#convergent technologies | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

sahabudinmaddie28 · 8 months

Text

TRENDS IN ICT

•Convergence-refers to the merging or integration of different technologies, services, or platforms into a unified system or solution. This convergence often leads to greater efficiency, convenience, and new possibilities for users.

2. Social Media-refers to digital platforms and technologies that enable users to create, share, and interact with content and connect with others online. These platforms often facilitate the exchange of information, ideas, and media in real-time, allowing individuals and organizations to engage with a global audience

• Six types of Social Media:a) Social Networks - These are sites that allows you to connect with other people with the same interests or background. Once the user creates his/her account, he/she can set up a profile, add people, share content, etc.Ex. Facebook and Googleb) Bookmarking Sites - Sites that allow you to store and manage links to various website and resources. Most of the sites allow you to create a tag to others.Ex. Stumble Upon, Pinterestc)

Social News – Sites that allow users to post their own news items or links to other news sources. The users can also comment on the post and comments may also be rank.Ex. Reddit and Diggd)

Media Sharing – sites that allow you to upload and share media content like images, music and video.Ex. Flickr, YouTube and Instagrame)

Microblogging - focus on short updates from the user. Those that subscribed to the user will be able to receive these updates.Ex. Twitter and Plurkf)

Blogs and Forums - allow user to post their content. Other users are able to comment on the said topic.Ex. Blogger, WordPress and Tumblr

3. Mobile Technologies - The popularity of smartphones and tablets has taken a major rise over the years. This is largely because of the devices capability to do the tasks that were originally found in PCs. Several of these devices are capable of using a high-speed internet. Today the latest model devices use 4G Networking (LTE), which is currently the fastest.MOBILE OS

• iOS - use in apple devices such as iPhone and iPad

• Android - an open source OS developed by Google. Being open source means mobile phone companies use this OS for free.

• Blackberry OS - use in blackberry device

• Windows phone OS - A closed source and proprietary operating system developed by Microsoft.

• Symbian - the original smartphone OS. Used by Nokia devices

• Web OS- originally used in smartphone; now in smart TVs.

• Windows Mobile - developed by Microsoft for smartphones and pocket PCs4.

4. Assistive Media - is a non- profit service designed to help people who have visual and reading impairments. A database of audio recordings is used to read to the user.

5. Cloud computing- distributed computing on internet or delivery of computing service over the internet. e.g. Yahoo!, Gmail, Hotmail-Instead of running an e-mail program on your computer, you log in to a Web e-mail account remotely. The software and storage for your account doesn’t exist on your computer – it’s on the service’s computer cloud.It has three components

1. Client computers – clients are the device that the end user interact with cloud.

2. Distributed Servers – Often servers are in geographically different places, but server acts as if they are working next to each other.

3. Datacenters – It is collection of servers where application is placed and is accessed via Internet.

TYPES OF CLOUDS

• Public cloud - allows systems and services to be easily accessible to the general public. Public cloud may be less secured because of its openness, e.g. e-mail

• Private cloud - allows systems and services to be accessible within an organization. It offers increased security because of its private nature.

• Community cloud - allows systems and services to be accessible by group of organizations.

• Hybrid cloud - is a mixture of public and private cloud. However, the critical activities are performed using private cloud while the non-critical activities are performed using public cloud.

#ict #trendsinict #Information communication technology #social media #Mobile technology #assistive technology #Cloud computing #Convergence technology

1 note · View note

japanbizinsider · 10 months

Text

0 notes

infozonepk · 2 years

Text

Huawei holds Forum on Converging Technologies to facilitate Digital Transformation in Industries

During the 19th Huawei Global Analyst Summit, Huawei held a forum titled “Dive into Industrial Digitalization, Creating New Value Together” to address the challenges of digital transformation faced by different industries, such as mining, electric power, port, and highway. Huawei discussed how to innovate ICT infrastructure and integrate digital technologies with industry scenarios, and work with…

View On WordPress

#Converging Technologies #Digital Transformation in Industries #Huawei #Huawei Forum #Huawei Forum Converging Technologies

0 notes

elucid-bio · 2 years

Quote

ElucidVivo is enabling personalized treatment plans which take imaging to place no other technology can. Hear more about Elucid’s roadmap to improved CVD care here in our webcast. #precisionmedicine #artificialintelligence #cardiovasculardisease #patientcare #YesCCT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqWWwyAVTzs

#The Convergence of Technology - Andrew Buckler CTO of Elucid Bio #Postcard Studt Results - Matthew Budoff MD #Tipping the Scales - Jason Bottiglieri CCO of Elucid Bio #Personalization in Cardiac Care - Andrew Buckler President and CTO of Elucid Bio

0 notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 9 months

Text

Cloudburst

Enshittification isn’t inevitable: under different conditions and constraints, the old, good internet could have given way to a new, good internet. Enshittification is the result of specific policy choices: encouraging monopolies; enabling high-speed, digital shell games; and blocking interoperability.

First we allowed companies to buy up their competitors. Google is the shining example here: having made one good product (search), they then fielded an essentially unbroken string of in-house flops, but it didn’t matter, because they were able to buy their way to glory: video, mobile, ad-tech, server management, docs, navigation…They’re not Willy Wonka’s idea factory, they’re Rich Uncle Pennybags, making up for their lack of invention by buying out everyone else:

https://locusmag.com/2022/03/cory-doctorow-vertically-challenged/

But this acquisition-fueled growth isn’t unique to tech. Every administration since Reagan (but not Biden! more on this later) has chipped away at antitrust enforcement, so that every sector has undergone an orgy of mergers, from athletic shoes to sea freight, eyeglasses to pro wrestling:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2021/07/09/the-importance-of-competition-for-the-american-economy/

But tech is different, because digital is flexible in a way that analog can never be. Tech companies can “twiddle” the back-ends of their clouds to change the rules of the business from moment to moment, in a high-speed shell-game that can make it impossible to know what kind of deal you’re getting:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/27/knob-jockeys/#bros-be-twiddlin

To make things worse, users are banned from twiddling. The thicket of rules we call IP ensure that twiddling is only done against users, never for them. Reverse-engineering, scraping, bots — these can all be blocked with legal threats and suits and even criminal sanctions, even if they’re being done for legitimate purposes:

https://locusmag.com/2020/09/cory-doctorow-ip/

Enhittification isn’t inevitable but if we let companies buy all their competitors, if we let them twiddle us with every hour that God sends, if we make it illegal to twiddle back in self-defense, we will get twiddled to death. When a company can operate without the discipline of competition, nor of privacy law, nor of labor law, nor of fair trading law, with the US government standing by to punish any rival who alters the logic of their service, then enshittification is the utterly foreseeable outcome.

To understand how our technology gets distorted by these policy choices, consider “The Cloud.” Once, “the cloud” was just a white-board glyph, a way to show that some part of a software’s logic would touch some commodified, fungible, interchangeable appendage of the internet. Today, “The Cloud” is a flashing warning sign, the harbinger of enshittification.

When your image-editing tools live on your computer, your files are yours. But once Adobe moves your software to The Cloud, your critical, labor-intensive, unrecreatable images are purely contingent. At at time, without notice, Adobe can twiddle the back end and literally steal the colors out of your own files:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/10/28/fade-to-black/#trust-the-process

The finance sector loves The Cloud. Add “The Cloud” to a product and profits (money you get for selling something) can turn into rents (money you get for owning something). Profits can be eroded by competition, but rents are evergreen:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-demon

No wonder The Cloud has seeped into every corner of our lives. Remember your first iPod? Adding music to it was trivial: double click any music file to import it into iTunes, then plug in your iPod and presto, synched! Today, even sophisticated technology users struggle to “side load” files onto their mobile devices. Instead, the mobile duopoly — Apple and Google, who bought their way to mobile glory and have converged on the same rent-seeking business practices, down to the percentages they charge — want you to get your files from The Cloud, via their apps. This isn’t for technological reasons, it’s a business imperative: 30% of every transaction that involves an app gets creamed off by either Apple or Google in pure rents:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/doctorow/red-team-blues-another-audiobook-that-amazon-wont-sell/posts/3788112

And yet, The Cloud is undeniably useful. Having your files synch across multiple devices, including your collaborators’ devices, with built-in tools for resolving conflicting changes, is amazing. Indeed, this feat is the holy grail of networked tools, because it’s how programmers write all the software we use, including software in The Cloud.

If you want to know how good a tool can be, just look at the tools that toolsmiths use. With “source control” — the software programmers use to collaboratively write software — we get a very different vision of how The Cloud could operate. Indeed, modern source control doesn’t use The Cloud at all. Programmers’ workflow doesn’t break if they can’t access the internet, and if the company that provides their source control servers goes away, it’s simplicity itself to move onto another server provider.

This isn’t The Cloud, it’s just “the cloud” — that whiteboard glyph from the days of the old, good internet — freely interchangeable, eminently fungible, disposable and replaceable. For a tool like git, Github is just one possible synchronization point among many, all of which have a workflow whereby programmers’ computers automatically make local copies of all relevant data and periodically lob it back up to one or more servers, resolving conflicting edits through a process that is also largely automated.

There’s a name for this model: it’s called “Local First” computing, which is computing that starts from the presumption that the user and their device is the most important element of the system. Networked servers are dumb pipes and dumb storage, a nice-to-have that fails gracefully when it’s not available.

The data structures of source-code are among the most complicated formats we have; if we can do this for code, we can do it for spreadsheets, word-processing files, slide-decks, even edit-decision-lists for video and audio projects. If local-first computing can work for programmers writing code, it can work for the programs those programmers write.

Local-first computing is experiencing a renaissance. Writing for Wired, Gregory Barber traces the history of the movement, starting with the French computer scientist Marc Shapiro, who helped develop the theory of “Conflict-Free Replicated Data” — a way to synchronize data after multiple people edit it — two decades ago:

https://www.wired.com/story/the-cloud-is-a-prison-can-the-local-first-software-movement-set-us-free/

Shapiro and his co-author Nuno Preguiça envisioned CFRD as the building block of a new generation of P2P collaboration tools that weren’t exactly serverless, but which also didn’t rely on servers as the lynchpin of their operation. They published a technical paper that, while exiting, was largely drowned out by the release of GoogleDocs (based on technology built by a company that Google bought, not something Google made in-house).

Shapiro and Preguiça’s work got fresh interest with the 2019 publication of “Local-First Software: You Own Your Data, in spite of the Cloud,” a viral whitepaper-cum-manifesto from a quartet of computer scientists associated with Cambridge University and Ink and Switch, a self-described “industrial research lab”:

https://www.inkandswitch.com/local-first/static/local-first.pdf

The paper describes how its authors — Martin Kleppmann, Adam Wiggins, Peter van Hardenberg and Mark McGranaghan — prototyped and tested a bunch of simple local-first collaboration tools built on CFRD algorithms, with the goal of “network optional…seamless collaboration.” The results are impressive, if nascent. Conflicting edits were simpler to resolve than the authors anticipated, and users found URLs to be a good, intuitive way of sharing documents. The biggest hurdles are relatively minor, like managing large amounts of change-data associated with shared files.

Just as importantly, the paper makes the case for why you’d want to switch to local-first computing. The Cloud is not reliable. Companies like Evernote don’t last forever — they can disappear in an eyeblink, and take your data with them:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/9/23789012/evernote-layoff-us-staff-bending-spoons-note-taking-app

Google isn’t likely to disappear any time soon, but Google is a graduate of the Darth Vader MBA program (“I have altered the deal, pray I don’t alter it any further”) and notorious for shuttering its products, even beloved ones like Google Reader:

https://www.theverge.com/23778253/google-reader-death-2013-rss-social

And while the authors don’t mention it, Google is also prone to simply kicking people off all its services, costing them their phone numbers, email addresses, photos, document archives and more:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/08/22/allopathic-risk/#snitches-get-stitches

There is enormous enthusiasm among developers for local-first application design, which is only natural. After all, companies that use The Cloud go to great lengths to make it just “the cloud,” using containerization to simplify hopping from one cloud provider to another in a bid to stave off lock-in from their cloud providers and the enshittification that inevitably follows.

The nimbleness of containerization acts as a disciplining force on cloud providers when they deal with their business customers: disciplined by the threat of losing money, cloud companies are incentivized to treat those customers better. The companies we deal with as end-users know exactly how bad it gets when a tech company can impose high switching costs on you and then turn the screws until things are almost-but-not-quite so bad that you bolt for the doors. They devote fantastic effort to making sure that never happens to them — and that they can always do that to you.

Interoperability — the ability to leave one service for another — is technology’s secret weapon, the thing that ensures that users can turn The Cloud into “the cloud,” a humble whiteboard glyph that you can erase and redraw whenever it suits you. It’s the greatest hedge we have against enshittification, so small wonder that Big Tech has spent decades using interop to clobber their competitors, and lobbying to make it illegal to use interop against them:

https://locusmag.com/2019/01/cory-doctorow-disruption-for-thee-but-not-for-me/

Getting interop back is a hard slog, but it’s also our best shot at creating a new, good internet that lives up the promise of the old, good internet. In my next book, The Internet Con: How to Seize the Means of Computation (Verso Books, Sept 5), I set out a program fro disenshittifying the internet:

https://www.versobooks.com/products/3035-the-internet-con

The book is up for pre-order on Kickstarter now, along with an independent, DRM-free audiobooks (DRM-free media is the content-layer equivalent of containerized services — you can move them into or out of any app you want):

http://seizethemeansofcomputation.org

Meanwhile, Lina Khan, the FTC and the DoJ Antitrust Division are taking steps to halt the economic side of enshittification, publishing new merger guidelines that will ban the kind of anticompetitive merger that let Big Tech buy its way to glory:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/07/biden-administration-corporate-merger-antitrust-guidelines/674779/

The internet doesn’t have to be enshittified, and it’s not too late to disenshittify it. Indeed — the same forces that enshittified the internet — monopoly mergers, a privacy and labor free-for-all, prohibitions on user-side twiddling — have enshittified everything from cars to powered wheelchairs. Not only should we fight enshittification — we must.

Back my anti-enshittification Kickstarter here!

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad- free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/08/03/there-is-no-cloud/#only-other-peoples-computers

Image: Drahtlos (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Motherboard_Intel_386.jpg

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

—

cdsessums (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Monsoon_Season_Flagstaff_AZ_clouds_storm.jpg

CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en

#pluralistic #web3 #darth vader mba #conflict-free replicated data #CRDT #computer science #saas #Mark McGranaghan #Adam Wiggins #evernote #git #local-first computing #the cloud #cloud computing #enshittification #technological self-determination #Martin Kleppmann #Peter van Hardenberg

886 notes · View notes

requinoesis · 4 months

Note

What got you started on the anthropomorphic sharks as characters? I love them very much I just wish to learn the origin of this idea.

I'm delighted that you're interested in them!

They are part of a world belonging to a cosmology that I created several years ago with the intention of seeing how far I could go creatively with sharks, which could captivate people to get to know their reality through a good fantasy story.

There's a lot to tell, from events involving a dying ancestral presence that now lives on in the sharks' dreams to misadventures involving a human who has been chosen as the sharks' herald, and many things I still want to keep secret.

Everything culminates in this shark civilization, which will appear on Earth millions of years post-anthropocene, humanity resting in the deepest beds of the Earth, now only as a little-understood archaeological curiosity.

But a mysterious presence has influenced these shark inhabitants to follow a human-like line of civilization, because it's the only way known to work in creating a diversity of creativity, philosophy and life experiences, which is what an entity was looking for to heal its wounded soul.

So they only have buildings, cars and clothes like us because humanity existed at some point to inspire a kind of path. Otherwise, they would probably have evolved to be great wild beasts for a cosmic destiny.

The story ended up being too long to tell, with millions of years of distance from one plot to the next. There are things happening from tribalistic and medieval times to events in the distant technological and space future.

Then this world was born! It is in the "middle" of the history of this civilization, in a period very similar to humanity between 1980~2000. At first it was just an idea that came up when I did an illustration of these sharks of mine in a retro period, I liked the aesthetic so much that I started to explore it further and now it's become a story that I'm managing to converge everything I wanted to tell about them in just one story.

The three sharks in the band are just some of the protagonists who are part of this story that I want to tell at some point.

I'm sorry if I've written too much, I don't know how to summarize things and sorry if there are any anomalies in the English, I used a translator.

#shark #sharks

242 notes · View notes

apas-95 · 8 months

Text

like. okay yeah I have my own criticisms of bourgeois academia as an instrument of class rule, but some of this is a bit silly. a lot of people are acting as though academia refers solely to like, literature degrees.

like at a fundamental level, yes, the purpose of a degree is as a barrier to access - but that is not in and of itself always a negative thing! the proletariat also requires the ability to produce, assess, and verify intellectuals. all the 'why the fuck should I care if the student across from me cheated on their tests, never attended class, etc' talk falls apart when the question being answered by their possession of a degree is 'should this person be permitted to design and construct buildings'! fundamentally, yes, someone cheating on their exams devalues a degree, because the confidence in qualification granted by that degree is lessened - not to mention the inherent danger of a fraudulent qualification! (strangely, this argument hasn't been extended to driving license exams yet, though I'm sure the inevitable libertarian convergence isn't far away.)

in all the discussion of burning down the local polytechnical, i have seen vague mention to academia existing as a barrier to access, some scant reference to discrimination against poor and minority students, but zero mention of the actual role of bourgeois academia and the intelligentsia in upholding bourgeois rule! it's all simply coming from the point of view of the restrictiveness being bad because it prevents people from getting high-paying jobs or the like, and the vague notion of elitism. again, with all abolition discourse here, given the lack of any real class analysis, the question is - are we talking solely within the context of capitalism, of existing bourgeois institutions? if so, why? why limit our positions to capitalist realism, to an essentially liberal discourse? if not - then how have we not reconciled the real, practical value of these technologies (mass education, examination, qualification) with their specific characteristics under capitalism?

everything has both positive and negative aspects. bourgeois class rule itself, even, was once a truly progressive thing. we can acknowledge the negative side of bourgeois academia without ignoring its positive side - and still take it on the whole that it, along with all bourgeois institutions, should be torn down and replaced by proletarian ones. that, stripped of their capitalist character, these are useful barriers.

Fundamentally, the point is this: why is our focus on attacking the barriers keeping us from class mobility, from high-paying jobs, themselves; instead of on attacking the existence of the high-paying, middle-class jobs that themselves characterise a fundamentally useful, practical system like examination as an instrument of class rule?

#this is coming from a mentally ill student with good aptitude and passion for my subject but an intense difficulty with examinations #like yes on the one hand the structure of existing academia serves as a means of enforcing class distinction and is inflexible as such.#but also.#i should not be allowed to do work i cant prove im qualified for. no amount of change to the structure of the institution changes that

412 notes · View notes