Bill Gates Also Worries Artificial Intelligence Is A …

Posted on by

Aside from founding Microsoft, Bill Gates is known as an all-around smart guy who has put his money where his mouth is when it comes to saving the world. It would seem that this makes his opinions worth considering when he tells us that he, like fellow brainiac Stephen Hawking and Tesla Motors founder / Iron Man inspiration Elon Musk, fears that artificial intelligence could pose a threat to humanity.

In a Reddit Ask Me Anything (AMA) session on Wednesday, Gates echoed the concerns expressed over the past year by Hawking, Musk and others that something vaguely resembling the science fiction scenarios from the Terminator and Matrix franchises could come to pass if the potential of artificial superintelligence is not taken seriously.

I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well, Gates wrote. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern. I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and dont understand why some people are not concerned.

Earlier this month, Elon Musk put down $10 million of his own money to fund an effort to keep artificial intelligence friendly. Gates and Musk both have an interest in ensuring that artificial intelligence not only stays friendly, but stays viable (e.g. public sentiment and lawmakers dont turn against the basic notion of smart networks and devices), given that its likely to play a role in the future of not only Microsoft, but also Musks SpaceX and Tesla.

Personal interests aside, Musk and Gates could just be right about the threat posed by artificial superintelligence. When the guys most likely to benefit from a new technology see a need for it to be put on a leash, theres probably something worth worrying about.

To really understand the potential threat Musk and Gates are talking about, I highly recommend reading Nick Bostroms recent book, Superintelligence, which lays out the entire artificial superintelligence landscape including threats posed. Musk has referred to and recommended it in the past and it seems to be the primary foundation for much of the recent concern over A.I.

To jack in to my brain and get more on the latest in science, tech and innovation, follow me here on Forbes, as well as onTwitter@ericcmackand onGoogle+.

Excerpt from:

Bill Gates Also Worries Artificial Intelligence Is A ...

Bill Gates on dangers of artificial intelligence: I dont understand why some people are not concerned

Posted on by

Bill Gates is a passionate technology advocate (big surprise), but his predictions about the future of computing aren't uniformly positive.

During a wide-ranging Reddit "Ask me Anything" session-- one that touched upon everything from his biggest regrets to his favorite spread to lather on bread -- the Microsoft co-founder and billionaire philanthropist outlined a future that is equal parts promising and ominous.

Midway through the discussion on Wednesday, Gates was asked what personal computing will look like in 2045. Gates responded by asserting that the next 30 years will be a time of rapid progress.

"Even in the next 10 problems like vision and speech understanding and translation will be very good," he wrote. "Mechanical robot tasks like picking fruit or moving a hospital patient will be solved. Once computers/robots get to a level of capability where seeing and moving is easy for them then they will be used very extensively."

He went on to highlight a Microsoft project known as the "Personal Agent," which is being designed to help people manage their memory, attention and focus. "The idea that you have to find applications and pick them and they each are trying to tell you what is new is just not the efficient model - the agent will help solve this," he said. "It will work across all your devices."

The response from Reddit users was mixed, with some making light of Gates's revelation ("Clippy 2.0?," wrote one user) -- and others sounding the alarm.

"This technology you are developing sounds at its essence like the centralization of knowledge intake," a Redditor wrote. "Ergo, whomever controls this will control what information people make their own. Even today, we see the daily consequences of people who live in an environment that essentially tunnel-visions their knowledge."

Shortly after, Gates was asked how much of an existential threat superintelligent machines pose to humans.

The question has been at the forefront of several recent discussions among prominent futurists. Last month, theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking said artificial intelligence "could spell the end of the human race."

[Why the worlds most intelligent people shouldnt be so afraid of artificial intelligence]

Link:

Bill Gates on dangers of artificial intelligence: I dont understand why some people are not concerned

Artificial intelligence 'will not end human race'

Posted on by

Titan, created by England Cyberstein Robots, at a food market ahead of a robotics exhibition in Moscow last year. Photograph: Sergei Ilnitsky/EPA

The head of Microsofts main research lab has dismissed fears that artificial intelligence could pose a threat to the survival of the human race.

Eric Horvitz believed that humans would not lose control of certain kinds of intelligences, adding: In the end well be able to get incredible benefits from machine intelligence in all realms of life, from science to education to economics to daily life.

Professor Stephen Hawking last month expressed his fears about the rise of AI. He believed that technology would eventually become self-aware and supersede humanity: The primitive forms of artificial intelligence we already have, have proved very useful. But I think the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.

Horvitz made his comments in an video interview after being awarded the Feigenbaum Prize by the AAAI for his contribution to artificial intelligence research.

However, he acknowledged that advances in AI were likely to have significant impact on society and pose numerous legal, ethical, economic and psychological issues.

Well need to remain vigilant about assessing and continuing to address potential risks and rough edges ... We need to be assured that systems working in high-stakes areas will behave safely and in accordance with our goals, even when they encounter unforeseen situations, the researcher said in a Microsoft blog.

Other high-profile figures to cast doubt on AI include Elon Musk, the co-founder of PayPal who went on to set up Tesla, the electric car manufacturer, and SpaceX, which focuses on rocket technology.

He said last year that AI was the biggest existential threat to humans. We need to be very careful. Im increasingly inclined to think that there should be some regulatory oversight, maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we dont do something very foolish.

Musk is one of the high-profile investors, alongside Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg and actor Ashton Kutcher, in Vicarious.

See the original post:

Artificial intelligence 'will not end human race'

Microsoft research chief says AI will not end human race

Posted on by

The head of Microsofts research division has dismissed fears that artificial intelligence could pose a threat to the survival of the human race. Image: Getty

The head of Microsofts research division has dismissed fears that artificial intelligence could pose a threat to the survival of the human race.

Eric Horvitz believed that humans would not lose control of certain kinds of intelligences, adding: In the end well be able to get incredible benefits from machine intelligence in all realms of life, from science to education to economics to daily life.

Professor Stephen Hawking last month expressed his fears about the rise of AI. He believed that technology would eventually become self-aware and supersede humanity: The primitive forms of artificial intelligence we already have, have proved very useful. But I think the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.

Horvitz made his comments in an video interview after being awarded the Feigenbaum Prize by the AAAI for his contribution to artificial intelligence research.

However, he acknowledged that advances in AI were likely to have significant impact on society and pose numerous legal, ethical, economic and psychological issues.

Well need to remain vigilant about assessing and continuing to address potential risks and rough edges ... We need to be assured that systems working in high-stakes areas will behave safely and in accordance with our goals, even when they encounter unforeseen situations, the researcher said in a Microsoft blog.

Other high-profile figures to cast doubt on AI include Elon Musk, the co-founder of PayPal who went on to set up Tesla, the electric car manufacturer, and SpaceX, which focuses on rocket technology.

He said last year that AI was the biggest existential threat to humans. We need to be very careful. Im increasingly inclined to think that there should be some regulatory oversight, maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we dont do something very foolish.

Musk is one of the high-profile investors, alongside Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg and actor Ashton Kutcher, in Vicarious.

Continued here:

Microsoft research chief says AI will not end human race

Bill Gates is worried about artificial intelligence too

Posted on by

Microsoft's co-founder and former CEO is the latest luminary from the world of technology and science to warn against the threat of smart machines.

Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates joins entrepreneur Elon Musk and physicist Stephen Hawking with a warning about machine intelligence. Getty Images

Bill Gates has a warning for humanity: Beware of artificial intelligence in the coming decades, before it's too late.

Microsoft's co-founder joins a list of science and industry notables, including famed physicist Stephen Hawking and Internet innovator Elon Musk, in calling out the potential threat from machines that can think for themselves. Gates shared his thoughts on AI on Wednesday in a Reddit "AskMeAnything" thread, a Q&A session conducted live on the social news site that has also featured President Barack Obama and World Wide Web founder Tim Berners-Lee.

"I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence," Gates said in response to a question about the existential threat posed by AI. "First, the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that, though, the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern."

Gates, who is co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, isn't the only one worried. Musk, the billionaire inventor and founder of SpaceX and CEO of electric car maker Tesla Motors, is not an expert in AI. But he did join a growing list of hundreds of researchers and professors in the field who signed an open letter earlier this month that proposed proper safeguards be put in place to research and develop such intelligence without humans losing control.

"I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and don't understand why some people are not concerned," Gates said.

The reason they're worried is that AI isn't science fiction anymore. In stories and movies, AI is often presented as a good idea gone horribly wrong. In "The Matrix" movie trilogy, machines deem humanity a threat and enslave people in a virtual existence so they can feed off the electricity generated by the human body. When the Skynet computer system in "The Terminator" movie series becomes sentient, it wages a multiyear war using human-like robots designed to kill. HAL 9000, the socio-pathic supercomputer from "2001: A Space Odyssey," is now a cinematic icon -- HAL's robotic tone and malevolent quotes have become pop culture tropes.

Back in the real world, Apple's voice-based personal assistant Siri may seem a little dumb now, but AI is getting smarter as researchers develop ways to let machines teach themselves and mine the deep trove of data produced by our many connected gadgets. IBM's Watson supercomputer has moved on from besting Jeopardy contestants to conducting medical research and diagnosis, and researchers earlier this month detailed a new computer program that can beat anyone at poker. A need to worry? Of course not, but Gates and others are trying to imagine the worst.

Musk in October called AI development "summoning the demon," and has invested in the space to keep his eye on it. Hawking, writing for The Independent in May 2014, also expressed his concerns. "Whereas the short-term impact of AI depends on who controls it, the long-term impact depends on whether it can be controlled at all," Hawking wrote.

Read this article:

Bill Gates is worried about artificial intelligence too

Comment on Bill Gates Also Worries Artificial Intelligence Is A Threat by worldpress

Posted on by

Eric Mack Forbes 1/28/2015

Aside from founding Microsoft, Bill Gates is known as an all-around smart guy who has put his money where his mouth is when it comes to saving the world. It would seem that this makes his opinions worth considering when he tells us that he, like fellow brainiac Stephen Hawking and Tesla Motors founder / Iron Man inspiration Elon Musk, fears that artificial intelligence could pose a threat to humanity.

In a Reddit Ask Me Anything (AMA) session on Wednesday, Gates echoed the concerns expressed over the past year by Hawking, Musk and others that something vaguely resembling the science fiction scenarios from the Terminator and Matrix franchises could come to pass if the potential of artificial superintelligence is not taken seriously.

I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well, Gates wrote. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern. I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and dont understand why some people are not concerned.

Earlier this month, Elon Musk put down $10 million of his own money to fund an effort to keep artificial intelligence friendly. Gates and Musk both have an interest in ensuring that artificial intelligence not only stays friendly, but stays viable (e.g. public sentiment and lawmakers dont turn against the basic notion of smart networks and devices), given that its likely to play a role in the future of not only Microsoft, but also Musks SpaceX and Tesla.

Personal interests aside, Musk and Gates could just be right about the threat posed by artificial superintelligence. When the guys most likely to benefit from a new technology see a need for it to be put on a leash, theres probably something worth worrying about.

To really understand the potential threat Musk and Gates are talking about, I highly recommend reading Nick Bostroms recent book, Superintelligence, which lays out the entire artificial superintelligence landscape including threats posed. Musk has referred to and recommended it in the past and it seems to be the primary foundation for much of the recent concern over A.I.

Continue reading here:

Comment on Bill Gates Also Worries Artificial Intelligence Is A Threat by worldpress

Artificial intelligence not a threat: Microsoft's Eric Horvitz contradicts Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates

Posted on by

By Tim BiggsJan. 29, 2015, 1:56 p.m.

Machines will eventually achieve a human-like consciousness but do not pose a threat to the survival of mankind, Microsoft head of research Eric Horvitz says.

Nothing to worry about: The RoboThespian interactive humanoid robot, developed by Engineered Arts. Photo: Kiyoshi Ota

Science fiction: Alex Garland's Ex Machina is one of thousands of films to explore the idea of hostile AI.

Machines will eventually achieve a human-like consciousness but do not pose a threat to the survival of mankind, Microsoft head of research Eric Horvitz says, in comments that place him at odds with technologist Elon Musk and theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking.

"There have been concerns about the long-term prospect that we lose control of certain kinds of intelligences," Horvitz said in an interviewafter being awarded the prestigious AAAI Feigenbaum Prize for his contribution to artificial intelligence (AI) research, "[but]I fundamentally don't think that's going to happen".

"I think that we will be very proactive in terms of how we field AI systems, and that in the end we'll be able to get incredible benefits from machine intelligence in all realms of life, from science to education to economics to daily life."

In a later blog, Horvitz admitted the procession of AI towards super-intelligence would present challenges in the realms of privacy, law and ethics, but pointed to an essay he had co-authored which concludes that "AI doomsday scenarios belong more in the realm of science fiction than science fact".

Meanwhile technologist Elon Musk, co-founder of PayPal and founder of SpaceX and Tesla Motors, has repeatedly expressed concerns about the development of AI, first likening it to the production of nuclear weapons and then claiming mankind was "summoning the demon" by pursuing the technology carelessly.

Famed physicist Stephen Hawking recently said AI "could spell the end of the human race".He added that the technology would eventually become self-aware and "supersede" humanity as it developed faster than biological evolution.

Read more:

Artificial intelligence not a threat: Microsoft's Eric Horvitz contradicts Elon Musk, Stephen Hawking, Bill Gates

Aerospace & Defense Mfg Summit 2014-Speaker Interview, Julie Goswick, Raytheon Missile Systems – Video

Posted on by


Aerospace Defense Mfg Summit 2014-Speaker Interview, Julie Goswick, Raytheon Missile Systems
The 2014 Aerospace Defense Summit delivered world class briefings from some of the leading minds in the aerospace defense industry including: Lockheed Ma...

By: me Summits Global #meSummitsGlobal #meSummits

Read the rest here:

Aerospace & Defense Mfg Summit 2014-Speaker Interview, Julie Goswick, Raytheon Missile Systems - Video

Home – Coventry & Warwickshire Aerospace Forum

Posted on by

The Coventry and Warwickshire Aerospace Forum is a group of world-class manufacturing businesses working individually or collaboratively to ensure Aerospace customers need only one point of contact; whether it is a single enquiry for a make to print precision machined component or a more complex engineered solution the group maintains a focus on the key drivers of quality, cost, delivery and responsiveness.

The CWAF does a tremendous job promoting the world class aerospace capability in CW LEP area and driving forward projects and collaborations that are helping build the skills, capabilities and quality required to compete globally.

The CWAF has played a key role, as part of the High Value Manufacturing Group, in helping shape CW LEP strategy and priorities so that the LEP can deliver relevant and practical actions to support this sector to grow and flourish in our region. The CW LEP is delighted to have the CWAF engaged and we look forward to working together on exciting future projects

Louise Rowland -CW LEP

Continued here:

Home - Coventry & Warwickshire Aerospace Forum

Ball Aerospace Integrates Two of Five Instruments for JPSS-1

Posted on by

Two of the five instruments scheduled to fly on the nation's next polar-orbiting weather satellite, NOAA's Joint Polar Satellite System -1, have been integrated to the spacecraft bus by prime contractor Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp.

The Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite-Nadir (OMPS-N) along with the Clouds and Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES) instruments are now aboard the spacecraft. Next up is the Visible Infrared Imaging Radiometer Suite (VIIRS) set to arrive in February. The satellite is on schedule for delivery to NOAA and launch in 2017. JPSS-1 is critical for continuity of long-standing atmospheric, ocean and land measurements currently provided by the Suomi National Polar-orbiting Partnership (Suomi NPP) mission. The Suomi NPP satellite launched in 2011 and was also built by Ball Aerospace.

"Integration of JPSS-1 continues to proceed on schedule," saidCary Ludtke, vice president and general manager of Ball's Operational Space business unit. "NOAA and NASA are reaping enormous benefit from the Suomi NPP satellite, and maintaining that continuity makes the timely completion and launch of JPSS-1 very important to our nation."

The Ozone Mapping and Profiler Suite-Nadir (OMPS-N) was built by Ball Aerospace. OMPS-N data is used at NOAA for numerical weather prediction modeling and a variety of environmental observations, like volcanic ash monitoring to aid in aircraft safety warnings. CERES, built by Northrop Grumman's Aerospace Systems division for NASA's Langley Research Center inHampton, Virginia, measures the reflected sunlight and thermal radiation emitted by the Earth, two components of the Earth's Radiation Budget (ERB). Ball also anticipates arrival of the Cross-track Infrared Sounder (CrlS) in the first quarter of 2015 with the Advanced Technology Microwave Sounder (ATMS) to follow.

NOAA is responsible for the funding and requirements for JPSS and teams with NASA, which procures the flight and portions of the ground segment. NOAA is also responsible for operations of the satellites and instruments after launch. Under contract to NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, Ball Aerospace is responsible for designing and building the JPSS-1 satellite bus, the OMPS instrument, integrating all instruments, and performing satellite-level testing and launch support.

Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. supports critical missions for national agencies such as the Department of Defense, NASA, NOAA and other U.S. government and commercial entities. The company develops and manufactures spacecraft, advanced instruments and sensors, components, data exploitation systems and RF solutions for strategic, tactical and scientific applications. For more information, visithttp://www.ballaerospace.com/.

Ball Corporation (NYSE: BLL) supplies innovative, sustainable packaging solutions for beverage, food and household products customers, as well as aerospace and other technologies and services primarily for the U.S. government. Ball Corporation and its subsidiaries employ 14,500 people worldwide and reported 2013 sales of$8.5 billion. For more information, visitwww.ball.com, or connect with us on Facebook or Twitter.

X

Continued here:

Ball Aerospace Integrates Two of Five Instruments for JPSS-1

Nanobiotix Shares Transferred from Compartment C to Compartment B of the Regulated Market of Euronext in Paris

Posted on by

Regulatory News:

NANOBIOTIX (Euronext: NANO ISIN: FR0011341205), a clinical-stage nanomedicine company pioneering novel approaches for the local treatment of cancer, today announces the transfer of its shares from compartment C to compartment B of the regulated market of Euronext in Paris with effect as from January 28, 2015, thanks to its stock market capitalization increase performances during 2014.

Compartment B groups together listed companies with a stock market capitalization of between 150 million and 1 billion euros. For the record, the average market capitalization of Nanobiotix over the last 60 trading days in 2014 was 249 million euros.

This transfer has no impact on the inclusion of Nanobiotix shares to NYSE Euronext indexes.

Laurent Levy, CEO of Nanobiotix comments: Following our admission to the SRD label in December, we are proud to announce the transfer of our shares from compartment C to compartment B of the regulated market of Euronext in Paris. This transfer rewards the dynamism and stock market performance of Nanobiotix during 2014. This operation and the strong increase of Nanobiotix shares liquidity with more than 1 billion 300 million euros traded this year, should improve the visibility of Nanobiotix to the international financial and industrial communities.

Compartment transfers were officially announced to market members by means of a notice to the market from Euronext on January 26, with an effective date of January 28, 2015.

Next financial press release: revenue for the 4thquarter of 2014 by February 27, 2015

About NANOBIOTIX: http://www.nanobiotix.com/fr

Nanobiotix (Euronext: NANO / ISIN: FR0011341205) is a clinical-stage nanomedicine company pioneering novel approaches for the local treatment of cancer. The companys first-in-class, proprietary technology, NanoXray, enhances radiotherapy energy with a view to provide a new, more efficient treatment for cancer patients. NanoXray products are compatible with current radiotherapy treatments and are meant to treat a wide variety of cancers including Soft Tissue Sarcoma, Breast Cancer, Liver Cancer, Head and Neck Cancer, Glioblastoma, Prostate Cancer, etc., via multiple routes of administration.

Link:
Nanobiotix Shares Transferred from Compartment C to Compartment B of the Regulated Market of Euronext in Paris

Achenbach: Welcome to Science Tuesday Mid-Afternoon: Should we be worried about synthetic organisms cooked up in …

Posted on by

[Cross-posted from our new Energy and Environment blog.]

One of the strange things about being human beings is that we are highly conscious of our surroundings, yet are oblivious to the molecular machinations within our own bodies. Sure, we monitor ourselves were hungry, were tired, were squirrelly, weve got the sewing-machine leg, we shoulda tried the decaf. Those of us who focus on our breathing can find our psychic zone of serenity, where we can feel superior to other people who breathe less immaculately and more clumsily. But whatever: Were not aware of whats happening at the cellular level, down there where the ribosomes are taking information from DNA and manufacturing proteins that somehow serve specific functions simply through their three-dimensional structure.

We certainly dont pause to consider that, thanks to the trillions of bacteria we host, most of the genetic information in our bodies is not actually human. Were a composite organism. Life is basically the weirdest and most astonishing thing ever.

And now, increasingly, human beings are at the controls through genetic engineering and other advanced laboratory technologies. This is the age of synthetic life.

GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are a source of enduring controversy, and its not simply a matter of science. There are economic and political issues here, with huge corporations like Monsanto looming over a discussion that touches on ownership of novel species and the question of who, exactly, will benefit from these technologies.

But lets cut to a basic question: Are GMOs safe?

Nothing controversial there! Seriously, you can answer this question round or square depending on which experts and activists you contact. Generally, though, scientists hold that food containing GMOs are just as safe to consume as food that comes from crops modified through traditional breeding techniques. Just because it comes out of a lab doesnt make it dangerous. The American Association for the Advancement of Science opposed the 2012 Proposition 37 California referendum that would have required GMO labeling. The AAAS board of directors said this would unnecessarily alarm consumers.

But what about the environment? Do GMOs pose an ecological risk?

The answer to that is controversial, said David Guston, a professor of politics and global studies and co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University. He noted a much-publicized case where superweeds had developed a resistance to the herbicide Roundup as a result of heavy Roundup use on genetically modified, Roundup-resistant crops.

Any particular change is part of a larger system. You can say that the Roundup-resistant weeds, the superweeds, arent a direct effect of the genetic modification of the BT-resistant corn, but theyre a consequences of the agricultural practices that surround the Roundup-ready crop, Guston said. Some of this is foreseeable, and some of this is not foreseeable.

Read more here:
Achenbach: Welcome to Science Tuesday Mid-Afternoon: Should we be worried about synthetic organisms cooked up in ...

Welcome to Science Tuesday Mid-Afternoon: Should we be worried about synthetic organisms cooked up in laboratories?

Posted on by

[Cross-posted from our new Energy and Environment blog.]

One of the strange things about being human beings is that we are highly conscious of our surroundings, yet are oblivious to the molecular machinations within our own bodies. Sure, we monitor ourselves were hungry, were tired, were squirrelly, weve got the sewing-machine leg, we shoulda tried the decaf. Those of us who focus on our breathing can find our psychic zone of serenity, where we can feel superior to other people who breathe less immaculately and more clumsily. But whatever: Were not aware of whats happening at the cellular level, down there where the ribosomes are taking information from DNA and manufacturing proteins that somehow serve specific functions simply through their three-dimensional structure.

We certainly dont pause to consider that, thanks to the trillions of bacteria we host, most of the genetic information in our bodies is not actually human. Were a composite organism. Life is basically the weirdest and most astonishing thing ever.

And now, increasingly, human beings are at the controls through genetic engineering and other advanced laboratory technologies. This is the age of synthetic life.

GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are a source of enduring controversy, and its not simply a matter of science. There are economic and political issues here, with huge corporations like Monsanto looming over a discussion that touches on ownership of novel species and the question of who, exactly, will benefit from these technologies.

But lets cut to a basic question: Are GMOs safe?

Nothing controversial there! Seriously, you can answer this question round or square depending on which experts and activists you contact. Generally, though, scientists hold that food containing GMOs are just as safe to consume as food that comes from crops modified through traditional breeding techniques. Just because it comes out of a lab doesnt make it dangerous. The American Association for the Advancement of Science opposed the 2012 Proposition 37 California referendum that would have required GMO labeling. The AAAS board of directors said this would unnecessarily alarm consumers.

But what about the environment? Do GMOs pose an ecological risk?

The answer to that is controversial, said David Guston, a professor of politics and global studies and co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University. He noted a much-publicized case where superweeds had developed a resistance to the herbicide Roundup as a result of heavy Roundup use on genetically modified, Roundup-resistant crops.

Any particular change is part of a larger system. You can say that the Roundup-resistant weeds, the superweeds, arent a direct effect of the genetic modification of the BT-resistant corn, but theyre a consequences of the agricultural practices that surround the Roundup-ready crop, Guston said. Some of this is foreseeable, and some of this is not foreseeable.

Read more:
Welcome to Science Tuesday Mid-Afternoon: Should we be worried about synthetic organisms cooked up in laboratories?

Scientists are actually creating microscopic life in laboratories. Should you worry?

Posted on by

One of the strange things about being human beings is that we are highly conscious of our surroundings, yet are oblivious to the molecular machinations within our own bodies. Sure, we monitor ourselves were hungry, were tired, were squirrelly, weve got the sewing-machine leg, we shoulda tried the decaf. Those of us who focus on our breathing can find our psychic zone of serenity, where we can feel superior to other people who breathe less immaculately and more clumsily. But whatever: Were not aware of whats happening at the cellular level, down there where the ribosomes are taking information from DNA and manufacturing proteins that somehow serve specific functions simply through their three-dimensional structure.

We certainly dont pause to consider that, thanks to the trillions of bacteria we host, most of the genetic information in our bodies is not actually human. Were a composite organism. Life is basically the weirdest and most astonishing thing ever.

And now, increasingly, human beings are at the controls through genetic engineering and other advanced laboratory technologies. This is the age of synthetic life.

GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are a source of enduring controversy, and its not simply a matter of science. There are economic and political issues here, with huge corporations like Monsanto looming over a discussion that touches on ownership of novel species and the question of who, exactly, will benefit from these technologies.

But lets cut to a basic question: Are GMOs safe?

Nothing controversial there! Seriously, you can answer this question round or square depending on which experts and activists you contact. Generally, though, scientists hold that food containing GMOs are just as safe to consume as food that comes from crops modified through traditional breeding techniques. Just because it comes out of a lab doesnt make it dangerous. The American Association for the Advancement of Science opposed the 2012 Proposition 37 California referendum that would have required GMO labeling. The AAAS board of directors said this would unnecessarily alarm consumers.

But what about the environment? Do GMOs pose an ecological risk?

The answer to that is controversial, said David Guston, a professor of politics and global studies and co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University. He noted a much-publicized case where superweeds had developed a resistance to the herbicide Roundup as a result of heavy Roundup use on genetically modified, Roundup-resistant crops.

Any particular change is part of a larger system. You can say that the Roundup-resistant weeds, the superweeds, arent a direct effect of the genetic modification of the BT-resistant corn, but theyre a consequences of the agricultural practices that surround the Roundup-ready crop, Guston said. Some of this is foreseeable, and some of this is not foreseeable.

In their 2012 statement, the AAAS board of directors offered a much stronger endorsement of GMO crops:

Read the original:
Scientists are actually creating microscopic life in laboratories. Should you worry?

Large-scale analytics system for predicting major societal events described in Big Data Journal

Posted on by

IMAGE:Big Data, published quarterly in print and online, facilitates and supports the efforts of researchers, analysts, statisticians, business leaders, and policymakers to improve operations, profitability, and communications within... view more

Credit: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers

New Rochelle, January 28, 2015 - EMBERS is a large-scale big data analytics system designed to use publically available data to predict population-level societal events such as civil unrest or disease outbreaks. The usefulness of this predictive artificial intelligence system over the past 2 years is reviewed in an article in Big Data, the highly innovative, peer-reviewed journal from Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers. The article is available free on the Big Data website.

In the article "Forecasting Significant Societal Events Using the EMBERS Streaming Predictive Analytics System," Andy Doyle and coauthors, CACI, Inc. (Lanham, MD), Virginia Tech (Arlington, VA), and BASIS Technology (Herndon, VA), describe the structure and function of the Early Model Based Event Recognition using Surrogates (EMBERS) system. They describe EMBERS as a working example of a big data streaming architecture that processes large volumes of social media data and uses a variety of modeling approaches to make predictions.

"EMBERS represents a significant advance in our ability to make sense of large amounts of unstructured data in an automated manner," says Big Data Editor-in-Chief Vasant Dhar, Co-Director, Center for Business Analytics, Stern School of Business, New York University. "The authors present an architecture that provides a scalable method for dealing with large streams of social media data emanating from Twitter. Although the focus of the paper is on predicting social unrest globally, the methods should be usable for processing these type of data for a variety of applications."

###

About the Journal

Big Data, published quarterly in print and online, facilitates and supports the efforts of researchers, analysts, statisticians, business leaders, and policymakers to improve operations, profitability, and communications within their organizations. Spanning a broad array of disciplines focusing on novel big data technologies, policies, and innovations, the Journal brings together the community to address the challenges and discover new breakthroughs and trends living within this information. Complete tables of content and a sample issue may be viewed on the Big Data website.

About the Publisher

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers is a privately held, fully integrated media company known for establishing authoritative medical and biomedical peer-reviewed journals, including OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, Journal of Computational Biology, New Space, and 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing. Its biotechnology trade magazine, Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News (GEN), was the first in its field and is today the industry's most widely read publication worldwide. A complete list of the firm's more than 80 journals, newsmagazines, and books is available on the Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers website.

Read the original post:
Large-scale analytics system for predicting major societal events described in Big Data Journal