Lifeboat Foundation: Safeguarding Humanity
Toggle light / dark theme

Blog

Category: innovation – Page 223

Have you hugged or told someone that you love them today? Maybe it wasn’t someone — maybe it was your smartphone that you gave an extra squeeze or gave an extra pat as you slipped it into your pocket. Humans have become increasingly invested in their devices, and a new era of emotional attachment to our devices and other AI seems to be upon us. But how does this work itself out on the other end — will or could AI ever respond to humans in an emotional fashion?

Communication Sparks Emotional Response

AI is broad, and clearly not all AI are meant to give and receive in an emotional capacity. Humans seem prone to respond to features that are similar to its own species, or to those to which it can relate to in some sort of communicative way. Most “emotional” or responsive algorithm-based capabilities have been programmed into robots that are in a humanoid – or at least a mammal-like – form.

Think androids in customer-service, entertainment, or companion-type roles. There are also robots like PARO, the baby harbor seal used for therapeutic interaction with those in assisted living and hospital environments.

In a 2003 paper published through the International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Cynthia Breazeal quotes a study by Reeves and Nass (1996), whose research shows humans (whether computer experts, lay people, or computer critics) generally treat computers as they might treat other people.

Breazeal goes on to state that humanoid robots (and animated software agents) are particularly relevant, as a similar morphology promotes an intuitive bond based on similar communication modes, such as facial expression, body posture, gesture, gaze direction, and voice.

An Emotional Model for AI

This in and of itself may not be a complete revelation, but how you get a robot to accomplish such emotional responses is far more complicated. When the Hanson Robotics’ team programs responses, a key objective is to build robots that are expressive and lifelike so that people can interact and feel comfortable with the emotional responses that they are receiving from a robot.

In the realm of emotions, there is a difference between robot ‘responses’ and robot ‘propensities’. Stephan Vladimir Bugaj, Creative Director at Hanson Robotics, separated the two during an interview with TechEmergence. “Propensities are much more interesting and are definitely more of the direction we’re going in the immediate long-term”, he says.

“An emotional model for a robot would be more along the lines of weighted sets of possible response spaces that the robot can go into based on a stimulus and choose a means of expression within that emotional space based on a bunch of factors.” In other words, a robot with propensities would consider a set of questions, such as “What do I think of the person? How did it act in the last minute? How am I feeling today?”. This how most humans function through reason, though it happens so habitually and quickly in the subconscious that we are hardly aware of the process.

Context of immediate stimulus would provide an emotional frame, allowing a robot to have a more complex response to each stimulus. The use of short-term memory would help the robot build a longer-term emotional model. “You think of it as layers, you can think of it as interconnected networks of weighted responses…as collections of neurons, there’s a lot of different ways of looking at it, but it basically comes down to stages of filtering and considering stimuli, starting with the input filter at the perceptual level.”

Similar to a human being, robots could have more than one response to a stimulus. An initial reaction or reflex might quickly give way to a more “considered response”, cause by stored and shared information in a neural-like network. Stephan describes a hypothetical scene in which a friend enters a room and begins taking swings at his or her friend. At first, the friend who is on the defense might react by immediately assuming a fighting stance; however, it might only take a few seconds for him or to realize that the other person is actually just “horsing around” and being a bit of an antagonist for sport.

This string of events provides a simple way to visualize emotional stages of reaction. Perception, context, and analysis all play a part in the responses of a complex entity, including advanced robots. Robots with such potential complex emotional models seem different from AI entities programmed to respond to human emotions.

The Beginnings of Responsive Robots

These AI don’t necessarily need to take a human-like form (I’m thinking of the movie Her), as long as they can communicate in a language that humans understand. In the past few years, innovators have started to hit the IndieGogo market with domestic social robots such as Jibo and EmoSPARK, meant to enhance human wellbeing through intelligent response capabilities.

Patrick Levy Rosenthal, founder of EmoSpace, envisioned a device that connects to the various electronic objects in our homes, able to adjust their function to positively affect our emotional state. “For the last 20 years, I believe that robotics and artificial intelligence failed humans…we still see them as a bunch of silicon… we know that they don’t understand what we feel.”

Rosenthal set out to change this perception with EmoSPARK, a cube-like AI that calibrates with other objects in the user’s home, such as an mp3 music player. The device, according to Rosenthal, tracks over 180 points on a person’s face, as well as the relation between those points – if you’re smiling, your lips will be stretched and eyes more narrow. The device also detects movement and voice tonality for reading emotional cues. It can then respond to those cues with spoken prompts and suggestions for improving mood – for example, asking if its human user needs to hear a joke or a favorite song; it can also respond to and process spoken commands.

While robots that respond to humans’ emotionally-based states and requests may soon be available to the masses, robots that have their own emotional models – that can “laugh and cry” autonomously, so to speak – are still out of reach, for the time being.

Australian scientists have published an ‘instruction manual’ that makes it a whole lot easier and cheaper to create metallic glass — a type of flexible but ultra-tough alloy that’s been described as “the most significant materials science innovation since plastic”. The material is similar to the sci-fi liquid-type metal used to create the T-1000 in Terminator 2 - when it’s heated it’s as malleable as chewing gum, but when it cools it’s three times stronger than steel.

Researchers have been dabbling with the creation of metallic glass — or amorphous metal — for decades, and have made a range of different types by mixing metals such as magnesium, palladium, or copper — but only after an expensive and lengthy process of trial and error. Now, for the first time, Australian scientists have created a model of the atomic structure of metallic glass, and it will allow scientists to quickly and easily predict which metal combinations can form the unique material.

“Until now, discovering alloy compositions that form these materials has required a lengthy process of trial and error in the laboratory,” lead researcher Kevin Laws from the University of New South Wales (UNSW) said in a press release. “With our new instruction manual we can start to create many new useful metallic glass-types and begin to understand the atomic fundamentals behind their exceptional properties.”

Read more

Inspired by the coats of fur on some animals, researchers at MIT have developed a flexible skin-like material covered in thousands of tiny magnetic hairs that can move in varying directions in the presence of a magnetic field. That might not seem particularly useful, until MIT points out that the new material can be used to control how liquids move across its surface, even causing water to flow against the pull of gravity.

It’s a neat trick, for sure, but there are other more useful applications of this new material. The tiny magnetic micro-pillars that make up the hair can be manufactured from a fiber optic-like material allowing them to change the direction of light passing through, facilitating self-darkening windows, or revolutionary new optics for cameras. The material can also be used to create advanced artificial skins, smart waterproofing, and even a precise way to manipulate individual cells. And let’s not forget a potential radical breakthrough in self-combing toupees and wigs. [MIT].

Read more

Scientists love coffee. More than anyone else, by some surveys. So in a way, it makes perfect sense that they would be responsible for what could be the greatest coffee-related invention since coffee-alcohol: a mug that keeps coffee hot – but not too hot – for hours on end. Here are the fifteen professions that drink the most coffee. Guess who’s number one. Here are the fifteen professions that drink the most coffee. Guess who’s number one. Here are the fifteen professions that drink the mo In 2011, Dunkin’ Donuts teamed up with CareerBuilder to shed some light on U.S. coffee…

Read more

Is seasteading the wave of the future? Joe Quirk of the Seasteading Institute thinks floating cities will allow micro nations to compete for people — providing better life options and innovations. “Aquapreneurs,” says Quirk, can save humanity from disease, environmental harm and maybe even war.

Voice & Exit is a dynamic, transformative festival of the future. Exiters are dedicated to maximizing human flourishing for individuals, communities and our world.

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality,” Buckminster Fuller reminds us. “To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” The Voice & Exit community is for those actively seeking to opt-out of models that don’t give rise to human flourishing to create those models that do.

We don’t predict the future, we create it.

Watch more talks and join the community at www.voiceandexit.com.

Read more

Progress always seems to ride a slippery slope. Innovations generally bring a plethora of potential benefits and just as many dangers, the obvious and the hidden. Technologies that tamper with our biological constructs is well underway in the neuro- and biotech industries. Historically, innovations in medicine have usually been beneficial on the aggregate.

But these new breakthroughs go beyond preventing and healing pre-existing causes. Transhuman technologies hold the promise of enhancing who we are as individuals and potentially as an entire species, and the decisions surrounding these technologies are far from simple. Dr. Nayef Al-Rodhan, a philosopher, neuroscientist, and director of the Geneva Center for Security Policy, believes we should be acting now to prepare for the inevitable and the unpredictable ramifications.

Framing Human Motivation

Considering our mixed track record as a species in rolling out groundbreaking innovations, discussing and finding potential solutions to many of the hidden dangers, and obvious ones, seems more than reasonable. One of the more puzzling questions is, where do we begin to have a pragmatic conversation on the ethics of these technologies?

There are plenty of theories about what drive human decisions, not least because human morality is infinitely complex and our minds crave frames through which to make sense of chaos. Dr. Al-Rodhan has his own conception of what drives human motivations. He makes meaning using the lens of “5 P’s” – Power, Pride, Profit, Pleasure, and Permanence – which he posits drive human motivations. “This is my view, the foundation of my outlook…this perceived emotion of self interest drives our moral compass.”

Al-Rodhan’s view of human nature seems to make a lot of sense, bridging the rational with the emotional. Such a frame is particularly helpful when considering technology that undoubtedly taps into our deepest fears and hopes, and invokes rational (and irrational) debate. During a recent TechEmergence interview with Nayef, I asked for his thoughts on the concerns and considerations of this brand of technology in the coming decade.

The Near Business of Enhancement

Al-Rodhan believes that we will see cognitive enhancement primarily through neuropharmacology, or neuro- and psychostimulants. This concept of this technology is nothing new — the military and many other organization have used their stimulants of choice in the past, one of the most pervasive being alcohol. But this new wave of neuro- and psychostimulants will methodically target specific areas in the brain, giving way to the possibility for innovations like increased mood modulation and more cognitive ability within the confines of the brain’s neuronal population.

Neuromodulation has been used in the military, with some efforts to make soldiers less emotional and to require less sleep. The difficulties with side effects are often more pronounced when soldiers return from combat. “They are all messed up due to severe brutality, fear, and some of these agents they are given make them addicts to certain things,” says Nayef, acknowledging that this happens in most all militaries. “The point is that psychostimulants and neuromodulators will make us feel very good, but they are very dangerous because they require addictive behavior…and we need strict oversight mechanisms.”

Nayef says that technologies such as brain machine interface (BMI) are likely beyond the span of a decade, but that implantable microchips (whether bio or biotechnological) are as much of an immediate concern as the introduction of neurostimulants. “The FDA in the United States is entrusted with keeping us on the right path,” says Al-Rodhan.

Finding Common Regulatory Ground

Is it possible to put in place national or international structures for managing these new and emerging technologies? Al-Rodhan believes it is more than possible; however, the primary issue is that our regulation is way behind innovation. Regulatory frameworks are lacking for a number of reasons. The unpopularity in politics is a major obstacle to overcome. In elections, these types of contradictory frameworks are not politically on the front burner for most candidates, and the long-term outlook is limited.

Another area for concern is corporate pharmaceutical entities, which Nayef says are not as well regulated as some might think. Businesses are concerned about the bottom line above all else, which at times yields unfortunate outcomes for the whole of society. “This is part of their role as executive, they’re not too concerned about moral regulation,” says Nayef. As unappealing as it might sound to free market capitalists, the institution that traditionally steps into these frontiers to regulate is government.

A relevant and current example is the science and business of moderating genomes in China, which is already investing a lot of money in this industry. Some effects of this technology may not be so obvious at first, and it is possible that negative ramifications could occur without the correct bioethical oversight. Al-Rodhan asks “what happens if you get a piece of DNA that preludes the biosphere? Who knows what kind of mutation that may produce spontaneously or by merging with other DNA in an organism.” These are the types of questions that governments, academic institutions, corporations, and individual citizens need to be asking, considering the multiple perspectives that emerge from a framework like Al-Rodhan’s that applies across cultural boundaries.

Al-Rodhan describes the process of implementing such regulatory frameworks as a transnational effort, but says that such efforts start with countries like the U.S., Japan, and Europe, where accountable mechanisms already exist. Taking the lead doesn’t guarantee the same priorities will be given elsewhere, but it can provide an example — and ideally a positive one. “We have about a decade to get our act together,” says Al-Rodhan.

The man-made “plant” can create endless oxygen using light and water!

Pioneers have been dreaming about living in outer space for eons, but there’s always been one major roadblock: securing a long-term oxygen supply. Toting around an indefinite supply of O2 isn’t feasible, and obtaining oxygen from plants in space is difficult, as green vegetation does not thrive in zero gravity environments.

But thanks to graduate student Julian Melchiorri, long-term space travel could soon be a reality. Melchiorri worked with Dezeen and MINI Frontiers to produce the Silk Leaf, an invention capable of sustaining life.

Read more