ISO 15926 is a standard for data integration, sharing, exchange, and hand-over between computer systems. The title, "Industrial automation systems and integration—Integration of life-cycle data for process plants including oil and gas production facilities", is regarded too narrow by the present ISO 15926 developers. Having developed a generic data model and reference data library for process plants, it turned out that this subject is already so wide, that actually any state information may be modelled with it. == History == In 1991 a European Union ESPRIT-, named ProcessBase, started. The focus of this research project was to develop a data model for lifecycle information of a facility that would suit the requirements of the process industries. At the time that the project duration had elapsed, a consortium of companies involved in the process industries had been established: EPISTLE (European Process Industries STEP Technical Liaison Executive). Initially individual companies were members, but later this changed into a situation where three national consortia were the only members: PISTEP (UK), POSC/Caesar (Norway), and USPI-NL (Netherlands). (later PISTEP merged into POSC/Caesar, and USPI-NL was renamed to USPI). EPISTLE took over the work of the ProcessBase project. Initially this work involved a standard called ISO 10303-221 (referred to as "STEP AP221"). In that AP221 we saw, for the first time, an Annex M with a list of standard instances of the AP221 data model, including types of objects. These standard instances would be for reference and would act as a knowledge base with knowledge about the types of objects. In the early nineties EPISTLE started an activity to extend Annex M to become a library of such object classes and their relationships: STEPlib. In the STEPlib activities a group of approx. 100 domain experts from all three member consortia, spread over the various expertises (e.g. Electrical, Piping, Rotating equipment, etc.), worked together to define the "core classes". The development of STEPlib was extended with many additional classes and relationships between classes and published as Open source data. Furthermore, the concepts and relation types from the AP221 and ISO 15926-2 data models were also added to the STEPlib dictionary. This resulted in the development of Gellish English, whereas STEPlib became the Gellish English dictionary. Gellish English is a structured subset of natural English and is a modeling language suitable for knowledge modeling, product modeling and data exchange. It differs from conventional modeling languages (meta languages) as used in information technology as it not only defines generic concepts, but also includes an English dictionary. The semantic expression capability of Gellish English was significantly increased by extending the number of relation types that can be used to express knowledge and information. For modelling-technical reasons POSC/Caesar proposed another standard than ISO 10303, called ISO 15926. EPISTLE (and ISO) supported that proposal, and continued the modelling work, thereby writing Part 2 of ISO 15926. This Part 2 has official ISO IS (International Standard) status since 2003. POSC/Caesar started to put together their own RDL (Reference Data Library). They added many specialized classes, for example for ANSI (American National Standards Institute) pipe and pipe fittings. Meanwhile, STEPlib continued its existence, mainly driven by some members of USPI. Since it was clear that it was not in the interest of the industry to have two libraries for, in essence, the same set of classes, the Management Board of EPISTLE decided that the core classes of the two libraries shall be merged into Part 4 of ISO 15926. This merging process has been finished. Part 4 should act as reference data for part 2 of ISO 15926 as well as for ISO 10303-221 and replaced its Annex M. On June 5, 2007 ISO 15926-4 was signed off as a TS (Technical Specification). In 1999 the work on an earlier version of Part 7 started. Initially this was based on XML Schema (the only useful W3C Recommendation available then), but when Web Ontology Language (OWL) became available it was clear that provided a far more suitable environment for Part 7. Part 7 passed the first ISO ballot by the end of 2005, and an implementation project started. A formal ballot for TS (Technical Specification) was planned for December 2007. However, it was decided then to split Part 7 into more than one part, because the scope was too wide. == Need for ISO15926 == In 2004, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) released a report on the impact of the lack of digital interoperability in the capital projects industry. The report estimated the cost of inadequate interoperability in the U.S. capital facilities industry to be $15.8 billion per year. This was considered likely to be a conservative figure. == The standard == ISO 15926 has thirteen parts (as of February 2022): Part 1 - Overview and fundamental principles Part 2 - Data model Part 3 - Reference data for geometry and topology Part 4 - Reference Data, the terms used within facilities for the process industry Part 6 - Methodology for the development and validation of reference data (under development) Part 7 - Template methodology Part 8 - OWL/RDF implementation Part 9 - Implementation standards, with the focus on standard web servers, web services, and security (under development) Part 10 - Conformance testing Part 11 - Methodology for simplified industrial usage of reference data (under development) Part 12 - Life cycle integration ontology in Web Ontology Language (OWL2) Part 13 - Integrated lifecycle asset planning === Description === The model and the library are suitable for representing lifecycle information about technical installations and their components. They can also be used for defining the terms used in product catalogs in e-commerce. Another, more limited, use of the standard is as a reference classification for harmonization purposes between shared databases and product catalogues that are not based on ISO 15926. The purpose of ISO 15926 is to provide a Lingua Franca for computer systems, thereby integrating the information produced by them. Although set up for the process industries with large projects involving many parties, and involving plant operations and maintenance lasting decades, the technology can be used by anyone willing to set up a proper vocabulary of reference data in line with Part 4. In Part 7 the concept of Templates is introduced. These are semantic constructs, using Part 2 entities, that represent a small piece of information. These constructs then are mapped to more efficient classes of n-ary relations that interlink the Nodes that are involved in the represented information. In Part 8 the Part 7 Templates are defined in OWL and instantiated in RDF. For validation and reasoning purposes all are represented in First-Order Logic as well. In Part 9 these Node and Template instances are stored in an RDF triple store, set up to a standard schema and an API. Each participating computer system maps its data from its internal format to such ISO-standard Node and Template instances. Data can be "handed over" from one triple store to another in cases where data custodianship is handed over (e.g. from a contractor to a plant owner, or from a manufacturer to the owners of the manufactured goods). Hand-over can be for a part of all data, whilst maintaining full referential integrity. Documents are user-definable. They are defined in XML Schema and they are, in essence, only a structure containing cells that make reference to instances of Templates. This represents a view on all lifecycle data: since the data model is a 4D (space-time) model, it is possible to present the data that was valid at any given point in time, thus providing a true historical record. It is expected that this will be used for Knowledge Mining. Data can be queried by means of SPARQL. In any implementation a restricted number of triple stores can be involved, with different access rights. This is done by means of creating a CPF Server (= Confederation of Participating Façades). An Ontology Browser allows for access to one or more triple stores in a given CPF, depending on the access rights. == Projects and applications == There are a number of projects working on the extension of the ISO 15926 standard in different application areas. === Capital-intensive projects === Within the application of Capital Intensive projects, some cooperating implementation projects are running: The DEXPI project: The objective of DEXPI is to develop and promote a general standard for the process industry covering all phases of the lifecycle of a (petro-)chemical plant, ranging from specification of functional requirements to assets in operation. Finalised projects include: The EDRC Project of FIATECH Capturing Equipment Data Requirements Using ISO 15926 and Assessing Conforma
Huroof
Huroof (Arabic: حروف, lit. 'letters') is an Android kids application produced by the Islamic State, specifically the Islamic States' Al-Himmah Library, which is targeted towards kids in order to teach kids the Arabic alphabet, and to also get kids to support the Islamic State and its practices. == Application == Huroof uses child-like appearances on the main menu, and throughout multiple of Huroof's in-game games for learning the alphabet, a lot of the games reference jihadist concepts, including imagery of weapons (such as missile, tank, cannon, sword,...), 'violent' images, as well as Islamic State imagery, including the flag of the Islamic State, Huroof uses nasheeds from Ajnad Media Foundation for audio production in the app. Reportedly, Huroof was released via Telegram channels of the Islamic State, as well as other file sharing websites. It is not the first moblie app released by Islamic State, but it is the first time they released a moblie application targeting children. === Nasheed game === In the Huroof app, there's a game where you listen to a radio, with the Al-Bayan logo on it, and learn the Arabic alphabet while the nasheed plays. === Writing game === In Huroof, there's a game where you can write out letters of the Arabic alphabet, as well as numbers while a small child tells you what they are. === Letter choosing game === In the app, there's a game they shows you images, and you choose which letter that image/item starts with.
Pinoy baiting
Pinoy baiting is a phrase that has been used to refer to acts by non-Filipino individuals, usually celebrities or YouTubers, of posting content online purportedly with the intention of getting the attention of Filipinos, by being surprised about the Philippines or its people. Pinoy baiters are defined as giving superficial and allegedly insincere praises and similar reactions that give recognition to the Philippines or its people. Subsequent responses by Filipinos to what have been referred to as acts of Pinoy baiting have been criticized as a form of cultural cringe. This criticism would subsequently give the advice that Filipinos should not constantly require validation from non-Filipinos about themselves or their country. == Pinoy baiting mediums == === Reaction videos === On social media such as YouTube, channels with specific focus on showing their reaction towards and opinions about certain videos or topics are called reaction channels. Reaction videos are very popular and require minimal effort to create, and thus made it easy for alleged Pinoy baiting to thrive within this video-making genre. === Travel vlogs === Vlogging, short for video blogging, grew in popularity in the 2020s. Most of the popular alleged Pinoy-baiting channels tend to be vlog channels, normally following the same script under such titles as "The Philippines changed us/me", "First impression of the Philippines", "Is this really Manila?" and "Filipinos are such Kind/Good People!", and made while travelling to touristy areas such as Boracay or Bonifacio Global City and taste-testing the fast food chain Jollibee, among others. == Criticism of the phrase == Philippines-based Korean vlogger Jessica Lee had been accused by some YouTube viewers of engaging in Pinoy baiting. In a response vlog, Lee acknowledged that there may be individuals engaging in this "business strategy" of gaining views and subscribers from one of the largest communities online. However, she questioned the objectivity of some use of the phrase, citing any vlogging subject as fair game for a negative impression of being a "baiting" tool for the vlogger treating of that subject. She also invoked vloggers' freedom to choose whatever subject they want to talk about in a deep or shallow manner, while enjoining citizens to exercise their free-market right to unfollow vloggers they hate and follow those vloggers that "make them happy". She also gave her critics an explanation why she ended up vlogging about Philippine and Filipino subjects.
List of cryptography journals
List of cryptography journals includes notable peer-reviewed academic journals that focus on cryptography, cryptanalysis, information security, and related areas in computer science and mathematics. == Notable journals == Cryptologia Designs, Codes and Cryptography IEEE Transactions on Information Theory International Journal of Information Security Journal of Cryptology Journal of Computer Security ACM Transactions on Privacy and Security Information Processing Letters Information and Computation
Social television
Social television is the union of television and social media. Millions of people now share their TV experience with other viewers on social media such as Twitter and Facebook using smartphones and tablets. TV networks and rights holders are increasingly sharing video clips on social platforms to monetise engagement and drive tune-in. The social TV market covers the technologies that support communication and social interaction around TV as well as companies that study television-related social behavior and measure social media activities tied to specific TV broadcasts – many of which have attracted significant investment from established media and technology companies. The market is also seeing numerous tie-ups between broadcasters and social networking players such as Twitter and Facebook. The market is expected to be worth $256bn by 2017. Social TV was named one of the 10 most important emerging technologies by the MIT Technology Review on Social TV in 2010. And in 2011, David Rowan, the editor of Wired magazine, named Social TV at number three of six in his peek into 2011 and what tech trends to expect to get traction. Ynon Kreiz, CEO of the Endemol Group told the audience at the Digital Life Design (DLD) conference in January 2011: "Everyone says that social television will be big. I think it's not going to be big—it's going to be huge". Much of the investment in the earlier years of social TV went into standalone social TV apps. The industry believed these apps would provide an appealing and complimentary consumer experience which could then be monetized with ads. These apps featured TV listings, check-ins, stickers and synchronised second-screen content but struggled to attract users away from Twitter and Facebook. Most of these companies have since gone out of business or been acquired amid a wave of consolidation and the market has instead focused on the activities of the social media channels themselves – such as Twitter Amplify, Facebook Suggested Videos and Snapchat Discover – and the technologies that support them. == Twitter == Twitter and Facebook are both helping users connect around media, which can provoke strong debate and engagement. Both social platforms want to be the 'digital watercooler' and host conversation around TV because the engagement and data about what media people consume can then be used to generate advertising revenue. As an open platform, conversation on Twitter is closely aligned with real-time events. In May 2013, it launched Twitter Amplify – an advertising product for media and consumer brands. With Amplify, Twitter runs video highlights from major live broadcasts, with advertisers' names and messages playing before the clip. By February 2014, all four major U.S. TV networks had signed up to the Amplify program, bringing a variety of premium TV content onto the social platform in the form of in-tweet real-time video clips. In June 2014, Twitter acquired its Twitter Amplify partner in the U.S. SnappyTV, a company that was helping broadcasters and rights holders to share video content both organically across social and via Twitter's Amplify program. Twitter continues to rely on Grabyo, which has also struck numerous deals with some of the largest broadcasters and rights holders in Europe and North America to share video content across Facebook and Twitter. == Facebook == Facebook made significant changes to its platform in 2014 including updates to its algorithm to enhance how it serves video in users' feeds. It also launched video autoplay to get users to watch the videos in their feeds. It rapidly surpassed Twitter and by the end of 2014 it was enjoying three billion video views a day on its platform and had announced a partnership with the NFL, one of Twitter's most active Twitter Amplify partners. In April 2015, at its F8 Developer Conference, it revealed it was working with Grabyo among other technology partners to bring video onto its platform. Then in July it announced it would be launching Facebook Suggested Videos, bringing related videos and ads to anyone that clicks on a video – a move that not only competed with Twitter's commercial video offering but also put it in direct competition with YouTube. == TV Time == TV Time is a television dedicated social network that allows users to keep track of the television series they watch, as well as films. It also allows them to express their reaction to the media they have seen with episode specific voting for favorite characters and emotional reaction to episodes, as well as commenting in episode restrictive pages. This way users are able to avoid spoilers while also finding a precise audience and community for each of their interactions, as opposed to bigger, non-television dedicated social medias such as Facebook and Twitter where the likelihood of unintentionally reading spoilers is much higher. TV Time offers an analytics service called "TVLytics" where the votes and reactions collected from users can be studied for research and television production purposes. == Advertising == According to Businessinsider.com, there are variety of applications for social TV, including support for TV ad sales, optimizing TV ad buys, making ad buys more efficient, as a complement to audience measurement, and eventually, audience forecasting and real-time optimization. Social TV data can ease access to focus groups and may create a positive feedback loop for generating ultra-sticky TV programming and multi-screen ad campaigns. == In numbers == Viewers share their TV experience on social media in real-time as events unfold: between 88-100m Facebook users login to the platform during the primetime hours of 8pm – 11pm in the US. The volume of social media engagement in TV is also rising – according to Nielsen SocialGuide, there was a 38% increase in tweets about TV in 2013 to 263m. For the 2014 Super Bowl, Twitter reported that a record 24.9 million tweets about the game were sent during the telecast, peaking at 381,605 tweets per minute. Facebook reported that 50 million people discussed the Super Bowl, generating 185 million interactions. The 2014 Oscars generated 5m tweets, viewed by an audience of 37m unique Twitter users and delivering 3.3bn impressions globally as conversation and key moments were shared virally across the platform. In 2014 the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC), hosts of Wimbledon, used Grabyo to share video content across social. The videos were viewed 3.5 million times across Facebook and Twitter. In partnered with Grabyo again in 2015 and the videos generated over 48 million views across Facebook and Twitter. == Television shows with social integration == Here are some examples of how TV executives are integrating social elements with TV shows: C-SPAN streamed tweets from US Senators and Representatives during the quorum call The Voice had the judges of the program tweet during the show and the posts scrolls on the bottom of the screen. The use of Twitter also led to an increase in viewers. "Glee" Entertainment Weekly created a second screen viewing platform for the Glee season 3 premiere. == Related publications == Erika Jonietz. "Making TV Social, Virtually" MIT Technology Review. (January 11, 2010) AmigoTV (Alcatel-Lucent; Coppens et al.) – 2004 www.ist-ipmedianet.org/Alcatel_EuroiTV2004_AmigoTV_short_paper_S4-2.pdf Nextream (MIT Media Lab, Martin et al.) – 2010 Social Interactive Television: Immersive Shared Experiences and Perspectives (P. Cesar, D. Geerts, and K. Chorianopoulos (eds.)) – 2009 Social TV and the Emergence of Interactive TV – Multimedia Research Group – November 2010 Interactive Social TV on Service Oriented Environments: Challenges and Enablers (May 2011) == Systems == Boxee – acquired by Samsung GetGlue – acquired by i.TV Grabyo KIT digital Miso TV Tank Top TV WiO Xbox Live
List of security-focused operating systems
This is a list of operating systems specifically focused on security. Similar concepts include security-evaluated operating systems that have achieved certification from an auditing organization, and trusted operating systems that provide sufficient support for multilevel security and evidence of correctness to meet a particular set of requirements. == Linux == === Android-based === GrapheneOS is a security-focused, Android-based mobile OS that uses a hardened kernel, C library, custom memory allocator (hardened_malloc), and a hardened Chromium-based browser named Vanadium. It also offers privacy/security features, such as Duress PIN/Password or disabling the USB-C port at a driver/hardware level to avoid exploitation. It deploys exploit mitigations such as hardware-based memory tagging, secure app spawning, restricted dynamic code loading, and more. === Debian-based === Linux Kodachi is a security-focused operating system. Tails is aimed at preserving privacy and anonymity. KickSecure is a security-focused Linux distribution that aims to be "hardened by default". It uses network hardening, kernel hardening, Strong Linux User Account Isolation, better randomness, root access restrictions, and app-specific hardening. Whonix is an anonymity focused operating system based on KickSecure. It consists of two virtual machines, And all communications are routed through Tor. === Other Linux distributions === Alpine Linux is designed to be small, simple, and secure. It uses musl, BusyBox, and OpenRC instead of the more commonly used glibc, GNU Core Utilities, and systemd. Owl - Openwall GNU/Linux, a security-enhanced Linux distribution for servers. Secureblue, a Fedora Silverblue based distro that uses a hardened kernel, custom memory allocator (hardened_malloc), Trivalent, a security-focused, Chromium-based browser inspired by Vanadium, and many other exploit mitigations. == BSD == OpenBSD is a Unix-like operating system that emphasizes portability, standardization, correctness, proactive security, and integrated cryptography. == Xen == Qubes OS aims to provide security through isolation. Isolation is provided through the use of virtualization technology. This allows the segmentation of applications into secure virtual machines.
Semi-Automatic Ground Environment
The Semi-Automated Ground Environment (SAGE) was a system of large computers and associated networking equipment that coordinated data from many radar sites and processed it to produce a single unified image of the airspace over a wide area. SAGE directed and controlled the NORAD response to a possible Soviet air attack, operating in this role from the late 1950s into the 1980s. The processing power behind SAGE was supplied by the largest discrete component-based computer ever built, the AN/FSQ-7, manufactured by IBM. Each SAGE Direction Center (DC) housed an FSQ-7 which occupied an entire floor, approximately 22,000 square feet (2,000 m2) not including supporting equipment. The FSQ-7 was actually two computers, "A" side and "B" side. Computer processing was switched from "A" side to "B" side on a regular basis, allowing maintenance on the unused side. Information was fed to the DCs from a network of radar stations as well as readiness information from various defense sites. The computers, based on the raw radar data, developed "tracks" for the reported targets, and automatically calculated which defenses were within range. Operators used light guns to select targets on-screen for further information, select one of the available defenses, and issue commands to attack. These commands would then be automatically sent to the defense site via teleprinter. Connecting the various sites was an enormous network of telephones, modems and teleprinters. Later additions to the system allowed SAGE's tracking data to be sent directly to CIM-10 Bomarc missiles and some of the US Air Force's interceptor aircraft in-flight, directly updating their autopilots to maintain an intercept course without operator intervention. Each DC also forwarded data to a Combat Center (CC) for "supervision of the several sectors within the division" ("each combat center [had] the capability to coordinate defense for the whole nation"). SAGE became operational in the late 1950s and early 1960s at an estimated total cost between 8 and 12 billion dollars, four times the cost of the Manhattan Project. Throughout its development, there were continual concerns about its real ability to deal with large attacks, and the Operation Sky Shield tests showed that only about one-fourth of enemy bombers would have been intercepted. Nevertheless, SAGE was the backbone of NORAD's air defense system into the 1980s, by which time the tube-based FSQ-7s were increasingly costly to maintain and completely outdated. Today the same command and control task is carried out by microcomputers, based on the same basic underlying data. == Background == === Earlier systems === Just prior to World War II, Royal Air Force (RAF) tests with the new Chain Home (CH) radars had demonstrated that relaying information to the fighter aircraft directly from the radar sites was not feasible. The radars determined the map coordinates of the enemy, but could generally not see the fighters at the same time. This meant the fighters had to be able to determine where to fly to perform an interception but were often unaware of their own exact location and unable to calculate an interception while also flying their aircraft. The solution was to send all of the radar information to a central control station where operators collated the reports into single tracks, and then reported these tracks to the airbases, or sectors. The sectors used additional systems to track their own aircraft, plotting both on a single large map. Operators viewing the map could then see what direction their fighters would have to fly to approach their targets and relay that simply by telling them to fly along a certain heading or vector. This Dowding system was the first ground-controlled interception (GCI) system of large scale, covering the entirety of the UK. It proved enormously successful during the Battle of Britain, and is credited as being a key part of the RAF's success. The system was slow, often providing information that was up to five minutes out of date. Against propeller driven bombers flying at perhaps 225 miles per hour (362 km/h) this was not a serious concern, but it was clear the system would be of little use against jet-powered bombers flying at perhaps 600 miles per hour (970 km/h). The system was extremely expensive in manpower terms, requiring hundreds of telephone operators, plotters and trackers in addition to the radar operators. This was a serious drain on manpower, making it difficult to expand the network. The idea of using a computer to handle the task of taking reports and developing tracks had been explored beginning late in the war. By 1944, analog computers had been installed at the CH stations to automatically convert radar readings into map locations, eliminating two people. Meanwhile, the Royal Navy began experimenting with the Comprehensive Display System (CDS), another analog computer that took X and Y locations from a map and automatically generated tracks from repeated inputs. Similar systems began development with the Royal Canadian Navy, DATAR, and the US Navy, the Naval Tactical Data System (NTDS). A similar system was also specified for the Nike SAM project, specifically referring to a US version of CDS, coordinating the defense over a battle area so that multiple batteries did not fire on a single target. All of these systems were relatively small in geographic scale, generally tracking within a city-sized area. === Valley Committee === When the Soviet Union tested its first atomic bomb in August 1949, the topic of air defense of the US became important for the first time. A study group, the "Air Defense Systems Engineering Committee", was set up under the direction of Dr. George Valley to consider the problem and is known to history as the "Valley Committee". Their December report noted a key problem in air defense using ground-based radars. A bomber approaching a radar station would detect the signals from the radar long before the reflection off the bomber was strong enough to be detected by the station. The committee suggested that when this occurred, the bomber would descend to low altitude, thereby greatly limiting the radar horizon, allowing the bomber to fly past the station undetected. Although flying at low altitude greatly increased fuel consumption, the team calculated that the bomber would only need to do this for about 10% of its flight, making the fuel penalty acceptable. The only solution to this problem was to build a huge number of stations with overlapping coverage. At that point the problem became one of managing the information. Manual plotting was ruled out as too slow, and a computerized solution was the only possibility. To handle this task, the computer would need to be fed information directly, eliminating any manual translation by phone operators, and it would have to be able to analyze that information and automatically develop tracks. A system tasked with defending cities against the predicted future Soviet bomber fleet would have to be dramatically more powerful than the models used in the NTDS or DATAR. The Committee then had to consider whether or not such a computer was possible. The Valley Committee was introduced to Jerome Wiesner, associate director of the Research Laboratory of Electronics at MIT. Wiesner noted that the Servomechanisms Laboratory had already begun development of a machine that might be fast enough. This was the Whirlwind I, originally developed for the Office of Naval Research as a general purpose flight simulator that could simulate any current or future aircraft by changing its software. Wiesner introduced the Valley Committee to Whirlwind's project lead, Jay Forrester, who convinced him that Whirlwind was sufficiently capable. In September 1950, an early microwave early-warning radar system at Hanscom Field was connected to Whirlwind using a custom interface developed by Forrester's team. An aircraft was flown past the site, and the system digitized the radar information and successfully sent it to Whirlwind. With this demonstration, the technical concept was proven. Forrester was invited to join the committee. === Project Charles === With this successful demonstration, Louis Ridenour, chief scientist of the Air Force, wrote a memo stating "It is now apparent that the experimental work necessary to develop, test, and evaluate the systems proposals made by ADSEC will require a substantial amount of laboratory and field effort." Ridenour approached MIT President James Killian with the aim of beginning a development lab similar to the war-era Radiation Laboratory that made enormous progress in radar technology. Killian was initially uninterested, desiring to return the school to its peacetime civilian charter. Ridenour eventually convinced Killian the idea was sound by describing the way the lab would lead to the development of a local electronics industry based on the needs of the lab and the students who would leave the lab to start their