Editor's pick – There is good news for science on microplastics
As Graham Lawton reports, the evidence on whether microplastics are harmful to health is uncertain, complex and full of gaps (7 December 2019, p 38). But there are also some things that we know for certain, such as that the risk of harm is increasing and will peak within a century if current pollution rates continue.
Policy decisions must often be made before all the evidence is in. So our advice to the European Commission included concrete recommendations for how to manage and reduce plastic pollution, and for targeting future research to plug the knowledge gaps ().
These recommendations are already being taken up by political actors in Europe and elsewhere in the world. Others aren’t shy about using the evidence in its current state. When we published our advice, some environmental organisations took it as a battle cry for stronger regulation, while the plastics industry cited it as a reason to be cautious. Such is life.
Whichever side you take, there is good news for science: high-quality evidence that is independently collected still plays a vital role in good governance. We prefer to think of this as a glass-half-full scenario, even if the water in the glass is indeed peppered with microplastics.
Whoever owns your face may raid your bank
Annalee Newitz gives plenty of reasons not to have an internet-connected smart doorbell with a camera (14 December 2019, p 24). I suggest another. Hackers will scrutinise any mass-market, low-cost, internet-connected device and will almost certainly find a security flaw. If they do, such devices offer them a gateway past the security in your router and into your local network, the computers on it and thus everything on them, including passwords and bank details.
Putting pets' ecological footprint in proportion (1)
Graham Lawton suggests cats and dogs in the US consume the same amount of energy as 60 million people, and notes their other adverse environmental impacts (7 December 2019, p 24). We can also, of course, observe that humans contribute several times more than their pets.
The real problem for the planet isn’t the number of pets: it is the number of humans. A minimum amount of space is required to support each of us, as is a minimum intake of natural resources to keep us warm, fed and clothed 鈥� plus quite a lot more if we want to be entertained, play sport and live the life of the mind. Even if we achieve 100 per cent renewable energy, that will simply remove one obstacle to an even larger population. Another crunch point 鈥� perhaps water 鈥� will surely show up.
I have no children. I believe I have done more for the planet by that one non-action than I ever will by giving up meat or my pet cat. Yes, I am quite prepared to work until I drop, rather than retire in my 60s and thus instantly become a drain on those still working. Of course, we need to look for immediate solutions to solve the immediate problems, but if we all just use 20 per cent or even 50 per cent less of everything, that just puts off the evil day.
By its dissatisfaction shall you know machine art (1)
Douglas Heaven reviews and notes the argument that works created by a machine aren’t art, while those created by a human aren’t machine art (14 December 2019, p 30).
All the creative artists I know are constantly dissatisfied with their work. They always feel that they could do better, and sometimes want to destroy works that they have made.
When a computer can express the same dissatisfaction with its art, I will believe both that it is creative and that it may have become conscious.
We fight to reduce stress by taking the tight turns
Roger Morgan suggests that humans may get more stressed in a self-driving car than when driving themselves, as it seems rats that have been taught to drive a tiny car do (Letters, 30 November 2019). Living in Switzerland, with its many sinuous mountain roads, I can think of one example where this is clearly the case: motion sickness. When I sit at the steering wheel, I can anticipate the curves perfectly since I am the one taking them. I actually enjoy driving in the mountains.
When I am in the passenger seat, I often get sick. A friend and I fight over who takes the wheel in the mountainous parts of excursions. This would surely be an issue with autonomous vehicles too.
Abandoned mental health apps are no surprise
You report that most people give up on using mental health apps within a few weeks (16 November 2019, p 14). I have tried three mental health and well-being apps for mobile phones that have high user ratings.
All of them restrict what you can do without purchasing a subscription for the service, and offer a free trial of their premium features lasting for up to a few weeks, after which you have to pay. So the high level of abandonment at this interval is hardly surprising.
How much would you pay to strip ads from films?
The account by Donna Lu of products being pasted into TV shows was fascinating (23 November 2019, p 9). But if a company can insert product placement into existing movies, then surely it can also remove or disguise such things.
Apps for your phone often have the option of an ad-free version, for which you pay an additional fee. Perhaps in the future we will be able to choose between movies that are free but crammed to the sprocket holes with product placements and those that charge a premium to avoid such ads.
Putting pets' ecological footprint in proportion (2)
Describing the damage done to wildlife by cats roaming outside, Lawton suggests that keeping them indoors wouldn’t suit them. As a cat lover and owner, it seems to me that a cat raised indoors from kittenhood is perfectly well-adjusted and healthy.
We should convince new cat owners to consider only house cats. The comfort, affection and fun they give is immeasurable, but wildlife must be protected.
By its dissatisfaction shall you know machine art (2)
Heaven’s incisive review might have mentioned something that is common to bad art that is made by AI: the non-artist creators of the AI think art is merely about what it looks like. For many decades at least, art has also been about context.
An artificial intelligence that did things that sort-of looked like science wouldn’t get very far. Artists laugh at most attempts to portray science as art, just as most scientists would if artists posed in a lab coat with a test tube and claimed they were doing science.
Concerns about golden rice aren't entirely baseless
I read Michael Le Page’s article on 鈥済olden rice鈥� with interest (23 November 2019, p 23). Many consider it to have enormous benefits and opposition to it may be wrong, but it isn’t entirely baseless. Le Page risks convincing no one except those already convinced, and provides little for those who want to understand the scientific nature of the debate. He also fails to mention issues about intellectual property rights in genetically modified crops and other commercial and economic issues. Such concerns are often wished away when there is a strong public benefit, which there clearly is with golden rice.