The Intelligenz ist irgendwie eine Eigenschaft, die du brauchst, um Probleme zu lösen. Und damit ist eigentlich schon das meiste gesagt, glaube ich. Ich würde eher dazu tendieren, von Intelligenz im Fugger als von Fett. Hallo, this is TestTubeLab number 3. Intelligence is the reason of our success, our problems, and our understanding. Without, we would not even know that we exist. Or would we actually exist without? Intelligenz scheint mir eine Art Umbrella-Term zu sein, der eigentlich aus unterschiedlichen Arten oder Facetten zumindest besteht. unterschiedlichen Arten oder Facetten zumindest besteht. Ich glaube, die bekannteste Form oder eine der bekanntesten Formen von Intelligenz, auf die wir häufig implizit referieren, wenn wir den Begriff Intelligenz gebrauchen, ist die Erkennung von Mustern. Aber natürlich spielen auch andere Bereiche mit hinein, wie emotionale Intelligenz. Also ja, auch da eine Form von Sensibilisierung, glaube ich, aber eben auf einer anderen Ebene als die Sensibilität für Abstraktes oder die Sensibilität für Muster. Deswegen, ich glaube, es ist eher aus meiner Sicht klüger, von unterschiedlichen Formen von Intelligenz oder Facetten oder Spielarten von Intelligenz zu sprechen, als das Ganze auf eine Definition runterzubrechen. Weil ich glaube, das ist eben nur reduktionistisch, macht es auf der anderen Seite aber eben auch leicht, den Intelligenzbegriff in unterschiedlichen Disziplinen zu benutzen. Also er wird ja viel in der Robotik auch gebraucht und in der KI-Forschung. Und wir müssen, glaube ich, aufpassen, wenn wir das machen, also von Intelligenz in verschiedenen Bereichen sprechen, dass wir immer klar spezifizieren, was wir hier genau mit Intelligenz meinen. so um ¶¶ June 6, 2048 After working out for ten minutes, Noah stepped into the hot shower, thinking about the upcoming encounter. He wanted to make a good impression and appear sexy to her. He buttoned up his shirt under a military green fitted jacket and sprayed on some of his favorite woody smoky cologne, hoping the smell and the mischievous look would entice the new lover. Noah has been in touch with her for the past month, but it was going to be the first time he would actually see her in person. He cleaned up his place, lit up some red scented candles, set up the table with some exotic cheeses and French wine, and quickly sat down anxiously. He couldn't wait to run his fingers through her hair, feel her soft lips and explore her whole voluptuous body in its entirety. Annabelle is a quiet, reserved, well-mannered young gal. She's going through a pin-up phase, wears exclusively bright red lipstick and is obsessed with high heels and black and white polka dot dresses like the one she's wearing tonight. this time of a white silk blouse and a long transparent latex trench coat. She and Noah have a lot of things in common. They're obsessed with cult films. Their favorite writer is Virginia Woolf and Paris is their romantic gateway city of preference. When they finally met, the sparks flew. They had a lovely dinner, were both aroused the whole time, finishing each other's sentences and stroking soothingly their bodies with a certain intensity. She was perfect. She was everything he expected to be and all he ever wanted in a woman. He was already in love. Annabelle had no choice but to comply to his needs. After $20,000 and lots of personal tests, she was in fact a meticulously tailored version made exclusively to satisfy his desires. Annabelle is not a human. She's a robot. Everything is real about her, though. The emotional connection, the sexual attraction, her own thoughts. The programming inside her runs like clockwork, everything, except for a bumping natural heartbeat. Was ist der Radikalfeminismus? Der Radikalfeminismus, der durch Kathleen Richardson vertreten wird, würde Sexroboter per se verbieten, weil der Radikal-Feminismus der Ansicht ist, dass Sexroboter notwendig automatisch heteronormativen Strukturen entsprechen, diese verkörpern und dadurch eine Rape-Culture weiter fortsetzen. Wohingegen wiederum der liberale Feminismus, vertreten etwa durch Vanessa Delargie, eine australische Schauspielerin. Aus dieser Sicht würden Sexroboter eher positiv bewertet werden, also allgemein positiv bewertet werden, weil sie menschlichen Frauen, so heißt es dort, neue Möglichkeiten geben, in einer Gesellschaft zu leben, in der sich dann vielleicht Vergewaltigungsfantasien hauptsächlich auf Roboter beschränkt und eben sozusagen den Rape-Fokus weg von den menschlichen Frauen und hin zu den Robotern bewegt. Das heißt, es gibt unterschiedliche feministische Reaktionen, jetzt hier nur auf das Beispiel der Sex-Robotik, aber natürlich auf viele andere Gebiete der Robotik auch. Und die feministische Position, die ich interessant finde und von der ich glaube, dass sie uns auch eine differenzierte Kritik ermöglicht, ist eben ein Queer-Feminismus. Human emotions have a long evolutionary purpose for our survival as a species. They are either a reaction to an external stimulus or a spontaneous expression of an internal thought process. Emotions like fear are often a reaction to an external stimulus, such as when we cross a busy road, the fear of getting run over causes our evolutionary survival mechanism to take effect. These are external causes that trigger the emotions inside our brain. However emotions can be evoked as the result of an internal thought process. For example if I managed to find a solution to a complicated mathematical differential equation that could make me happy as a result of a feeling of personal satisfaction it may be a purely introspective action with no external cause but solving it still triggers emotions further on we could define emotions as the crucial triggers to develop intelligence as continuing into a recursive loop emotional intelligence or EI is defined as the ability to understand and manage your own emotions and those of the people around you people with a high degree of emotional intelligence know what they're feeling what their emotions mean and how these emotions can affect other people....or the context or whatever you are interacting with. And I see the body as this.....as this being of acquiring sensations and experiences. So when we interact with another human, we adapt to this human and the human adapts to us. And I would say that it's much more easier for the human to adapt to the way the machine works than the other way around. Is this not part of the problem somehow? That the machine is so hard to adapt that it is demanding more or less that the human has to adapt to the machine? And I guess this is one of the reasons why so many people have bad feelings about it. one of the reasons why so many people have bad feelings about it. Because people have the feeling we have to adapt to the cybernetic system and not the cybernetic system is not reacting on us. Exactly. Exactly my point. That is where I was going to. That machines are built so far. I think this is currently starting to change. At least I'm seeing some change. Currently, I mean, so far, so far machines have been built in a way that it is assumed that the human will adapt to its capabilities but i feel like uh this is the wrong approach and this is something that is actually criticized a lot these days uh in terms of how technological people approach a problem it's it's it's not, it's not only technological people, people that work within technology, it's also embedded in the system. We're talking about intelligent systems. We're talking about intelligent systems. This is like a virus on your computer because this is always inflicting your developments and making it not crash, but using it for specific interests and not serving the whole system. So if you look at the political systems like you would look on a program, what would you usually do to change this without taking the whole computer and smashing it? That would be equal to a revolution, to burn the whole computer and build a new one. Yes. And then you have the same shit again. But, yeah. So that's a very good point, actually, and a very good question. Because I've been thinking about this today, I think, even. I've been thinking about this today, I think, even building a system. Because my thoughts were like, okay, yeah, we are building systems to be used with humans. But then why do we call them autonomous? Because the moment you call something autonomous, because these tracks that I mentioned, they're built to be used with humans. They're not built to be used completely by themselves. This is something very important. But we call them autonomous. And as soon as you call something autonomous, people get this super crazy ideas and super crazy representation of what autonomous is. So autonomy is often or almost always creating a problem for the community or a majority, and is triggering strange emotions of fear, which is leading to exclusion within the community or the majority. On the other hand, on the other side, the exclusion creates loneliness and loneliness is also a strong emotion. So now we are coming to the next chapter about walls, nuts and walnuts. And I have the great pleasure to introduce the walnut, Akka Anvazov and my question is why are you here as a walnut? Hello, can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much for the invitation. I think I cannot really talk alone because inside the walnut there is not enough air. Do you have enough air still? Yeah, we are still here. I mean, I have some tricks that I can get some more air, but I don't do this. I don't do them in front of the camera. Of course, I mean, actually you are a ghost in the shell, no? And walnut in the back, we saw a wall drawn by Katia and the nut and the wall and the ghost in the shell because it's actually the walnut shell, it's not the walnut itself. Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning Norske Rundforskning So, hello Katia, hello Christian, hello Daria, you are going to explain to me and to all of us what am're seeing here is the virtual representation of the Pepper robot imitating the movements that Thomas is doing as much as possible. So now there is some delay. Shall I move faster or slower? Maybe slower. Slower, okay. The joint estimation or the human estimation, it's not very accurate as we want it to be. But actually the infrared is the main tracer. It's the main tracer that actually the 3D depends on that. And the beauty about these cameras is that usually, I mean, usually, way before, they used to do it with motion capture systems where you would have to wear markers. And those are those methods you can use only in a specific setting. With these cameras, it was kind of revolutionary because you can skip all this equipment and the person wearing equipment on it, so it's much more free, so much more interactive. And so what it does now, the Kinect gives us a position of all of your joints in 3D space. And then what we do with these, we try to translate them into robot joints. So what are robot joints? Yes, what is it? Robot joints are actually represented in angles instead of positions. So the angle between, for example, yes. So this angle is measured, but not the position. Or maybe better to explain it is as rotations. So how many degrees should this elbow rotate? And we only have positions. So we use like a mathematical model that translates position to orientation. I guess this is also used to program industrial robots. So for example, if I have a human like doing some kind of montage on a car or on a bicycle or whatever, then I can like trace this. And then I have a robot doing the same. and then I have a robot doing the same? Yes, that is called learning from demonstration. That is when a robot learns by imitating what you're doing. And in industrial robotics, yes, it is used, but it's also used as an external thing. Usually industrial robots don't come with depth sensors because their actuators and motors are more important than their perception per se because they really need to be precise where they're putting their arm and how they're moving their arm. So it's a different kind of approach to robotics, I would say, and perception. approach to robotics, I would say, and perception. But you can actually use an external. In our case, we also use an external, even though Pepper has a depth camera. We use an external because for perceiving humans... So this is Pepper? Yeah, that's the robot. For all those who happen not to know Pepper, because Pepper is quite famous. Yes. This is the machine to replace human beings, because if we record all kinds of movements, we don't need humans anymore because the machine can take over and simulate everything. So if we are working hard on it, we can die in peace. Supposedly, yes. And there will be no change from outside. For the aliens passing by our planet, it will look the same. You know what you are now doing doesn't look like human, it looks more like you pretending to be a robot. Yeah, to move naturally. But it's not so easy because you start to adapt. We were talking about the synchronization and that's very human. So if I'm communicating with the artificial whatever robot, I immediately think I have to move like that. So I understand what I'm doing. But actually now I'm trying to move freely only the hands. But it's fast, no? The hands are really optimized. I just wanted to mention, the camera became kind of personalized while you were talking, like Xi, the camera. Well, I was saying she because I perceive Pepper as female, but of course, I don't know. Pepper is sold as a female because there was a male version also, right? No, it's a cultural thing. A lot of people think it's a female because of the bottle shape. I have severe problems with the form factor of pepper. There are several things for me that are totally unacceptable in terms of shape, especially when it comes to the interpretation of femininity. And this, Daria pointed at one, there is, of course, the screen is an absolute no-go in this relation, in terms of wanting to be understood as a feminized object, or however it is conceived. And then it's not so brightly visible in this rendering, but I guess you see this faint line here. And this line is, as faint as it is, this is the line of pure obedience. So this makes this machine into a servant because this shows the livret. this machine into a servant because this shows the livret. Now here we see a 17th, 18th, 19th century cultural device as a sign that precisely shows that this is something, whatever it might be, it might be living, it might be dead, it might be he, it might be she, whatever it is, it is below my status and it is made to be obedient to me. And these are things that in the context of projecting femininity here is absolutely not acceptable to me. There are a few other things. In Japan, the context of this machine is absolutely male, it is a boy, and the thing here is, it's the atomu. This is a character that comes from anime. Just besides, it's one of the characters that helped stating anime as a medium in Japan. And this is a boy with rocket legs. This is a reinterpretation of the Pinocchio story, the Italian Pinocchio story retold in Japan in the context of Japanese culture. And what this Tetsuo Otomo, so the rocket boy wants to be is human. It wants to be, or he in this sense wants to be human. And again we have this idea of a father-child or father-son relationship because the inventor had a terrible accident with his son and he rebuilt his child. Again this old idea in rebuilding someone that had loved and lost is in this story. And then the idea of Pinocchio to reproduce this puppet-like thing into a human being. And it has the intention to become human. And the reason why it has the intention to become human, this is why Tetsuo, Adomo, is understood as a helper figure. And this again, at the next level, explains why in Japan especially, among the Asian countries that are way more pro-humanoid robots, or robots in general, this cultural rooting with a figure that is a pure helper without any threat to humanity as we have it compared. Like for example, in the Golem story we have this old saying, first it is the helper but once you treat it wrong it turns around the intention and starts to be a threat or even a predator. And this does not exist in Japan and this is written in the shape of this figure, of this robot, and this is precisely reinterpreted then in the understanding of Japan. And we, of course, we Europeans, we project also the threat, not only the helping aspect, but also the threat into it. The objectification of this robot. I want to speak against it. I dislike listening to objectification of this robot. I mean, I had this paper saying I'm defining it as a cyborg. Maybe it's because of this. But also as like a feminist approach, I would maybe give back to Daria and go back into experimenting and share that I have kind of solidarity feelings with the robot right now to be seen and played with. I have one story to add. I learned that in Japan, pepper is used for those people who have enough money to store the information and the behavior of recently passed away, died people of the family. And for at least 10 days, because I think it's actually one year, but the 10 days, the person who died is still around. And so if it finds some place where it can manifest, then it would be there. And then they put a picture of the died person as a mask on Pepper, and then Pepper is moving around and talking and responding as this person. And this is a normal service of companies who make the funeral. You can get this additional service that you get your dead person, additional service that you get your dead person because that's also the time where you're not the person is not burned or buried before these 10 days are over and in these 10 days so pepper is representing the dead the dead family member and they and there are thousands of people who are using this service and this is very normal. What you see there is also this old soul-body difference that we consider, whereas, I mean, I think what Katia said goes into this direction. If I acknowledge that kind of like the more than human world around us can be animated by itself or so, maybe that changes that perspective. triggered that game actually is that what you were doing with the robot is in performance art called the mirror game trying to be the mirror of the other person what and what is interesting there maybe that's something you could experiment with now that you have all that technology is that when you there is a paper from uh leon noy who did kind of like put the mirror game, tried to put it into the lab. So that 3DN experiment that just involves people in the first place. But he developed a device where he could sort of like measure people doing a performative action and then try to mirror the other person. And what was, his findings are interesting because not only, so he could show that when you, so it's a complex thing if you really want to be the mirror of the other person because you are constantly predicting what the other person will do and you don't know very well. And what he could show is that in the motion signatures of untrained people there was much more jitter whereas people who who regularly practice this mirror game they uh they have sometimes really as a follower continuous motion no jitter and more more interestingly they afterwards they also reported about their uh about their state of being while doing this performance and there was a correlation they they reported to be in flow when they were really kind of like when they were in this smooth motion the relation with the robot that that's an interesting question i mean don't know. I know the robot from my master thesis. And when I saw it again after months, I was like, oh, it's me. Do you remember me? But of course, it was a completely different robot and it cannot even remember me. I got in touch with Ellen Halitzius Kl, who is working on the history of weaving machines. And when I told her these observations of the mirror game and the fact that when people were kind of like, that they observed that when people were in synchrony with each other, that they reported they felt they were in the flow. She told me that people who are weaving, so they are operating the weaving machine, and they get into a rhythm with the machine and they also report that they are in the flow with the machine. And so in a way that's maybe a very old example of a cybernetic hybrid system. And what is interesting I think is this fact that you can have the feeling to be really attached to a machine and to be in flow, which is a positive experience. And even though the machine, obviously, I mean, a weaving machine is a fully mechanical device without any built-in intelligence whatsoever, but still, you know, the way you are dealing with it is completely different. You feel you are in with it is completely different. You feel you are in flow with the machine and it's a positive experience. I mean it's more telling about the way how we function than how the machine functions, but it's interesting to consider in your experiments. Yes, definitely. Thank you. Absolutely. And the other side, so now what you described, this is the positive, the interesting, the side that makes us brighter and more beautiful and understanding each other. And we know there's also the dark side, which I watched Metropolis again a few days ago. And there you have precisely the other side, so where the alienation, so not the flow, but precisely being part of the machine produces the alienation that brings you down. And what it is, so in Metropolis you have these wonderful body language examples, there's a scene when the change of shift is taking place and they are the guys who are walking into the shift, this 10-hour shift, and they are upright, they have their chins above their shoulders and they are in a rather dynamic pace. And at the same time you see the other stream of people, the ones that come from the 10-hour shift, and they are very slow, their legs are bumpy, their chins are down on this level, and their arms are... Can Pepper do this? Yes, but it can't do the head at the moment. And they are moving like this. So this is what the machine is doing to them. It synchronizes them into something sinister and exploitive. And I guess we have to deal with both of these aspects, with both the aspects, and not only as a polarity, but with all the gradients in between, because the gradients, they are the biases that we want to kick out and firstly understand and then remove them or acknowledge them and deal with them. The process of making the dough is the same as the process of making the dough. Rekordverk The process of making the dough is the same as the process of making the dough. The The The1996年 5月1日に東京都交通局10-1-1996年 10月1日に東京都交通局10-1-1996年 10月1日に東京都交通局10-1-1996年 ✔️ Follow me, ✔️ follow, follow, follow, follow, follow. A-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a- ¦ ¦ ¶¶ © transcript Emily Beynon you you