Altera

altera

USA v. eBay Court Filing, retrieved on January 11, 2024, is part of . You can jump to any part in this filing . This is part 12 of 12. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here COUNT SIX - Destruction, Alteration, and Falsification of Records in a Federal Investigation (18 U.S.C. § 1519) The United States Attorney further charges: 60. The United States Attorney re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 53 of this Information. 61. On or about the dates set forth below, in the District of Massachusetts, the defendant, eBay Inc., did knowingly alter, destroy, conceal and falsify the records, documents, and tangible objects below with the intent to impede, obstruct, and influence the investigation and proper administration of a matter within the jurisdiction of any department and agency of the United States, that is, the harassment and intimidation campaign charged in this Information. All in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1519. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on January 11, 2024, from is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. ecommercebytes.com

eBay Charged With Destruction, Alteration and Falsification of Records in a Federal Investigation

The New Spirit by Havelock Ellis is part of the HackerNoon Books Series. You can jump to any chapter in this book here . PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION No alterations have been made in this edition. It is true that three of the figures here studied were living when the book was written; but their genius had matured, their work was for the most part done. Nothing they could produce would seriously modify one’s conception of them as aboriginal personal forces, the outcome of the past, the initiators of the future. Apart from this, it seems to me a mistake to manipulate or add to one’s own completed work. If I were to re-write it, I should doubtless write it differently; the Conclusion, for instance, which is earliest in date, seems to me now rather formal and metaphysical. But for the most part I have nothing seriously to alter or to omit. I have sometimes been asked why, in a discussion of some of the new influences of the past century, I have left out representative men who have made so great a stir in the world. Goethe, it may possibly be true, stalks through every page, but where are Kant, Hegel, Auguste Comte, John Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer? I cannot remember ever proposing to include these names. The reason may be clearer if I mention other names I once wished to include, although—partly doubting my competence to discuss them, partly fearing that their introduction might seem to interfere with the unity of the book—I ultimately refrained. One was Burne Jones. I shall never forget how, as a youth in the Public Library at Sydney, I turned over the leaves of a volume of etchings and suddenly alighted on “Merlin and Vivien.” Something I knew of Botticelli, Lippi and the rest, and I had brooded over their antique mystery and charm; but here were all the mystery and the charm brought down among us from the world where saints stand stiff and aureoled, and angels walk tip-toe on lily cups. The fifteenth century artists of Flanders and Venice and Florence introduced us into a frankly supernatural world, and they delighted like children to scatter rich fruits on the golden floors, and to stick peacocks’ feathers into the bejewelled walls. It is a rarer and subtler art to suggest that infinitely remote world while accepting the austere conditions of our own earth. The pale ghosts of Puvis de Chavannes’ frescoes are a far-off suggestion of this art; and one thinks too of the modern magician who has brought before us the twinkling of Salome’s feet by the red blood from the Baptist’s head, curdling amid the flowers; the rich-robed daughters of Apollo among the olives; the mystic elephant in solemn festival, gathering the lotus with his trunk as his feet plash slowly in the clear waters of the sacred lake. But the shadowy art of Puvis, the wayward and limited art of Gustave Moreau, come short of the consistent and completely realised art which has been attained by the painter who stands forth in the eyes of Europe as the greatest imaginative artist of England. It is a new synthesis of the world of nature and the world of dreams. The three women who dance in the foreground of “The Mill” tell us of a country where human joys and sorrows, hopes and fears, are set to a different measure, and sung in unknown keys. A strange and troublous art, it seems sometimes,—like the sinuous melodies of Renan, which seem to belong to some far-haunted past, and yet contain the intimate secrets of our own hearts,—but it fascinates and holds us as though music became visible before our eyes. It opens before us a new and delightful pathway into the land of dreams. Another was Auguste Rodin. To mould the human figure has been an amusement for man since ever he carved wood or indented clay. It was left for the sculptors of Egypt and of Greece and of Italy to form human figures of stone, not as a mere symbol of the reality, but as a revelation of their own moods and visions of beauty or passion; and since then the amusement has fallen back into convention and symbol, although the plastic representation of the modern human body, etiolated and hidden, offers fewer difficulties than its representation in painting which Millet and Degas have in varying ways striven to achieve. Now even the great sculptors of old only suggest to us beauty or grace or strength that has become conventional; they reveal nothing. In this man’s work the form that is closest to us of all forms in the world, that we cling to from the day of birth, and that remains with us, half-seen or divined, until the day of death, has been revealed anew, just as new aspects of light have been revealed by Claude Monet. It is the ancient human way-worn and passion-used form, rendered with pathetic truth, and yet we feel that we have never truly seen the human body before. We marvel how expression can be carried so far without passing the bounds of nature and simplicity. It is far from the method of Michelangelo, Rodin’s immediate predecessor, with whom it has been the fashion to compare him. Michelangelo’s stupendous fantasy twisted the human body into the strange or lovely shapes of his own inverted dreams. In Rodin’s work, it is through a relentless love of nature that we are led to a new and intimate vision of the body. The quiet artist in his simple work-room has been building up through long years his great Gate of Hell; it is the gate of the joy and beauty and terror of life, expressed otherwise than those sober stories of the old world so charmingly told on that gate that was thought worthy of Heaven. But through this gate we are led to a new insight of that figure in the world which is closest to us and most precious, such an insight, it may well be, as Pheidias and Donatello brought to the men of their time. Another personality that I desired to analyse, and perhaps the greatest, was Richard Wagner. The Leipzig youth, who hated the tawdry tinsel of the theatre, and was so little of a musical prodigy that he could never learn to play the piano, impelled by a strange instinct has yet wrought music and the stage to a poetic height never before approached. Just as our arts rise out of our industries, so the manifold art of Wagner—woven of music and poetry and drama—rises to something that is beyond art. Wagner has made the largest impersonal synthesis yet attainable of the personal influences that thrill our lives, and has built it on the broadest physiological basis of our senses, so that faith has here become sight. Such harmony is what we are accustomed to call Heaven, and such art—to the mere musician cacophony and confusion—is truly called religion. It will take some time yet before we understand its place in life as a new expression of the human soul. Generations must pass before it will be possible for a greater artist, by a still wider sensory appeal, to lift us to any higher Heaven. It is not the men of one idea—important as these are—who most truly represent the spirit of an age. Such men most often represent the spirit of some earlier generation, which in them has become definitely crystallised. It is the men whose ideas are still free in pungent, penetrating, often confused solution that we may count nearest to the natural forces of an age, and it is these that are most interesting to analyse. In such men the feebler instincts of their fellows are concentrated, and the flaming energy of their spirits attracts few, repels most, of their fellows. It is, no doubt, because of this high degree of emotional exaltation that these men bring us to religion. It all comes to religion. I would point out to those who think that this result needs apology, that such men do not bring before us the pale, animistic children of dreams, who for so many ages have sought with their shadowy arms to beckon men away from the world to a home on the other side of the sky, but the robust children of our working life, the offspring of our living energies and emotions, the harmonised satisfaction of all that we have lived, of all that we have felt. So the “new spirit” brings us to one of the most ancient modes of human emotion. I sought to emphasise this in my Introduction as well as in the Conclusion, not altogether successfully for some of my readers, who have been led to credit me with virtues of modernity to which I can make no claim. So far from being “an apostle of modernity,” the “new spirit” that I am concerned with is but a quickening in the pulse of life such as may take place in any age, though my tracings are only of a recent acceleration. The greatest manifestation of the new spirit that I know of took place long since in the zoological history of the race when the immediate ancestor of man began to walk on his hind legs, so developing the skilful hands and restless brain that brought sin into the world. That strange and perilous method of locomotion—which carried other diseases and disabilities in its train, more concrete than sin—marked a revolutionary outburst of new life worth contemplating. Yet even among the later and minor movements of life it is not the most recent that to me personally are the most attractive. The Eiffel Tower does not thrill me like the gray towers of Chartres; I find the streets of Zaragoza more interesting than those of Manchester. And, on the other hand, there are modernities which seem to me old, very old, older than life itself. To say this is no doubt to confess that the personal element has a large place in this study of the “New Spirit.” And it is true that, however honest a piece of mechanism your sphygmograph may be, if it is alive there is a very considerable personal equation which you must make up your mind to reckon with. I believe I am not altogether incapable of slinging facts at the head of the British Goliath (with purely benevolent intentions), but on this occasion I wrote for my own pleasure: let me apologise to Goliath for any annoyance I may so have caused him. I wished to speak for once, so far as might be, in my own voice, glad if here and there a reader cared to follow my impatient track, furnishing from the stores of his own knowledge and intelligence what was lacking in commentaries and pièces justificatives. I wished at the outset to take a bird’s-eye view of the world as it presented itself to me personally, only indicating by mere hints those parts of the field in which I was more specially concerned. And I wished also to indicate—perhaps once for all—my own faith in those large facts of nature which are unaffected by personal equation, and which harmonise all our petty individual activities. Nature is bent on her own ends, and with infinite ingenuity uses all our energies to carry out her idea of increasing and multiplying the countless forms of life. Death itself is but an accidental after-thought, a beneficial adaptation—as Weismann would have us express it—only affecting the body, that servant of the immortal germ-cells which has grown so large and arrogant since the days when we Metazoa were young in the world. That is the one master-thought of Nature, or—shall we say?—her systematised delusion, her délire à forme chronique. But the malady, if it is one, is incurable. A friend of mine, under the influence of nitrous oxide, once found himself face to face with the Almighty. Being a man of earnest and philosophic temperament, he took advantage of the opportunity to demand passionately the meaning and aim of this tangled skein of things in which we find ourselves: “Why have You placed us here? For what purpose have You submitted us to all this strife and misery? What is the solution of the riddle of life?” And then, uttered in a characteristic bass, came in one word the awful reply which my friend will never forget: “ .” I fear that that voice is, or might well have been, divine. Procreation And yet why should one “fear”? We have our brief triumph. Seeking out many curious things, we learn to know and to enjoy the earth. Nature’s naughty children—whether artists or scientists or mystics—we may stand aside, contemplate her great object, and impudently elevate our fingers to our nose. It amuses us, and scarcely hurts her. She cannot refuse us the by-play of her own adaptations. For it all comes of that primitive manifestation of the new spirit, the “Fall,” which raised us on to our hind limbs and enabled us to drink of the Cider of Paradise. H. E. 7th October, 1892. About HackerNoon Book Series: We bring you the most important technical, scientific, and insightful public domain books. This book is part of the public domain. Havelock Ellis (2017). The New Spirit. Urbana, Illinois: Project Gutenberg. Retrieved October 2022 https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/55878/pg55878-images.html This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org , located at https://www.gutenberg.org/policy/license.html.

No alterations have been made in this edition

COPA v. Wright, Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 39 of 42. 37. The Tulip Trust Deed (Particulars of Claim at [66A] {A/2/10}) ({ID_001186}) / {L8/20/1}) The Fifth Pleaded Example 728. In the Kleiman Litigation, Dr Wright proffered a Deed of Trust document as evidence of the existence of a trust called the Tulip Trust. Dr Wright has claimed that the Tulip Trust held Bitcoin and/or an encrypted file with keys to that Bitcoin. The Deed of Trust document that was adduced by Dr Wright was dated 23 October 2012. (a) COPA’s Reasons for Alleging Forgery 729. The date of 23 October 2012 was false. Computer forensic analysis of this document shows that it was backdated and that it was not created until at least 22 May 2015 (over two years after the death of David Kleiman on 26 April 2013). This document was therefore forged. As to the basis on which the Claimant alleges forgery, the Claimant relies on the above matters and the fact that this Deed of Trust document was found to be backdated in the Order of Justice Reinhart dated 27 August 2019. 730. A copy of this document is at C00000560 {L8/17/1}, which was included in the Extended Disclosure served on 7 March 2023. The Re-Re-Amended Defence was served on 20 April 2023. (b) Dr Wright’s Explanations and COPA’s Rebuttal 731. The document appears as a Deed of Trust between two Seychelles companies, Wright International Investments (“WIIL”) and Tulip Trading Ltd (“TTL”) with a date of 23 October 2012. 732. In Wright11 Appendix C, Dr Wright addressed this 23 October 2012 Deed of Trust document by reference to one particular version of it. There are a number of copies disclosed which are all identical in substance: 732.1. (C00000560) / {L8/17/1} – (includes the Kleiman case reference at the top). 732.2. (ID_001186) / {L8/20/1}; 732.3. (ID_003790) / {L8/28/1}; 732.4. (ID_003982) / {L8/14/1}; and 732.5. (ID_003329) / L15/86/1} – this is the version Dr Wright refers to in Wright11. 733. Mr Madden addresses the identical nature of the above documents in PM48, {H/304/8}. In PM48, Mr Madden notes that the documents analysed indicate that WIIL was purchased as an aged shelf company in 2014, not being active prior to that date: PM48 at [29] {H/304/9}. Mr Madden also notes the effect of similar analysis in respect of other similar documents relating to TTL (PM4 [119-127], {H/29/38}). 734. In his Defence (after various amendments), Dr Wright states that, pursuant to an order of the US Court in the Kleiman proceedings, he disclosed a copy of a Deed of Trust document between two Seychelles companies, WIIL and TTL, with a date of 23 October 2012 (Defence [85A(1)] {A/3/26}. Dr Wright claims that: “The date 23 October 2012 is not a false date as the Deed of Trust was executed on 23 October 2012” (Defence [85A(5)] {A/3/27}. 735. In Wright11, Dr Wright gives the following account. He says that he set up the trust structure with the intention that he did not have any rights to see documents until 2020 (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.6] {CSW/3/14}). Dr Wright says that Dianne Pinder of Lloyds solicitors in Brisbane Australia drafted a deed of trust to replace a former trust structure that had been set up in such a way that he did not have a right to see documents until 2020 (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.6] {CSW/3/14}). Dr Wright says that, as he was not a party to the Tulip Trust Deed, he can only comment on what appears on the face of the documents, and that the version at {ID_003329} is not the trust deed for the Tulip Trust (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.11] {CSW/3/15}). The position stated in Wright11 therefore appears to be that, whilst a trust was settled on 23 October 2012 which was called the Tulip Trust, the disclosed versions set out above do not represent the deed of that trust or record its terms. 736. Dr Wright further states in Wright11 that he thinks that the version at {ID_003329} has been doctored by someone, as some of the parties acting for Savannah Ltd as noted in the document held no authority with the company, which he did not find out until after 2022 (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.12] {CSW/3/15}). 737. In his oral evidence at trial, Dr Wright at first accepted that he had sworn in the Kleiman proceedings that the Tulip Trust Deed put to him in those proceedings (which was the version at {L8/17/1}) was an authentic document {Day4/107:4} to {Day4/109:5}. However, he then went on to say that it does not record the terms of the trust. He said that this particular Tulip Trust Deed is not a real document and that it is not part of the trust. Dr Wright claimed that he told the Judge in Kleiman that it was a real document but that he did not know any different to say otherwise at that time: {Day4/109:2} to {Day4/112:2}. He claimed that he had subsequently spoken to some of the individuals whose signatures appear on this Tulip Trust Deed and they told him that they did not sign it: {Day4/113:6}. 738. Dr Wright claimed that this particular version of the Tulip Trust Deed was formed by someone merging documents together: {Day4/114:5}. Dr Wright said that it was a fake document used by Ira Kleiman, and that there had never been any agreement made between Wright International and Tulip Trading: {Day4/115:10} to {Day4/115/20}. 739. COPA submitted that Dr Wright’s explanation should be rejected for the following reasons: 739.1. On Dr Wright’s own admission, the Tulip Trust Deed is not a genuine document on the basis that (on his account) (i) there never has been any agreement between WIIL and TTL at all; (ii) the signatures are said not to be genuine; and (iii) the terms do not reflect what he understood to be the terms of the Tulip Trust Deed actually executed on 23 October 2012. It is, however, remarkable that he failed to mention this in his Re-Amended Defence. 739.2. There is no evidence of any of other version of the Tulip Trust Deed dated to 23 October 2012 with different terms. Dr Wright has not brought any of those who are said to deny signing this deed to Court as witnesses, nor has he called anyone as a witness to say what the “real” terms of the Tulip Trust are. 739.3. WIIL is purportedly a party to the Tulip Trust Deed, but that company was only first purchased as an off the shelf company by Dr Wright in October 2014. Mr Madden's findings in Appendix PM48 to the effect that alteration of documents supports that proposition {H/304/9} were not challenged in cross-examination. 739.4. Paragraph 3 of this Tulip Trust Deed {L8/17/2} refers to bitcoin having been transferred into TTL on 10 June 2011, although that company likewise was not purchased until October 2014 (as explained in relation to {ID_001421} and {ID_001930} in COPA’s original Forgeries Schedule at {A/2/91} and {A/2/101}. 739.5. There is nothing in the terms of this trust (as recorded in this Deed) to say that trust documents cannot be shown to Dr Wright. He claimed that he did not know the terms of the document, but also that those terms precluded him from talking directly to any of the individuals involved. He then said that he had spoken to them and found out that the signatures on the document were not genuine. Dr Wright's evidence about this document, and the Tulip Trust more generally, has been confused and internally inconsistent. In particular, he has invented the excuse of having been precluded from seeing the document to explain away his having sworn to its authenticity in the Kleiman proceedings and made a sworn declaration based on its terms, but then having denied its authenticity in the Granath proceedings. See generally: {Day3/105:2} to {Day3/119:5}. (c) Conclusions 740. I found Dr Wright’s contorted explanations to be wholly unconvincing and false, including his final excuse that this document was ‘doctored by someone’. 741. There is strong evidence that (and I so find) both Tulip Trading Limited and Wright International Investments Ltd were acquired by Dr Wright in 2014 as aged shelf companies, and that the ‘Tulip Trust’ itself was a fabrication designed to shield Dr Wright’s assets against possible bankruptcy. Dr Wright’s explanations of the terms of the Trust were inconsistent and did not ring true. He has never explained the plain inconsistency between his assertion that the Trust put his assets (including his IP in various documents) beyond reach, yet his continued ability apparently to reference and use all such documents to yield the large number of ‘White Papers’ which are said to have given rise to all the claimed patent filings for nChain. Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.

This court case retrieved on January 29, 2024, judiciary.uk is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. COPA v. Wright, Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 39 of 42. COPA v. Wright, Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series . You can jump to any part of this filing here . This part is 39 of 42. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here here 37. The Tulip Trust Deed (Particulars of Claim at [66A] {A/2/10}) ({ID_001186}) / {L8/20/1}) The Fifth Pleaded Example 728. In the Kleiman Litigation, Dr Wright proffered a Deed of Trust document as evidence of the existence of a trust called the Tulip Trust. Dr Wright has claimed that the Tulip Trust held Bitcoin and/or an encrypted file with keys to that Bitcoin. The Deed of Trust document that was adduced by Dr Wright was dated 23 October 2012. Kleiman (a) COPA’s Reasons for Alleging Forgery (a) COPA’s Reasons for Alleging Forgery 729. The date of 23 October 2012 was false. Computer forensic analysis of this document shows that it was backdated and that it was not created until at least 22 May 2015 (over two years after the death of David Kleiman on 26 April 2013). This document was therefore forged. As to the basis on which the Claimant alleges forgery, the Claimant relies on the above matters and the fact that this Deed of Trust document was found to be backdated in the Order of Justice Reinhart dated 27 August 2019. 730. A copy of this document is at C00000560 {L8/17/1}, which was included in the Extended Disclosure served on 7 March 2023. The Re-Re-Amended Defence was served on 20 April 2023. (b) Dr Wright’s Explanations and COPA’s Rebuttal (b) Dr Wright’s Explanations and COPA’s Rebuttal 731. The document appears as a Deed of Trust between two Seychelles companies, Wright International Investments (“ WIIL ”) and Tulip Trading Ltd (“ TTL ”) with a date of 23 October 2012. WIIL TTL 732. In Wright11 Appendix C, Dr Wright addressed this 23 October 2012 Deed of Trust document by reference to one particular version of it. There are a number of copies disclosed which are all identical in substance: 732.1. (C00000560) / {L8/17/1} – (includes the Kleiman case reference at the top). 732.2. (ID_001186) / {L8/20/1}; 732.3. (ID_003790) / {L8/28/1}; 732.4. (ID_003982) / {L8/14/1}; and 732.5. (ID_003329) / L15/86/1} – this is the version Dr Wright refers to in Wright11. 733. Mr Madden addresses the identical nature of the above documents in PM48, {H/304/8}. In PM48, Mr Madden notes that the documents analysed indicate that WIIL was purchased as an aged shelf company in 2014, not being active prior to that date: PM48 at [29] {H/304/9}. Mr Madden also notes the effect of similar analysis in respect of other similar documents relating to TTL (PM4 [119-127], {H/29/38}). 734. In his Defence (after various amendments), Dr Wright states that, pursuant to an order of the US Court in the Kleiman proceedings, he disclosed a copy of a Deed of Trust document between two Seychelles companies, WIIL and TTL, with a date of 23 October 2012 (Defence [85A(1)] {A/3/26}. Dr Wright claims that: “The date 23 October 2012 is not a false date as the Deed of Trust was executed on 23 October 2012” (Defence [85A(5)] {A/3/27}. “The date 23 October 2012 is not a false date as the Deed of Trust was executed on 23 October 2012” 735. In Wright11, Dr Wright gives the following account. He says that he set up the trust structure with the intention that he did not have any rights to see documents until 2020 (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.6] {CSW/3/14}). Dr Wright says that Dianne Pinder of Lloyds solicitors in Brisbane Australia drafted a deed of trust to replace a former trust structure that had been set up in such a way that he did not have a right to see documents until 2020 (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.6] {CSW/3/14}). Dr Wright says that, as he was not a party to the Tulip Trust Deed, he can only comment on what appears on the face of the documents, and that the version at {ID_003329} is not the trust deed for the Tulip Trust (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.11] {CSW/3/15}). The position stated in Wright11 therefore appears to be that, whilst a trust was settled on 23 October 2012 which was called the Tulip Trust, the disclosed versions set out above do not represent the deed of that trust or record its terms. 736. Dr Wright further states in Wright11 that he thinks that the version at {ID_003329} has been doctored by someone, as some of the parties acting for Savannah Ltd as noted in the document held no authority with the company, which he did not find out until after 2022 (Wright11 Appendix C, [6.12] {CSW/3/15}). 737. In his oral evidence at trial, Dr Wright at first accepted that he had sworn in the Kleiman proceedings that the Tulip Trust Deed put to him in those proceedings (which was the version at {L8/17/1}) was an authentic document {Day4/107:4} to {Day4/109:5}. However, he then went on to say that it does not record the terms of the trust. He said that this particular Tulip Trust Deed is not a real document and that it is not part of the trust. Dr Wright claimed that he told the Judge in Kleiman that it was a real document but that he did not know any different to say otherwise at that time: {Day4/109:2} to {Day4/112:2}. He claimed that he had subsequently spoken to some of the individuals whose signatures appear on this Tulip Trust Deed and they told him that they did not sign it: {Day4/113:6}. 738. Dr Wright claimed that this particular version of the Tulip Trust Deed was formed by someone merging documents together: {Day4/114:5}. Dr Wright said that it was a fake document used by Ira Kleiman, and that there had never been any agreement made between Wright International and Tulip Trading: {Day4/115:10} to {Day4/115/20}. 739. COPA submitted that Dr Wright’s explanation should be rejected for the following reasons: 739.1. On Dr Wright’s own admission, the Tulip Trust Deed is not a genuine document on the basis that (on his account) (i) there never has been any agreement between WIIL and TTL at all; (ii) the signatures are said not to be genuine; and (iii) the terms do not reflect what he understood to be the terms of the Tulip Trust Deed actually executed on 23 October 2012. It is, however, remarkable that he failed to mention this in his Re-Amended Defence. 739.2. There is no evidence of any of other version of the Tulip Trust Deed dated to 23 October 2012 with different terms. Dr Wright has not brought any of those who are said to deny signing this deed to Court as witnesses, nor has he called anyone as a witness to say what the “real” terms of the Tulip Trust are. 739.3. WIIL is purportedly a party to the Tulip Trust Deed, but that company was only first purchased as an off the shelf company by Dr Wright in October 2014. Mr Madden's findings in Appendix PM48 to the effect that alteration of documents supports that proposition {H/304/9} were not challenged in cross-examination. 739.4. Paragraph 3 of this Tulip Trust Deed {L8/17/2} refers to bitcoin having been transferred into TTL on 10 June 2011, although that company likewise was not purchased until October 2014 (as explained in relation to {ID_001421} and {ID_001930} in COPA’s original Forgeries Schedule at {A/2/91} and {A/2/101}. 739.5. There is nothing in the terms of this trust (as recorded in this Deed) to say that trust documents cannot be shown to Dr Wright. He claimed that he did not know the terms of the document, but also that those terms precluded him from talking directly to any of the individuals involved. He then said that he had spoken to them and found out that the signatures on the document were not genuine. Dr Wright's evidence about this document, and the Tulip Trust more generally, has been confused and internally inconsistent. In particular, he has invented the excuse of having been precluded from seeing the document to explain away his having sworn to its authenticity in the Kleiman proceedings and made a sworn declaration based on its terms, but then having denied its authenticity in the Granath proceedings. See generally: {Day3/105:2} to {Day3/119:5}. Kleiman Granath (c) Conclusions (c) Conclusions 740. I found Dr Wright’s contorted explanations to be wholly unconvincing and false, including his final excuse that this document was ‘doctored by someone’. 741. There is strong evidence that (and I so find) both Tulip Trading Limited and Wright International Investments Ltd were acquired by Dr Wright in 2014 as aged shelf companies, and that the ‘Tulip Trust’ itself was a fabrication designed to shield Dr Wright’s assets against possible bankruptcy. Dr Wright’s explanations of the terms of the Trust were inconsistent and did not ring true. He has never explained the plain inconsistency between his assertion that the Trust put his assets (including his IP in various documents) beyond reach, yet his continued ability apparently to reference and use all such documents to yield the large number of ‘White Papers’ which are said to have given rise to all the claimed patent filings for nChain. Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on January 29, 2024, judiciary.uk is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on January 29, 2024, judiciary.uk is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. judiciary.uk judiciary.uk

Forensic Analysis Exposes Flaws in Craig Wright's Tulip Trust Deed

Artificial Intelligence in Sound Design: A Revolution or a Threat?

Craig Wright's Bitcoin White Paper Document Questioned for Forgery

COPA v. Wright, Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 28 of 42. 26. The SSRN Submission (Particulars of Claim at [30]-[35] {A/2/10}) The Fourth Pleaded Example 489. On or about 21 August 2019, Dr Wright uploaded to the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) a document which he asserts to be the ‘final’ version of the Bitcoin White Paper, in which he is named as the author. The post claims that the document was written on 21 August 2008. Dr Wright posted two versions of what he claims to be his original version of the Bitcoin White Paper within SSRN. **(a) COPA’s Reasons for Alleging Forgery** 490. The metadata of the actual Bitcoin White Paper has a creation date of 24 March 2009. The first version Dr Wright submitted to SSRN has discrepancies in the document properties. Examination of this first version reveals that its metadata was tampered with - supplemental metadata was added to this version to superficially indicate a creation date of 24 January 2008 and a “modified” date of 21 May 2008. This added metadata displays as the creation and modified date in the user interface of standard consumer software, i.e. the tampered dates are what would appear to a layperson upon cursory examination. However, a forensic examination of the metadata of this first version reveals another “creation date” entry embedded within the metadata, specifying a creation date that corresponds exactly to the creation date of the Bitcoin White Paper, specifically “/CreationDate (D:20090324113315-06:00)". 491. The metadata of this first version includes an entry indicating that the original creation date is 29 March 2009, which is at odds with the creation date of 24 January 2008 that shows up in other parts of the metadata. In the premises, it is averred that this first version posted to SSRN is actually a copied version of the Bitcoin White Paper with alterations to its metadata (at least that the dates of 24 January 2008 and 21 May 2008 were added to the genuine metadata of the Bitcoin White Paper) to make it appear that it was created in 2008. It is averred that the dates of 24 January 2008 and 21 May 2008 were added to the genuine metadata of the Bitcoin White Paper by Wright to support his attempt to claim that he had drafted the Bitcoin White Paper. 492. The second version that Dr Wright uploaded to SSRN, which is the version he has currently uploaded there, had further changes to the metadata compared to the first version. However, the original creation date of 24 March 2009 from the actual Bitcoin White Paper still exists within the second version’s metadata. COPA allege that Dr Wright again sought to manipulate the metadata a second time but failed to remove the original creation date. 493. The genuine metadata in the actual Bitcoin White Paper and metadata contained within the two versions posted on SSRN by Dr Wright all state the 24 March 2009 date as being the creation date, with the dates/times agreeing to the millisecond. (b) Dr Wright’s Explanations and COPA’s Rebuttal 494. In his Defence, Dr Wright admits that the two versions of the Bitcoin White Paper which Dr Wright uploaded to SSRN were not created in 2008 or 2009, but in 2019. He claims that his purpose in uploading these versions was not to prove that he was the author of the Bitcoin White Paper but “to assert [his] authorship of the White Paper”: see Defence, [55-56] {A/3/16}. In his Defence, Dr Wright gives no explanation for the uploaded versions having metadata creation dates of 2008 and 2009 respectively. 495. In Appendix B to Wright11, Dr Wright repeats the account given in his Defence. However, he now adds the assertion that he prepared each document in LATEX and that he set the metadata in LATEX to refer to creation dates of 2008 and 2009 respectively. See: {CSW/3/8}. 496. COPA submitted that Dr Wright’s explanation should be rejected for the following reasons: 496.1. As established by the evidence of Mr Rosendahl (which was agreed in the joint statement by Dr Wright’s expert, Mr Lynch), Dr Wright’s account of the Bitcoin White Paper being authored in LATEX is false. There is equally no basis for saying that the versions of the White Paper uploaded to the SSRN in 2019 were created in LATEX. 496.2. Accordingly, the only conclusion to be drawn from these versions having been created by Dr Wright in 2019 (as is admitted) but containing metadata referring to 2008 / 2009 creation dates is that the metadata information was deliberately backdated. 496.3. In summary, Dr Wright in 2019 posted publicly two versions of the Bitcoin White Paper which he presented as his work and which contained metadata timestamps backdated to 2008. In the context of Dr Wright claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto and to have written the Bitcoin White Paper, the only plausible explanation is that he was presenting these to the world as early originals of the paper written by him. (c) Conclusion 497. In addition to the points set out above, I refer also to the analysis in the main Judgment at [489]-[495] of what Dr Wright did with the pdfcreationdate command and how those commands were added to the White Paper LaTeX files in November 2023. 498. Accordingly, Dr Wright’s latest explanation, based on the assertion that the Bitcoin White Paper was created in LATEX, is plainly false. The document was deliberately backdated by Dr Wright, in an attempt to present those two versions of the Bitcoin White Paper as early originals written by him. This was all lies. Continue Reading Here. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings.

This court case retrieved on January 29, 2024, judiciary.uk is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. COPA v. Wright, Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series. You can jump to any part of this filing here. This part is 28 of 42. COPA v. Wright, Court Filing, retrieved on January 29, 2024, is part of HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series . You can jump to any part of this filing here . This part is 28 of 42. HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series HackerNoon’s Legal PDF Series here here 26. The SSRN Submission (Particulars of Claim at [30]-[35] {A/2/10}) The Fourth Pleaded Example 489. On or about 21 August 2019, Dr Wright uploaded to the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) a document which he asserts to be the ‘final’ version of the Bitcoin White Paper, in which he is named as the author. The post claims that the document was written on 21 August 2008. Dr Wright posted two versions of what he claims to be his original version of the Bitcoin White Paper within SSRN. **(a) COPA’s Reasons for Alleging Forgery ** 490. The metadata of the actual Bitcoin White Paper has a creation date of 24 March 2009. The first version Dr Wright submitted to SSRN has discrepancies in the document properties. Examination of this first version reveals that its metadata was tampered with - supplemental metadata was added to this version to superficially indicate a creation date of 24 January 2008 and a “modified” date of 21 May 2008. This added metadata displays as the creation and modified date in the user interface of standard consumer software, i.e. the tampered dates are what would appear to a layperson upon cursory examination. However, a forensic examination of the metadata of this first version reveals another “creation date” entry embedded within the metadata, specifying a creation date that corresponds exactly to the creation date of the Bitcoin White Paper, specifically “/CreationDate (D:20090324113315-06:00)". 491. The metadata of this first version includes an entry indicating that the original creation date is 29 March 2009, which is at odds with the creation date of 24 January 2008 that shows up in other parts of the metadata. In the premises, it is averred that this first version posted to SSRN is actually a copied version of the Bitcoin White Paper with alterations to its metadata (at least that the dates of 24 January 2008 and 21 May 2008 were added to the genuine metadata of the Bitcoin White Paper) to make it appear that it was created in 2008. It is averred that the dates of 24 January 2008 and 21 May 2008 were added to the genuine metadata of the Bitcoin White Paper by Wright to support his attempt to claim that he had drafted the Bitcoin White Paper. 492. The second version that Dr Wright uploaded to SSRN, which is the version he has currently uploaded there, had further changes to the metadata compared to the first version. However, the original creation date of 24 March 2009 from the actual Bitcoin White Paper still exists within the second version’s metadata. COPA allege that Dr Wright again sought to manipulate the metadata a second time but failed to remove the original creation date. 493. The genuine metadata in the actual Bitcoin White Paper and metadata contained within the two versions posted on SSRN by Dr Wright all state the 24 March 2009 date as being the creation date, with the dates/times agreeing to the millisecond. (b) Dr Wright’s Explanations and COPA’s Rebuttal (b) Dr Wright’s Explanations and COPA’s Rebuttal 494. In his Defence, Dr Wright admits that the two versions of the Bitcoin White Paper which Dr Wright uploaded to SSRN were not created in 2008 or 2009, but in 2019. He claims that his purpose in uploading these versions was not to prove that he was the author of the Bitcoin White Paper but “to assert [his] authorship of the White Paper”: see Defence, [55-56] {A/3/16}. In his Defence, Dr Wright gives no explanation for the uploaded versions having metadata creation dates of 2008 and 2009 respectively. 495. In Appendix B to Wright11, Dr Wright repeats the account given in his Defence. However, he now adds the assertion that he prepared each document in LATEX and that he set the metadata in LATEX to refer to creation dates of 2008 and 2009 respectively. See: {CSW/3/8}. 496. COPA submitted that Dr Wright’s explanation should be rejected for the following reasons: 496.1. As established by the evidence of Mr Rosendahl (which was agreed in the joint statement by Dr Wright’s expert, Mr Lynch), Dr Wright’s account of the Bitcoin White Paper being authored in LATEX is false. There is equally no basis for saying that the versions of the White Paper uploaded to the SSRN in 2019 were created in LATEX. 496.2. Accordingly, the only conclusion to be drawn from these versions having been created by Dr Wright in 2019 (as is admitted) but containing metadata referring to 2008 / 2009 creation dates is that the metadata information was deliberately backdated. 496.3. In summary, Dr Wright in 2019 posted publicly two versions of the Bitcoin White Paper which he presented as his work and which contained metadata timestamps backdated to 2008. In the context of Dr Wright claiming to be Satoshi Nakamoto and to have written the Bitcoin White Paper, the only plausible explanation is that he was presenting these to the world as early originals of the paper written by him. (c) Conclusion (c) Conclusion 497. In addition to the points set out above, I refer also to the analysis in the main Judgment at [489]-[495] of what Dr Wright did with the pdfcreationdate command and how those commands were added to the White Paper LaTeX files in November 2023. 498. Accordingly, Dr Wright’s latest explanation, based on the assertion that the Bitcoin White Paper was created in LATEX, is plainly false. The document was deliberately backdated by Dr Wright, in an attempt to present those two versions of the Bitcoin White Paper as early originals written by him. This was all lies. Continue Reading Here. Continue Reading Here . Here About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on January 29, 2024, judiciary.uk is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. About HackerNoon Legal PDF Series: We bring you the most important technical and insightful public domain court case filings. This court case retrieved on January 29, 2024, judiciary.uk is part of the public domain. The court-created documents are works of the federal government, and under copyright law, are automatically placed in the public domain and may be shared without legal restriction. judiciary.uk judiciary.uk

COPA Sues Craig Wright for Forging Bitcoin White Paper Metadata

Craig Wright’s Homework Gets an F from Forensic Analysts 

Court Rules Craig Wright Definitely Isn't Satoshi Nakamoto

আদালতের নিয়ম ক্রেগ রাইট অবশ্যই সাতোশি নাকামোতো নন

Gericht entscheidet: Craig Wright ist definitiv nicht Satoshi Nakamoto

La corte dictamina que Craig Wright definitivamente no es Satoshi Nakamoto

Le tribunal décide que Craig Wright n'est définitivement pas Satoshi Nakamoto

कोर्ट ने फैसला सुनाया कि क्रेग राइट निश्चित रूप से सातोशी नाकामोतो नहीं हैं

裁判所はクレイグ・ライトが間違いなくサトシ・ナカモトではないと判決

법원 판결에 따르면 크레이그 라이트는 확실히 나카모토 사토시가 아니다

Tribunal decide que Craig Wright definitivamente não é Satoshi Nakamoto

Суд постановил, что Крейг Райт определенно не Сатоши Накамото

Mahkeme Kararı Craig Wright Kesinlikle Satoshi Nakamoto Değildir

Phán quyết của tòa án Craig Wright chắc chắn không phải là Satoshi Nakamoto

法院裁定 Craig Wright 绝对不是中本聪

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming the electronics manufacturing sector through higher output, more robust quality control, and greater creativity. Machine learning techniques enhance production schedules while minimizing downtime and maximizing resource utilization. Artificial intelligence (AI)-powered predictive maintenance solutions anticipate equipment issues and address them before they worsen, protecting production cycles. With the use of modern computer vision, AI-powered quality control performs entire product inspections, significantly reducing operational costs and defect rates. Additionally, Generative AI makes adaptive manufacturing processes possible. In these processes, machines freely adapt their operations in response to actual time data on performance, enabling consumer demands for operational flexibility and flexibility. Let's analyze how AI impacts electronics in the future. Overview of AI in Electronics: Artificial intelligence (AI) in electronics is the imitation of human intelligence in machines, enabling them to perform tasks like language comprehension, learning, reasoning, and problem-solving. The core concepts of artificial intelligence (AI) include neural networks, which process information through networked nodes to identify patterns, machine learning, which uses algorithms to teach computers to learn from data and make decisions without the need for explicit programming, and data processing, which is necessary for creating AI models and involves obtaining, cleaning, and analyzing vast amounts of data to increase accuracy and efficiency. Specific Difficulties in the Manufacturing of Electronics The sector faces several distinct challenges. Accuracy must be preserved throughout the production process since even minor errors can have an important effect on the dependability and functionality of electronic products. Rapid advances in technology also require substantial costs for brand-new machinery and instruction, in addition to continuous process alterations in the manufacturing sector. Durability is a major concern as well because there is an increasing desire to embrace sustainable methods even in spite of the consumption of dangerous chemicals and waste. Furthermore, companies need to continuously innovate in the face of intense competition in order to remain economic and of use in the market. AI in the Background of Electronics Timeline Over the years, there have been several phases of transition in artificial intelligence (AI) development on electronics. Machine learning and neural networks are much newer ideas but can be traced back to early AI research, which was first written about in the 1950s-60s. In the 1980s, robotics and automated technology began to make their way into the industry. This is when AI first really started disrupting industries with mini-cars that ran through tubes taking parts from one end of a factory floor to another. Consumer electronics manufacturers integrated a form of artificial intelligence in their products such as smartphones and smart home appliances, starting in the 2000s. The 2010s saw a transformation in AI capabilities, propelled primarily by advancements in deep learning and big data analytics. AI and Digital Transformation Are Expanding Manufacturers in particular have had their regulations evolve because of the digitization across many industries. This move can mostly be attributed to the work of AI which is responsible for increasing efficiency, bringing in quality control levels, and predicting maintenance. This would improve productivity by decreasing wait times and maximizing the use of resources as production schedules and resources go through the Terms of Service. It does a thorough quality check of any particular product using cutting-edge computer vision, which reduces faults and scrap rates. Predictive maintenance uses artificial intelligence (AI) to quickly determine when equipment is likely to be more dependable before it actually fails, keeping your business running smoothly. An AI-driven manufacturing IoT business meets-loop is the key to cutting-edge innovation in a competitive market, allowing firms to stay ahead of the curve without falling into their own success trap. Artificial Intelligence (AI) explained Creating machines and software that can undertake tasks normally requiring human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and language understanding. AI also involves developing the technologies that will make this possible. It can range from simple rule-based systems to complex machine learning and deep learning algorithms. How Production Can Benefit From AI AI is utilized throughout a large number of the device-making process. Predictive maintenance is improved by using machine data to anticipate and prevent equipment issues before they occur. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based quality control systems precisely manage inspection procedures to ensure that products strictly fulfill quality requirements. Making Gadgets With Artificial Intelligence. AI is being used in a new way in the business of making gadgets. Systems that use artificial intelligence (AI) to find problems before they happen look at data from industry monitors from the past and the present. As a result, maintenance and downtime costs are decreased. When used for inspection jobs, AI's better visual recognition systems can find flaws more accurately than human inspectors. This reduces downsizing, improves the quality of products, satisfies customers, and more efficiency in the production of the goods. Additionally, AI adjusts production schedules by using data analytics to better manage supplies, modify schedules, and respond quickly to changes in demand. A Look at How AI Has Been Used in the Making of Electronics Putting AI to use in the real world shows how it can help make things better and faster. While individuals take longer to create things, AI-powered robots are significantly more useful than human labor since they can accomplish challenging jobs more rapidly and consistently. Machine learning systems employ production line data to identify issues and defects early on. This improves quality control. This ensures that buyers will only get products free of flaws. By utilizing AI's power and intelligence, organizations may pinpoint important issues, establish goals, and get ready for a reliable, scalable solution. AI applications require a robust infrastructure made up of data management systems, clever software, and long-lasting hardware. Training and development for the workforce is also very important because it gives workers the skills they need to use AI systems properly and get the information they need to make smart business choices. AI is a big deal in the business of making gadgets. It helps companies solve long-standing problems, become more efficient, and make better products that they sell. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming the electronics manufacturing sector through higher output, more robust quality control, and greater creativity. Machine learning techniques enhance production schedules while minimizing downtime and maximizing resource utilization. Artificial intelligence (AI)-powered predictive maintenance solutions anticipate equipment issues and address them before they worsen, protecting production cycles. With the use of modern computer vision, AI-powered quality control performs entire product inspections, significantly reducing operational costs and defect rates. Additionally, Generative AI makes adaptive manufacturing processes possible. In these processes, machines freely adapt their operations in response to actual time data on performance, enabling consumer demands for operational flexibility and flexibility. Generative AI Generative AI Let's analyze how AI impacts electronics in the future. Overview of AI in Electronics: Artificial intelligence (AI) in electronics is the imitation of human intelligence in machines, enabling them to perform tasks like language comprehension, learning, reasoning, and problem-solving. The core concepts of artificial intelligence (AI) include neural networks , which process information through networked nodes to identify patterns, machine learning, which uses algorithms to teach computers to learn from data and make decisions without the need for explicit programming, and data processing, which is necessary for creating AI models and involves obtaining, cleaning, and analyzing vast amounts of data to increase accuracy and efficiency. Artificial intelligence (AI) in electronics Artificial intelligence (AI) in electronics artificial intelligence (AI) include neural networks artificial intelligence (AI) include neural networks Specific Difficulties in the Manufacturing of Electronics The sector faces several distinct challenges. Accuracy must be preserved throughout the production process since even minor errors can have an important effect on the dependability and functionality of electronic products. Rapid advances in technology also require substantial costs for brand-new machinery and instruction, in addition to continuous process alterations in the manufacturing sector. Durability is a major concern as well because there is an increasing desire to embrace sustainable methods even in spite of the consumption of dangerous chemicals and waste. Furthermore, companies need to continuously innovate in the face of intense competition in order to remain economic and of use in the market. AI in the Background of Electronics Timeline Over the years, there have been several phases of transition in artificial intelligence (AI) development on electronics. Machine learning and neural networks are much newer ideas but can be traced back to early AI research, which was first written about in the 1950s-60s. In the 1980s, robotics and automated technology began to make their way into the industry. neural networks neural networks This is when AI first really started disrupting industries with mini-cars that ran through tubes taking parts from one end of a factory floor to another. Consumer electronics manufacturers integrated a form of artificial intelligence in their products such as smartphones and smart home appliances, starting in the 2000s. The 2010s saw a transformation in AI capabilities, propelled primarily by advancements in deep learning and big data analytics. AI and Digital Transformation Are Expanding Manufacturers in particular have had their regulations evolve because of the digitization across many industries. This move can mostly be attributed to the work of AI which is responsible for increasing efficiency, bringing in quality control levels, and predicting maintenance. This would improve productivity by decreasing wait times and maximizing the use of resources as production schedules and resources go through the Terms of Service. It does a thorough quality check of any particular product using cutting-edge computer vision, which reduces faults and scrap rates. Predictive maintenance uses artificial intelligence (AI) to quickly determine when equipment is likely to be more dependable before it actually fails, keeping your business running smoothly. An AI-driven manufacturing IoT business meets-loop is the key to cutting-edge innovation in a competitive market, allowing firms to stay ahead of the curve without falling into their own success trap. Artificial Intelligence (AI) explained Creating machines and software that can undertake tasks normally requiring human intelligence, such as visual perception, speech recognition, decision-making, and language understanding. AI also involves developing the technologies that will make this possible. It can range from simple rule-based systems to complex machine learning and deep learning algorithms. How Production Can Benefit From AI AI is utilized throughout a large number of the device-making process. Predictive maintenance is improved by using machine data to anticipate and prevent equipment issues before they occur. Artificial intelligence (AI)-based quality control systems precisely manage inspection procedures to ensure that products strictly fulfill quality requirements. Making Gadgets With Artificial Intelligence. AI is being used in a new way in the business of making gadgets. Systems that use artificial intelligence (AI) to find problems before they happen look at data from industry monitors from the past and the present. As a result, maintenance and downtime costs are decreased. When used for inspection jobs, AI's better visual recognition systems can find flaws more accurately than human inspectors. This reduces downsizing, improves the quality of products, satisfies customers, and more efficiency in the production of the goods. Additionally, AI adjusts production schedules by using data analytics to better manage supplies, modify schedules, and respond quickly to changes in demand. A Look at How AI Has Been Used in the Making of Electronics Putting AI to use in the real world shows how it can help make things better and faster. While individuals take longer to create things, AI-powered robots are significantly more useful than human labor since they can accomplish challenging jobs more rapidly and consistently. Machine learning systems employ production line data to identify issues and defects early on. This improves quality control. This ensures that buyers will only get products free of flaws. AI-powered robots AI-powered robots By utilizing AI's power and intelligence, organizations may pinpoint important issues, establish goals, and get ready for a reliable, scalable solution. AI applications require a robust infrastructure made up of data management systems, clever software, and long-lasting hardware. Training and development for the workforce is also very important because it gives workers the skills they need to use AI systems properly and get the information they need to make smart business choices. AI is a big deal in the business of making gadgets. It helps companies solve long-standing problems, become more efficient, and make better products that they sell.

AI: Powering the Future of Electronics

এআই: ইলেকট্রনিক্সের ভবিষ্যতকে শক্তিশালী করে

KI: Antrieb für die Zukunft der Elektronik

IA: impulsando el futuro de la electrónica

IA : alimenter l’avenir de l’électronique

एआई: इलेक्ट्रॉनिक्स के भविष्य को सशक्त बनाना

AI: エレクトロニクスの未来を支える

AI: 전자제품의 미래를 주도하다

IA: impulsionando o futuro da eletrônica

Искусственный интеллект: будущее электроники

Yapay Zeka: Elektroniğin Geleceğine Güç Vermek

AI: Cung cấp năng lượng cho tương lai của điện tử

人工智能：驱动电子产品的未来

Digital Health: LLMs for Prompt and Quality Sleep?

Barely a week ago, popular cryptocurrency exchange KuCoin announced that its KYC’d Nigerian users would be eligible to pay a 7.5% VAT on every crypto transaction starting the 8th of July, 2024. In other words, Nigeria's tax agency, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), is comprehensively setting plans in motion to regulate the country’s burgeoning crypto industry by charging a flat rate on every crypto transaction. With the outright ban on cryptocurrency still ongoing and the protracted legal battle with the world's most popular cryptocurrency exchange Binance, the Nigerian regulators appeared to have missed the point about the fundamentals of cryptocurrency regulation, so much so that they have unwittingly put the cart before the horse. While Nigeria, a country with over 12 million crypto users, has not officially imposed a ban on cryptocurrency, its apex bank, the Central Bank of Nigeria(CBN), has continued to maintain anti-crypto policies with the tacit cooperation of the country's capital market regulator, SEC Nigeria, making the West African country one of the most ambiguous crypto regulating countries in the world. Recent actions to restrict peer-to-peer (P2P) crypto trading in Nigeria highlighted the government's resolve to address what it saw as palpable concerns about the potential impact of cryptocurrency on the national currency, the Naira. These concerns were based on the allegations of the Naira manipulation on cryptocurrency exchanges. However, in a surprising move, the Tinubu-led government is now focusing its effort on taxing cryptocurrency transactions despite the restrictions that have been put in place. This development does not only alter its course of action altogether, but it also raises a valid question as to whether the government's plan to tap into the endless possibilities of crypto taxation can coexist with the unofficial recognition of cryptocurrency in the country. Apparently, the newly introduced VAT policy on crypto transactions emanated from the noticeable absence of a tax framework for cryptocurrency in Nigeria, as revealed by the Binance tussle with the Nigerian authorities, most especially from the failure of the FIRS to find credible evidence to support the tax evasion charges it leveled against a mid-level Binance executive Tigran Gambrayan, who has spent several months in one of the nation's worst prisons. (Gambrayan, a former US federal agent alongside his colleague Nadeem Anjarwalla, was arrested and detained by the Office of the National Security Advisers(ONSA)after they were invited for a talk in Abuja). The sudden recourse to cryptocurrency, which is what the 7.5%  VAT represents, is ill-advised and inopportune. It's the latest in a list of several ridiculous crypto policies that have come out of Nigeria. Is it not surprising that within a year, Nigeria has gone from charging exorbitant crypto licensing fees to imposing a 7.5% VAT on crypto transactions while maintaining its ban on cryptocurrency? Is the government now suddenly realizing that there are millions of dollars of unrealized taxes lying outside of the province of the FIRS? One must pay attention to the event preceding the introduction of the VAT policy. A few months ago, the CBN made a shocking discovery that crypto P2P trading had been responsible for the steady decline of the Naira and promptly responded by waging a week-long war on crypto exchanges operating in the country. These actions signaled a harsh stance on cryptocurrency. Binance, the most popular centralized crypto exchange (CEX), was first scapegoated. Two of its executives found themselves under investigation for Binance-related activities in Nigeria. Later, they were dragged to court on charges bordering on tax evasion, money laundering, and currency manipulation. The Nigerian press further amplified concerns by heavily publicizing the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor's unverified claim of a $26 billion outflow from Nigeria through Binance. Many news reports portrayed cryptocurrency as a national security threat, potentially prompting an urgent response from the Nigerian government. How, within a short window of time, is cryptocurrency now part of the FIRS’ grand design to expand the nation’s revenue base? While the VAT policy signifies a regulatory approach toward crypto regulation, it can afford to wait until there is a much broader and clearer regulatory framework governing Nigeria’s burgeoning cryptocurrency industry. In other words, there have to be clearly defined rules in place addressing the key issues surrounding cryptocurrency before a tax policy is activated, borrowing a leaf from countries like South Africa and Kenya, which have made significant progress in this regard. Not only is the establishment of a clear-cut policy framework for digital assets a non-negotiable cryptocurrency adoption strategy, but it is also in the first order of cryptocurrency regulation principles. Countries that are intentional about leveraging this technology don't take a leap of faith but rather create a regulatory environment where crypto rules are clearly defined and established. The rationale behind the VAT on crypto transactions, however well-intentioned, might be overshadowed by the urgency of addressing Nigeria's broader economic challenges. For decades, Nigerians have grappled with a struggling national economy alongside pockets of insecurity. As of today, inflation is a nationwide concern, further fueled by President Tinubu's removal of fuel subsidies in May 2023. Barely a week ago, popular cryptocurrency exchange KuCoin announced that its KYC’d Nigerian users would be eligible to pay a 7.5% VAT on every crypto transaction starting the 8th of July, 2024. In other words, Nigeria's tax agency, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), is comprehensively setting plans in motion to regulate the country’s burgeoning crypto industry by charging a flat rate on every crypto transaction. With the outright ban on cryptocurrency still ongoing and the protracted legal battle with the world's most popular cryptocurrency exchange Binance, the Nigerian regulators appeared to have missed the point about the fundamentals of cryptocurrency regulation, so much so that they have unwittingly put the cart before the horse. While Nigeria, a country with over 12 million crypto users, has not officially imposed a ban on cryptocurrency, its apex bank, the Central Bank of Nigeria(CBN), has continued to maintain anti-crypto policies with the tacit cooperation of the country's capital market regulator, SEC Nigeria, making the West African country one of the most ambiguous crypto regulating countries in the world. Recent actions to restrict peer-to-peer (P2P) crypto trading in Nigeria highlighted the government's resolve to address what it saw as palpable concerns about the potential impact of cryptocurrency on the national currency, the Naira. These concerns were based on the allegations of the Naira manipulation on cryptocurrency exchanges. However, in a surprising move, the Tinubu-led government is now focusing its effort on taxing cryptocurrency transactions despite the restrictions that have been put in place. This development does not only alter its course of action altogether, but it also raises a valid question as to whether the government's plan to tap into the endless possibilities of crypto taxation can coexist with the unofficial recognition of cryptocurrency in the country. Apparently, the newly introduced VAT policy on crypto transactions emanated from the noticeable absence of a tax framework for cryptocurrency in Nigeria, as revealed by the Binance tussle with the Nigerian authorities, most especially from the failure of the FIRS to find credible evidence to support the tax evasion charges it leveled against a mid-level Binance executive Tigran Gambrayan, who has spent several months in one of the nation's worst prisons. (Gambrayan, a former US federal agent alongside his colleague Nadeem Anjarwalla, was arrested and detained by the Office of the National Security Advisers(ONSA)after they were invited for a talk in Abuja). The sudden recourse to cryptocurrency, which is what the 7.5%  VAT represents, is ill-advised and inopportune. It's the latest in a list of several ridiculous crypto policies that have come out of Nigeria. Is it not surprising that within a year, Nigeria has gone from charging exorbitant crypto licensing fees to imposing a 7.5% VAT on crypto transactions while maintaining its ban on cryptocurrency? Is the government now suddenly realizing that there are millions of dollars of unrealized taxes lying outside of the province of the FIRS? One must pay attention to the event preceding the introduction of the VAT policy. A few months ago, the CBN made a shocking discovery that crypto P2P trading had been responsible for the steady decline of the Naira and promptly responded by waging a week-long war on crypto exchanges operating in the country. These actions signaled a harsh stance on cryptocurrency. Binance, the most popular centralized crypto exchange (CEX), was first scapegoated. Two of its executives found themselves under investigation for Binance-related activities in Nigeria. Later, they were dragged to court on charges bordering on tax evasion, money laundering, and currency manipulation. The Nigerian press further amplified concerns by heavily publicizing the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor's unverified claim of a $26 billion outflow from Nigeria through Binance. Many news reports portrayed cryptocurrency as a national security threat, potentially prompting an urgent response from the Nigerian government. How, within a short window of time, is cryptocurrency now part of the FIRS’ grand design to expand the nation’s revenue base? While the VAT policy signifies a regulatory approach toward crypto regulation, it can afford to wait until there is a much broader and clearer regulatory framework governing Nigeria’s burgeoning cryptocurrency industry. In other words, there have to be clearly defined rules in place addressing the key issues surrounding cryptocurrency before a tax policy is activated, borrowing a leaf from countries like South Africa and Kenya, which have made significant progress in this regard. Not only is the establishment of a clear-cut policy framework for digital assets a non-negotiable cryptocurrency adoption strategy, but it is also in the first order of cryptocurrency regulation principles. Countries that are intentional about leveraging this technology don't take a leap of faith but rather create a regulatory environment where crypto rules are clearly defined and established. The rationale behind the VAT on crypto transactions, however well-intentioned, might be overshadowed by the urgency of addressing Nigeria's broader economic challenges. For decades, Nigerians have grappled with a struggling national economy alongside pockets of insecurity. As of today, inflation is a nationwide concern, further fueled by President Tinubu's removal of fuel subsidies in May 2023.

Nigeria's Crypto Conundrum: Taxing The Forbidden Fruit

How Did the Supreme Court Reach Its Conclusion of Trump v United States?

Is a Former President Entitled to Immunity? The U.S. Supreme Court Discusses

Trump v. United States: All of the Important Summary Points

Have you ever found yourself staring at an image spotted somewhere on the internet and wondering whether it results from human or artificial creative labor? Since the breakthrough in image generation technology, I’ve been captivated by interior designs, nature scenery, fashion photographs, and futuristic cityscapes made with AI that look like professional artwork. As someone with a creative eye yet no artistic skills, I was excited about the opportunity to transform ideas from my mind into visuals based solely on text input. I tried out several popular text-to-image tools, like MidJourney and DreamStudio on the web and ARTA on mobile. Still, while they all provided a good starting point and a straightforward user experience, the generation outcomes often fell short of my expectations and differed from what I envisioned — until I learned to tell AI what to draw in the language it understands. If you’re new to AI-generated art and need assistance streamlining the creative process, I’ll provide a step-by-step guide below to help you compose concise and well-structured text prompts that the AI models can effectively interpret and translate into the desired images. In the bottom line, I will share an example of both a correct and an incorrect prompt to illustrate how significantly they can impact the generation output in practice. First things first, two common prompt-writing mistakes you should avoid when using any text-to-image generator are being too wordy and using complex grammar. In fact, the more words you incorporate and the more complicated your grammar, the more difficult it is for AI to understand your prompt and adequately depict your concept. Therefore, communicate concisely, carefully choosing keywords, and list your ideas explicitly and separately rather than trying to cram them into one sentence. Step 1. Choose the Content Type Ask yourself how you want your image to look overall. Do you see it as a photograph, illustration, painting, sketch, or other artwork type? This initial decision puts you in control of the final result and helps align all the elements with this general framework. For instance, choosing a sketch will typically produce pencil images, while opting for a painting will add colors and likely create a more vintage appearance. Step 2. Define the Subject AI image generators require a specific subject for rendering, so you must indicate the main subject of your future image, whether a person, an animal, or a landscape. Stick to one subject per prompt and opt for concrete nouns like girl, dog, train, rose, ocean, temple, etc., for more accurate results. You can most likely render something using abstract keywords like love, peace, or joy, but the results may appear very inconsistent in what they depict. Step 3. Add Subject Description Now, it’s time to detail the concept with modifiers – adjectives or attributive nouns that add to the sense of a head subject. Modifiers can completely change the perspective of your image and boost its overall quality, so the more descriptive you are, the better the generated output. Define what the subject looks like, what the subject is doing, and other characteristics essential to representing your concept. Step 4. Describe the Context To help AI create the exact atmosphere and surroundings you need, give attention to aspects like lightning (studio, soft, cinematic, volumetric, accent lighting, sunlight, frontlight, backlight, ambient, moonlight, etc.), color theme (pastel, vibrant, neon pink, dark, etc.), environment/scene (in the sky, indoor, underwater, at night, etc.), and background (forest, beach, solid color, nebula, etc.). Additionally, consider the mood and vibe you want to convey. Simple feeling modifiers can set the scene’s atmosphere, whether you opt for positive (energetic, cozy, romantic, satisfaction, etc.) or negative (depressive, loneliness, regret, fear, etc.) ones. Step 5. Define Perspective Add a point of view to determine the angle from which you are looking at the image, such as side, overhead, or front. Other essential modifiers for creating photo-like images involve lenses and cameras. Here are a few examples: close-up, macro, lens flare, wide angle, microscopic, bokeh, isometric, depth of field, ultra-wide angle, fisheye lens, and panorama. Step 6. Add Art Style, Art Mediums, and Artists Proceed to aesthetic settings and define the overall artistic style. Also, specify the art medium. These aspects can greatly contribute to the value of the generated output, making it more consistent and expressive. Here are some of the common keywords: geometrical art, pop art, watercolor, line drawing, line art, 3D sculpture, crayon drawing, painting, oil painting, pastel drawing, medieval art, photography, digital art, stained glass, cave painting, polaroid, vector art, retro, illustration, comics, editorial fashion photography, Japanese anime style, surreal, travel photography, pencil sketch, steampunk, cartoon, futurism, vaporwave, art deco, interior design, psychedelic, street art. Consider including artistic influences. Adding the name of a specific artist whose signature artwork aligns with your chosen art genre can enhance the final image. Note, however, that finding the right artist is crucial so as not to mess up the output. Some artists affect the generation only subtly, while others can alter it significantly depending on their distinctive manner. For example, Claude Monet can infuse impressionism into landscapes, while mentioning Salvador Dali adds a surrealistic touch. Step 7. Add “Magic” Words Certain words can make a dramatic difference in the outcomes of the generation. The keywords like highly detailed, ultra-realistic, 4K, 8K, UHD, and HDR are the game changers for the overall quality of the image. Adding “studio lighting” will introduce appealing textures to the image, while “accent lighting” can draw attention to specific features. Describing the image as “professional” can enhance color contrast and detail, while mentioning “vivid colors” will bring life to your image. Using terms like ultra-wide angle, panoramic, or long-shot will help guide the camera. Packing your prompt with phrases related to artistic techniques and materials (such as trending on artstation, precise line-art, golden ratio, fine art, etc.) and those associated with artistic value (such as most beautiful image ever seen, epic composition, etc.) can also bring sophisticated improvements. Step 8. Consider Adding Negative Prompts Negative prompts are parameters that inform the generation model about what you do not want to see in the final image. They help prevent AI from generating specific elements, fix image abnormalities, and improve overall quality. Here are some universal examples: blurry, cropped, cloned face, duplicate, error, ugly, wrong proportions, deform, fused fingers, extra arms, law quality res, watermark, and more. Step 9. Define Correct Word Order and Keyword Weight Input The order is almost as important as the vocabulary, guiding the AI in generating the desired output. Combine keywords to direct the focus of your prompt and note key phrases that influence image preference. Emphasize essential keywords with a full colon and decimal number, use parentheses for added importance, and brackets for less importance. Typically, the earlier a word appears in the sentence, the more importance it is given. If the AI model didn’t take in some key phrase and failed to depict it in the generated image, try rearranging the order of words, placing the missing element earlier in the prompt. Bad vs. Good Prompt Example Bad prompt: portrait of a woman looking directly at the camera, neck tattoo, urban pink background. Good prompt: head and shoulders realistic photo portrait of a beautiful woman looking at the camera, white skin, pink lips, red hair, blue eyes, black tattoos on her neck, neon punk, highly detailed, pink neon city background. Creating effective prompts requires both artistic imagination and technical skills. By including the necessary building blocks and following the proper prompt structure you ensure that the text-to-image generation model understands your vision and produces optimal output. However, don’t be afraid to experiment; the more you practice, the more adept you become, and the more remarkable your creations will be. Have you ever found yourself staring at an image spotted somewhere on the internet and wondering whether it results from human or artificial creative labor? Since the breakthrough in image generation technology, I’ve been captivated by interior designs, nature scenery, fashion photographs, and futuristic cityscapes made with AI that look like professional artwork. Have you ever found yourself staring at an image spotted somewhere on the internet and wondering whether it results from human or artificial creative labor? Since the breakthrough in image generation technology, I’ve been captivated by interior designs, nature scenery, fashion photographs, and futuristic cityscapes made with AI that look like professional artwork. As someone with a creative eye yet no artistic skills, I was excited about the opportunity to transform ideas from my mind into visuals based solely on text input. I tried out several popular text-to-image tools, like MidJourney and DreamStudio on the web and ARTA on mobile. Still, while they all provided a good starting point and a straightforward user experience, the generation outcomes often fell short of my expectations and differed from what I envisioned — until I learned to tell AI what to draw in the language it understands. If you’re new to AI-generated art and need assistance streamlining the creative process, I’ll provide a step-by-step guide below to help you compose concise and well-structured text prompts that the AI models can effectively interpret and translate into the desired images. In the bottom line, I will share an example of both a correct and an incorrect prompt to illustrate how significantly they can impact the generation output in practice. First things first, two common prompt-writing mistakes you should avoid when using any text-to-image generator are being too wordy and using complex grammar. In fact, the more words you incorporate and the more complicated your grammar, the more difficult it is for AI to understand your prompt and adequately depict your concept. Therefore, communicate concisely, carefully choosing keywords, and list your ideas explicitly and separately rather than trying to cram them into one sentence. Step 1. Choose the Content Type Ask yourself how you want your image to look overall. Do you see it as a photograph, illustration, painting, sketch, or other artwork type? This initial decision puts you in control of the final result and helps align all the elements with this general framework. For instance, choosing a sketch will typically produce pencil images, while opting for a painting will add colors and likely create a more vintage appearance. Step 2. Define the Subject AI image generators require a specific subject for rendering, so you must indicate the main subject of your future image, whether a person, an animal, or a landscape. Stick to one subject per prompt and opt for concrete nouns like girl, dog, train, rose, ocean, temple, etc., for more accurate results. You can most likely render something using abstract keywords like love, peace, or joy, but the results may appear very inconsistent in what they depict. Step 3. Add Subject Description Now, it’s time to detail the concept with modifiers – adjectives or attributive nouns that add to the sense of a head subject. Modifiers can completely change the perspective of your image and boost its overall quality, so the more descriptive you are, the better the generated output. Define what the subject looks like, what the subject is doing, and other characteristics essential to representing your concept. Step 4. Describe the Context To help AI create the exact atmosphere and surroundings you need, give attention to aspects like lightning (studio, soft, cinematic, volumetric, accent lighting, sunlight, frontlight, backlight, ambient, moonlight, etc.), color theme (pastel, vibrant, neon pink, dark, etc.), environment/scene (in the sky, indoor, underwater, at night, etc.), and background (forest, beach, solid color, nebula, etc.). Additionally, consider the mood and vibe you want to convey. Simple feeling modifiers can set the scene’s atmosphere, whether you opt for positive (energetic, cozy, romantic, satisfaction, etc.) or negative (depressive, loneliness, regret, fear, etc.) ones. Step 5. Define Perspective Add a point of view to determine the angle from which you are looking at the image, such as side, overhead, or front. Other essential modifiers for creating photo-like images involve lenses and cameras. Here are a few examples: close-up, macro, lens flare, wide angle, microscopic, bokeh, isometric, depth of field, ultra-wide angle, fisheye lens, and panorama. Step 6. Add Art Style, Art Mediums, and Artists Proceed to aesthetic settings and define the overall artistic style. Also, specify the art medium. These aspects can greatly contribute to the value of the generated output, making it more consistent and expressive. Here are some of the common keywords: geometrical art, pop art, watercolor, line drawing, line art, 3D sculpture, crayon drawing, painting, oil painting, pastel drawing, medieval art, photography, digital art, stained glass, cave painting, polaroid, vector art, retro, illustration, comics, editorial fashion photography, Japanese anime style, surreal, travel photography, pencil sketch, steampunk, cartoon, futurism, vaporwave, art deco, interior design, psychedelic, street art. Consider including artistic influences. Adding the name of a specific artist whose signature artwork aligns with your chosen art genre can enhance the final image. Note, however, that finding the right artist is crucial so as not to mess up the output. Some artists affect the generation only subtly, while others can alter it significantly depending on their distinctive manner. For example, Claude Monet can infuse impressionism into landscapes, while mentioning Salvador Dali adds a surrealistic touch. Step 7. Add “Magic” Words Certain words can make a dramatic difference in the outcomes of the generation. The keywords like highly detailed, ultra-realistic, 4K, 8K, UHD, and HDR are the game changers for the overall quality of the image. Adding “studio lighting” will introduce appealing textures to the image, while “accent lighting” can draw attention to specific features. Describing the image as “professional” can enhance color contrast and detail, while mentioning “vivid colors” will bring life to your image. Using terms like ultra-wide angle, panoramic, or long-shot will help guide the camera. Packing your prompt with phrases related to artistic techniques and materials (such as trending on artstation, precise line-art, golden ratio, fine art, etc.) and those associated with artistic value (such as most beautiful image ever seen, epic composition, etc.) can also bring sophisticated improvements. Step 8. Consider Adding Negative Prompts Negative prompts are parameters that inform the generation model about what you do not want to see in the final image. They help prevent AI from generating specific elements, fix image abnormalities, and improve overall quality. Here are some universal examples: blurry, cropped, cloned face, duplicate, error, ugly, wrong proportions, deform, fused fingers, extra arms, law quality res, watermark, and more. Step 9. Define Correct Word Order and Keyword Weight Input The order is almost as important as the vocabulary, guiding the AI in generating the desired output. Combine keywords to direct the focus of your prompt and note key phrases that influence image preference. Emphasize essential keywords with a full colon and decimal number, use parentheses for added importance, and brackets for less importance. Typically, the earlier a word appears in the sentence, the more importance it is given. If the AI model didn’t take in some key phrase and failed to depict it in the generated image, try rearranging the order of words, placing the missing element earlier in the prompt. Bad vs. Good Prompt Example Bad prompt: portrait of a woman looking directly at the camera, neck tattoo, urban pink background. Good prompt: head and shoulders realistic photo portrait of a beautiful woman looking at the camera, white skin, pink lips, red hair, blue eyes, black tattoos on her neck, neon punk, highly detailed, pink neon city background. Creating effective prompts requires both artistic imagination and technical skills. By including the necessary building blocks and following the proper prompt structure you ensure that the text-to-image generation model understands your vision and produces optimal output. However, don’t be afraid to experiment; the more you practice, the more adept you become, and the more remarkable your creations will be.

How to Write Text Prompts for AI Image Generators to Get Optimal Results with Ease

DARPA is putting together a research program to shine near-infrared light into people’s brains that if successful, would be able to activate and deactivate drugs in their bodies on demand. The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) put out a special notice for its Alert WARfighter Enablement (AWARE) program, which aims to help increase alertness following sleep loss in humans. “The AWARE program aims to develop a combination drug and device to non-invasively increase alertness following sleep loss in humans, without negative side effects such as anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, and with reduced addictive potential”
DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice American soldiers are often prescribed dextroamphetamine as a stimulant to help keep them alert following sleep deprivation, but the drug can cause anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, the latter of which can lead to addiction. To counter this, DARPA is looking for a way to give soldiers a “photoswitchable” version of dextroamphetamine that remains inactive in the body until activated by the presence of near-infrared (NIR) light: “While active, the new photoswitchable drug behaves in the same manner as regular (i.e., non-photoswitchable) dextroamphetamine.” Theoretically, the drug could be switched on or off with a flick of a NIR light shot into the head “to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible.” According to DARPA, “Temporal arrangement of NIR light pulses may be used to titrate the dose of activated drug over time, which can further reduce the potential for addiction and other undesirable effects.” “The AWARE technology will be developed with temporal selectivity, enabling reversible activation of the drug precisely when needed”
DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice The DARPA special notice describes the process as such: “Through non-invasive delivery of NIR light to specific area(s) of the brain, the combination of photoswitchable drug and a NIR-emitting light will selectively activate regions of the prefrontal cortex responsible for executive function, working memory, and decision making, while avoiding deep brain structures such as the amygdala and striatum, which have been implicated in mood alterations and euphoria, respectively.” Leading the AWARE program, should it become a fully-funded research project, will be Dr. Pedro Irazoqui, who, according to his bio, “joined DARPA in January 2024 as a program manager in the Biological Technologies Office. His research seeks to address the need for a more capable fighting force in extreme environments.” As a full professor at Johns Hopkins University, Irazoqui’s “research is focused on the development of wearable and implantable wireless medical devices for treating diverse neural pathologies with a particular focus on epilepsy.” “The temporal selectivity of switching the drug from an active to inactive state is anticipated to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible“
DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice Last month, Neuroscience News highlighted a study from researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital showing how near-infrared light could help with traumatic brain injuries, PTSD, depression, and possibly even autism. According to the Neuroscience News report: “Low-level light therapy aids brain healing in patients with moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI). Using a helmet that emits near-infrared light, researchers observed increased brain connectivity within two weeks of treatment.” And according to a 2022 study in Frontiers in Pharmacology, near-infrared light “can penetrate transcranially the physical barriers of the skin and skull and reach the brain parenchyma if an optical window is used between 650 nm and 1,200 nm without excessive heat generation. Biomedical reports demonstrate the ability of NIR light to stimulate biochemical processes that maintain a healthy brain state and can be beneficial in acute and chronic pathologic brain conditions.” The DARPA AWARE program is anticipated to comprise three phases over 36 months. Tim Hinchliffe, Editor, The Sociable DARPA is putting together a research program to shine near-infrared light into people’s brains that if successful, would be able to activate and deactivate drugs in their bodies on demand. The US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) put out a special notice for its Alert WARfighter Enablement (AWARE) program, which aims to help increase alertness following sleep loss in humans. special notice “The AWARE program aims to develop a combination drug and device to non-invasively increase alertness following sleep loss in humans, without negative side effects such as anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, and with reduced addictive potential” DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice “The AWARE program aims to develop a combination drug and device to non-invasively increase alertness following sleep loss in humans, without negative side effects such as anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, and with reduced addictive potential” “The AWARE program aims to develop a combination drug and device to non-invasively increase alertness following sleep loss in humans, without negative side effects such as anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, and with reduced addictive potential” “The AWARE program aims to develop a combination drug and device to non-invasively increase alertness following sleep loss in humans, without negative side effects such as anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, and with reduced addictive potential” DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice American soldiers are often prescribed dextroamphetamine as a stimulant to help keep them alert following sleep deprivation, but the drug can cause anxiety, irritability, or euphoria, the latter of which can lead to addiction. dextroamphetamine To counter this, DARPA is looking for a way to give soldiers a “photoswitchable” version of dextroamphetamine that remains inactive in the body until activated by the presence of near-infrared (NIR) light: “ While active, the new photoswitchable drug behaves in the same manner as regular (i.e., non-photoswitchable) dextroamphetamine .” While active, the new photoswitchable drug behaves in the same manner as regular (i.e., non-photoswitchable) dextroamphetamine While active, the new photoswitchable drug behaves in the same manner as regular (i.e., non-photoswitchable) dextroamphetamine Theoretically, the drug could be switched on or off with a flick of a NIR light shot into the head “ to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible .” to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible According to DARPA, “ Temporal arrangement of NIR light pulses may be used to titrate the dose of activated drug over time, which can further reduce the potential for addiction and other undesirable effects .” Temporal arrangement of NIR light pulses may be used to titrate the dose of activated drug over time, which can further reduce the potential for addiction and other undesirable effects Temporal arrangement of NIR light pulses may be used to titrate the dose of activated drug over time, which can further reduce the potential for addiction and other undesirable effects “The AWARE technology will be developed with temporal selectivity, enabling reversible activation of the drug precisely when needed” DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice “The AWARE technology will be developed with temporal selectivity, enabling reversible activation of the drug precisely when needed” “The AWARE technology will be developed with temporal selectivity, enabling reversible activation of the drug precisely when needed” “The AWARE technology will be developed with temporal selectivity, enabling reversible activation of the drug precisely when needed” DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice The DARPA special notice describes the process as such: “Through non-invasive delivery of NIR light to specific area(s) of the brain, the combination of photoswitchable drug and a NIR-emitting light will selectively activate regions of the prefrontal cortex responsible for executive function, working memory, and decision making, while avoiding deep brain structures such as the amygdala and striatum, which have been implicated in mood alterations and euphoria, respectively .” the combination of photoswitchable drug and a NIR-emitting light will selectively activate regions of the prefrontal cortex responsible for executive function, working memory, and decision making, while avoiding deep brain structures such as the amygdala and striatum, which have been implicated in mood alterations and euphoria, respectively the combination of photoswitchable drug and a NIR-emitting light will selectively activate regions of the prefrontal cortex responsible for executive function, working memory, and decision making, while avoiding deep brain structures such as the amygdala and striatum, which have been implicated in mood alterations and euphoria, respectively Leading the AWARE program, should it become a fully-funded research project, will be Dr. Pedro Irazoqui, who, according to his bio , “joined DARPA in January 2024 as a program manager in the Biological Technologies Office. His research seeks to address the need for a more capable fighting force in extreme environments.” his bio As a full professor at Johns Hopkins University, Irazoqui’s “research is focused on the development of wearable and implantable wireless medical devices for treating diverse neural pathologies with a particular focus on epilepsy.” “The temporal selectivity of switching the drug from an active to inactive state is anticipated to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible“ DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice “The temporal selectivity of switching the drug from an active to inactive state is anticipated to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible“ “ The temporal selectivity of switching the drug from an active to inactive state is anticipated to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible “ The temporal selectivity of switching the drug from an active to inactive state is anticipated to facilitate on-demand de-transition from alertness and make restorative sleep possible DARPA AWARE Program Special Notice Last month, Neuroscience News highlighted a study from researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital showing how near-infrared light could help with traumatic brain injuries, PTSD, depression, and possibly even autism. Neuroscience News Neuroscience News According to the Neuroscience News report: Neuroscience News “ Low-level light therapy aids brain healing in patients with moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI). Using a helmet that emits near-infrared light, researchers observed increased brain connectivity within two weeks of treatment .” Low-level light therapy aids brain healing in patients with moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI). Using a helmet that emits near-infrared light, researchers observed increased brain connectivity within two weeks of treatment Low-level light therapy aids brain healing in patients with moderate traumatic brain injury (TBI). Using a helmet that emits near-infrared light, researchers observed increased brain connectivity within two weeks of treatment And according to a 2022 study in Frontiers in Pharmacology , near-infrared light “can penetrate transcranially the physical barriers of the skin and skull and reach the brain parenchyma if an optical window is used between 650 nm and 1,200 nm without excessive heat generation. Biomedical reports demonstrate the ability of NIR light to stimulate biochemical processes that maintain a healthy brain state and can be beneficial in acute and chronic pathologic brain conditions.” Frontiers in Pharmacology Frontiers in Pharmacology The DARPA AWARE program is anticipated to comprise three phases over 36 months. Tim Hinchliffe, Editor, The Sociable Tim Hinchliffe, Editor, The Sociable Tim Hinchliffe , Editor, The Sociable Tim Hinchliffe

DARPA Wants To Activate Drugs in Human Brains With Near-Infrared Lights

DARPA নিয়ার-ইনফ্রারেড লাইট দিয়ে মানুষের মস্তিষ্কে ওষুধ সক্রিয় করতে চায়৷

DARPA will Medikamente im menschlichen Gehirn mit Nahinfrarotlicht aktivieren

DARPA quiere activar fármacos en el cerebro humano con luces del infrarrojo cercano

La DARPA veut activer des médicaments dans le cerveau humain avec des lumières proche infrarouge

DARPA निकट-अवरक्त प्रकाश की सहायता से मानव मस्तिष्क में दवाओं को सक्रिय करना चाहता है

DARPAは近赤外線で人間の脳内の薬物を活性化したいと考えている

DARPA는 근적외선 조명으로 인간 두뇌의 약물을 활성화하고자 합니다.

DARPA quer ativar drogas em cérebros humanos com luzes infravermelhas próximas

DARPA хочет активировать лекарства в человеческом мозге с помощью ближнего инфракрасного света

DARPA, İnsan Beynindeki İlaçları Yakın Kızılötesi Işıklarla Etkinleştirmek İstiyor

DARPA muốn kích hoạt thuốc trong não người bằng đèn cận hồng ngoại

DARPA 希望利用近红外光激活人类大脑中的药物

Effortlessly Launch LangChain APIs with LangServe and MinIO Integration

অনায়াসে LangServe এবং MinIO ইন্টিগ্রেশন সহ LangChain API চালু করুন

Müheloses Starten von LangChain-APIs mit LangServe- und MinIO-Integration

Lance las API de LangChain sin esfuerzo con la integración de LangServe y MinIO

Lancez sans effort les API LangChain avec l'intégration LangServe et MinIO

LangServe और MinIO एकीकरण के साथ LangChain API को आसानी से लॉन्च करें

LangServe と MinIO の統合により LangChain API を簡単に起動

LangServe 및 MinIO 통합을 통해 LangChain API를 손쉽게 실행

Inicie APIs LangChain sem esforço com integração LangServe e MinIO

Легко запускайте API-интерфейсы LangChain с интеграцией LangServe и MinIO.

LangServe ve MinIO Entegrasyonu ile LangChain API'lerini Zahmetsizce Başlatın

Dễ dàng khởi chạy API LangChain với tích hợp LangServe và MinIO

通过 LangServe 和 MinIO 集成轻松启动 LangChain API

Integrating North American Credit Models into Asian and Middle Eastern Educational Systems

Stories, News & Mentions about ALTERA

Altera’s Stories on HackerNoon