Humans can now control turtles' minds



HYPERLINK "" can now control turtles' mindsBy Walt Bonner Published April 11, 2017 Image courtesy of the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) It sounds like something Dr. Evil from Austin Powers might have come up with. But unlike sharks with laser beams attached to their heads, mind–controlled turtles are now a reality. That’s right, researchers in Korea have figured out a way to control how turtles move with human thought. The new technology uses the turtle’s natural flight or fight response to tell it which direction to swim.?The system, created by researchers from the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), combines two technologies opposite to one another: brain–to–computer interfaces (BCI’s), which allow humans to control machines via thought– and computer–to–brain interfaces (CBI’s), which make it possible to transmit data from a computer to the brain.The system works like this: a camera is attached to a turtle’s shell providing a live feed to a human. When the human operator thinks of a direction to move in– left, right, or to stay put– the thought is received by a computer the human wears, which recognizes the directions as electroencephalography (EEG)?signals. The wearable computer then transmits the command over Wi–Fi to a receiver, also mounted atop the turtle’s shell.This receiver activates a small blind attached to the front of the shell. This blind can move from left to right. Whichever direction the human decides for the turtle to swim, the blind will move to the opposite side. For instance, when the human thinks left, the blind will move to the right. The turtle’s instinct kicks in, telling it to swim to the left to get around the perceived obstacle.… Utter Uselessness of Job InterviewsJun CenApril 8, 2017Gray MatterBy JASON DANAA friend of mine once had a curious experience with a job interview. Excited about the possible position, she arrived five minutes early and was immediately ushered into the interview by the receptionist. Following an amicable discussion with a panel of interviewers, she was offered the job.Afterward, one of the interviewers remarked how impressed she was that my friend could be so composed after showing up 25 minutes late to the interview. As it turned out, my friend had been told the wrong start time by half an hour; she had remained composed because she did not know she was late.My friend is not the type of person who would have remained cool had she known she was late, but the interviewers reached the opposite conclusion. Of course, they also could have concluded that her calm reflected a flippant attitude, which is also not a trait of hers. Either way, they would have been wrong to assume that her behavior in the interview was indicative of her future performance at the job. ** the issue with dating a potential mate ** This is a widespread problem. Employers like to use free-form, unstructured interviews in an attempt to “get to know” a job candidate. Such interviews are also increasingly popular with admissions officers at universities looking to move away from test scores and other standardized measures of student quality. But as in my friend’s case, interviewers typically form strong but unwarranted impressions about interviewees, often revealing more about themselves than the candidates.People who study personnel psychology have long understood this. In 1979, for example, the Texas Legislature required the University of Texas Medical School at Houston to increase its incoming class size by 50 students late in the season. The additional 50 students that the school admitted had reached the interview phase of the application process but initially, following their interviews, were rejected. A team of researchers later found that these students did just as well as their other classmates in terms of attrition, academic performance, clinical performance (which involves rapport with patients and supervisors) and honors earned. The judgment of the interviewers, in other words, added nothing of relevance to the admissions process.Research that my colleagues and I have conducted shows that the problem with interviews is worse than irrelevance: They can be harmful, undercutting the impact of other, more valuable information about interviewees.…from our colleague Teresa:There have been a number of cases of children not raised by humans and the results. I have attached a report out of India on a recent case. This suggests how strongly humans are curated from birth by other humans and what happens if a child is not properly curated. Most of these kinds of kids, if found after the first decade, never learn to speak properly, among other deficits.Girl found living with monkeys in Indian forestThe young Indian girl sat on a bed at a hospital on Thursday.By Biswajeet Banerjee ASSOCIATED PRESS APRIL 06, 2017LUCKNOW, India — Indian police are reviewing reports of missing children to try to identify a girl who was found living in a forest with a group of monkeys.The girl, believed to be 10 to 12 years old, was unable to speak, was wearing no clothes and was emaciated when she was discovered in January and taken to a hospital in Bahraich, a town in Uttar Pradesh state in northern India.She behaved like an animal, running on her arms and legs and eating food off the floor with her mouth, said D.K. Singh, chief medical superintendent of the government-run hospital.After treatment, she has begun walking normally and eating with her hands.… tiny changes that can cause AI to failMachines still have a long way to go before they learn like humans do – and that’s a potential danger to privacy, safety, and more.By Aviva Hope Rutkin, 11 April 2017 HYPERLINK "" The year is 2022. You’re riding along in a self-driving car on a routine trip through the city. The car comes to a stop sign it’s passed a hundred times before – but this time, it blows right through it.To you, the stop sign looks exactly the same as any other. But to the car, it looks like something entirely different. Minutes earlier, unbeknownst to either you or the machine, a scam artist stuck a small sticker onto the sign: unnoticeable to the human eye, inescapable to the technology.In other words? The tiny sticker smacked on the sign is enough for the car to “see” the stop sign as something completely different from a stop sign.It may sound far-fetched. But a growing field of research proves that artificial intelligence can be fooled in more or less the same way, seeing one thing where humans would see something else entirely. As machine learning algorithms increasingly find their way into our roads, our finances, our healthcare system, computer scientists hope to learn more about how to defend them against these “adversarial” attacks – before someone tries to bamboozle them for real.Artificial intelligence fuels our everyday lives in increasingly inextricable ways, from self-driving cars to household appliances that self-activate (Credit: Getty Images)“It’s something that’s a growing concern in the machine learning and AI community, especially because these algorithms are being used more and more,” says Daniel Lowd, assistant professor of computer and information science at the University of Oregon. “If spam gets through or a few emails get blocked, it’s not the end of the word. On the other hand, if you’re relying on the vision system in a self-driving car to know where to go and not crash into anything, then the stakes are much higher.”… ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download