In February this year, hackers managed to steal 81 million from the central bank of Bangladesh after exploiting vulnerabilities with a sophisticated malware. In January this year, press reports highlighted how highly destructive malware infected three regional power utility service providers in Ukraine, which led to a power failure. In June last year, CNN reported how hackers successfully managed to ground 1400 passengers, as Poland's national carrier was forced to cancel 20 flights due to an attack on its IT systems. In an age of connected machines, these incidents show how hackers can cause irreparable damage. Despite putting in place the best IT infrastructure, some of the biggest firms have got hacked, as vulnerabilities exist in every enterprise and hackers only need one loophole to sneak in an enterprise and steal data.

It is every Top Gun's worst nightmare - an AI can can outmanoeuvre them in the air. Now researchers have tested their AI on a retired top gun - and left him stunned. Retired United States Air Force Colonel Gene Lee took on the AI in a simulator - and lost. An AI has beated Air Force pilots in simulated showdowns for the first time. Retired United States Air Force Colonel Gene Lee took on the AI in a simulator.

As at least three major wildfires rage across the American southwest, the people tasked with controlling them are contending with an unusual problem beyond the flames themselves: Drones. Officials say that small personal drones are increasingly being spotted flying near or above wildfires, interfering with aircraft used for aerial firefighting and firefighter transport operations. Small drones operating near wildfires put those aircraft at risk of collision. It's unclear why people are flying drones near wildfires, but it's likely they're being used to record video footage of the blazes. Firefighters spotted two drones in their air crew's operating area on Wednesday in Arizona, the Arizona Republic reports.

The last few weeks I published a variety of thought leadership articles/blogs on some of my favorite topics. Please find below the links. Charles (Chuck) Brooks serves as the Vice President for Government Relations & Marketing for Sutherland Global Services. Chuck leads Federal and State & Local Government relations activities. He is also responsible for the Marketing portfolio (Media, PR, Digital Outreach, Thought Leadership, Strategic Partnering, Branding) for the Federal and State & Local markets.

At dawn on 17 March the inhabitants of Los Angeles were woken by a mild tremor. Less than three minutes later the Los Angeles Times website published an initial piece on the subject, at first sight a wire drafted in haste by a press agency: "A shallow magnitude 4.7 earthquake was reported Monday morning five miles [8km] from Westwood, California, according to the US Geological Survey. The temblor occurred at 6.25am Pacific time at a depth of 5.0 miles. According to the USGS, the epicentre was six miles from Beverly Hills, California, seven miles from Universal City, California, seven miles from Santa Monica, California, and 348 miles from Sacramento, California. In the past 10 days, there have been no earthquakes magnitude 3.0 and greater centred nearby. This information comes from the USGS Earthquake Notification Service and this post was created by an algorithm written by the author."

Where is the IoT market heading for in 2016? Looking back at 2015, we witnessed a strong buzz around the size of the IoT market, veracity of the market being real vs. I do not foresee such assessments and predictions to die down soon. In fact, with more technological interventions seeing light of the day, the billion dollar counter against the IoT market potential will only go one way – upside. In this post, I've highlighted some of the key and realistic IoT trends we are likely to witness in the coming year.

The doomsday scenarios spun around this theme are so outlandish -- like The Matrix, in which human-created artificial intelligence plugs humans into a simulated reality to harvest energy from their bodies -- it's difficult to visualize them as serious threats. Meanwhile, artificially intelligent systems continue to develop apace. Self-driving cars are beginning to share our roads; pocket-sized devices respond to our queries and manage our schedules in real-time; algorithms beat us at Go; robots become better at getting up when they fall over. It's obvious how developing these technologies will benefit humanity. But, then -- don't all the dystopian sci-fi stories start out this way? One is overly credulous scare-mongering. But the other extreme is equally dangerous -- complacency that we don't need to think about these issues, because humanity-threatening AI is decades or more away.

Should a self-driving car kill its passengers for the greater good – for instance, by swerving into a wall to avoid hitting a large number of pedestrians? Surveys of nearly 2,000 US residents revealed that, while we strongly agree that autonomous vehicles should strive to save as many lives as possible, we are not willing to buy such a car for ourselves, preferring instead one that tries to preserve the lives of its passengers at all costs. Driving our own cars might be a enjoyable pursuit, but it's also responsible for a tremendous amount of misery: it locks out the elderly and physically challenged and is the primary cause of death, worldwide, for people aged 15 to 29. Every year, over 30,000 traffic-related deaths and millions of injuries, costing close to a trillion dollars, take place in the US alone (worldwide, the numbers approach 1.25 million fatalities and 20 to 50 million injuries a year). And, according to numerous studies, human error has been responsible for at least a staggering 90 percent or more of these accidents.

AS DOOMSDAY SCENARIOS go, it does not sound terribly frightening. The "paperclip maximiser" is a thought experiment proposed by Nick Bostrom, a philosopher at Oxford University. Imagine an artificial intelligence, he says, which decides to amass as many paperclips as possible. It devotes all its energy to acquiring paperclips, and to improving itself so that it can get paperclips in new ways, while resisting any attempt to divert it from this goal. Eventually it "starts transforming first all of Earth and then increasing portions of space into paperclip manufacturing facilities". This apparently silly scenario is intended to make the serious point that AIs need not have human-like motives or psyches.

Bots (short for software robots) have been around since the early days of computers. One compelling example of bots is chatbots, algorithms designed to hold a conversation with a human, as envisioned by Alan Turing in the 1950s.33 The dream of designing a computer algorithm that passes the Turing test has driven artificial intelligence research for decades, as witnessed by initiatives like the Loebner Prize, awarding progress in natural language processing.a Many things have changed since the early days of AI, when bots like Joseph Weizenbaum's ELIZA,39 mimicking a Rogerian psychotherapist, were developed as demonstrations or for delight. Today, social media ecosystems populated by hundreds of millions of individuals present real incentives--including economic and political ones--to design algorithms that exhibit human-like behavior. Such ecosystems also raise the bar of the challenge, as they introduce new dimensions to emulate in addition to content, including the social network, temporal activity, diffusion patterns, and sentiment expression. A social bot is a computer algorithm that automatically produces content and interacts with humans on social media, trying to emulate and possibly alter their behavior. Social bots have inhabited social media platforms for the past few years.7,24