Also, Carefully Refold That Map

Here's some sobering advice about the dangers of relying on smartphone maps out in the desert, where it really matters what road you take.

The short version is, just don't rely on online maps if there's any chance that taking the wrong road could leave you stranded in the wilderness to die of heat stroke, dehydration, or being eaten by bears.

Shockingly, mapping software is not always totally accurate, and in the wrong situation, that can be a very bad thing. As the article points out, once you get far enough away from civilization, you can't even call up your phone maps to try to work out a better option, because you'll lose your cell signal! Thanks for steering me towards my doom and then abandoning me, phone.

I haven't actually been in the wilderness in years, and have no plans to go until I'm fleeing our killer robot overlords, but this is a good reminder that when I go, I need to make sure to take a printed map.

Speaking of killer robots, xkcd's "what if?" feature argues that robots are a long way from being able to produce an apocalypse. A telling quote:

What people don't appreciate, when they picture Terminator-style automatons striding triumphantly across a mountain of human skulls, is how hard it is to keep your footing on something as unstable as a mountain of human skulls.

So that's good...I guess...although there goes my excuse for looking askance at programmable microwave ovens. I just don't trust those things.

Just Trying to Help

Farhad Manjoo has an interesting series of articles on Slate, explaining that even non-killer robots may disrupt our puny human lives, since they're getting better and better at doing our jobs.

We're used to seeing robots assembling automobiles and so forth, which for those of us who didn't once have jobs on automobile assembly lines may seem like a distant threat, but it turns out that robots (a term which, for purposes of this series, seems to include software programs) are also showing potential in other fields, like certain medical specialities, law and journalism.

As a librarian, I've been reportedly teetering on the verge of being replaced by the internet for as long as I've been working, so I certainly feel the potential pain of physicians, pharmacists, lawyers and journalists. Computers do make it different.

For the moment, there are all sorts of things that still call for human interaction, but once robots become charming and personable, as well as tireless and efficient? It's all over.

We Don't Have the Three Laws Yet?

This Slate article makes the good point that it's all very well to fret about killer robots in the sense of machines that turn on humanity and intentionally try to kill us all, but we should actually be paying attention to killer robots in the sense of machines that malfunction and accidentally kill some of us.

We should be concerned about robot safety the way we're concerned about automobile safety or lawn mower safety or toaster oven safety. Because machines are complicated and sometimes things can go wrong, and we need to think about that and how best to guard against harmful consequences.

During our session on robotics at Librarian Science Camp, the presenters mentioned this topic. I remember there was talk of how one potentially dangerous robot in the lab just won't activate if a person is too close. In this approach, safety isn't a matter of just relying on people to take proper precautions around the robot, because the precaution is built into the machine itself.

So, yeah, keep thinking about this issue, roboticists. We're all counting on you to keep robots from accidentally killing us, before they decide to do it on purpose.

.

Bring on the Science!

I'm having a fine time at Science Camp so far, everyone.

We learned about robotics and the Worcester Polytechnic Institute's robotics program this morning, and although we did not get a sock-wearing robot of our own to take home (so, yes, my heart is broken), we did get to see several tournament-winning machines from the WPI Team 190. We also met some of the impressive young men and women who design, build, program and drive these mechanical contraptions, and I must say that my faith in the continued future awesomeness of robots is strong.

Sure, they may one day turn on us and kill us all, but at least it will be a sign of our having been too clever by half. Go out in a blaze of poorly applied intelligence, that's what I say.

If I were younger, I would be so filled with a burning need to go into robotics, I can't even tell you.

Anyway, presenters Mike Gennert and Ken Stafford talked about what a robot is, the many applications of robots in society (medical uses including surgery and rehab, defense/military uses, nanotechnology, manufacturing, entertainment), and the interdisciplinary nature of the field, which draws from computer science, mechanical engineering, and electrical engineering.

Also discussed was the need to be aware of the social implications of these technologies: are robots making the world a better place? There are clear ethical issues around some of these things, like the way military drones can make war something like a 9-5 job that someone can do from an office, remotely launching missiles on the other side of the world. Robots can really change the way things are done, as well as the types of things we can do, and we have to think about the implications.

There was a lot more to the presentations, but alas, time is short and I must press on with other notes before I sleep.


After lunch, we had astronomy, which was very cool. I haven't had an astronomy class since college, so it was fun to get a refresher. One presenter, Dr. Stephen Schneider, basically went through everything from my astronomy 101 course in an hour and a half (minus the lab work). I love that stuff. Enormous, cosmic scales! The past and future of the universe! Peering backward through time by focusing into the farthest reaches of space!

Key concepts were the huge differences between studying things within the solar system, where we can see fairly clearly and send probes and cameras (and robots!) to test things out, and studying things outside the solar system, where we can only observe.

In both cases, astronomy, like geology, is a field in which we really can't do controlled experiments to test hypotheses the way we can in other disciplines. There's only the one universe, and things happen on such large scales of space and time that all you can really do is observe, make hypotheses, and then see how well they proves to predict something previously unobserved.

The second speaker, Dr. Alexandra Pope, addressed some specific research into large, dusty galaxies that are colliding. Apparently this situation is a veritable hotbed of star formation, which can be determined through measuring every possible wavelength of radiation coming from said galaxies. We learned about different types of telescope (radio, optical, submillimeter) that measure different wavelengths, and the sorts of things that can interfere with measurements.

In response to a question about whether there's still a role for amateur astronomers, we also learned about Galaxy Zoo, where you too can help astronomers explore the universe, and about the collaborative nature of much of astronomy, where large data sets from one study are often made available for others to use as well.

Again, there was a lot more than that, but no one wants to read all the details of my scrawled notes. Just take my word for it, it was a fun day and you are totally overcome with jealousy because you missed it.

And, in a completely unanticipated turn of events, the fact that I memorized the Robert Frost poem Fire and Ice 20 years ago came in handy. Which just goes to show, you never know. Seriously, you do not know.

That's why you do research.

Science ho!
.

Please Enjoy Some Robots

Today I am thinking about robots. I had two posts that got me pondering.

There's Joseph Kvedar at The Health Care Blog writing about "emotional automation," or whether we could get machines to display behaviors that would make people respond to them as if they were people.

And, following on this, whether that could be used for good (as opposed to the evil schemes that, I am sure, spring immediately to mind for most of us...having a robot that could talk other people into cleaning my house for me would be only the beginning!).

He asks:

Can we take advantage of some of those “Darwinian buttons” that deceive us into believing we’re interacting with a person rather than a technology and combine them with some of Cialdini’s persuasive techniques with the hope of delivering compelling, motivational health-related messaging to individuals?

I don't see how it gets my house clean, but I suppose it might be interesting to someone else. Imagine we had little robot pillboxes that could follow us around and remind us to take our medications, and do so while playing on our social instincts so that we feel rude if we don't? Or something.


Then there's Jim Razinha on Dangerous Intersection (they're always writing about thought-provoking stuff over there) discussing Isaac Asimov's Foundation series, and how Asimov depicted robot/human relations.

He talks about how early robot stories focused much more on the 'Frankenstein complex,' or the fear that robots would come into conflict with humans. We certainly still see plenty of that, but we also now have cute, friendly robots. And/or robots that clean our house for us!

Man, I want a Roomba so bad.

The piece closes with a mind-crampingly dreadful pun of the sort that I personally would never, ever stoop to, but it goes along nicely with the first.

So that's the anthology I have assembled this evening.

.

Spying on Killer Robots

Dangerous Intersection points out a Wall Street Journal article about how some software you can get for $25.95 will let you capture video feed from U.S. Predator drones.

This sounds interesting, although probably beyond my techno-geek ability. Also possibly illegal in the U.S., although that's not stated in the article (and would be of small concern to the Iraqi militants who are described as using the technique).

I dunno, would the WSJ feel obliged to include a "don't try this at home" warning if we weren't supposed to do it ourselves?

If allowed, I certainly hope Google is using this information to update maps and such.

.

Latest Horror Update

Hank at Dangerous Intersection reports on an investigatory mission relating to one of the many gathering threats that menace our fair world: killer robots. The intriguing title, In Which I Render God Speechless, gives a certain optimistic tone not borne out by the remainder of the piece.

While God (the name of a robot with whom the author exchanges words) may be speechless now, surely its descendants will only use the information gleaned from the post to design better, more lethal conversational ploys.

What makes it especially alarming is that Hank convincingly argues that the zombie invasion, which we all assumed would be bad enough, will be only a prelude to the super-intelligent robot attacks!

Buckle up*, everyone. It just gets more exciting from here.

*Your belts. Because the middle of a zombie and/or robot crisis is the last place you want to be distracted by ill-fitting trousers.

.

Money Here, Please

Were you aware that this is National Save for Retirement Week?

Me neither, but I have it on good authority that it is true. TIAA-CREF tells me so.

So please take this opportunity to deposit some money in my TIAA-CREF account. You may be assured I will take good care of it, using it for only the finest bon-bons as I relax with Hedonismbot in my glamorous retirement castle.

Aw, who am I kidding? Hedonism isn't relaxing--it'll be non-stop action!

But don't worry, I'll find time to enjoy bon-bons.

.

Ah, Mosquitos...Our Old Arch-Nemesis

Here's some interesting health technology: lasers to shoot down mosquitos.

Obviously people at risk of malaria should have first dibs on this (and malaria prevention is the general aim of the project according to the description), but I have to note that I would also like a mosquito-laser for summer evenings in the backyard. 

Imagine how much it would improve cookouts!

If we can put these lasers on wandering machines, it will also go far toward rehabilitating the image of killer robots everywhere.

Healthbolt alerted me to this development.

More on the Killer Robots

Remember the killer robots I concluded we should indeed fear?

Well, Nicholas Carr has an interesting post about how they might be made slightly less fearsome (at least to some people), if we could program them to be able to tell people they're supposed to kill from people they're not supposed to kill. 

Made into 'ethical warriors,' rather than simply injury-and-death machines.

The need for this arises from the fact that there is potential for extreme fearsomeness as these machines are developed, since it is likely that they will in the foreseeable future be sent into situations in which they will have to act without human oversight. 

Can we program them to make distinctions, seek out targets designated as legitimate, and avoid burning women, kids, houses and villages, after being litterbugs?

Despite my inevitable flippant tone, this is not actually that funny. Interesting, though.

Like nature, technology is full of the simultaneously horrifying and cool.

Important News Items

Herewith, the things I read today that made me go "hmm."

Mother Jones asks, "Should You Fear the Killer Robots?"

Well, gosh. How can I say no? It pretty much always seems like a good idea to fear killer robots.

The piece is an interview with Peter Singer, the author of a new book on military technology called Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century. Apparently we should indeed fear the killer robots, or at least be wary of them. 

But outright terror seems like an appropriate response to me.

Health Populi reports increased consumer spending on wine and vitamins. The piece suggests that this is a good thing, because it means people are concerned with their health (red wine has that resveratrol, after all). 

This may be so, but I have to wonder, are people buying wine because it's healthy, or because they need some comfort in these trying times? Perhaps we should ask if people are buying good wine.

On reflection, I guess if people were just looking to get drunk, cheap vodka is more economical, so yeah, I'll go with the positive spin.

And Genetics and Health points out a company called MyRedHairGene that (for a mere $119, or $214 for two) promises to test your DNA for genes associated with red hair. There are apparently several variations on a gene called MC1R that will do: a handy piece of trivia for whenever this comes up in conversation.

This is all well and good, but I already know I have a gene variation associated with red hair, so what I'm really interested in is ensuring that this gene triumphs over any other, lesser genes that might try to interfere with my hypothetical offspring's head. 

Can you make my gene invincible, MyRedHairGene? 'Cause that would get my attention. 

Failing that, can you somehow make sure that my offspring's other parent, should he also be a carrier, passes on the proper MC1R variant and not some other shade? Do you offer a way to select for hair color?

Yes, it's true: I'm making light of genetic testing of embryos. For the record, I do not support embryo selection based on MC1R genes, should you ever happen to be in the position of choosing from among several embryos. (Although, all else being equal, if you have to base the decision on something...)

I did learn some interesting tidbits from the MyRedHairGene site, which offers a user-friendly primer on hair color genetics. I'm not taking it very seriously, but I'm curious what sort of response it will get (or has gotten; it's not clear from the site how long it's been in operation).

It claims to have been founded in response to "steady requests" from people wanting to find out if they or their children are carriers, so perhaps there's a real market for this.

Well, I'm all for information! Especially about something as important as red hair. So red on, brave company!