Online Artificial Intelligence Courses | Microsoft …

The Microsoft Professional Program (MPP) is a collection of courses that teach skills in several core technology tracks that help you excel in the industry’s newest job roles.

These courses are created and taught by experts and feature quizzes, hands-on labs, and engaging communities. For each track you complete, you earn a certificate of completion from Microsoft proving that you mastered those skills.

Go here to see the original:

Online Artificial Intelligence Courses | Microsoft …

What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)? – Definition from …

Artificial intelligence is a branch of computer science that aims to create intelligent machines. It has become an essential part of the technology industry.

Research associated with artificial intelligence is highly technical and specialized. The core problems of artificial intelligence include programming computers for certain traits such as:

Knowledge engineering is a core part of AI research. Machines can often act and react like humans only if they have abundant information relating to the world. Artificial intelligence must have access to objects, categories, properties and relations between all of them to implement knowledge engineering. Initiating common sense, reasoning and problem-solving power in machines is a difficult and tedious task.

Machine learning is also a core part of AI. Learning without any kind of supervision requires an ability to identify patterns in streams of inputs, whereas learning with adequate supervision involves classification and numerical regressions. Classification determines the category an object belongs to and regression deals with obtaining a set of numerical input or output examples, thereby discovering functions enabling the generation of suitable outputs from respective inputs. Mathematical analysis of machine learning algorithms and their performance is a well-defined branch of theoretical computer science often referred to as computational learning theory.

Machine perception deals with the capability to use sensory inputs to deduce the different aspects of the world, while computer vision is the power to analyze visual inputs with a few sub-problems such as facial, object and gesture recognition.

Robotics is also a major field related to AI. Robots require intelligence to handle tasks such as object manipulation and navigation, along with sub-problems of localization, motion planning and mapping.

The rest is here:

What is Artificial Intelligence (AI)? – Definition from …

A.I. Artificial Intelligence – Wikipedia

A.I. Artificial Intelligence, also known as A.I., is a 2001 American science fiction drama film directed by Steven Spielberg. The screenplay by Spielberg and screen story by Ian Watson were based on the 1969 short story “Supertoys Last All Summer Long” by Brian Aldiss. The film was produced by Kathleen Kennedy, Spielberg and Bonnie Curtis. It stars Haley Joel Osment, Jude Law, Frances O’Connor, Brendan Gleeson and William Hurt. Set in a futuristic post-climate change society, A.I. tells the story of David (Osment), a childlike android uniquely programmed with the ability to love.

Development of A.I. originally began with producer-director Stanley Kubrick, after he acquired the rights to Aldiss’ story in the early 1970s. Kubrick hired a series of writers until the mid-1990s, including Brian Aldiss, Bob Shaw, Ian Watson, and Sara Maitland. The film languished in protracted development for years, partly because Kubrick felt computer-generated imagery was not advanced enough to create the David character, who he believed no child actor would convincingly portray. In 1995, Kubrick handed A.I. to Spielberg, but the film did not gain momentum until Kubrick’s death in 1999. Spielberg remained close to Watson’s film treatment for the screenplay.

The film divided critics, with the overall balance being positive, and grossed approximately $235 million. The film was nominated for two Academy Awards at the 74th Academy Awards, for Best Visual Effects and Best Original Score (by John Williams).

In a 2016 BBC poll of 177 critics around the world, Steven Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence was voted the eighty-third greatest film since 2000.[3] A.I. is dedicated to Stanley Kubrick.

In the late 22nd century, rising sea levels from global warming have wiped out coastal cities such as Amsterdam, Venice, and New York and drastically reduced the world’s population. A new type of robots called Mecha, advanced humanoids capable of thought and emotion, have been created.

David, a Mecha that resembles a human child and is programmed to display love for his owners, is given to Henry Swinton and his wife Monica, whose son Martin, after contracting a rare disease, has been placed in suspended animation and not expected to recover. Monica feels uneasy with David, but eventually warms to him and activates his imprinting protocol, causing him to have an enduring childlike love for her. David is befriended by Teddy, a robotic teddy bear that belonged to Martin.

Martin is cured of his disease and brought home. As he recovers, he grows jealous of David. He tricks David into entering the parents’s bedroom at night and cutting off a lock of Monica’s hair. This upsets the parents, particularly Henry, who fears David intended to injure them. At a pool party, one of Martin’s friends pokes David with a knife, activating David’s self-protection programming. David grabs Martin and they fall into the pool. Martin is saved from drowning, but Henry persuades Monica to return David to his creators for destruction. Instead, she abandons David and Teddy in the forest. She warns David to avoid all humans, and tells him to find other unregistered Mecha who can protect him.

David is captured for an anti-Mecha “Flesh Fair”, where obsolete, unlicensed Mecha are destroyed before cheering crowds. David is placed on a platform with Gigolo Joe, a male prostitute Mecha who is on the run after being framed for murder. Before the pair can be destroyed with acid, the crowd, thinking David is a real boy, begins booing and throwing things at the show’s emcee. In the chaos, David and Joe escape. Since Joe survived thanks to David, he agrees to help him find Blue Fairy, whom David remembers from The Adventures of Pinocchio, and believes can turn him into a real boy, allowing Monica to love him and take him home.

Joe and David make their way to the decadent resort town of Rouge City, where “Dr. Know”, a holographic answer engine, directs them to the top of Rockefeller Center in the flooded ruins of Manhattan. There, David meets a copy of himself and destroys it. He then meets Professor Hobby, his creator, who tells David he was built in the image of the professor’s dead son David. The engineers are thrilled by his ability to have a will without being programmed. He reveals they have been monitoring him to see how he progresses and altered Dr. Know to guide him to Manhattan, back to the lab he was created in. David finds more copies of him, as well as female versions called Darlene, that have been made there.

Disheartened, David lets himself fall from a ledge of the building. He is rescued by Joe, flying an amphibicopter he has stolen from the police who were pursuing him. David tells Joe he saw the Blue Fairy underwater, and wants to go down to meet her. Joe is captured by the authorities, who snare him with an electromagnet. Before he is pulled up, he activates the amphibicopter’s dive function for David, telling him to remember him for he declares “I am, I was.” David and Teddy dive to see the Fairy, which turns out to be a statue at the now-sunken Coney Island. The two become trapped when the Wonder Wheel falls on their vehicle. David repeatedly asks the Fairy to turn him into a real boy. Eventually the ocean freezes and David’s power source is depleted.

Two thousand years later, humans are extinct, and Manhattan is buried under glacial ice. The Mecha have evolved into an advanced silicon-based form called Specialists. They find David and Teddy, and discover they are original Mecha who knew living humans, making them special. The Specialists revive David and Teddy. David walks to the frozen Fairy statue, which collapses when he touches it. The Mecha use David’s memories to reconstruct the Swinton home. David asks the Specialists if they can make him human, but they cannot. However, he insists they recreate Monica from DNA from the lock of her hair, which Teddy has kept. The Mecha warn David that the clone can live for only a day, and that the process cannot be repeated. David spends the next day with Monica and Teddy. Before she drifts off to sleep, Monica tells David she has always loved him. Teddy climbs onto the bed and watches the two lie peacefully together.

Kubrick began development on an adaptation of “Super-Toys Last All Summer Long” in the late 1970s, hiring the story’s author, Brian Aldiss, to write a film treatment. In 1985, Kubrick asked Steven Spielberg to direct the film, with Kubrick producing.[6] Warner Bros. agreed to co-finance A.I. and cover distribution duties.[7] The film labored in development hell, and Aldiss was fired by Kubrick over creative differences in 1989.[8] Bob Shaw briefly served as writer, leaving after six weeks due to Kubrick’s demanding work schedule, and Ian Watson was hired as the new writer in March 1990. Aldiss later remarked, “Not only did the bastard fire me, he hired my enemy [Watson] instead.” Kubrick handed Watson The Adventures of Pinocchio for inspiration, calling A.I. “a picaresque robot version of Pinocchio”.[7][9]

Three weeks later, Watson gave Kubrick his first story treatment, and concluded his work on A.I. in May 1991 with another treatment of 90 pages. Gigolo Joe was originally conceived as a G.I. Mecha, but Watson suggested changing him to a male prostitute. Kubrick joked, “I guess we lost the kiddie market.”[7] Meanwhile, Kubrick dropped A.I. to work on a film adaptation of Wartime Lies, feeling computer animation was not advanced enough to create the David character. However, after the release of Spielberg’s Jurassic Park, with its innovative computer-generated imagery, it was announced in November 1993 that production of A.I. would begin in 1994.[10] Dennis Muren and Ned Gorman, who worked on Jurassic Park, became visual effects supervisors,[8] but Kubrick was displeased with their previsualization, and with the expense of hiring Industrial Light & Magic.[11]

“Stanley [Kubrick] showed Steven [Spielberg] 650 drawings which he had, and the script and the story, everything. Stanley said, ‘Look, why don’t you direct it and I’ll produce it.’ Steven was almost in shock.”

Producer Jan Harlan, on Spielberg’s first meeting with Kubrick about A.I.[12]

In early 1994, the film was in pre-production with Christopher “Fangorn” Baker as concept artist, and Sara Maitland assisting on the story, which gave it “a feminist fairy-tale focus”.[7] Maitland said that Kubrick never referred to the film as A.I., but as Pinocchio.[11] Chris Cunningham became the new visual effects supervisor. Some of his unproduced work for A.I. can be seen on the DVD, The Work of Director Chris Cunningham.[13] Aside from considering computer animation, Kubrick also had Joseph Mazzello do a screen test for the lead role.[11] Cunningham helped assemble a series of “little robot-type humans” for the David character. “We tried to construct a little boy with a movable rubber face to see whether we could make it look appealing,” producer Jan Harlan reflected. “But it was a total failure, it looked awful.” Hans Moravec was brought in as a technical consultant.[11]Meanwhile, Kubrick and Harlan thought A.I. would be closer to Steven Spielberg’s sensibilities as director.[14][15] Kubrick handed the position to Spielberg in 1995, but Spielberg chose to direct other projects, and convinced Kubrick to remain as director.[12][16] The film was put on hold due to Kubrick’s commitment to Eyes Wide Shut (1999).[17] After the filmmaker’s death in March 1999, Harlan and Christiane Kubrick approached Spielberg to take over the director’s position.[18][19] By November 1999, Spielberg was writing the screenplay based on Watson’s 90-page story treatment. It was his first solo screenplay credit since Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977).[20] Spielberg remained close to Watson’s treatment, but removed various sex scenes with Gigolo Joe. Pre-production was briefly halted during February 2000, because Spielberg pondered directing other projects, which were Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, Minority Report and Memoirs of a Geisha.[17][21] The following month Spielberg announced that A.I. would be his next project, with Minority Report as a follow-up.[22] When he decided to fast track A.I., Spielberg brought Chris Baker back as concept artist.[16]

The original start date was July 10, 2000,[15] but filming was delayed until August.[23] Aside from a couple of weeks shooting on location in Oxbow Regional Park in Oregon, A.I. was shot entirely using sound stages at Warner Bros. Studios and the Spruce Goose Dome in Long Beach, California.[24]The Swinton house was constructed on Stage 16, while Stage 20 was used for Rouge City and other sets.[25][26] Spielberg copied Kubrick’s obsessively secretive approach to filmmaking by refusing to give the complete script to cast and crew, banning press from the set, and making actors sign confidentiality agreements. Social robotics expert Cynthia Breazeal served as technical consultant during production.[15][27] Haley Joel Osment and Jude Law applied prosthetic makeup daily in an attempt to look shinier and robotic.[4] Costume designer Bob Ringwood (Batman, Troy) studied pedestrians on the Las Vegas Strip for his influence on the Rouge City extras.[28] Spielberg found post-production on A.I. difficult because he was simultaneously preparing to shoot Minority Report.[29]

The film’s soundtrack was released by Warner Sunset Records in 2001. The original score was composed and conducted by John Williams and featured singers Lara Fabian on two songs and Josh Groban on one. The film’s score also had a limited release as an official “For your consideration Academy Promo”, as well as a complete score issue by La-La Land Records in 2015.[30] The band Ministry appears in the film playing the song “What About Us?” (but the song does not appear on the official soundtrack album).

Warner Bros. used an alternate reality game titled The Beast to promote the film. Over forty websites were created by Atomic Pictures in New York City (kept online at Cloudmakers.org) including the website for Cybertronics Corp. There were to be a series of video games for the Xbox video game console that followed the storyline of The Beast, but they went undeveloped. To avoid audiences mistaking A.I. for a family film, no action figures were created, although Hasbro released a talking Teddy following the film’s release in June 2001.[15]

A.I. had its premiere at the Venice Film Festival in 2001.[31]

A.I. Artificial Intelligence was released on VHS and DVD by Warner Home Video on March 5, 2002 in both a standard full-screen release with no bonus features, and as a 2-Disc Special Edition featuring the film in its original 1.85:1 anamorphic widescreen format as well as an eight-part documentary detailing the film’s development, production, music and visual effects. The bonus features also included interviews with Haley Joel Osment, Jude Law, Frances O’Connor, Steven Spielberg and John Williams, two teaser trailers for the film’s original theatrical release and an extensive photo gallery featuring production sills and Stanley Kubrick’s original storyboards.[32]

The film was released on Blu-ray Disc on April 5, 2011 by Paramount Home Media Distribution for the U.S. and by Warner Home Video for international markets. This release featured the film a newly restored high-definition print and incorporated all the bonus features previously included on the 2-Disc Special Edition DVD.[33]

The film opened in 3,242 theaters in the United States on June 29, 2001, earning $29,352,630 during its opening weekend. A.I went on to gross $78.62 million in US totals as well as $157.31 million in foreign countries, coming to a worldwide total of $235.93 million.[34]

Based on 192 reviews collected by Rotten Tomatoes, 73% of critics gave the film positive notices with a score of 6.6/10. The website’s critical consensus reads, “A curious, not always seamless, amalgamation of Kubrick’s chilly bleakness and Spielberg’s warm-hearted optimism. A.I. is, in a word, fascinating.”[35] By comparison, Metacritic collected an average score of 65, based on 32 reviews, which is considered favorable.[36]

Producer Jan Harlan stated that Kubrick “would have applauded” the final film, while Kubrick’s widow Christiane also enjoyed A.I.[37] Brian Aldiss admired the film as well: “I thought what an inventive, intriguing, ingenious, involving film this was. There are flaws in it and I suppose I might have a personal quibble but it’s so long since I wrote it.” Of the film’s ending, he wondered how it might have been had Kubrick directed the film: “That is one of the ‘ifs’ of film historyat least the ending indicates Spielberg adding some sugar to Kubrick’s wine. The actual ending is overly sympathetic and moreover rather overtly engineered by a plot device that does not really bear credence. But it’s a brilliant piece of film and of course it’s a phenomenon because it contains the energies and talents of two brilliant filmmakers.”[38] Richard Corliss heavily praised Spielberg’s direction, as well as the cast and visual effects.[39] Roger Ebert gave the film three stars, saying that it was “wonderful and maddening.”[40] Leonard Maltin, on the other hand, gives the film two stars out of four in his Movie Guide, writing: “[The] intriguing story draws us in, thanks in part to Osment’s exceptional performance, but takes several wrong turns; ultimately, it just doesn’t work. Spielberg rewrote the adaptation Stanley Kubrick commissioned of the Brian Aldiss short story ‘Super Toys Last All Summer Long’; [the] result is a curious and uncomfortable hybrid of Kubrick and Spielberg sensibilities.” However, he calls John Williams’ music score “striking”. Jonathan Rosenbaum compared A.I. to Solaris (1972), and praised both “Kubrick for proposing that Spielberg direct the project and Spielberg for doing his utmost to respect Kubrick’s intentions while making it a profoundly personal work.”[41] Film critic Armond White, of the New York Press, praised the film noting that “each part of David’s journey through carnal and sexual universes into the final eschatological devastation becomes as profoundly philosophical and contemplative as anything by cinema’s most thoughtful, speculative artists Borzage, Ozu, Demy, Tarkovsky.”[42] Filmmaker Billy Wilder hailed A.I. as “the most underrated film of the past few years.”[43] When British filmmaker Ken Russell saw the film, he wept during the ending.[44]

Mick LaSalle gave a largely negative review. “A.I. exhibits all its creators’ bad traits and none of the good. So we end up with the structureless, meandering, slow-motion endlessness of Kubrick combined with the fuzzy, cuddly mindlessness of Spielberg.” Dubbing it Spielberg’s “first boring movie”, LaSalle also believed the robots at the end of the film were aliens, and compared Gigolo Joe to the “useless” Jar Jar Binks, yet praised Robin Williams for his portrayal of a futuristic Albert Einstein.[45][not in citation given] Peter Travers gave a mixed review, concluding “Spielberg cannot live up to Kubrick’s darker side of the future.” But he still put the film on his top ten list that year for best movies.[46] David Denby in The New Yorker criticized A.I. for not adhering closely to his concept of the Pinocchio character. Spielberg responded to some of the criticisms of the film, stating that many of the “so called sentimental” elements of A.I., including the ending, were in fact Kubrick’s and the darker elements were his own.[47] However, Sara Maitland, who worked on the project with Kubrick in the 1990s, claimed that one of the reasons Kubrick never started production on A.I. was because he had a hard time making the ending work.[48] James Berardinelli found the film “consistently involving, with moments of near-brilliance, but far from a masterpiece. In fact, as the long-awaited ‘collaboration’ of Kubrick and Spielberg, it ranks as something of a disappointment.” Of the film’s highly debated finale, he claimed, “There is no doubt that the concluding 30 minutes are all Spielberg; the outstanding question is where Kubrick’s vision left off and Spielberg’s began.”[49]

Screenwriter Ian Watson has speculated, “Worldwide, A.I. was very successful (and the 4th highest earner of the year) but it didn’t do quite so well in America, because the film, so I’m told, was too poetical and intellectual in general for American tastes. Plus, quite a few critics in America misunderstood the film, thinking for instance that the Giacometti-style beings in the final 20 minutes were aliens (whereas they were robots of the future who had evolved themselves from the robots in the earlier part of the film) and also thinking that the final 20 minutes were a sentimental addition by Spielberg, whereas those scenes were exactly what I wrote for Stanley and exactly what he wanted, filmed faithfully by Spielberg.”[50]

In 2002, Spielberg told film critic Joe Leydon that “People pretend to think they know Stanley Kubrick, and think they know me, when most of them don’t know either of us”. “And what’s really funny about that is, all the parts of A.I. that people assume were Stanley’s were mine. And all the parts of A.I. that people accuse me of sweetening and softening and sentimentalizing were all Stanley’s. The teddy bear was Stanley’s. The whole last 20 minutes of the movie was completely Stanley’s. The whole first 35, 40 minutes of the film all the stuff in the house was word for word, from Stanley’s screenplay. This was Stanley’s vision.” “Eighty percent of the critics got it all mixed up. But I could see why. Because, obviously, I’ve done a lot of movies where people have cried and have been sentimental. And I’ve been accused of sentimentalizing hard-core material. But in fact it was Stanley who did the sweetest parts of A.I., not me. I’m the guy who did the dark center of the movie, with the Flesh Fair and everything else. That’s why he wanted me to make the movie in the first place. He said, ‘This is much closer to your sensibilities than my own.'”[51]

Upon rewatching the film many years after its release, BBC film critic Mark Kermode apologized to Spielberg in an interview in January 2013 for “getting it wrong” on the film when he first viewed it in 2001. He now believes the film to be Spielberg’s “enduring masterpiece”.[52]

Visual effects supervisors Dennis Muren, Stan Winston, Michael Lantieri and Scott Farrar were nominated for the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects, while John Williams was nominated for Best Original Music Score.[53] Steven Spielberg, Jude Law and Williams received nominations at the 59th Golden Globe Awards.[54] A.I. was successful at the Saturn Awards, winning five awards, including Best Science Fiction Film along with Best Writing for Spielberg and Best Performance by a Younger Actor for Osment.[55]

Read the original post:

A.I. Artificial Intelligence – Wikipedia

Artificial Intelligence: The Pros, Cons, and What to Really Fear

For the last several years, Russia has been steadily improving its ground combat robots. Just last year,Kalashnikov, the maker of the famous AK-47 rifle,announced it would builda range of products based on neural networks, including a fully automated combat module that promises to identify and shoot at targets.

According to Bendett,Russia delivered a white paperto the UN saying that from Moscow’s perspective,it would be inadmissible to leave UASwithout anyhuman oversight. In other words, Russia always wants a human in the loop and to be the one to push the final button to fire that weapon.

Worth noting: “A lot of these are still kind of far-out applications,” Bendett said.

The same can be said for China’s more military-focused applications of AI, largely in surveillance and UAV operations for the PLA,said Elsa Kania, Technology Fellow at the Center for a New American Security. Speaking beside Bendett at the Genius Machines event in March, Kania said China’s military applications appear to beat a a fairly nascent stage in its development.

That is to say: There’snothing to fear about lethal AI applications yet unless you’re an alleged terrorist in the Middle East. For the rest of us, we have our Siris, Alexas, Cortanas and more, helping us shop, search, listen to music,and tag friends in images on social media.

Until the robot uprising comes, let us hope there will always be clips ofthe swearing Atlas Robot from Boston Dynamics available online whenever we need a laugh. It may be better to laugh before these robots start helping each other through doorwaysentirely independent of humans. (Too late.)

Go here to read the rest:

Artificial Intelligence: The Pros, Cons, and What to Really Fear

A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001) – IMDb

Nominated for 2 Oscars. Another 17 wins & 68 nominations. See more awards Learn more More Like This

Comedy | Drama | Sci-Fi

An android endeavors to become human as he gradually acquires emotions.

Director:Chris Columbus

Stars:Robin Williams,Embeth Davidtz,Sam Neill

Adventure | Sci-Fi | Thriller

As Earth is invaded by alien tripod fighting machines, one family fights for survival.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Tom Cruise,Dakota Fanning,Tim Robbins

Action | Crime | Mystery

In a future where a special police unit is able to arrest murderers before they commit their crimes, an officer from that unit is himself accused of a future murder.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Tom Cruise,Colin Farrell,Samantha Morton

Drama | History

In 1839, the revolt of Mende captives aboard a Spanish owned ship causes a major controversy in the United States when the ship is captured off the coast of Long Island. The courts must decide whether the Mende are slaves or legally free.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Djimon Hounsou,Matthew McConaughey,Anthony Hopkins

Drama | History | War

Young Albert enlists to serve in World War I after his beloved horse is sold to the cavalry. Albert’s hopeful journey takes him out of England and to the front lines as the war rages on.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Jeremy Irvine,Emily Watson,David Thewlis

Drama | Sci-Fi

Roy Neary, an electric lineman, watches how his quiet and ordinary daily life turns upside down after a close encounter with a UFO.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Richard Dreyfuss,Franois Truffaut,Teri Garr

Drama | History | War

A young English boy struggles to survive under Japanese occupation during World War II.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Christian Bale,John Malkovich,Miranda Richardson

Drama | History | Thriller

Based on the true story of the Black September aftermath, about the five men chosen to eliminate the ones responsible for that fateful day.

Director:Steven Spielberg

Stars:Eric Bana,Daniel Craig,Marie-Jose Croze

In the not-so-far future the polar ice caps have melted and the resulting rise of the ocean waters has drowned all the coastal cities of the world. Withdrawn to the interior of the continents, the human race keeps advancing, reaching the point of creating realistic robots (called mechas) to serve them. One of the mecha-producing companies builds David, an artificial kid which is the first to have real feelings, especially a never-ending love for his “mother”, Monica. Monica is the woman who adopted him as a substitute for her real son, who remains in cryo-stasis, stricken by an incurable disease. David is living happily with Monica and her husband, but when their real son returns home after a cure is discovered, his life changes dramatically. Written byChris Makrozahopoulos

Budget:$100,000,000 (estimated)

Opening Weekend USA: $29,352,630,1 July 2001, Wide Release

Gross USA: $78,616,689, 23 September 2001

Cumulative Worldwide Gross: $235,927,000

Runtime: 146 min

Aspect Ratio: 1.85 : 1

More here:

A.I. Artificial Intelligence (2001) – IMDb

Poll: Two Thirds of Americans Support Human Gene Editing to Cure Disease

The majority of U.S. adults would support gene editing embryos to protect babies against disease, according to a new poll.

Human Gene Editing

The majority of U.S. adults support human gene editing to protect babies against disease, according to a new poll.

But they wouldn’t support gene edits that make babies smarter or taller, according to the new research by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, which polled about a thousand U.S. adults this month to learn about public attitudes toward genetic engineering.

Deep Divides

The AP research found that 71 percent of respondents support gene editing to protect a baby from an inherited condition, and 67 percent support reducing the risk of diseases like cancer.

But just 12 percent would be okay with tampering with intelligence or athletic ability, and only 10 percent would consider altering physical characteristics like eye color or height.

CRISPR Drawer

Questions about using technologies like CRISPR to gene edit human embryos gained immediacy last month, when Chinese scientists claimed to have edited the genes of two babies in order to protect them against HIV — a move that prompted an international outcry, but also questions about when the technology will be ready for human testing.

“People appear to realize there’s a major question of how we should oversee and monitor use of this technology if and when it becomes available,” Columbia University bioethicist Robert Klitzman told the AP of the new research. “What is safe enough? And who will determine that? The government? Or clinicians who say, ‘Look, we did it in Country X a few times and it seems to be effective.

READ MORE: Poll: Edit baby genes for health, not smarts [Associated Press]

More on human gene editing: Chinese Scientists Claim to Have Gene-Edited Human Babies For the First Time

The post Poll: Two Thirds of Americans Support Human Gene Editing to Cure Disease appeared first on Futurism.

The rest is here:

Poll: Two Thirds of Americans Support Human Gene Editing to Cure Disease

Gov Shutdown Means 95 Percent of NASA Employees Aren’t At Work

The ongoing government shutdown means that 95 percent of NASA's workforce is home on furlough during New Horizons' historic flyby.

Get Furlough

When NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft soars by the space rock Ultima Thule on New Years Eve, it will be the most distant object humankind has ever explored.

Though you’ll be able to stream the historic flyby on the YouTube channel of Johns Hopkins Univerisity’s Applied Physics Laboratory, the event — which is arguably the most awe-inspiring item of space news all year — won’t be available on NASA TV, which typically offers extensive commentary and access to subject matter experts regarding the space agency’s projects. The reason: the ongoing government shutdown means that 95 percent of NASA’s workforce is home on furlough.

“Act of Ineptitude”

NASA employees are disgusted by the legislative dysfunction that’s keeping all but the most mission-critical workers home during the historic flyby, according to the Houston Chronicle — and their ire is reportedly focused on politicians who have allowed the science agency’s work to grind to a halt.

“We have not heard from a single member who supports the president’s inaction,” said the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, a union that represents federal workers, in a statement quoted by the paper. “Most view this as an act of ineptitude.”

Heat Death

The Chronicle also pointed to a post by Casey Dreier, a senior space policy adviser to the nonprofit scientific advocacy organization The Planetary Society, that chastised leaders for failing the nation’s scientific workers — and worried that the political brinkmanship of a shutdown could lead talented workers away from government work entirely, altering the dynamics of space exploration.

“I fear that we will see more and more NASA employees ask themselves why they put up with such needless disruptions and leave for jobs the private sector,” Dreier wrote. “We know that NASA can get back to work, but how long will the best and the brightest want to work at an agency that continues to get callously tossed into political churn?”

READ MORE: NASA, other federal workers not as supportive of government shutdown as Trump claims, union rep says [Houston Chronicle]

More on government shutdowns and space travel: Government Shutdown Hampers SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy Testing

The post Gov Shutdown Means 95 Percent of NASA Employees Aren’t At Work appeared first on Futurism.

Original post:

Gov Shutdown Means 95 Percent of NASA Employees Aren’t At Work

Scientists to Test New Cancer Treatment on Human Patients in 2019

A new cancer treatment that uses the body's own immune system to fight cancer is scheduled to start human trials in 2019.

Cancer Treatment

A new cancer treatment that uses the body’s own immune system to fight cancer is scheduled to start human trials in 2019.

The U.K.’s Telegraph reports that the new treatment, devised by researchers at the Francis Crick Institute in London, uses implanted immune system cells from strangers to fight tumors, instead of old-school cancer treatments like chemotherapy — a new tack in oncology that the researchers say could boost cancer ten-year cancer survival rates from 50 percent to 75 percent.

Immune System

The scientists behind the project explained it as a “do-it-yourself” approach to cancer treatment in interviews with the Telegraph. Instead of relying on chemicals or radiation outside the body to fight tumors, the transplants aim to help the bodies of cancer patients fight the tumors on their own.

“It’s a very exciting time,” said Charlie Swanton, one of the Francis Crick researchers involved in the work, in an interview with the paper. “Using the body’s own immune cells to target the tumor is elegant because tumours evolve so quickly there is no way a pharmaceutical company can keep up with it, but the immune system has been evolving for over four billion years to do just that.”

“Rapidly Treated Diseases”

Swanton told the Telegraph that he believes the trials could lead to a whole new tool set that doctors will be able to use to fight cancer.

“I would go so far as to say that we might reach a point, maybe 20 years from now, where the vast majorities of cancers are rapidly treated diseases or long-term chronic issues that you can manage,” he said. “And I think the immune system will be essential in doing that.”

READ MORE: Cancer breakthrough: Scientists say immune system transplants mean ‘future is incredibly bright’ [The Telegraph]

More on cancer research: Researchers May Have Discovered a New Way to Kill off Cancer Cells

The post Scientists to Test New Cancer Treatment on Human Patients in 2019 appeared first on Futurism.

Read more from the original source:

Scientists to Test New Cancer Treatment on Human Patients in 2019

Holograms Are Resurrecting Dead Musicians, Raising Legal Questions

Dead Musicians

Michael Jackson. Amy Winehouse. Tupac. Roy Orbison.

Those are just a few of the dead musicians who have been resurrected on stage in recent years as holograms — and a new feature by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation explores not just the critical reception and technological frontiers of the new industry, but the legal minefield it raises to dust off the visage of a famous person and bring them out on the road.

Back to Life

According to University of Sydney digital human researcher Mike Seymour, today’s musical holograms have only started to tap the medium’s potential. In the future, he predicted to the ABC, machine learning will let these long-dead holograms interact with the crowd and improvise.

Additionally, according to the report, the law is still grappling with how to handle life-after-death performances. In the U.S., a legal concept called a “right to publicity” gives a person, or their estate, the right to profit from their likeness. But whether right to publicity applies after death, and for how long, differs between states.

Atrocity

Of course, no legal or technical measures will win over fans of an act who find it disrespectful to raise a performer from death and trot them out on tour.

“If you are appalled by [the idea], because you think it’s an atrocity to the original act, you are going to hate it,” Seymour told the broadcaster. “And if you are a fan that just loves seeing that song being performed again, you are going to think it’s the best thing ever.”

READ MORE: Dead musicians are touring again, as holograms. It’s tricky — technologically and legally [Australian Broadcasting Corporation]

More on hologram performances: Wildly Famous Japanese Pop Star Sells Thousands of Tickets in NYC. Also, She’s A Hologram

The post Holograms Are Resurrecting Dead Musicians, Raising Legal Questions appeared first on Futurism.

Go here to read the rest:

Holograms Are Resurrecting Dead Musicians, Raising Legal Questions

New Theory: The Universe is a Bubble, Inflated by Dark Energy

A mind-bending new theory claims to make sense not just of the expanding universe and extra dimensions, but string theory and dark energy as well.

Dark Energy

A mind-bending new theory claims to make sense not just of the expanding universe and extra dimensions, but string theory and dark energy as well.

According to the new model, proposed in the journal Physical Review Letters by researchers from Uppsala University, the entire universe is riding on an expanding bubble in an “additional dimension” — which is being inflated by dark energy and which is home to strings that extend outwards from it and correspond to all the matter that it contains.

Breaking It Down

The paper is extraordinarily dense and theoretical. But the surprising new theory it lays out, its authors say, could provide new insights about the creation and ultimate destiny of the cosmos.

In the long view, though, physicists have suggested many outrageous models for the universe over the years — many of which we’ve covered here at Futurism. The reality: until a theory not only conforms to existing evidence but helps explain new findings, the road to a consensus will be long.

READ MORE: Our universe: An expanding bubble in an extra dimension [Uppsala University]

More on dark energy: An Oxford Scientist May Have Solved the Mystery of Dark Matter

The post New Theory: The Universe is a Bubble, Inflated by Dark Energy appeared first on Futurism.

Read more from the original source:

New Theory: The Universe is a Bubble, Inflated by Dark Energy

Elon Musk Thinks the First Mars Settler Could Be an AI

On Friday, Elon Musk speculated that a sophisticated artificial intelligence might touch down on the Red Planet before the first human Mars settler.

The MartAIn

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk wants to establish a base on Mars — but he isn’t sure its first resident will be human.

On Friday, the mercurial billionaire responded to a question on Twitter about whether a sophisticated artificial intelligence might touch down on the Red Planet before human colonists. Musk’s answer: 30 percent.

30%

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 27, 2018

AI Overlords

Musk has a fraught relationship with the topic of AI. He’s publicly warned about the danger’s of unregulated AI, even going so far as to found the organization Open AI to encourage the development of responsible machine learning systems.

It’s such a signature issue for Musk that other tech personalities have weighed in on his claims — including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who said the notion of killer AI was “pretty irresponsible,” and Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian, who quipped at an event earlier this month that Musk was “writing a great screenplay for a Black Mirror episode.”

Case For Optimism

But Musk also believes that AI could be made to help humankind — or that the two could even merge, ushering in a new era of evolution.

Or, as the Friday tweet shows, it seems that Musk could get on board with AI as long as it could help further his visions for the colonization of space.

The post Elon Musk Thinks the First Mars Settler Could Be an AI appeared first on Futurism.

View original post here:

Elon Musk Thinks the First Mars Settler Could Be an AI

Leaked Documents Show How Facebook Controls Speech Across the Globe

Leaked documents showing how Facebook controls speech online raise deep questions about the future of the company's role in international discourse.

Unfriended

Documents obtained by the New York Times show how the social giant’s international content moderation strategy is dictated by thousands of pages of PowerPoint presentations and spreadsheets that “sometimes clumsily” tell thousands of moderators what to allow and what to delete. The revelation raises deep questions about the future of Facebook’s role in international discourse — especially in the wake of damaging revelations about how the platform allowed propaganda during the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.

“Facebook’s role has become so hegemonic, so monopolistic, that it has become a force unto itself,” political scientist Jasmin Mujanovic told the Times. “No one entity, especially not a for-profit venture like Facebook, should have that kind of power to influence public debate and policy.”

It’s Complicated

Facebook moderators who spoke to the Times under condition of anonymity said they felt hamstrung by the extraordinarily complex rule set, which forces them to make rapid decisions, sometimes using Google Translate, about fraught topics including terrorism and sectarian violence.

“You feel like you killed someone by not acting,” said a moderator who spoke to the paper on condition of anonymity.

The result, according to the Times, is that Facebook has become a “far more powerful arbiter of global speech than has been publicly recognized or acknowledged by the company itself.”

“A Lot of Mistakes”

Facebook executives pushed back against the implication that its content moderation efforts were murky or disorganized, arguing that the platform has a responsibility to moderate the content its users post and defending its efforts to do so.

“We have billions of posts every day, we’re identifying more and more potential violations using our technical systems,” Facebook’s head of global policy management Monika Bickert told the Times. “At that scale, even if you’re 99 percent accurate, you’re going to have a lot of mistakes.”

READ MORE: Inside Facebook’s Secret Rulebook for Global Political Speech [The New York Times]

The post Leaked Documents Show How Facebook Controls Speech Across the Globe appeared first on Futurism.

Read more:

Leaked Documents Show How Facebook Controls Speech Across the Globe

Washington May Become the First State to Legalize Human Composting

Washington State may be set to become the first state to allow human composting

Death Reimagined

Grandma is in the garden. No, literally.

There’s something beautiful in deciding how one’s final moments should be confined to the memory of our loved ones. Advances in technology and changing mindsets seem to have people wondering why a coffin in the ground should have to be the only option of final resting place. Residents in Washington state have a brand new vision of returning to the Earth. Now a bill being sponsored in the state’s legislature could see Washington become the first state to legalize human composting.

A Tree of Me

The bill, backed by state Senator Jamie Pedersen, would allow for the “recomposition” of human remains, a process which speeds up decomposition and turns remains into a nutrient-packed soil which could be returned to families.

“People from all over the state who wrote to me are very excited about the prospect of becoming a tree or having a different alternative for themselves,” Pedersen told NBCnews.

Although “becoming a tree” and other futuristic burial ideas aren’t entirely new concepts, Washington would become the first state to allow human composting if the bill is passed. The idea isn’t just futuristic, it’s also economical. More and more Americans are turning to crowdfunding to support funeral costs, with the average funeral costing more than $7,000 in 2017, according to the National Funeral Directors Association. The recomposition process in comparison is somewhat cheaper with costs expected to fall around $5,500.

Safety First

The process is very similar to traditional composting. Unembalmed human remains are placed in a composting chamber and left to decompose with organic material like woodchips or straw. Air is occasionally pulled into the chamber to help microbes speed up decomposition and in about one month all that remains is a cubic yard of compost.

A five-month study, in which six donor bodies were decomposed, was led by researcher Lynne Carpenter-Boggs, Associate Professor of Sustainable and Organic Agriculture at Washington State. The study was carefully controlled to prevent spreading any harmful pathogens, a concern which led to the defeat of a similar bill sponsored by Pederson in 2017.

Carpenter-Boggs’ study concluded in August that the remains produced were safe and she plans to submit her research for publication in 2019. If the bill passes, it would take effect May 1, 2020. Until then, we can keep dreaming of “becoming trees” but Pederson’s bill could open doors to new burial alternatives and ways we can choose to have our memory honored.

READ MORE: Washington could become the first state to legalize human composting [NBCNews]

More on Burial Alternatives: 7 Futuristic Things To Do With Your Body When You Die

The post Washington May Become the First State to Legalize Human Composting appeared first on Futurism.

Follow this link:

Washington May Become the First State to Legalize Human Composting

NASA Clears “Dream Chaser” Space Cargo Plane For Full-Scale Production

Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Dream Chaser cargo spacecraft has been cleared by NASA for full-scale production

Space Plane

Watch out space, there’s a new commercial cargo carrier entering the race.

Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) has been given the go ahead from NASA to begin full-scale production of it’s “Dream Chaser” commercial space cargo plane. Scheduled to make its first mission in 2020, the company announced on December 18 that it had cleared the last milestone in its Commercial Resupply Services 2 contract. Now the company is able to move ahead with the full-scale production of the carrier which will be used to deliver cargo to the International Space Station (ISS).

T-minus 2 Years

The Dream Chaser was originally conceptualized for NASA’s commercial crew program but ultimately sidelined by NASA in favor of designs from Boeing and SpaceX. A redesigned version of the original Dream Chaser, the cargo version includes fold-able wings and is capable of carrying 5,500 kilograms (approximately 12125 lbs) of cargo to the International Space Station and return 1,850 kilograms (approximately 4078 lbs) to Earth in a runway landing.

SNC was one of three companies, alongside SpaceX and Orbital ATK (now Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems), to receive a commercial cargo contract from NASA in 2016. The contract guarantees each corporation at least six missions to the ISS.

Various components of the full-scale Dream Chaser have already been produced and tested. At a conference last October, Steve Lindsey, Steve Lindsey, Vice President for Space Exploration Systems at SNC said he expected to be “the majority of the way through” assembly and testing of the first Dream Chaser by next October.

Commercial Space Race

High launch costs are one of the most limiting factors in commercial space operations. Increased competition between corporations is helping to reduce the cost of launches opening new doors for smaller companies.

“When those launch vehicle prices come down — which, by the way, is about 80 percent of our costs on every mission we fly — that opens up the commercial market,” said Lindsey. As both competition and innovation increase, companies will face new pressure to stake their claim among the stars.

READ MORE: Private Dream Chaser Space Plane Cleared to Begin Full-Scale Production [Space]

More on Dream Chaser: United Nations Set To Launch Its First Ever Space Mission for 2021 

The post NASA Clears “Dream Chaser” Space Cargo Plane For Full-Scale Production appeared first on Futurism.

Original post:

NASA Clears “Dream Chaser” Space Cargo Plane For Full-Scale Production

Rerouting Nerves During Amputation May Reduce Phantom Limb Pain

Nerve cells could be rerouted to help prevent phantom limb pain

Begone Ghost

If you’ve never had to feel pain in a limb you no longer have, consider yourself lucky.

“Phantom limb pain” is a sensation of pain and muscle tension in a limb which isn’t actually attached to the body anymore. Roughly 60% to 80% of amputees feel some sort of phantom limb pain after their procedure. The effects, beyond being painful, can be outright debilitating for some people.

Now, doctors from the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center have discovered that a procedure originally meant to help with advanced prosthetic devices may also reduce or prevent phantom limb pain entirely.

Un-Nerving

Primary targeted muscle reinnervation or TMR, the process of rerouting nerves cut by amputation into surrounding muscle, was originally developed to help patients have better control of upper-limb prosthetics. Normally the procedure is performed month or even years after an initial amputation. By performing TMR at the time of amputation, however, doctors can tie up loose ends (so to speak) helping to prevent pain.

Over the course of three years, surgeons performed 22 TMR surgeries on below-the-knee amputees. None of the patients have developed neuromas, or pinched nerves, and six months later only 13 percent of patients reported having pain.

Attaching severed nerves “allows the body to re-establish its neural circuitry. This alleviates phantom and residual limb pain by giving those severed nerves somewhere to go and something to do,” said Dr. Ian Valerio, division chief of Burn, Wound and Trauma in Ohio State’s Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

Sweet Relief

By making TMR surgery a normal part of amputation procedures, doctors may be able to prevent a lifetime of pain for patients and later enable them to have more precise control over prosthetic limbs. In the United States alone there are approximately 185,000 amputations annually, according the Amputee Coalition. Developments, like those made by Valerio and team, will go a long way toward helping new amputees and those who use advanced prosthetic devices.

READ MORE: Rerouting nerves during amputation reduces phantom limb pain before it starts [EurekAlert]

More on Advanced Prosthetics: Electronic Skin Lets Amputees Feel Pain Through Their Prosthetics

The post Rerouting Nerves During Amputation May Reduce Phantom Limb Pain appeared first on Futurism.

Read the original post:

Rerouting Nerves During Amputation May Reduce Phantom Limb Pain

Experts: Stop Adding Cancer-Causing Chemicals to our Meats

Burgers full of beef and bacon are facing a new threat from cancer causing chemicals.

Bringing Home The Bacon

Experts in the UK are smoking mad over a lack of regulation surrounding food additives which may be leading to increased rates of cancer in people who eat processed meats.

Meat has had a mighty difficult go of things since a concerning 2015 World Health Organization report which reclassified processed meats as Group 1, carcinogenic to humans. The news that your crispy bacon might be causing cancer was met with mixed reactions. But scientists in the UK are now suggesting there may be a way to have your bacon and eat it too.

Nasty Nitrites

Part of the problem may center around the meat industry’s use of nitrites as preservatives. Nitrites are used as both a preservative and color fixture, ensuring meat has a pinkish hue, according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). A coalition led by Queen’s University professor Chris Elliott claims there is a “consensus of scientific opinion” that adding nitrites to cure meats can cause an increased risk of cancer in humans and leading to 6,600 cases of bowl cancer in the UK. Coalition members, like cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra, are calling upon the UK government to stop the use of nitrites are preservatives.

“Government action to remove nitrites from processed meats should not be far away. Nor can a day of reckoning for those who dispute the incontrovertible facts. The meat industry must act fast, act now – or be condemned to a similar reputational blow to that dealt to tobacco,” Malhotra said to The Guardian.

Home Of The Whopper

In the United States, nitrites are considered to be a safe food additive by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has established guidelines on the recommended limit for nitrite and sodium nitrite additives.

“To meat or not to meat” may be a question one has to decide for one’s own self. Thankfully, we may be about to get many more plant-based meat alternatives that seem almost like the real thing, even as debates rage whether plant-based alternatives should be allowed to be called meat.

READ MORE: Stop adding cancer-causing chemicals to our bacon, experts tell meat industry [TheGuardian]

More on Meat: Think Big Oil’s a Problem? “Big Meat” Emits More Greenhouse Gas Than Most Countries

The post Experts: Stop Adding Cancer-Causing Chemicals to our Meats appeared first on Futurism.

Read this article:

Experts: Stop Adding Cancer-Causing Chemicals to our Meats

Google Wins Lawsuit Over Facial Recognition Technology

Google won a key Illinois lawsuit that has long been a barrier to big tech companies' use of facial recognition software.

Apple Of My Eye

After weeks of notoriety and backlash, Google has scored a legal victory allowing it to keep a close watch on users of Google products.

On Saturday, a U.S. District Judge in Chicago dismissed a lawsuit filled against the internet giant which alleged that Google violated users’ right to privacy by using facial recognition technology without their consent. The lawsuit, originally filed in 2016, was the result of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act, one of the strictest biometric security laws in the nation. It requires tech companies to obtain explicit permission from Illinois citizens in order to make any biometric scans of their bodies.

Facebook and Snapchat are facing similar challenges from the law, but Google’s victory could signal a new era in the use and development of facial recognition technology.

“Concrete Injuries”

In his dismissal of the case, U.S. District Judge Edmond E. Chang cited the lack of “concrete injuries.” In the legal realm this means either physical damage or damage to one’s reputation which actually exists. In short, Chang’s conclusion was that despite not asking permission, Google’s use of the plaintiff’s photos didn’t result in any physical harm or damage to their reputation and was therefore legal. The cases against Facebook and Snapchat are still pending, but Google’s win could provide lawyers with some ammunition in defending the other two tech giants.

Big Brother

Facial recognition technology may take center stage in increasingly common debates about the intersection of advanced technology and rights to personal privacy.  Still, development continues despite the technology’s imperfections and warnings from other tech executives calling for stricter legal guidelines.

Facial recognition technology is becoming increasingly common in everyday life, cropping up at airports and even Taylor Swift concerts. Yet, as we continue to decide who has what right to our data and why, big technology companies are moving quickly to decide our future for themselves.

READ MORE: Google wins dismissal of facial recognition lawsuit over biometric privacy act [TheVerge]

More on facial recognition: Microsoft President Warns Of “1984” Facial Recognition Future

The post Google Wins Lawsuit Over Facial Recognition Technology appeared first on Futurism.

More here:

Google Wins Lawsuit Over Facial Recognition Technology

The EU Is Banning Almost All Coal Mining on Jan 1

Come January 1, all unprofitable coal mines in the European Union will be shut down. In Spain, that means 26 new closures.

No More Handouts

Every unprofitable coal mine in the European Union must cease production by the first day of 2019, the date on which all public funds for the mines will come to an end. In Spain, that means that 26 coal mines are about to close up shop, according to Reuters.

This move away from coal is a refreshing bit of bluntness — letting the failed remnants of a fossil fuel industry fade away — compared to how the federal government in the U.S. is grasping at anything to keep coal alive. But it remains to be seen how much of an impact the coal closures will have in the ongoing effort to curb climate change.

Always a Bigger Fish

The deadline was set back in 2010 as the EU sought to move away from fossil fuel dependence, according to Telesur. The EU wanted to end public aid to coal mines sooner, but groups from Germany — which shuttered its last coal mine earlier this month — and Spain are responsible for extending the deadline all the way to the end of 2018.

Spain has already decreased the portion of its electricity generated by coal down to about 14 percent, according to United Press International. And 90 percent of the coal burned in Spain is imported from Russia and Colombia anyway.

Still, the deal that Spain struck with the EU dictates that nine of the 15 coal-burning plants in Spain must close by 2020, according to Telesur. That on its own is huge news for the transition to cleaner power, and marks a clear sign that major world powers are taking their responsibility to help prevent our impending climate change catastrophe seriously.

Think Ahead

Once again in stark contrast to the U.S., where coal miners in Appalachia face a weak job market with few prospects, Spain’s socialist government — largely supported by coal mining communities — made a deal with mining union in October to ensure that displaced workers will be taken care of, according to Reuters.

About 60 percent of the people who worked in closing mines are expected to take advantage of an early retirement offer, while others have access to the 250 million euros that the government is making available to help launch new businesses or repurpose the land around the coal mines.

READ MORE: Spanish coal miners work last shifts before mines shuttered [Reuters]

More on coal: More Than 40 Percent of the World’s Coal Plants Lose Money

The post The EU Is Banning Almost All Coal Mining on Jan 1 appeared first on Futurism.

Original post:

The EU Is Banning Almost All Coal Mining on Jan 1

Foreign Cyberattack Cripples Major U.S. Newspapers

A cyberattack targeting the printing presses of several newspapers, delaying their delivery this weekend, appears to have originate from outside the U.S.

Late Delivery

This weekend, several of the most widely circulated newspapers in the United States found themselves the target of a cyberattack that reportedly originated on foreign soil.

Many questions about the attack remain unanswered, but one thing is certain: the media is under attack — and if something isn’t done to protect it, we could be headed toward a future in which we can’t believe anything we read.

Stop the Presses

The malware attack targeted newspaper printing plants run by The Los Angeles Times and Tribune Publishing, which owned The Los Angeles Times from April 2007 until June 2018 (and which, in a much-lampooned episode, briefly changed its name to Tronc in 2016.)

The malware prevented editors from transmitting pages of the papers to printing presses, and it delayed the scheduled printing and delivery of the Saturday editions of several newspapers, including The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

Nobody is sure of the source of the attack, but several people with inside knowledge of Tribune told The Los Angeles Times that the attack appeared to be Ryuk ransomware. Experts have linked this software to groups in North Korea and Eastern Europe, but for now, all The Los Angeles Times has confirmed is that the attack appears to have originated from outside the U.S.

Media Under Attack

As the name implies, ransomware attacks are typically financially motivated — attackers disrupt a company’s operations and demand a ransom to end the disruption — but neither Tribune Publishing nor The Los Angeles Times has reported any ransom demand. An anonymous source told The Los Angeles Times that the attackers didn’t appear to steal any information either.

That means a likely motivation behind the attack was preventing newspaper readers from getting their news — and that is highly troubling.

Just this month, the majority of Americans admitted for the first time that they prefer to get their news from social media platforms than from traditional print newspapers. While the latter sources are held to journalistic standards that place a premium on fact-checking and context, the former are notoriously rife with misinformation and bias.

If foreign actors are able to further cripple the U.S.’s already vulnerable newspaper industry by literally preventing the printing of newspapers, the “fake news” that dominates our social media feeds could one day overshadow the real news — and we’ve already gotten a glimpse of the disturbing impact that can have on a democracy.

READ MORE: Malware Attack Disrupts Delivery of L.A. Times and Tribune Papers Across the U.S. [The Los Angeles Times]

More on newspapers: For News, Americans Now Officially Prefer Social Media to Newspapers

The post Foreign Cyberattack Cripples Major U.S. Newspapers appeared first on Futurism.

Read the rest here:

Foreign Cyberattack Cripples Major U.S. Newspapers

Demand for Combustion Engine Cars May Have Peaked in 2018

combustion engine

No Sale

The reign of the fossil fuel-powered car may be ending.

In a report published on Sunday, several experts told the Financial Times that they believe sales of fossil fuel-powered internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles peaked in 2018, meaning that it’s unlikely that more ICE cars will be sold in any future year— and if they’re correct, this epochal change in the auto industry could majorly benefit the environment.

Going Down

Many experts predicted at the beginning of 2018 that demand for ICE vehicles wouldn’t peak until 2022 at the earliest, according to the FT report. But a combination of several factors — including Brexit, the U.S.-China trade war, and new emissions targets in Europe — has dealt a major blow to global car sales this year.

“When you look at 2018 since the summer, new car sales in all of the important markets are going down,” Axel Schmidt, global automotive lead at Accenture, told FT. “Selling combustion engine cars to customers — this will not grow in the future.”

Even if overall car sales increase in 2019, ICE sales would likely fall thanks to the continued adoption of electric vehicles (EVs).

Road to Recovery

This might not be what ICEcar manufacturers want to hear, but it’s excellent news for the environment.

According to energy research group Wood Mackenzie, a mid-sized EV produces 67 percent fewer greenhouse gas emissions than a comparable gasoline-powered ICE vehicle. That figure doesn’t just take into account the emissions produced while the car is in use, either — it includes emissions caused by everything from electricity generation to crude oil refinement.

In 2016, transportation was the primary source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., so if EVs continue to replace ICE cars in this nation and others, the world could significantly cut down on the climate-destroying emissions emanating from its roadways.

READ MORE: Combustion Engine Car Sales to Hit Peak Demand in 2018, Say Analysts [Financial Times]

More on ICE cars: These 7 Countries Want to Say Goodbye to Fossil Fuel-Based Cars

The post Demand for Combustion Engine Cars May Have Peaked in 2018 appeared first on Futurism.

Read this article:

Demand for Combustion Engine Cars May Have Peaked in 2018