Robotic reaction only human, right?
By Sheryl-Lee Kerr
TWO interesting stories plopped onto my desk this week, neither of
which, I am amazed to report, (and you may need to sit down for this) had anything to do with the Sydney Games, medals, or the perplexing mystery as to why synchronised diving is an Olympic sport.
The first story, from London's Telegraph newspaper, reports that
scientists have discovered why humans can't tickle themselves.
To quote, “using a robot tickler and a brain scanner, Sarah-Jayne
Blakemore of the Wellcome Department of Cognitive Neurology at University College London, discovered how the brain can tell when tickling is self-inflicted”.
She explains: “The brain responds differently to self-generated and
externally generated sensations, disregarding the former and accentuating the latter.”
So what she's saying is that the brain is essentially a spoilsport,
and flops back smirking “nu-uh, I'm not falling for that old trick”.
I think I speak for everyone when I say, “Wow, a tickling robot
breakthrough; at last I can sleep at night”.
I guess this proves that golden rule - anything humans can do, you
can bet that someone, somewhere has a robot built to mimic it.
(Proctologists’ patients, be very afraid ...)
Which brings me to that other story, from New Scientist magazine.
Thai inventors have come up with “Roboguard” - billed as a
“gun-toting sentinel designed as a cheap alternative to a human guard. It can be ordered to fire at will ...”
Yes, no longer do zealots - right-wing, religious, or jealous - have
a monopoly on the notion that we have the right to kill people because, well, we can. Now mankind has thoughtfully simplified the process so robots can do it for us. (Wow, and to think I thought the robot tickler was a time-saver ...)
New Scientist explains that Roboguard has “no qualms about whom it
shoots” and can be put in automatic mode or operated by remote control over the Internet, its fire mechanism protected by a password.
Not happy is Kevin Warwick, a cyberneticist at Reading University
who warns in New Scientist: “Things can always go wrong. You can never allow for all eventualities ... robots will find ways to get round
(programming).”
Now I think this is taking a pretty negative slant on things. Why
immediately assume that a robot designed by flawed humans, armed to the teeth and programmed for automatically shooting people, will actually shoot people? Next thing they'll be saying the Victorian police aren't protestor-friendly.
Frankly, we should be more afraid if they ever combine these two
robots. Think about this: a rampaging, tickling robot which never stands down. It'd be like being five years old again and having 100 older brothers who know your ticklish spots. Now that's scary ...
© Sheryl-Lee Kerr & The Advertiser, 19 SEP 2000