Loab ( LOBE) is a fictional character that artist and writer Steph Maj Swanson claimed to have discovered with a text-to-image AI model in April 2022. In a viral Twitter thread, Swanson described the images of Loab as an unexpectedly emergent property of the software, saying they discovered them when asking the model to produce something "as different from the prompt as possible". == History == The Sweden-based artist Steph Maj Swanson said that they first generated these images in April 2022 by using the algorithmic technique of "negative prompt weights" accessing latent space. The initial prompt - 'Brando::-1', requesting the opposite of actor Marlon Brando - generated a "skyline logo" with the cryptic lettering "DIGITA PNTICS". Attempting to generate the opposite of this image using the prompt "DIGITA PNTICS skyline logo::-1" yielded what Swanson described as "off-putting images, all of the same devastated-looking older woman with defined triangles of rosacea(?) on her cheeks". Swanson nicknamed the character "Loab", after one of the generated images resembled an album cover that included the printed word "loab". Swanson says that using the image as a prompt for further images produced increasingly violent and gory results. Swanson speculated that something about the image could be "adjacent to extremely gory and macabre imagery in the distribution of the AI's world knowledge". Swanson says that when they combined images of Loab with other pictures, the subsequent results consistently return an image including Loab, regardless of how much distortion they added to the prompts to try and remove her visage. Swanson speculated that the latent space region of the AI map that Loab is located in, in addition to being near gruesome imagery, must be isolated enough that any combinations with other images could only use Loab from her area and no related images due to its isolation. After enough crossbreeding of images and dilution attempts, Swanson was able to eventually generate images without Loab, but found that crossbreeding those diluted images would also eventually lead to a version of Loab to reappear in the resulting images. Swanson has said that "for various reasons" they declined to disclose the software used to create the images. Loab has been referred to as the "first AI-generated cryptid" and as such has gone viral. Despite hyping up the cryptid nature of the discovery in their wording, Swanson admitted that "Loab isn't really haunted, of course", but noted that the mythos that has sprung up around the AI-generated character has gone beyond their initial involvement. Swanson speculated that people sharing pictures and memes of Loab would lead future AIs to use those images as a part of their latent space maps, making her an innate part of the internet landscape, with Swanson adding "If we want to get rid of her, it's already too late." == Response == There has been discussion of whether the Loab series of images are "a legitimate quirk of AI art software, or a cleverly disguised creepypasta." Smithsonian magazine has written that "Loab sparked some lengthy ethical conversations around visual aesthetics, art and technology," and some have criticized the labeling of a woman with rosacea as a horror image, considering this to be "stigmatizing disability". Swanson responded that if the AI map is combining Loab with violent imagery, then that is a "social bias" in the data being used for the image modeling software. The Atlantic writer Stephen Marche described Loab as a "form of expression that has never existed before" whose authorship is unclear and that exists as an "emanation of the collective imagistic heritage, the unconscious visual mind". Laurens Verhagen in de Volkskrant commented that rather than showing that there are "dark horror creatures hidden deep within AI", the existence of Loab instead implies that our current "understanding of AI is limited". Mhairi Aitken at the Alan Turing Institute stated that rather than a "creepy" emergent property, output results like Loab were representative of the "limitations of AI image-generator models" and was more concerned about the urban legends that are born from such "boring" innocuous things and how easily "other people take these things seriously". Carly Cassella for ScienceAlert described Loab as a "modern day tronie" (a style of Dutch painting) that is not representative of an actual person, but just a concept or idea, similar but distinct from works like the Girl With A Pearl Earring. Wired's Joel Warner argued that Loab was only the beginning and that, with AI text generators such as ChatGPT becoming more commonplace, a "linguistic version of Loab" would emerge in that space as well and begin creating ideas through "intentional prompts" or otherwise that will be as disturbing as The 120 Days of Sodom.
Tensor operator
In pure and applied mathematics, quantum mechanics and computer graphics, a tensor operator generalizes the notion of operators which are scalars and vectors. A special class of these are spherical tensor operators which apply the notion of the spherical basis and spherical harmonics. The spherical basis closely relates to the description of angular momentum in quantum mechanics and spherical harmonic functions. The coordinate-free generalization of a tensor operator is known as a representation operator. == The general notion of scalar, vector, and tensor operators == In quantum mechanics, physical observables that are scalars, vectors, and tensors, must be represented by scalar, vector, and tensor operators, respectively. Whether something is a scalar, vector, or tensor depends on how it is viewed by two observers whose coordinate frames are related to each other by a rotation. Alternatively, one may ask how, for a single observer, a physical quantity transforms if the state of the system is rotated. Consider, for example, a system consisting of a molecule of mass M {\displaystyle M} , traveling with a definite center of mass momentum, p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} , in the z {\displaystyle z} direction. If we rotate the system by 90 ∘ {\displaystyle 90^{\circ }} about the y {\displaystyle y} axis, the momentum will change to p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} , which is in the x {\displaystyle x} direction. The center-of-mass kinetic energy of the molecule will, however, be unchanged at p 2 / 2 M {\displaystyle p^{2}/2M} . The kinetic energy is a scalar and the momentum is a vector, and these two quantities must be represented by a scalar and a vector operator, respectively. By the latter in particular, we mean an operator whose expected values in the initial and the rotated states are p z ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {z}} }} and p x ^ {\displaystyle p{\mathbf {\hat {x}} }} . The kinetic energy on the other hand must be represented by a scalar operator, whose expected value must be the same in the initial and the rotated states. In the same way, tensor quantities must be represented by tensor operators. An example of a tensor quantity (of rank two) is the electrical quadrupole moment of the above molecule. Likewise, the octupole and hexadecapole moments would be tensors of rank three and four, respectively. Other examples of scalar operators are the total energy operator (more commonly called the Hamiltonian), the potential energy, and the dipole-dipole interaction energy of two atoms. Examples of vector operators are the momentum, the position, the orbital angular momentum, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} , and the spin angular momentum, S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} . (Fine print: Angular momentum is a vector as far as rotations are concerned, but unlike position or momentum it does not change sign under space inversion, and when one wishes to provide this information, it is said to be a pseudovector.) Scalar, vector and tensor operators can also be formed by products of operators. For example, the scalar product L ⋅ S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }\cdot {\mathbf {S} }} of the two vector operators, L {\displaystyle {\mathbf {L} }} and S {\displaystyle {\mathbf {S} }} , is a scalar operator, which figures prominently in discussions of the spin–orbit interaction. Similarly, the quadrupole moment tensor of our example molecule has the nine components Q i j = ∑ α q α ( 3 r α , i r α , j − r α 2 δ i j ) . {\displaystyle Q_{ij}=\sum _{\alpha }q_{\alpha }\left(3r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}-r_{\alpha }^{2}\delta _{ij}\right).} Here, the indices i {\displaystyle i} and j {\displaystyle j} can independently take on the values 1, 2, and 3 (or x {\displaystyle x} , y {\displaystyle y} , and z {\displaystyle z} ) corresponding to the three Cartesian axes, the index α {\displaystyle \alpha } runs over all particles (electrons and nuclei) in the molecule, q α {\displaystyle q_{\alpha }} is the charge on particle α {\displaystyle \alpha } , and r α , i {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}} is the i {\displaystyle i} -th component of the position of this particle. Each term in the sum is a tensor operator. In particular, the nine products r α , i r α , j {\displaystyle r_{\alpha ,i}r_{\alpha ,j}} together form a second rank tensor, formed by taking the outer product of the vector operator r α {\displaystyle {\mathbf {r} }_{\alpha }} with itself. == Rotations of quantum states == === Quantum rotation operator === The rotation operator about the unit vector n (defining the axis of rotation) through angle θ is U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = exp ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right)} where J = (Jx, Jy, Jz) are the rotation generators (also the angular momentum matrices): J x = ℏ 2 ( 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 ) J y = ℏ 2 ( 0 i 0 − i 0 i 0 − i 0 ) J z = ℏ ( − 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 ) {\displaystyle J_{x}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&1&0\\1&0&1\\0&1&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{y}={\frac {\hbar }{\sqrt {2}}}{\begin{pmatrix}0&i&0\\-i&0&i\\0&-i&0\end{pmatrix}}\,\quad J_{z}=\hbar {\begin{pmatrix}-1&0&0\\0&0&0\\0&0&1\end{pmatrix}}} and let R ^ = R ^ ( θ , n ^ ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {R}}={\widehat {R}}(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})} be a rotation matrix. According to the Rodrigues' rotation formula, the rotation operator then amounts to U [ R ( θ , n ^ ) ] = 1 1 − i sin θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J − 1 − cos θ ℏ 2 ( n ^ ⋅ J ) 2 . {\displaystyle U[R(\theta ,{\hat {\mathbf {n} }})]=1\!\!1-{\frac {i\sin \theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} -{\frac {1-\cos \theta }{\hbar ^{2}}}({\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} )^{2}.} An operator Ω ^ {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}} is invariant under a unitary transformation U if Ω ^ = U † Ω ^ U ; {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U;} in this case for the rotation U ^ ( R ) {\displaystyle {\widehat {U}}(R)} , Ω ^ = U ( R ) † Ω ^ U ( R ) = exp ( i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) Ω ^ exp ( − i θ ℏ n ^ ⋅ J ) . {\displaystyle {\widehat {\Omega }}={U(R)}^{\dagger }{\widehat {\Omega }}U(R)=\exp \left({\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right){\widehat {\Omega }}\exp \left(-{\frac {i\theta }{\hbar }}{\hat {\mathbf {n} }}\cdot \mathbf {J} \right).} === Angular momentum eigenkets === The orthonormal basis set for total angular momentum is | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |j,m\rangle } , where j is the total angular momentum quantum number and m is the magnetic angular momentum quantum number, which takes values −j, −j + 1, ..., j − 1, j. A general state within the j subspace | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}|j,m\rangle } rotates to a new state by: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m c j m U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =U(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{m}c_{jm}U(R)|j,m\rangle } Using the completeness condition: I = ∑ m ′ | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | {\displaystyle I=\sum _{m'}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|} we have | ψ ¯ ⟩ = I U ( R ) | ψ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m | j , m ′ ⟩ ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =IU(R)|\psi \rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}|j,m'\rangle \langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } Introducing the Wigner D matrix elements: D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) = ⟨ j , m ′ | U ( R ) | j , m ⟩ {\displaystyle {D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}=\langle j,m'|U(R)|j,m\rangle } gives the matrix multiplication: | ψ ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m m ′ c j m D m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ ⇒ | ψ ¯ ⟩ = D ( j ) | ψ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =\sum _{mm'}c_{jm}D_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle \quad \Rightarrow \quad |{\bar {\psi }}\rangle =D^{(j)}|\psi \rangle } For one basis ket: | j , m ¯ ⟩ = ∑ m ′ D ( R ) m ′ m ( j ) | j , m ′ ⟩ {\displaystyle |{\overline {j,m}}\rangle =\sum _{m'}{D(R)}_{m'm}^{(j)}|j,m'\rangle } For the case of orbital angular momentum, the eigenstates | ℓ , m ⟩ {\displaystyle |\ell ,m\rangle } of the orbital angular momentum operator L and solutions of Laplace's equation on a 3d sphere are spherical harmonics: Y ℓ m ( θ , ϕ ) = ⟨ θ , ϕ | ℓ , m ⟩ = ( 2 ℓ + 1 ) 4 π ( ℓ − m ) ! ( ℓ + m ) ! P ℓ m ( cos θ ) e i m ϕ {\displaystyle Y_{\ell }^{m}(\theta ,\phi )=\langle \theta ,\phi |\ell ,m\rangle ={\sqrt {{(2\ell +1) \over 4\pi }{(\ell -m)! \over (\ell +m)!}}}\,P_{\ell }^{m}(\cos {\theta })\,e^{im\phi }} where Pℓm is an associated Legendre polynomial, ℓ is the orbital angular momentum quantum number, and m is the orbital magnetic quantum number which takes the values −ℓ, −ℓ + 1, ... ℓ − 1, ℓ The formalism of spherical harmonics have wide applications in applied mathematics, and are closely related to the formalism of spherical tensors, as shown below. Spherical harmonics are functions of the polar and azimuthal angles, ϕ and θ respectively, which can be conveniently collected into a unit vector n(θ, ϕ) pointing in the direction of those angles, in the Cartesian basis it is: n ^ ( θ , ϕ ) = cos ϕ sin θ e x + s
UCSD Pascal
UCSD Pascal is a Pascal programming language system that runs on the UCSD p-System, a portable, highly machine-independent operating system. UCSD Pascal was first released in 1977. It was developed at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). == The p-System == In 1977, the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Institute for Information Systems developed UCSD Pascal to provide students with a common environment that could run on any of the then available microcomputers as well as campus DEC PDP-11 minicomputers. The operating system became known as UCSD p-System. There were three operating systems that IBM offered for its original IBM PC: the UCSD p-System, CP/M-86, and IBM PC DOS. Vendor SofTech Microsystems emphasized p-System's application portability, with virtual machines for 20 CPUs as of the IBM PC's release. It predicted that users would be able to use applications they purchased on future computers running p-System; advertisements called it "the Universal Operating System". PC Magazine denounced UCSD p-System on the IBM PC, stating in a review of Context MBA, written in the language, that it "simply does not produce good code". The p-System did not sell very well for the IBM PC, because of a lack of applications and because it was more expensive than the other choices. Previously, IBM had offered the UCSD p-System as an option for IBM Displaywriter, an 8086-based dedicated word processing machine. (The Displaywriter's native operating system had been developed completely internally and was not opened for end-user programming.) Notable extensions to standard Pascal include separately compilable Units and a String type. Some intrinsics were provided to accelerate string processing (e.g. scanning in an array for a particular search pattern); other language extensions were provided to allow the UCSD p-System to be self-compiling and self-hosted. UCSD Pascal was based on a p-code machine architecture. Its contribution to these early virtual machines was to extend p-code away from its roots as a compiler intermediate language into a full execution environment. The UCSD Pascal p-Machine was optimized for the new small microcomputers with addressing restricted to 16-bit (only 64 KB of memory). James Gosling cites UCSD Pascal as a key influence (along with the Smalltalk virtual machine) on the design of the Java virtual machine. UCSD p-System achieved machine independence by defining a virtual machine, called the p-Machine (or pseudo-machine, which many users began to call the "Pascal-machine" like the OS—although UCSD documentation always used "pseudo-machine") with its own instruction set called p-code (or pseudo-code). Urs Ammann, a student of Niklaus Wirth, originally presented a p-code in his PhD thesis, from which the UCSD implementation was derived, the Zurich Pascal-P implementation. The UCSD implementation changed the Zurich implementation to be "byte oriented". The UCSD p-code was optimized for execution of the Pascal programming language. Each hardware platform then only needed a p-code interpreter program written for it to port the entire p-System and all the tools to run on it. Later versions also included additional languages that compiled to the p-code base. For example, Apple Computer offered a Fortran Compiler (written by Silicon Valley Software, Sunnyvale California) producing p-code that ran on the Apple version of the p-system. Later, TeleSoft (also located in San Diego) offered an early Ada development environment that used p-code and was therefore able to run on a number of hardware platforms including the Motorola 68000, the System/370, and the Pascal MicroEngine. UCSD p-System shares some concepts with the later Java platform. Both use a virtual machine to hide operating system and hardware differences, and both use programs written to that virtual machine to provide cross-platform support. Likewise both systems allow the virtual machine to be used either as the complete operating system of the target computer or to run in a "box" under another operating system. The UCSD Pascal compiler was distributed as part of a portable operating system, the p-System. == History == UCSD p-System began around 1974 as the idea of UCSD's Kenneth Bowles, who believed that the number of new computing platforms coming out at the time would make it difficult for new programming languages to gain acceptance. He based UCSD Pascal on the Pascal-P2 release of the portable compiler from Zurich. He was particularly interested in Pascal as a language to teach programming. UCSD introduced two features that were important improvements on the original Pascal: variable length strings, and "units" of independently compiled code (an idea included into the then-evolving Ada (programming language)). Niklaus Wirth credits the p-System, and UCSD Pascal in particular, with popularizing Pascal. It was not until the release of Turbo Pascal that UCSD's version started to slip from first place among Pascal users. The Pascal dialect of UCSD Pascal came from the subset of Pascal implemented in Pascal-P2, which was not designed to be a full implementation of the language, but rather "the minimum subset that would self-compile", to fit its function as a bootstrap kit for Pascal compilers. UCSD added strings from BASIC, and several other implementation dependent features. Although UCSD Pascal later obtained many of the other features of the full Pascal language, the Pascal-P2 subset persisted in other dialects, notably Borland Pascal, which copied much of the UCSD dialect. == Versions == There were four versions of UCSD p-code engine, each with several revisions of the p-System and UCSD Pascal. A revision of the p-code engine (i.e., the p-Machine) meant a change to the p-code language, and therefore compiled code is not portable between different p-Machine versions. Each revision was represented with a leading Roman Numeral, while operating system revisions were enumerated as the "dot" number following the p-code Roman Numeral. For example, II.3 represented the third revision of the p-System running on the second revision of the p-Machine. === Version I === Original version, never officially distributed outside of the University of California, San Diego. However, the Pascal sources for both Versions I.3 and I.5 were freely exchanged between interested users. Specifically, the patch revision I.5a was known to be one of the most stable. === Version II === Widely distributed, available on many early microcomputers. Numerous versions included Apple II ultimately Apple Pascal, DEC PDP-11, Intel 8080, Zilog Z80, and MOS 6502 based machines, Motorola 68000 and the IBM PC (Version II on the PC was restricted to one 64K code segment and one 64K stack/heap data segment; Version IV removed the code segment limit but cost a lot more). Project members from this era include Dr Kenneth L Bowles, Mark Allen, Richard Gleaves, Richard Kaufmann, Pete Lawrence, Joel McCormack, Mark Overgaard, Keith Shillington, Roger Sumner, and John Van Zandt. === Version III === Custom version written for Western Digital to run on their Pascal MicroEngine microcomputer. Included support for parallel processes for the first time. === Version IV === Commercial version, developed and sold by SofTech. Based on Version II; did not include changes from Version III. Did not sell well due to combination of their pricing structure, performance problems due to p-code interpreter, and competition with native operating systems (on top of which it often ran). After SofTech dropped the product, it was picked up by Pecan Systems, a relatively small company formed of p-System users and fans. Sales revived somewhat, due mostly to Pecan's reasonable pricing structure, but the p-System and UCSD Pascal gradually lost the market to native operating systems and compilers. Available for the TI-99/4A equipped with p-code card, Commodore CBM 8096, Sage II/IV, HP 9000, and BBC Micro with 6502 second processor. == Further use == The Corvus Systems computer used UCSD Pascal for all its user software. The "innovative concept" of the Constellation OS was to run Pascal (interpretively or compiled) and include all common software in the manual, so users could modify as needed.
WebCL
WebCL (Web Computing Language) is a JavaScript binding to OpenCL for heterogeneous parallel computing within any compatible web browser without the use of plug-ins, first announced in March 2011. It is developed on similar grounds as OpenCL and is considered as a browser version of the latter. Primarily, WebCL allows web applications to actualize speed with multi-core CPUs and GPUs. With the growing popularity of applications that need parallel processing like image editing, augmented reality applications and sophisticated gaming, it has become more important to improve the computational speed. With these background reasons, a non-profit Khronos Group designed and developed WebCL, which is a Javascript binding to OpenCL with a portable kernel programming, enabling parallel computing on web browsers, across a wide range of devices. In short, WebCL consists of two parts, one being Kernel programming, which runs on the processors (devices) and the other being JavaScript, which binds the web application to OpenCL. The completed and ratified specification for WebCL 1.0 was released on March 19, 2014. == Implementation == Currently, no browsers natively support WebCL. However, non-native add-ons are used to implement WebCL. For example, Nokia developed a WebCL extension. Mozilla does not plan to implement WebCL in favor of WebGL Compute Shaders, which were in turn scrapped in favor of WebGPU. Mozilla (Firefox) - hg.mozilla.org/projects/webcl/ === WebCL working draft === Samsung (WebKit) - github.com/SRA-SiliconValley/webkit-webcl (unavailable) Nokia (Firefox) - github.com/toaarnio/webcl-firefox (down since Nov 2014, Last Version for FF 34) Intel (Crosswalk) - www.crosswalk-project.org === Example C code === The basic unit of a parallel program is kernel. A kernel is any parallelizable task used to perform a specific job. More often functions can be realized as kernels. A program can be composed of one or more kernels. In order to realize a kernel, it is essential that a task is parallelizable. Data dependencies and order of execution play a vital role in producing efficient parallelized algorithms. A simple example can be thought of the case of loop unrolling performed by C compilers, where a statement like:can be unrolled into:Above statements can be parallelized and can be made to run simultaneously. A kernel follows a similar approach where only the snapshot of the ith iteration is captured inside kernel. Rewriting the above code using a kernel:Running a WebCL application involves the following steps: Allow access to devices and provide context Hand over the kernel to a device Cause the device to execute the kernel Retrieve results from the device Use the data inside JavaScript Further details about the same can be found at == Exceptions List == WebCL, being a JavaScript based implementation, doesn't return an error code when errors occur. Instead, it throws an exception such as OUT_OF_RESOURCES, OUT_OF_HOST_MEMORY, or the WebCL-specific WEBCL_IMPLEMENTATION_FAILURE. The exception object describes the machine-readable name and human-readable message describing the error. The syntax is as follows: From the code above, it can be observed that the message field can be a NULL value. Other exceptions include: INVALID_OPERATION – if the blocking form of this function is called from a WebCLCallback INVALID_VALUE – if eventWaitList is empty INVALID_CONTEXT – if events specified in eventWaitList do not belong to the same context INVALID_DEVICE_TYPE – if deviceType is given, but is not one of the valid enumerated values DEVICE_NOT_FOUND – if there is no WebCLDevice available that matches the given deviceType More information on exceptions can be found in the specs document. There is another exception that is raised upon trying to call an object that is ‘released’. On using the release method, the object doesn't get deleted permanently but it frees the resources associated with that object. In order to avoid this exception, releaseAll method can be used, which not only frees the resources but also deletes all the associated objects created. == Security == WebCL, being an open-ended software developed for web applications, has lots of scope for vulnerabilities in the design and development fields too. This forced the developers working on WebCL to give security the utmost importance. Few concerns that were addressed are: Out-of-bounds Memory Access: This occurs by accessing the memory locations, outside the allocated space. An attacker can rewrite or erase all the important data stored in those memory locations. Whenever there arises such a case, an error must be generated at the compile time, and zero must be returned at run-time, not letting the program override the memory. A project WebCL Validator, was initiated by the Khronos Group (developers) on handling this vulnerability. Memory Initialization: This is done to prevent the applications to access the memory locations of previous applications. WebCL ensures that this doesn't happen by initializing all the buffers, variables used to zero before it runs the current application. OpenCL 1.2 has an extension ‘cl_khr_initialize_memory’, which enables this. Denial of Service: The most common attack on web applications cannot be eliminated by WebCL or the browser. OpenCL can be provided with watchdog timers and pre-emptive multitasking, which can be used by WebCL in order to detect and terminate the contexts that are taking too long or consume lot of resources. There is an extension of OpenCL 1.2 ‘cl_khr_terminate_context’ like for the previous one, which enables to terminate the process that might cause a denial of service attack. == Related browser bugs == Bug 664147 - [WebCL] add openCL in gecko, Mozilla Bug 115457: [Meta] WebCL support for WebKit, WebKit Bugzilla
Digital artifactual value
Digital artifactual value, a preservation term, is the intrinsic value of a digital object, rather than the informational content of the object. Though standards are lacking, born-digital objects and digital representations of physical objects may have a value attributed to them as artifacts. == Intrinsic value in analog materials == With respect to analog or non-digital materials, artifacts are determined to have singular research or archival value if they possess qualities and characteristics that make them the only acceptable form for long-term preservation. These qualities and characteristics are commonly referred to as the item's intrinsic value and form the basis upon which digital artifactual value is currently evaluated. Artifactual value based on this idea is predicated upon the artifact's originality, faithfulness, fixity, and stability. The intrinsic value of a particular object, as interpreted by archival professionals, largely determines the selection process for archives. The National Archives and Records Administration Committee on Intrinsic Value in "Intrinsic Value in Archival Material" classified an analog object as having intrinsic value if it possessed one or more of the follow qualities: Physical form that may be the subject for study if the records provide meaningful documentation or significant examples of the form. Aesthetic or artistic quality. Unique or curious physical features. Age that provides a quality of uniqueness. Value for use in exhibits. Questionable authenticity, date, author, or other characteristic that is significant and ascertainable by physical examination. General and substantial public interest because of direct association with famous or historically significant people, places, things, issues or events. Significance as documentation of the establishment or continuing legal basis of an agency or institution. Significance as documentation of the formulation of policy at the highest executive levels when the policy has significance and broad effect throughout or beyond the agency or institution. Other archival professionals such as Lynn Westney have written that the characteristics of materials exhibiting intrinsic value include age, content, usage, particularities of creation, signatures, and attached seals. Westney and others have stated that paper-based artifacts can be thought to have evidentiary value, or significant contextual markings, insofar that the original manifestation of the artifact can attest to the originality, faithfulness or authenticity, fixity, and stability of the content. For other analog materials, properly articulating intrinsic value remains essential for determining artifactual value. Similar to paper-based objects in many respects, artifactual value for images typically takes into account artistic value, age, authorial prestige, significant provenance, and institutional priorities. Analog audio preservation is based upon similar factors, including the cultural value of the item, its historical uniqueness, the estimated longevity of the medium, the current condition of the item, and the state of playback equipment, among other things. == Analog conventions in a digital realm == The standard definition of artifactual value, as it has applied to analog or non-digital materials in the twentieth century, is based upon a set of conventions which do not ordinarily apply to digital objects in toto. The Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) has stated that printed texts and other paper-based manuscripts, when considered as objects, are imbued with meaning distilled from a general set of understandings inherent to these conventions: The object is of a fixed and stable composition/form. Authorship and intellectual property are a recognizable concept. Duplication is possible. Fungibility of informational content (or, in other words, the ability to be replaced by another identical object). These conventions are important to consider because they help to describe the physical and even metaphysical relationship between a document's content and its physical manifestation. The underpinnings of this relationship are not identical and do not apply with the same degree of clarity to an immaterial digital realm. The idea of fixity with regard to printed materials, for example, is largely predicated on the notion that an object has been recorded on a relatively stable medium. The physical presence of a print text serves as proof of its authenticity as an object or artifact, as well as its scarcity and uniqueness in relation to other print materials. Variations in the chemical properties and storage conditions of print-based materials, as well as other cultural variables, certainly impact the fixity or stability of print materials, but there is little controversy about determining its fundamental existence or originality. However, uniqueness in the physical, paper-based sense does not translate to a digital realm in which immaterial objects are subject to theoretically infinite levels of reproduction and dissemination. Born-digital and digital surrogates may or may not look any different from each other on a server, and alterations can be made without explicit notice to the user. These alterations are normally called migration events, or actions taken on the digital object that change the original object's composition. They can enact subtle but fundamental alterations to the original document, thereby compromising its existence as an original object. Furthermore, because the tools used to generate and access digital objects have historically evolved quite rapidly, issues of playback obsolescence, incapability, data loss, and broken pathways to information have changed traditional ideas of fixity and stability. Therefore, artifactual value in a digital realm requires a modified set of generalized standards for determining artifactual originality. Michael J. Giarlo and Ronald Jantz, only two of many, have posited a list of methods for establishing digital intrinsic value by way of careful metadata generation and records maintenance. In their report, a digital original possesses three key characteristics that distinguishes it from identical copies. These include continuous verification and re-verification of the document's digital signature starting from the date of creation; retaining versions and recordings of all changes to the object in an audit trail; and having the archival master contain the creation date of the digital object. They also reported that originality in digital sources could be verified or produced by the following techniques: Digital object is given a date-time stamp that's automatically inserted into the METS-XML header upon creation. Date-time is inserted into archival metadata. Encapsulation. Digital signatures. == The role of digital surrogates == Digital surrogates are considered a utility for aiding in the preservation and increased access of certain artifacts. However, digital surrogates can have different utilities for objects depending on the nature of the original artifact and the condition the artifact is in. In 2001 the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) published a report on the artifact in library collections. The CLIR states that the utility of the digital surrogate can be determined by dividing the original material (artifact) into two different categories, artifacts that are rare and those that are not. These two categories can be further divided by two categories, artifacts that are frequently used and those that are not. === Materials that are frequently used and not rare === According to the CLIR "it is not obvious that digital surrogates provide all the functionality, all the information, or all the aesthetic value of originals. Therefore, while it may be sensible to recommend that digital surrogates be used to reduce the cost and increase the availability of library holdings that circulate frequently, the decision to deaccession a physical object in library collections and replace it with a digital surrogate should be based on a careful assessment of the way in which library patrons use the original object or objects of its kind." === Materials that are infrequently used and not rare === Keeping the original is always the best solution for libraries and especially archives but in the case of libraries where an artifact is not rare or used infrequently there must be a barometer that is developed to help "balance functionality with actual use in order to help decide when digital surrogates that provide most of the functionality of originals are acceptable." === Materials that are rare and frequently used === A professional in the field of Library and Information Science (LIS) would almost certainly not argue that a digital surrogate could replace a rare object. However, in the case of a rare object that is falling into poor shape due to heavy use a digital surrogate could be extremely useful in reducing the wear a
Ciscogate
Ciscogate, also known as the Black Hat Bug, is the name given to a legal incident that occurred at the Black Hat Briefings security conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, on July 27, 2005. On the morning of the first day of the conference, July 26, 2005, some attendees noticed that 30 pages of text had been physically ripped out of the extensive conference presentation booklet the night before at the request of Cisco Systems and the CD-ROM with presentation slides was not included. It was determined the pages covered a talk to be given by Michael Lynn, a security researcher with Atlanta-based IBM Internet Security Systems (ISS). Instead of the pages with the details, attendees found a photographed copy of a notice from Black Hat saying "Due to some last minute changes beyond Black Hat's control, and at the request of the presenter, the included materials aren't up to the standards Black Hat tries to meet. Black Hat will be the first to apologize. We hope the vendors involved will follow suit." According to Lynn's lawyer, his employer had approved of the talk leading up to the conference but changed their minds two days before the scheduled talk, forbidding him from presenting. Lynn's original presentation was to cover a vulnerability in Cisco routers. The presentation was one of four scheduled to follow Jeff Moss' keynote address on the first day of the conference, titled "Cisco IOS Security Architecture". After being told by his employer that he could not present on the topic, Lynn chose an alternate topic. Cisco and ISS had offered to give new joint presentation but this was turned down by Black Hat because the original speaking slot was given to Lynn, not Cisco. Lynn's presentation began by covering security issues in services that allow users to make Voice over IP telephone calls. Shortly after beginning the presentation Lynn changed back to his original topic and began disclosing some technical details of the vulnerability he found in Cisco routers stating that he would rather resign from his job at ISS than keep the details private. == Lawsuit == Shortly after Lynn concluded his talk he met Jennifer Granick, who would soon become his lawyer. During their initial meeting Lynn told Granick that he expected to be sued. Later in the evening Lynn had heard that Cisco and ISS had filed a lawsuit and requested a temporary restraining order against Black Hat but not himself. A public relations representative from Black Hat told Granick that the lawsuit was against both Black Hat and Lynn and that the companies had scheduled an Ex parte hearing in San Francisco the next morning to request the restraining order. That night, Andrew Valentine, an attorney for ISS and Cisco called Lynn who directed them to Granick. During the conversation Valentine explained the claims and accusations against Lynn, which included three things: 1) ISS claimed copyright over the presentation that Lynn gave, 2) Cisco claimed copyright over the decompiled machine code obtained from the router which was included in the presentation, and 3) Cisco claimed the presentation contained trade secrets. These complaints were outlined in a civil complaint at the U.S. Northern District of California and filed against both Lynn and Black Hat. According to Granick, she and Valentine were able agree to an injunction to settle the case without court proceedings. This deal was almost called off due to an inadvertent mistake by Black Hat in which they had restored Lynn's presentation on their web server. Black Hat, Granick, and the plaintiff's lawyers were able to resolve this problem and the deal stood. One condition of the settlement required Lynn to provide an image of all computer data he used in his research to be provided to a third party for forensic analysis before erasing his research and any Cisco data from his systems. The settlement also stipulated that Lynn was prohibited from talking about the vulnerability in the future. == FBI Investigation == Shortly after lawyers for Lynn and ISS / Cisco filed settlement papers, FBI agents from the Las Vegas office arrived at the conference to begin asking questions. According to Granick, they were there at the request of the Atlanta FBI office and Lynn was not of interest. Granick asserted the Fifth and Sixth amendment rights on behalf of her client, Lynn. Granick asserted his rights for the Atlanta office and asked if an arrest warrant had been issued for Lynn. Over the next 24 hours Granick was not able to ascertain the status of a warrant but ultimately determined no warrant was issued. When the FBI was asked about the case by a journalist, spokesman Paul Bresson declined to discuss the case saying "Our policy is to not make any comment on anything that is ongoing. That's not to confirm that something is, because I really don't know". Granick would only confirm to journalists that the "investigation has to do with the presentation". == Response == === Attendees === Attendees of Black Hat Briefings, as well as many that also attended DEF CON, were not happy with vendors threatening legal action over vulnerability disclosure. The term "Ciscogate" was coined quickly by an unknown person, but some attendees were quick to create shirts to commemorate the incident. === Cisco === Mojgan Khalili, a senior manager for corporate PR at Cisco, issued a statement to the press saying "It is important to note that the information Mr. Lynn presented was not a disclosure of a new vulnerability or a flaw with Cisco IOS software. Mr. Lynn's research explores possible ways to expand exploitations of existing security vulnerabilities impacting routers." === ISS === Kim Duffy, managing director of ISS Australia, was asked about ISS's response to the incident. Duffy responded that it was "business as usual" as the company handled the incident "strictly by the book". He gave a brief statement to ZDNet UK saying "ISS has published rules for disclosure and that is what we stick to. We didn't care to publish [the disclosure] because we were not ready. We had not completed the research to our satisfaction so it was not ready to be disclosed". ISS spokesperson Roger Fortier confirmed that Lynn was no longer employed with the company and that ISS was still working with Cisco on the matter. He gave a statement to the Washington Post saying "ISS and Cisco have been working on this in the background and didn't feel at this time that the material was ready for publication. The decision was made on Monday to pull the presentation because we wanted to make sure the research was fully baked."
End-to-end encryption
End-to-end encryption (E2EE) is a method of implementing a secure communication system where only the sender and intended recipient can read the messages. No one else, including the system provider, telecom providers, Internet providers or malicious actors, can access the cryptographic keys needed to read or send messages. End-to-end encryption prevents data from being read or secretly modified, except by the sender and intended recipients. In many applications, messages are relayed from a sender to some recipients by a service provider. In an E2EE-enabled service, messages are encrypted on the sender's device such that no third party, including the service provider, has the means to decrypt them. The recipients retrieve encrypted messages and decrypt them independently on their own devices. Since third parties cannot decrypt the data being communicated or stored, services with E2EE are better at protecting user data from data breaches and espionage. Computer security experts, digital freedom organizations, and human rights activists advocate for the use of E2EE due to its security and privacy benefits, including its ability to resist mass surveillance. Popular messaging apps like WhatsApp, iMessage, Facebook Messenger, and Signal use end-to-end encryption for chat messages, with some also supporting E2EE of voice and video calls. As of May 2025, WhatsApp is the most widely used E2EE messaging service, with over 3 billion users. Meanwhile, Signal with an estimated 70 million users, is regarded as the current gold standard in secure messaging by cryptographers, protestors, and journalists. Since end-to-end encrypted services cannot offer decrypted messages in response to government requests, the proliferation of E2EE has been met with controversy. Around the world, governments, law enforcement agencies, and child protection groups have expressed concerns over its impact on criminal investigations. As of 2025, some governments have successfully passed legislation targeting E2EE, such as Australia's Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment Act (2018) and the Online Safety Act (2023) in the UK. Other attempts at restricting E2EE include the EARN IT Act in the US and the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation in the EU.[1] Nevertheless, some government bodies such as the UK's Information Commissioner's Office and the US's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) have argued for the use of E2EE, with Jeff Greene of the CISA advising that "encryption is your friend" following the discovery of the Salt Typhoon espionage campaign in 2024. == Definitions == End-to-end encryption is a means of ensuring the security of communications in applications like secure messaging. Under E2EE, messages are encrypted on the sender's device such that they can be decoded only by the final recipient's device. In many non-E2EE messaging systems, including email and many chat platforms, messages pass through intermediaries and are stored by a third party service provider, from which they are retrieved by the recipient. Even if messages are encrypted, they are only encrypted 'in transit', and are thus accessible by the service provider. Server-side disk encryption is also distinct from E2EE because it does not prevent the service provider from viewing the information, as they have the encryption keys and can simply decrypt it. The term "end-to-end encryption" originally only meant that the communication is never decrypted during its transport from the sender to the receiver. For example, around 2003, E2EE was proposed as an additional layer of encryption for GSM or TETRA, in addition to the existing radio encryption protecting the communication between the mobile device and the network infrastructure. This has been standardized by SFPG for TETRA. Note that in TETRA, the keys are generated by a Key Management Centre (KMC) or a Key Management Facility (KMF), not by the communicating users. Later, around 2014, the meaning of "end-to-end encryption" started to evolve when WhatsApp encrypted a portion of its network, requiring that not only the communication stays encrypted during transport, but also that the provider of the communication service is not able to decrypt the communications—maliciously or when requested by law enforcement agencies. Similarly, messages must be undecryptable in transit by attackers through man-in-the-middle attacks. This new meaning is now the widely accepted one. == Motivations == The lack of end-to-end encryption can allow service providers to easily provide search and other features, or to scan for illegal and unacceptable content. However, it also means that content can be read by anyone who has access to the data stored by the service provider, by design or via a backdoor. This can be a concern in many cases where privacy is important, such as in governmental and military communications, financial transactions, and when sensitive information such as health and biometric data are sent. If this content were shared without E2EE, a malicious actor or adversarial government could obtain it through unauthorized access or subpoenas targeted at the service provider. E2EE alone does not guarantee privacy or security. For example, the data may be held unencrypted on the user's own device or accessed through their own app if their credentials are compromised. == Modern implementations == === Messaging === In May 2026, Meta ended support for end-to-end encryption (E2EE) on Instagram, reversing a previous commitment to expand the technology across its messaging services. The company justified the move as a measure to mitigate fraudulent activity and facilitate the detection of harmful content. The decision highlighted a conflict between digital privacy and online safety; while child protection organizations supported the change to better identify predatory behavior, privacy advocates argued that removing E2EE compromises user security. As of 2025, messaging apps like Signal and WhatsApp are designed to exclusively use end-to-end encryption. Both Signal and WhatsApp use the Signal Protocol. Other messaging apps and protocols that support end-to-end encryption include Facebook Messenger, iMessage, Telegram, Matrix, and Keybase. Although Telegram supports end-to-end encryption, it has been criticized for not enabling it by default, instead supporting E2EE through opt-in "secret chats". As of 2020, Telegram did not support E2EE for group chats and no E2EE on its desktop clients. In 2022, after controversy over the use of Facebook Messenger messages in an abortion lawsuit in Nebraska, Facebook added support for end-to-end encryption in the Messenger app. Writing for Wired, technologist Albert Fox Cahn criticized Messenger's approach to end-to-end encryption, which required the user to opt into E2EE for each conversation and split the message thread into two chats which were easy for users to confuse. In December 2023, Facebook announced plans to enable end-to-end encryption by default despite pressure from British law enforcement agencies. As of 2016, many server-based communications systems did not include end-to-end encryption. These systems can only guarantee the protection of communications between clients and servers, meaning that users have to trust the third parties who are running the servers with the sensitive content. End-to-end encryption is regarded as safer because it reduces the number of parties who might be able to interfere or break the encryption. In the case of instant messaging, users may use a third-party client or plugin to implement an end-to-end encryption scheme over an otherwise non-E2EE protocol. === Audio and video conferencing === Signal and WhatsApp use end-to-end encryption for audio and video calls. Since 2020, Signal has also supported end-to-encrypted video calls. In 2024, Discord added end-to-end encryption for audio and video calls, voice channels, and certain live streams. However, they had no plans to implement E2EE for messages. In 2020, after acquiring Keybase, Zoom announced end-to-end encryption would be limited to paid accounts. Following criticism from human rights advocates, Zoom extended the feature to all users with accounts. In 2021, Zoom settled an $85M class action lawsuit over past misrepresentation about end-to-end encryption. The FTC confirmed Zoom previously retained access to meeting keys. === Other uses === Some encrypted backup and file sharing services provide client-side encryption. Nextcloud and MEGA, offer end-to-end encryption of shared files. The term "end-to-end encryption" is sometimes incorrectly used to describe client-side encryption. Some non-E2EE systems, such as Lavabit and Hushmail, have described themselves as offering "end-to-end" encryption when they did not. == Law enforcement and regulation == In 2022, Facebook Messenger came under scrutiny because the messages between a mother and daughter in Nebraska were used to seek criminal charges in an abortion-rel