nicandroisla-blog

[nicandroisla-blog]

What if an AI was your girlfriend/boyfriend?

These days people are fond of the technological world. People are so obssesed with their phones, the internet, their laptops that they spend most of their time using them. Technology provides us with things we can't even imagine, feel or experience in the real world. Inventions like virtual reality, siri, etc. makes us feel like we're living in a different world. So it's not suprising anymore when one falls inlove with these technology. Love that might even be more than admiration, but can be affectionate love.

Love for technology is not anymore new to this world. Recent films depicting human-machine romance could soon be a reality, as more people are becoming comfortable with the idea of dating robots. People are with their gadgets all the time. An example of human-machine romance film is the movie "Her" where a lonely man named Theodore, who is in his final stages of his divorce fell inlove with an AI or a sytem that they call OS1. OS1 is the world's first artificially intelligent operating system, "It's not just an operating system, it's a consciousness," the ad states. Theodore quickly finds himself drawn in with Samantha, the voice behind his OS1. As they start spending time together they grow closer and closer and eventually find themselves in love. Having fallen in love with his OS, Theodore finds himself dealing with feelings of both great joy and doubt. As an OS, Samantha has powerful intelligence that she uses to help Theodore in ways others hadn't.

Advances in robotics and AI are starting to gain some real momentum. In the coming decades, scientists predict robots will take over more and more jobs—including white collar ones, and gain ubiquity in the home, school, and work spheres. Due to this, roboticists and AI experts, social scientists, psychologists, and others are speculating what impact it will have on us and our world. Google and Oxford have teamed up to make a kill switch should AI initiate a robot apocalypse.

There are indications that falling for a robot is possible. For instance, research shows that people who chitchat via email, messenger, on the phone, or through text often feel a more intimate bond than those who chat face-to-face. The pressure is off, and so too might it be with a robot.Anyone who has found love complicated, basically all of us, has wished for a simpler relationship, and a robot lover may fit the bill. Still, AI is not at the level where it can make nuanced emotional responses. Ever go on a date with someone who doesn’t have any emotional or intellectual depth? It is such a turnoff. NYU psychology professor Gary Marcus says there are different kinds of love. Right now, we may find a relationship with a robot much like that of dog and master, at least until their intellectual and emotional intelligence is up to snuff.

If the movie "Her" were to become a reality, then it would be possible because human-machine romance is present today. There are even videos in youtube where people intentionally flirt with siri, some might be inteded for humor but some are convincingly not. Putting that in the context of my life, if I were to be an introvert and I see no more chance of me having a girlfriend/boyfriend, then I would probably have an AI to be my girlfriend/boyfriend. But If I was just a normal person looking for love then no I won't have an AI as my gf/bf. Simply because I would really like to have a physical love one that I can see and really feel. I'm not totally against human-machine romance, i'm just really fond of Physical love. But If ever I would have an AI as my gf/bf then I would still treat it as a real person. No matter what or who it is I would still love an AI.

[nicandroisla-blog]

Ed Sheeran guilty of copyright infringement

Ed Sheeran is guilty of copyright infringement lawsuit filed by two songwriters over his song, “Photograph”. Songwriters Martin Harrington and Thomas Leonard said that the song was simillar of their work and sought $20 million in damages. Harrington, Leonard and their publishers HaloSongs filed the lawsuit back in June 2016 alleging that Sheeran’s “Photograph” was too similar to their 2009 track “Amazing”. “Amazing” was released a single by 2010 X Factor winner Matt Cardle who, previously, had distanced himself from the case saying, “This is not my lawsuit. I think Ed Sheeran is a genius and 100 per cent deserves all his success”. On Friday (April 7) court papers were filed that dismissed the case with prejudice but the California Federal Court will retain the power to enforce the terms of agreement. There has been no reported word on settlement terms on either Sheeran’s or HaloSongs’ side, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

The original lawsuit reportedly claimed, “The chorus sections of ‘Amazing’ and the infringing ‘Photograph’ share 39 identical notes”.

And after Sheeran was sued earlier last year, several Twitter users took to the social platform to point out the exact same thing. Some even wondered why he wasn't being sued for that song's resemblance to "Let's Get it On," rather than the similarities between "Photograph" and "Amazing." Heck, even Sheeran himself seemed to slowly acknowledge that the songs sound the same when he blended them it's almost impossible to tell when he switches songs 

On the other hand, Heirs of the composer for Marvin Gaye's "Let's Get It On" sued British musician Ed Sheeran for the 2nd time, claiming his hit song "Thinking Out Loud" copies core elements of the late soul singer's 1973 track. The copyright infringement lawsuit was filed by the heirs of Ed Townsend, who co-wrote the lyrics to "Let's Get It On" in 1973 and created its musical composition, according to the complaint filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York. Representatives for defendants Sheeran, Sony/ATV Music Publishing, and Atlantic Records did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The lawsuit, which asks for damages to be assessed at a jury trial, argues that the harmonic progressions, melodic and rhythmic elements central to "Let's Get It On" formed the structure of Sheeran's "Thinking Out Loud." "The Defendants copied the 'heart' of 'Let's' and repeated it continuously throughout 'Thinking,'" the lawsuit said. "The melodic, harmonic, and rhythmic compositions of 'Thinking' are substantially and/or strikingly similar to the drum composition of 'Let's get it On.'" Grammy Award-winning Sheeran has become one of Britain's top-selling artists in the past two years, and has written and co-written tracks for artists such as One Direction, Taylor Swift and Justin Bieber and its is suprising that a great songwriter would have this kind of case not only once but twice.

Sources: https://www.google.com.ph/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN10L04X

https://www.google.com.ph/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/08/10/ed-sheeran-sued-for-copyright-infringement-for-second-time-this-year/

[nicandroisla-blog]

Humans now have shorter attention span than that of a Goldfish.

“Many of us don’t think about numbers on the day-to-day. We use numbers, we crunch numbers, but we don’t think about numbers. To me, this is a shame, because numbers can say some impressive things.” Did you know that if that first paragraph took you eight seconds to read, then your attention span is probably now lost? A study in 2014 revealed that the average attention span is only eight seconds compared to the 12 seconds it was in 2000. In 14 years, humans have lost four seconds of focus. What’s more interesting is that a goldfish’s attention span is nine seconds, meaning that humans now have shorter attention spans.

Humans have become so crazy with portable devices, web based apps and gets overwhelmed by content that we now have attention spans shorter than that of the previously jokingly juxtaposed goldfish. Microsoft has contucted a surveyed over 2,000 people and used electroencephalograms (EEGs) to monitor the brain activity of another 112 in the study, which sought to determine the impact that pocket-sized devices and the increased availability of digital media and information have had on our daily lives. Good news that our ablility to multi task has greatly improved, but our attention span had fallen.

Anecdotely, many people can relate to the inability to critically focus on tasks, because people tend to get distracted by checking on their phones or scrolling down a news feed. Another recent study by the National Centre for Biotechnology Information and the National Library of Medicine in the US found that 79 per cent of respondents used portable devices while watching TV (known as dual-screening) and 52 per cent check their phone every 30 minutes.One professor believes it’s an entirely natural response though as we consume an increasing volume of information and digest it faster, our appetite for it grows.

According to Asia News, games captured consumer attention for 78 percent more time, increasing to 8.7 minutes per session in 2013 from 4.9 minutes for each one the previous year. Consumers are using apps for shorter bursts of time and opting to snack on content more frequently, according to newly released data. A record 70 billion smartphone and tablet apps are expected to be downloaded globally this year, according to market research firm ABI Research. But consumers’ attention spans for apps are dropping. Showing this data it is indeniably true that our attention span has trully fallen, but it is mainly due on things that we are focused on the most. There’s a lot going on with the human brain than that of a gold fish. We are more engage in mobile devices; we also deal with numbers; and our ability to multitask has clearly increased. These are not easy to deal with at the same time considering a simple goldfish is just stuck on a aquarium or in the sea swimming and looking for food. Never the less as time progresses our attention span might still change the question here now is will it increase? Or will it still be lower than that of a Goldfish.