Here’s an interesting hypothesis that I came across recently, reading through an article in the latest edition of the IEEE Spectrum about digitally animated faces. It’s called the “Uncanny Valley” effect, formulated by Japanese roboticist Masahiro Mori, and it basically says that, as a robot becomes more human-like in appearance, the more humans are likely to empathise with it. However, this effect reaches a point where empathy is reversed, and humans are likely to be repulsed instead. This, too, is then reversed and replaced with positive empathy once more as the appearance of the robot becomes even closer to that of a human being.

I’d be extremely interested if this hypothesis could work in reverse. For example, could individuals who believe in cyborgization i.e. integrating themselves with machines actually decrease the amount of empathy fellow humans feel for them?

For anyone interested in privacy, security and surveillance issues, Roger Clarke’s website is a must. Well-researched and insightful, it has become a regular read for me since he covers a lot of issues that have arisen from technology-saturated societies and the natural marriage between IT, governments and corporations in creating ubiquitous surveillance.

Today’s quote is from a paper Clarke wrote in 2006 entitled “What’s Privacy?“, in which he offers this wonderful definition of privacy:

Privacy is the interest that individuals have in sustaining a ‘personal space’, free from interference by other people and organisations.

We would do well to keep this definition in mind before privacy simply comes to mean that corporations and governments can still conduct massive surveillance and collect information on you, but they’ll try make sure it’s secured from unauthorized access. Privacy is not, and should never be, the same as data security.

Business Week are running a piece on motion capture technology, saying that it is transforming the way companies do business, as well as advertise. From the article:

Motion capture is starting to transform how businesses market their products as well as design and manufacture them. This spring the Las Vegas McCarren International Airport will set up large plasma screens with a motion- tracking component that lets advertisers bring pedestrians into their commercials. When you walk past a car ad, for example, the vehicle might move at the same speed you’re walking. When you turn to look at the driver, he’ll turn to look at you, and you’ll be staring into an image of your own face. Dozens of blue-chip aerospace, auto, and heavy-equipment makers, from Lockheed Martin to BMW to Caterpillar already use motion tracking to let workers collaborate in shared virtual environments, sometimes when they are thousands of miles apart. Together they can test the ergonomics of a design for a car or a plane. “Any company that creates a product used by people needs to understand how the human body moves,” says Iek van Cruyningen, head of securities at Libertas Capital Group, a specialist investment bank. “Motion-tracking systems and virtual simulations accelerate product development and boost productivity.”

Some interesting questions arise from all this, all of them to do with privacy (aside from the fact that most billboards are just damn ugly monstrosities invading our personal space). What if I don’t consent to having my face and body displayed on a massive billboard or an advert? Whose permission do they ask for in order to film me? How do I opt out so that any possible cameras they’re using don’t film me? How long before ubiquitous advertising such as this essentially becomes out-sourced surveillance for the city’s/country’s law enforcement?

I’m pretty sure that Second Life - or, at least, a business in Second Life - must be looking at this and thinking, “Wouldn’t it be cool to have a motion capture system that overlaid our real world store into the virtual world?” Tie that in with arphid store-loyalty cards, and you’ve got a perfect real-world simulation of your store and everyone in it.

Pretty much what I had pictured before. Yeah, pretty cool. Too bad it’ll be used to just track everything you do.

I’m also curious as to how long it’ll be before ad busters and culture jammers start hacking into these 21st Century billboards to replace them with their own. Looking forward to that one.

Ever wonder how a robot might look like dancing? Have a look at Keepon, “a small creature-like robot developed to perform emotional and attentional interaction with children”. Insanely addictive little critter! [Via New Scientist]

Today’s quote comes from German chemist Ernst Otto Fischer, winner of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry, 1973:

 As machines become more and more efficient and perfect, so it will become clear that imperfection is the greatness of man.

I’m a great believer in this myself, and think a world of uniform efficiency and perfection is one of dull, straight, black and white lines.

The New York Times has a great article about two competing trends, namely using drugs to augment intelligence and creativity, or using “mind expanding” technology to do it instead. (Forget, for a moment, the weed-puffing dope smokers would tell you there’s a natural creative enhancer already). One argument it gives against using drugs is that the “creativity shortcut” of using a pill may create a “delusional state” where “weak ideas are mistaken for strong ones”.

Supporters of using technology argue that computer networks are great enablers of human creativity because they can “share ideas with people they�??ve never met”. Quoting Lawrence Lessig, he points out that the Internet helps create “ideas that are more robust and create a wider range of perspectives.�?�

Continue reading »

The term artilect is a combination of the words “artificial intellect”, and is used to describe highly intelligent machines that differ from today’s concepts of artificial intelligence by being far more intelligent than humans, almost god-like. In case you think this is taken from a book of science fiction, it’s not. The term was coined by Professor Dr. Hugo de Garis, who specialises in a field of artificial intelligence, and expanded upon in his book The Artilect War (a .pdf version can be found here).

According to de Garis, the most important question that we shall face in the coming years is “Who or what should be dominant species on the planet?” The “debate” over this question shall be so controversial that it will actually result in an all-out war sometime during the 21st Century.

Continue reading »

More commonly referred to as the “Deep Web“, it’s defined as “World Wide Web content [that is] not part of the surface Web indexed by search engines”. I prefer deepnet myself because a) I can use it for the word of the day, and b) it sounds cooler.

I found a reference to it while searching for DARPA on Google, and was interested to discover that they had funded (along with a host of other US groups like the NSA and the US Air Force) an AI-based deep web search engine that is now being run under a commercial company called Fetch. According to another news article on Computer World, the search is “used by government agencies seeking to rapidly import and integrate data from multiple Web sites and databases for emergency response, location intelligence and antiterrorism efforts”.

Yet another great example of how the military-industrial complex continues to drive technology.

“It’s like watching you get beaten to death with croutons.”

– Bruce Sterling on the “passing” fad of blogs and Twitter, courtesy of El Reg. You can also read a bit more about his speech at the Technology Review.

One of my favourite books from last year was the superb “Spychips” by Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre (they have a blog), examing the RFID industry and its threat to privacy. What I found to be of particular interest was the strategy developed by the Auto-ID Centre - the primary research group behind the Internet of Things concept, backed by some major corporations like Procter & Gamble and Gillette, and also the Department of Defense - to overcome the privacy concerns of consumers.

The Auto-ID Centre hired the pricey public relations firm Fleishman-Hillard and set out to “develop best messages to pacify” consumers. Yes, pacify. They came up with a plan to “identify potential consumer road blocks/fears, construct a proactive message framework to minimize negatives arising [and] assess consumer reaction if [the] press develop scare stories.”

[…]

The Auto-ID Centre’s advisers knew it would be tough [but] they hoped consumers would feel hopeless and too “apathetic” to react (their exact quote was “on balance they are negative by apathetic”). […] “The best communication strategy appears to be positioning the technology simply as an improved barcode,” the advised, noting that, ” … discussing any benefits or using rational argument is largely ineffective and is perceived as ’spin’. Once consumers are concerned, they remain concerned, no matter what we tell them.” (Spychips, pg 156-7)

So, next time you hear it’s an improved barcode, or someone refers to a “radio barcode” (Tesco), “intelligent label” (Marks & Spencer), an “electronic product code” (Wal-Mart), or “green tag” (Auto-ID Centre), remember that someone is trying to “pacify” you.

I wonder how long before we’ll be told that arphids enable and enhance who you really are?