C++17 in details: Parallel Algorithms | Bartłomiej Filipek

Bartłomiej Filipek <noreply@blogger.com>; C++17 in details: Parallel Algorithms; In His Blog; 2017-08-17.

Contents

Mentioned

  • C++11
  • C++14
  • C++17
  • “map reduce” is “transform reduce” in C++17.
  • execution policy.

Scheme

std::algorithm_name(policy, arguments...);

Components

#include <execution>
namespace std::execution
std::execution::ExecutionPolicy

Configuration
Sequential
The algorithm may not be parallelized.

  • (type) std::execution::sequenced_policy
  • (constant) std::execution::seq
Parallel
The algorithm may be parallelized; each individual ith can be scheduled concurrently, but within a stripe, serialization occurs.

  • (type) std::execution::parallel_policy
  • (constant) std::execution::par
Unsequenced (Vectorizable)
The algorithm can be vectorized; the workload as a whole is to be considered.

  • (type) std::execution::parallel_unsequenced_policy
  • (constant) std::execution::par_unseq

Catalog

Via Experimental Parallel Algorithms, at cppreference.com.

Generally…

  • adjacent difference
  • adjacent find.
  • all_of
  • any_of
  • none_of
  • copy
  • count
  • equal
  • fill
  • find
  • generate
  • includes
  • inner product
  • in place merge
  • merge
  • is heap
  • is partitioned
  • is sorted
  • lexicographical_compare
  • min element
  • minmax element
  • mismatch
  • move
  • n-th element
  • partial sort
  • sort copy
  • partition
  • remove & variations
  • replace & variations
  • reverse
  • rotate
  • search
  • set difference
  • intersection
  • union
  • symmetric difference
  • sort
  • stable partition
  • swap ranges
  • transform
  • unique
More New…
  • for_each
  • for_each_n
  • reduce
  • exclusive_scan
  • inclusive_scan
  • std::partial_sum
The Map/Reduce Idom
  • transform_reduce – applies a functor, then reduces out of order
  • transform_exclusive_scan – applies a functor, then calculates exclusive scan
  • transform_inclusive_scan – applies a functor, then calculates inclusive scan

Filler

  • GPU
  • Vectorization (SIMD)
  • Packages
    • CUDA
    • OpenCL
    • OpenGL
    • SYCL
    • Intel TBB
    • “other” vectorized libraries
  • Amdahl’s law; In Jimi Wales’ Wiki

Referenced

There are many resources referenced

Papers

isocpp.org
  • N4659Draft, Standard for Programming Language C++, 2017-03-21.
  • P0024R2Parallelism
    a.k.a. “the original paper for the spec”
  • P0636r0Changes between C++14 and C++17 DIS
  • N3554PDF: A Parallel Algorithms Library, 2013.
    a.k.a. “the initial Parallelism TS”

Popularization

In Modern C++ (Magazine)‖

Books

  • Jacek Galowicz; C++17 STL Cookbook; amzn.to
  • Marius Bancila; Modern C++ Programming Cookbook; amzn.to

YouTube

  • Bryce Adelstein; A Talk; On YouTube; WHEN?
    tl;dr → something about the distinction between std::execution::par, and std::execution::par_unseq.
  • Bryce Lelbach: C++Now 2017: C++17 Features; On YouTube; 2017.
  • Sean Parent; A Talk; At code::dive (Conference), hosted on YouTube; 2016; same material(?) was the subject of a keynote address at CppNow 2012 <rly?>
  • Jason Turner: C++ Weekly channel; On YouTube.
    tl;dr → covers C++17 features in a linear read-the-news-at-you-over-visual-media type format.

Implementations

Previously

In His Blog

Series

  1. Fixes and deprecation
  2. Language clarification
  3. Templates
  4. Attributes
  5. Simplification
  6. Library changes – Filesystem
  7. Library changes – Parallel STL
  8. Library changes – Utils
  9. Wrap up, Bonus

Previously filled.

Defending Internet Freedom through Decentralization: Back to the Future? | Barabas, Narula, Zuckerman

Chelsea Barabas, Neha Narula, Ethan Zuckerman; Defending Internet Freedom through Decentralization: Back to the Future?;a book?; The Center for Civic Media & The Digital Currency Initiative; MIT Media Lab; 2017; 113 pages.

tl;dr → theoretical; witnessing.  You tell it, you tell the story!  Mentions Bitcoin on page 2; uses the word “hegemon” on page 14.  Offers a cook’s tour of the boosterist community and their projects: Freedom Box, Diaspora, Mastodon, Blockstack, Interplanetary File System (IPFS), Solid, Appcoins, Steemit.

Table of Contents

  • Executive Summary
  • Introduction
    • The Rise of the Centralized Web
    • Risks Posed by the Centralized Web
    • Structural Interventions as a Possible Solution
  • Section II: Federation
    • Freedom Box
    • Diaspora
    • Mastodon
  • Section III: Open Protocols
    • Authentication
    • Blockstack
    • Interoperability
    • IPFS
    • Solid
  • Section IV: Appcoins
    • Steemit
  • Conclusion

Recommendations

  • Wait and see, only time will tell.
    <quote>A precondition for the success of these distributed
    platforms is a shift towards user-controlled data,</quote>
  • Fund the projects (the best-of-breed exemplars, below, and more)
    e.g. Let’s Encrypt.
  • The fascination, gee whiz!; it’s simply phenomenal!
    Use Appcoins

    • circumvent Venture Capital funding.
    • business model: unspecified, but definitely “not advertising”
  • A fool and his money are soon parted:
    • <quote>However, this space also has a lot of potential for scams, and it might be unreasonable to expect users to manage a financial stake in many different networks.</quote>

Mentions

  • Bitcoin
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Let’s Encrypt
  • Appcoins
  • Digitial Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
  • File Transfer Protocol (FTP)
  • Gopher
  • Archie
  • Wide Area Information Server (WAIS)
  • John Perry Barlow
    A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
  • Fred Turner
    ambiguous reference

  • World Wide Web (WWW)
  • Domain Name System (DNS)
  • “lock the web open”, attributed to Brewster Kayle.
  • Peer-to-Peer
  • cypherpunk worldview
  • Diffie-Hellman key exchange
  • Bitcoin
  • ledger
  • accounts
  • Hyper-Text Transport Protocol (HTTP)
  • Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP)
  • <quote>Distributed, peer-to-peer protocols like HTTP and SMTP</quote>
    um, what?
  • Millennials
  • Baby Boomers
  • Google competitors
    • Baidu,
    • Yahoo,
    • Microsoft,
    • Yandex.
    • hey … what about DuckDuckGo?
  • Twitter
  • Arab Spring
  • Tunisia
  • Baltimore
  • BitTorrent
  • YouTube
  • WhatsApp
  • software stack
  • surveillance
  • decryption keys
  • Thailand
  • Thai Royal Family
  • “lock

Exemplars

Good

  • Freedom Box
  • Diaspora
  • Mastodon
  • Blockstack
  • Interplanetary File System (IPFS)
  • Solid
  • Appcoins
  • Steemit

Bad

  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
  • YouTube

Concerns

  • User and developer adoption
  • Security
  • Monetization and incentives

Risks

Elaborated in the Introduction

  1. Top-down, Direct Censorship
  2. Something. Couldn’t identify what it was. His second point, and surely they had one…

Characterizations

Honorifics

  • decentralized
  • good old days of unmediated publishing
  • critical safeguard for user privacy
  • mainstream
  • “disrupt” this new class of power elites

Epithets

  • mega-platform
  • centralized
  • third-party intermediaries
  • marginalized voices
  • for-profit
  • today’s online hegemons.

Who

  • John Perry Barlow, theorist.
  • Philando Castile, executed by police, on live TV.
  • David Chaum, polymath.
  • Fred Turner, Harry and Norman Chandler Professor of Communication
    Department Chair, Stanford University.
  • Frederick Jackson Turner, Wisconsin, Harvard, 1861→1932.
  • Mark Zuckerbirg, CEO, Facebook

References

There are 201 references, presented inline, as footnotes, in the style of a legal tract.

They are <omitted/> herein.

Previously filled.

BUS 145 — Product Management for the Internet of Things

BUS 145 — Product Management for the Internet of Things

Instructor: Daniel Elizalde

Syllabus

Daniel Elizalde, Founder, TechProductManagement

Daniel Elizalde trains product managers to become successful at managing IoT products through his IoT Decision Framework. He has over fifteen years of experience managing the lifecycle of IoT products. He regularly speaks at conferences and publishes the IoT product management blog TechProductManagement.

From the Survey

Greatest Challenge

Longevity and continuity concepts in product design and business model operation for consumer IoT operation. By way of perspective, my home is 60 years old.  My truck is fifteen years old.  All of them still “work.”  However, in the time span that I have owned the house, I have installed and a whole generation of television technology (the cutover to HDTV and encrypted digital cable from terrestrial broadcast analog signal transmission) and I have installed and remaindered two separate generations of analog and hybrid copper telecom infrastructure.  Today I use a 2nd generation of VoIP (whereas AT&T committed to and abandoned their VoiP business line [CallVantage]).  The challenge for IoT is how to provide significant lifespan to the technologies underpinning the services being offered.  Product lifetimes are short, frequently being circumscribed to a single build plan or kickstarter initiative at all.  More frequently now one sees abandonment of whole products and even lines of business in toto within a single fiscal year; c.f. Intel’s recent repudiation of their IoT product lines.  By the time the class starts, the IoT SBC line, Edison, Curie, etc., will be in final-order EOL status.

What to Learn
The learning would be around business model development under ephemeral technology constraints and the tie-in to product design. One is very cognizant of the “How to Survive on a Diet of Poisoned Fruit” thinking.  My trade is in and around online entertainment experiences. These are today are primarily driven from the WinTel platform, but moving onto Apple/Google. They are funded by advertising. The business model for the experiences is oriented around aggregation of “eyeballs”  Success is measured in “unique user counts” or “gross rating points” or “daily active users.”  Monetization (how the money happens) occurs through the introduction of gently intrusive messaging (advertising) wherein sponsors insert reminders of their call to action within the media being created. Whereas “data is the new oil”, the great martech and adtech machinery amplifies the efficacy of the media delivery by allowing audience-based buying and selling of the media.  The current form of the media is “pages” or short-form linear media (video snippets).  None of this makes any sense for an IoT world.  It is unclear how IoT will fund itself.  Consumers will simply not put up with advertising prior to turning on their thermostats or prior to commanding their oven to ignite.  And having a $35-$100/month bill for a “connected light bulb fleet” doesn’t make any sense at all.  We already do this for cell phones and telecom value-added services. Of course one can comprehend that budget-heavy enterprise solutions for predictive maintenance amortization will be useful, that too does not make sense in a consumer or household type setting.

How To Use a Futurist | Leading Thought (Liz Alexander)

How To Use a Futurist, promotional literature; Leading Thought; undated
25 ways futurists help organizations of all sizes and types discover, influence and experience preferred futures
Leading Thought is a training boutique.

tl;dr → demand generation for futurist work product. & interventions.  While anyone can do it, and it requires no real training, there is no actual barrier to entry in “the field”; yet there are branded methods. schemas and a lexicon to follow in the production of conforming output.

Author

Liz Alexander, Ph.D., Consulting Futurist & Co-founder, Leading Thought.
Leading Thought is a training boutique.

Table of Contents

  1. INTRODUCTION: Why Hire a Futurist?
  2. PART ONE: OVERVIEW
  3. What can a futurist do for you?
    Nine futurists representing Australia, Canada, Malaysia, Pakistan, U.K. and the United States outline how they help their clients achieve impact.
  4. PART TWO: TOOLS
  5. How do futurists arrive at alternatives?
    “Big Time,” Implications Wheel®, and Three Horizons are just a few of the many tools and methodologies that futurists use.
  6. PART THREE: SYNERGIES7.
  7. What else do we bring to the table?
    In many respects futurists are like gardeners. We cultivate insights and ideas by drawing on a broad range of expertise, skills and talents. But we begin by cultivating ourselves!
  8. Resources and Extras
  9. How other futurists are making an impact.
  10. Are You Ready to Claim YOUR Future?
Book

Craig Badings, Liz Alexander; # THOUGHT LEADERSHIP tweet Book01: 140 Prompts for Designing and Executing an Effective Thought Leadership Campaign (yes, that’s really the title, you can do that when you self-publish); THINKaha; 2012-10-06; 161 pages; ISBN:1616990929; Amazon:B009VJOZLQ: Kindle: $10, paper: $5+SHT.

Mentioned

  • Causal Layered Analysis (CLA)
    claim: links metaphor to strategy
  • Metafuture, a consultancy, training services.
  • Volatile, Uncertain, Complex Ambiguous (VUCA)
  • Scenarios, a.k.a. “alternative futures”
    definition: set of fictional narratives reflecting plausible future worlds
  • Kerr Smith, a design shop.
  • Generic Alternative Futures
    of the Manoa School.
  • Industry 4.0
  • Millennials
  • Generation Z.
  • Udacity
  • Knowledge Works
  • YouTube
  • Visioning
  • Roadmapping
    something about Systems Thinking
  • Future of Cities
  • Thought Leaders
  • Arup Foresight
  • Preferred Futures
  • Big History Project
    • Big Time
    • Big Space
  • Implications Wheel®
  • Futures Wheel
  • Futures Triangle
  • The Six Pillars Method
  • Futures
    • Negative Futures
    • Positive Futures
  • <aphorism>futurists are like gardeners</aphorism>
  • Bloom’s Taxonomy
    • a pedagogical theory
    • Benjamin Bloom
    • 1956
  • Anticipatory Action Learning (AAL)
  • Multiple Selves Theory
    perhaps David Lester
  • Visioning
  • Backcasting (contra Forecasting)
  • Delphi Method
  • Anthropology
    • “tribes” of consumer classes
    • user research, consumer research
    • The Focus Group
    • e.g. self-employed, sole proprietors, journeymen, tradesmen.
  • Internet of Things (IoT)
  • Triple Bottom Line (3BL)
    • Concept
      • Social
      • Environmental (also, ecological)
      • Financial
    • Jimi Wales’ Wiki
    • Contra
      • Double Bottom Line
        (Regular) Bottom Line.
  • Weak Signals
  • Megatrends
    • Social, Demographic, Technological, Economic, Environmental, Political (STEEP)
    • Probably other acronyms as well
  • burgeoning fields

Methods

Anticipatory Action Learning (AAL)

  • Sketch of the Concept: none
    Seems to be a group process facilitation method with guard precepts around “the triggers.”  Something about how AAL is better; gives more confidence in treated subjects and … the salubrious result obtains.
  • Definition
    • <quote>unique style of questioning the future</quote>
  • Non-Concepts
    • <quote>while critical, it does not accede to any particular tradition of
      critical theory (Continental or Indic, for example) but rather draws from the actors’ ownepistemological categories.</quote>
  • Steps: unknown
  • Goals
    • better alternative futures, better scenarios; less boosterism, gee whiz!
    • <quote cite=ref section=4>A crucial factor is seeing futures not only as forecasting but as creating confidence individuals’ and systems’ abilities to creatively adapt to new challenges. The anticipatory action learning dimension is decisive. <snip/> Organizational, social, environmental, cultural and spiritual innovation is one of the most important potential contributions of Futures Studies.</quote>
  • Separation of Concerns
    1. Sensitivity to the social norms
    2. Discomfort with the material (“the struggle”)
    3. Will can be “appropriatable by power” by “official futures” [is that good or bad?]
    4. Notional “resistance” is to be respected; negotiated with, not removed.
    5. The Other.
  • References

Causal Layered Analysis (CLA)

  • Sketch of the Concept, among the link chiclets of Tricia Lustig, at pearltrees.
  • Steps
    Recite & elaborate

    1. Litany, of operating assumptions
    2. Systems and Institutions
    3. Worldviews, the values and tacit knowledge of Systems and Institutions
    4. Myths & Metaphors, narratives, framing, language usage, etc. c.f. Lakoff; e.g. “war against” { drugs, cancer, poverty, terrorism, Christmas }.
  • References

Delphi Method

  • Sketch of the Concept: none
  • Steps
    • Interview many.
    • Blend
    • Synthesize a “consensus opinion.”
    • Report out.
  • References

Futures Wheel

  • Sketch of the Concept, among the link chiclets of Tricia Lustig, at pearltrees.
  • Steps
    • Pretend the change has already happened.
    • Elaborate.
    • Focus on unintended consequences.
  • References
    • Obvious

Generic Alternative Futures (GAF), of the Manoa School

  • Sketch of the Method
    • alternative futures, a.k.a. “scenarios”
    • futures visioning process (five futures)
    • generic alternative futures (four)
      1. continuation
      2. collapse
      3. discipline
      4. transformation
    • preferred alternative future (plus one)
      1. preferred
  • References

Mulitple Selves Theory

  • Concept
    just what it says
  • Genre
    • personality development
    • child development
    • etc.
  • References
    • David Lester; A Multiple Self Theory of Personality; Nova Science Publishers, 1st edition; 2010-03-30; 186 pages; ASIN:1608767833 kindle: no, paper: $70+SHT.

Roadmapping

Three Horizons

  • Sketch of the Method, among the link chiclets of Tricia Lustig, at pearltrees
  • Concepts (the plurals):
    • Horizons named as Horizon #0, Horizon #1, Horizon #2, Horizon #3.
    • Tomorrows named as “tomorrow++”, “tomorrow+”
  • Steps
    1. Identify Horizon #0 Recent enough past for context
    2. Identify Horizon #1, the present
    3. Imagine “tomorrow++”
      This is Horizon #3, the possible future of “30-years hence”
    4. Imagine “tomorrow +” as a blend between Horizon #1 & Horizon #3.
      This is Horizon #2, as the reasoned path-based narration from Horizon #1 & Horizon #3.
  • Reference

Six Pillars Method

  • Sketch of the Method
  • Concepts
  • Steps
    1. Mapping the Present and the Future
      Apply: futures triangle, futures landscape.
    2. Anticipating the Future
      Apply:  emerging issues analysis, futures wheel.
    3. Timing the Future
      Apply: macrohistory, macrofutures.
    4. Deepening the Future
      Apply: causal layered analysis, multiple selves theory.
    5. Creating Alternatives to the Present
      Apply: scenarios, nuts and bolts[?]
    6. Transforming the Present and Creating the Future
      Apply: visioning, backcasting, anticipatory action learning, the transcend conflict resolution method.
  • References

Visioning

  • Concept: envisioning, imagining.
  • References
    • Obvious

Pantheon

In order of appearance in the work product…

Liz Alexander
Ross Dawson
  • Ross Dawson
  • a promoter
  • founder or co-founder of six (6) companies
    • Rh7thm
    • Advanced Human Technologies
  • Basis: Sydney, Australia
Lynn Curry
Proprietor, CurryCorp
CurryCorp offers training services. <quote>optimizes organizational performance</quote>
Sohail Inayatullah
  • UNESCO Chair for Futures Studies at USIM, Malaysia.
  • Professor, Graduate Institute of Futures Studies at
    • Tamkang University
    • Melbourne Business School, the University of Melbourne;
    • University of the Sunshine Coast.
  • Elsewhere attributed as:
    • Professor of Futures Studies, International Management Centres
    • Professorial Research Fellow, Tamkang University, Taiwan
    • Visiting Academic at the Communication Center, Queensland University of Technology.
    • Associate editor of New Renaissance
    • Co-editor of the Journal of Futures Studies.
Robert Burke
  • instructor with Sohail Inayatullah, “Futures Thinking and Strategy Development at Melbourne Business School, the University of Melbourne.
  • offered taught a residential four-day Futures Thinking and Strategy Development Program on a twice-yearly cadence at Melbourne Business School for over 15 years.
  • a director of Futureware Consulting
  • associate of Melbourne Business School, the University of Melbourne.
  • Previously
    • CEO-title roles, various.
Sohail Inayatullah
has many appointments
Ira Wolfe
Ruben Nelson
  • Executive Director of Foresight Canada.
  • Vice Chair, the Institute on Religion in an Age of Science.
  • Honors (from)
    • Queen’s University
    • the Queen’s Calgary Alumni
    • Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science
    • The World Business Academy
    • The Meridian Institute on Leadership, Governance, Change and the Future
Rushdi Abdul Rahim
  • A Senior Vice President at MIGHT
    MIGHT is a policy shop supervised by the Prime Minister’s Department, Malaysia
  • The Director of myForesight® – the Malaysian Foresight Institute.
Kyle Brown
  • from Toronto, Canada
  • Senior Foresight Strategist, Idea Couture
    Idea Couture is an idea shop
  • ex-staff Copenhagen Institute for Futures Studies.
Mark Tuckwood
  • Leading Thought associate
  • founder and principal at Insight Gravity
    Insight Gravity is an idea shop
William Gibson
And which quote do you think they selected?
Victor Vahidi Motti
  • News Editor and Co-Chair of the Youth Council for the World Futures Studies Federation (WFSF)
  • Honors
    • WFSF President’s Outstanding Young Futurists Award in 2013
    • is internationally-renowned
Joel Barker
  • a really great guy
  • “first person to popularize” credit for the concept of the “paradigm shift”
Tom Cheesewright
  • English (UK)
  • a corporate trainer
Patricia Lustig
  • Also “Tricia” Lustig; c.f. tricialustig
  • CEO of LASA Insight Ltd.
  • UK-based
  • practitioner in the methods
  • “author” credit, Strategic Foresight: Learning from the Future; Triarchy Press; 2015-07-15; 186 pages; Amazon:190947066X: Kindle: $16, paper: $21+SHT.
Umar Sheraz Sheraz
  • Senior Research Officer, Center for Policy Studies at the COMSATS Institute of Information Technology in Islamabad, Pakistan.
Jonathan Peck
  • President, Institute for Alternative Futures (IAF)
  • President, Alternative Futures Associates (AFA), the for-profit subsidiary
  • Credits
    • “leader” credit in “aspirational futures”
      … which <quote>integrates vision into scenario development</quote>
    • the method has been used in billable practice.
Jörn Bühring
  • Dr. Jörn Bühring
  • Research Assistant Professor, School of Design, Hong Kong Polytechnic University of Technology
  • program leader of the [Design] School’s Ignite Innovation Program
  • Has performed billable work for industry
  • He likes design-inspired foresight, vision and fiction.
Anne Boysen
  • Founder of After the Millennials,
    After the Millennials is an idea shop.
  • Associate,Leading Thought
  • A practitioner.
  • A graduate of the Foresight Program of the University of Houston.
Andrew Staines
Lisa Galarneau
  • Dr. Lisa Galarneau
  • An anthropologist
    A socio-cultural anthropologist
  • Graduated 25 years ago.
  • Employment: Amazon
Jacques Barcia
  • Jacques Barcia
  • Brazilian citizenship
  • Trade: reporter.
  • Has won awards
  • is an award-winning
  • “responsible” credit Mind the Future program at Porto Digital
    Porto Digital is an idea shop.
  • Staff, Dream Machine Futures Studio
    Dream Machine Futures Studio is an idea shop
Alice Walker
is quoted
Radha Mistry
  • Radha Mistry
  • Employment
  • Applied Research and Consulting (Division), Steelcase
  • Previous
    • Arup Foresight, London
    • Arup Foresight, San Francisco.
Frank Spencer
Puruesh Chaudhary
  • Founder and President of AGAHI
    AGAHI, Foresight Lab is an idea shop
  • Pakistan.
  • member, the Global Shapers Community, World Economic Forum
Mazlan Othman
  • Dr. Mazlan Othman
  • Credits
    • “first astro-physicist of Malaysia”
Brian David Johnson

Practicum

Hosts

  • Burston Marsteller
  • Ford
  • OECD
  • SAP

Purveyors

Schools

  • Arizona State University
  • University of Houston
  • University of Hawaii, Manoa

Outreach

Inspiration

  • Drivers Of Change
Credits

Image: 123rf.com
Cover: Le Moal Olivier
Interior: everythingpossible

Promotions

Referenced

in arbitrary order…

Previously filled.

Reflections on the REST Architectural Style and “Principled Design of the Modern Web Architecture” | Fielding, Taylor, Erenkrantz, Gorlick, Whitehead, Khare, Oreizy

Roy T. Fielding, Richard N. Taylor, Justin Erenkrantz, Michael M. Gorlick, E. James Whitehead, Rohit Khare, Peyman Oreizy; Reflections on the REST Architectural Style and “Principled Design of the Modern Web Architecture; In Proceedings of the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2017); 2017; pages 4-11 (8 pages); landing.

Performed

Reflections on REST; keynote address; performed at the 2017 11th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE 2017); by one of Roy Fielding, Richard Taylor, Rohit Khare (expect: Rohit Khare); video; 0:47:41; slides (42 slides).

Abstract

Seventeen years after its initial publication at ICSE 2000, the Representational State Transfer (REST) architectural style continues to hold significance as both a guide for understanding how the World Wide Web is designed to work and an example of how principled design, through the application of architectural styles, can impact the development and understanding of large-scale software architecture. However, REST has also become an industry buzzword: frequently abused to suit a particular argument, confused with the general notion of using HTTP, and denigrated for not being more like a programming methodology or implementation framework. In this paper, we chart the history, evolution, and shortcomings of REST, as well as several related architectural styles that it inspired, from the perspective of a chain of doctoral dissertations produced by the University of California’s Institute for Software Research at UC Irvine. These successive theses share a common theme: extending the insights of REST to new domains and, in their own way, exploring the boundary of software engineering as it applies to decentralized software architectures and architectural design. We conclude with discussion of the circumstances, environment, and organizational characteristics that gave rise to this body of work.

Mentions

  • REpresentational State Transfer (REST)
  • Computational REpresentational State Transfer (CREST)
    Computational REST (CREST)
  • Capability Uniform Resource Locator (CURL)
    Capability URL (CURL)
  • COmputAtional State Transfer (COAST)
  • Computing Resource Exchange with Security (COAST)
  • ARRESTED
  • Application Programming Interface (API)
  • Distributed Hash Table (DHT)
  • SIENA (Scalable Internet Event Notification Architectures)
  • XML
  • DHT
  • HTTP
  • REST
  • bit.ly
  • Persistsent Uniform Resource Locator (PURL)
    Persistsent URL (PURL)
  • Notifications
    • e.g. on page transitions
    • HTML ping
    • DOM, onClick, onLoad, onAnything
    • M. Thomson, E. Damaggio, B Raymor. Generic Event Delivery Using HTTP Push. RFC 8030. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2016.
  • Google Analytics
  • Google Docs
  • Google Sheets
  • AJAX
  • JavaScript
  • HTTP
    • LINK
    • UNLINK
  • Peer-to-Peer (P2P)
  • Decentralized Applications (DAPPs, dApps)
  • Client/Server
  • Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WebDAV, WEBDAV)
    • lock-based concurrency control
    • An RPC-based client-server centralized ile system with remote access “over HTTP”
  • Limitations of REST
    • one-shot
    • one-to-one
    • one-way
  • execution engine
  • binding environment
  • COAST
    • Capabilities
      • Services
      • Messaging
      • Interpretation
    • Claims
      • Secure remote code execution (RCE)
      • Live update
      • Novel
      • Monitoring & Traceability
      • Something about refactoring:
        Server abdication, client redelegation, server re-offering (fewer services), client reprogramming of the server.
      • Dynamic Reconfiguration
  • Group Consensus and Simultaneous Agreement (GCSA)
  • WebRTC,
  • Websockets
  • Webhooks
  • HTTP/2
  • Internet of Things (IoT)
  • Content Distrubtion Network (CDN)
  • TrueTime
  • GlobalClock
  • Apache Kafka
  • Amazon Kinesis,
  • Google Cloud Pub/Sub
  • Amazon Lambda,
  • IFTTT
  • ‘assistants’, a natural language conversational product concept, within the buzzy AI business culture. Think: Eliza, that you built in high school.
  • Cassandra
  • NoSQL
  • Federated Learning
  • Merkle Hash Trees (not MHT)
  • Bitcoin
  • <buzz>blockchain</buzz>
  • Git
    • is a decentralized in concept.
    • is not decentrlaized in practice, c.f. GitHub
  • Software-as-a-Service (SaaS)
  • Computational REpresentational State Transfer (CREST)
  • Aura
  • Nikander
  • Trickles
  • network continuations
  • Hypertext Transport Protocol (HTTP)
    • HTTP/1.1
    • HTTP/2
  • DARPA
  • NSF
  • ISR (Irvine Software Rationalization?)
  • Arcadia

Behavior, Asynchrony, State, Execution (BASE)

Concept

Adapability requires the design-time  actions…

LP1
making the parts that are subject to change identifiable, discrete and manipulable.
LP2
providing mechanisms for controlling interactions between the parts subject to change.
LP3
providing techniques for managing state.

Elaborated

  • Peyman Oreizy, Nenad Medvidovic, Richard N. Taylor. Runtime Software Adaptation: Framework, Approaches, and Styles. In Companion of 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE Companion). 2008. ACM. pages 899–910.
  • Richard N. Taylor, Nenad Medvidovic, Peyman Oreizy. Architectural Styles for Runtime Software Adaptation. In Proceedings of the Eighth Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture and Third European Conference on Software Architecture. IEEE Computer Society, 171–180. 2009.

Exemplars

  • C2
  • CREST
  • MapReduce
  • Pipe-and-Filter
  • Event Notifications
  • “and others.”

Disambiguation

  1. within the transaction formalization of Database Theory
    • Basically Available, Soft state, Eventual consistency (BASE)
      not as used herein.
    • a consistency model wherein everything almost works
      riposte: “eventually we are all dead.”
    • Contra
      • Always Computing In Denial (ACID)
      • Atomicity Consistency Isolation Durability (ACID)
  2. within the Dynamic Software Architectures Theory, page 9.
    • Behavior
    • Asynchrony
    • State
    • Execution
  3. within the ARRESTED Theory, page 10.
    the “mindset” of a node in a distributed network.
    Best-Effort
    Others are making their best effort, as are you.
    Approximate
    There is only approximate knowledge of the state of The Other; your theory of mind is limited & foggy, slacky-latent.
    Self-centered
    Others are self-centered, as are you.
    Efficient
    Make efficient use of the only global resource: communication bandwidth to others; i.e. time is the only finite resource.

Asynchronous, Routed, REpresentational State Transfer with Estimation & Delgation (A+R+REST+E+D, ARRESTED)

  • Polling (and its inverse Asynchrony)
  • Asynchrony (and its inverse Polling)
  • Routing
  • Delegation
  • Estimation

Concept

Theory
REST+P
REST with Polling.
REST+E
REST with Estimation.
A+REST
REST with Asynchrony (callbacks).
R+REST
REST with Routing (packets).
REST+D
REST with Delegation (proxies, gateways).
ARREST
Asynchronous, Routed, REST.
ARREST+E
Asynchronous, Routed, REST, with Estimation.
ARREST+D
Asynchronous, Routed, REST, with Delgation.
ARREST+D
Asynchronous, Routed, REST, with Estimation & Delgation.
ARRESTED
A synonym for slow, yes?
Topology

The metaphor.

Poles
North
Centralized Systems
East
Estimated Systems
South
Decentralized Systems
West
Distributed Systems
Boundaries
now horizon
  • Master-Slave Styles
  • Peer-to-Peer Styles
agency boundary
  • Consensus-Based Styles
  • Consensus-Free Styles

Elaborated

Techniques

  • Bitcoin
  • and other distributed ledger schemes.

Computational REpresentational State Transfer (CREST)

Is just like functional programming.

  • The Poetry
    • mashups of Web culture are “the same as” continuations in programming language theory & culture. c.f. Scheme & SML
    • 300-series redirects are continuations

Principles

CP1
The key abstraction of computation is a resource, named by an URL.
CP2
The representation of a resource is a program, a closure, a continuation, or a binding environment plus metadata to describe the program, closure, continuation, or binding environment.
CP3
All computations are context-free.
CP4
Only a few primitive operations are always available, but additional per-resource operations are also encouraged.
CP5
The presence of intermediaries is promoted.

Concept

  • Ship code+data as a package to evaluate off-box (over there, on their box).
  • Receive code+data as a package to evaluate on-box (here on our box).
  • What could go possibly wrong here? [over there?]

Elaborations

  • Justin R. Erenkrantz. Computational REST: A New Model for Decentralized, Internet-Scale Applications. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2009.
  • Justin R. Erenkrantz, Michael Gorlick, Girish Suryanarayana, Richard N. Taylor. Harmonizing Architectural Dissonance in REST-based Architectures. Technical Report UCI-ISR-06-18. Institute for Software Research, University of California, Irvine. 2006.
  • Justin R. Erenkrantz, Michael M. Gorlick, Girish Suryanarayana, Richard N. Taylor. From Representations to Computations: The Evolution of Web Architectures. In ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on The Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE). 2007. pages 255–264.
  • Roy T. Fielding. Maintaining distributed hypertext infostructures: Welcome to MOMspider’s Web. In Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 27, 2. 1994. pages 193–204. doi:10.1016/0169-7552(94)90133-3. Series title? Selected Papers of the First World-Wide Web Conference.

Techniques

  • web mashups
  • session management
  • cookies in client/server interactions
    <quote>, and the (misplaced) role of cookies in client/server interactions</quote>
  • time-dependent resources; e.g. weather forecasts.
  • time-series responses; e.g. stock tickers.

<editorial>Why aren’t cookies necessary again? They uniquely number the consumer base. They are used to develop Measurement, Targeting, Retargeting & Profiling which are the explicit and probably only renumerative use case of the (online) media business model. Oh, right, and paywalls. And, um, public televison-type “membership drive” tip jars.</editorial>

References

There are 59 references.

Abstracted

  • Roy T. Fielding, Richard N. Taylor. Principled Design of the Modern Web Architecture. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 2000. pages 407–416. IEEE, Limerick, Ireland.

Dissertated

  • Justin R. Erenkrantz. Computational REST: A New Model for Decentralized, Internet-Scale Applications. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2009.
  • Roy T. Fielding. Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, California, USA. 2000.
  • Michael Martin Gorlick. Computational State Transfer: An Architectural Style for Decentralized Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technical Report UCI-ISR-16-3. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2016.
  • David Alan Halls. Applying Mobile Code to Distributed Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 1997.
  • Michael Hicks. Dynamic Software Updating. Ph.D. Dissertation. Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 2001.
  • Rohit Khare. Extending the REpresentational State Transfer (REST) Architectural Style for Decentralized Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, California, USA. 2003.
  • Mark Samuel Miller. Robust Composition: Towards a Unified Approach to Access Control and Concurrency Control. Ph.D. Dissertation. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2006.
  • Peyman Oreizy. Open architecture software: a flexible approach to decentralized software evolution. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.
  • Emmet James Whitehead, Jr. An Analysis of the Hypertext Versioning Domain. Ph.D. Dissertation. Univ. of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2000.

Complete

  1. T. Aura, P. Niklander. Stateless Connections. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Information and Communication Security (Lecture Notes In Computer Science), Y. Han, T. Okamoto, S. Qing (editors), Vol. 1334. Springer-Verlag, 1997. pages 87–97.
  2. Tim Berners-Lee, Robert Cailliau, Ari Luotonen, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, Arthur Secret. The World-Wide Web. In Communications of the ACM, 37, 8. 1994-08. pages 76–82. doi:10.1145/179606.179671.
  3. Tim Berners-Lee, Roy T. Fielding, Larry Masinter. Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. RFC 3986. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2005-01. doi:10.17487/RFC3986.
  4. Tim Berners-Lee, Roy T. Fielding, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen. Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.0. RFC 1945. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 1996-05. doi:10.17487/RFC1945.
  5. Tim Berners-Lee, Jean-Francois Groff. The World Wide Web (a.k.a. WWW). In SIGBIO Newsletter, 12, 3. 1992-09. pages 37–40. doi:10.1145/147126.147133.
  6. Keith Bonawitz, Vladimir Ivanov, Ben Kreuter, Antonio Marcedone, H. Brendan McMahan, Sarvar Patel, Daniel Ramage, Aaron Segal, Karn Seth. Practical Secure Aggregation for Federated Learning on User-Held Data. In Proceedings of the NIPS Workshop on Private Multi-Party Machine Learning. 2016. landing.
  7. Antonio Carzaniga, David S. Rosenblum, Alexander L. Wolf. Design and Evaluation of a Wide-Area Event Notification Service. In ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 19, 3. 2001-08. pages 332–383. paywall.
  8. James C. Corbett, Jeffrey Dean et. al. Spanner: Google’s Globally-distributed Database. In Proceedings of the 10th USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation (OSDI). 2012. pages 251–264. paywall, landing. slides: pptx, event: session.
  9. Chris Dixon. Crypto Tokens: A Breakthrough in Open Network Design. In His Blog, centrally hosted on Medium. 2017-06.
  10. L. Dusseault. HTTP Extensions for Web Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WEBDAV). RFC 4918. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2007.
  11. Justin R. Erenkrantz. Computational REST: A New Model for Decentralized, Internet-Scale Applications. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2009.
  12. Justin R. Erenkrantz, Michael Gorlick, Girish Suryanarayana, Richard N. Taylor. Harmonizing Architectural Dissonance in REST-based Architectures. Technical Report UCI-ISR-06-18. Institute for Software Research, University of California, Irvine. 2006.
  13. Justin R. Erenkrantz, Michael M. Gorlick, Girish Suryanarayana, Richard N. Taylor. From Representations to Computations: The Evolution of Web Architectures. In ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on The Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE). 2007. pages 255–264.
  14. Roy T. Fielding. Maintaining distributed hypertext infostructures: Welcome to MOMspider’s Web. In Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 27, 2. 1994. pages 193–204. doi:10.1016/0169-7552(94)90133-3. Series title? Selected Papers of the First World-Wide Web Conference.
  15. Roy T. Fielding. Relative Uniform Resource Locators. RFC 1808. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 1995-06. doi:10.17487/RFC1808.
  16. Roy T. Fielding. Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, California, USA. 2000.
  17. Roy T. Fielding, Gail Kaiser. The Apache HTTP Server Project. In IEEE Internet Computing. 1, 4. 1997-07. pages 88–90. doi:10.1109/4236.612229
  18. Roy T. Fielding, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen, Jeffrey Mogul, Jim Gettys, Tim Berners-Lee. Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.1. RFC 2068. 1997-01. doi:10.17487/RFC2068
  19. Roy T. Fielding, Julian Reschke. Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content. RFC 7231. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2014-06. doi:10.17487/RFC7231.
  20. Roy T. Fielding, Richard N. Taylor. Principled Design of the Modern Web Architecture. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering. 2000. pages 407–416. IEEE, Limerick, Ireland.
  21. Roy T. Fielding, Richard N. Taylor. Principled Design of the Modern Web Architecture. In ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 2, 2. 2002-05. pages 115–150.
  22. Roy T. Fielding, E. James Whitehead, Jr., Kenneth M. Anderson, Gregory A. Bolcer, Peyman Oreizy, Richard N. Taylor. Web-Based Development of Complex Information Products. In Communications of the ACM, 41, 8. 1998-08. pages 84–92.
  23. Matias Giorgio, Richard N. Taylor. Accountability Through Architecture for Decentralized Systems: A Preliminary Assessment. Technical Report UCI-ISR-15-2. Institute for Software Research, University of California, Irvine. 2015.
  24. Cristiano Giuffrida, Anton Kuijsten, Andrew S. Tanenbaum. 2013. Safe and Automatic Live Update for Operating Systems. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS’13). ACM, New York City, New York, USA, 279–292.
  25. Y. Goland, E. Whitehead, A. Faizi, S. Carter, D. Jensen. HTTP Extensions for Distributed Authoring – WEBDAV. RFC 2518. Internet Engineering Task Force. 1999.
  26. Michael Martin Gorlick. Computational State Transfer: An Architectural Style for Decentralized Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technical Report UCI-ISR-16-3. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2016.
  27. Michael M. Gorlick, Kyle Strasser, Richard N. Taylor. COAST: An Architectural Style for Decentralized On-Demand Tailored Services. In Proceedings of 2012 Joint Working Conference on Software Architecture & 6th European Conference on Software Architecture (WICSA/ECSA). 2012. pages 71–80.
  28. David Alan Halls. Applying Mobile Code to Distributed Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 1997.
  29. Michael Hicks. Dynamic Software Updating. Ph.D. Dissertation. Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 2001.
  30. Irvine Research Unit in Software (IRUS). The Workshop on Internet-Scale Technology (TWIST). A series, 1998-2000.
  31. R. Kadia. Issues Encountered in Building a Flexible Software Development Environment: Lessons from the Arcadia Project. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Software Development Environments (SDE). 1992. ACM, New York, NY, USA. pages 169–180. doi:10.1145/142868.143768.
  32. Rohit Khare. Extending the REpresentational State Transfer (REST) Architectural Style for Decentralized Systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, California, USA. 2003.
  33. Rohit Khare, Richard N. Taylor. Extending the REpresentational State Transfer Architectural Style for Decentralized Systems. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 2004. IEEE Computer Society, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK. pages 428–437.
  34. Avinash Lakshman, Prashant Malik. Cassandra: A Decentralized Structured Storage System. In SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, 44, 2. 2010-04. pages 35–40.
  35. David Mazieres. The stellar consensus protocol: A federated model for internet-level consensus. Stellar Development Foundation. 2015.
  36. Mark Samuel Miller. Robust Composition: Towards a Unified Approach to Access Control and Concurrency Control. Ph.D. Dissertation. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 2006.
  37. Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. 2008.
  38. Peyman Oreizy. Open architecture software: a flexible approach to decentralized software evolution. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA.
  39. Peyman Oreizy, Michael M. Gorlick, Richard N. Taylor, Dennis Heimbigner, Gregory Johnson, Nenad Medvidovic, Alex Quilici, David Rosenblum. An Architecture-based Approach to Self-Adaptive Software. In IEEE Intelligent Systems, 14, 3. 1999-05 (May-June). pages 54–62.
  40. Peyman Oreizy, Nenad Medvidovic, Richard N. Taylor. Architecture-Based Runtime Software Evolution. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 1998. pages 177–186.
  41. Peyman Oreizy, Nenad Medvidovic, Richard N. Taylor. Runtime Software Adaptation: Framework, Approaches, and Styles. In Companion of 30th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE Companion). 2008. ACM. pages 899–910.
  42. Peyman Oreizy, Richard N. Taylor. 1998. On the role of software architectures in runtime system reconfiguration. In IEE Proceedings-Software, 145, 5. 1998. pages 137–145.
  43. Dewayne E. Perry, Alexander L. Wolf. 1992. Foundations for the Study of Software Architecture. In SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 17, 4. 1992-10. pages 40–52. doi:10.1145/141874.141884.
  44. Sean Rhea, Brighten Godfrey, Brad Karp, John Kubiatowicz, Sylvia Ratnasamy, Scott Shenker, Ion Stoica, Harlan Yu. OpenDHT: A Public DHT Service and Its Uses. In SIGCOMM Computing Communication Review, 35, 4. 2005-08. pages 73–84.
  45. Alan Shieh, Andrew C. Myers, Emin G. Sirer. Trickles: A Stateless Network Stack for Improved Scalability, Resilience, and Flexibility. In Proceedings of Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation,/em> (NSDI), Vol. 2. USENIX Association. 2005. pages 175–188.
  46. Alan Shieh, Andrew C. Myers, Emin Gün Sirer. A Stateless Approach to Connection-Oriented Protocols. In ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 26, 3. 2008-09. pages 8:1–8:50.
  47. James W. Stamos, David K. Gifford. Implementing Remote Evaluation. In IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 16, 7. 1990-07. pages 710–722.
  48. James W. Stamos, David K. Gifford. Remote Evaluation. In ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), 12, 4. 1990-10. pages 537–564.
  49. Chengzheng Sun, Xiaohua Jia, Yanchun Zhang, Yun Yang, David Chen. Achieving Convergence, Causality Preservation, and Intention Preservation in Real-time Cooperative Editing Systems. In ACM Transactions on Complicating Human Interactions (HCI), 5, 1. 1998-03. pages 63–108.
  50. Richard N. Taylor, Nenad Medvidovic, et al. A Component- and Message- Based Architectural Style for GUI Software. In Transactions on Software Engineering. 1996-06. pages 390–406.
  51. Richard N. Taylor, Nenad Medvidovic, Eric M. Dashofy. Software Architecture: Foundations, Theory, and Practice. John Wiley & Sons. 2010. ASIN:B012AQ8M42: Kindle: no, paper: $151-$600.
  52. Richard N. Taylor, Nenad Medvidovic, Peyman Oreizy. Architectural Styles for Runtime Software Adaptation. In Proceedings of the Eighth Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture and Third European Conference on Software Architecture. IEEE Computer Society, 171–180. 2009.
  53. R.D. Tennant. 1976. The Denotational Semantics of Programming Languages. In Communications of the ACM 19, 8. 1976-08. pages 437–453.
  54. M. Thomson, E. Damaggio, B Raymor. Generic Event Delivery Using HTTP Push. RFC 8030. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2016.
  55. Emmet James Whitehead, Jr. An Analysis of the Hypertext Versioning Domain. Ph.D. Dissertation. Univ. of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA. 2000.
  56. Emmet James Whitehead, Jr., Yaron Goland. The WebDAV Property Design. In Software, Practice and Experience 34 2004, 135–161.
  57. Wikipedia. 2017. Representational state transfer,/a>. In Wikipedia. 2017.
  58. Scott Wolchok, J Alex Halderman. Crawling BitTorrent DHTs for Fun and Profit. In Proceedings of the Fourth USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies (WOOT10). 2010.
  59. Gavin Wood. 2014. Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Paper 151. Ethereum Project Yellow Papers 2014.

Previously filled.

Trip report: Summer ISO C++ standards meeting (Toronto) | Sutter’s Mill

Herb Sutter; Trip report: Summer ISO C++ standards meeting (Toronto); In His Blog entitled Sutter’s Mill; 2017-07-15.

Mentions

  • Concepts TS
    • “introducer syntax”
    • “terse/natural syntax”
  • Draft C++20
  • C++17
  • Modules TS
  • Coroutines TS
  • Networking TS
  • atomic_shared_ptr<T>
  • Latches
  • Barriers
  • Reflection
  • Library Evolution [Working Group]
  • SG1
  • CppCon

Something About…

  • several new containers
  • compile-time programming
  • metaclass programming

and…

  • modules
  • contracts

Definitions

“IS”
The “international standard” is core [of the] C++ standard.
a.k.a. “trunk.”
“TS”
The “technical specification” is a document separate from the main standard. Experimental features can start here before being put into the IS.
a.k.a. “beta branches.”
Current Status
See the actualities, below.

Who

  • Bjarne Stroustrup
  • Gabriel Dos Reis
  • Andrew Sutton

Referenced

Proposals
  • P0194compile-time reflection
  • P0244Unicode support
  • P0355date library
  • P0329Add designated initializers.
    e.g. struct A { int x; int y; int z; }; A b{.x = 1, .z = 2};
  • P0409Allow lambda capture [=, this].
  • P0428Allow template parameter lists on lambdas.
    e.g. auto f = []<typename T>(std::vector<T> vector) { /*…*/ };
Issues
  • BUG 311remove deprecated features

Previously

In His Blog

Actualities

Previously filled

A Comprehensive Look at Low Power, Wide Area Networks (LPWAN) | LinkLabs

A Comprehensive Look at Low Power, Wide Area Networks (LPWAN); a whitepaper; LinkLabs; 2017?; 16 pages (2 of content)
Teaser: For ‘Internet of Things’ Engineers and Decision Makers Important People Like You

Promotion

Mentions

  • Low Power, Wide Area Network (LPWAN)
  • Internet of things (IoT)
  • Machine to Machine (M2M)
  • Topologies
    • Mesh
    • Star
  • Energy per symbol
    • Shannon-Hartley Theorem
    • Information Theory
  • Regulations
    • FCC Part 15 (requrement)
    • ETSI (rules)
  • Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR)
  • Radio Frequency (RF)
  • Code Division Multiplexing (CDMA)
  • Chirp Spread Sprectum (CSS)
  • Frequency Shift Keying (FSK)
  • LoRaWAN
  • Groupe Speciale Mobile Association (GSMA)
  • Adaptive Data Rate
  • IoT Platform sector
  • Cellular IoT (CIoT) LPWAN.
  • Forking 4G with LTE-M.
  • LoRa, LoRaWAN
  • “clobbered,” a technical term.
  • Band
    • Europe (868 MHz)
      U.S. (915 MHz)
  • MAC
  • SATCOM
  • MTU
  • Ultra Narrowband (UNB) Radio
  • Random Phase Multiple Access (RPMA)
  • BPSK
Definition
  • long range
    10km
  • low power
    Aspirationally: half-a-generation, a decade, ten years.
  • low data rate
    metaphorical inverse of “blazing-fast”

Folklore

  • ZigBee has “trouble” in the 20-30m range; unusable beyond 30m.
  • Star topology is best.
  • LPWAN operate at 140-160 decibels (dB) of total path.
  • Receiver sensitivity
    • LPWAN  is more than -130 dBm
    • [some] other wireless is within -90 to -110 dBm.
  • The 915 MHz band is available only in ⅓ of the world.
    Therefore LPWAN is “not ready”
    There is no globally available band for LPWAN technologies like there is at the 2.4 GHz level (for Bluetooth and WiFi).

Standards

  • 802.11 of IEEE
    • 802.11ac
    • 802.11ad
    • 802.11n
    • 802.11a
    • 802.11g
    • 802.11b
  • 802.15 of IEEE
    • 802.15.4 ZigBee
    • 802.15.4 WPAN
    • 802.15.4k Nwave, Random Phase Multiple Access (RPMA)
    • 802.15.5 WBAN
  • The ‘G of The Telecom Sphere
    • 2G
    • 3G
    • 4G
    • 5G
    • you guessed it … “6G”
  • Bluetooth
    • Bluetooth (Classic)
    • Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE)
  • and
    • RFID
    • NFC

Products

  • Sigfox

    • What Is Sigfox
    • Proprietary
    • Concept
      12-byte packets, 300 baud, BPSK
      message repetition.
      15 byte messages, 10 messages/day up, 4 acknowledgements/day (down).
    • Something about: 2015, protocol upgrade, guaranteed message acknowledgment for up to four messages per day.
    • Scheme
      BPSK, 868 MHz,,915 MHz
  • Nwave
    • Proprietary
      • Capabilites unknown
      • Unpublished, undocumented
    • Scheme
      Ultra Narrowband (UNB) radio, sub-1 GHz ISM bands.
  • Ingenu
    • Proprietary
    • Founder, IEEE 802.15.4k task group
    • Something about: has a MAC concept.
    • Scheme
      Random Phase Multiple Access (RPMA); 2.4GHz
  • Weightless
    • Weightless Special Interests Group (SIG)
      unknown, unproven specifications & capabilities.
    • Concept
      10 year battery life
      2-way communication
    • Three sub-standards.
      • Weightless-W
    • Scheme
      sub-1GHz, unlicensed; in “unused TV spectrum”
  • LoRaWAN
    • LoRa Alliance
      • Specification, request
      • Intellectual Property
        • Semtech
        • with
          • IBM Research
          • Actility.
    • Concept
      Like Sigfox, but different
    • Dependencies
      • Any “code” must b be run off-box “in the cloud.”
      • Requires a “cloud vendor.”
      • Thus, heavy monthly fees for the compute.
        How much would you pay to have “smart light bulb?”
        With a monthly “subscription” and bill presentment?
    • Vendors
      • none
      • Aspiration
        • STMicroelectronics

Referenced

Actualities

Link Labs, 130 Holiday Court, Suite 100, Annapolis, MD 21401,

LinkLabs
130 Holiday Court, Suite 100
Annapolis, MD 21401,
http://www.nwave.io/

Previously filled.

Tech is Public Enemy #1. So Now What? | John Battelle

John Battelle; Tech Is Public Enemy #1. So Now What?; In His Blog, white-labeled as NewCo, centrally-hosted on Medium; 2017-09-10.
Teaser: If tech wants to reverse the crushing tide of negative public opinion, it must start creating public good commensurate with its extraction of private profit.

tl;dr → Agree, perhaps. But it’s not clear to what one is agreeing at all. Whereas the lede is buried; that being the promotion of Richard Florida’s book The New Urban Crisis.
and → Unto the hook of the title: For the sin, The Nostrum. To wit:

Nostrum
  • Enumerate.
  • Confess,
  • Repent,
  • Restitute, reparate.
  • Return.

Occasion

John Battelle interviewed Richard Florida towards a book promotion.

Book

Richard Florida The New Urban Crisis: How Our Cities Are Increasing Inequality, Deepening Segregation, and Failing the Middle Class—and What We Can Do About It 1st Edition ; Basic Books; 2017-04-11; 336 pages; ASIN:0465079741: Kindle: $18, paper: $12+SHT.

Mentions

  • Where “tech” is Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Google, and maybe Netflix (rly?).
  • And JB foresaw it in a vision of 2017-01; fair. he also “saw” it in 2011-12, had Microsoft in the cohort, and pitched “The Internet Big Five” as a gushing chronicle-of-the-times, only-time-will-tell honorific of boosterist veneration. indeed though, it’s okay to change one’s mind upon further reflection.
  • Richard Florida is granted 191 words at the end to speak as a threat.
    Whereas Richard Florida has a direct line to Congress.
    Unless his demands are met … something will happen
  • Google Apple Facebook Amazon (GAFA),
    Google Amazon Facebook Apple (GAFA)
  • Facebook Amazon Netflix Google (FANG),
    Facebook Apple Netflix Google (FANG)
  • No Wintel.  The PC Revolution is over O.V.E.R.
    • No Microsoft?
    • No Intel?
Definition: the “tech” is an enumeration
  • Apple → fabless. Purveyors of phones & some laptops.
  • Amazon → Retail reseller. Cloud (billed as a service).
  • Facebook → Entertainment. laid against advertising.
  • Google → Fabless, phone designs. Cloud (billed as a service), Advertising marketplaces.  And 25 other hobbies as “Alphabet.”
  • Netflix → Licensed video entertainment. An Amazon cloud customer.
    …can’t really seriously belong in the class of the first four can it?

Epithets

  • Uber — a company that proved a perfect exemplar of tech’s most sociopathic characteristics*.
  • <quote>The bro culture long parodied in popular culture proved to be virulently on display at the world’s most valuable startup — misogyny, tone deaf management, winning at all costs, ignorance of social and political consequence.</quote>
  • Everything Store
  • <quote>rapacious and robotic approach to platform capitalism</quote>
  • Amazon’s purchase of Whole Foods
  • Big Tech
  • fake news
  • Russian information ops
  • <quote>They’re extracting — but giving nothing back.</quote>

Rebuttal

New bogies for new panics, not the old bogies from old panics…

Missing

Anyone that actually makes things out of actual atoms. No one is afraid of companies that fabricate things out of atoms.

  • Industry (even so called “light industry”)
  • Big Defense (denizens of ‘I’ in Military-Industrial Complex)
  • Big Oil
  • Big Food
  • Big Finance, a.k.a. “Wall Street”
  • Big Auto
  • Big Semiconductor
  • Big Telecom
  • Big Blue, a.k.a. IBM
  • Big Mining
  • Big Ads, a.k.a. “Madison Avenue”
  • Big Media, a.k.a. major market television
  • Big Music, a.k.a. “the Record Labels”
  • Big Hollywood, a.k.a. “The Movie Studios”
  • Big Newspaper
  • Big Cable
  • The Diamond Cartel, e.g. de Beers
  • Railroad Trusts
  • Anyone on the Conference Board.
    Remember the “interlocking directorate” research of ‘ago?
  • The QSR, as a self-conscious class.
  • Disney
  • Microsoft
  • Walmart
  • McDonald’s

And

  • No Japanese conglomerates. Remember MITI-managed organized markets?
  • No European national champions. Remember the ’90s?

Referenced

In archaeological order, newer outbursts on top, older opinements below…

Previously

In His Blog

Related

The publishing pile-on exponentially increasing across 2015, 2016, 2017. There are many more than are presented here. Everyone is sayin’ it, doin’ it; walkin’ the walk, talkin’ the talk. Yet presented here in archaeological order, newer outbursts on top, older opinements below…

Previously filled.

Out of Action: Do protests work? | The New Yorker

Out of Action: Do protests work?; Nathan Heller; In The New Yorker; 2017-08-14.
Teaser: Skeptics suggest that “folk politics”—marches, protests, and the like—are a distraction from the challenges of real change.

tl;dr → No.  Betteridge’s Law. folk politics as “leaderless” slactivism does not work; “leader”-based, top-down circa 1955-1965 did work; see Zeynep Tufekci.

Summary

<quote>Tufekci’s conclusions about the civil-rights movement are unsettling because of what they imply. People such as Kauffman portray direct democracy as a scrappy, passionate enterprise: the underrepresented, the oppressed, and the dissatisfied get together and, strengthened by numbers, force change. Tufekci suggests that the movements that succeed are actually proto-institutional: highly organized; strategically flexible, due to sinewy management structures; and chummy with the sorts of people we now call élites.</quote>

Mentions

  • “folk politics”
    • Attributed to Nick Srnicek, Alex Williams in Inventing the Future
    • Constitutes
      • authenticity-mongering
      • <quote>reasoning through individual stories [is] also a journalistic tic</quote>
      • <quote>a general inability to think systemically about change&lt/;quote>
    • “This is politics transmitted into pastime—politics-as-drug-experience, perhaps—rather than anything capable of transforming society”
    • <quote>Their objection to protest and direct action defies generations of radical zeal. “The people, united, will never be defeated!” the old street chant goes. These lefties say that, actually, they will.</quote>
    • <quote><snip/>the left, despite its pride in being progressive, is mired in nostalgia.
      “Petitions, occupations, strikes, vanguard parties, affinity groups, trade unions: all arose out of particular historical conditions,” they say. They think that modernizing these things for an internationalized, digitized world will free us from what they vividly call our “endless treadmill of misery.” Protest is fine for digging in your heels. But work for change needs to be pragmatic and up-to-date. </quote>
    • <quote>Inventing the Future may be the shrewdest, sanest pipe dream of a book published since the recession.</quote>
  • “the multitude”
    • Attributed to Michael Hardt, Antonio Negri; Assembly (Heretical Thought);
    • Constitutes
    • …some things…

Quotes

  • <quote><snip/>the killings of “more than” forty unarmed black people by law-enforcement officers. A majority of these officers were not indicted, however; of those that were, three were found guilty. To date, only one of the convicted has received a prison sentence.</quote>
  • …more…

Referenced

Previously

In The New Yorker

Datelined
Essays

Soup

  • New York
  • London
  • 2003
  • Occupy Wall Street
  • misdeeds of the finance industry
  • stranglehold of corporate power
  • predations of inequality.
  • Autumn 2011
  • Zuccotti Park
  • lower Manhattan.
  • 2014.
  • Black Lives Matter (B.L.M.)
  • demonstrators
  • Missouri
  • Women’s March
  • female empowerment
  • just-inaugurated President
  • boulevards in cities
  • New York
  • Washington
  • London
  • Los Angeles
  • First Amendment
  • “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”
  • Stamp Act boycotts of the seventeen-sixties
  • 1913 suffrage parade and the March on Washington
  • 1963
  • Tom Lehrer
  • Arab Spring
  • Macau
  • the feminism-and-rationalism-flaunting event known as Boobquake.
  • strident
  • Boobquake
  • Brainquake.
  • smartphones
  • social media
  • made organizing easier
  • social theatre
  • folk politics
  • authenticity-mongering
  • reasoning through individual stories [is] also a journalistic tic
  • channelling the righteous sentiments of those involved over the mechanisms of real progress.
  • pastime—politics-as-drug-experience
  • [not] wing nuts of the right
  • [not] stodgy suits
  • [not] quailing centrists.
  • Marx-infused leftists
  • “post-work,” open-bordered world.
  • “postcapitalist”
  • shorten the work week
  • a generous and global basic income
  • when robots take our jobs.

Previously filled.

Marketing Technology Landscape Supergraphic (2017): Martech 5000


(ChiefMarTec); Marketing Technology Landscape Supergraphic (2017): Martech 5000; In Their Blog; 2017-05-10.

Occasion

Martech 5000
Slide
copy, original
JPEG
copy, original
PDF
copy, original
Sheet

Licentious licentiate: <quote ref=”cite“>Feel free to cut-and-paste this data and use it as a starting point for your own research.</quote>

Mentions

  • Integration-Platform-as-a-Service(iPaaS, IPaaS)
    • are “distributed” platforms
    • perform <quote>[as] dynamically piping data between marketing applications and [a] data lake.</quote>
  • Content Management System (CMS)
    • are platforms, per se
    • are centralized
    • are repositories of data and services
    • Gartner staff renamed them digital marketing hub
  • Among: DMP, CDP, RTIM
    • is a subtle blending among them
    • The Spectrum
      • Data Management Platforms (DMP),
      • Customer Data Platform (CDP),
      • Real-Time Interaction Management (RTIM)

Exemplars

Content Management System (CMS)

  • Adobe
  • HubSpot
  • IBM
  • Marketo
  • Oracle
  • Salesforce
  • Sitecore

IPaaS, now with Microservices!

  • Boomi, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Dell, a.k.a. Dell Boomi
  • Informatica
  • Jitterbit
  • Mulesoft
  • Segment
  • Zapier

The Spectrum Among: DMP, CDP, RTIM

Customer Data Platform (CDP)
  • AgilOne
  • Lytics
  • RedPoint
  • Tealium
  • Treasure Data
  • Usermind
Data Management Platform (DMP)
As a feature, not even Line of Business
  • Adobe
  • Oracle
  • Salesforce
Standalone
  • DataXu
  • MediaMath
  • Neustar
  • Rocketfuel, (sic) Rocket Fuel of Sizmek
Real-Time Importance Management (RTIM)
  • Experian
    but not Acxiom? EXPM contra ACXM …”the same, but different” aren’t they?
  • Infor
  • Pegasystems
  • SAS
  • Teradata

Credited

Iterations

Argot

  • Content Management System (CMS)
  • Customer Data Platform (CDP)
  • Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
  • Data Lake, an inelegant metaphor,
    a body corpora of water data facts in a controlled-but-unstructured format.
  • Data Management Platform (DMP)
  • Digital Marketing Hub (DMH)
    Gartner ‘lingo for the MarTech genre.
  • Enabler
    Doesn’t actually do the work, but still sends a bill for allowing it to occur.
    Usage: <quote>iPaaS and microservice platform enablers.</quote>
  • Integration-Platform-as-a-Service (iPaaS)
  • Long Tail
  • Marketing Automation Platform (MAP)
  • Microservices
  • Platform-as-a-Service (iPaaS)
  • Real-Time Interaction Management (RTIM)
  • Service-as-a-Service (SaaS)
  • Success-as-a-Service, a scheme.
    e.g. 2&20.

Referenced

Previously

In Their Blog

Actualities

Licentiate: ibidem.




The Fate of Online Trust in the Next Decade | Pew Research Center

, ; The Fate of Online Trust in the Next Decade; Pew Research Center; 2017-08-10; 89 pages; landing.

Teaser

Many experts say lack of trust will not be a barrier to increased public reliance on the internet. Those who are hopeful that trust will grow expect technical and regulatory change will combat users’ concerns about security and privacy. Those who have doubts about progress say people are inured to risk, addicted to convenience and will not be offered alternatives to online interaction. Some expect the very nature of trust will change.

Concept

  • Delphi-type survey design
  • N=1,233
  • A pull-quote generation vehicle. To Wit.

Summary

  • 48% → trust will be strengthened
  • 28% → trust will stay the same
  • 24% → trust will be diminished

Scope

Six major themes on the future of trust in online interactions

Theme 1
Trust will strengthen because systems will improve and people will adapt to them and more broadly embrace them

  • Better technology plus regulatory and industry changes will help increase trust
  • The younger generation and people whose lives rely on technology the most are the vanguard of those who most actively use it, and these groups will grow larger
Theme 2
The nature of trust will become more fluid as technology embeds itself into human and organizational relationships

  • Trust will be dependent upon immediate context and applied differently in different circumstances
  • Trust is not binary or evenly distributed; there are different levels of it
Theme 3
Trust will not grow, but technology usage will continue to rise, as a “new normal” sets in

  • “The trust train has left the station”; sacrifices tied to trust are a “side effect of progress”
  • People often become attached to convenience and inured to risk
  • There will be no choice for users but to comply and hope for the best
Theme 4
Some say blockchain could help; some expect its value might be limited

  • Blockchain has potential to improve things
  • There are reasons to think blockchain might not be as disruptive and important as its advocates expect it to be
Theme 5
The less-than-satisfying current situation will not change much in the next decade
Theme 6
Trust will diminish because the internet is not secure, and powerful forces threaten individuals’ rights

  • Corporate and government interests are not motivated to improve trust or protect the public
  • Criminal exploits will diminish trust

Producers

Imagining The Internet (Center)
  • Pew Research Center
  • Elon University

Previously filled.

Purism Librem 5 – A Security and Privacy Focused Phone

Librem 5A Security and Privacy Focused Phone
still uses Flash on the promotion page.

 

 

 

Conformance

Telecommunications

  • 2G/3G/4G
  • GSM
  • UMTS
  • LTE

Software

Applications

  • HTML5 “web apps” in a browser
  • Matrix

Operating Systems

  • PureOS
  • Debian GNU/Linux
  • Ubuntu
  • Fedora
  • Suse
  • Arch Linux
  • SubgraphOS
  • “will run almost any GNU+Linux based distribution”

Hardware

  • 5″ touchscreen
  • i.MX6/i.MX8 CPU
  • Vivante GPU
    (Etnaviv free software accelerated driver
  • Separate mobile baseband
  • 3GB LPDDR3
  • 32GB eMMC
  • MicroSD slot
  • Camera (front and back)
  • Flash
  • Headphone and Microphone Jack (3.5mm)
  • Microphone
  • Speaker
  • Power Button
  • Volume Controls
  • SIM Slot
  • WiFi 802.11
  • Bluetooth 4
  • Debugging interface (internal)
  • USB Host
  • USB Type-C
  • Battery
  • Sensors:
    • GPS
    • Accelerometer
    • Gyroscope
    • Compass
    • Ambient Light
    • Proximity
  • Hardware kill switches for:
    • Camera
    • Microphone
    • Baseband
    • WiFi/Bluetooth

whatcounts.com | Your connection is not secure

Nothing says “The Web is Misconfigured” quite like a low-level security protocol failure notice on a DIY computer-hobbyist site.


Explanation

Pre-Conference AdTech Summarization | Gubbins

; Things you should know about AdTech, today; In His Blog, centrally hosted on LinkedIn; 2017-08-30; regwalled (you have to login to linkedin).

Occasion

Boosterism in front of the trade shows
  • Exchange Wire #ATSL17
  • Dmexco
  • Programmatic IO

Mentions

  • There be consolidation in the DSP category.
  • There will be more DSPs not less fewer.
  • Owned & Operated (O&O)
  • preferential deals
  • private equity companies
  • party data & a GDPR compliant screen agnostic ID
  • no “point solutions.”
  • Doubleclick Bid Manager (DBM), Google
  • Lara O’Reilly; Some Article; In Business Insider (maybe); WHEN?
    tl;dr → something about how Google DSP DBM guarantee “fraud-free” traffic.
  • Ads.txtAuthorized Digital Sellers, IAB Tech Lab
  • Claimed:
    comScore publishers are starting to adopt Ads.txt

Buy Side

Deal Flow
  • Sizmek acquired Rocket Fuel, (unverified) $145M.
  • Tremor sells its DSP to Taptica for $50M.
  • Singtel acquired Turn for $310M.
No flow, yet
  • Adform
  • MediaMath
  • DataXu
  • AppNexus

Sell Side

  • Header Bidding (HB)
    • Replaces the SSP category
    • <quote>effectively migrated the sell sides narrative & value prop of being a yield management partner to that of a feet on the street publisher re-seller.</quote>
  • QBR (Quarterly Business Result?)
  • Prebid.js
  • With server bidding, too.
  • Supply Path Optimization (SPO)
    • Brian O’Kelley (AppNexus); Article; In His Blog; WHEN?
      Brian O’Kelley, CEO, AppNexus.
    • Article; ; In ExchangeWire; WHEN?
  • Exchange Bidding in Dynamic Allocation (EBDA), Google
Exemplars
The Rubicon Project
a header tag, compatible with most wrappers, no proprietary wrapper, only Prebid.js
Index Exchange
a header tag, compatible with most wrappers, a proprietary wrapper
OpenX
a header tag that, compatible with many (not ‘most’) wrappers, a proprietary wrapper
AppNexus
a header, compatible with many (not ‘most’) wrappers, a proprietary wrapper (that is better than OpenX’s which is not enterprise grade)
PubMatic
a header tag, compatible with many (not ‘most)’ wrappers, a proprietary wrapper.
Other
  • TrustX
    • with
      • Digital Content Next
      • IPONWEB
      • ANA
    • Something about a transparent marketplace.
  • Something about another supply network
    • German
    • trade press in Digiday
Mobile
  • No header bidding, yet.
  • Mobile equals Adware (“in app”)
    • but Apps don’t have “browsers.”
    • but App browsers don’t have “pages” with “headers.”
    • though Apps have SDKs (libraries).
Video
  • RTL acquires SpotX
  • <quote>One could argue video is the perfect storm for header bidding, limited quality supply & maximum demand, the ideal conditions for a unified auction…</quote>
Talking Points
  • The industry is currently debating the pros & cons of running header bidding either client or server side (A lot boils down to latency V audience match rates)
  • Google offer their own version of header bidding, this is referred to as EBDA (Exchange Bidding in Dynamic Allocation) and is available to DFP customers.
  • Facebook recently entered header bidding by launching a header tag that enables publishers to capture FAN demand via header bidding on their mobile traffic.
  • Criteo entered header bidding by offering publishers their header tag (AKA Direct Bidder) that effectively delivers Criteos unique demand into the publisher’s header auction, at a 1st rather than cleared 2nd price.
  • Amazon have launched a server to server header bidding offering for publishers that delivers unique demand and the ability to manage other S2S demand partners for the publisher.
Extra Credit
  • <quote>senior AdTech big wigs</quote>
  • programmatic auction process
  • 1st v 2nd price
  • 2nd price was for waterfall
  • 1st price will be for unified (header bidding)

General Data Protection Regulation’ (GDPR)

  • 2018-05
  • Consent must be collected.
  • Will make 2nd party data marketplaces economical.
  • The salubrious effect.
  • Publishers have a Direct Relationship with consumers.
    this is argued as being “better.”
  • Industry choices
    • collect holistic consent
      <quote>one unified [process] of consumer [outreach] rather than one for every vendor</quote>
    • individual vendor consent
      <quote>for every cookie or device ID that flows through the OpenRTB pipes we have spent the last 10 years laying.</quote>

Viewability & Brand Safety

  • IAB
  • MRC

Talking Points

  • Moat was sold to Oracle for reported number of $800M.
  • PE Firm Providence Equity bought a % of Double Verify giving them a reported value of $300M.
  • Integral Ad Science remains independent, for now

Telcos

  • Telcos have what everybody in AdTech wants:
    • accurate data
    • privacy compliant data
    • scaled data
    • 1st party data.
  • Telcos want what AdTech & publishing companies have:
    • programmatic sell and buy side tools
    • content creation functions
    • distribution at scale.
    • diversification of revenues

Talking Points

  • Verizon buys AOL & Yahoo to form Oath, a publisher, a DSP, a DMP.
  • Telenor buys TapAd, a cross-device DMP-type-thing
  • Altice buys Teads, a streaming video vendor)
  • Singtel buys Turn, a DSP
  • AT&T needs a line in this list; might want to buy Time Warner which is a movie studio, media holding copmany, a cable operator, an old owner of AOL.
Shiny
Smartpipe
Raised $18.75M, Series A. Why?
ZeoTap
Raised $20M, through Series B, Why?

Data Management Platform (DMP)

  • Not a pure-play business.
    • A division, not a business.
    • An interface, not a division.
  • Everyone wants to own one.
Deciderata
  • Should DMP’s also be in the media buying business?
  • What are DMP’s doing to stay relevant for a world without cookies?
  • Do DMP’s plan to build or buy device graph features / functions?
  • For platforms that process & model a lot of 1st, 2nd & 3rd party data, how will they be affected by the pending GDPR?
Talking Points
  • Adobe bought Tube Mogul, a video DSP, for $540M (based on information &amp belief).
  • Oracle bought Moat, a verification feature, for $800M
  • Oracle bought Crosswise, a cross-device database, for <unstated/>
  • Salesforce bought Krux, a DMP, FOR $700M

Lotame remains independent, for now

ID Consortium’s & Cross-Device Players

Claims
Probabilistic “won’t work”
<quote>The GDPR may make it very difficult for a number of probabilistic methods to be applied to digital ID management.</quote>
Walled Garden
They … <quote>are using their own proprietary cross-screen deterministic token / people based ID that in many cases only works within their O&O environments.</quote>
Universal ID
Is desired. <quote>CMO’s & agencies in the future will not be requesting a cleaner supply chain, but a universal ID (or ID clearing house) that will enable them to manage reach, frequency & attribution across all of the partners they buy from.</quote>
Initiatives
The DigiTrust
<quote>This technology solution creates an anonymous user token, which is propagated by and between its members in lieu of billions of proprietary pixels and trackers on Web pages.</quote>
Claim: “Many” leading AdTech companies are already working with the DigiTrust team. [Which?]
AppNexus ID Consortium
  • Scheme: people-based ID.
  • Launch: 2017-05
  • Trade Name: TBD
    • Index Exchange
    • LiveRamp
    • OpenX
    • Live Intent
    • Rocket Fuel
Standalones
  • Adbrain
  • Screen6
  • Drawbridge

Blockchain

BUZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!

  • Blockchain is slow, too slow, way too slow
    Blockchain can handle 10 tps.
  • Does not work in OpenRGB
  • NYIAX
    • New York City
Referenced
  • Some Q&A; In AdExchanger
    tl;dr → interview of Dr Boris WHO?, IPONWEB; self-styled “the smartest man in AdTech and he concurs”

Artificial Intelligence

  • Is bullshit.
  • c.f.(names dropped)
    • Deepmind
    • Boston Dynamics

Omitted

  • DOOH
  • Audio
  • Programmatic TV
  • Over The Top (OTT)
  • MarTech != AdTech

Previously filled.

Surviving on a Diet of Poisoned Fruit: Reducing the National Security Risks of America’s Cyber Dependencies | Danzig (CNAS)

Richard J. Danzig; Surviving on a Diet of Poisoned Fruit Reducing the National Security Risks of America’s Cyber Dependencies; Center for a New American Security; 2014-07; 64 pages; landing.

tl;dr → a metaphor for an ambivalent relationship with the technical platforms upon which all things depend.  Writ large into the relationship with the supply chain that we do not control and is inimical to our interests..

Executive Summary

Digital technologies, commonly referred to as cyber systems, are a security paradox: Even as they grant unprecedented powers, they also make users less secure. Their communicative capabilities enable collaboration and networking, but in so doing they open doors to intrusion. Their concentration of data and manipulative power vastly improves the efficiency and scale of operations, but this concentration in turn exponentially increases the amount that can be stolen or subverted by a successful attack. The complexity of their hardware and software creates great capability, but this complexity spawns vulnerabilities and lowers the visibility of intrusions. Cyber systems’ responsiveness to instruction makes them invaluably flexible; but it also permits small changes in a component’s design or direction to degrade or subvert system behavior. These systems’ empowerment of users to retrieve and manipulate data democratizes capabilities, but this great benefit removes safeguards present in systems that require hierarchies of human approvals. In sum, cyber systems nourish us, but at the same time they weaken and poison us.

The first part of this paper illuminates this intertwining. The second part surveys the evolution of strategies to achieve greater cybersecurity. Disadvantaged by early design choices that paid little attention to security, these strategies provide some needed protection, especially when applied collectively as a coordinated “defense in depth.” But they do not and never can assure comprehensive protection; these strategies are typically costly, and users will commonly choose to buy less security than they could obtain because of the operational, financial or convenience costs of obtaining that security.

Three other factors, discussed in Section V, amplify cyber insecurity. First, the cyber domain is an area of conflict. Cyberspace is adversarial, contested territory. Our adversaries (including criminals, malevolent groups and opposing states) co-evolve with us. The resulting ecosystem is not static or stable. Second, the speed of cyber dissemination and change outpaces our recognition of problems and adoption of individual and societal safeguards to respond to them. Protective actions are likely to continue to lag behind security needs. Third, in cyberspace America confronts greater-than customary limits to U.S. government power because of the global proliferation of cyber capabilities, cyber attackers’ ability to remain outside the United States even while operating within the country’s systems and our likely inability, over the long term, to avoid technological surprise. Two-thirds of a century of technological dominance in national security matters has left the United States intuitively ill-prepared for technology competitions that it probably will not continue to dominate and in which there is a high likelihood of surprise.

What then is to be done? The concluding part of this paper does not attempt to recapitulate or evaluate efforts now extensively debated or in progress. It focuses instead on recommending initiatives that deserve fresh attention from U.S. government decision-makers. These include:

  1. Articulate a national security standard defining what it is imperative to protect in cyberspace. The suggested standard is: “The United States cannot allow the insecurity of our cyber systems to reach a point where weaknesses in those systems would likely render the United States unwilling to make a decision or unable to act on a decision fundamental to our national security.” A more stringent standard may later be in order, but this standard can now secure a consensus, illuminate the minimum that the United States needs to do and therefore provide an anvil against which the nation can hammer out programs and priorities.
  2. Pursue a strategy that self-consciously sacrifices some cyber benefits in order to ensure greater security for key systems on which security depends. Methods for pursuing this strategy include stripping down systems so they do less but have fewer vulnerabilities; integrating humans and other out-of-band (i.e., non-cyber) factors so the nation is not solely dependent on digital systems; integrating diverse and redundant cyber alternatives; and making investments for graceful degradation. Determining the trade-offs between operational loss and security gain through abnegating choices will require and reward the development of a new breed of civilian policymakers, managers and military officers able to understand both domains.
  3. Recognize that some private-sector systems fall within the national security standard. Use persuasion, federal acquisition policies, subsidy and regulation to
  4. apply the abnegating approach to these systems. While doing this, reflect an appreciation of the rapidity of cyber change by focusing on required ends while avoiding specification of means. Refrain from regulating systems that are not critical.
  5. Bolster cyber strategic stability between the United States and other major nation-states by seeking agreement on cyber constraints and confidence-building measures. As an early initiative of this kind, focus on buttressing the fragile norm of not using cyber as a means of physical attack between China, Russia and the United States.
  6. Evaluate degradation in the sought-after certainties of mutually assured destruction (MAD) as a result of uncertainties inherent in cyber foundations for nuclear command, control and attack warning. If we are moving to a regime of mutually unassured destruction (MUD), suggest to China and Russia that we are all becoming less secure. Then pursue agreements that all parties refrain from cyber intrusions into nuclear command, control and warning systems.
  7. Map the adversarial ecosystem of cyberspace in anthropological detail with the aim of increasing our understanding of our adversaries and our own incentives and methods of operation.
  8. Use the model of voluntary reporting of near-miss incidents in aviation to establish a data collection consortium that will illuminate the character and magnitude of cyber attacks against the U.S. private sector. Use this enterprise as well to help develop common terminology and metrics about cybersecurity.
  9. Establish a federally funded research and development center focused on providing an elite cyber workforce for the federal government. Hire that workforce by cyber competition rather than traditional credentials, and promote, train, retain and assign (including to the private sector) that workforce by standards different from those currently used in federal hiring.

Previously filled.