Does No One Understand How To Deport A Man?

I've seen them perform, absolutely amazing

A Single Book Can Alter The Strongest Of Foundations

Installation artist Jorge Mendez Blake creates a powerful brick sculpture titled “The Castle”. The intimidating wall, formidable and erect, loses its symmetry and forms a rift at the point where a book it inserted at its root. 

Keep reading

Should robots be gendered? | Robohub

Should robots be gendered? I have serious doubts about the morality of designing and building robots to resemble men or women, boys or girls. Let me explain why.

The first worry I have follows from one of the five principles of robotics, which states: robots should not be designed in a deceptive way to exploit vulnerable users; instead their machine nature should be transparent.

To design a gendered robot is a deception. Robots cannot have a gender in any meaningful sense. To impose a gender on a robot, either by design of its outward appearance, or programming some gender stereotypical behaviour, cannot be for reasons other than deception – to make humans believe that the robot has gender, or gender specific characteristics.

When we drafted our 4th ethical principle the vulnerable people we had in mind were children, the elderly or disabled. We were concerned that naive robot users may come to believe that the robot interacting with them (caring for them perhaps) is a real person, and that the care the robot is expressing for them is real. Or that an unscrupulous robot manufacture exploits that belief. But when it comes to gender we are all vulnerable. Whether we like it or not, we all react to gender cues. So whether deliberately designed to do so or not, a gendered robot will trigger reactions that a non-gendered robot will not.

Our 4th principle states that a robot’s machine nature should be transparent. But for gendered robots that principle doesn’t go far enough. Gender cues are so powerful that even very transparently machine-like robots with a female body shape, for instance, will provoke a gender-cued response.

My second concern leads from an ethical problem that I’ve written and talked about before: the brain-body mismatch problem. I’ve argued that we shouldn’t be building android robots at all until we can embed an AI into those robots that matches their appearance. Why? Because our reactions to a robot are strongly influenced by its appearance. If it looks human then we, not unreasonably, expect it to behave like a human. But a robot not much smarter than a washing machine cannot behave like a human. Ok, you might say, if and when we can build robots with human-equivalent intelligence, would I be ok with that? Yes, provided they are androgynous.

My third – and perhaps most serious concern – is about sexism. By building gendered robots there is a huge danger of transferring one of the evils of human culture: sexism, into the artificial realm. By gendering and especially sexualising robots we surely objectify. But how can you objectify an object, you might say? The problem is that a sexualised robot is no longer just an object, because of what it represents. The routine objectification of women (or men) because of ubiquitous sexualised robots will surely only deepen the already acute problem of the objectification of real women and girls. (Of course if humanity were to grow up and cure itself of the cancer of sexism, then this concern would disappear.)

What of the far future? Given that gender is a social construct then a society of robots existing alongside humans might invent gender for themselves. Perhaps nothing like male and female at all. Now that would be interesting.

Alan Winfield is Professor in robotics at UWE Bristol. He communicates about science on his personal blog… read more

Thousands of years of human breeding transformed wild species into the domesticated varieties we enjoy every year. Most of these foods were originally found in the Americas. Some of my favorite details:

The original domesticated carrots were purple. Carrots were bred to be orange by Dutch farmers in the 17th century, and then used as a political symbol of the ruling family - the House of Orange.

The ancestors of pumpkins were mainly eaten by mastodons and giant sloths - they were too bitter for smaller animals to stomach.

Turkeys were bred to have white plumage so their skin would be more uniform in color.

Happy Thanksgiving!!

New Evidence Found which Matches Legendary Founding of the First Dynasty of China

A archaeological team from Beijing University have found new evidence that surprisingly fits the ancient Chinese histories’ accounts of the founding of the Xia Dynasty. Previously, historians had dismissed all accounts of the first, second, and third dynasties as fabrications. They were written to glorify the dynasties which came later, not to document what had really happened. But archaeological findings over the last century provided evidence that the second and third dynasties had really existed. The Shang Dynasty you likely heard about in schools. Yup, we had once thought it was a myth. Now science and archaeology may be confirming the earliest dynasty written about existed as well. Read more

Computer Room Not Found

Sorry, little guy

Schiaparelli is scheduled to land on Mars tomorrow! Good luck, little guy.

A Brief Intro To Pre-historic Egypt

Humans have lived in the Nile River valley since at least 30,000 BCE. Stone age communities hunted, gathered, and fished in the fertile river valley. Then, around 5,500 BCE, agricultural communities emerged. Over the next 3,400 years the communities became self-governing. Each community developed independently and at different rates politically, economically, socially, and culturally.  Then suddenly, by 3,100 BCE, Egypt was politically unified with a highly efficient bureaucratic system and elaborate kingship rites worshiping a single ruler. How the transition happened between each of these stages of Egyptian history is an argument historians and archaeologists are still having.