Editor's pick: Will no one think of the aliens under fire?
We seem to be making progress toward building space probes that can travel near the speed of light and reach Proxima Centauri in just 20 years (15 October 2016, p 7). This is a nifty idea, but it might be worth pausing to consider what this would look like from Proxima Centauri's perspective.
We would be hurling near-light speed projectiles at their system. If one hit a planet by sheer bad luck, it would detonate with considerable force. If our theoretical probe has a mass of 5 kilograms, its kinetic energy at 60 million metres per second, “only” a fifth the speed of light, would be about 1016 Joules. That's twice as much energy as a 1-megaton atomic bomb – fairly large as atomic bombs go nowadays.
Any intelligent life along the path travelled by one of these probes, from Proxima Centauri onwards across the universe may deem our actions criminally negligent at best, if not an act of war. Maybe we should be patient, wait a little longer for our technology to develop, and think of a better plan.
Who's afraid of artificial intelligence taking over?
Toby Walsh suggests that the much-discussed world takeover by self-replicating artificial intelligences is unlikely (19 November 2016, p 30). I would go further and suggest that such a scenario is impossible.
For a machine to replicate itself, it must extract the materials needed to manufacture itself, establish a supply chain, and set up factories and assembly plants. Even if such a thing were possible, the machines would have to be set up by humans to carry out these functions, and why would we even consider setting them up to do so?
Also, machines need energy to work. If they get out of hand, surely all we need to do is switch them off?
Who's afraid of artificial intelligence taking over?
Why does no one mention hardware in these articles on how AIs may supersede humans? What substrate made of what materials are these intelligences running on? Is the power source 100 per cent reliable? Do they have a temperature-controlled environment that would need to be fail-safe?
It would be instructive to see an analysis now of all the materials, processes and supply chains required to build and run a super computer from the ground up.
Who's afraid of artificial intelligence taking over?
Stephen Hawking's fear that “the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race” joins history's long list of doom-sayers vexed by revolutionary innovation.
For some, things like the cross-bow, gunpowder, steam power, X-rays and atomic power heralded “the end of life as we know it”. Super-AI will surely inject a sorely needed mega-dose of rationalism into human affairs, since it will be unbound by (often psychotic) human bias.
First class post
Sounds like an excuse for men to continue being overly whiny when they're sick
Melissa Brown that viruses may have evolved to hit men harder than women (17 December 2016, p 7)
More reasons to fear the collapse of civilisation
Your speculative articles on the next 60 years were excellent (19 November 2016, p 30). But Debora MacKenzie, considering the possibility of civilisation collapsing, missed a few simple bets. For example, in countries such as the UK, one of the greatest threats lies in how few days' supply of food we have if global disruption stops food trade.
How long before there are food riots in London?
Second, climate patterns, including rainfall, are shifting as the world continues to warm. Rivers that pass through many different countries will attract the worst of nationalist fervour as different societies use and pollute their increasingly precious water: any bets on the odds of water wars before 2050?
Finally, if current cyber events are any indication, then cyberwarfare will almost inevitably shut down the world wide web, with only small local or city-wide data-grids left running.
On the net benefits of free trade treaties
Dan Ariely and Vlad Chituc state that there is “virtual unanimity” amongst economists regarding the benefits of free trade (19 November 2016, p 21). But what of the views on particular “free trade” treaties held by economists and Jeffrey Sachs, Financial Times analyst , or former World Bank chief economist ? All have been extremely critical of these deals: as Sachs says, they “are mostly investor protection agreements…” They allow corporations to sue governments for any legislation or regulation that affects their profits.
The Canadian government's own Global Affairs department that the agreement would, if ratified, permanently increase the country's GDP by just 0.127 per cent, not until 2040. Maybe I misunderstand the concept of “net benefit” but I do have a good grasp of “net loss.”
Genetically modified organic food could work
It was fascinating to read of a possible link between gut bacteria and Parkinson's disease, and that it's plausible that pesticides may be a contributory factor (3 December 2016, p 8). In the same issue, Michael Le Page dismisses any health benefits of organic food, as if it is a known fact that pesticides have no impact on our health (p 21).
More work needs to be done to understand the full range of effects that the non-organic methods have. What is the impact of pesticides on surrounding wildlife? How much does it cost us to filter out those pesticides from our water supply? What is the human cost of increased antibacterial resistance caused by intensive farming? Genetic modification is clearly worthy of exploration: but acceptance won't come from attacking organic food. GM can be an ally of organic food if it can be shown to reduce our dependence on pesticides and reduce the quantities of fertilisers and water required. Crops that are resistant to pesticides may increase yields but they are a direct affront to one of the main reasons people eat organic.
I may not turn into Superman by eating an organic apple, but then it's not all about me.
Phones would be safer if 'off' meant 'off'
That apps, even when “off”, can spy on you through your phone's microphone without your knowledge, (5 November 2016 p 22) is disturbing. The simplest and most obvious protection would be for phone manufacturers to include physical on/off switches for microphones and cameras. That way users can ensure these input devices are only on when you explicitly want them to be. Similarly, a physical on/off switch for the whole phone would be much safer and more reliable.
Mystery and explanation of ancient glyphs
Genevieve von Petzinger's work on cave art and the mysterious pictographs covered in your article is incredible (12 November 2016, p 36). It raises the question: how did our ancestors manage to standardise detailed pictographs around the globe 30,000 years ago, without any known method of long-distance communication apart from the canoe?
Mystery and explanation of ancient glyphs
You print a photo showing “bell shapes” at El Castillo in Spain. That shape, particularly in red and with the centre line present in some of the figures, is instantly recognisable to anyone who has done any significant amount of work with leather. Those are almost certainly slightly simplified animal hides.
These feet are made for walking, not electricity
The old chestnut of generating power from footfalls is back again (5 November 2016, p 23). Saying that “one footstep… yields between 10 and 30 volts” conveys little information. I want to know how much usable electrical energy one footstep generates.
A calculation of the mechanical energy dissipated by an average footstep tells me there is no possible way that this will ever be anything other than a curiosity. The environmental costs of construction and maintenance are going to far outweigh the energy produced.
When your face is a ticket and you have a movie…
The facial recognition system used at the ticketed tourist town of Wuzhen “detects facial movements, so can't be fooled by someone holding up an image of another person's face,” Timothy Revell writes (26 November 2016, p 25). That's such a 20th-century image.
What does it do when you show it a movie on a tablet?
Sorted for substances other than alcohol
Jon White describes young people drinking less (3 December 2016, p 38). But he makes no mention of what they are doing instead, if anything. I suggest, because of the high price of alcohol, they are popping pills instead.
I suspect those promoting a reduction in alcohol use have only done half a job. I suggest more research to clarify.
The editor writes:
• Some researchers have indeed that “party drug” consumption may be . But it's inevitably difficult to get accurate figures for the former.
Warning: this letter may cause hallucinations
Helen Thomson reports that “tactile hallucinations are less common than their auditory or visual cousins” (5 November 2016, p 28). I beg to differ. I would suggest that I could induce one in many readers right now, just by asking them to ponder: are you feeling itchy?