At first as it gets, it is now mid-terms, 1.5months have passed since life in SMU began. This is how fast all of us are aging, although I am still 20 going 21. Technology and World Change has made me realise that Technology itself has revealed humans being the weakest link of all changes surrounding us.
We have attempted to use technology to reach the holy grail of life, longetivity, although we are still far from it, if we look back, the improvement is sufficiently significant. The ability to handle illness has been brought about with healthcare revolution. We have established a more streamlined system in exchanging information. For example, the setup of World Health Organisation has allowed a common platform in the gathering and exchanging of world health status. When met with and disease epidemic outbreak, the team of professionals will be able to narrow down the search of patient zero, the source of disease. The efficient flow of information with technology has also allowed the medical resources to be distributed to those in need more efficiently.
Nonethelss, in hopes of longetivity, scientist such as Aubrey de Grey has came up with Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (SENS), a proposal to research regenerative medical procedures to periodically repair all the age-related damage in the human body, thereby maintaining a youthful state indefinitely. He believes that aging process is really a buildup of side effects of being alive in the first place. As he progressed with his research, he faced with many criticisms similar to those of the days when people believe that the Earth was flat and continued to believe until it was proven round. Then again, we ask ourselves, whats the point of spending a large amount of resources on people who are at the last stage of their lives, just to extend their mortality by 1 or 2 years?
However, even with better technology, the very innate character of self before others have caused humans ourselves to hinder the progress of mankind. Moral hazards a situation in which one party in a transaction has more information than another. In particular, moral hazard may occur if a party that is insulated from risk has more information about its actions and intentions than the party paying for the negative consequences of the risk. More broadly, moral hazard occurs when the party with with more information about its actions or intentions has a tendency or incentive to behave inappropriately from the perspective of the party with less information. For example, escalating cost unnecessairly. Its always a question of life saving versus monetary benefits where ethics and questioned and we as patients are at the mercy of the professionals.
Similarly, moral hazard also arises in a principal-agent problem, where one party, called an agent, acts on behalf of another party, called the principal. The agent usually has more information about his or her actions or intentions than the principal does, because the principal usually cannot completely monitor the agent. The agent may have an incentive to act inappropriately (from the viewpoint of the principal) if the interests of the agent and the principal are not aligned.
Makes me wonder, if humans ourselves will cause our own extinction like the dinosaurs.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Saturday, September 17, 2011
TWC Session 5
ICT has brought about a convergence of technology through internet. Now, our little cellphones that we hold in our hands is like a one-stop centre for you to reach out to everyone, anytime and anywhere. Imagine losing your cellphone, it can be really disasterous.
Apart from convergence of technology itself, ICT today has changed to meet the demands of man. It is starting to have that extra emotional touch. Take a look at the internet 3.0 which has the ability to gather data, learn, process and predict human request. Do a little search on google and you would realise that the results are out even before you key in your full request.
Developers of ICT has also gone the extra mile to improve the level of human-technology interaction. Project Natal, or commonly known as Xbox kinect. As amazing as it gets, this high tech device has the capability to detect full body motion, gesture and voice bringing the players into the game itself. Amateurs out there are hoping to establish a hack to integrate Xbox Kinect with their PC in hopes to integrate motion control. I doubt, this will come in handy as people usually prefer to be seated while using the PC. Perhaps the only flaw with Xbox kinect is the responsiveness, because of the lag time required for the 3D camera to scan the motion and integrate into the game itself.
With the increasing interaction between technology and humans, it has also revealed one of our weakness in life: Loneliness. Always wanting to know what your friends or family members are doing. Just when you are sitted down in front of your desktop, the first thing that you want to do is probably to log on to the internet. Without the internet one will feel disconnected from the world. Upon staying connected, you probably would log onto to facebook, look at the newsfeed to see what's going on around you. Where someone is, what is he doing, what is he thinking. All this to satisfy out inner securities.
Never in my life, do I hope for a world of Matrix, where technology controls your see, smell, hear, taste and feel.
Humans have created technology to extend our ability. I understand why we are dependant on them, but we cannot be addicted to them. Be discerning.
Apart from convergence of technology itself, ICT today has changed to meet the demands of man. It is starting to have that extra emotional touch. Take a look at the internet 3.0 which has the ability to gather data, learn, process and predict human request. Do a little search on google and you would realise that the results are out even before you key in your full request.
Developers of ICT has also gone the extra mile to improve the level of human-technology interaction. Project Natal, or commonly known as Xbox kinect. As amazing as it gets, this high tech device has the capability to detect full body motion, gesture and voice bringing the players into the game itself. Amateurs out there are hoping to establish a hack to integrate Xbox Kinect with their PC in hopes to integrate motion control. I doubt, this will come in handy as people usually prefer to be seated while using the PC. Perhaps the only flaw with Xbox kinect is the responsiveness, because of the lag time required for the 3D camera to scan the motion and integrate into the game itself.
With the increasing interaction between technology and humans, it has also revealed one of our weakness in life: Loneliness. Always wanting to know what your friends or family members are doing. Just when you are sitted down in front of your desktop, the first thing that you want to do is probably to log on to the internet. Without the internet one will feel disconnected from the world. Upon staying connected, you probably would log onto to facebook, look at the newsfeed to see what's going on around you. Where someone is, what is he doing, what is he thinking. All this to satisfy out inner securities.
Never in my life, do I hope for a world of Matrix, where technology controls your see, smell, hear, taste and feel.
Humans have created technology to extend our ability. I understand why we are dependant on them, but we cannot be addicted to them. Be discerning.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Impact Assessment: Robots At War
Executive Summary
War today is waged against terrorism. Lives are continuously loss, and military forces need to engage in asymmetric warfare to counter terrorist type threat in previously different ways – through robots.
Although still rare, robots are poised for a breakout with the fact that they are saving lives (particularly American lives) and killing American enemies, the terrorist. However, we need to question the underlining values of the use of robot systems to make the strike.
This topic review seeks to answer the following:
1) How has the use of robots changed modern warfare?
2) The issues on ethics and proliferation of automated defence systems involved
3) What lies ahead of the future with the inclusion of robots in military technology?
Introduction/Background
- Military technology has changed over time with ideas.
- Human is becoming the weakest link in defence systems.
- Previously, it matters who has the bigger sticks, it certainly matters more who is swinging it. Now, where it is being swing makes a much bigger difference.
- Robots are now used to deal with issues what people in the field call “Three D’s” – Task that are dull, dirty or dangerous.
- Robots increases the combat effectiveness distance of soldiers, such as avoiding improvised explosive devices that may appear no different from any piece of trash.
- Kings of the war previously the artillery for its distance effectiveness has now overtaken by the UAVs.
- Give up blood for machines
Issues/Challenges/Opportunities
Opportunities
- Precision to reduce Collateral Damage (A chance to do so, however the stage of accomplishing is still too immature.
Point it on the map, they won’t take it
- Combat effectiveness (UAV such as the predator, previously used for reconnaissance)
- Reducing cost of military operations.
- Military Technology can be used for Rescue. Disaster Relief.
- Psychology disconnection from the war
Issues
- A successful hit is known in the CIA as a “bugsplat”. It is horribly like a video game
- Digital Jamming ( Fighting blind, losing control )
Challenges
- Risk of civilian casualties
Out of Blue A growing controversy over the use of unmanned aerial strikes – Economist Jul 30th 2011
Out of Blue A growing controversy over the use of unmanned aerial strikes – Economist Jul 30th 2011
- Should we hand over autonomy to artificial intelligence of a robot?
Programme for counter measures while fighting blind
Key Observations
Discussion and Analysis
Discussion and Analysis
- Providing autonomy to machines is an issue equivalent to Lord Voldemort in Harry Potter, an issue not to be discussed.
- Technology such as unmanned systems can be seductive, feeding overconfidence that can lead nations to war.
- Lower Human cost of war can seduce us into more wars.
- Concept of war porn. Watching rather than experiencing.
- Has the use of robots particularly in the case of UAVs went against the International Humanitarian Laws.
Who should be held liable for the collateral damage after all each individual UAV can be piloted by a few UAV.
Taking Things Forward
- Concept of supervise rather than control
- Working as a team
- Would machine autonomy lead to a takeover, matrix-style
- Future of the technology would probably be smaller, faster. Combat load of 75kg. To be reduced, or integrated to our daily technology to save cost.
PS3 for super computer, Ipad, Iphone
- Better manoeuvre
- Multiple control over different robots?
Conclusion
- Military Technology is present as a deterrent factor. Not used as a form of aggression
- World War allowed us to understand that war isn’t pleasant, while we are creating the next Iron Man.
- Use of robots is still at a very premature age to go further and be accepted by society, this technologies need to iron out
References
Friday, September 9, 2011
Session 4
Session 4, looks into drivers of world change together with change management and change leadership.
Change is permanent. Change is around us. Change can be revolutionary. Change can be evolutionary. Today, it is not the strongest nor the most intelligent that survive. It is the one who is most adaptable to change. Hence, specialisation once superior is now flawed. A weakness. We need to diversify to cope with changes. Professor brought up an interesting concept: One can either adapt to the world, or have the world adapt to himself. The latter is one that garners progress in humanity, for he rejects what he sees in the world. However, I warn, that those who fail to have the world adapt to him should always remember to pick himself up, adapt to the world, before trying to change the world again. It is the resistance to accept failure, that hinders all human progress ultimately, but it is never smooth sailing.
Drivers of world change, to me is a catalyst of human progress. It accelerates the effect that affects our everyday life. Sometimes, it has passive impacts on individuals causing us to have divert our attention. Therefore, we need to equip ourselves with skills to better handle the future. As stated in the first reading, society must anticipate the future. We start off by looking at what is present, what is known, what is the unknown, predict the future and accept any possiblity. Society must work according to assumptions as we make judgements, trial and error over future issues. Nonethless, we are at the mercy of wildcard scenarios that may change the world. September 11 attack, the tsunami that took out Fukushima Daichi, SARS... The list is never ending... Never should we abandon our ability to adapt change.
If we take a step back and look at what we have, humanity is definitely more able to handle change. Technology facilitated the exchange of ideas, the spread of information, the ability to simulate and better handle impact. Solutions comes up at a shorter rate, as humanity attempts to seek the holy grail to provide us with the little answers in life.
Second part of the session involves change management and change leadership.
Professor categorised mankind into three categories of birds, base on how they view change:
1) The Eagle, one who sees the big picture and make things happen.
2) Ostrich, one who bury his head and be ignorant about change
3) Dodo bird, one who gets eliminated by change
I propose to have another category between the eagle and the ostrich:
The Crow: one who doesn't see the big picture but adapts to change to survive.
Makes me wonder, how can we influence those below the Eagle to become one? (Food for thought.)
It is true, change is not necessary for survival is not mandatory, how dull can your life be if you preach the following. Without a doubt, society needs a leader for change. The interesting concept brought up was the fact that a leader is a visionary, one who provides direction, lead the change and manage the change. However, a visionary is not necessarily a leader for he is one who has the idea, but not the guts to bring the dream to life.
I would not deny that, taking the first step to change the world is never easy. Along the way, it is human nature for us to have our exuberance for change in life to decrease over time. We can manage change in two approaches brought up by professor: 1) The traditional approach - Freeze, unfreeze and refreeze. 2) Modern Approach - Continous monitoring and renewal. I believe the latter, although proven effective via modern systems, require prudence over when to renew the changes. For example the need to assign a timeframe to judge the effectivness of any new changes adopted.
Managing change largely rely on managing human ourselves. Never easy. Like the first reading for session 4b: "Human Management: Herding Cats" the style of human management must change as today's information age rely on knowledge workers. They are different from industrial workers (people who do what they are told). Knowledge workers are thinkers, they have their own opinion they have their own principles that one must respect, to get the fullest out of them. Its like herding cats, each is independant of their own thoughts. Not accepting this fact will only attract destructive office politics, and a management can lose their most important asset: Humans.
Just like the presentation brought up in one of the presentation, generation X and generation Y people are totally different. To deal with the differences one can adopt management style brought up in the second reading of session 2, directing and managing world change. Instead of a top down approach that corporations usually have, they can be a side by side approach where managers and employees start to work hand in hand to evaluate and recommend changes. This is a more holistic approach, however we need to maintain the status quo of hierachy because we are not trying to seek common consensus. The manager can seek advice from senior employees, however, he should ultimately make the final decision and be accountable for the changes. If a company attempts to seek common consensus, we will end up with a inefficient management system that ends up in a stalemate.
Ultimately, to lead change and to manage change, commitment is the breaking point of all these. We can sum it up with one equation: Commitment = Aspiration + Determined Action + Accepting failures ( Fail fast, fail cheap, fail early)
Rating: 6/10
Change is permanent. Change is around us. Change can be revolutionary. Change can be evolutionary. Today, it is not the strongest nor the most intelligent that survive. It is the one who is most adaptable to change. Hence, specialisation once superior is now flawed. A weakness. We need to diversify to cope with changes. Professor brought up an interesting concept: One can either adapt to the world, or have the world adapt to himself. The latter is one that garners progress in humanity, for he rejects what he sees in the world. However, I warn, that those who fail to have the world adapt to him should always remember to pick himself up, adapt to the world, before trying to change the world again. It is the resistance to accept failure, that hinders all human progress ultimately, but it is never smooth sailing.
Drivers of world change, to me is a catalyst of human progress. It accelerates the effect that affects our everyday life. Sometimes, it has passive impacts on individuals causing us to have divert our attention. Therefore, we need to equip ourselves with skills to better handle the future. As stated in the first reading, society must anticipate the future. We start off by looking at what is present, what is known, what is the unknown, predict the future and accept any possiblity. Society must work according to assumptions as we make judgements, trial and error over future issues. Nonethless, we are at the mercy of wildcard scenarios that may change the world. September 11 attack, the tsunami that took out Fukushima Daichi, SARS... The list is never ending... Never should we abandon our ability to adapt change.
If we take a step back and look at what we have, humanity is definitely more able to handle change. Technology facilitated the exchange of ideas, the spread of information, the ability to simulate and better handle impact. Solutions comes up at a shorter rate, as humanity attempts to seek the holy grail to provide us with the little answers in life.
Second part of the session involves change management and change leadership.
Professor categorised mankind into three categories of birds, base on how they view change:
1) The Eagle, one who sees the big picture and make things happen.
2) Ostrich, one who bury his head and be ignorant about change
3) Dodo bird, one who gets eliminated by change
I propose to have another category between the eagle and the ostrich:
The Crow: one who doesn't see the big picture but adapts to change to survive.
Makes me wonder, how can we influence those below the Eagle to become one? (Food for thought.)
It is true, change is not necessary for survival is not mandatory, how dull can your life be if you preach the following. Without a doubt, society needs a leader for change. The interesting concept brought up was the fact that a leader is a visionary, one who provides direction, lead the change and manage the change. However, a visionary is not necessarily a leader for he is one who has the idea, but not the guts to bring the dream to life.
I would not deny that, taking the first step to change the world is never easy. Along the way, it is human nature for us to have our exuberance for change in life to decrease over time. We can manage change in two approaches brought up by professor: 1) The traditional approach - Freeze, unfreeze and refreeze. 2) Modern Approach - Continous monitoring and renewal. I believe the latter, although proven effective via modern systems, require prudence over when to renew the changes. For example the need to assign a timeframe to judge the effectivness of any new changes adopted.
Managing change largely rely on managing human ourselves. Never easy. Like the first reading for session 4b: "Human Management: Herding Cats" the style of human management must change as today's information age rely on knowledge workers. They are different from industrial workers (people who do what they are told). Knowledge workers are thinkers, they have their own opinion they have their own principles that one must respect, to get the fullest out of them. Its like herding cats, each is independant of their own thoughts. Not accepting this fact will only attract destructive office politics, and a management can lose their most important asset: Humans.
Just like the presentation brought up in one of the presentation, generation X and generation Y people are totally different. To deal with the differences one can adopt management style brought up in the second reading of session 2, directing and managing world change. Instead of a top down approach that corporations usually have, they can be a side by side approach where managers and employees start to work hand in hand to evaluate and recommend changes. This is a more holistic approach, however we need to maintain the status quo of hierachy because we are not trying to seek common consensus. The manager can seek advice from senior employees, however, he should ultimately make the final decision and be accountable for the changes. If a company attempts to seek common consensus, we will end up with a inefficient management system that ends up in a stalemate.
Ultimately, to lead change and to manage change, commitment is the breaking point of all these. We can sum it up with one equation: Commitment = Aspiration + Determined Action + Accepting failures ( Fail fast, fail cheap, fail early)
Rating: 6/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)