sasamsz

Inquiry Blog 2:

How Artificial Intelligence Will Revolutionize Our Lives

Summary:

Simon Worrall starts by pointing out how artificial intelligence could help cure cancer but also cause people in many fields to lose their jobs. Then he goes into how AI learning is a part of our daily lives with examples of Amazon products and the National Security Agency. He brings in Pedro Domingos, a professor of computer science at the University of Washington, to explain how AI could replace doctors, match Einstein’s theory of relativity, and how replacing soldiers with robots could make warfare more humane. Then Worrall goes on to explain AI learning in simple language by comparing traditional programming, explaining to the computer in painstaking detail what you want it to do, to AI learning, programming the computer to learn by itself. Worrall gives examples by explaining how most of the internet like Amazon, Netflix, Facebook, and Twitter use AI learning to recommend products, movies, social media posts, and much more. Worrall then goes into how AI learning affects the medical field by explaining how machines can attend to vastly more information and more complex processes than human beings allowing them to discover drugs or vaccines by simulating the process on a computer, rather than a scientist have to test in labs. This is then shown in AIDS and cancer where there are many factors for a human to master, but for a self-learning machine, it is possible to predict the correct drug combinations to use for each specific patient.

Evaluation:

By starting with, “On one hand, it may help cure cancer and let robots rather than humans fight wars; on the other, doctors and lawyers may be out of a job.”, Worrall gets the reader thinking about how AI could have some major pros and cons. He also has an interesting picture representing machine learning that grabbed my attention. Worrall gets interesting information from Pedro Domingos, who is a professor of computer science at the University of Washington, to provide very interesting quotes throughout the article for example, “MACHINES CAN ATTEND TO VASTLY MORE INFORMATION AND MORE COMPLEX PROCESSES THAN HUMAN BEINGS.” These quotes provide a deeper look into the possibilities of what AI is capable of.

Refection:

Worrall shows many pros that could come with the AI currently being developed by scientists. Worrall explains how AI can better vaccinate viruses like AIDS because of its ability to process simulations faster and more efficient than humans. Similar with cancer the AI can take into account the patient’s medical history to predict which combination of drugs would work best for patients specific cancer. “The best soldier fights without vengeance, without anger and without hate. Might robots one day replace human soldiers on the battlefield?” This is a unique point, pointed out by Worrall, she explains that if we ban humans in combat rather than robots, warfare could hopefully become a competition to see who can build and destroy the most, rather than killing people.  

Reference:

This Is Exactly What Happens To Your Body When You Eat A Ton Of Sugar. By: Amy Marturana.

What happens to your brain after you spend a good half hour chowing down on a majority of your halloween candy. Sweets seem to be addicting and sometimes you just can’t stop. Why is that? Amy Marturana, senior editor for self. delves deep into what  happens in the brain and the body when you eat a ton of sugar. Thirteen facts about sugar and the body are listed. I don’t recommend eating the candy you have saved for tricker treaters while reading this article. Marturana breaks down the chemical effects of sugar with ease so that we can understand what is happening when we eat the laffy taffy and twix.

Just to name a few of the facts, sugar releases a neurotransmitter called dopamine, it’s like a feel-good chemical. Cocaine, when ingested, releases the same neurotransmitter. This dopamine tells your body, I WANT MORE OF WHATEVER THAT WAS! Another one of Marturana’s facts about sugar was that when sugar excess sugar gets into your blood it makes it like sludge. Imagine sludgy liquid trying to move through a small straw. Whatever is pumping that sludge through that straw would have to work extra. Those straws are like your blood vessels and the pump, well that is like your heart.

Something that is at the heart of the Marturana’s article is fact. She cites studies and doctors. A lot of the facts are backed up by a citation to either a doctor or a study. This makes for a convincing argument.

An argument that Martuana makes in her article was that once you eat a lot of sugar your body releases insulin to counteract the mass amount of sugar. When the insulin goes down it gives a real sludgy and tired feeling.

Reference List: 

A Review of the Daily Show

On May 5th, 2016, The Daily Show, ran by Comedy Central, posted a video interviewing some of the USWNT members asking them more questions about why they feel they deserve to be paid more. The satirical talk and news program had their uncanny reporter, Hasan Minhaj, question three members from the USWNT in an ironic sort of way. Initially, he is posing questions with a comedic ignorance, which if not watched carefully, the viewer could miss the humor within it. Minhaj begins his segment with a voice over saying, “I sat down with three members from the U.S. Soccer team to find out why they are being so greedy.” I have to admit, that put me off to begin the show, but as it continues, the plot unfolds and it is revealed that by using ignorance, Minhaj allows the girls, Becky Sauerbrunn, Hope Solo, and Ali Krieger, to fact check him and explain where they’re coming from in this ongoing debate. They then move onto the numbers of things, (see https://dcwhite8asu.tumblr.com/post/166973066998/what-exactly-is-this-pay-difference-that-everyone for more information) and they dicuss the possibility of having a second job on top of being a professional, world-class athelete – which is just not possible.

In an attempt to explain the other side of things, Gavin McInnes, notoriously known for his right-wing talk show, comes onto the show and talks to us about why the USWNT has no room to complain. McInnes states in his interview, “You’re playing a man’s game by man’s rules, this is the way it is in our world. You gotta earn it.”

After further research, he was set up in this video to look like an extremist, but he is still a meninist to no end. McInnes is a very well educated man, with valid points, he just has an old-worldly point of view on things that people like myself and Billie Jean King don’t agree on. The queen of sports equality was interviewed following the disaster with McInnes and she had a lot to say. BJK fought hard to earn equality in pay for tennis players in 1973 in a “Battle of the Sexes” against Bobby Riggs, which she won and made progress for women athletes everywhere. One of my favorite things that she said in this interview with Minhaj is, “we’re supposed to be so grateful if we get just one crumb, ‘oh thank you.’ No, we deserve the cake, the icing, the cherry on top just like the boys.” BJK was a pioneer, and she is rallying around the girls of the USWNT to help gain acknowledgment and support from the same people who supported her and many others. 

After the interview with BJK concludes, the USWNT members are featured in a mock up promotional commercial, comparing the men versus the women in a tragicomical fashion. As Sauerbrunn, Krieger, and Solo are showing off their talent on the field, there is a voice over playing, setting the tone by saying, “You can be great… You can make history… You can aspire to be less than… You can be just as good as any other person, as long as that person doesn’t have a penis.” With this ‘commercial,’ they wrap the video up by making a play on Nike’s slogan with, “You can treat us equally, you can give us grass to play on, you can pay us what we deserve, just f@#%ing do it.”

This video offered fact checking with a twist of ironic humor that stuck out in the viewer’s mind. Yes, there was some bias about Gavin McInnes, but then again, that is up to the viewer about where they stand and what that means to them. This platform for the USWNT has impacted a multitude of people, as 568,000 people have watched this video and the team has since made great strides in their equality fight. It was a very clever way for the team to make themselves even more known.  

To understand the problem and significance of concussions, it is helpful to get a glimpse into what the word “concussion” really means. My favorite explanation is given in a Youtube video titled, “What happens when you have a concussion?-Clifford Robbins” by Clifford Robbins. This video consists of information about how concussions occur, what a concussion is, post concussion problems, and research on degenerative brain diseases associated with concussions. It is first stated that concussions occur when our fragile brain neurons stretch or tear, and release toxins killing other neurons. Robbins explains that concussion symptoms may include blackouts, blurry vision, headaches, balance problems, altered mood and behavior, problems with memory, thinking and sleeping or anxiety and depression. The majority of concussions go away in days or weeks, but sometimes Post Concussion Syndrome (PCS) occurs. With PCS, one suffers constant headaches, learning difficulties, and behavioral symptoms. Robbins says that sometimes it’s hard to know if you have a concussion. In fact, 50%-80% of concussions in football are undiagnosed. Furthermore, Robbins states that subconcussive impacts are very common without being diagnosed or treated. Soccer players were studied and found to have “damaged structural integrity of axon bundles” over time after heading the ball repeatedly. In simpler words, after heading the ball too much, the soccer players could sustain nervous system damage and brain damage that can lead to more serious issues like traumatic brain injuries and chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). Finally, it informs that too many subconcussive hits have been found to cause CTE, a degenerative brain disease. He also explains what CTE is by telling that the Tau proteins in the brain “dislodge and clump together” when hit and block communications in the brain. These are the first steps to a brain malfunction.

This video is only six minutes, but is jam packed with important facts that would be useful for any person to know. It is viewer friendly and breaks down concussions and related problems in a very understandable way. Research can be confusing at times, as you get so many different points of view in different articles and videos on one subject that they start to meld together. Medical research can be even worse since the sites speak a language that is not understandable to someone outside of the medical field. This video did a great job of starting with the basics and showing this reader clearly and effectively, what concussions really are as well as it explain other diseases and syndromes that can occur. Before I watched this video I knew the symptoms that concussions produce, but never knew the reason why those symptoms occurred, or what was really happening. It was nice to put scientific reasoning behind the word concussion. I suffered a traumatic brain injury in September of 2013 playing in a high school soccer game. It changed my life and opened my eyes to a dangerous reality that most seem to avoid. I waited the prescribed two weeks for the symptoms to stop occurring, but they persisted. My diagnoses lingered a few months, then a year, and symptoms continued to grow until I came to the realization that my symptoms may continue indefinitely or possibly never cease completely. My situation inspired me to learn as much as I could about concussions so I could help others learn of the risks they take as well, if they choose to participate in extracurricular activities. Perhaps, if someone had shared more information with me about the severity and long term conditions of sports, I would have acted more cautiously. If anyone has heard the word concussion, but never understood fundamentally what that means, I highly recommend this article, and hope my future blogs can also help shed a little light on this very prevalent subject.

Citation

Robbins, Clifford. (2017, July 27). What happens when you have a concussion? - Clifford

Robbins [video file]. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvjK-4NXRsM

Dr. Jonas Colliander is a researcher from the Stockholm School of Economics, a leading business school in Europe. In the article, “The social media balancing act: Testing the use of balance self-presentation strategy for politicians using twitter,” Colliander and his team explore how separation of politicians professional and personal lives effects the publics opinion. Their goal was to distinguish a link between social media strategies and specific political outcomes from the electorate, or voters. During the article, the author referred to a politician’s professional life as “front stage” and their personal life as “back stage.” The study subjected the electorate to multiple candidates with varying amounts of social media updates over 5 days in order to measure the influential effects of social media.

The Colliander team started by selecting a group of people to act as part of a fictitious voters. These voters were instructed to monitor, or follow social media postings from fabricated candidates, some with strictly front stage content, and other with backstage and frontstage content. The surprising thing I found was that combining both front and backstage content increased the possibility that the voters would vote for the candidate’s party. This speaks volumes to how cultures have changed over the past couple decades, especially with the introduction of social media. Election times are monumental in countries where the people decide who will take office, as such, social media utilization has provided political figures farther reaching capability at a minimal cost. This gives potential candidates many avenues to reach the voters, but the content must be carefully crafted in order to make sure voters have a clear understanding of their agenda.

Going to an animal shelter can be quite the adventure, especially when looking for a potential partner in crime, but, have you ever looked at the different breeds and thought “Just how long have you been waiting for a home?” Three researchers from Arizona State University did. They conducted a structured three part investigation into different breeds, and their ‘lookalikes’ that were left within the shelter based upon phenotypes, the use of labeling, or perceived behavior.

Lisa Gunter, Rebecca Barber, and Clive D.L. Wynee, are the three researchers from Mary Fulton Teachers College and Department of Psychology, who decided to conduct extensive research to find out why certain breeds of dogs stayed longer in shelters than others.

The first section of their research revolved around the perceived ‘attractiveness’ of three dog breeds (Labrador Retriever, Pit Bull Terrier, and Border Collie), as well as the effects of a handler’s appearance on their perspective of pit bulls. They theorized that the pit bull breed would have a much lower desirability and adoptability rate compared to the other two dog breeds.. They also theorized that the appearance of a male child or an elderly woman alongside the pit bull would improve the public’s perception of the breed. However, a tough looking older male would cause a negative impact for the breed. By the end of the testing, and original final results were analyzed, they found that the pit bull was seen as a less approachable, less intelligent breed, and had a very slim chance of being adopted. Comparatively,  the other two, despite being rated higher for aggression and difficulty to train, were also found to have had a positive impact with an elderly woman or child next to them, and a small negative effect with a tough looking older adult male.

The next study was based around the labeling of the different breeds and how potential adopters viewed them attractive or not, and to see if this affected the length of stay for the different breeds. The theory was that the pit bull dogs would have a longer length if they were labeled as a pit bull, while those who looked phenotypically similar (lookalikes) but were labeled a different breed, would have a shorter stay. The end results were quite shocking. They found that the pit bulls labeled as pit bulls stayed three times longer, than their ‘lookalikes’. They concluded that the shelters labeling of the breeds,  influenced the result of how long the dog remained without a home.

The final part of their research seemed to be the most interesting out of the entirety of all their research put together. They decided that the second study needed to be pushed more. So the last part of their study was designed to further test the impact on labeling between pit bulls and their ‘lookalikes’. This time however, they would be using short videos of the dogs being presented along with a manipulated breed label in order to further expand upon the true impact on potential adopters views. They predicted that the pit bulls and ‘lookalikes’ viewed without a label would be rated as equal, and those with the pit bull label would decrease ratings while the ‘lookalikes’ rating would be significantly higher. The conclusive results exhibited exactly that.

Gunter, Barber, and D.L. Wynee created a factual experiment showing just how vital labeling and perception has to do with how the life of a dog, especially with breeds having a bad reputation, can be manipulated. Their main goal was to find a reason as to why certain breeds end up living all their lives in shelters, compared to the others. The results were quite eye opening, to say the least. The fact that a simple label can dictate the decision of whether or not a dog got a home or was euthanized, is to say the least, unbelievable and staggering.

Research like this goes on to show that people still haven’t changed their minds on how they perceive the pit bulls. They may claim to want to end the fighting and the stereotypes, but if they were put to a test, like the people who were picked out for this experiment, would they really want to adopt a pit bull based upon the label, or would they go to there ‘lookalikes’ and pick them instead?  An article with this amount of evidence is quite valuable, and gives us an insight on just how much influence these shelters have in  what happens to these that live inside.  

Gunter LM, Barber RT, Wynne CDL (2016) What’s in a Name? Effect of Breed Perceptions & Labeling on Attractiveness, Adoptions & Length of Stay for Pit-Bull-Type Dogs. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=8&sid=d73c5db8-7274-430e-a694-476097b6ee2c%40sessionmgr120