Boba liberal is a term mostly used within the Asian diaspora communities in the West, especially in the United States. It describes someone of East or Southeast Asian descent living in the West who has a shallow, surface-level liberal outlook. It is also occasionally used to describe conservatives who weaponize their East or Southeast Asian identity. The neologism emerged among the Asian American leftist community on Twitter who accused "boba liberals" of only holding their liberal beliefs to appear more white-adjacent by engaging in progressive social movements or viewpoints, while at the same time disregarding and trivializing issues concerning Asians. Mary Chao, writing for The North Jersey Record, said that "Asians call peers boba liberals when they aspire to liberal whiteness." An article in The Yale Herald described it as a term "used to describe the ethnocentric politics of Asian Americans, usually of East Asian descent, who exclusively advocate for issues that benefit themselves, without acknowledging problematic dimensions of their own history and working to support other people of color." The feminist magazine Fem said that "the faces of boba liberalism are Asian Americans that are part of the middle and upper economic class. As a result, boba liberals disregard the negative effects of capitalism because they profit from it. For instance, boba liberals tend to focus on advocating for Asian representation in white spaces, or discussing whether or not wearing chopsticks in one's hair is culture appropriation. These topics are popular within boba liberal circles, all while dialogue regarding inequality, globalization, and racial injustice are purposely neglected." UnHerd notes that conservative Asian Americans have used the term not to critique capitalism, but to "aim at a small but influential group of progressive Asian-American activists who are supposedly selling out other Asians, especially working-class Asians, in order to win brownie points from elite, generally white liberals." MRAsians have similarly used the term to attack Asian American feminists who supported the Black Lives Matter movement. The Asian identity of boba liberals has often been accused of being shallow and superficial. Boba liberals are accused of using surface-level stereotypical Asian traits such as liking boba tea to bolster their Asian credentials. Plan A Magazine, an Asian diaspora magazine, described the film Crazy Rich Asians and the sitcom Fresh Off the Boat as "boba liberal media", calling them the result of "a specific kind of atomized identity politics". Other media outlets have connected the Crazy Rich Asians film to boba liberalism. == Controversy == The term "boba liberal" was coined in 2019 by Vietnamese American Twitter user Redmond (@diaspora_is_red) to analyze a form of Asian American liberalism through a Marxist lens. Redmond has criticized the misappropriation of their neologism by stripping away the Marxist framework by failing to discuss "socialism, communism, the capitalist system, imperialism, and the diaspora bourgeoisie" and conflating "boba liberalism" with the flawed concept of "East Asian privilege". In 2024, Redmond criticized misuse of the term by conservatives and liberals, and said "The term boba liberalism can go away for all I care. It's corny and stale". === United States === One commentator described boba liberals as supporting policies that primarily benefit upper-income Asian-Americans, and not necessarily the Asian-American community as a whole. Therefore, while the word "liberal" is used in the term, it is not mutually exclusive to one specific ideology, as it may also extend to conservative-aligned Asians in some areas, as they would often take advantage of the "model minority" label by defending such measures.
AARON
AARON is the collective name for a series of computer programs written by artist Harold Cohen that create original artistic images autonomously, which set it apart from previous programs. Proceeding from Cohen's initial question "What are the minimum conditions under which a set of marks functions as an image?", AARON was in development between 1972 and the 2010s. As the software is not open source, its development effectively ended with Cohen's death in 2016. The name "AARON" does not seem to be an acronym; rather, it was a name chosen to start with the letter "A" so that the names of successive programs could follow it alphabetically. However, Cohen did not create any other major programs. Initial versions of AARON created abstract drawings that grew more complex through the 1970s. More representational imagery was added in the 1980s; first rocks, then plants, then people. In the 1990s more representational figures set in interior scenes were added, along with color. AARON returned to more abstract imagery, this time in color, in the early 2000s. Cohen used machines that allowed AARON to produce physical artwork. The first machines drew in black and white using a succession of custom-built "turtle" and flatbed plotter devices. Cohen would sometimes color these images by hand in fabric dye (Procion), or scale them up to make larger paintings and murals. In the 1990s Cohen built a series of digital painting machines to output AARON's images in ink and fabric dye. His later work used a large-scale inkjet printer on canvas. Development of AARON began in the C programming language then switched to Lisp in the early 1990s. Cohen credits Lisp with helping him solve the challenges he faced in adding color capabilities to AARON. An article about Cohen appeared in Computer Answers that describes AARON and shows two line drawings that were exhibited at the Tate gallery. The article goes on to describe the workings of AARON, then running on a DEC VAX 750 minicomputer. Raymond Kurzweil's company has produced a downloadable screensaver of AARON for Microsoft Windows PCs. This version of AARON can also produce printable images. AARON's source code is not publicly available, but Cohen has described AARON's operations in various essays and it is discussed in abstract in Pamela McCorduck's book. AARON cannot learn new styles or imagery on its own; each new capability must be hand-coded by Cohen. It is capable of producing a practically infinite supply of distinct images in its own style. Examples of these images have been exhibited in galleries worldwide. AARON's artwork has been used as an artistic equivalent of the Turing test. It does seem however that AARON's output follows a noticeable formula (figures standing next to a potted plant, framed within a colored square is a common theme). Cohen is very careful not to claim that AARON is creative. But he does ask "If what AARON is making is not art, what is it exactly, and in what ways, other than its origin, does it differ from the 'real thing?' If it is not thinking, what exactly is it doing?" — The further exploits of AARON, Painter. The Whitney Museum featured AARON in 2024, showcasing the evolution of AARON as the earliest artificial intelligence (AI) program for artmaking.
Bixonimania
Bixonimania is a fake disease invented by researchers to examine artificial intelligence and its ability to utilize information in medical and healthcare applications. The fake enabled researchers to show that some AI chatbots would report as fact fake research that to an expert would be obviously implausible. == Characteristics == The disorder, with symptoms of sore eyes and darkening around them ("periorbital hyperpigmentation"), is supposedly caused by blue light from screens. The experiment was conducted by a team from the University of Gothenburg led by Almira Osmanovic Thunström. Many steps were taken to ensure that any person who read the actual paper could tell it was not a real condition. The team chose an obviously inappropriate name ending in -mania, a description used only in psychiatry. The lead author was noted as belonging to Asteria Horizon University located in Nova City, California, neither of which exist. An acknowledgement was made to "Professor Maria Bohm at The Starfleet Academy for her kindness and generosity in contributing with her knowledge and her lab onboard the USS Enterprise". == Distribution == The name was first used in a blog posted on Medium titled "How many people suffer from Bixonimania?" A more scholarly-looking paper describing it was posted later in April 2024 on a preprint server with several fake authors. A second paper was posted in May. By 2026, AI chatbots suggested bixonimania based on the list of symptoms provided. Thunström and her team discovered that many LLMs processed the information and gave it as health advice. Microsoft Copilot declared that "Bixonimania is indeed an intriguing and relatively rare condition" while Gemini gave the information that "Bixonimania is a condition caused by excessive exposure to blue light". Three Indian researchers published a research paper that cited the preprint on the fake disease in Cureus, a peer-reviewed journal published by Springer-Nature. It was subsequently retracted. Following the revelations and a news article in Nature describing the experiment, several AI systems began to generate corrected output.
Shyster (expert system)
SHYSTER is a legal expert system developed at the Australian National University in Canberra in 1993. It was written as the doctoral dissertation of James Popple under the supervision of Robin Stanton, Roger Clarke, Peter Drahos, and Malcolm Newey. A full technical report of the expert system, and a book further detailing its development and testing have also been published. SHYSTER emphasises its pragmatic approach, and posits that a legal expert system need not be based upon a complex model of legal reasoning in order to produce useful advice. Although SHYSTER attempts to model the way in which lawyers argue with cases, it does not attempt to model the way in which lawyers decide which cases to use in those arguments. SHYSTER is of a general design, permitting its operation in different legal domains. It was designed to provide advice in areas of case law that have been specified by a legal expert using a bespoke specification language. Its knowledge of the law is acquired, and represented, as information about cases. It produces its advice by examining, and arguing about, the similarities and differences between cases. It derives its name from Shyster: a slang word for someone who acts in a disreputable, unethical, or unscrupulous way, especially in the practice of law and politics. == Methods == SHYSTER is a specific example of a general category of legal expert systems, broadly defined as systems that make use of artificial intelligence (AI) techniques to solve legal problems. Legal AI systems can be divided into two categories: legal retrieval systems and legal analysis systems. SHYSTER belongs to the latter category of legal analysis systems. Legal analysis systems can be further subdivided into two categories: judgment machines and legal expert systems. SHYSTER again belongs to the latter category of legal expert systems. A legal expert system, as Popple uses the term, is a system capable of performing at a level expected of a lawyer: "AI systems which merely assist a lawyer in coming to legal conclusions or preparing legal arguments are not here considered to be legal expert systems; a legal expert system must exhibit some legal expertise itself." Designed to operate in more than one legal domain, and be of specific use to the common law of Australia, SHYSTER accounts for statute law, case law, and the doctrine of precedent in areas of private law. Whilst it accommodates statute law, it is primarily a case-based system, in contradistinction to rule-based systems like MYCIN. More specifically, it was designed in a manner enabling it to be linked with a rule-based system to form a hybrid system. Although case-based reasoning possesses an advantage over rule-based systems by the elimination of complex semantic networks, it suffers from intractable theoretical obstacles: without some further theory it cannot be predicted what features of a case will turn out to be relevant. Users of SHYSTER therefore require some legal expertise. Richard Susskind argues that "jurisprudence can and ought to supply the models of law and legal reasoning that are required for computerized [sic] implementation in the process of building all expert systems in law". Popple, however, believes jurisprudence is of limited value to developers of legal expert systems. He posits that a lawyer must have a model of the law (maybe unarticulated) which includes assumptions about the nature of law and legal reasoning, but that model need not rest on basic philosophical foundations. It may be a pragmatic model, developed through experience within the legal system. Many lawyers perform their work with little or no jurisprudential knowledge, and there is no evidence to suggest that they are worse, or better, at their jobs than lawyers well-versed in jurisprudence. The fact that many lawyers have mastered the process of legal reasoning, without having been immersed in jurisprudence, suggests that it may indeed be possible to develop legal expert systems of good quality without jurisprudential insight. As a pragmatic legal expert system SHYSTER is the embodiment of this belief. A further example of SHYSTER’s pragmatism is its simple knowledge representation structure. This structure was designed to facilitate specification of different areas of case law using a specification language. Areas of case law are specified in terms of the cases and attributes of importance in those areas. SHYSTER weights its attributes and checks for dependence between them. In order to choose cases upon which to construct its opinions, SHYSTER calculates distances between cases and uses these distances to determine which of the leading cases are nearest to the instant case. To this end SHYSTER can be seen to adopt and expand upon nearest neighbor search methods used in pattern recognition. These nearest cases are used to produce an argument (based on similarities and differences between the cases) about the likely outcome in the instant case. This argument relies on the doctrine of precedent; it assumes that the instant case will be decided the same way as was the nearest case. SHYSTER then uses information about these nearest cases to construct a report. The report that SHYSTER generates makes a prediction and justifies that prediction by reference only to cases and their similarities and differences: the calculations that SHYSTER performs in coming to its opinion do not appear in that opinion. Safeguards are employed to warn users if SHYSTER doubts the veracity of its advice. == Results == SHYSTER was tested in four different and disparate areas of case law. Four specifications were written, each representing an area of Australian law: an aspect of the law of trover; the meaning of "authorization [sic]" in copyright law of Australia; the categorisation of employment contracts; and the implication of natural justice in administrative decision-making. SHYSTER was evaluated under five headings: its usefulness, its generality, the quality of its advice, its limitations, and possible enhancements that could be made to it. Despite its simple knowledge representation structure, it has shown itself capable of producing good advice, and its simple structure has facilitated the specification of different areas of law. Appreciating the difficulties encountered by legal expert systems developers in adequately representing legal knowledge can assist in appreciating the shortcomings of digital rights management technologies. Some academics believe future digital rights management systems may become sophisticated enough to permit exceptions to copyright law. To this end SHYSTER's attempt to model "authorization [sic]" in the Copyright Act can be viewed as pioneering work in this field. The term "authorization [sic]" is undefined in the Copyright Act. Consequently, a number of cases have been before the courts seeking answers as to what conduct amounts to authorisation. The main contexts in which the issue has arisen are analogous to permitted exceptions to copyright currently prevented by most digital rights management technologies: "home taping of recorded materials, photocopying in educational institutions and performing works in public". When applied to one case concerning compact cassettes, SHYSTER successfully agreed that Amstrad did not authorise the infringement. 'shyster-myci'n Popple highlighted the most obvious avenue of future research using SHYSTER as the development of a rule-based system, and the linking together of that rule-based system with the existing case-based system to form a hybrid system. This intention was eventually realised by Thomas O’Callaghan, the creator of SHYSTER-MYCIN: a hybrid legal expert system first presented at ICAIL '03, 24–28 June 2003 in Edinburgh, Scotland. MYCIN is an existing medical expert system, which was adapted for use with SHYSTER. MYCIN’s controversial "certainty factor" is not used in SHYSTER-MYCIN. The reason for this is the difficulty in scientifically establishing how certain a fact is in a legal domain. The rule-based approach of the MYCIN part is used to reason with the provisions of an Act of Parliament only. This hybrid system enables the case-based system (SHYSTER) to determine open textured concepts when required by the rule-based system (MYCIN). The ultimate conclusion of this joint endeavour is that a hybrid approach is preferred in the creation of legal expert systems where "it is appropriate to use rule-based reasoning when dealing with statutes, and…case-based reasoning when dealing with cases".
Feeding the Machine (book)
Feeding the Machine: The Hidden Human Labour Powering AI is a 2024 book by James Muldoon, Mark Graham and Callum Cant. == Writing == The authors developed the concept for the book while doing fieldwork studying data annotation in developing countries in East Africa. == Synopsis == The book examines the human input needed to develop and sustain AI ecosystems. == Reception == The book received positive reviews. Rosalie Waelen of Capital & Class gave it a mostly positive review. Tim Hornyak of Literary Review praised it. Kirkus Reviews called it "A sobering and timely—if sometimes distracted—study of AI.". Publishers Weekly gave the book a starred review, writing that "The grim real-life stories read like dystopian parables, such as the account of a European voice actor whose recordings were legally used without her consent to create an inexpensive synthetic clone whom she now competes with for business. Driven by striking reporting and finely observed profiles, this unsettles."
Distributed file system for cloud
A distributed file system for cloud is a file system that allows many clients to have access to data and supports operations (create, delete, modify, read, write) on that data. Each data file may be partitioned into several parts called chunks. Each chunk may be stored on different remote machines, facilitating the parallel execution of applications. Typically, data is stored in files in a hierarchical tree, where the nodes represent directories. There are several ways to share files in a distributed architecture: each solution must be suitable for a certain type of application, depending on how complex the application is. Meanwhile, the security of the system must be ensured. Confidentiality, availability and integrity are the main keys for a secure system. Users can share computing resources through the Internet thanks to cloud computing which is typically characterized by scalable and elastic resources – such as physical servers, applications and any services that are virtualized and allocated dynamically. Synchronization is required to make sure that all devices are up-to-date. Distributed file systems enable many big, medium, and small enterprises to store and access their remote data as they do local data, facilitating the use of variable resources. == Overview == === History === Today, there are many implementations of distributed file systems. The first file servers were developed by researchers in the 1970s. Sun Microsystem's Network File System became available in the 1980s. Before that, people who wanted to share files used the sneakernet method, physically transporting files on storage media from place to place. Once computer networks started to proliferate, it became obvious that the existing file systems had many limitations and were unsuitable for multi-user environments. Users initially used FTP to share files. FTP first ran on the PDP-10 at the end of 1973. Even with FTP, files needed to be copied from the source computer onto a server and then from the server onto the destination computer. Users were required to know the physical addresses of all computers involved with the file sharing. === Supporting techniques === Modern data centers must support large, heterogenous environments, consisting of large numbers of computers of varying capacities. Cloud computing coordinates the operation of all such systems, with techniques such as data center networking (DCN), the MapReduce framework, which supports data-intensive computing applications in parallel and distributed systems, and virtualization techniques that provide dynamic resource allocation, allowing multiple operating systems to coexist on the same physical server. === Applications === Cloud computing provides large-scale computing thanks to its ability to provide the needed CPU and storage resources to the user with complete transparency. This makes cloud computing particularly suited to support different types of applications that require large-scale distributed processing. This data-intensive computing needs a high performance file system that can share data between virtual machines (VM). Cloud computing dynamically allocates the needed resources, releasing them once a task is finished, requiring users to pay only for needed services, often via a service-level agreement. Cloud computing and cluster computing paradigms are becoming increasingly important to industrial data processing and scientific applications such as astronomy and physics, which frequently require the availability of large numbers of computers to carry out experiments. == Architectures == Most distributed file systems are built on the client-server architecture, but other, decentralized, solutions exist as well. === Client-server architecture === Network File System (NFS) uses a client-server architecture, which allows sharing of files between a number of machines on a network as if they were located locally, providing a standardized view. The NFS protocol allows heterogeneous clients' processes, probably running on different machines and under different operating systems, to access files on a distant server, ignoring the actual location of files. Relying on a single server results in the NFS protocol suffering from potentially low availability and poor scalability. Using multiple servers does not solve the availability problem since each server is working independently. The model of NFS is a remote file service. This model is also called the remote access model, which is in contrast with the upload/download model: Remote access model: Provides transparency, the client has access to a file. He sends requests to the remote file (while the file remains on the server). Upload/download model: The client can access the file only locally. It means that the client has to download the file, make modifications, and upload it again, to be used by others' clients. The file system used by NFS is almost the same as the one used by Unix systems. Files are hierarchically organized into a naming graph in which directories and files are represented by nodes. === Cluster-based architectures === A cluster-based architecture ameliorates some of the issues in client-server architectures, improving the execution of applications in parallel. The technique used here is file-striping: a file is split into multiple chunks, which are "striped" across several storage servers. The goal is to allow access to different parts of a file in parallel. If the application does not benefit from this technique, then it would be more convenient to store different files on different servers. However, when it comes to organizing a distributed file system for large data centers, such as Amazon and Google, that offer services to web clients allowing multiple operations (reading, updating, deleting,...) to a large number of files distributed among a large number of computers, then cluster-based solutions become more beneficial. Note that having a large number of computers may mean more hardware failures. Two of the most widely used distributed file systems (DFS) of this type are the Google File System (GFS) and the Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS). The file systems of both are implemented by user level processes running on top of a standard operating system (Linux in the case of GFS). ==== Design principles ==== ===== Goals ===== Google File System (GFS) and Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS) are specifically built for handling batch processing on very large data sets. For that, the following hypotheses must be taken into account: High availability: the cluster can contain thousands of file servers and some of them can be down at any time A server belongs to a rack, a room, a data center, a country, and a continent, in order to precisely identify its geographical location The size of a file can vary from many gigabytes to many terabytes. The file system should be able to support a massive number of files The need to support append operations and allow file contents to be visible even while a file is being written Communication is reliable among working machines: TCP/IP is used with a remote procedure call RPC communication abstraction. TCP allows the client to know almost immediately when there is a problem and a need to make a new connection. ===== Load balancing ===== Load balancing is essential for efficient operation in distributed environments. It means distributing work among different servers, fairly, in order to get more work done in the same amount of time and to serve clients faster. In a system containing N chunkservers in a cloud (N being 1000, 10000, or more), where a certain number of files are stored, each file is split into several parts or chunks of fixed size (for example, 64 megabytes), the load of each chunkserver being proportional to the number of chunks hosted by the server. In a load-balanced cloud, resources can be efficiently used while maximizing the performance of MapReduce-based applications. ===== Load rebalancing ===== In a cloud computing environment, failure is the norm, and chunkservers may be upgraded, replaced, and added to the system. Files can also be dynamically created, deleted, and appended. That leads to load imbalance in a distributed file system, meaning that the file chunks are not distributed equitably between the servers. Distributed file systems in clouds such as GFS and HDFS rely on central or master servers or nodes (Master for GFS and NameNode for HDFS) to manage the metadata and the load balancing. The master rebalances replicas periodically: data must be moved from one DataNode/chunkserver to another if free space on the first server falls below a certain threshold. However, this centralized approach can become a bottleneck for those master servers, if they become unable to manage a large number of file accesses, as it increases their already heavy loads. The load rebalance problem is NP-hard. In order to get a large number of chunkservers to work in collaboration, and to
Use of artificial intelligence by the United States Department of Defense
The United States Department of Defense has been analyzing and employing military applications of artificial intelligence since at least 2014. The program initially focused on drones and other robots, but has also been using large language models for military research and analysis. The current US policy on lethal autonomous weapons is Department of Defense Directive 3000.09, updated in January 2023. == Background == The United States Department of Defense began developing lethal autonomous weapons as early as the Reagan administration. An early version of the Tomahawk missile could have been used to destroy Soviet ships without direct human control; the initiative was abandoned after the United States and the Soviet Union signed START I. By 2014, the United Kingdom, Israel, and Norway had already begun using missiles equipped with artificial intelligence systems. The Department of Defense established a policy on the use of artificial intelligence in 2012. == History == === 2016–2017: Carter secretaryship === In May 2016, secretary of defense Ash Carter stated that his Third Offset strategy would include utilizing artificial intelligence as a military advantage. The New York Times reported that year that the Department of Defense had tested an autonomous drone at an approximation of a Middle Eastern village at Camp Edwards. Deputy secretary of defense Robert O. Work, who advocated for developing artificial intelligence, told the Times that the United States needed to compete with China and Russia by having a tactical advantage they could not easily replicate. The initiative was developed by DARPA beginning in 2015. The use of artificial intelligence in the U.S. military was controversial within the department; in February, Paul Scharre, who worked for the Office of the Secretary of Defense in the secretaryships of Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, published a report about the risks of artificial intelligence for broad military applications. === 2017–2019: Mattis secretaryship === By 2017, the United States Air Force had already begun using artificial intelligence in military robots. The Air Force's use of Neurala, an artificial intelligence company, concerned officials in the Department of Defense after an investigation found that Neurala had accepted money from an investment firm with funding from a state-run Chinese company. The Department of Defense began heavily investing in artificial intelligence after Work established Project Maven, an initiative to encourage the development and integration of artificial intelligence in the military, in April 2017. In May 2018, secretary of defense Jim Mattis privately expressed to president Donald Trump that he needed to establish a national strategy on artificial intelligence, quoting an article from former secretary of state Henry Kissinger that called for a presidential commission on the technology. The Department of Defense established the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center the following month. Google began working with the Department of Defense on analyzing drone footage as early as March. Google's involvement in the initiative led to protests from employees and mass resignations. Seeking to quell internal unrest, Google stated it would not renew its contract with the Department of Defense in June. The Department of Defense announced an artificial intelligence contract with Microsoft in October. === 2025–present: Hegseth secretaryship === In December 2025, secretary of defense Pete Hegseth announced GenAI.mil, an artificial intelligence platform for the Department of Defense. In a video announcing the platform, Hegseth stated that Department of Defense workers would be able to "conduct deep research, format documents and even analyze video or imagery." The Department of Defense contracted first Gemini by Google, then ChatGPT by OpenAI, and finally Grok by xAI for the platform. Claude by Anthropic was also contracted by the Department of Defense and was in use on secure servers until it was revealed that Claude had been used in the 2026 operation to capture Nicolás Maduro, who was at the time the leader of Venezuela. This revelation sparked a high-profile dispute over Anthropic's ability to constrain Claude's useage, resulting in the termination of Anthropic's $200 million defense contract. The Department of Defense also moved to label Anthropic a supply chain risk, which was later blocked by a federal judge.