robopocalypse delayed

Robot apocalypticists often presume that artificially intelligent beings will be all-too-eager to cooperate to destroy humanity. Which is why this video is so reassuring.

[via Mark Frauenfelder]

the fast and the furious

Johnette Howard of ESPN has written a fascinating summary of the triumph and travails of Oscar Pistorius, the path-blazing runner who might get a shot at the Olympics, as well as the controversy created by his technologically facilitated racing. Even the scientists disagree as to whether Pistorius' prosthetics give him an unfair advantage. Quite the paradox.

the LED bulb has arrived

As Farhad Manjoo explains, a company called Switch Lighting will soon ramp up production on an LED bulb that looks as warm and inviting as an incandescent--at a fifth of the energy costs.

On average, an incandescent bulb lasts about 1,000 hours—that's about a year, if you keep it on for about three hours a day. Electricity in America also costs about 11 cents per kilowatt hour (that's the average; it varies widely by region). In other words, a 50-cent, 60-watt incandescent bulb will use about $6.60 in electricity every year. Switch's 60-watt-equivalent LED, meanwhile, uses only 13 watts of power, so it will cost only $1.43 per year. The Switch bulb also has an average lifespan of 20,000 hours--20 years. If you count the price of replacing the incandescent bulb every year, the Switch bulb will have saved you money by its fourth year. Over 20 years, you'll have spent a total of about $142 for the incandescent bulbs (for electricity and replacement bulbs) and less than $50 for Switch's 60-watt bulb.

Getting Americans to give up incandescents won't be easy, even with their 2014 phase-out. Migraine sufferers have a reason to be concerned: up until now, the least expensive viable option, compact fluorescents, were a known migraine trigger. As far as we know, though, LEDs are a safer alternative.

Now, if only they could find a way to salvage the Easy-Bake Oven.

the GPS had murder on its mind

This wasn't the first time, and it won't be the last:

Three women from out of the country drove their car into Mercer Slough in Bellevue early Wednesday while trying to follow directions from their GPS.

The women, from Mexico, told police they had been following the device about midnight but obviously took a wrong turn.

The women went into the water with the rental car but were able to get out safely, said Carla Iafrate, spokeswoman for the Bellevue Police Department.

today's science links

Mars rover Spirit is gone for good? Probably.

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome caused by a rodent virus?? Probably not.

Government funds ridiculously wasteful research??? Not exactly.

Cell phones cause cancer???? Uh, insufficient evidence, thanks.

Washington teen discovers that diaper powder increases crop yields????? You better believe it.



Added: Now with a panda tie bonus.

Google in the courtroom

Eugene Volokh points to a law.com article about one judge's attempt to keep Google out of the courtroom:

Now that New Jersey courtrooms have Wi-Fi capability, trial lawyers with wireless laptops have a distinct edge: the ability to Google prospective jurors at the counsel table.

And an appeals court has given its blessing to the practice, reversing a trial judge who told a lawyer to disconnect lest he gain an unfair advantage.

"That [plaintiff's counsel] had the foresight to bring his laptop computer to court, and defense counsel did not, simply cannot serve as a basis for judicial intervention in the name of 'fairness' or maintaining 'a level playing field,'" the court said on Aug. 30 in Carino v. Muenzen, M.D., A-5491-08.

"The playing field was, in fact, already 'level' because Internet access was open to both counsel, even if only one of them chose to utilize it."

It was only a matter of time--and as the future lawyers and judges of America (i.e., high school debaters) become increasingly used to (and dependent on) having laptops in their debate rounds, we can expect that trend will only continue.

philosophy dreams bigger

This one's for Aaron.

Sharpie has entered the game of "bust that ontology" with a a "liquid pencil." (As I understand it, there are other products titled "liquid pencils" that aren't graphite-based and aren't erasable like a pencil. And yes, it's ready for purchase.)

So... is it a pencil? Or a pen with graphite ink?

Philosophers? Any help?




[Via Rob Beschizza. Title references Hamlet, if you weren't sure.]

half-formed thoughts on cyberbullying

A work in progress. Your comments and suggestions are appreciated.

Sticks and stones
May break my bones
But words will never hurt me.


I'm made of rubber,
You're made of glue.
Everything you say
Bounces off me
And sticks to you.

--children's sayings

Recently a reader sent this email:

I'm a long-time reader of your blog. I was hoping that you would blog about cyberbullying laws sometime since they have been a matter of controversy for a while now. Thanks!

I was somewhat stumped. As a teacher who uses the Internet all throughout the curriculum, and for someone who has established a persistent online presence for seven years, I'm ashamed to admit that my perspective on cyberbullying is, at best, half-formed and ad hoc.

Which it shouldn't be, as cyberbullying challenges traditional notions of education, juvenile law, and parenting.

My thoughts were expanded when another reader, Kevin, sent along one an otherwise unrelated email titled "German Civil Rights Fail." (Any insertions or edits are his.)

"Article Five: Freedom of Expression.

(1) Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of repor...ting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. **There shall be no censorship.** [Sweet! Censorship = un-Constitutional in Germany.]

(2) **These rights shall find their limits** [Wait a minute! You just promised us CONSTITUTIONALLY that censorship will not happen! What happened?] in the provisions of general laws, in provisions for the protection of young persons, and in the right to **personal honor** [What does this even mean?! It's a violation of civil rights to insult somebody?!]."

GERMAN CIVIL RIGHTS?

FAIL

At first I didn't notice the connection, but there it is: the language of the German constitution provides a perfect framework for understanding the current controversy over cyberbullying. After all, it is a form of speech that threatens the mental and emotional wellbeing of young persons, and is an affront to their personal honor.

But should it be a crime? And, if so, what about free speech?

In one sense, the German constitution is superior to its U.S. counterpart; at least it explicitly notes the limitations on free speech, while in the U.S., we have to rely solely on decades of muddled juriprudence to determine where the boundaries of infringement lie. (Eugene Volokh, discussing a related issue, notes that even the word "infringement" isn't simple.  See also his critique of a new cyberbullying statute.  Legislators definitely run the risk of too broadly defining what constitutes cyberbullying.)

Here in the U.S., as the children's sayings imply, we certainly value personal honor and the sensibilities of the young. We don't want a nation of wimps.  A societally coordinated and aggressive approach to bullying, though, is a fairly recent invention. We leave personal honor to the person, creating a razor-thin line between encouraging mental toughness and blaming the victim--because sometimes words will hurt, and arguing otherwise is a form of denial. (If you disagree, imagine what a bully thinks when told that "words will never hurt.")

Throw this kind of thinking into a culture saturated with technology, which creates new dimensions for bullies.  What happens?

• There are new means of public or private aggression.  Blogs. Forums.  YouTube videos. Text messages.
• There seem to be no natural "times out," given the ubiquity of technology.
• The audience is potentially global, multiplying any humiliations--especially when older folks get in on the act. (Children aren't the only ones who cyberbully, as the Jessi Slaughter incident makes obvious. And if you look up Slaughter's experience, be warned: it's disturbing on multiple levels.)
• Anonymity and the removal from a personal context increase aggression.
• Thanks to Google, cyberbullying's evidence can last a lifetime.  How do you heal when the sting never stops?

Humans live out narratives, selves couched in stories and words.  As we migrate further into the digital hemisphere, words take on more and more importance. Maybe the Germans are on to something.

For further reading: Emily Bazelon's excellent series on the subject over at Slate.

we join the 21st century, now in progress

Back when the National Forensic League was considering the use of computers in Debate, I wrote:

In a 5-3-1 vote, the Council decided to allow a one-year trial where laptop computers may be used within Policy Debate rounds, with District competitions to have the option. There are provisions forbidding the use of wireless networks, but really--are judges going to have to check in between every speech to make sure no one's cheating? I hope and pray computers never become a fixture in Lincoln-Douglas.

Looking back, it was only a matter of time before the NFL's trial policy evolved and expanded into standard procedure.

This morning, the Washington State Forensics Association voted to allow computers in Cross-Examination and Lincoln Douglas Debate, while forming a committee to investigate adding them in Congress and Public Forum. (On a related note, they're now allowed in Extemporaneous prep as well.)

And I voted yes.

In three and a half years, what changed my mind?

1. Computers are far more affordable.
2. More and more resources are available online.
3. I tried flowing on a laptop once, and really liked it.
4. Quality coaching matters more than anything when it comes to quality debate. And computers seem to help more than they hinder.
5. Let's waste less paper. My team extensively uses blogs, Google Docs, Gmail chat, and Facebook to collaborate when preparing. The less we have to print, the better.
6. The Internet allows instant fact-checking. During rounds, I've heard too much obviously bad information that could have been easily shot down by a thirty second Google search.

The WSFA's new rule requires that evidence on the computer be available for the other team's investigation, whether printed out or on a second laptop. It also requires equity in Internet use--a team may use the Internet in-round only if their competitors have access as well. That's an interesting and reasonable concession, I think. The likelihood of cheating is still there--but that's what coaches are for. We're supposed to train our charges to be ethical. Especially if we're debating ethics.

Thanks to foot-dragging people like me, it took the WSFA only 10 years to join the 21st century. And now: "We're gonna see a brave new world where they run everybody a wire and hook us all up to a grid. Yes, sir, a veritable age of reason. Like the one they had in France. Not a moment too soon..."

the Skinner Box in your PS3

I pity young folks. Cursed with the most incredible technology, it's no surprise that they are online, or at least plugged in, more than researchers imagined possible. David Wong, in an amusing article, explains why:

This is a big source of controversy in the world of game design right now. Braid creator Jonathan Blow said Skinnerian game mechanics are a form of "exploitation." It's not that these games can't be fun. But they're designed to keep gamers subscribing during the periods when it's not fun, locking them into a repetitive slog using Skinner's manipulative system of carefully scheduled rewards.

Why would this work, when the "rewards" are just digital objects that don't actually exist? Well...

On second thought, maybe you don't want to know why.

And I'll add: now I know why the treasure boxes in Assassin's Creed II are worth varying amounts of cash. (I am not a gamer, though. Promise.)

Sidebar: Chris Dahlen joins the cult of Mario.

robots evolve altruistic behaviors

More fun in the field of evolutionary robotics:

In one experimental condition, the arena contained only large tokens, and the only way for robots to increase their fitness was to cooperate in pushing them [37]. Accordingly, robots readily evolved the ability to cooperatively push large tokens towards the white wall in all 20 evolutionary replicates that were conducted. However, when the arena contained both large and small tokens, the behaviour of robots was influenced by the group kin structure. In groups of unrelated robots (i.e., robots whose genomes where not more similar within than between groups), robots invariably specialised in pushing the small objects, which was the most efficient strategy to maximise their own individual fitness them (i.e., large tokens provided an equal direct payoff as a small token but were more difficult to successfully push). By contrast, the presence of related robots within groups allowed the evolution of altruism. When groups were formed of “clonal” robots all having the same genome, individuals primarily pushed the large tokens even though it was costly, in terms of individual fitness, for the robots pushing (Video S6).

Up next: robots evolve jealousy, petty rage, and scorn.


[via Reed A. Cartwright]

the digital is the actual

I'm not sure I'm really sold on the idea that augmenting one's own reality makes one less of a machine. And I'm not sure the world needs more visual clutter as random folks project their desktops onto office windows and subway walls (tip for oblivious passersby: don't stare into the blinding beam). And don't we need a space where we can escape the noise for a time? ("Tell that idiot to quit watching YouTube on that cliff face already.")

But the idea of taking one's computation out of a plastic tower and into the wider world is otherwise pretty darn cool.

OSD could learn from City of Olympia

Last year, in the middle of some of the toughest budget decisions in recent Olympia School District memory, the District publicized a list of potential cuts, allowing citizens an unprecedented level of transparency in the budget process. What was missing? Interactivity.

To fill in the gap, I took data from District PDF files and created a somewhat hurky spreadsheet, so you could play around with the figures and try to balance the budget on your own.

If I had any coding skills, I would've added something like the City of Olympia is offering now. "Constrained prioritization" is the name of the game: you rate services or priorities from 1-4, but you're forced to limit each rating to only 11 out of the 44 choices--in other words, you can't put everything as a "1" or a "4." It's hard. (Sorry, Parks and Recreation.)

It's not a perfect survey, but it's a step. Next time the OSD stares down another tough budget--and you can bet that's going to be soon--it would do well to collect its constituents' input in a similar fashion.



[Link via Mathias Eichler.]

flip forward to the future

I'd love to know what late adopters like Christina think of Google's in-development "Fast Flip." (Initial impression: not for laptops with small screens.)

[Via the old-school-new-school New York Times.]

swine flu predictions worsen; is your school ready?

Word from a White House report says that 50% of Americans could contract H1N1 this coming autumn.

The virus, clinically called H1N1, could cause symptoms in 60 million to 120 million people, more than half of whom might seek medical attention, and could peak before a vaccine is widely available, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology estimated in an 86-page report assessing the government's response to the first influenza pandemic in 41 years.

Although most cases probably would be mild, up to 300,000 people could require intensive care, which could tie up all those beds in some parts of the country at the peak of the outbreak, the council said.

If it gets that bad, you know that schools will be hit hard. Education Secretary Arne Duncan offers recommendations:

Duncan said schools should evaluate what materials they have available for at-home learning. The latest guidance provides more details on methods schools could use, such as distributing recorded classes on podcasts and DVDs; creating take-home packets with up to 12 weeks of printed class material; or holding live classes via conference calls or "webinars."

Federal officials said earlier this month schools should close only as a last resort. They also advised that students and teachers can return to school or work 24 hours after their fever is gone; the old advice was to stay home for a week. The virus prompted more than 700 schools to temporarily close last spring.

Online school: a solution that was evident back in April--or sooner, for some.

Upodate 8/29: Some 200 students at Washington State University have reported sick, many potentially with swine flu. In a pattern we're seeing across the country, the flu seems to strike within a week or two of the start of classes.

killing them softly with excerpts

Introductory phrase, followed by relevant link.

Blockquoted, thoughtfully chosen excerpt, highlighting the article's main argument, perhaps, or a good quote that would drum up a reader's interest or provoke some sort of analysis or observation on the blogger's part, in a way that respects "fair use."

Analysis, observation, ranting, raving, etc., perhaps with a call to read the whole thing, which, of course, would include a link.






P.S. When you click through, don't be surprised if you're asked to register for the right to read free content online. And you wonder what's really killing newspapers.

P.P.S. Should you refer to this blog post, I will find your attention flattering.

P.P.P.S. I learned about it on Twitter.

P.P.P.P.S. And thus I have reached the legal limit for postscripts.

Senate axes F-22 funding

Back in February, Slate's Fred Kaplan had argued that it was time for Congress to stop ordering new F-22 Raptors, later providing reasons that the save-our-jobs argument for the fighter jet was essentially bunk. Yesterday, the Senate followed his advice. Kaplan triumphant:

This is a big deal: The Senate today voted to halt production of the F-22 stealth fighter plane, and it did so 58-40, a margin much wider than expected.

Not only is this a major victory for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who lobbied strenuously (something he rarely does) to kill this program, and for President Barack Obama, who pledged to veto the defense bill if it contained a nickel for more F-22s. The vote might also mark the beginning of a new phase in defense politics, a scaling-back of the influence that defense contractors have over budgets and policies.

Then again, I might be dreaming. Surely things couldn't be changing quite that much. Could they?

Time, as they say, is a blabbermouth.

The F-22 is wicked cool, but in today's geopolitical climate (partly cloudy, with pockets of insurgency), air superiority through fighter combat is obsolete. As Kaplan observes, the Raptor has never been deployed in battle.

The future belongs to drones.

memristors, slime molds, and artificial intelligence

Memristors, a fairly recent discovery that I've blogged about twice previously, get the long form treatment in NewScientist.

To Chua, this all points to a home truth. Despite years of effort, attempts to build an electronic intelligence that can mimic the awesome power of a brain have seen little success. And that might be simply because we were lacking the crucial electronic components - memristors.

So now we've found them, might a new era in artificial intelligence be at hand? The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency certainly thinks so. DARPA is a US Department of Defense outfit with a strong record in backing high-risk, high-pay-off projects - things like the internet. In April last year, it announced the Systems of Neuromorphic Adaptive Plastic Scalable Electronics Program, SyNAPSE for short, to create "electronic neuromorphic machine technology that is scalable to biological levels".

Williams's team from Hewlett-Packard is heavily involved. Late last year, in an obscure US Department of Energy publication called SciDAC Review, his colleague Greg Snider set out how a memristor-based chip might be wired up to test more complex models of synapses. He points out that in the human cortex synapses are packed at a density of about 1010 per square centimetre, whereas today's microprocessors only manage densities 10 times less. "That is one important reason intelligent machines are not yet walking around on the street," he says.

You'll have to read the article to figure out how slime molds fit in--and then judge for yourself whether this new technology will lead to a breakthrough in artificial intelligence.

Of course, as Slate's Tom Vanderbilt reminds us in an otherwise unrelated essay on the Segway, the future has its own plans.

virtual reality gets really realistic

Nick Bostrom's "simulation argument" just got a little more plausible.

The computing power that is now available makes it feasible to simulate physical processes from the smallest scale upwards, rather than trying to approximate their overall effect.

For example, when computer scientist Jonathan Kaldor at Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, wanted to create virtual fabrics better those that had gone before he did something unthinkable just a few years ago. "We decided to start from the [individual] yarns. It sounds crazy but it actually works."

Knitting garments like socks and scarves from virtual wool modelled on real-world yarn gives results that stretch and deform realistically no matter how close up the view. The results could also be used with a haptic interface to provide the feel of fabric.

To add further realism, the team now plans to simulate the fuzz on the surface of each piece of yarn that adds friction between threads.

Click through and watch the video to see the improved physics in action.

today's Twitter links

1. Snohomish County emergency teams are tweeting.

2. Twitter's management team faces the future.

3. Tweeters--twitterers--should watch out for worms.

4. Twitter's jumping onto the tube.

5. Leading to the inevitable protest.

6. And the inevitable backlash.