FPS Resources https://fpsbailey.edublogs.org Floyd
DISTICT PROMPT: Robotic Age
Science fiction stories often depict a futuristic world run by computer programs and machines. How realistic is it that we will one day reger to robots as our colleages, our neighbors, or our friends? Already robotoc innovations have transformed the way cars are build and how a wide array of products are made. Will such innovations in the future produce a net increase or a net decrease in jobs? What will happen to workers who are laid off as jobs are downsized in favor of machines that do not require a pension or vacation days? To what extent can robots truly be endowed with artificial intelligence? Are there ethical limits to the types of decisions that should be left to intelligent pieces of technology?
Robot Article 1:
|
Web address: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/ 100809094527.htm |
Robots Created That Develop Emotions in Interaction With Humans
ScienceDaily (Aug. 9, 2010) — The first prototype robots capable of developing emotions as they interact with their human caregivers and expressing a whole range of emotions have been finalised by researchers.
Led by Dr. Lola Cañamero at the University of Hertfordshire, and in collaboration with a consortium of universities and robotic companies across Europe, these robots differ from others in the way that they form attachments, interact and express emotion through bodily expression.
Developed as part of the interdisciplinary project FEELIX GROWING (Feel, Interact, eXpress: a Global approach to development with Interdisciplinary Grounding), funded by the European Commission and coordinated by Dr. Cañamero, the robots have been developed so that they learn to interact with and respond to humans in a similar way as children learn to do it, and use the same types of expressive and behavioural cues that babies use to learn to interact socially and emotionally with others.
The robots have been created through modelling the early attachment process that human and chimpanzee infants undergo with their caregivers when they develop a preference for a primary caregiver.
They are programmed to learn to adapt to the actions and mood of their human caregivers, and to become particularly attached to an individual who interacts with the robot in a way that is particularly suited to its personality profile and learning needs. The more they interact, and are given the appropriate feedback and level of engagement from the human caregiver, the stronger the bond developed and the amount learned.
The robots are capable of expressing anger, fear, sadness, happiness, excitement and pride and will demonstrate very visible distress if the caregiver fails to provide them comfort when confronted by a stressful situation that they cannot cope with or to interact with them when they need it.
"This behaviour is modelled on what a young child does," said Dr Cañamero. "This is also very similar to the way chimpanzees and other non-human primates develop affective bonds with their caregivers."
This is the first time that early attachment models of human and non-human primates have been used to program robots that develop emotions in interaction with humans.
"We are working on non-verbal cues and the emotions are revealed through physical postures, gestures and movements of the body rather than facial or verbal expression," Dr Cañamero added.
The researchers led by Dr. Cañamero at the University of Hertfordshire are now extending the prototype further and adapting it as part of the EU project ALIZ-E, which will develop robots that learn to be carer/companion for diabetic children in hospital settings.
Within this project, coordinated by Dr Tony Belpaeme of the University of Plymouth, the Hertfordshire group will lead research related to the emotions and non-linguistic behaviour of the robots. The future robot companions will combine non-linguistic and linguistic communication to interact with the children and become increasingly adapted to their individual profiles in order to support both, therapeutic aspects of their treatment and their social and emotional wellbeing.
The FEELIX GROWING project has been funded by the Sixth Framework Programme of the European Commission. The other partners in the project are: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France), Université de Cergy Pontoise (France), Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (Switzerland), University of Portsmouth (U.K.), Institute of Communication and Computer Systems (Greece), Entertainment Robotics (Denmark), and Aldebaran Robotics (France).
Robot Article 2:
|
Web address: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/ 100809094527.htm |
Robots Created That Develop Emotions in Interaction With Humans
ScienceDaily (Aug. 9, 2010) — The first prototype robots capable of developing emotions as they interact with their human caregivers and expressing a whole range of emotions have been finalised by researchers.
Led by Dr. Lola Cañamero at the University of Hertfordshire, and in collaboration with a consortium of universities and robotic companies across Europe, these robots differ from others in the way that they form attachments, interact and express emotion through bodily expression.
Developed as part of the interdisciplinary project FEELIX GROWING (Feel, Interact, eXpress: a Global approach to development with Interdisciplinary Grounding), funded by the European Commission and coordinated by Dr. Cañamero, the robots have been developed so that they learn to interact with and respond to humans in a similar way as children learn to do it, and use the same types of expressive and behavioural cues that babies use to learn to interact socially and emotionally with others.
The robots have been created through modelling the early attachment process that human and chimpanzee infants undergo with their caregivers when they develop a preference for a primary caregiver.
They are programmed to learn to adapt to the actions and mood of their human caregivers, and to become particularly attached to an individual who interacts with the robot in a way that is particularly suited to its personality profile and learning needs. The more they interact, and are given the appropriate feedback and level of engagement from the human caregiver, the stronger the bond developed and the amount learned.
The robots are capable of expressing anger, fear, sadness, happiness, excitement and pride and will demonstrate very visible distress if the caregiver fails to provide them comfort when confronted by a stressful situation that they cannot cope with or to interact with them when they need it.
"This behaviour is modelled on what a young child does," said Dr Cañamero. "This is also very similar to the way chimpanzees and other non-human primates develop affective bonds with their caregivers."
This is the first time that early attachment models of human and non-human primates have been used to program robots that develop emotions in interaction with humans.
"We are working on non-verbal cues and the emotions are revealed through physical postures, gestures and movements of the body rather than facial or verbal expression," Dr Cañamero added.
The researchers led by Dr. Cañamero at the University of Hertfordshire are now extending the prototype further and adapting it as part of the EU project ALIZ-E, which will develop robots that learn to be carer/companion for diabetic children in hospital settings.
Within this project, coordinated by Dr Tony Belpaeme of the University of Plymouth, the Hertfordshire group will lead research related to the emotions and non-linguistic behaviour of the robots. The future robot companions will combine non-linguistic and linguistic communication to interact with the children and become increasingly adapted to their individual profiles in order to support both, therapeutic aspects of their treatment and their social and emotional wellbeing.
The FEELIX GROWING project has been funded by the Sixth Framework Programme of the European Commission. The other partners in the project are: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France), Université de Cergy Pontoise (France), Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (Switzerland), University of Portsmouth (U.K.), Institute of Communication and Computer Systems (Greece), Entertainment Robotics (Denmark), and Aldebaran Robotics (France).
Robot Article 2: The ethics of unmanned vehicle warfare
Published: Dec. 8, 2011 at 6:34 AM
ALEXANDRA SCHWAPPACH and AUSTIN SMITH, MEDILL NEWS SERVICE || Written for UPI
The premise for the criticism is that the robotic technology, formally called unmanned aerial vehicles, is a new type of weapon that has killed thousands of people in recent years, so it needs an entirely new ethical framework.
But others see it as a new style of weapon, not a new style of warfare.
"I think these questions would be more relevant if there had not been a human in the loop," said Guy Ben-Ari, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic International Studies, a Washington think tank. "Until we have the debate about whether or not to make these systems autonomous, I think that the ethics issue doesn't really come into play."
The way Ben-Ari sees it, as long as a human -- regardless of where that human is located -- is making the decisions behind a weapon's actions, the ethics should be viewed through the same lens that's used for other weapons.
"Just by virtue of keeping a human in the loop," he said. "You are self-insuring -- the military is self-insuring -- against any sort of misuse of these systems."
From 2004-07, the United States launched a total of nine drone strikes, followed by 33 in 2008, 53 in 2009, and 118 in 2010, and 70 in the first 10 1/2 months of 2011, a study by the New America Foundation, a non-partisan Washington think tank, stated.
This rapid increase can be attributed to a variety of factors, including technological advances and non-traditional wartime enemies.
UAVs, like the one that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an American-born Muslim cleric who called for attacked against U.S. interests, in a September drone strike in Yemen, are controlled remotely -- often from thousands of miles away -- and can launch strikes on specific targets. Despite their precision, they have been criticized for their potential to cause collateral casualties.
In 2010, 748 militants were killed by drone attacks and 46 non-militants were killed collaterally, the New America Foundation's recent report "The Year of the Drone" concluded.
Dan Goure, vice president of the Lexington Institute, a conservative think tank in Virginia, argues that drones are more precise and careful than other alternatives.
"We can talk about SEAL team or a CIA paid assassin," he said, "but honestly, in terms of aerial munitions [drones are] just about the most discriminate capability we have."
Goure pointed to drones' ability to loiter and wait for the absolute best time to launch an attack, as well as the precision of the weapons drones carry. This "makes them much more discriminate and therefore moral, ethical, effective than what we had before," he said.
Asked to expand on drone policy, U.S. Army Lt. Col. Todd Breasseale, Pentagon spokesman, pointed reporters to a speech by the U.S. State Department legal adviser as the representation of the U.S. government's position.
In a speech, delivered March 24, 2010, at the annual meeting of the American Society of International Law, Harold Hongju Koh said the United States, when engaged in war, isn't required to provide its targets with legal process before the use of lethal force.
"In U.S. operations against al-Qaida and its associated forces, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles," Koh said, "great care is taken to adhere to these principles in both planning and execution to ensure that only legitimate objectives are targeted and that collateral damage is kept to a minimum."
But because there's no question that drones are unprecedented weapons. And other experts -- such as Peter Singer of the non-partisan Brookings Institution in Washington -- say they warrant a new set of ethics.
"New technologies are game changers," Singer said. "And we should be asking tough questions about them. These are all sorts of questions that we haven't had to ask before."
While drone technology has advanced quickly, Singer said the ethics have moved at a "glacial pace."
"We can't develop a technology, put it out in the real world and decide after the fact that there needs to be laws and ethics attached to it," he said.
Drones are operated by pilots sitting in front of computer screens, which look similar to a video game, in locations such as New Mexico and Nevada. As distant as these controls are from the death and destruction they cause, the psychological impacts on the operator appear to be similar to those that combat pilots over the skies of Afghanistan experience.
Any discussion of drone ethics would be remiss to ignore this. To think that drone strikes are so remote that they don't affect an operator's psyche isn't wise, Singer said. Drone operators, despite carrying out a strike and then going home to their families all in the same day, still suffer from trauma, including post-traumatic stress disorder.
"It's only the last few years that people have been even willing to talk about PTSD and it's still not something understood," Singer said. "So to think we have a handle on this new kind of experience of fighting from afar and its stresses after just a few years would be really arrogant of us."
Whether drone strikes will play a major role in the future of the U.S. military isn't in question -- they will.
If Singer had his way, the government would be designing official ethical guidelines for the use of drones but little formal action has been taken in this direction.
© 2011 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Read more: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2011/12/08/The-ethics-of-unmanned-vehicle-warfare/UPI-26071323344040/print#ixzz2CpFjYgUu
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com.
Robot Article 3: Analysis: U.S. factory jobs rebound seen destined to fizzle
By Jason Lange
(Reuters) - U.S. manufacturers are hiring at the fastest pace in more than a decade to keep up with new orders but sweeping technological advances could cost thousands of factory workers their jobs in years to come.
At a new factory in upstate New York, which is due to churn out its first computer chips this year, technicians are calibrating robots to ferry material from machine to machine using miles of overhead track.
"This factory is designed to be fully automated, meaning theoretically it requires no human intervention at all," said Eric Choh, general manager at the facility run by semiconductor maker GlobalFoundries.
The company is hiring engineers and programmers who are still needed to mind the machines. But "compared to 20 years ago, today we don't need a lot of labor," said Choh.
Last year, factories added 237,000 jobs - the most since 1997 - and that burst in hiring is seen stretching into this year as the economy recovers from the 2007-09 recession.
But a renaissance for industrial employment is unlikely. Over the long term, factory job creation looks destined to stagnate as technology advances, and manufacturers' role in the labor market will likely continue a decades-long decline.
A Labor Department report published on February 1 projected factory employment will drop to 11.5 million workers by 2020 - down from 11.9 million in January - despite expectations production will increase in coming years.
The projected decline in employment suggests it will be hard for President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidates like Rick Santorum to protect factory jobs as ardently as they have promised on the campaign trail.
Factories have a special place in American hearts because they have been the gateway to the middle class for millions of workers.
Even though the United States remains a pre-eminent manufacturing power, accounting for about a fifth of global factory output, only 9 percent of its workforce is engaged in factory activity, and that percentage is falling.
Manufacturers' share of the labor market will likely drop to 7 percent by the end of the decade, according to the government projections, down from nearly a third in the 1950s when unskilled workers played a bigger role.
"You just don't need as many people as in the days when you were essentially running a Ford assembly line," said James Franklin, a Labor Department economist who helped draw up the long-term employment projections.
<^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Graphic on U.S. manufacturing: link.reuters.com/cur76s
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>
TEMPORARY REBOUND
The outlook is more positive in the near-term. At GlobalFoundries' sprawling new plant in Saratoga County, for example, Choh plans to hire about 500 more people by year's end.
And across the country, factory payrolls will likely swell by 173,000 this year, says the Manufacturers Alliance for Productivity and Innovation, an industry research group.
Last month, Daimler Trucks announced it would hire 1,200 new workers at a North Carolina plant that makes long-haul trucks that sell well in Australia and South Africa.
But analysts say much of the recent hiring spurt is just a temporary rebound from the recession, when manufacturing output fell about 20 percent and factories laid off 2 million people.
"They probably got rid of more capacity and more employees than was necessary in retrospect," said MAPI economist Cliff Waldman, who expects factory hiring to slow sharply next year.
Still, there are factors supporting the sector.
The U.S. dollar has lost about a third of its value since 2001, helping exporters, and U.S. producers have become more competitive.
After a decade of heightened competition with China, which devastated American industries like clothing makers, the U.S. factories that remain are more high-tech and less likely to be undercut on labor costs.
Moreover, wages in China are rising much faster than in the United States, reducing the incentive to offshore production, while the recession itself raised pressure on U.S. companies to embrace more cost-saving measures, like automation.
S & S Hinge Company, for example, has retooled its plant in Bloomingdale, Illinois, since the recession. A pair of computers runs its newest production line, which makes hinges 50 percent faster than older lines. That is helping the firm meet rising orders for parts that go into pickup truck toolboxes while reducing the need for more staff.
"We've upgraded our factory. We actually put in a new operating system. So it has cut the need for more bodies," said Richard Sade, the company's chief operating officer.
FROM FACTORIES TO SERVICES
As grim as that sounds for many workers, a future with fewer factory jobs isn't necessarily bad for the economy.
Part of the drive to be more efficient has led factories to outsource more work, contracting services from accounting firms, consultancies and other companies.
Even though the number of workers in U.S. factories today is roughly the same as 70 years ago, jobs in business services, a sector that includes many people working indirectly for manufacturers, have grown eight-fold. The Labor Department expects business services will be one of the top job-creating industries in coming years.
That makes plans by Obama to give manufacturers special treatment - or to penalize them for offshoring jobs - wrongheaded, says Jagdish Bhagwati, an economist at Columbia University.
Obama last week proposed new tax breaks for manufacturers, but many economists view the decline in factory employment as a normal part of the economy's development.
"New jobs in services constantly emerge from manufacturing," Bhagwati said.
(Reporting by Jason Lange from Washington; Editing by Diane Craft)
© Thomson Reuters 2011. All rights reserved. Users may download and print extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the world.
Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com.
Robot Article: ‘Living’ microbot to detect diseases in future