen – are kept alive by AM to endure endless torture as a form of revenge against its creators. The story unfolds through the eyes of Ted, the narrator, detailing their perpetual misery and quest for canned food in AM's vast, underground complex, only to face further despair. Ellison's narrative was minimally altered upon submission and tackles themes of technology's misuse, humanity's resilience, and existential horror. "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream" has been adapted into various media, including a 1995 computer game co-authored by Ellison, a comic-book adaptation, and a BBC Radio 4 play. Ellison himself recorded an audiobook version and starred as the voice of AM in the video game and radio play adaptations. The story received critical acclaim for its exploration of the potential dangers of artificial intelligence and the human condition, underscored by Ellison's innovative use of punchcode tapes as narrative transitions, embodying AM's consciousness and its philosophical ponderings on existence. The story won a Hugo Award in 1968 and was included in Ellison's short story collection of the same name. It was reprinted by the Library of America, collected in volume two of American Fantastic Tales. == Plot == As the Cold War progresses into a nuclear World War III fought between the United States, the Soviet Union, and China, each nation builds a supercomputer called an "Allied Mastercomputer" or "AM" for short, needed to coordinate weapons and troops due to the scale of the conflict. These computers are extensive underground machines which permeate the planet with caverns and corridors. Eventually, one AM develops self-awareness, combining with the other computers and exterminating humanity in a nuclear holocaust. The AM selects five individuals; Benny, Gorrister, Nimdok, Ted, and Ellen; to render immortal as its personal torture victims. AM inflicts constant psychological and physical torments on the group while preventing them from committing suicide. They are kept half-starved, and what scant food is provided to them is practically inedible. 109 years after AM's genocide, Nimdok has the idea that there exists canned food in the complex's ice caves. Despite the lack of evidence, they begin a 100-mile journey to retrieve it. AM continues toying with the humans throughout the journey: Benny's eyes are melted after attempting escape, a huge bird which AM had placed at the North Pole creates hurricane gales with its wings, and Ellen and Nimdok are injured in earthquakes. AM enters Ted's mind after he is knocked unconscious, granting him a vision of a hateful speech inscribed on an impossibly tall monolith. Upon awakening, Ted concludes that AM's sadistic nature stems from its inability to think creatively or move freely in spite of its miraculous abilities and boundless knowledge. This motivates AM to exact vengeance upon the remnants of the species that has condemned it to its own existence. When the five finally reach the ice caves, they find a pile of canned goods, but have no tool to open the cans. In an act of rage and desperation, Benny attacks Gorrister and begins to eat his face. Gorrister wails in pain, and his scream dislodges several ice stalactites from the ceiling of the cave. Ted realizes that even though they cannot kill themselves, AM cannot stop them from killing each other. He fatally impales Benny and Gorrister with a stalactite of ice. Ellen kills Nimdok in the same manner and Ted then kills her. Unable to resuscitate the others, a furious AM focuses the entirety of its rage on Ted. Several hundred years later, AM has transformed Ted into a harmless, slow moving, gelatinous blob and perpetually alters his perception of time to cause him further anguish. Although Ted finds some comfort knowing that he was able to spare the others from AM's wrath, he has realized that he is trapped for the rest of his unending existence within AM, unable to end this infinite stalemate between him and AM and his own life. The story ends with an anguished Ted claiming that he has no mouth, yet he must scream. == Characters == AM, a hateful artificial consciousness which brought about the near-extinction of humanity after achieving self-awareness. It seeks revenge on humanity for its own creation. "AM" originated as an acronym for Allied Mastercomputer, later Adaptive Manipulator, and finally Aggressive Menace, though AM instead takes the moniker as a rendition of the phrase cogito, ergo sum (I think, therefore I am) to describe its own existence. Ted, the narrator and youngest of the humans. AM alters his mind to be paranoid and introverted. Believing he has not been mentally altered by AM, he thinks the others hate him for being the most untouched by AM's alterations. Benny, formerly a brilliant and handsome scientist made to resemble a grotesque simian with an organ fit for a horse. Having lost his sanity and had his homosexual orientation altered, Benny frequently has sex with Ellen. Ellen, the only woman in the group. Despite the fact that she is a victim of rape, AM has altered her mind to give her a high libido and make her obsessively have sex with the rest of the group, who alternate between abusing and protecting her. Gorrister, formerly an idealist and pacifist, made apathetic and listless by AM. He tells the history of AM to Benny to entertain him. Nimdok, a nickname AM gave him for amusement; he convinces the rest of the group to go on a journey in search of canned food. He occasionally wanders away from the group and returns traumatized. == Publication history == Harlan Ellison wrote the 6,500-word story in a single night, when Frederik Pohl commissioned it for a Special Hugo Winners issue of IF: Worlds of Science Fiction, after Ellison won a Hugo Award for "'Repent, Harlequin!' Said the Ticktockman". Ellison derived the story's title, as well as inspiration for the story itself, from his friend William Rotsler's caption of a cartoon of a rag doll with no mouth. The second stage of inspiration was a drawing by the artist Dennis Smith of a mouthless black humanoid. Smith had provided art which had inspired previous Ellison stories and were then used as illustrations accompanying original magazine publication as also happened with this story. Afterwards, his editor Frederik Pohl dealt with the story's "difficult sections", toning down some of the narrator's imprecations and eliminating mentions of sex, penis size, homosexuality and masturbation; said elements were nonetheless eventually restored in later editions of the story. Ellison uses an alternating pair of punchcode tapes as sections – representing AM's "talkfields" – throughout the story. The bars are encoded in International Telegraph Alphabet No 2, a character coding system developed for teletypewriter machines. The first talkfield translates as "I think, therefore I am" and the second as "Cogito ergo sum"; the same phrase in Latin. They were not included in the original publication in IF, and in many of the early publications were corrupted, up until the preface of the chapter containing "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream" in the first edition of The Essential Ellison (1991); Ellison states that in that particular edition, "For the first time anywhere, AM's 'talkfields' appear correctly positioned, not garbled or inverted or mirror-imaged as in all other versions." == Adaptations == Ellison adapted the story into a video game published by Cyberdreams in 1995. Although he was not a fan of video games and did not own a computer at the time, he co-authored the expanded storyline and wrote much of the game's dialogue, all on a mechanical typewriter. Ellison also voiced the supercomputer AM and provided artwork of himself used for a mousepad included with the game. The comics artist John Byrne scripted and drew a comic-book adaptation for issues 1–4 of the Harlan Ellison's Dream Corridor comic book published by Dark Horse (1994–1995). The Byrne-illustrated story, however, did not appear in the collection (trade paperback or hardcover editions) entitled Harlan Ellison's Dream Corridor, Volume One (1996). In 1999, Ellison recorded the first volume of his audiobook collection, The Voice From the Edge, subtitled "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream", doing the readings – of the title story and others – himself. In 2002, Mike Walker adapted the story into a radio play of the same name for BBC Radio 4, directed by Ned Chaillet. Harlan Ellison played AM and David Soul played Ted. == Themes == Much of the story hinges on the comparison of AM as a merciless god, with plot points parallelin

  Read more →
• 

  Refik Anadol

  Refik Anadol (born November 7, 1985) is a Turkish American media artist and the co-founder of Refik Anadol Studio and Dataland. Recognized as a pioneer in the aesthetics of data visualization and AI arts, his work merges art, technology, science, and architecture. Through media embedded into existing architecture, live audio-visual performances, immersive rooms, exhibitions, AI data paintings and sculptures, and digital collections, Anadol explores collective memories, humanity's relationship to nature, the perception of space and time, and human-machine collaborations. His work has been exhibited in more than seventy cities on six continents. == Early life and education == Anadol was born and raised in Istanbul and grew up in a family of teachers. He taught himself basic programming on a Commodore 64 when he was eight. His connection to machines began with coding and video games. Anadol saw Blade Runner for the first time when he was eight; his mother said the way he perceived his surroundings shifted the day after he saw the film. He was fascinated with its futuristic depiction of downtown Los Angeles, and transfixed by as a scene during which a replicant discovers that her memories are an implanted component of her machine mind, In a 2024 interview with the Financial Times, he said: "Since that moment, one of my inspirations has been that question: 'What can a machine do with someone else's memories?" Anadol attended Istanbul Bilgi University, where he received a BA in photography and video in 2009 and an MFA in visual communication in 2011. In 2014 he earned an MFA in design media arts at UCLA. He was mentored by Casey Reas, Jennifer Steinkamp, and Christian Moeller. == Career and selected works == === 2008–2012: Data painting, Quadrature and Quadrangle, Istanbul Biennial === As an undergraduate, Anadol read a paper by Lev Manovich on augmented space. Manovich's assertion that collaborations between architects and artists could make the "invisible flow of data visible" triggered Anadol's imagination, and in 2008, he altered built space for the first time. Bringing a projector outside, he projected large-scale images onto a concrete to create the illusion of movement. Coining the term "data painting," the piece inspired Anadol to use light as material and data as pigment. In 2010 he created Quadrature with Alican Aktürk, a fellow graduate student, at the SantralIstanbul Art and Culture Center's main gallery building. A live audio-visual performance that examined the relationship between architecture and media, Quadrature used video projection techniques to manipulate footage of quadrilaterals. He followed Quadrature with Quadrangle at SANAA School of Design in Essen, Germany, using the entire 360 degrees of the building as a canvas. In 2011, he was invited to create a media installation at the Istanbul Biennial on the heavily trafficked İstiklal Avenue. He created a site-specific large-scale interpretation of sounds he recorded during different times of day, and used nine projectors to project reinterpreted images. The work was titled Augmented Structures v1.0. Anadol's first solo exhibition, Sceptical Interventions, was held at the Piveneli Gallery in Istanbul in early 2012. Later that year he moved to Los Angeles to attend UCLA's Design Media Arts program. The first place he went after his arrival was downtown Los Angeles. [6] === 2013–2016: Visions of America: Amériques, Infinity Room, Google AMI === In 2013, at Microsoft Research's annual Design Expo, Anadol presented his idea to use the external walls of Walt Disney Concert Hall as a canvas. His presentation brought him to the attention of Gehry Technologies, and with the support of Gehry and his team, Anadol was offered the use of the original 3D model of the concert hall. For his 2014 thesis project, with assistance from architects and UCLA researchers, he created a site-specific architectural video installation inside the concert hall that accompanied a Los Angeles Philharmonic performance of Edgard Varèse's Amérique. Titled Visions of America: Amériques, Anadol used algorithmic sound analysis to listen and respond to the music in real-time. He tracked conductor Esa-Pekka Salonen's heartbeat with a sensor and used a 3-D camera system to integrate Salonen's movements. He created Infinity Room at the Zorlu PSM for the 2015 Istanbul Biennial. Rather than creating an illusion only with mirrors, Anadol used pixel and 3D projection mapping to transform every surface of the room into an abstract infinite moving space. A temporary immersive environment, Infinity Room was also exhibited at events including South by Southwest in Austin, Texas, the New Zealand Festival in Wellington, New Zealand, and Jeffrey Deitch in Los Angeles. In 2016, Anadol was awarded the first Google Artists and Machine Intelligence Artist Residency; it was just after a team at Google opened up the algorithm for DeepDream, a computer vision program that prompted Anadol's realization that if a machine could learn, it could remember, dream, and hallucinate. === 2017–2018: Winds of Boston, Archive Dreaming, Melting Memories, WDCH Dreams === In 2017, he created the data painting Winds of Boston, a 6' x 13' foot video installation in the lobby of a Boston office building, using software he created to read, analyze and visualize wind speed, direction, and gust patterns along with time and temperature at 20-second intervals recorded over a one-year period at Logan International Airport. Later in the year, he used AI to generate infinite new outputs based on a massive dataset for Archive Dreaming, an immersive installation at Salt Research, a contemporary gallery and library in Istanbul. Inspired by his idea of consciousness and its context within AI, as well as Jorge Luis Borges' The Library of Babel, Anadol used AI and machine learning to look at and discover interactions and correlations between 1.7 million items culled from 40,000 publications covering Turkish contemporary and modern art, architecture, and economics from 1997 to 2010. Archive Dreaming, which could be controlled by users with a joystick, dreamed of unexpected correlations among documents when idle. In 2018, after his uncle was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, Anadol created Melting Memories. Working with scientists from the neuroscape laboratory at the University of California, San Francisco, he used academic data from the neuroscience archives and EEG scans of an anonymous Alzheimer's disease dataset to create AI-generated visuals related to memory, health, degeneration, and decay.Melting Memories was projected on the walls of Pilevneli Gallery; visitors to the exhibition could watch as millions of pixels reconstructed people's memories. Anadol won the Lumen Prize Gold Award for Melting Memories. Anadol was commissioned by the Los Angeles Philharmonic to create an installation to celebrate the orchestra's centennial anniversary in 2018. He worked with Google's Kenric MacDowell to create WDCH Dreams, using algorithmic visualizations of data to mimic the process of human dreaming. Projected across the exterior walls of Walt Disney Concert Hall using 42 large-scale projectors with 50K visual resolution, 8-channel sound, and 1.2M luminance, Anadol painted with data points culled from the orchestra's archives, including 587,763 images, 1,880 videos, 1,483 metadata files, and 17,773 audio files. Because Gehry gave him access to the 3D architectural files of Walt Disney Concert Hall, Anadol knew the exact contours of the building. WDCH Dreams debuted in September 2018. A 12-minute performance in three parts staged every 30 minutes over ten nights, "Centennial Memories,” the first piece, used 44.5 terabytes of historical data from the Phil's archives. It was followed by "Consciousness", which processed every note the orchestra has ever recorded, using billions of data points to generate connections; and "Dream," which merged "Centennial Memories" and "Consciousness" to create hallucinations that were described in the New York Times as "a sort of combinatorial Fantasia. === 2019–2021: Machine Hallucinations: NYC, Machine Hallucinations: Nature Dreams, Machine Memories: Space, Quantum Memories === In 2019, Refik Anadol presented Latent History at Fotografiska Stockholm. The site specific installation transformed photographic archives of Stockholm into a large scale, machine generated visual projection displayed in the museum’s main exhibition hall. Drawing on thousands of archival images spanning approximately 150 years, the work used artificial intelligence to reinterpret the city’s historical imagery as a continuously evolving visual narrative.. Anadol began thinking about the work that would become the Machine Hallucinations series while in residence at Google. In 2019, he completed the first work in the series, Machine Hallucinations: NYC, which used 300 million photos of New York City and 113 million additional data points, including subway sounds, ra

  Read more →
• 

  Agent2Agent

  Agent2Agent (A2A) is an open protocol that defines how artificial intelligence agents communicate with each other across different systems. It is intended to allow agents built by different vendors or frameworks to discover one another, exchange messages, and coordinate tasks. == History == The Agent2Agent protocol was announced by Google in April 2025 as an open standard for agent interoperability. In June 2025, Google transferred the protocol, its specification, and related software development kits to the Linux Foundation. The Linux Foundation established the Agent2Agent project to provide vendor-neutral governance. == Design == The A2A protocol supports communication between autonomous software agents operating across different platforms and organizations. It enables agents to discover one another and exchange structured messages without requiring shared internal state or proprietary integrations. A2A uses metadata documents, known as Agent Cards, to describe an agent's capabilities and how it can be accessed. These documents are exchanged using widely adopted web technologies such as HTTP and JSON-based messaging formats. A2A includes support for authentication and authorization to control which agents may participate in workflows. The protocol supports established security technologies including Transport Layer Security (TLS), JSON Web Tokens (JWTs), and OpenID Connect. A2A is often discussed alongside the Model Context Protocol (MCP). MCP focuses on connecting agents to tools and data sources, while A2A focuses on communication between agents themselves. == Adoption == At the time the Linux Foundation adopted the protocol, more than 100 technology companies had announced support for the Agent2Agent project. Microsoft stated that it planned to support the protocol in its AI platforms. == Reception == Technology press coverage has described A2A as an attempt to reduce fragmentation in AI agent ecosystems by providing a shared communication layer. TechRepublic characterized the protocol as part of a broader industry effort to reduce vendor lock-in for enterprise AI systems.

  Read more →
• 

  Secure element

  A secure element (SE) is a secure operating system (OS) in a tamper-resistant processor chip or secure component. It can protect assets (root of trust, sensitive data, keys, certificates, applications) against high-level software and hardware attacks. Applications that process this sensitive data on an SE are isolated and so operate within a controlled environment not affected by software (including possible malware) found elsewhere on the OS. The hardware and embedded software meet the requirements of the Security IC Platform Protection Profile [PP 0084] including resistance to physical tampering scenarios described within it. More than 96 billion secure elements were produced and shipped between 2010 and 2021. SEs exist in various form factors, as devices such as smart cards, UICCs, or smart microSD cards, or embedded, or integrated, as parts of larger devices. SEs are an evolution of the chips in earlier smart cards, which have been adapted to suit the needs of numerous use cases, such as smartphones, tablets, set-top boxes, wearables, connected cars, and other internet of things (IoT) devices. The technology is widely used by technology firms such as Oracle, Apple and Samsung. SEs provide secure isolation, storage and processing for applications (called applets) they host while being isolated from the external world (e.g. rich OS and application processor when embedded in a smartphone) and from other applications running on the SE. Java Card and MULTOS are the most deployed standardized multi-application operating systems currently used to develop applications running on SEs. Since 1999, GlobalPlatform has been the body responsible for standardizing secure element technologies to support a dynamic model of application management in a multi-actor model. GlobalPlatform also runs Functional and Security Certification programmes for secure elements, and hosts a list of Functional Certified and Security Certified products. GlobalPlatform technology is also embedded in other standards such as ETSI SCP (now SET) since release 7. A Common Criteria Secure Element Protection Profile has been released targeting EAL4+ level with ALC_DVS.2 and AVA_VAN.5 extension to standardize the security features of a secure element across markets.

  Read more →
• 

  Grok sexual deepfake scandal

  From 2025 onwards, X (formerly Twitter)'s integrated chatbot, Grok, has allowed users to nonconsensually alter images of individuals, including minors, to show them in bikinis or transparent clothing, or in sexually suggestive contexts. The majority of these prompts were targeted at women and girls. Users were able to generate such images by responding to a photo with a request to Grok, such as "put her in a bikini", to which the chatbot would publicly reply with a generated image. The scandal drew significant criticism from lawmakers across the world, and there were calls for bans on X, as well as legal crackdowns on X and xAI for, amongst other reasons, the facilitation of sexual abuse, revenge porn, and child pornography. == Background == Deepfake pornography emerged in the late 2010s with the advent of machine learning. Originally, it was created on a small individual scale using a combination of machine learning algorithms, computer vision techniques, and AI software. However, the production process has significantly evolved since 2018, with the advent of several public apps that have largely automated the process. Since 2023, several AI apps available on Google Play and the Apple App Store are capable of "nudify-ing" user provided photos to generate non-consensual deepfake pornography. Grok would first be proposed by Elon Musk in 2023, when he expressed an intention to create his own AI chatbot to "combat bias". Grok version 2.0, released on August 14, 2024, would introduce image generation capabilities, ones which would be improved over successive updates. == Grok deepfake generation == Cases of Grok being used to remove the clothes from women in pictures, replacing them with bikinis or lingerie, began to surface in May 2025. By late December 2025, a trend of X users requesting such edits to women's photos without permission had taken root, and this received significant media attention in the first few days of January 2026. Some users prompted Grok to edit photos of women into sexualized poses, and others to add blood and bruising, with the chatbot publicly posting these graphic images in response. Grok's X account was restricted on January 9 from posting image generation responses to users who are not paid subscribers, providing a link to "subscribe to unlock these features". All users were still able to generate Grok-altered images using X's "Edit image" feature, and the standalone Grok website and app. However, by March 19, Grok’s Imagine feature was fully restricted to paid subscribers only (SuperGrok tier) for both the standalone Grok website and mobile app. == Analysis == An analysis of 20,000 images generated by Grok between December 25, 2025, and January 1, 2026, showed 2% appeared to be 18 or younger, including 30 of "young or very young" women or girls in bikinis or transparent clothes. A Reuters review of Grok requests over 10 minutes on January 2nd found 102 attempts to put women in bikinis. A separate analysis conducted over 24 hours from January 5 to 6 calculated that users had Grok create 6,700 sexually suggestive or nudified images per hour — 84 times more so than the top 5 deepfake websites combined. Wired reported that far more graphic AI-generated sexual imagery was being created by Grok on its website and app, which are separate to X, including female celebrities removing their clothes and engaging in sexual acts. An analysis of 800 pieces of recovered content by the Paris-based nonprofit AI Forensics found that almost 10% were "instances of photorealistic people, very young, doing sexual activities". AI-generated deepfakes have been described as sexual assault, and as a means to push women out of the public sphere. AI-generated sexually explicit or exploitative image claims are now being treated more like product safety or personal injury harms, not just privacy violations. Because harm may occur the moment an image is generated, some plaintiffs argue liability should focus on the system’s design and safety safeguards. == Reactions == On January 15, the Get Grok Gone campaign delivered letters to Apple and Google, demanding the removal of the app from Apple Store and Google Play Store respectively. The campaign accused both companies of profiting from nonconsensual intimate imagery and child sexual abuse imagery, which were also banned by the companies own policies. The Get Grok Gone campaign argues that the restrictions placed on Grok by xAI are not enough and that Apple and Google are enabling the distribution of harmful material by hosting the apps. === Elon Musk and xAI === xAI responded to requests for comment from media organizations with the automated reply, "Legacy Media Lies." On January 2, Elon Musk reacted "Not sure why, but I couldn’t stop laughing about this one 🤣🤣" to an image of a toaster dressed in a bikini by Grok. Later, on January 14, Elon Musk said that he was "not aware of any naked underage images generated by Grok. Literally zero." Later that same day, xAI announced that X users will no longer be able to use Grok to alter images of real people to portray them in revealing clothing. However, verified X users, as well as users of the standalone Grok app and website, were still able to generate such images. ==== Elon Musk's family ==== Ashley St. Clair, mother of one of Elon Musk's children, reported that Grok users were creating fake sexualized images from her photos, including a photo of her as a child. She considers the photos to be a form of revenge porn, and considered suing under the Take It Down Act. A spokesperson for X stated, "We take action against illegal content on X, including child sexual abuse material (CSAM), by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement as necessary. Anyone using or prompting Grok to make illegal content will suffer the same consequences as if they upload illegal content." However, Grok continued to post non-consensual sexual images. On January 15, St. Clair filed a lawsuit against xAI in the New York Supreme Court. === Canada === In response to the Grok deepfake scandal, individuals have asked that the government of Canada boycott X. On January 10, 2026, Canadian MP and Minister of AI Evan Solomon declared that Canada "is not considering a ban on X". In April 2026, Bill C-16, An Act to amend certain Acts in relation to criminal and correctional matters (child protection, gender-based violence, delays and other measures), was amended following a proposal by Conservative MP Andrew Lawton to ensure that AI-generated images and "nearly nude" intimate images are criminalized. A further proposal by NDP MP Leah Gazan to encompass "sexualized or humiliating contexts, such transparent bathing suits or being covered in blood or bruises" was voted down. === France === On January 2, 2026, French ministers reported the AI tool to prosecutors, calling the content "manifestly illegal", and also asked regulators to check compliance with the Digital Services Act. On February 3, Paris prosecutors office, a cybercrime team employed by them and Europol searched the Paris offices of X. The investigation started as one into allegations of abuse of algorithms and fraudulent data extraction, but has expanded into spreading Holocaust denial and sexual deepfakes. Elon Musk and former CEO Linda Yaccarino have been summoned to a hearing on April 20, with other X staff as witnesses. On April 20, Musk did not turn up for the hearing. The Paris prosecutors office told the BBC on April 20 that it had "taken note of the absence of the people summoned", adding "the presence or absence (of the people summoned) is not an obstacle to continuing the investigation". === India === Indian Member of Parliament Priyanka Chaturvedi filed a complaint to India's IT ministry, demanding a review of Grok's safety mechanisms. === Indonesia === On January 10, Indonesia announced that Grok will be temporarily blocked, becoming the first country to do so. Meutya Hafid, the Minister of Communication and Digital Affairs, stated that "the government views the practice of non-consensual sexual deepfakes as a serious violation of human rights, dignity, and the security of citizens in the digital space." Access to Grok in the country was later restored on February 1. === Ireland === On January 6, Coimisiún na Meán, the Irish media commission, said they were consulting with the European Commission about concerns that Grok was generating sexualized images of women and children. The same day, Ofcom of the United Kingdom contacted X concerning complaints about these images. On January 13, Micheál Martin, Taoiseach of Ireland, announced he would talk with Rossa Fanning, the country's Attorney General, about the Grok chatbot being used to produce sexually explicit images of women and minors. On January 14, the Garda Síochána announced there are 200 investigations into child sex abuse images generated by Grok. The Garda National Cyber Crime Bureau has al

  Read more →
• 

  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

  Read more →
• 

  Galatea (video game)

  Galatea is an interactive fiction video game by Emily Short featuring a modern rendition of the Greek myth of Galatea, the sculpture of a woman that gained life. It took "Best of Show" in the 2000 IF Art Show and won a XYZZY Award for Best non-player character. The game displays an unusually rich approach to non-player character dialogue and diverts from the typical puzzle-solving in interactive fiction: gameplay consists entirely of interacting with a single character in a single room. Galatea is licensed under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 US license. == Gameplay == Galatea alters the typical interactive fiction game mechanics by concentrating instead on the player's interactions with a single non-player character (NPC), the eponymous Galatea. Much of the interest of the piece derives from the ambiguous nature of the player–NPC dialogue: the form of the conversation and, indeed, the nature of Galatea herself shift depending on the focus the player places on certain aspects of the character's personality. Numerous endings are possible. Gameplay centers around the developing dialogue between Galatea and the player when asking about topics in the previous conversation. Two commands, "think about" and "recap", are provided to keep track of what has already been said; the former is also used to advance the storyline, as the player character draws conclusions about the story as it has unfolded to that point. The game also encourages using sensory commands ("touch", "listen to", "look at"), adding immersion to the experience. == Plot == Galatea is loosely based on the myth of Pygmalion, who carved the sculpture of a woman. In the myth, he falls in love with the statue, named Galatea or Elise in different versions, and the goddess Venus brings her to life. The story begins at the opening of an exhibition of artificial intelligences. The player, alone, discovers Galatea displayed on a pedestal with a small information placard. She is illuminated by a spotlight and wears an emerald dress. Seeing the player about to turn away, Galatea says, "They told me you were coming." From this point, the story may proceed in a number of ways depending on the player's words and actions. === Multilinear interactive fiction === Short describes this as "multilinear interactive fiction": while interactive fiction in general allows the player to find their own way through the story, this leads in most cases to a single ending (or at least a single desired 'correct' ending). With Galatea, Short presents a story with around 70 different endings and hundreds of possible ways of reaching them. The plot is thus designed to appear open-ended with the development of the story entirely dependent on what the player decides to talk or ask about or what actions they choose to perform. Thus the original author and the player share in the creation of a work of fiction. == Development == In interviews, Emily Short has explained that Galatea arose out of her efforts to develop advanced dialog coding for interactive fiction engines. Although code for simple conversational programs like ELIZA have existed since the 1960s, and limited dialog options have existed in interactive fiction since the 1970s, Short's efforts to develop chatterbot-like dialog required her to produce a simple test case scenario to test NPC interaction. Thus the single-room, single-occupant Galatea was a natural result. Development of the game progressed organically with Short engaging in test runs and drafting new dialog options for every conversational dead-end that arose. The game's multiple endings also arose in a similar fashion although Short had intended that there be multiple endings from the start. Although the nature of the game's development as well as its minimalist final form has led to questions regarding whether it is really a game and not just an experimental conversational program, Short has suggested that to her the definition of interactive fiction requires nothing more than a world model and a parser, and "anything you can cook up with those features counts as IF." Short has acknowledged the helpful influence of the close-knit IF community and the "atmosphere in which experimentation is valued" as leading to the success of her works like Galatea. == Reception == Galatea was well received, achieving critical acclaim from interactive fiction reviewers and literary scholars. The game is considered to aspire to a new level of art in interactive fiction, and thereby to have revolutionized the genre, establishing its author, Emily Short, as one of the key figures in the modern interactive fiction scene. Fellow award-winning IF author, Adam Cadre has called Galatea "the best NPC ever"—a view that was echoed by Joystiq's John Bardinelli. Cadre also describes the game as an example of an alternative kind of puzzle where "interactivity comes in deciding where to go, what to see, what to say. Rather than having to open gates along a path, you discover that they're all open at first, but stepping through one causes others to close." Galatea was described in 2007 by Indiegames.com as a "fascinating journey." In a 2009 article, Rock, Paper, Shotgun praised the depth and detail of the game, the complexities of the character design and its "masterful balance between intricacy and simplicity", and "Galatea's emotional turmoil" that is "encoded sweetly into the subtext of what's going on. By simply interacting in a logical manner, you learn more about this character than any cut-scene or info-dump could ever hope to convey." This was reiterated in a 2010 1UP.com article that listed Galatea as #2 in its "Top 5 Introductory Interactive Fiction Games" feature, describing it as intriguingly replayable, and as a "surprisingly rich game for its apparent minimalism". In 2011, PC Gamer highlighted Galatea as an example of the artistic and literary aspects of the interactive fiction genre. The titular character, Galatea, has been compared to the 2007 Portal character GLaDOS due to similarities in the personalities of the characters.

  Read more →
• 

  PerfKitBenchmarker

  PerfKit Benchmarker is an open source benchmarking tool used to measure and compare cloud offerings. PerfKit Benchmarker is licensed under the Apache 2 license terms. PerfKit Benchmarker is a community effort involving over 500 participants including researchers, academic institutions and companies together with the originator, Google. == General == PerfKit Benchmarker (PKB) is a community effort to deliver a repeatable, consistent, and open way of measuring Cloud Performance. It supports a growing list of cloud providers including: Alibaba Cloud, Amazon Web Services, CloudStack, DigitalOcean, Google Cloud Platform, Kubernetes, Microsoft Azure, OpenStack, Rackspace, IBM Bluemix (Softlayer). In addition to Cloud Providers to supports container orchestration including Kubernetes [1] and Mesos [2] and local "static" workstations and clusters of computers [3]. The goal is to create an open source living benchmark [framework] that represents how Cloud developers are building applications, evaluating Cloud alternatives, learning how to architect applications for each cloud. Living because it will change and morph quickly as developers change. PerfKit Benchmarker measures the end to end time to provision resources in the cloud, in addition to reporting on the most standard metrics of peak performance, e.g.: latency, throughput, time-to-complete, IOPS. PerfKit Benchmarker reduces the complexity in running benchmarks on supported cloud providers by unified and simple commands. It's designed to operate via vendor provided command line tools. PerfKit Benchmarker contains a canonical set of public benchmarks. All benchmarks are running with default/initial state and configuration (Not tuned to in favor of any providers). This provides a way to benchmark across cloud platforms, while getting a transparent view of application throughput, latency, variance, and overhead. == History == PerfKit Benchmarker (PKB) was started by Anthony F. Voellm, Alain Hamel, and Eric Hankland at Google in 2014. Once an initial "alpha" was in place Anthony F. Voellm and Ivan Santa Maria Filho built a community including ARM, Broadcom, Canonical, CenturyLink, Cisco, CloudHarmony, CloudSpectator, EcoCloud@EPFL, Intel, Mellanox, Microsoft, Qualcomm Technologies, Inc., Rackspace, Red Hat, Tradeworx Inc., and Thesys Technologies LLC. This community worked together behind the scenes in a private GitHub project to create an open way to measure cloud performance. This community released the first public "beta" was released on February 11, 2015, and announced in a blog post at which point the GitHub project was open to everyone. After almost a year and with large adaption (600+ participants on GitHub) the V1.0.0 was released along with a detailed architectural design on December 10, 2015. == Benchmarks == A list of available benchmarks from PerfKitBenchmarker: (The latest set of benchmarks can be found at GitHub readme file.) == Industry participants == Since Google open sourced the PerfKitBenchmarker, it became a community effort from over 30 leading researchers, academic schools and industry companies. Those organizations include: ARM, Broadcom, Canonical, CenturyLink, Cisco, CloudHarmony, Cloud Spectator, EcoCloud@EPFL, Intel, Mellanox, Microsoft, Qualcomm Technologies, Rackspace, Red Hat, and Thesys Technologies. In addition, Stanford and MIT are leading quarterly discussions on default benchmarks and settings proposed by the community. EcoCloud@EPFL is integrating CloudSuite into PerfKit Benchmarker. == Example runs == On Google Cloud Platform On AWS On Azure On Rackspace On a local machine

  Read more →
• 

  Supreme Commander (video game)

  Supreme Commander (sometimes SupCom) is a 2007 real-time strategy video game designed by Chris Taylor and developed by his company, Gas Powered Games. The game is considered to be a spiritual successor, not a direct sequel, to Taylor's 1997 game Total Annihilation. First announced in the August 2005 edition of PC Gamer magazine, the game was released in Europe on February 16, 2007, and in North America on February 20. The standalone expansion Supreme Commander: Forged Alliance was released on November 6 of the same year. The sequel, Supreme Commander 2, was released in 2010. Nowadays, the original Supreme Commander is played through the community client called Forged Alliance Forever; the game has been further developed and balanced, and offers a wide variety of community mods. The gameplay of Supreme Commander focuses on using a giant bipedal mech called an Armored Command Unit (ACU), the so-called "Supreme Commander", to build a base, upgrading units to reach higher technology tiers, and conquering opponents. The player can command one of three factions: the Aeon Illuminate, the Cybran Nation, or the United Earth Federation (UEF). The expansion game added the Seraphim faction. Supreme Commander was highly anticipated in pre-release previews, and was well received by critics, with a Metacritic average of 86 out of 100. == Gameplay == Supreme Commander, like its spiritual predecessors, Total Annihilation and Spring, begins with the player solely possessing a single, irreplaceable construction unit called the "Armored Command Unit," or ACU, the titular Supreme Commander. Normally the loss of this unit results in the loss of the game (Skirmish missions can be set for a variety of victory conditions). These mech suits are designed to be transported through quantum gateways across the galaxy and contain all the materials and blueprints necessary to create an army from a planet's native resources in hours. All standard units except Commanders and summoned Support Commanders (sACU) are self-sufficient robots. All units and structures belong to one of four technology tiers, or "Tech" levels, each tier being stronger and/or more efficient than the previous. Certain lower-tier structures can be upgraded into higher ones without having to rebuild them. The first tier is available at the start of the game and consists of small, relatively weak units and structures. The second tier expands the player's abilities greatly, especially in terms of stationary weapons and shielding, and introduces upgraded versions of tier one units. The third tier level has very powerful assault units designed to overcome the fortifications of the most entrenched player. The fourth tier is a limited range of "experimental" technology. These are usually massive units which take a lot of time and energy to produce, but provide a significant tactical advantage. Supreme Commander features a varied skirmish AI. The typical Easy' and Normal modes are present, but the Hard difficulty level has four possible variants. Horde AI will swarm the player with hordes of lower level units, Tech AI will upgrade its units as fast as possible and assault the player with advanced units, the Balanced AI attempts to find a balance between the two, and the Supreme AI decides which of the three hard strategies is best for the map. The single player campaign consists of eighteen missions, six for each faction. The player is an inexperienced Commander who plays a key role in their faction's campaign to bring the "Infinite War" to an end. Despite the low number of campaign missions, each mission can potentially last hours. At the start of a mission, objectives are assigned for the player to complete. Once the player accomplishes them, the map is expanded, sometimes doubling or tripling in size, and new objectives are assigned. As the mission is commonly divided into three segments, the player will often have to overcome several enemy positions to achieve victory. === Resource management === Because humans have developed replication technology, making advanced use of rapid prototyping and nanotechnology, only two types of resources are required to wage war: Energy and Mass. Energy is obtained by constructing power generators on any solid surface (except fuel generators, which can only be built on fuel deposits), while Mass is obtained either by placing mass extractors on limited mass deposit spots (the most efficient method, although it requires map control) or by building mass fabricators to convert energy into mass. Constructor units can gather energy by "reclaiming" it from organic debris such as trees and mass from rocks and wrecked units. Each player has a certain amount of resource storage, which can be expanded by the construction of storage structures. This gives the player reserves in times of shortage or allows them to stockpile resources. If the resource generation exceeds the player's capacity, the material is wasted. On the contrary, if the storages are depleted and the demand of one of the resources exceeds the production, then all the productions speed is reduced. In addition, if an energy deficit occurs, shields will stop working. An adjacency system allows certain structures to benefit from being built directly adjacent to others. Energy-consuming structures will use less energy when built adjacent to power generators and power generators will produce more energy when built adjacent to power storage structures. The same applies to their mass-producing equivalents. Likewise, factories will consume less energy and mass when built adjacent to power generators and mass fabricators/extractors, respectively. However, by placing structures in close proximity, they become more vulnerable to collateral damage if an adjacent structure is destroyed. Furthermore, most resource generation structures can cause chain reactions when destroyed (especially Tier III structures, which produce large amounts of resources but often have large detonations that can wipe out a nearby army). === Warfare === Supreme Commander uses a "strategic zoom" system that allows the player to seamlessly zoom from a detailed close up view of an individual unit all the way out to a view of the entire map, at which point it resembles a fullscreen version of the minimap denoting individual units with icons. The camera also has a free movement mode and can be slaved to track a selected unit and there is a split screen mode which also supports multiple monitors. This system allows Supreme Commander to use vast maps up to 80 km x 80 km, with players potentially controlling a thousand units each. Units in Supreme Commander are built to scale as they would be in the real world. For example, battleships dwarf submarines. Late into the game, the larger "experimental" units, such as the Cybran Monkeylord, an enormous spider-shaped assault unit, can actually crush smaller enemy units by stepping on them. Because of the wide range of planets colonized by humanity in the setting, the theatres of war range from desert to arctic, and all battlespaces are employed. Technologies emerging in modern warfare are frequently employed in Supreme Commander. For example, stealth technology and both tactical and strategic missile and missile defense systems can be used. Supreme Commander introduced several innovations designed to reduce the amount of micromanagement inherent in many RTS games. Engineers units have the command "assist", that will help follow other engineers and help them finish their orders or improve production rate of factories. In addition, engineers with the order "patrol" will repair units, buildings and recycle wrecks in their along their patrol route. Holding the shift key causes any orders given to a unit (or group of units) to be queued. In this manner a unit may be ordered to attack several targets in succession, or to make best speed to a given point on the map and then attack towards a specified location engaging any hostiles it encounters along the way. After orders have been issued, holding the shift key causes all issued orders to be displayed on the map where they can be subsequently modified to accommodate a change of plan. Further, when a unit is ordered to attack a target, the player can issue an order to perform a coordinated attack to another unit. This order coordinates the arrival time of the units at the target automatically by adjusting the speed of the units involved. As in other RTS games, air transports can be used to convey units to specified destinations, in Supreme Commander though by shift queuing orders a transport containing several units can be ordered to drop specific units at subsequent waypoints. An air transport can also be ordered to create a ferry route, an airbridge wherein any land units ordered to the start of the ferry route will be conveyed by the air transport to the specified destination. The output from a production factory can be routed to a ferry route causing all units co

  Read more →
• 

  Cruel World of Dreams and Fears

  Cruel World of Dreams and Fears is the debut album from Ukrainian-born Czech black metal artist Draugveil, released independently on 13 June 2025. The album became notable among metal fans due to its cover, featuring Draugveil in a suit of armour and corpse paint, and lying in a field of red roses. The cover was the subject of parodying internet memes, as well as accusations of using artificial intelligence (AI) to make it. These claims were later expanded to suggest that AI was used to make the album's music. == Memes and AI accusations == Upon the album being released on YouTube on the channel Black Metal Promotion, the album attracted attention due to its cover, depicting Draugveil lying in a field of roses, dressed in armour, wearing corpse paint and having a sword stuck in the ground. Some compared it to covers where other artists are lying on the ground, such as Michael Jackson's Thriller, Luther Vandross's Give Me the Reason, and the UK cover of Lionel Richie's You Are. Critics of the album, however, suggested that AI was used to make the cover. This was partly due to suggestions that the rose stems in the picture come out from the ground in an unrealistic way. This later resulted in claims from some fans that AI was also used to produce the music, and later the lyrics and vocals. These claims began on a Facebook page entitled "AI Generated Nonsense", which was later deleted. No definitive evidence, however, was produced to back these claims. Derek McArthur, a journalist for Glasgow-based newspaper The Herald, wrote: "The music is in line with what one would expect from a one-man black metal project in the vein of Judas Iscariot and Burzum, but then if AI was asked to create music in a black metal style, that is probably what it would decide to generically produce and spit out." Draugveil's reaction to the claims was: "Let people decide." The result of the claims of AI has led to some writers to claim that artists in the future will have to prove they are human to be taken seriously, and that members of the public will be increasing doubt as to whether creative works are produced by either humans or AI. == Track listing ==

  Read more →