Curious about the best AI blog writer? An AI blog writer is software that uses machine learning to help you get more done — it combines speed, accuracy, and an interface that just works. Hands-on testing shows real-world results vary, so a short free trial is the smartest way to decide. Whether you are a beginner or a pro, the right AI blog writer slots into your workflow and pays for itself fast. This guide breaks down the top picks, their pros and cons, and who each one is best for.
Tridium
Tridium Inc. is an American engineering hardware and software company based in Richmond, Virginia, whose products facilitate and integrate the automation of building and other engineering control systems. Since November 2005, the company has operated as an independent business entity of Honeywell International Inc. == History == Tridium Inc. was founded in 1995. In 1999, Tridium launched the Niagara Framework, a software infrastructure that connects all systems and devices to a central console. In 2002, John Petze became president and CEO, replacing Jerry Frank. The company was acquired by Honeywell International Inc in 2005. == Products == Tridium's products facilitate by integrating building automation using open and proprietary communications protocols such as Modbus, Lonworks and BACnet. Tridium is the developer of Niagara Framework. The Niagara Framework is a universal software infrastructure that allows building controls integrators, HVAC and mechanical contractors to build custom, web-enabled applications for accessing, automating and controlling smart devices real-time via local network or over the Internet.
Social media use in hiring
Social media use in hiring refers to the examination by employers of job applicants' (public) social media profiles as part of the hiring assessment. For example, the vast majority of Fortune 500 companies use social media as a tool to screen prospective employees and as a tool for talent acquisition. This practice raises ethical questions. Employers and recruiters note that they have access only to information that applicants choose to make public. Many Western-European countries restrict employer's use of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin protect applicants and employees from surrendering usernames and passwords for social media accounts. Use of social media has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media. A 2013 survey of 17,000 young people in six countries found that one in ten people aged 16 to 34 claimed to have been rejected for a job because of social media activity. Social media services have been reported to affect deception in resumes. While these services do not affect deception frequency, it does increase deception about interests and hobbies. == Ethical implications == This issue raises many ethical questions that some consider an employer's right and others consider discrimination. As of 2016, except in the states of California, Maryland, and Illinois, there are no laws that prohibit employers from using social media profiles as a basis of whether or not someone should be hired. Title VII also prohibits discrimination during any aspect of employment including hiring or firing, recruitment, or testing. Social media has been integrating into the workplace, and this has led to conflicts within employees and employers.[107] Particularly, Facebook has been seen as a popular platform for employers to investigate in order to learn more about potential employees. This conflict first started in Maryland when an employer requested and received an employee's Facebook username and password. State lawmakers first introduced legislation in 2012 to prohibit employers from requesting passwords to personal social accounts in order to get a job or to keep a job. This led to Canada, Germany, the U.S. Congress and 11 U.S. states to pass or propose legislation that prevents employers' access to private social accounts of employees.[108] Many Western European countries have already implemented laws that restrict the regulation of social media in the workplace. States including Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin have passed legislation that protects potential employees and current employees from employers that demand them to give forth their username or password for a social media account. Laws that forbid employers from disciplining an employee based on activity off the job on social media sites have also been put into act in states including California, Colorado, Connecticut, North Dakota, and New York. Several states have similar laws that protect students in colleges and universities from having to grant access to their social media accounts. Eight states have passed the law that prohibits post secondary institutions from demanding social media login information from any prospective or current students and privacy legislation has been introduced or is pending in at least 36 states as of July 2013. As of May 2014, legislation has been introduced and is in the process of pending in at least 28 states and has been enacted in Maine and Wisconsin. In addition, the National Labor Relations Board has been devoting a lot of their attention to attacking employer policies regarding social media that can discipline employees who seek to speak and post freely on social media sites. Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites. A 2014 survey of recruiters found that 93% of them check candidates' social media postings. Moreover, professor Stijn Baert of Ghent University conducted a field experiment in which fictitious job candidates applied for real job vacancies in Belgium. They were identical except in one respect: their Facebook profile photos. It was found that candidates with the most wholesome photos were a lot more likely to receive invitations for job interviews than those with the more controversial photos. In addition, Facebook profile photos had a greater impact on hiring decisions when candidates were highly educated. These cases have created some privacy implications as to whether or not companies should have the right to look at employee's Facebook profiles. In March 2012, Facebook decided they might take legal action against employers for gaining access to employee's profiles through their passwords. According to Facebook Chief Privacy Officer for policy, Erin Egan, the company has worked hard to give its users the tools to control who sees their information. He also said users shouldn't be forced to share private information and communications just to get a job. According to the network's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, sharing or soliciting a password is a violation of Facebook policy. Employees may still give their password information out to get a job, but according to Erin Egan, Facebook will continue to do their part to protect the privacy and security of their users. == Impacts == Use of social media by young people has caused significant problems for some applicants who are active on social media when they try to enter the job market. A survey of 17,000 young people in six countries in 2013 found that 1 in 10 people aged 16 to 34 have been rejected for a job because of online comments they made on social media websites. A 2014 survey of recruiters found that 93% of them check candidates' social media postings. Moreover, in 2015 professor Stijn Baert of Ghent University conducted a field experiment in which fictitious job candidates applied for real job vacancies in Belgium. They were identical except in one respect: their Facebook profile photos. It was found that candidates with the most wholesome photos were a lot more likely to receive invitations for job interviews than those with the more controversial photos. In addition, Facebook profile photos had a greater impact on hiring decisions when candidates were highly educated. These cases have created some privacy implications as to whether or not companies should have the right to look at employee's Facebook profiles. In March 2012, Facebook decided they might take legal action against employers for gaining access to employee's profiles through their passwords. According to Facebook Chief Privacy Officer for policy, Erin Egan, the company has worked hard to give its users the tools to control who sees their information. He also said users shouldn't be forced to share private information and communications just to get a job. According to the network's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities, sharing or soliciting a password is a violation of Facebook policy. Employees may still give their password information out to get a job, but according to Erin Egan, Facebook will continue to do their part to protect the privacy and security of their users. == Policy Responses == 26 US states now have laws against an employer requiring a current or potential employee to give the employer their username and password.
Business continuity and disaster recovery auditing
Given organizations' increasing dependency on information technology (IT) to run their operations, business continuity planning (and its subset IT service continuity planning) covers the entire organization, while disaster recovery focuses on IT. Auditing documents covering an organization's business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR) plans provides a third-party validation to stakeholders that the documentation is complete and does not contain material misrepresentations. == Overview == Often used together, the terms business continuity (BC) and disaster recovery (DR) are very different. BC refers to the ability of a business to continue critical functions and business processes after the occurrence of a disaster, whereas DR refers specifically to the IT functions of the business, albeit a subset of BC. == Metrics == The primary objective is to protect the organization in the event that all or part of its operations and/or computer services are rendered partially or completely unusable. === DR metrics === Minimizing downtime and data loss during disaster recovery is typically measured in terms of two key concepts: Recovery time objective (RTO), time until a system is completely up and running Recovery point objective (RPO), a measure of the ability to recover files by specifying a point in time the backup copy will restore to. == The auditor's role == Role of the Internal Auditor in Auditing a Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP): 1. Governance & Oversight - Confirm roles, responsibilities, and oversight are defined, and DRP aligns with risk appetite and continuity strategy. 2. Risk Assessment & BIA - Verify risk and impact assessments identify critical systems and define RTO/RPO. 3. Plan Design & Documentation - Ensure the DRP is current, complete, and includes key recovery procedures. 4. Testing & Validation - Confirm regular DRP testing occurs and results are used to improve the plan. 5. Backup & Recovery - Assess backup frequency and recovery capabilities against RTO/RPO targets. 6. Communication & Training - Verify staff are trained and communication protocols are in place for crises. 7. Maintenance & Improvement - Ensure the DRP is regularly updated and lessons learned are integrated. == Documentation == === Disaster recovery plan === A disaster recovery plan (DRP) is a documented process or set of procedures to execute an organization's disaster recovery processes and recover and protect a business IT infrastructure in the event of a disaster. It is "a comprehensive statement of consistent actions to be taken before, during and after a disaster". The disaster could be natural, environmental or man-made. Man-made disasters could be intentional (for example, an act of a terrorist) or unintentional (that is, accidental, such as the breakage of a man-made dam or even "fat fingers" - or errant commands entered - on a computer system). ==== Types of plans ==== Although there is no one-size-fits-all plan, there are three basic strategies: prevention, including proper backups, having surge protectors and generators detection, a byproduct of routine inspections, which may discover new (potential) threats correction The latter may include securing proper insurance policies, and holding a "lessons learned" brainstorming session. ==== Best practices ==== To maximize their effectiveness, DRPs are most effective when updated frequently, and should: be an integral part of all business analysis processes, be revisited at every major corporate acquisition, at every new product launch and at every new system development milestone. be thoroughly tested, not just unpracticed bureaucratic documentation Adequate records need to be retained by the organization. The auditor examines records, billings, and contracts to verify that records are being kept. One such record is a current list of the organization's hardware and software vendors. Such list is made and periodically updated to reflect changing business practices and as part of an IT asset management system. Copies of it are stored on and off site and are made available or accessible to those who require them. An auditor tests the procedures used to meet this objective and determine their effectiveness. === Relationship to BCPs === Disaster recovery is a subset of business continuity. Where DRP encompasses the policies, tools and procedures to enable recovery of data following a catastrophic event, BCP involves keeping all aspects of a business functioning regardless of potential disruptive events. As such, a business continuity plan is a comprehensive organizational strategy that includes the DRP as well as threat prevention, detection, recovery, and resumption of operations should a data breach or other disaster event occur. Therefore, BCP consists of five component plans: Business resumption plan Occupant emergency plan Continuity of operations plan Incident management plan Disaster recovery plan The first three components (business resumption, occupant emergency, and continuity of operations plans) do not deal with the IT infrastructure. The incident management plan (IMP) does deal with the IT infrastructure, but since it establishes structure and procedures to address cyber attacks against an organization's IT systems, it generally does not represent an agent for activating the DRP; thus DRP is the only BCP component of active interest to IT. == Testing == The overall categorization of tests are functional- and discussion-based. Types of tests include: tabletop exercises, checklists, simulations, parallel processing (testing recovery site while primary site is in operation), and full interruption (fail over) tests. These apply to both BC and DR. == Benefits == Like every insurance plan, there are benefits that can be obtained from proper business continuity planning, including: Studies have shown a correlation between higher spending on auditing fees and lower rates of Incidents. Minimizing risk of delays Guaranteeing the reliability of standby systems (even automating the failure detection and recovery in certain scenarios) Providing a standard for testing the plan Minimizing decision-making during a disaster Reducing potential legal liabilities Lowering unnecessarily stressful work environment === Planning and testing methodology === According to Geoffrey H. Wold of the Disaster Recovery Journal, the entire process involved in developing a Disaster Recovery Plan consists of 10 steps: Performing a risk assessment: The planning committee prepares a risk analysis and a business impact analysis (BIA) that includes a range of possible disasters. Each functional area of the organization is analyzed to determine potential consequences. Traditionally, fire has posed the greatest threat. A thorough plan provides for "worst case" situations, such as destruction of the main building. Establishing priorities for processing and operations: Critical needs of each department are evaluated and prioritized. Written agreements for alternatives selected are prepared, with details specifying duration, termination conditions, system testing, cost, any special security procedures, procedure for the notification of system changes, hours of operation, the specific hardware and other equipment required for processing, personnel requirements, definition of the circumstances constituting an emergency, process to negotiate service extensions, guarantee of compatibility, availability, non-mainframe resource requirements, priorities, and other contractual issues. Collecting data: This includes various lists (employee backup position listing, critical telephone numbers list, master call list, master vendor list, notification checklist), inventories (communications equipment, documentation, office equipment, forms, insurance policies, workgroup and data center computer hardware, microcomputer hardware and software, office supply, off-site storage location equipment, telephones, etc.), distribution register, software and data files backup/retention schedules, temporary location specifications, any other such lists, materials, inventories, and documentation. Pre-formatted forms are often used to facilitate the data gathering process. Organizing and documenting a written plan Developing testing criteria and procedures: reasons for testing include Determining the feasibility and compatibility of backup facilities and procedures. Identifying areas in the plan that need modification. Providing training to the team managers and team members. Demonstrating the ability of the organization to recover. Providing motivation for maintaining and updating the disaster recovery plan. Testing the plan: An initial "dry run" of the plan is performed by conducting a structured walk-through test. An actual test-run must be performed. Problems are corrected. Initial testing can be plan is done in sections and after normal business hours to minimize disruptions. Subsequent tests occur during normal business hours. === Caveats/controversie
POODLE
POODLE (which stands for "Padding Oracle On Downgraded Legacy Encryption") is a security vulnerability which takes advantage of the fallback to SSL 3.0. If attackers successfully exploit this vulnerability, on average, they only need to make 256 SSL 3.0 requests to reveal one byte of encrypted messages. Bodo Möller, Thai Duong and Krzysztof Kotowicz from the Google Security Team discovered this vulnerability; they disclosed the vulnerability publicly on October 14, 2014 (despite the paper being dated "September 2014"). On December 8, 2014, a variation of the POODLE vulnerability that affected TLS was announced. The CVE-ID associated with the original POODLE attack is CVE-2014-3566. F5 Networks filed for CVE-2014-8730 as well, see POODLE attack against TLS section below. == Prevention == To mitigate the POODLE attack, one approach is to completely disable SSL 3.0 on the client side and the server side. However, some old clients and servers do not support TLS 1.0 and above. Thus, the authors of the paper on POODLE attacks also encourage browser and server implementation of TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV, which will make downgrade attacks impossible. Another mitigation is to implement "anti-POODLE record splitting". It splits the records into several parts and ensures none of them can be attacked. However the problem of the splitting is that, though valid according to the specification, it may also cause compatibility issues due to problems in server-side implementations. A full list of browser versions and levels of vulnerability to different attacks (including POODLE) can be found in the article Transport Layer Security. Opera 25 implemented this mitigation in addition to TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. Google's Chrome browser and their servers had already supported TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. Google stated in October 2014 it was planning to remove SSL 3.0 support from their products completely within a few months. Fallback to SSL 3.0 has been disabled in Chrome 39, released in November 2014. SSL 3.0 has been disabled by default in Chrome 40, released in January 2015. Mozilla disabled SSL 3.0 in Firefox 34 and ESR 31.3, which were released in December 2014, and added support of TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV in Firefox 35. Microsoft published a security advisory to explain how to disable SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer and Windows OS, and on October 29, 2014, Microsoft released a fix which disables SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer on Windows Vista / Server 2003 and above and announced a plan to disable SSL 3.0 by default in their products and services within a few months. Microsoft disabled fallback to SSL 3.0 in Internet Explorer 11 for Protect Mode sites on February 10, 2015, and for other sites on April 14, 2015. Apple's Safari (on OS X 10.8, iOS 8.1 and later) mitigated against POODLE by removing support for all CBC protocols in SSL 3.0, however, this left RC4 which is also completely broken by the RC4 attacks in SSL 3.0. POODLE was completely mitigated in OS X 10.11 (El Capitan 2015) and iOS 9 (2015). To prevent the POODLE attack, some web services dropped support of SSL 3.0. Examples include CloudFlare and Wikimedia. Network Security Services version 3.17.1 (released on October 3, 2014) and 3.16.2.3 (released on October 27, 2014) introduced support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV, and NSS will disable SSL 3.0 by default in April 2015. OpenSSL versions 1.0.1j, 1.0.0o and 0.9.8zc, released on October 15, 2014, introduced support for TLS_FALLBACK_SCSV. LibreSSL version 2.1.1, released on October 16, 2014, disabled SSL 3.0 by default. == POODLE attack against TLS == A new variant of the original POODLE attack was announced on December 8, 2014. This attack exploits implementation flaws of CBC encryption mode in the TLS 1.0 - 1.2 protocols. Even though TLS specifications require servers to check the padding, some implementations fail to validate it properly, which makes some servers vulnerable to POODLE even if they disable SSL 3.0. SSL Pulse showed "about 10% of the servers are vulnerable to the POODLE attack against TLS" before this vulnerability was announced. The CVE-ID for F5 Networks' implementation bug is CVE-2014-8730. The entry in NIST's NVD states that this CVE-ID is to be used only for F5 Networks' implementation of TLS, and that other vendors whose products have the same failure to validate the padding mistake in their implementations like A10 Networks and Cisco Systems need to issue their own CVE-IDs for their implementation errors because this is not a flaw in the protocol but in the implementation. The POODLE attack against TLS was found to be easier to initiate than the initial POODLE attack against SSL. There is no need to downgrade clients to SSL 3.0, meaning fewer steps are needed to execute a successful attack.
Tandem (app)
Tandem is a mobile language exchange and language learning app. == History == Tandem was founded in Hannover, Germany in 2014 by Arnd Aschentrup, Tobias Dickmeis, and Matthias Kleimann. Prior to founding Tandem, the trio had launched Vive, a members-only mobile video chat platform. Tandem has been criticised for not accepting members into the community immediately, as opposed to competitors including HelloTalk, Speaky or Cafehub. In some countries, there is a waiting list and applicants can wait up to seven days for their application to be processed by human moderators. In 2015, Tandem completed its first funding round (seed funding) of €600,000. Participating investors included business angels such as Atlantic Labs (Christophe Maire), Hannover Beteiligungsfonds, Marcus Englert (Chairman of the Supervisory Board of Rocket Internet SE ), Catagonia, Ludwig zu Salm, Florian Langenscheidt, Heiko Hubertz, Martin Sinner, and Zehden Enterprises. In 2016, the company received a further €2 million from new investors Rubylight and Faber Ventures, as well as from existing investors Hannover Beteiligungsfonds, Atlantic Labs, and Zehden Enterprises. Since 2018, the premium membership Tandem Pro has been available, which offers members unlimited access to all language learning features of the app as well as the removal of advertising for a monthly fee.
Myrinet
Myrinet, ANSI/VITA 26-1998, is a high-speed local area networking system designed by the company Myricom to be used as an interconnect between multiple machines to form computer clusters. == Description == Myrinet was promoted as having lower protocol overhead than standards such as Ethernet, and therefore better throughput, less interference, and lower latency while using the host CPU. Although it can be used as a traditional networking system, Myrinet is often used directly by programs that "know" about it, thereby bypassing a call into the operating system. Earlier versions of Myrinet used a variety of media and connectors: Generation 2 used copper media with DC-37 (Myrinet-LAN, M2L- controllers and switches) or microribbon (Myrinet-SAN, M2M-) connectors. Generation 3 used copper media with HSSDC (Myrinet-Serial, M3S-) or microribbon (Myrinet-SAN, M3M-) connectors, or fiber with LC-connectors (Myrinet-Fiber, M3F-). The later versions of Myrinet physically consist of two fibre optic cables, upstream and downstream, connected to the host computers with a single connector. Machines are connected via low-overhead routers and switches, as opposed to connecting one machine directly to another. Myrinet includes a number of fault-tolerance features, mostly backed by the switches. These include flow control, error control, and "heartbeat" monitoring on every link. The "fourth-generation" Myrinet, called Myri-10G, supported a 10 Gbit/s data rate and can use 10 Gigabit Ethernet on PHY, the physical layer (cables, connectors, distances, signaling). Myri-10G started shipping at the end of 2005. Myrinet was approved in 1998 by the American National Standards Institute for use on the VMEbus as ANSI/VITA 26-1998. One of the earliest publications on Myrinet is a 1995 IEEE article. === Performance === Myrinet is a lightweight protocol with little overhead that allows it to operate with throughput close to the basic signaling speed of the physical layer. For supercomputing, the low latency of Myrinet is even more important than its throughput performance, since, according to Amdahl's law, a high-performance parallel system tends to be bottlenecked by its slowest sequential process, which in all but the most embarrassingly parallel supercomputer workloads is often the latency of message transmission across the network. === Deployment === According to Myricom, 141 (28.2%) of the June 2005 TOP500 supercomputers used Myrinet technology. In the November 2005 TOP500, the number of supercomputers using Myrinet was down to 101 computers, or 20.2%, in November 2006, 79 (15.8%), and by November 2007, 18 (3.6%), a long way behind gigabit Ethernet at 54% and InfiniBand at 24.2%. In the June 2014 TOP500 list, the number of supercomputers using Myrinet interconnect was 1 (0.2%). In November 2013, the assets of Myricom (including the Myrinet technology) were acquired by CSP Inc. In 2016, it was reported that Google had also offered to buy the company.