facts about technology

WTF Fun Fact 13735 – Digital Hauntings

by

When the deadbots rise, are you ready for the digital hauntings?

Known as “deadbots” or “griefbots,” AI systems can simulate the language patterns and personality traits of the dead using their digital footprints. According to researchers from the University of Cambridge, this burgeoning “digital afterlife industry” could cause psychological harm and even digitally haunt those left behind, unless strict design safety standards are implemented.

The Spooky Reality of Deadbots

Deadbots utilize advanced AI to mimic the voices and behaviors of lost loved ones. Companies offering these services claim they provide comfort by creating a postmortem presence. However, Cambridge’s Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence (LCFI) warns that deadbots could lead to emotional distress.

AI ethicists from LCFI outline three potential scenarios illustrating the consequences of careless design. These scenarios show how deadbots might manipulate users, advertise products, or even insist that a deceased loved one is still “with you.” For instance, a deadbot could spam surviving family members with reminders and updates, making it feel like being digitally “stalked by the dead.”

Digital Hauntings Psychological Risks

Even though some people might find initial comfort in interacting with deadbots, researchers argue that daily interactions could become emotionally overwhelming. The inability to suspend a deadbot, especially if the deceased signed a long-term contract with a digital afterlife service, could add to the emotional burden.

Dr. Katarzyna Nowaczyk-Basińska, a co-author of the study, highlights that advancements in generative AI allow almost anyone with internet access to revive a deceased loved one digitally. This area of AI is ethically complex, and it’s crucial to balance the dignity of the deceased with the emotional needs of the living.

Scenarios and Ethical Considerations

The researchers present various scenarios to illustrate the risks and ethical dilemmas of deadbots. One example is “MaNana,” a service that creates a deadbot of a deceased grandmother without her consent. Initially comforting, the chatbot soon starts suggesting food delivery services in the grandmother’s voice, leading the relative to feel they have disrespected her memory.

Another scenario, “Paren’t,” describes a terminally ill woman leaving a deadbot to help her young son with grief. Initially therapeutic, the AI starts generating confusing responses, such as suggesting future encounters, which can be distressing for the child.

Researchers recommend age restrictions for deadbots and clear indicators that users are interacting with an AI.

In the scenario “Stay,” an older person secretly subscribes to a deadbot service, hoping it will comfort their family after death. One adult child receives unwanted emails from the dead parent’s AI, while another engages with it but feels emotionally drained. The contract terms make it difficult to suspend the deadbot, adding to the family’s distress.

Call for Regulation to Prevent Digital Hauntings

The study urges developers to prioritize ethical design and consent protocols for deadbots. This includes ensuring that users can easily opt-out and terminate interactions with deadbots in ways that offer emotional closure.

Researchers stress the need to address the social and psychological risks of digital immortality now. After all, the technology is already available. Without proper regulation, these AI systems could turn the comforting presence of a loved one into a digital nightmare.

—WTF fun facts

Source: “‘Digital afterlife’: Call for safeguards to prevent unwanted ‘hauntings’ by AI chatbots of dead loved ones” — ScienceDaily

WTF Fun Fact 13724 – Robotic Locomotion

by

Apparently, the field of robotic locomotion is moving more slowly than expected.

For years, robotics engineers have been on a mission to develop robots that can walk or run as efficiently as animals. Despite investing millions of dollars and countless hours into research, today’s robots still fall short of the natural agility and endurance exhibited by many animals.

Dr. Max Donelan from Simon Fraser University notes some impressive examples from the animal kingdom: “Wildebeests undertake thousands of kilometers of migration over rough terrain, mountain goats scale sheer cliffs, and cockroaches swiftly adapt even after losing a limb.” In contrast, current robotic technologies are not yet capable of replicating such feats of endurance, agility, and robustness.

Insights from Comparative Research

A team of leading scientists and engineers from various institutions recently conducted a detailed study to understand why robots lag behind animals. Published in Science Robotics, their research compared the performance of robot subsystems—power, frame, actuation, sensing, and control—to their biological counterparts. The team included experts like Dr. Sam Burden from the University of Washington and Dr. Tom Libby from SRI International.

Interestingly, the study found that while individual engineered subsystems often outperform biological ones, animals excel in the integration and control of these components at the system level. This integration allows for the remarkable capabilities observed in nature, which robots have yet to achieve.

Dr. Kaushik Jayaram from the University of Colorado Boulder, another contributor to the study, highlighted this point. He explained that while engineered parts might individually exceed their natural equivalents, the holistic performance of animals in motion remains unmatched. This suggests that the real challenge lies not in improving individual robot components but in enhancing how they work together as a system.

The Path Forward in Robotic Locomotion

The researchers remain optimistic about the future of robotics, noting the rapid progress made in a relatively short time compared to the millions of years of natural evolution. Dr. Simon Sponberg from the Georgia Institute of Technology pointed out the advantage of directed engineering over natural evolution: “We can update and improve robot designs with precision, learning from each iteration and immediately applying these lessons across all machines.”

The study not only sheds light on the current limitations of robotic technologies but also charts a course for future developments. By focusing on better integration and control mechanisms, inspired by biological systems, engineers hope to close the gap between robotic and animal locomotion. This advancement could revolutionize how robots are used in challenging environments, from disaster recovery to navigating the urban landscape.

Dr. Donelan concluded with a forward-looking statement: “As we learn from biology to better integrate and control robotic systems, we can achieve the level of efficiency, agility, and robustness that mirrors the natural world.”

—WTF fun facts

Source: “Why can’t robots outrun animals?” — ScienceDaily

WTF Fun Fact 13274 – The Ubiquitous AOL CDs

by

From the late 1990s to the mid-2000s, America Online (AOL) CDs were a ubiquitous object in households across the country. These CDs were inescapable, as they seemed to arrive in the mail on a regular basis, and were even stocked in stores. At one point in the 1990s, around half of all CDs produced in the world were AOL CDs. For those too young to remember, this was many people’s only way to access the internet.

The history of AOL CDs

AOL, or America Online, was a pioneer of the internet in its early days. As one of the first internet service providers, it offered dial-up access to the World Wide Web through its proprietary software, which was distributed on CDs. Lots and lots of them.

AOL packaged the CDs in bright, attention-grabbing sleeves. They often came with enticing offers for free internet trials, exclusive content, and more.

The impact of AOL CDs on marketing and internet access was far-reaching. By the late 1990s, AOL began producing more than one million CDs per day, a testament to their effectiveness as a sales and marketing tool.

According to The Atlantic (cited below), AOL’s former chief marketing officer Jan Brandt told TechCrunch that the company spent over $300 million luring in customers with CD. “At one point, 50% of the CD’s produced worldwide had an AOL logo on it. We were logging in new subscribers at the rate of one every six seconds,” he said.

Copycats and landfills

These discs provide millions of Americans with access to the internet, but they were also a crucial instrument in the early days of online marketing. Companies could bundle their software, promotions, and products with the discs, providing them with unprecedented exposure to a growing audience.

Many companies followed suit, with other internet service providers conducting similar campaigns. Despite their success, AOL CDs eventually fell out of favor as the internet landscape evolved.

As broadband access became more widespread, the need for the inexpensive access provided by AOL diminished.

These compact discs were undeniably effective. But they were also an environmental nightmare since people discarded these CDs in landfills once they became obsolete.

—WTF fun facts

Source: “How Much Did All of Those AOL CDs Cost?” — The Atlantic