Sponsored by Texas Instruments: More sophisticated cyberthreats have prioritized security measures in wireless electronics design. Thanks to the latest standards, one of the best...

Meet the Latest Cybersecurity Standards with New, Integrated Wireless MCUs | Electronic Design

At Yahoo Finance, you get free stock quotes, the latest news, portfolio management resources, international market data, social interaction and mortgage rates to help you manage your financial life.

Texas Instruments (TXN) International Revenue in Focus: Trends and 
Expectations

Texas Instrument&#x27;s (TXN) first-quarter 2024 results reflect the impacts of widespread weakness in various end markets on the Analog segment.

Soft Analog Demand Hurts Texas Instrument's (TXN) Q1 Revenues

Texas Instruments stock surges on an earnings beat and signs of market recovery. Is the chip pioneer&#x27;s stock a buy today?

Why Texas Instruments Stock Opened 8.5% Higher Today @themotleyfool #stocks $TXN

Texas Instruments&#x27; (TXN) first-quarter 2024 results reflect weakness across end markets.

Texas Instruments (TXN) Q1 Earnings Beat, Revenues Fall Y/Y - April 24, 2024 - Zacks.com

Why Texas Instruments Stock Opened 8.5% Higher Today

Several metrics were down in Q1 year over year, but the tech giant did better than analysts expected.

Texas Instruments Rough Quarter Still Exceeded Expectations @themotleyfool #stocks $TXN

Barron&#x27;s is a leading source of financial news, providing in-depth analysis and commentary on stocks, investments and how markets are moving across the world.

Amazon, Meta, AMD, Super Micro, Texas Instruments, Tech Stocks in Focus 
Today

It was a weak quarter for the company ... of Impinj's results here and Texas Instruments's results here. The fears around raising interest rates have been putting pressure on tech stocks, and while some of the analog semiconductors stocks have fared ...

Microchip Technology Earnings: What To Look For From MCHP

Texas Instruments isn't flinching; it knows from experience that the time to put money to work is when things look bleak.

This Tech Titan Is Struggling, But It Is Already Preparing for the Rebound

Texas Instruments

texasinstruments

Dividend stocks are a great way to generate income from your investments while also benefiting from capital appreciation. However, not all dividend stocks are created equal. Some may offer high yields but low growth prospects, while others may have erratic payouts or poor stock performance. To help you find the best dividend stocks under $50 in 2023, we have screened for companies that have: : This is an arbitrary threshold, but it helps us focus on stocks that are more accessible and less expensive than some of the high-priced dividend aristocrats or blue chips. A current share price below $50 This is also a subjective cutoff, but it ensures that we get a decent return on our investment. A yield above 2% is also higher than the average yield of the S&P 500 index, which is currently around 1.3%. A dividend yield above 2%: This shows that the company has a long-term commitment to rewarding shareholders with consistent and growing dividends. It also indicates that the company has a stable and profitable business model that can withstand various economic cycles and competitive pressures. A history of increasing dividends for at least 10 years: This demonstrates that the company has been able to grow its earnings over time, which supports its dividend payments and future growth prospects. A positive earnings growth rate also implies that the company has a competitive advantage or a strong market position in its industry. A positive earnings growth rate over the past five years: This measures how much of the company’s earnings are paid out as dividends. A lower payout ratio means that the company retains more earnings for reinvestment or debt reduction, which enhances its financial flexibility and sustainability. A higher payout ratio means that the company has less room to grow or maintain its dividends in case of an earnings decline. A reasonable payout ratio below 80%: Based on these criteria and a few more important ones listed by five of the best dividend stocks under $50 that you can explore right now. Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and e. Investing involves risk and you should carefully consider all risks and uncertainties before making any investment decisions. We do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information presented and we are not responsible for any errors or omissions. You should consult with a financial advisor before making any investment decisions. should not be construed as professional investment advic List of best dividend stocks under $50 in 2023 (NYSE: PFE) Pfizer Pfizer is one of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies, with a of drugs and vaccines for various therapeutic areas. The company has been in the spotlight for its COVID-19 vaccine, which has generated strong sales and profits in 2021 and 2022. diversified portfolio Pfizer has a long history of paying and growing dividends, with 11 consecutive years of annual increases. The current dividend yield is 4%, and the payout ratio is 54%. The company has also delivered an impressive earnings growth rate of 36% over the past five years. Pfizer expects to grow its revenue by 6% to 9% annually through 2025, driven by its core products and pipeline opportunities. The company also plans to return more cash to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks. (NYSE: T) AT&T AT&T is a leading telecommunications company that provides wireless, broadband, video, and media services to millions of customers. The company also owns WarnerMedia, which includes HBO, CNN, Warner Bros., and other entertainment assets. AT&T has been paying dividends since 1984 and has increased them for 36 consecutive years. The current dividend yield is a whopping 6%, and the payout ratio is 58%. The company has also grown its earnings by an average of 5% per year over the past five years. AT&T is undergoing a major transformation as it plans to spin off WarnerMedia and merge it with Discovery (NASDAQ: DISCA) in mid-2023. The deal will create a new media giant that will compete with Netflix (NASDAQ: NFLX) and Disney (NYSE: DIS). AT&T will focus on its core connectivity business and reduce its debt load. AT&T expects to maintain its dividend at current levels after the spin-off and grow it modestly over time. The company also expects to generate strong free cash flow and invest in its wireless network and fiber broadband expansion. (NASDAQ: TXN) Texas Instruments Texas Instruments is one of the world's largest companies that designs and manufactures chips for various applications such as industrial equipment, automotive systems, personal electronics, communications devices, and more. semiconductor Texas Instruments has been paying dividends since 1962 and has increased them for 18 consecutive years. The current dividend yield is 2.8%, and the payout ratio is only 46%. The company has also achieved an impressive earnings growth rate of 21% per year over the past five years. Texas Instruments benefits from its diversified end markets, strong competitive position, high-quality products, efficient manufacturing capabilities, and robust cash generation. The company expects to grow its revenue by mid-to-high single digits annually over the long term and return more than 100% of its free cash flow to shareholders through dividends and share buybacks. (NYSE: XOM) Exxon Mobil Exxon Mobil is one of the largest oil and gas companies in the world, with operations spanning exploration, production, refining, chemicals and renewables. The company has been recovering from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on oil demand and prices, as well as facing pressure from investors and regulators to address climate change risks. Exxon Mobil has been taking steps to improve its profitability and sustainability by cutting costs, divesting non-core assets, investing in low-carbon technologies and increasing shareholder returns. The company expects to grow its earnings by more than four times by 2027, compared to its pre-pandemic level in 2019, while also reducing its greenhouse gas intensity by up to 20% by 2025. emissions Exxon Mobil pays a quarterly dividend of $0.87 per share, which translates to an annual yield of about 3.5% at the current stock price. The company has raised its dividend for 39 consecutive years, making it another long-standing dividend aristocrat. Exxon Mobil trades at a fair valuation of 15 times forward earnings, which is slightly above the industry average of 14 times. The company also generates solid cash flow and has a manageable debt-to-equity ratio of 0.8. (NASDAQ: CSCO) Cisco Systems Inc Cisco is a leading provider of networking equipment and software for enterprises and consumers. The company has been paying dividends since 2011 and has increased them every year since then. The current dividend yield is 3.05% and the payout ratio is 49%. Cisco has also grown its earnings per share (EPS) by an average of 9.6% annually over the past five years. The stock is trading at $48.19 as of March 22, 2023. Conclusion In conclusion, dividend stocks are a reliable way to generate income while benefiting from capital appreciation. However, not all dividend stocks are created equal. To find the best dividend stocks under $50, we have used specific criteria such as a current share price below $50, a dividend yield above 2%, a history of increasing dividends for at least 10 years, a positive earnings growth rate over the past five years, and a reasonable payout ratio below 80%. Based on these criteria, Pfizer, AT&T, Texas Instruments, and Exxon Mobil are some of the best dividend stocks under $50 in 2023. These companies have a long history of paying and growing dividends, a stable and profitable business model, and a strong market position in their respective industries. Moreover, they offer decent dividend yields and a potential for future growth, making them a good investment opportunity for income-seeking investors. Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and e. Investing involves risk and you should carefully consider all risks and uncertainties before making any investment decisions. We do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information presented and we are not responsible for any errors or omissions. You should consult with a financial advisor before making any investment decisions. should not be construed as professional investment advic

Dividend Stocks Under $50 to Consider in 2023

As I can see, electronic design companies are far more undervalued by the media than the software ones. But the fact remains that the market is fairly large and continues to snowball in growth. According to the , the size of the electronic design services, combined with contract manufacturing, has reached almost $400 bln in 2018 and will grow by up to more than $650 bln by 2025. Grand View Research comprehensive report To overcome this grave injustice, I’ve prepared my research on electronic design companies that are working on a contractual basis. Let me first explain how I selected them. Trustworthy Electronic Design Services: Selection Criteria The electronic design services domain is comprised of a relatively large amount of companies from around the globe. But have no illusions: not all of them are trustworthy. That’s why all the companies from the list below: Have at least ten years of history (the youngest one established in 2009); Covering a variety of services (instead of extremely specialized companies with a single focus); Acts as an official partner of at least one or at least one . semiconductor company from the top 50 member of the Semiconductor Industry Association The list of electronic design companies as follows: Promwad Website: https://www.promwad.com/ Location: Vilnius, Lithuania Founded: 2004 No. of employees: 51 — 200 Services: electronic product design, hardware development, PCB design, FPGA design, embedded software development, automotive electronics development The Promwad electronics design house was founded in 2004 to create new products for their clients. Since that time, the company has opened new offices in the USA and EU and has successfully finished 300+ projects. The number of devices manufactured under the design they made has surpassed by 3 mln. Among the noteworthy clients of Promwad is Qoobi B.V., and the device Qoobi ONE, where Promwad took part, received the in the category “Best of the Best.” Among the others are Parrot, Prestigio, Lapka (acquired by Airbnb), and various famous businesses. What’s to the reason why I included it to the listing, Promwad is an official partner of top 50 members NXP, Texas Instruments, STMicroelectronics, Fujitsu, and Analog Devices. Red Dot Award in 2019 Variscite Website: https://www.variscite.com/ Location: Lod, Israel Founded: 2003 No. of employees: 51 — 200 Services: SOM development and manufacturing, board design, OEM manufacturing The main focus of this Israeli-born company is Systems on Modules design, development, as well as manufacturing. Since 2003, Variscite has passed the 1 mln of shipped SoM devices milestone. Variscite’s business is mostly product-oriented. That’s why their clients aren’t detailed out. What is clear, is that the company is a with early access to their ARM-based i.MX8 family solutions. And it is a reason why the company won its seat here. key partner of NXP Semiconductors/Freescale TOPIC Embedded Systems Website: https://topic.nl/en Location: Best, Netherlands Founded: 1996 No. of employees: 51 — 200 Services: embedded software development, hardware development, FPGA development, technical consulting With more than 20 years of experience, TOPIC is a trusted European embedded solutions developer. The company focuses on FPGA, digital hardware, and embedded software projects. The domain expertise includes healthcare, robotics, aerospace and defense, automotive, transport and logistics, as well as semiconductors industries. Along with the services, the company has its products. Among these include systems on modules, some ready-made building blocks, as well as operating systems for FPGA and SoC. TOPIC is a , a chartered member of SIA, which made it possible to enlist the company here. premium partner of Xilinx DesignLinx Hardware Solutions Website: https://www.designlinxhs.com/ Location: Nashua, New Hampshire, USA Founded: 2009 No. of employees: 11 — 50 Services: FPGA design, embedded software development, ITAR compliance, board-level design, AWS/AI/ML support The DesignLinx Hardware Solutions company has a keen focus on FPGA design services, as well as on several other niche ones. The company is veteran-owned, which makes it well adapted to defense business orders. Defense Logistics Agency is one of the leading partners of the DesignLinx, as well as some other government and private companies. It has been a of the Xilinx Alliance since 2011, as well as an official partner of both Intel and Analog Devices. As you can see, DesignLinx is worthy of being here. premier member L-CARD Website: https://en.lcard.ru/ Location: Moscow, Russia Founded: 1987 No. of employees: 51 — 200 Services: modular DAQ systems, ADC/DAC boards, fuel measuring sensors, R&D outsourcing, OEM manufacturing The L-CARD company has a rather long history for a Russian one. The official year of establishment is 1987, however, the laboratory was established in 1980 as a part of a state-owned research institute. The main focus is the development and manufacturing of measuring equipment but the design and development services branch is also here. The electronic equipment designed by L-CARD is used by 3,000+ clients globally. For example, its DAQ system is installed on the . The only partnership that meets our criteria is Apple’s MFi licensing program membership as an official developer of iPhone/iPad-compatible devices. Swedish MAX IV synchrotron Hectronic Website: https://hectronic.se/ Location: Uppsala, Sweden Founded:  1989 No. of employees: 11 — 50 Services: embedded solutions, embedded Systems, COM modules, Qseven, ARM modules, COM express This Swedish company has more than 30 years of history in embedded product development services. Moreover, it acts as a manufacturer, as well.  Hectronic is a part of , and among their clients are ABB, Saab/Scania, Ericsson, and Atlas Copco. discoverIE Group PLC The industries in which the company has strong expertise include maritime and offshore, transportation, medical, defense, industrial automation, as well as telecommunications. The company wins millions of dollars worth of contracts pretty regularly. Among the official partners are Mitsubishi Electric, AMD, Intel, NXP, and Texas Instruments. RT-RK Website: https://www.rt-rk.com/ Location: Novi Sad, Serbia Founded: 1991 No. of employees: 1001 — 5000 Services: hardware product development, FPGA rapid prototyping, embedded software development, home automation services RT-RK positions itself not only as a company but as a Serbian national research institute. Not only national but international: it has offices in Bosnia and Croatia, as well. The company has a significant history as the near-shore development partner for Cirrus Logic and Marvell. This is the main reason to call RT-RK trustworthy here. The company has a rather wide focus, including embedded, TV, automotive, home appliances, DSP, defense, FPGA, and even UX. It constantly participates in major tech exhibitions like . CES Softeq Website: https://www.softeq.com/ Location: Houston, Texas, USA Founded: 1997 No. of employees: 201 — 500 Services: hardware design, embedded systems development, custom software development Softeq is a full-stack development company in both the hardware and software fields. With that said, the majority of their finished projects are software-related. The list of clients includes Coca-Cola, Nvidia, HP, Epson, and other famous enterprises. For many years, the company works in close . This fact made it possible to include Softeq in our list. partnership with SK Hynix According to the company website, its key domains are consulting, product development, and digital strategy. What’s mostly covered in the hardware-related industry are consumer electronics. Among the most eye-catching projects is the Hunity curved wrist screen smartphone.

Top Electronic Design Service Companies You Should Consider in 2020

What is the significance of blockchain technology in the future, why can Bitcoin be hyped for over ten years and still have such strong vitality? It is impossible to know what the future world will look like without studying these issues in depth. The Cornerstone of Decentralization and the cornerstone of decentralized development is the . From monarchy to republic, planned economy to market economy, both have proved a history of decentralization, incentive mechanism From the vast history of humankind, it is not difficult to see that those very successful countries must have created more advanced incentive mechanisms. For example, the “Joint-Stock Company”, a social incentive mechanism that changed human destiny, once created the first marine empire, the Netherlands. The Dutch East India Company, considered to be the first truly joint-stock company in humankind, reached its peak in 1637, with a market value of 7.2 trillion U.S. dollars — nearly seven times higher than Apple. Once the “shareholding” company was created on the earth, the hype over “stocks” began to be rooted in human genes. In 1711, the British Nanhai Co., Ltd. was established. By 1719, the share price of the South Sea Company had risen from £128 at the beginning of the year to more than £1,000 in July. The speculators included more than half of the lawmakers, and even the king could not help but tempted to subscribe for shares worth 100,000 pounds. Of course, the stock price of the South Sea eventually broke, falling from more than £1,000 to around £100. We call it the “ ”. South Sea Bubble Photo: Wikipedia Isaac Newton also participated in this hype, and expectedly, ended up losing a lot. “I can calculate the motions of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people”. Isaac Newton, 1720 Although the South Sea bubble burst, the rise of joint-stock companies in Britain has brought great strength to its colonial expansion and the industrial revolution. Later, France learned it soon. In 1716, it adopted a similar approach to the United Kingdom and gave the “Mississippi” company the right to sell stocks. By mid-1719, the stock price of the Mississippi company had risen for 13 consecutive months, and the stock price had risen from 500 The river rose to more than ten thousand rivers, an increase of more than 20 times. But Mississippi’s stock price eventually broke down in 1721 and finally fell back to 500 Rivels. History has called the “ ”. Mississippi Bubble (Photo: devastatingdisasters.com) In the 19th century, the United States began to rise, and there were endless bubbles in rubber company stock prices and railway company stock prices. In the 20th century, the U.S. manufacturing stock price bubble broke out, including IBM and Texas Instruments, which can drive the price-earnings ratio to more than 80 times within a year, but fell back to 20–30 times a year later; In the 1990s, another high-tech stock bubble burst in the United States. Apparently, the rise of a country is accompanied by the birth of a new incentive mechanism, or the high use of certain incentive mechanisms as an inevitable hype. The rise of the Netherlands was accompanied by the prosperity of the shares of the Dutch East India Company and the birth of the world’s first stock exchange in Amsterdam; the colonial expansion of the United Kingdom and France and the industrial revolution were accompanied by the stock price bubbles of the South Sea and the stock prices of joint-stock companies such as the Mississippi bubble, and then the development of joint-stock companies. The United States has become a world hegemon, where it has been accompanied by stock price bubbles again and again. However, except for “shareholding” companies, is there any other incentive mechanism for the development of the human economy? Blockchain May Provide a Different Answer The reason why joint-stock companies have a strong incentive mechanism is that in the past 300 years, humans have mainly focused on production problems. It requires a strong system to stimulate production. Joint-stock companies make capital and professionals more relevant. Combining with the national law as a guarantee (the monarch cannot override the law), so that those who own the shares can continue to obtain benefits, this form of shares has become an unchallenged consensus in the market, mobilizing the entire market to invest resources All its potential. On the other hand, suppose that the shares you own may be deprived of violence at any time. Who would be willing to invest and who would desperately risk innovation? Therefore, the creativity stimulated by the shareholding system has caused mankind to stagnate the economic aggregate for thousands of years and began to rise linearly. Many people think that this is the credit for the industrial revolution, but the industrial revolution itself has not separated from the main body of the company. However, since the development of the human economy, its needs have changed. Although human needs for material are still very strong, there is greater demand for distribution systems and new incentive mechanisms that break national boundaries. Joint-stock companies can still play an important role, but behind a joint-stock company is the state, which is a specific or even exclusive legal system. If the guarantee of a specific legal system is lost, the stock will lose its wealth attribute and the incentive mechanism will be Invalid. (Photo: medium) The blockchain will further promote the logic of the shareholding system. The blockchain can allow the subject matter of equity to exceed the limits of specific countries, that is, it can be transferred and bought and sold without the protection of any national law. Undisputed consensus system. For example, the subject matter of blockchain equity such as Bitcoin has reached a global consensus and has produced incredible incentives. The price “bubble” is similar to the various stock price bubbles after the birth of the shareholding system, indicating a new Arrival of incentives. It can be said that the blockchain we understand now is just a technology, so it is still very narrow in terms of its development and use. This was like the East India Company, the South China Sea Company, and the Mississippi Company. At that time, it was used only for the government and the king to solve debt problems and distribute wealth from colonial robbery. It did not expect the role of the shareholding system in the history of human development. PM me at: https://t.me/ShinoAtkinson

The Ultimate Takeaway From The Rise of Blockchains is The Importance of Incentivization

Society has always been towards financiers. There has always been tension between the have-nots and have-yachts. For millennia people have sneered at ‘ ’ money lenders, while admiring more ‘honourable’ professions from farming to art. hostile parasitic But nothing could be further from the truth. Before the ascent of finance, society was more hostile. Hunter-gatherers didn’t trade, they’d raid. Before the ascent of financial technology, there was no river of progress—there was a dam of . stagnation Technology was in finance to build systems to record government finances, pay taxes, and to manage agricultural production. Those early financial innovations opened the floodgates to a river of human creativity—just as the of the 1600s spawned the industrial revolution of the 1700s. The ascent of FinTech spawned the ascent of man. first used financial revolution While  the ascent of FinTech is just beginning, the era of traditional banks may be ending. Despite banks like Goldman Sachs higher than the GDP of Croatia and Ecuador, banking expert Arvind Sankaran “We're witnessing the creative destruction of financial services.” Or as the Co-founder of the Bank Innovators Council, JP Nicols, , “Banks have to upgrade themselves, or risk being burnt to the ground.” earning a revenue can see puts it Whether traditional banks are at risk or not, FinTech is definitely changing the financial industry. If you’re a financial wizard looking to master the universe or simply wanting to take care of your personal finances, it has never been more to understand the history of FinTech. important 9,000 BC: The Beginning Of Finance - Man & Money When was money invented? How did the use of money progress? Early man would goods they had, for goods they needed. 9,000 BC: barter In China, people began using . This was the start of commodity money (gold, silver, bronze, salt etc.). 1,400 BC: bronze to trade with The was minted in modern day Turkey. 600 BC: first ever ‘official’ currency The banknote was used in its by the Tang Dynasty. 600s AD: early form The , first gold coin widely accepted across Europe was minted. It encouraged international commerce. 1,250 AD: Florin The financial in Europe began. It included joint stock companies, insurance, and banking. 1600s AD: revolution Paper money was minted for the first time in when banknotes were printed in Sweden. 1,661 AD: Europe 1866: Modern FinTech - Government Assistance How did government investments and assistance pave the way for modern FinTech? The first transatlantic telegraph cable was , connecting New York, Paris, and London. 1866: laid The US Federal Reserve Banks developed the so they could transfer funds between them in real-time. 1918: Fedwire Funds Service In WWII, resources applied to developing and breaking codes for secure communication led to breakthroughs in computer science that would later be applied to FinTech. Alan Turing began his 1950s paper with, “ ” 1938 - 1945: Can machines think? Credit cards were . The first was launched in 1946 called the Charg-It card. It was followed in 1950 by The Diners Club card came out, in 1958 by the American Express, and by the Interbank Card Association was created (now Mastercard) in 1966. 1946: invented 1967: FinTech 2.0 - Traditional Financial Institutions After initial government resources encouraged the growth of FinTech, how did the traditional financial institutions capitalise on those developments? The movement toward digitisation began. The first ATM was by Barclays in the UK and the first handheld calculator was invented by Texas Instruments. 1967: invented The first Real-TIme Gross Settlement system was in America, allowing transactions between banks to happen in real-time and settle on a one-to-one basis. 1970: launched NASDAQ, the electronic stock exchange in the world was launched in New York. 1971: first (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) was founded, enabling financial institutions across the globe to send and receive secure transactions. 1973: SWIFT Online banking was in the USA. 1980: introduced Bloomberg was . It later became the world's most valuable private information services firm in the world. 1981: founded The first market crash occurred, caused, at least in part, by . 1987: program trading Citigroup launched the Financial Services Technology Consortium project, which is where the term ‘ ’ was derived. 1993: FinTech In 1995 Wells Fargo online account checking on the World Wide Web. 1995: provided Confinity (currently PayPal) is . 1998: launched There were 8 US banks that had . 2001: more than 1 million online customers ING Direct and HSBC Direct, the completely online banks with no physical branches, were launched in the UK. 2005: first Mobile money, M-Pesa, was to Kenya by Vodafone. Within 3-4 years, the majority of Kenya’s GDP was flowing through M-Pesa. 2007: introduced The iPhone was . Now the power of a modern smartphone the power of a room-sized IBM mainframe from the 1970s. 2007: launched dwarfs 2008: FinTech 3.0 & 3.5 - Startups & Emerging Markets How are traditional financial institutions giving way to startups? Are emerging markets seeing more innovations than developed markets? How did the GFC lead to a growth in FinTech? Which are the most significant cryptocurrencies? How did Google and Apple enter the financial system? The FinTech sector received an following the GFC for three reasons. Firstly, many employees in the financial sector were laid off, so they went to work at FinTech startups. Secondly, after the GFC many regulatory changes were made which significantly increased the cost of compliance, so many companies looked to FinTech to provide more efficient solutions. Finally, the trust in major financial institutions decreased and people looked for alternative options. 2008: influx of resources was launched by Satoshi Nakamoto. It helped pave the way for cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology. 2009: Bitcoin Contactless cards were introduced for . 2010: quicker and easier payments Google Google Wallet. 2011: develops Apple Apple Pay. 2014: launched The cryptocurrency Ethereum was , featuring Smart Contracts. 2015: introduced Yu’E Bao, a Money Market Fund, was launched by the Chinese company Alibaba. Within 9 months it the world’s fourth-largest MMF (after Vanguard, Fidelity, and Schwab). 2015: became Data flow has increased dramatically. From 2013-2018, as much was laid as in the previous 150 years. 2018: undersea cable Global FinTech investment rose to a . 2018: record $111.8 Billion 2019+: The Future Of FinTech - BigTech & The AI Revolution In 1994, Bill Gates famously , “Banking is necessary, banks are not.” At the time the moguls of the financial world didn’t heed his warning. Now, traditional financial institutions are nervous. stated In 2014, J.P. Morgan CEO, Jamie Dimon, was aware of the imminent change. “Silicon Valley is coming,” he . “When I go to Silicon Valley… They all want to eat our lunch. Every single one of them is going to try.” said By 2019 we know it’s not just Silicon Valley who’s coming after the ‘lunch’ of traditional financial institutions. Nobody knows that better than the founder of Alibaba, Jack Ma. He started his technology company Alibaba, and as we saw above, they created Yu’E Bao which became . the world's largest Money Market Fund Jack Ma . While modern FinTech saw startups competing with traditional financial institutions, TechFin will see companies like Google, Amazon, Apple, and Alibaba competing with banks. coined the term ‘TechFin’ We knew that FinTech would improve the technology of the financial system. But TechFin will rebuild the entire system with new technology. Citigroup put the new fear succinctly in their 2018 report , “When bankers worry about the future, the fear is BigTech, not FinTech.” The Bank Of The Future Bankers may be worried about BigTech, but the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, is predicting something that could have far more impact: a powered by artificial intelligence and hyper-scalability. 4th industrial revolution What will that revolution look like? Former Ceo of Deutsche Bank, John Cryan, , “In our bank we have people doing work like robots. Tomorrow we will have robots behaving like people.” However, we aren’t as good at predicting the impact of innovations as we often believe. As states: We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run. predicted Amara’s law In 1867 when the transatlantic cable was built, nobody could have predicted that it would lead to credit cards, mobile money, and Bitcoin. Whatever the future of FinTech or TechFin brings, it’s sure to rise beyond even the most creative imaginations. And civilisation is going to ascend with it.

The Ascent of FinTech 

Starting with Compaq back in 1981, there haven’t been too many startups in the history of the tech business that have seen things from a different angle and won against the big boys. Now we look at one potential suitor for Compaq’s crown in quantum computing, IonQ, and how its approach to QC may change the discipline forever. Tacos and Burritos About a week ago, quite accidentally, I stumbled across a documentary on Netflix called . I thought I’d watch every tech documentary on Netflix, Amazon Prime and all other streaming service as well as for free on Youtube, so when this popped up on the Netflix recommendation algorithm I was pleasantly surprised. The documentary, about how Compaq competed with, and won against, IBM in the personal computer business in the early 1980s, was a revelation. Silicon Cowboys ‘The world is moving so fast that it’s become change or die. Nobody knows that better than me.’ — Joseph R. “Rod” Canion Of course, I’d heard about the history of Compaq and its CEO Rod Canion et al who left Texas Instruments of calculator fame to establish the startup back in ’81. That was not before, however, Canion, Bill Murto and Jim Harris had thought about starting up a chain of Mexican food restaurants in the Houston area. Where’s my Burrito! Thank goodness for destiny, though. Compaq versus IBM Compaq released its Compaq Portable PC onto the American market in the fall of 1982, and the rest is history, they say. Its winning formula, no doubt, was its compatibility with IBM’s PC, its portability and decent price point. Compaq’s Portable PC. Source: oldcomputers.net For over a decade David stood shoulder to shoulder with Goliath. Things only started to go belly up for Compaq when Dell became the major player in the PC market in the early 2000s. This led to its eventual acquisition by Hewlett-Packard until sadly, the name was retired in 2013. This can’t detract, nevertheless, from the way Compaq conducted itself on the PC market and for a very long time was able to hold its own against companies like Apple and IBM. Three cheers, I say. This only serves as a warning to the big boys of the tech industry that no matter how much money you have, how much influence you possess on the market, innovation is free, and out there, somewhere lurking like a wolf in the night, there’s a clever person or two ready to steal your crown with such a gem of an idea, that they will disrupt the industry forever. Feynman’s Legacy Over the last half a decade, ideas of how computers can change our lives have gone into different directions from the traditional binary system of ones and zeros. ‘Quantum’ is a new byword for tech progress, and quantum computing, the new industry sprouting up startup after startup. These embryonic companies, seeing a future where quantum theory and its applications will change the world of computing, industry, business, education and people’s lives, is here to stay. The man, the genius, Richard Feynman. Source: mystudentvoices.com First espoused by Nobel prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman and Russian mathematician Yuri Manin in the early 1980s — who believed a quantum computer had the potential to better simulate things than a classical computer could — quantum computing has become the go-to field for those interested in a world where the science of quantum mechanics could shape our future. There’s a buzz on the streets of places like College Park, Maryland, Burnaby, Canada and Berkeley, California — home of IonQ, D-Wave and Rigetti, respectively, three of the industry’s smaller companies competing against the giants of the quantum world: IBM, Google, Intel, Microsoft and the dozen others on the market trying to vie for supremacy in quantum computers. ‘Nature isn’t classical, dammit, and if you want to make a simulation of nature, you’d better make it quantum mechanical.’ — Richard Feynman One, though — IonQ , deserves special attention and reminds me of the brash and ballsy attitude of Compaq some forty years earlier. Not just because of its tiny budget in comparison to the others, but additionally for its approach to quantum computer research. While in the main most of the other companies’ efforts are in the semi-conductor superconducting slant to quantum computing, IonQ believes trapped ion technology and how it can be harnessed effectively to build a quantum machine that is both more reliable and cost-effective in the long run has seen many experts in the fledgling industry claim their approach is too unrealistic. Ion Trapping The startup, established in 2015 by cofounders , Professor of Physics at the University of Maryland and Fellow of the Joint Quantum Institute, and , a professor at Duke University, is going against the grain of the ‘traditional’ approach to quantum computer theory. Christopher Monroe Jungsang Kim Trapped ions versus Superconductor. Source: iontrap.umd.edu Their claims the ion trapping system requires less error correction, and that entangling a greater number of qubits is far simpler than in the current systems employed by many of the other companies in the industry, and uses, as its base, atomic clock theory The semi-conductor superconducting method, on the other hand, needs amongst other things dilution refrigerators and other costly equipment. Not good for the bottom line. IonQ’s developments are fairly new, and not everybody in the industry is on their side, though this has not stopped the startup from evangelizing their trapped ion architecture which they believe will surpass the semiconductor approach in the QC world practised by the big guns very soon. An obstacle facing all the companies at the moment is the noise produced by quantum computers, this is especially prescient with the semiconductor-based superconducting method. To say they are noisy is an understatement. These loud machines demand formidable error correction procedures mainly in part to eradicate external noises, wayward electromagnetic fields, vibration, heat and any other outside influences that can destroy the very delicate qubits that are at the centre of the technology. Once this is overcome, however, things can move forward. As of yet, though, the approach is still largely elementary. But wasn’t it the same at the early stages of the classical computer era? Whether IonQ’s remarkable achievements thus far come to fruition is open to debate. Yet, what they have accomplished must be applauded for its brave and innovative approach. Einstein once said: ‘Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new.’ And this is true in IonQ’s case. Like Rigetti and D-Wave, the Maryland-based startup is courageous enough to make a go of it, even though the odds are stacked up against it a hundred-fold. With the resources of infinite money afforded to Google, Intel and IBM, the task ahead will surely be Sisyphean in both its struggle and complexity. Believing in their unique scientific approach to QC and how ion trapping can help the technology move onwards and upwards, will only improve the people working there. Positively Mutated Intellects Compaq, unfortunately, is no more, though its legacy lives on in the laptop and other mobile devices that have become part and parcel of our modern lives. People like Monroe and Kim are just 21st-century versions of Canion, Murto and Harris, with many of the same traits that all entrepreneurs who want to change the world have. If, say, in ten years’ time IonQ is a name of the QC past, too, consigned to history as a company which tried to break the boundaries of science, I don’t think it will really matter that much. What they’re doing now, like all tech companies, and like all scientists in the history of the world have done, is moving scientific thought on, giving it fuel to surge forward in a quest for a better truth, a more realistic vision, of how we can be if we put our minds to it. Barring Einstein and a few other geniuses in the history of the world with a positively mutated intellect, human achievements have largely been based on accumulated knowledge, a continuum of ideas that spread from one generation to another, quite seamlessly on the whole, but so very magical. Positively Mutated Intellect or just an overly aggressive alien? Source: comicvine.gamespot.com IonQ, then, like its long lost brother company Compaq, can be proud of its achievements. Whether they be today or tomorrow. You see, the idea’s the thing. <a href="https://medium.com/media/3c851dac986ab6dbb2d1aaa91205a8eb/href">https://medium.com/media/3c851dac986ab6dbb2d1aaa91205a8eb/href</a>

Why Tech Startup IonQ Could Be The Future Of Quantum Computing

Ready to build an enterprise that endures the test of time and prevails in the future? Get organized to drive more cross-collaboration, creativity, sustained innovation, and digital transformation. If you could peer into a crystal ball and see how the world’s most successful companies were being run in 2029, what do you think you would see? I’ll hope what you see much of (unless something very drastic happens to the evolution of business over the next decade), and that’s organizational silos, manual processes, dependent employees, micromanagers, and the myriad of other business ills that companies are trying to solve right now. won’t Instead, your crystal ball should paint a picture of companies that thrive on collaboration, creativity, and innovation. By 2029, the leaders of these firms will have figured out the combination to fully leveraging these three qualities into successful, sustainable organizations. Here’s how they’ll do it: Max out both internal and external collaboration. They say no man is an island, and this is particularly true in the business arena, where we all rely on one another for ideas, insights, customers, sales, and everything else a company needs to thrive. So along with stoking internal collaboration among employees, the leader of the future has to broaden those networks outside of the company’s four walls. That means customers, suppliers, third-party providers, and other stakeholders will play a larger role in everycompany’s success (not just their own). team created a new WWII fighter jet in just 143 days — it’s one that begs to be rediscovered over and over. In the 1980s, Texas Instruments (TI), a leader in semiconductors, found itself lagging in its innovation. It formed an official collaborative development group, The Lunatic Fringe, tasked with bringing the company back from the brink. Today, the group’s mission is to continuously find new uses, opportunities, and ventures for TI technology. In 1943, Lockheed’s skunk works Cross-boundary collaboration happens in an environment where ideas are celebrated and anyone is welcome to contribute, regardless of their position or group, either within or outside the enterprise. Get behind creativity across the enterprise. entire You remember the story about the pair of 3M scientists who came up with idea for the Post-it® note, right? If not, here’s a quick refresh: In for his church’s upcoming service but needed a bookmark that would stick to the paper without damaging it; Spencer Silver was researching adhesives in the laboratory and discovered an adhesive that stuck lightly to surfaces but didn’t bond tightly to them. 1968 Art Fry was using small paper scraps to mark the hymns The rest, as they say, is history. The Post-it note has endured for more than 50 years, but this example shows just how valuable employee creativity can be for a company (Collectively, there are more than 4,000 Post-it products). In fact, an IBM poll reports that the majority of CEOs consider creativity to be a critical leadership skill (ranking higher than integrity and global thinking). The organization of the future will move even further down this path, ensuring that employees have the tools they need to be creative, and that leaders encourage it and support it. In return, companies see better team communications, improved collaboration among workers, higher sales and productivity, and a more engaged workforce. . Think, act, and do digital Technological transformations will continue to reshape the way the business world is organized. As information becomes more plentiful and less centralized, more organizations are likely to decentralize, too, in order to respond swiftly to it all. Digital transformation can be defined as a process whereby an organization shifts their business models, processes, and organizational culture with digital technologies to adapt to changing information flow. Picture how people in an organization use information. An executive studies a computer dashboard of operational data, an employee surfs the web, an administrative assistant sifts through the paper mail, a committee meets and hears a report, email flows endlessly, operational plans are printed and bound and put on a shelf, and on and on. New ideas float along these “flows” of information. And a leader’s task is twofold: Ensure that you have the right technology platform and flows in place, and create “filters” that capture the most valuable ideas while discarding the stuff that isn’t useful or relevant. How do you set up those filters? In general, information can be managed in three ways. One is through organizational structures, such as decision-making groups. Another is in processes — who hands off what information to whom. The other is through automation — technology that gathers and presents data, such as CRM data from a website. But while it’s vital to view your organization as an information collector, processor, and distributor all at once, it’s just as important to see and act upon something in all that information. This is what thinking, acting, and doing digital means. new Organize for sustained growth. Sustained growth is a holistic human endeavor that requires both left-brained (analytical) and right-brained (creative) talents. No single leader or group of decision-makers can manage sustained growth. Innovative enterprises build a culture that embraces a left-brain/right-brain approach to creative thinking, executing, and communicating. And successful innovation depends upon input from a wide range of people in collaboration, sharing ideas, comparing observations, offering wide-ranging perspectives from their diverse viewpoints, and brainstorming solutions to complex problems. I refer to these divergent perspectives as personas. Persona’s are people, inside and out-side of an organization, playing specific roles to achieve a specific outcome. Here are a few examples: keep an enterprise from being too internally focused and caught in their comfort zone. Learning personas move the innovation lifecycle forward; they are skilled at navigating processes, politics, and red tape to bring an innovation to market. Organizing personas are closest to the innovative action, establishing connections between the learning and organizing personas; they apply insights from the learning personas and channel empowerment from the organizing personas to facilitate innovation. Building personas Personas help challenge assumptions as the innovation lifecycle unfolds. Some are analytical, some are creative; others are a combination. Not all innovation teams require all personas, and teammates can adopt or change personas during the process. A holistic leader continuously enables organizations of personas to drive sustainable growth. In the same way that a farmer repeatedly tills the soil to help seeds germinate, a leader needs to till the workflow to allow meaningful progress and the engagement to take root. Where should you begin? The fact is that sustainable organizations are never one-time things. What matters is the basis upon where to begin, and determining that takes a little self-examination. Start by taking these steps: Closely examine your current strategy, right here in the present. How well is your team executing your current plan? What changes are needed today? Consider those execution methods from the perspective of your immediate situation to determine whether changing circumstances is likely to make your organization more or less effective. Analyze the impact of your current work of your team, partners, and customers. Where are the most obvious places your results can be improved or revenue increased? Evaluate your present capabilities for making those improvements. What assets and resources do you have at your command to try something new? If this sounds a little too present-focused, don’t worry. The assumptions you’re making about the future are embedded directly in the way you’re doing things right now. Closely reexamining your existing processes can make it easier to see the type of sustainable future that your current strategy assumes you’re heading toward. Copyright © 2019 by Faisal Hoque. All rights reserved. I am an . Founder of and other companies. Shadoka enables aspirations to lead, innovate, and transform. Shadoka’s accelerators and solutions bring together the management frameworks, digital platforms, and thought leadership to enable innovation, transformation, entrepreneurship, growth and social impact. entrepreneur and author SHADOKA Author of “ ” (McGraw Hill) and “ ” (Motivational Press). Follow me on Twitter . Everything Connects — How to Transform and Lead in the Age of Creativity, Innovation and Sustainability Survive to Thrive: 27 Practices of Resilient Entrepreneurs, Innovators, and Leaders Faisal Hoque Use the Everything Connects leadership app and Suvvive to Thrive resiliancy app for free.

What You Must Do To Lead A Sustainable Organization

There are few openly available quantitative results about . Motivated by this fact, we experimented with IOTA on two different IoT devices and two modern desktop and server computers. We found that despite the theoretical scalability of the Tangle, the actual IOTA protocol has relatively high energy consumption. The Proof-of-Work and transaction signing operations are computationally complex relative to the limited capabilities of many IoT devices and and may be impractical on energy-limited / battery-powered devices. IOTA Note: this article uses results from the research paper Distributed Ledger Technology and the Internet of Things: A Feasibility Study , presented in the 1st Workshop on Blockchain-enabled Networked Sensor Systems (BlockSys). Background If you’re reading this, you probably know that that aims to be suitable for IoT applications. In the summer of 2018, I come to realize that despite all the hype there are no publicly available numbers about energy consumption of IOTA operations, nor there are any public studies about the feasibility of IOTA on IoT devices. At the same time, the IOTA security assumptions require a large number of active IoT devices. So, “does it actually work on IoT devices?” is a critical question that should be asked more. IOTA is a cryptocurrency The ledger in IOTA is secured by a heavily distributed form of Proof-of-Work. The state of the ledger is maintained by so-called full nodes. The IoT devices are envisioned to function as light nodes; they are expected connect to the the full nodes, create & sign transactions, and compute a Proof-of-Work in a distributed fashion. The design of IOTA relies on — the idea that IoT devices can out-compute any computational resources a malicious actor might realistically obtain due to the sheer number of the IoT devices. safety in numbers The current state of IOTA the cryptocurrency falls short of this vision — the transactions are also validated by centralized Coordinator node(s). If IOTA wants to transition to fully decentralized operation, it needs to remove the Coordinator component. The key question here is “can the network be secured by the Proof-of-Work alone?”. More specifically, “can IoT devices provide sufficient distributed Proof-of-Work to secure against centralized attacks?” IoT devices and Proof-of-Work IoT devices span a wide spectrum of capabilities. Some of these devices are as powerful than a typical desktop PC (or even more powerful than that). However, they are exceptions. The states that “the number of connected devices that will be in use is estimated to reach 75 billion by 2025.” Cisco promises more than , Ericsson: . However, . For example, the number of currently operational low-power embedded microcontrollers is orders of magnitude larger than the number of Raspberry Pi-class IoT devices. IOTA Vision 50 billion connected devices by 2020 18 billion IoT devices by 2022 the vast majority of these are going to be low-power devices It is extremely unlikely that the billions of connected devices are going to contribute their full computational power to IOTA’s Proof-of-Work computations. Nominal vs. available computational power Many IoT devices run on batteries or have otherwise limited power sources. Theses devices aren’t able to use their nominal computational resources all the time, so they usually perform some kind of duty cycling. A device with computational power only has 0.01x computational power if it’s operating at 1% duty cycle. A thousand devices with 0.1% duty cycle only have as much available computational power as one equivalent device with 100% duty cycle. To put this in more concrete terms, a single server, on its own 1000x as powerful as the average IoT device, can effectively produce as much Proof-of-Work computations as a of these “average” IoT devices working at 0.1% duty cycle. nominal x available million The limiting factor of these IoT devices is not their nominal computational power; it’s their required battery lifetime. It’s not the millions of operations per second that matter, it’s the energy required for these operations. What about the IoT devices that don’t rely on batteries? Even these devices typically don’t have energy available as easily and cheaply as servers and mining farms. The latter two benefit from economies of scale, while IoT devices are usually highly distributed in space, don’t have nearby power sources, and don’t have their CPUs optimized for Proof-of-Work computations. Experimental setup We looked at two IoT devices from two different power classes, and compared them with two modern computers: Texas Instruments CC2650 LaunchPad (48 MHz, single core, only 20 kB of RAM and 128 kB of program memory) Raspberry Pi Model 3 (1200 MHz, 4 cores) Intel Core i7–6700 desktop machine (3400 MHz, 8 cores) Intel Xeon E5–2623 server (3000 MHz, 16 cores) with Nvidia Quadro K620. It’s nontrivial to measure the energy consumption on such a diverse set of devices. Besides, directly measuring the energy consumed by the platforms would also include their peripheral components, which are not important for this article— we’re primarily interested in the energy consumed by the CPU. So, the methodology we followed was to measure the CPU time required to perform IOTA operations, and then to extrapolate the timing to energy consumption. Time and energy required for the Proof-of-Work Time required to complete a single PoW operation on Raspberry Pi Model 3, Intel Core i7 desktop computer, and a Nvidia Quadro GPU. The green bars show average results, the small black bars — standard deviation. Log scale on y axis. We used the CCurl implementation by the IOTA Foundation ( ). It is implemented in C; however, it’s still too heavyweight to run on the TI LaunchPad — the core algorithm uses far too much RAM. We execute it on the three remaining platforms instead. https://github.com/iotaledger/ccurl The results show the time required in seconds (the graph on the left); extrapolating that to energy, we got 54.9 J (joules) for Raspberry Pi, 233.2 J for the Core i7, and 93.5 J for the Nvidia GPU. The computational power of the TI LauchPad is 10–100 times less than that of Raspberry Pi, depending on the exact workload. Even if the PoW code could run on the TI LauchPad, it would take an hour or so just to compute the PoW for a single transaction. The devices would also run out of battery in a day or a few weeks at most, depending on the capacity of the battery (100 mAh to 2700 mAh, respectively). Raspberry Pi it itself capable of doing some PoW, but it only can do the PoW for 1000 transactions per day, assuming it’s spending 100% CPU resources for the task — so, clearly, it cannot function as a major PoW hub either. The Core i7 server is only around 20 times faster than the Pi, so, a network of 20 Pi could in theory match the computational power of a single Core i7 server. Still, the Pi’s would have several times higher energy consumption. Also to note, historically the IOTA Tangle often has failed to confirm valid transactions in the first attempt, requiring them to be “reattached” by the user, in some instances for many times. Each “reattach” operation requires a brand-new Proof-of-Work for each reattached transaction. Outsourcing the Proof-of-Work There is a potential saving grace: the IOTA protocol allows to outsource the Proof-of-Work computation on external devices. This feature allows to improve the system design via collaboration between IoT devices and dedicated servers. The former have the incentive to do the Proof-of-Work, the latter have the computational resources and energy for efficient computations. However, this scheme can only work if: The IoT device can effectively function as an IOTA wallet, i.e. can create and sign IOTA transactions. The communication overhead between the IoT device and the Proof-of-Work device is low. A light-weight architecture where the PoW computation is outsourced to an IoT proxy node. Time and energy required for transaction signing and for wireless communications Time required to sign a single transaction on Texas Instruments CC2650, Raspberry Pi Model 3, Intel Core i7 desktop computer, and Intel Xeon server. The green bars show average results, the small black bars — standard deviation. Log scale on y axis. We used a port of the wallet to the operating system (see ). The port to Contiki-NG only kept the essential algorithms to fit it in the limited RAM and environment of the TI LaunchPad. IOTA Ledger Nano S Contiki-NG https://github.com/atiselsts/contiki-ng/tree/iota/examples/iota/value-transaction The results (on the left) show that it takes 7.7 seconds to sign a single transaction on the TI LaunchPad on the average, which consumes 74 mJ (millijoules) on this platform. For comparison, it requires estimated 82 mJ on Raspberry Pi, 28 mJ on the Core i7 server and 31 mJ on the older-generation Xeon server. In contrast, it only requires a few mJ to transmit a signed transaction using a one of the several low-power wireless protocol available on the TI LaunchPad (BLE and IEEE 802.15.4). It can be further optimized by transmitting only the essential parts of the transaction to a proxy device, which then fills the rest of the fields of the IOTA transaction’s data structure. Distribution of time required to perform a single Proof-of-Work operation (left graph) and a single signing operation (right graph). Results on Raspberry Pi Model 3. Log scale on x axis. The distributions show high variability for both operations, Both the PoW and transaction signing have large variance of timing (see the graphs above), making it difficult to quantify the minimal energy budget required to complete an IOTA operation. What does it all mean? In the paper we conclude that: Given the energy usage results, it is clear that on battery-powered devices, both PoW and transaction signing are not practical without hardware-accelerated cryptography. More powerful devices such as Raspberry Pi are capable of doing both operations, but instantaneous transactions are beyond their resources. Overall, IOTA does not like it’s designed for light-weight IoT applications. The communication overhead can be optimized by partially replacing the IOTA reference protocol with something more efficient, but even achieving the wallet functionality (i.e. being able to create and sign transactions) is computationally expensive and can take many seconds to complete. Consider an IoT device with a small battery (say, 100 mAh) that produces one IOTA “bundle” per minute, either with two signed transactions or a single signed transaction with two signature message fragments. Such a device is going to last less than 6 days before running out of battery —and that’s under the unrealistic assumption that it doesn’t do anything else besides signing IOTA transactions! feel Discussion There are two potential objections against the argument that IOTA is not suitable for the majority of IoT devices. Objection 1. The IOTA hash function can be hardware accelerated, and these accelerators may become commonplace on IoT devices. It’s not clear if this development would significantly change the balance in the total computational power. If Keccak (SHA-3) acceleration becomes commonplace on IoT devices due to some economical incentive, the same economical incentive may also apply to servers. Therefore both next generation servers and next generation IoT devices could be able to the PoW much faster and with lower energy consumption, leaving the overall balance unchanged. At best, this objection reduces the certainty of the argument, but does not refute it. Objection 2. The results from the current devices are not representative; CPUs of next generation IoT devices may be able to carry orders-of-magnitude more computational operations than the current ones. This is unlikely to have a large impact on battery lifetimes, unless we find new techniques for computing in much more energy-efficient ways (other than implementing the algorithms in hardware, which was already discussed above). Instead, a mass transition from battery-powered devices to energy-harvesting devices is currently on the horizon. Only minuscule amounts of energy can be accumulated in ways that are practical on IoT devices (which are mostly located indoors, mostly low-cost, mostly small). Devices that harvest their energy from environmental surroundings (e.g. from WiFi signals, vibrations, thermal couplings, etc.) typically have even more restricted energy budgets than devices powered by batteries. To sum up, the need to save energy is one of IoT fundamentals; there is no obvious way of getting around it. At least in the near-term , the majority of IoT devices are going to be stuck with low energy budgets, so their computational capabilities will remain limited. Hence, running any sort of PoW on IoT devices is doubtful. future en masse

Lessons learned from evaluating IOTA on Internet of Things devices

SXSW is a festival of culture and technology held every spring in Austin, Texas. Today it’s a global phenomenon, with hundreds of thousands attending the event every year and millions more following the media coverage. Even if you’ve never heard of it, you’ve certainly felt its influence on our culture. But it wasn’t always that way. Counterculture and entrepreneurial spirit At a quarter of its current population, the 1960s Austin was a quiet college town, home to one of the best and arguably one of the most liberal places in the South. It was well on its way to complete and, as the 70s rolled around, the hippies on the front lines of the civil rights movement gained a foothold in the Austin City Council. public universities in the country desegregation Safe to say, Austin was a city of counterculture, in more ways than one. Small regional banks came to prominence amidst financial deregulation. The old establishment couldn’t compete with the new players and promptly left. Their place was taken by small businesses and tech companies. , and AMD all set up shop in Austin, competing for the brightest UTA graduates. It really was a unique socioeconomic situation. IBM Texas Instruments The city was full of young, talented, ambitious people dying to show what they’re capable of. Anti-war protestors with progressive values held . Small business was booming. Then, in 1973, Texas , and it all finally came together. Because there’s nothing drunk young adults like more than than live music. actual positions of power lowered the drinking age to 18 Austin City Limits and the 70s music boom Austin’s music scene exploded seemingly overnight. Any place large enough to fit a band and a PA system was doing just that. New establishments all around the city. Some of them are still here today, and those lost to time are all but forgotten. The most influential Austin venue of the 70s was the . It embodied the city’s new homegrown identity, a unique blend of hippy and hillbilly culture called “Redneck Rock”. opened up Armadillo World Headquarters This venue the voice of Austin. was In 1976, a young television producer Bill Arhos decided to broadcast this voice nation-wide. His creation was none other than the on the American Television — Austin City Limits. For Austinites, it was more than a TV show. It was a cultural institution made to keep the city’s unique voice heard for decades to come. longest running music show The unlikely birth of SXSW However, the economic boom was short-lived. With Austin’s population still on the rise, Texas plunged into a full-blown The Armadillo World Headquarters closed its doors in 1980. Austin City Limits, despite the popularity, was still being filmed on a shoestring budget. banking crisis. Reagan’s administration rolled the drinking age back to 21, citing an increase in DUI accidents. The unemployment was terrible. Something had to be done to save the city’s musical heritage and empower entrepreneurs. Two decisions, made as the decade was coming to a close, defined the future of the city. Silicon Prairie Party at SXSW Silicon Prairie News | Photo by | Flickr | CC BY The first was the creation of the . The other was the establishment of SXSW by the team of a . Austin Technology Incubator local alternative newspaper SXSW Music: the new voice of Austin The first SXSW was a resounding success. 700 people showed up to watch perform at over 15 venues, exceeding the expected attendance by . Whatever they were selling, people wanted it. And the locals were happy with the attention their city was getting. So the festival kept growing until it became the discovery factory we know today. 177 artists a lot John Mayer’s multi-million dollar career took off at SXSW. The White Stripes’ propelled them into mainstream. 2001 appearance James Blunt met the producer of his while playing to a half-empty room in 2004. After failing to make it as a Christian signer-songwriter, Katy Perry’s critically acclaimed led to a recording contract that made her the superstar that she is now. best-selling debut album 2007 SXSW set These days, more than 50 thousand people from around the world attend the festival each year, while 2000+ bands perform, hoping to get noticed. SXSW Interactive: The early days SXSW was always meant to be more than just another music festival. First and foremost, it was a place for conversation. It was meant to bring creators together and spark cultural fires that would last long after the event itself. The very first SXSW had some elements of an industry conference. There was a keynote, as well as multiple panel discussions and workshops. At the speed personal computing was developing, it was only a matter of time before digital media became a permanent part of the festival. The first SXSW Interactive, or, as it was then called, SXSW Film & Multimedia, took place in 1994. That year, the Next Big Thing was … . CD-ROM People were freaking out about being able to fit music and video on the same disc. The media portion of the conference was , but it outshone the film component and became its own thing the next year. supposed to be secondary During the conference’s first four instalments, one of its most popular attractions was the World Wide Web Theatre, which was just a room with several internet connected computers. People lined up for hours to try the Internet for themselves. Todd Rundgren’s 1995 panel ruffled some feathers when he predicted the ubiquity of online media distribution. All this might sound funny in retrospect, but back then people didn’t quite understand the full potential of this new technology. Silicon Prairie Party at SXSW Ed Schipul | Photo by | Flickr | CC BY The potential of the conference itself was also underestimated. Just like the music part of the festival, it kept getting bigger as time went on, cementing its place in the country’s IT landscape after the turn of the century. Rags to riches: the SXSW Accelerator story Among the things SXSW helped popularise were: Video streaming (1999), Online blogging (or, as it was called in the year 2000, weblogging), Wearable tech (2001) and Wi-Fi (2003). There was little to no discussion of money and venture capital. If that was your thing, you could go to events in San Francisco or New York. SXSW positioned itself as the idealist’s IT conference. Which proved to be its greatest asset its greatest weakness. and A lot of people were digging this new, relaxed, IT conference format. Perhaps, too many. The keynote speakers were getting fancier. The startups were getting bigger. Blogger. Friendster. Twitter. Finally, in 2007, SXSW Interactive became the thing it once despised, and introduced the SXSW Accelerator. The festival outgrew its indie roots. It was time to dominate the industry. And it did. Gotta go fast! SXSW Pitch is an event open for startups from all over the world. Over the course of 11 years, it helped new tech businesses raise more than $5 billion. And while you might not have heard about it, you’ve definitely used at least some of the products that were pitched there. In February 2010, a group of 24 released a . They worked on it for 2 years with 24 million dollars in funding. It didn’t look ideal. It was too processor-intensive for most iPhone models. They pitched it at SXSW and, just a month later, were acquired by Apple. I’m talking, of course, about . former Stanford Research Institute employees free iOS app Siri Another SXSW success story is that of Kabbage — an online lending platform for businesses. It went on to secure $50M in funding from the Japanese tech giant SoftBank and has gotten big enough to acquire . another fintech startup Every year, dozens of startups enter the competition, hoping their story, too, will be that of success. About the author: Dmitry works with brands to create content and promote corporate culture at scale. He is one of the veterans at Techstars Startup Digest. Apart from it, he is acting as an advisor for the SXSW Pitch event and SXSW Release IT event. Email: dmitry.kabanov [@] startupdigestmail.com

The History of SXSW: How It All Started

The biggest myth is that Smalltalk is a dead or dying language. Nothing could be further from the truth. Smalltalk has an active worldwide community in . is a notable Smalltalk user organization in Argentina. , , and are three major Smalltalk vendors with lots of global enterprise customers. I have friends who work at a major Smalltalk house in Ottawa, Canada called . ESUG FAST Cincom Instantiations GemTalk Systems Simberon There are no fewer than six open source dialects of Smalltalk: , , , , , and . Pharo Squeak GNU Smalltalk Dolphin Smalltalk Amber Smalltalk Cuis Smalltalk A related myth is that Smalltalk was never popular. In fact, in the 1990s, Smalltalk became the most popular OOP language after C++. According to a 1995 IDC report, OOP language market shares were: C++ — 71.3% Smalltalk — 15.1% Objective-C — 5.7% Object Pascal — 4.2% CLOS — 2.5% Eiffel — 1.1% all others — 0.2% Here’s a page from Computerworld, November 6, 1995, showing Smalltalk and C++ duking it out: Smalltalk was so good for business use that IBM chose it as the centrepiece of their VisualAge enterprise initiative to replace COBOL: In the early 2000s, the U.S. joint military used Smalltalk to write a battle simulation program called JWARS. It actually outperformed a similar simulation called STORM written in C++ by the U.S. Air Force. That by itself was an astonishing testament to the capabilities of the language. million-line In fact, Smalltalk is quite popular in the financial industry; other users include Desjardins and UBS. Smalltalk was used by JP Morgan to write their massive financial risk management system called Kapital. Orient Overseas Container Lines used Smalltalk to develop their IRIS-2 shipping management system. Other major users include Florida Power & Light, Texas Instruments, Telecom Argentina, BMW, and Siemens AG. In my home country, Smalltalk is used by Communications Security Establishment (CSE), Canada’s national cryptologic agency. The second biggest myth is that Smalltalk’s system image is weird or unusual, and doesn’t play well with conventional toolchains like text editors and version control systems. However, Smalltalk’s image is no different from the system image found in virtualization software like VMware and VirtualBox. Imagine you have Linux running in a VirtualBox image. Imagine that you’re developing Java software using Eclipse. Imagine that you run your Java software in the image. How is this different from Smalltalk? In Smalltalk, you’re using an IDE called the System Browser. You run your Smalltalk application in the image. It’s the exact same thing. In our hypothetical Linux image, you can use version control systems like Git, CVS, and Subversion. In Smalltalk, you use version control systems like Monticello (Pharo), ENVY (VA Smalltalk), and Store (VisualWorks). You can also use Git. In Smalltalk, you can “File Out” your source code into a conventional text file. This allows you to use Git, Vim, Emacs, Visual Studio Code, whatever you like. Some Smalltalk dialects even let you work entirely from the command line. GNU Smalltalk was the original, but Pharo recently provided this capability, as well. The third biggest myth is that Smalltalk’s syntax is weird and difficult to learn. This complaint typically comes from programmers using C, C++, Java, or any other C-derived syntax language. Smalltalk syntax isn’t so weird when compared to Python ( ), Ruby, Clojure, Haskell, Erlang, J, Forth, Rebol. There is a whole universe of programming languages that look different from C. Should we only learn C-like languages till the end of time? off-side rule syntax /* In C and C++, the brace brackets style of syntax has spread tomany other languages like Java, JavaScript, PHP, Perl, etc. */if (x < y) {x++;printf("x is %i\n", x);}elseprintf("*** warning\n"); """ In Python, whitespace indentation is part of the syntax used to delineate blocks of code. Now, that is strange! """if x < y:x += 1print 'x is', xelse:print '*** warning' =beginIn Ruby, there are no brackets for delineating blocks of code!=endif x < y thenx += 1puts "x is #{x}"elseputs "*** warning"end "In Smalltalk, nearly all syntax is based on message passing.The message is sent to Boolean objects."x < y ifTrue: [ x := x + 1.Transcript show: 'x is ',x printString; cr ]ifFalse: [ Transcript show: '*** warning' ]. ifTrue:ifFalse: It is very easy to acclimate to Smalltalk syntax. I was a C developer for over 15 years. It took me less than a week to get comfortable with message passing. The parallels between Smalltalk, Python, Ruby, and C are easy to recognize. The fourth biggest myth is that Smalltalk programs are too slow. Too slow for what? How is Smalltalk slower than other dynamically typed languages like Python, Ruby, Perl, PHP, Erlang, Racket? Python and Ruby are still quite popular; Perl and PHP used to be quite popular. In most instances, performance was not an issue for these languages. It’s worth pointing out that some Smalltalk dialects are very fast. Pharo’s Cog VM is notably impressive. Smalltalk MT is optimized for maximum performance. Is Smalltalk slower than C++ and Java? Unquestionably. And if for some applications, Smalltalk isn’t fast enough, then don’t use it. Always choose the right tool for the job. The fifth biggest myth is that Smalltalk programs cannot scale. The truth is, Smalltalk may well be the only object-oriented language of note that is easily and painlessly scalable. This is because of Alan Kay’s brilliant conception of OOP. Let him explain it (starting from 2:18): Some more insight comes from Alan Kay’s “ ” (©1993 ACM): The Early History Of Smalltalk Smalltalk is a recursion on the notion of computer itself. Instead of dividing “computer stuff” into things each less strong than the whole — like data structures, procedures, and functions which are the usual paraphernalia of programming languages — each Smalltalk object is a recursion on the entire possibilities of the computer. Thus its semantics are a bit like having thousands and thousands of computers all hooked together by a very fast network. and object-oriented Smalltalk’s contribution is a new design paradigm — which I called — for attacking large problems of the professional programmer, and making small ones possible for the novice user. Object-oriented design is a successful attempt to qualitatively improve the efficiency of modeling the ever more complex dynamic systems and user relationships made possible by the silicon explosion. Languages like C++ and Java treat object-oriented programming as the application of Abstract Data Types, whereas languages like Smalltalk and Ruby view object-oriented programming as developing a network of cooperative virtual computers (objects). All the complaints you’ve heard about object-oriented programming and inheritance and scalability issues have come from using C++, Java, C#, etc. The Abstract Data Type philosophy is detrimental to . large-scale software development Alan Kay famously said: Actually, I made up the term “object-oriented,” and I can tell you I did not have C++ in mind. (Jump to 10:00.) Said Alan Kay: “The Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free?” Alan Kay likened his object-oriented philosphy to how the Internet was built, or how biological organisms consisting of billions of cells are built. Smalltalk is fantastic for truly scalable solutions.

What are the biggest myths about Smalltalk?

When the internet first made it’s presence known to the masses in the mid 1990’s, the public was understandably skeptical. Sure, people understood intuitively that computers were going to change the world, but up until that point the average person was not interacting with, or being effected by them on a daily basis. Or at least so they thought. The reality is that computers and the proto-internet were already streamlining aspects of the military, government, and mercantilism starting by the 1960’s. But despite those early use cases, in the 1980’s the majority of us were still not using computers for work nor did the majority of us have them in our homes. At most we had a Texas Instruments calculator to balance the checkbook or a Commodore 64 you could use to play games on a monochromatic screen like The Oregon Trail or Lode Runner. But gradually developments in personal computing allowed lay people to do more things with these mystery boxes composed of hydrocarbon plastics and filled with circuit boards and wires. Bulletin boards accessible via modems had strictly been the domain of “computer nerds” and those mysterious teenaged “hackers” that could effortlessly start WWIII as depicted in the film War Games. But when companies like AOL and Netscape made the worldwide web more easily accessible to the average consumer via their home telephone lines, the drawing of a new era with incalculable civilizational ramifications was unquestionably upon us. Of course, it didn’t look that way at the time. And to a large extent, it never really does except in hindsight. Even technologists and otherwise experts in the field cannot predict how and at what pace a technology will develop and create ripples of change throughout the world and in our day to day lives. At the time, that GeoCities Dave Matthews Band website wasn’t exactly setting the world on fire. What exactly did it do? What problems did it solve? How was it going to change the way we live? Well, it wasn’t. But early iterations of personal computing and the internet had enough of a hook to grab the public’s imagination and their desire to know more, to interact more, and to experience new things. And of course, there was money to be made. And that capital investment allowed these technologies to be further developed into whichever now nearly ubiquitous device you’re using right now to read these words. In discussing the crypto space and blockchain, AI, VR, and next-gen computing, it’s often been a reiterated truism that we are in a stage analogous to those early dial-up days of the internet where future use-cases were unclear but adoption seemed like an inevitable outcome to all but the old and visionless who had lived their lives in an analog world and assumed it would therefore always be as such. The quote from at the beginning of this article asserts that the trifecta of blockchain, AI, and quantum computing will work synergistically to create use-cases and applications that will change our lives in ways so potentially disruptive and liberating that we simply cannot conceive of them. As these technologies go forward, particularly in the case of machine learning and autonomous machine interaction, the telescopic and exponential growth curve in both applications and related markets is probably limitless. In fifteen years time our future selves will look back upon contemporary cryptocurrency exchanges and cloud computing in the same way our present selves experience a floppy disk drive. We will wonder how we ever managed without advanced robotics, artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and completely decentralized peer to peer mediums of exchange. Hopefully, we will also have availed ourselves to invest in these technologies and to be the ones that got in early on what everyone else will be using tomorrow. Below are three examples of companies that represent just such a future synthesis of blockchain and AI technology. a16zcrypto Designed to be the new generation blockchain, MATRIX leverages the latest artificial intelligence technology to resolve the aforementioned challenges. The fusion of blockchain and AI technologies enables MATRIX to build a revolutionary cryptocurrency, which support significantly boosted transaction speed, superior accessibility to general users, enhanced security under malicious attacks, and highly flexible operations. The challenges facing today’s blockchains have to be resolved before the ideal of cryptocurrency can really become reality. We believe the artificial intelligence technology, which has received an unprecedented growth in the past decade, provides out-of-box solutions to address the challenges. MATRIX is designed to be an intelligent chain to unleash the potential power of the blockchain technology. In this section, we briefly review the objectives of MATRIX. Although smart contracts give blockchains the essential capability to handle scaled commercial behaviors, they need the users to be able to write programs in a given programming language. With MATRIX, no programming expertise is needed any more for designing smart contracts. The unique code generation technique of MATRIX allows automatic conversion of an abstract description of a smart contract into an executable program. Matrix only requires users to input the core elements (e.g., input, output, and transaction conditions) of a contract with a scripting language. Then a code generator based on a deep neural network is able to automatically convert the script into an equivalent program. Smart contract programs may call functions offered by the host system and/or third-party libraries. Also, programs running on different computers in a distributed framework do not provide any guarantee for execution time. Such openness and decentralization are the reflection of the essential spirit of blockchains, but give birth to various sources of security threats. In fact, the lack of security is plaguing the smart contracts. The MATRIX blockchain is equipped with a power AI security engine consisting of four major components, 1) a rule- based semantic and syntactic analysis engine for smart contracts, 2) a formal verification toolkit to prove the security properties of smart contracts, 3) an AI-based detection engine for transaction model identification and security checking, and 4) a deep learning based platform for dynamic security verification and enhancement. Today all public chains are suffering from the problem of long transaction latency and low transaction throughput. Specifically, it takes over 30 minutes for Bitcoin to finish one transaction, while the transaction throughput of Ethereum is only 10 Transfer Per Second (TPS). In fact, a blockchain depends on a P2P network to validate transactions. Since a transaction needs to be broadcasted to all nodes in a network, the overall latency has to increase as long as more nodes are joining the network. MATRIX resolves the problem by dynamically selecting a delegation network in which all nodes are voted as delegates of others. All Proof-of-Work (PoW) processing is only allocated inside the delegation network, which only incurs a much smaller latency due to the smaller number of nodes. The selection process is random in the sense that a node is selected with a probability proportional to its Proof-of-Stake (PoS). The online version of MATRIX will support a throughput of 100,000 TPS. MATRIX is designed to be a highly flexible blockchain. The flexibility is twofold. First, MATRIX offers access control and routing services so as to allow seamless integration private chains into a common public chain. Such a feature meets the requirements many industry and government players for authorization, while at the same time allows necessary information flow from a public chain to a private one and vice versa. Second, MATRIX uses a reinforcement learning framework to optimize its parameters (e.g., consensus mechanism, and transaction configuration) in an evolutionary manner. The optimization paradigm ensures dynamic updating of parameters for near-optimal performance without the risk of incurring hardfork. Perhaps the most criticized part of cryptocurrency is the “waste” of energy in the mining computations. Although it is essential to attach physical value to the cryptocurrency, the mining process does not make any sense out of the world of digital currency. The problem is even worse when now over 70% of the total computing power around of world is dedicated to mining Bitcoins and others. MATRIX introduces a new mining mechanism in which miners perform the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) computation, which is an essential tool for Bayesian reasoning. MCMC based Bayesian computing plays a fundamental role in numerous big data applications such as gene regulatory network, clinical diagnosis, video analytics, and structural modeling. As a result, a distributed network of MCMC computing nodes provide the power for solving real-world compute-intensive problems and thus build a bridge between the values in the physical and virtual worlds. The Vectorspace AI [ ]platform enables ‘Smart Basket’ (token baskets for traders, funds, ETFs) generation based on user-selected trends that exist in search, social media and news. Their ‘Smart Baskets’ are based on the ability for these baskets to determine for themselves whether or not to include additional cryptocurrencies or components from related baskets that may increase overall returns. Baskets that interact this way with one another will conduct these kinds of transactions between one another using the Vectorspace utility token VAI, which is also required to dynamically generate baskets. link Vectorspace is designed as a tool for discovery as well as a suite of sophisticated tools to help you increase your profits with other cryptocurrencies by reducing risk and maximizing your gains. Their focus is on “Advanced Natural Language Processing (NLP) & Sentiment Analysis for Smart Cryptocurrency Basket Trading” and they have live products any crypto trader can use today. Their site updates every few minutes powered by their algorithms. [ Link to Smart Baskets ] According to their : “A growing number of organizations offer the ability to trade a basket or group of cryptocurrencies with a single transaction. Similar to a traditional ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund), “token baskets” as they’re more commonly called, enable a fund or individual investor to spread their risk, diversify and lower volatility while maximizing gains with more safety and stability. This approach is valuable but incomplete. For example, taking the top 20 best performing cryptocurrencies and placing them in a basket or fund minimizes gains compared to enabling fine-grained custom creation of token baskets. Which groups of cryptocurrencies are beating the market? Why? What do they have in common? How strong are those relationships? Are those relationships well known and obvious or are they hidden relationships? Are the relationships numerical or nonnumerical, based on concepts, context and sentiment, or a combination of both?” whitepaper These are the questions Crypto Discover is designed to answer. Vectorspace AI’s Crypto Discover platform is an advanced cryptocurrency discovery engine that enables a user to automatically generate a token basket or “mini-index fund” made up of cryptocurrencies that are related to trends in news, global and local searches, concepts, context, keywords, hashtags, social media, URLs and other “dynamic content.” Join the Vectorspace Telegram group for more information on the project . here The value and power of Artificial Intelligence is growing dramatically every year, and will soon dominate the internet — and the economy as a whole. However, AI tools today are fragmented by a closed development environment; most are developed by one company to perform one task, and there is no way to plug two tools together. SingularityNET aims to become the key protocol for networking AI and machine learning tools to form a coordinated Artificial General Intelligence. SingularityNET is an open-source protocol and collection of smart contracts for a decentralized market of coordinated AI services. Within this framework, the benefits of AI become a global commons infrastructure for the benefit of all; anyone can access AI tech or become a stakeholder in its development. Anyone can add an AI/machine learning service to SingularityNET for use by the network, and receive network payment tokens in exchange. SingularityNET is backed by the SingularityNET Foundation, which operates on a belief that the benefits of AI should not be dominated by any small set of powerful institutions, but shared by all. A key goal of SingularityNET is to ensure the technology is benevolent according to human standards, and the network is designed to incentivize and reward beneficial players. The concept of a Technological Singularity is increasingly widely accepted throughout the technology and business worlds. More and more, it is realized that within the next few decades there will be a transition to a new society and economy in which machine intelligence is the dominant factor; and novel digital and organic technologies acting on multiple scales will network together to produce emergent “global brain” dynamics of unprecedented complexity and sophistication. Humanity faces many challenges on the path to a positive Singularity; among these is the contemporary global economic system. In numerous respects, today’s standard financial mechanisms and institutions are not up to the task of serving as the economic engine of a smooth transition to a broadly positive Singularity. New, more flexible, open and rapidly adaptive economic structures and dynamics are needed. Blockchain provides a powerful tool for managing transactions in a Singularity- era economy; but blockchain is just a tool, and it must be used in the right way. A blockchain-based framework designed to serve the needs of AI Agents as they interact with each other and with external customers can enable the emergence of a collective intelligence. And it is critical that this framework be designed with positive principles in mind: Democratic governance on specific issues — giving the community a voice in the system will tend to make the system act for the benefit of the community; Encouraging innovative new Agents to enter the network, and creating the conditions for Agents to act in a manner that feeds the collective intelligence; • Directing a significant percentage of the network’s efforts toward causes of broad benefit. SingularityNET has been designed to meet these requirements, via Delivering intelligence services to corporations, individuals and organizations; Fostering the emergence of increasingly powerful distributed general intelligence; Deploying artificial intelligence for ever-increasing benefit of as many humans and other sentient beings as possible. SingularityNET is explicitly designed both to be highly valuable in the current context, and to lay the groundwork for the emergence of a future self-modifying, decentralized “artificial cognitive organism” with the eventual potential for general intelligence and beneficial ethical characteristics beyond the human level. It is a practical design inspired by long theoretical thinking and prototyping on the part of the founders regarding concepts such as Artificial General Intelligence, Open-Ended Intelligence and the Global Brain. What’s your opinion on AI and cryptocurrencies exploiting AI for great benefits? Originally published at medium.com on June 28, 2018.

Stories, News & Mentions about TEXASINSTRUMENTS

Texasinstruments’s Stories on HackerNoon

Texasinstruments's News & Mentions