My latest article for the Conversation covers another controversial subject in AI - what does this mean for the future of humanity. Take a look and let me know what you think.
Viewing entries tagged
Media Appearances
I absolutely loved this new movie, taking theatre into Grand theft Auto. It’s a must see. here’s my review
Great to speak with the amazing Dr Ghislaine Boddington for this BBC World documentary!
Just before leaving Paris, I visited a new exhibition dedicated to Paralympic history and now these Games are concluded, it’s a good time to reflect on how far we’ve come. Take a look
Following the success of Pari 2024, I dive into what’s on the horizon in this new article for The Conversation.
Interviewed on the Nigel Farage show on GB News, where I argued that it is a failure of our educational system that we are in this situation. The opportunity for learners to use powerful computers in the classrooms is something we desperately need to enable, but we’ve not managed to secure their use as educational tools.
The movie Oppenheimer was a fantastic insight into the complexity of pursuing science in the expectation that it will be used for good by humanity. Take a look at this review for the Times Higher Education
Here is the pre-edited verison:
The movie Oppenheimer depicts its protagonist with a classic narrative about the scientist’s vocation; the relentless pursuit of a world-changing idea, which begins as a nucleus of thought, developing into an all-consuming, compelling, and noble mission.
Admittedly, there are elements of this that are more complicated when the science leads to the creation of a bomb, but leaving that aside for a moment, what academic wouldn’t wish for their niche, fringe beliefs about how the world really works to gradually, but surely, inspire students to join seminars, peers to defer to their intellect, and heads of state to recognise the importance of their work in forms of national decorations, where each of these symbolises the broad public good that is derived from what they do by, predominantly, just thinking?
Oppenheimer is a story about being heard and being acknowledged for the most intimate facet of our humanity - the merit of our ideas and our ability to demonstrate their worth. The film inspired me to think about what and how I teach. Do each of my lectures or seminars present ideas that will confront students with new ways of thinking about the world, to challenge their assumptions and confront them with difficult, sometimes uncomfortable ideas? Do I go into every classroom and prioritise challenging the views of my students and bringing out the best of their views, cognisant of the fact that this opportunity for interaction is also the place where my own views can be remade and improved by theirs? Does the curriculum I have written prioritise this form of thinking and demonstration of intellectual achievement? The film also made me think about the function of teaching in the pursuit of knowledge, at a time where we seem often to be struggling with the division between teaching and research.
What we don’t see of Oppenheimer is the endless administrative tasks that now fall upon most academics, dealing with student wellbeing, progression rates, and any number of tasks which take the academic away from their core, unique capability, which must surely be to lead the development of new intellectual traditions through inquiry born out of scholarship, research, and teaching. While those forms of welfare are in the service of inclusive and supportive learning experiences, they can easily overwhelm the kind of singular conviction that we see as necessary in Oppenheimer’s pursuit of a complex problem, free from the burden of distraction, other than to wrangle with the crucial consideration as to whether our work is, indeed, good for humanity or not.
From what I have observed, very few scholars have the kind of academic life that is depicted by Oppenheimer’s journey through academia, in terms of that vocational conviction. Very few are able to maintain - or even to establish - a core sense of purpose about their pursuit of a subject or an idea and for this to sustain their entire career. While I have known researchers who are in pursuit of the answer to one question, that question is elusive for most. The singularity of purpose that was depicted of Oppenheimer - or who we often depict as being the most accomplished minds - is a rare presence in the academic community, but is it desirable that all should experience or pursue this kind of career?
To its credit, Oppenheimer did well at showing how he approached progress as a matter of collegial collaboration, encouraging others to pursue their ideas, even when he could not see their merit. Oppenheimer was portrayed as quite self-effacing at times, noting his own incompetence at experimental physics and demonstrating clear value at the need for both theory and experimentation. This helps to dispel the idea that genius is best understood as the work of an individual, working alone with their thoughts.
Back to the bomb
The uncomfortable tension amidst all of this inspirational discovery is the application of Oppenheimer’s science to what became the most destructive discovery humanity has ever created through its pursuit of knowledge. The bomb wasn’t just any bomb, but was an idea that could set the world on fire, to paraphrase the film.
It’s not an unfamiliar tension in an intellectual’s life to grapple with how their passion for the pursuit of knowledge might, later, be applied to grotesque situations and a vast amount of experimental research will find itself in this position, even if the separation between the science and the situation is significant. While not every academic’s work could be quite as destructive, the creation of new ideas, methods, or insights, is often a disruptive force with unexpected and undesirable consequences, whether these are realised immediately or over a longer period.
Oppenheimer did not enjoy the benefit of this separation; there was no cognitive dissonance possible, even though he convinced himself that realising the method would be enough to dissuade the world from the pursuit of creating the weapon. The film describes this as naivety and may be a forgivable assumption, when faced also with the prospect of other nations seeking to do the same and who are perceived to lack any such moral compass.
However, the error that the movie invites us to consider is Oppenheimer's belief that the USA were the good guys, the trusted nation, who would deploy the bomb for justifiable means or use it to deter others from its pursuit,
In the end, the film depicts a catastrophic failure in understanding what global peace diplomacy requires, but also fails to reveal that, in fact, we don’t really know what it requires - especially when the ‘we’ is the academic, who remains blissfully absent from the political sphere. And this is the problem. In the absence of a better idea, or even expert political judgement, the best available approach taken by even capable and established democracies is to stay ahead of one’s enemies and it’s a conclusion that many nations, in many ways, pursue through their entire investment in science and technology.
Perhaps the greatest wisdom found in Oppenheimer is that the mindless pursuit of STEM for their own sake, without attention to how intellectual journeys must be forged via critical moral and social insights, puts the world in a persistent state of tension. If we look at our learning curriculum today within our most advanced science and technology subjects, we see a gaping hole in this component of the learning process. How many courses on artificial intelligence have space in the curriculum for ethical debate? This needs urgent and immediate rebalancing to ensure our intellectual institutions protect and service the pursuit of intellectual endeavour for human prosperity, rather than its further demise.
Very pleased to be featured in this new podcast presented by by Ghislaine Boddington. Here’s the overview and links
Are you planning a summer holiday? Maybe you will have some time to relax on a lounger listening to the near future narratives I am presenting in the Fast Forward Season 2 podcast!
Join me as we explore the transformative shifts that emerging technologies are bringing to our bodies, minds and behaviours. This international series features engaging conversations with global experts, unlocking future visions. From avatars to women in gaming, to technology's impact on family dynamics, Fast Forward Season 2 covers it all.
The first 3 episodes are available:
Ep. 1 - "The Metaverse Blend - hyper-enhancing our hybrid future": Explore the I and the We of our new virtual realms, from the creation of individualised avatars that shape our virtual identities/self-expression by Michaela Larosse (The Fabricant) to how we can/will participate in groups with Professor Andy Miah, Chair of Science Communication & Future Media at The University of Salford explaining the advanced methods in e-sports.
Ep. 2 - "Women in Gaming - empowerment leads to engagement": Dive into the history of gender representation in the gaming industry, witness the inspiring transformations happening today. With life stories from Ghada Almoqbel, CEO of GCON, and Jennifer Donahoe Donahue, Head of Publishing & Marketing at HiDef, Inc.
Ep. 3 - "Telegram to Telepresence - is the family being swept away on a digital tidal wave?" Explore the concerns surrounding data transmission within our homes and its impact on parental care. And what happens when digital touch is also an option? Guests: Sonia Livingstone, Prof. of Social Psychology at The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and Sly Spencer-Lee, Co-Founder/Co-CEO at Emerge®.
And there's more - here's what's coming up:
Ep. 4 - "Extended self - our future digital twins": Uncover the transformative power of personalised body data and the boundless possibilities it offers. What about the lack of diversity of the data available? Guests: Michael D. Geer, Co-Founder of Humanity Inc. and Marija Butkovic, Founder of Women of Wearables (wearables, health tech & femtech).
Ep. 5 - "Cyborg Shifts – embedding technologies into our bodies": Discover groundbreaking advancements in cyborg technology, as prostheses and implants converge, creating opportunities for shifts towards cyborg existences. Guests: Dani Clode, University of Cambridge and trans-species artist Neil Harbisson.
Ep. 6 - "STEM Women are changing the world": Gain insights into women in tech activism and networks, inspiring the next generation of STEM leaders. Hear the experiences of younger women in STEM. Guests: Patricia Peck Pinheiro, PhD, CEO/Founding Partner of Peck Advogados and Dr A-Marie I., CEO of Stemettes.
Listen to explore how these emerging technologies will shape our lives and the world around us!
Spotify: https://lnkd.in/eBSjbNbn
Apple: https://lnkd.in/ePPUbAWZ
For new episodes, hit subscribe. If you like the series, rate and review it.
This week, I discovered that an article I published for the Times Higher Education made it into their top 15 articles of 2022. My contribution focuses on the future of knowledge, following 30 years of investment into the STEM disciplines. Here’s the article
and here’s a video piece which speaks to the main thesis:
Delighted to be interviewed by Fortune magazine writer Jonathan Vanian on what Clubhouse means for our future in social media. Audio communities are doing incredibly well at the moment, signalling a desire for retreating from video into the less intense, more intimate space of sound. The full article is behind a pay wall, but here’s the link.
A few weeks ago, I was interviewed for an article in the Washington Post, written by Nick Busca, who does fantastic work writing about new technology. You can access the article here (hopefully!)
I’m really excited to announce my involvement with a remarkable new tv series titled “Man 2.0” Across a number of episodes, I talk about how the human condition is being transformed by technology and what this means for our future. It’s currently being distributed worldwide, so may not yet be in your country, but you can see a trailer here.
Great to see this write up from our AI for Good event last week. An excellent summary of what we covered.
I was delighted to be a part of this BBC radio programme, especially since my dear friend Dr Mahfoud Amara is also interviews.
Why is watching sport so important to us as a species? And what happens when that experience is taken away from us? Award-winning sports journalist and broadcaster Clare Balding explores why sport plays such a crucial role in shaping society, speaking to a field of global experts and elite sportspeople, including Martina Navratilova.
In 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic abruptly put a stop to virtually all sporting activity across the globe – and left vast numbers of people staring into an existential void. In sport’s absence, we’ve been hungrily reliving past contests, debating hypothetical scenarios, and doing everything we can to plug the hole in our lives. The crisis has shown how our relationship with sport dominates our lives and our media, our conversations and our leisure time. In this documentary, Clare Balding talks to figures from the worlds of anthropology, philosophy and human behaviour to try to figure out why experiencing sport is so meaningful to us, whether we’re in a crowd, or one of millions following on television and social media.
Her interviewees include the sociologists Akilah Carter-Francique, Mahfoud Amara and Ramachandra Guha; anthropologist Leila Zaki Chakravarty; and philosophers Heather Reid and Andy Martin – who unpick the myriad ways in which our love of sport is deeply embedded in human experience and history, and how our consumption of it has shaped modern society.
Cognitive neuroscientist Sophie Scott reveals what we know about what happens in our brains as we watch sport, whilst bioethicist and technology expert Andy Miah tells Clare how cutting-edge digital advances and the new world of eSports are changing the relationship between fan and sporting event forever.
An Overcoat Media Production for BBC World Service. Produced by Steven Rajam Photo: Liverpool fans at Anfield, Credit: Tembele Bohle, Pexels
Digital homeschooling: we need to rethink our worries about children's screen time
We’ve spent the last decade being anxious about the increasing amount of time young people spend in front of screens. However, in the last two months, children have been encouraged to dive into digital like never before. This has thrown up all kinds of questions about how to keep well online in a time where being outside and together in physical space has been impossible.
Parents have sought to employ digital platforms any way they can to ensure their children remain intimately connected to their friends, fearful of the time they are missing socialising, playing, learning and sharing.
Where previously we may have been sceptical of digital learning compared to face-to-face experiences, it has become central to children’s homeschooling and a great deal of positives have come out of it. In addition to work set by schools, children in the UK and across the world have engaged with new teachers. Many have been exercising with Joe Wicks or doing maths with Carol Vorderman.
These digital learning experiences have been the best option for children under lockdown, yet this is hard to reconcile with our previous worries about limiting screen time. Seemingly overnight, even organisations that had warned us about being in digital space too much now advocate their use.
The World Health Organization, for example, has been working with gaming companies as a way of promoting key COVID-19 health messages. This comes less than two years after it identified excessive gaming as a possible health disorder. While this partnership is far from a general policy on promoting gaming for health, it has sent the message that gaming is an important way to maintain mental health during a long period of social isolation.
With social distancing and homeschooling likely to be a feature of children’s lives for some time yet, we need new ways to think about the time young people spend in digital space. Some helpful guidance can be found in a 2019 report published by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Public Health, which outlined guidance for children’s screen use.
The report did not specify putting time limits on screen time, nor did it say that certain kinds of screen exposure are worse or better than others. Instead, it invited families to talk about their collective screen health together and discuss when it seemed to be making family time worse. The report invited families to ask themselves four questions:
- Is screen time in your household controlled?
- Does screen use interfere with what your family wants to do?
- Does screen use interfere with sleep?
- Are you able to control snacking during screen time?
Answering these questions in 2020 feels like a very different exercise, but they’re still a really great place to start when helping children – and adults – through this difficult period.
The impact of extra screen time
One of the big challenges for researchers right now is understanding the impact of the extra screen time young people are experiencing during lockdown. We have no precedents for such conditions and most of the research on screen time is still in the context of a life where a big part of a child’s day is within a school setting.
For this reason, we need more data to understand how the extra screen time is affecting young people, but it’s reasonable to conclude that it all depends how that screen time is orchestrated. For example, being in front of a Joe Wicks workout and doing exercise is likely a very different category of experience than being on social media.
This is why active gaming and even virtual reality experiences could usher in an entirely new way of thinking about the screen and its impact on our lives. We already have evidence that active gaming experiences can promote physical wellbeing.
It’s also worth thinking about how this time offers an opportunity to completely rethink what and how we learn. Children can access lessons and courses from all over the world, which provides a chance for them to engage with children and teachers from other countries. Even astronauts on the International Space Station have been reading stories to children.
Through all of this, it’s crucial to remember that we’re not simply homeschooling or working from home, but trying hard to do these things in extraordinary times. In the rush to maintain standards and normality, we need to remember that a completely different approach is perfectly okay right now.
Andy Miah, Chair in Science Communication & Future Media, University of Salford
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Had a great conversation with Dr Alex Fenton and Ryan Mayer about how technology is helping sports figure out their Covid-19 strategy. Check out the full article here and a little video about the article below
I’m really delighted to have published this op ed for CLOT magazine and, especially, to have discovered their wonderful publication through this opportunity. it’s a fantastic site with some amazing articles about incredible art work. This intro into drone art covers one of the major chapters of my new book on DRONES. It’s the chapter that describes where I began with drones and I’m especially attached to it, as it was where I began working with some amazing and lovely people. Check it out HERE.
It’s a really tough time for everyone right now, not least of which is just making sure we are all are keeping healthy, fed, and taking care of ourselves more generally. Universities have been turned upside down and a lot of us are trying to focus on supporting colleagues and students to get through this time, along with being full time carers.
For me personally, research is an important way to stay to stay mentally balanced and so I’ve gone through some real soul searching to figure out what it is about my work that I think still matters.
I wrote this article in the hope that it might allow some of my colleagues to feel that their research still matters. I come from a wide educational background and really want to ensure that all the wonderful work we do in disciplines that are not at all related to this awful crisis is still allowed to continue.
Very excited to publish this article for the Design Exchange, bringing together some of my thoughts about esports and architecture. Some wider work developing around this theme. Check out the article here
Recently spoke to DeZeen magazine about stories regarding China’s use of drones to police citizens in the context of the coronavirus. The big story here isn’t really that this may be happening, but that the utilisation of drones by a range of enforcement services is likely to become commonplace and has been enabled by a growing utilisation of drones within military operations.