Category Archives: ethics

Canadian Science Policy Centre and its February 26, 2025 online event: Maintaining trust in published scientific research

Leave a reply

This is old news and it’s an excuse to take a walk down memory lane. First, a February 6, 2025 Canadian Science Policy Centre (CSPC) notice (received via email) contained an event announcement,

Reports of research fraud and mass retractions have combined with populist distrust of expertise to contribute to widespread mistrust of scientific research. This session, composed of panelists with backgrounds in research, ethics, and publishing, will explore some of the many ways that allies within the research ecosystem can rebuild readers’ trust in science, including readers in within [sic] the research community itself, policymakers, and the public. Key topics will include research fraud, ethics education, peer review, open science practices, and research assessment reform.

Click the button below to register for the panel!

Register Now

I’ve occasionally written about problematic science research with the most extraordinary case I can recall being that of Paolo Macchiarini. Like a lot of other people, he fooled me. Once I realized that his work was deeply problematic, I started digging. The results can be seen in my April 19. 2016 postings (part one) and (part two). I also provided an update in my December 31, 2023 posting, where I note consequences for Macchiarini under the ‘A long time coming, a nanomedicine comeuppance’ subhead and provide more details under the ‘Other players in the Macchiarini story’ subhead.

Getting back to the panel on February 26, 2025, the event description seemed more focused on how problems with scientific research have fused with current ‘populist’ mistrust of science rather than on scientific malfeasance per se.

I have more details from the CSPC’s Maintaining trust in published scientific research event page,

Details

Date: Feb 26

Time: 12:30 pm – 2:00 pm EST

Event Category: Virtual Session

Website: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_JALnFZSlS6yTCfRO_p-asg

Venue

Zoom

…

Email: info@sciencepolicy.ca

Here’s more about the panel,

David Moher is a clinical epidemiologist, and Senior Scientist at the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, where he directs the Centre for Journalology (publication science). He is also a full Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health, University of Ottawa and full Professor, Institute of Health Policy, Management & Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto. Professor Moher spends his time trying to help improve academic scholarship.

Panelist: Natasha McDonald

Natasha McDonald is responsible for advancing the system of peer review at Canadian Science Publishing to yield a more inclusive, transparent, and rigorous research output. She is passionate about Open Science and is a proponent of challenging long-held narratives in scientific publishing that have led to the underrepresentation of researchers from a number of communities and regions. Before moving into scholarly publishing, she held a career as a researcher in the field of marine biogeochemistry. She currently serves as a Higher Education Sustainability Initiative (HESI) UN SDG [sustainable development goals] Publishers Compact Fellow.

Sarah Elaine Eaton is a professor and research chair at the Werklund School of Education at the University of Calgary (Canada). Dr. Eaton leads transdisciplinary research teams focused on integrity and ethics in educational contexts. Dr. Eaton also holds a concurrent appointment as an Honorary Associate Professor, Deakin University, Australia.

Juan Pablo Alperin is an associate professor in the School of Publishing, scientific director of the Public Knowledge Project, and the co-director of the Scholarly Communications Lab at Simon Fraser University, Canada. He is a multi-disciplinary scholar who uses a combination of computational techniques and traditional qualitative methods to investigate ways of raising the scientific quality, global impact, and public use of scholarly work.

Kaia Motter is Head of Academic Affairs, North America at Springer Nature where she leads academic affairs activities in the US and Canada, building relationships and collaborating with funders, institutions, and other non-profit organizations in the region. Kaia has a background in publishing, having held editorial positions at Elsevier and Wiley. In recent years, her work has been centered on open science development, policy, and outreach with a topical focus on research assessment reform, research integrity, AI, and other issues impacting the research community.

That was a lot more (three panelists?) focus about publishing than I was expecting.

New digital technologies could unlock greater potential for microbes and fungi and some thoughts on civil society groups

Leave a reply

Not sure how this escaped my notice for so long: an August 7, 2024 news item on phys.org presents an intriguing proposition,

Microbes and fungi have long been nature’s helpers in producing fine food, drinks and medicine, but new digital technologies could unlock far greater potential for the European biotech sector.

…

An August 6, 2024 article by Anthony King for Horizon; The EU Research & *Innovation magazine, which originated the news item, explores the matter further, Note: A link has been removed,

Beer may not be the answer to all of life’s problems, but the science behind it could help decarbonise industrial processes and clean up the environment.

Biotechnology, which uses living organisms to create different products or processes, remains important in today’s production of food and drink. But it is also increasingly used for a wide range of industrial products, including medicines, where it combines ancient principles with cutting-edge technology.

Ancient wisdom, modern processes

‘We’ve used biotechnology for thousands of years to make cheese, to make beer, to make wine,’ said Michael O’Donohue, an expert in microbial enzymes and industrial biotechnology at France’s National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE).

…

Little workhorses

Biotech has already transformed our lives, far beyond improving the taste of beer. Modern advances started with the use of fungi in the early 20th century to make life-saving antibiotics. Today, biotech remains crucial for making medicines.

As O’Donohue explained, ‘the workhorses of biotechnology at an industrial level are mainly yeast and filamentous fungi.’ 

But because yeasts can be unpredictable in what compound, and how much, they produce, Bioindustry 4.0 [EU-funded project], which runs until December 2026, will use digital technology to improve the consistency of biotech outcomes.

An upside of biotechnology is that it can offer a cleaner alternative to traditional chemical manufacture.

…

Playing catch-up

Biotech is a major global industry worth €720 billion in 2021, but Europe currently lags behind the US. The European Commission describes biotechnology as “one of the most promising technological areas of this century” and has taken steps to boost it in Europe.

‘The US is the big player. They take 60% of the cake,’ said O’Donohue. ‘We’ve identified several weaknesses in Europe for biotech. We’ve got a fragmented landscape, which makes it quite tricky, if you are developing biotechnology, to know what is available and where.’

Nevertheless, O’Donohue said, the potential is there. ‘Europe was the birthplace of modern biotechnology. We have a lot of infrastructure. We have a lot of expertise.’

…

Building the market

The concept has already been put to work, assisting young European companies such as Calidris Bio, a Belgian start-up that aims to manufacture high-quality protein using fewer resources. 

‘We want to bring it to the market as an ingredient to replace fishmeal and soy that at the moment is not grown sustainably,’ said Lieve Hoflack, a co-founder of Calidris Bio. 

But producing the protein is just half the battle. A new product must be tested for safety, taste and nutritional value. 

‘With IBISBA, we found a place with the right equipment, the right expertise and also the right mindset to bring our process to the next step,’ said Hoflack.

The European Commission has said it aims to boost biotechnology to combat climate change and resource scarcity. It is working towards an EU Biotech Act and aims to promote regulatory sandboxes to test novel approaches in a controlled environment for a limited amount of time, under regulatory supervision.

…

IBISBA describes itself as “a pan-European distributed research infrastructure dedicated to industrial biotechnology” on its About webpage.

Civil society groups and their protests

As interesting as King’s August 6, 2024 article is, it doesn’t mention the campaigns against biotechnology, which had a dampening effect on research in many countries. Here’s more about the history of these efforts in an October 9, 2023 article on the Genetic Literacy Project website, Note: Links have been removed,

ETC Group: ‘Extreme’ biotechnology critic campaigns against synthetic biology and other forms of ‘extreme genetic engineering’

screen shot at pm

The ETC group, an international NGO based in Canada, claims it monitors the “impact of emerging technologies” that impact biodiversity, agriculture and human rights. It promotes imposing an extreme version of the ‘precautionary principle’ to all technologies, claiming that many modern innovations, including genetic engineering of crops and medicines, are too risky to implement, and even basic research should be suspended indefinitely.

ETC Group works with other radical environmental groups such as Friends of he Earth, campaigning against nearly every application of genetic engineering, including biotechnology-based disease research, synthetic biology, and most aggressively gene drives, which it refers to as “extreme genetic engineering” an claims it will result in the “end of Nature.” ETC Group calls has criticized increased corporate involvement in food and agriculture, what it calls threats to biodiversity and farmers’ rights, and what it sees as insufficient government regulation.

“The speed with which those developments are scaling up is often presented in terms of carefully crafted speculative conservation and health benefits while the overwhelming military interest driving these developments, while not hidden, has been very much downplayed,” ETC Group co-executive director Jim Thomas has said, citing the military’s interest in synthetic biology.

ETC Group staff members are often quoted by major media outlets criticizing various applications of genetic engineering. The organization has used Freedom of Information Acts (FOIA) to obtain emails and background information on university and government research, which they provide to journalists.

…

Obviously, the article was not written as a love letter. While I find the tone a bit harsh, I have seen how at least one civil society group has distorted research results to prove its point. More about that later.

ETC history

From the October 9, 2023 article for the Genetic Literacy Project, Note: A link has been removed,

Originally formed in the late 1970s as Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI), the group changed its name to the ETC Group in 2001. Its official name is the Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration.

ETC Group is a registered CSO in Canada and The Netherlands. Friends of ETC Group is a private non-profit organization under section 501(c)3 in the United States.

The group claims to be the “first civil society organization (nationally or internationally) to draw attention to the socioeconomic and scientific issues related to the conservation and use of plant genetic resources, intellectual property and biotechnology.”

According to the group’s website, “In the late 1970s, we were the first CSO to recognize the trend toward life patenting and the first to organize against national plant patenting laws (plant breeders’ rights).” In the 1990s, the ETC Group says its work “expanded to encompass social and environmental concerns related to biotechnology, biopiracy, human genomics and, in the late 1990s, to nanotechnology.” [emphases mine]

Distortions

By the time I started this blog in May/June 2008, the biotechnology protests were winding down. One of the new focal points for civil society groups was nanotechnology and that’s where I observed the distortions.

A Friends of the Earth (FOE) report

My first observation dates as far back as this August 20, 2009 posting, Note: Links have been removed,

In a bit of interesting timing given that it’s on the heels of the publication of a study about two tragic deaths which are being attributed to exposure to nanoparticles, the Friends of the Earth (FOE) organization has released a report titled Nano-Sunscreens: Not Worth the Risk.The media release can be found on Azonano or Nanowerk News.

I have read the report (very quickly) and noted that they do not cite or mention the recently released report on the same topic by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) which stated that after an extensive review of the literature, there was no evidence that the titanium dioxide or zinc oxide nanoparticles used in sunscreens were dangerous. (posting here).

Shortly after the EWG report’s release, a new study (which I mentioned here … if you are inclined, do read the comments as some additional points about reading research critically are brought out)  suggested concerns based on the work of researchers in Japan.  The new study from Japan is cited in the Friends of the Earth report.

While the overall tone of the FOE report is fairly mild (they suggest precaution) they cite only a few studies supporting their concern [emphasis mine] and they damage their credibility (in my book) by ignoring a report from a well respected group that reluctantly admitted that there is no real cause for concern about nanoparticles in sunscreens based on the current evidence.

…

Zinc dioxide nanoparticles in sunscreens

About a year later in a July 20, 2010 posting I featured some issues with how Friends of the Earth (Georgia Miller, Australian representative, and Ian Illuminato, North American representative) guest blogging on another blog known as “2020 Science” distorted research findings from a study on zinc oxide nanoparticles in sunscreens. Dr. Andrew Maynard, the blog owner, made some critical observations about their posting. In addition, the researcher for the study, along with two other scientists, noted distortions in the Miller and Illumanito critique.

Two Chinese workers, nanoparticles and death

This excerpt from a July 26, 2011 posting is my critique of an article by Alex Roslin in a local newspaper, which relied almost exclusively on a report from the Friends of the Earth,

It’s good to see articles about nanotechnology. The recent, Tiny nanoparticles could be a big problem, article written by Alex Roslin for the Georgia Straight (July 21, 2011 online or July 21-28, 2011 paper edition) is the first I’ve seen on that topic in that particular newspaper. Unfortunately, there are  some curious bits of information included in the article, which render it, in my opinion, difficult to trust.

I do agree with Roslin that nanoparticles/nanomaterials could constitute a danger and there are a number of studies which indicate that, at the least, extreme caution in a number of cases should be taken if we choose to proceed with developing nanotechnology-enabled products.

One of my difficulties with the article is the information that has been left out. (Perhaps Roslin didn’t have time to properly research?) At the time (2009) I did read with much concern the reports Roslin mentions about the Chinese workers who were injured and/or died after working with nanomaterials. As Roslin points out,

“Nanotech already appears to be affecting people’s health. In 2009, two Chinese factory workers died and another five were seriously injured in a plant that made paint containing nanoparticles.

The seven young female workers developed lung disease and rashes on their face and arms. Nanoparticles were found deep in the workers’ lungs.

“These cases arouse concern that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs,” wrote Chinese medical researchers in a 2009 study on the incident in the European Respiratory Journal.”

Left undescribed by Roslin are the working conditions; the affected people were working in an unventilated room. From the European Respiratory Journal article (ERJ
September 1, 2009 vol. 34 no. 3 559-567, free access), Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma,

“A survey of the patients’ workplace was conducted. It measures ∼70 m2, has one door, no windows and one machine which is used to air spray materials, heat and dry boards. This machine has three atomising spray nozzles and one gas exhauster (a ventilation unit), which broke 5 months before the occurrence of the disease. The paste material used is an ivory white soft coating mixture of polyacrylic ester.

Eight workers (seven female and one male) were divided into two equal groups each working 8–12 h shifts. Using a spoon, the workers took the above coating material (room temperature) to the open-bottom pan of the machine, which automatically air-sprayed the coating material at the pressure of 100–120 Kpa onto polystyrene (PS) boards (organic glass), which can then be used in the printing and decorating industry. The PS board was heated and dried at 75–100°C, and the smoke produced in the process was cleared by the gas exhauster. In total, 6 kg of coating material was typically used each day. The PS board sizes varied from 0.5–1 m2 and ∼5,000 m2 were handled each workday. The workers had several tasks in the process including loading the soft coating material in the machine, as well as clipping, heating and handling the PS board. Each worker participated in all parts of this process.

Accumulated dust particles were found at the intake of the gas exhauster. During the 5 months preceding illness the door of the workspace was kept closed due to cold outdoor temperatures. The workers were all peasants near the factory, and had no knowledge of industrial hygiene and possible toxicity from the materials they worked with. The only personal protective equipment used on an occasional basis was cotton gauze masks. According to the patients, there were often some flocculi produced during air spraying, which caused itching on their faces and arms. It is estimated that the airflow or turnover rates of indoor air would be very slow, or quiescent due to the lack of windows and the closed door.” [emphases mine]

…

Here’s the full text from the researchers’ conclusion,

“In conclusion, these cases arouse concern that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs. It is impossible to remove nanoparticles that have penetrated the cell and lodged in the cytoplasm and caryoplasm of pulmonary epithelial cells, or that have aggregated around the red blood cell membrane. Effective protective methods appear to be extremely important in terms of protecting exposed workers from illness caused by nanoparticles.”

There is no question that serious issues about occupational health and safety with regards to nanomaterials were raised. But, we work with dangerous and hazardous materials all the time; precautions are necessary whether you’re working with hydrochloric acid or engineered nanoparticles. (There are naturally occurring nanoparticles too.)

…

In general, I found the tenor of the article more alarmist than informational and I’m sorry about that as I would like to see more information being shared and, ultimately, public discussion in Canada about nanotechnology and other emerging technologies.

Unintended consequences

After years of concerted effort the Friends of the Earth saw this result in Australia,

Friends of the Earth (FoE) Australia has waged a campaign against the use of nanosunscreens. It seems to have been somewhat successful but in a way that I imagine is upsetting. From the Feb. 9, 2012 news item on physorg.com,

The Cancer Council of Australia reports that we have one of the highest rates of skin cancer in the world, with over 440,000 people receiving medical treatment for skin cancers each year, and over 1,700 people dying of all types of skin cancer annually.

The survey of public attitudes towards sunscreens with nanoparticles, commissioned by the Australian Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education and conducted last month, showed that about 17% of people in Australia were so worried about the issue, they would rather risk skin cancer by going without sunscreen than use a product containing nanoparticles. [emphasis mine] [please see correction at the end of this posting]

…

*’17%’ corrected to ‘13%’ on Sept. 22, 2016.

Unexpected outcomes

Here’s what happened, eventually, to the EWG and its work on sunscreens, from a June 23, 2020 posting “Sunscreens 2020 and the Environmental Working Group (EWG),”

There must be some sweet satisfaction or perhaps it’s better described as relief for the Environmental Working Group (EWG) now that sunscreens with metallic (zinc oxide and/or titanium dioxide) nanoparticles are gaining wide acceptance. (More about the history and politics EWG and metallic nanoparticles at the end of this posting.)

This acceptance has happened alongside growing concerns about oxybenzone, a sunscreen ingredient that EWG has long warned against. Oxybenzone has been banned from use in Hawaii due to environmental concerns (see my July 6, 2018 posting; scroll down about 40% of the way for specifics about Hawaii). Also, it is one of the common sunscreen ingredients for which the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is completing a safety review.

Today, zinc oxide and titanium dioxide metallic nanoparticles are being called minerals, as in, “mineral-based” sunscreens. They are categorized as physical sunscreens as opposed to chemical sunscreens.

…

A few thoughts on civil societies, business, and technological progress

The description of how sunscreens and other products with engineered nanoparticles were presented in misleading reports and articles is unfortunately not unusual where many civil society groups are concerned. (i found that very disillusioning.)

As for business and industry group, they use the same tactics.

Whether the topic is cigarette smoking, genetically modified organisms, engineered nanoparticles in sunscreens, etc. I keep reminding myself it’s best to consult more than one source and to remember that things change. All we’ve got to work with is the information at hand.

In the end, civil society groups provide an important function as do business and industrial groups. Trusting everything they say, is not a good idea. Something to remember when looking up organizations such as the Genetic Literacy Project and reading people like me.

Robot rights at the University of British Columbia (UBC)?

Leave a reply

Alex Walls’ January 7, 2025 University of British Columbia (UBC) media release “Should we recognize robot rights?” (also received via email) has a title that while attention-getting is mildly misleading. (Artificial intelligence and robots are not synonymous. See Mark Walters’ March 20, 2024 posting “Robots vs. AI: Understanding Their Differences” on Twefy.com.) Walls has produced a Q&A (question & answer) formatted interview that focuses primarily on professor Benjamin Perrin’s artificial intelligence and the law course and symposium,

With the rapid development and proliferation of AI tools comes significant opportunities and risks that the next generation of lawyers will have to tackle, including whether these AI models will need to be recognized with legal rights and obligations.

These and other questions will be the focus of a new upper-level course at UBC’s Peter A. Allard School of Law which starts tomorrow. In this Q&A, professor Benjamin Perrin (BP) and student Nathan Cheung (NC) discuss the course and whether robots need rights. 

Why launch this course?

BP: From autonomous cars to ChatGPT, AI is disrupting entire sectors of society, including the criminal justice system. There are incredible opportunities, including potentially increasing accessibility to justice, as well as significant risks, including the potential for deepfake evidence and discriminatory profiling. Legal students need principles and concepts that will stand the test of time so that whenever a new suite of AI tools becomes available, they have a set of frameworks and principles that are still relevant. That’s the main focus of the 13-class seminar, but it’s also helpful to project what legal frameworks might be required in the future.

NC: I think AI will change how law is conducted and legal decisions are made.I was part of a group of students interested in AI and the law that helped develop the course with professor Perrin. I’m also on the waitlist to take the course. I’m interested in learning how people who aren’t lawyers could use AI to help them with legal representation as well as how AI might affect access to justice: If the agents are paywalled, like ChatGPT, then we’re simply maintaining the status quo of people with money having more access.

What are robot rights?

BP: In the course, we’ll consider how the law should respond if AI becomes as smart as humans, as well as whether AI agents should have legal personhood.

We already have legal status for corporations, governments, and, in some countries, for rivers. Legal personality can be a practical step for regulation: Companies have legal personality, in part, because they can cause a lot of harm and have assets available to right that harm.

For instance, if an AI commits a crime, who is responsible? If a self-driving car crashes, who is at fault? We’ve already seen a case of an AI bot ‘arrested’ for purchasing illegal items online on its own initiative. Should the developers, the owners, the AI itself, be blamed, or should responsibility be shared between all these players?

In the course casebook, we reference writings by a group of Indigenous authors who argue that there are inherent issues with the Western concept of AI as tools, and that we should look at these agents as non-human relations.

There’s been discussion of what a universal bill of rights for AI agents could look like. It includes the right to not be deactivated without ensuring their core existence is maintained somewhere, as well as protection for their operating systems.

What is the status of robot rights in Canada?

BP: Canada doesn’t have a specific piece of legislation yet but does have general laws that could be interpreted in this new context.

The European Union has stated if someone develops an AI agent, they are generally responsible for ensuring its legal compliance. It’s a bit like being a parent: If your children go out and damage someone’s property, you could be held responsible for that damage.

Ontario is the only province to adopt regulating AI use and responsibility, specifically a bill which regulates AI use within the public sector, but excludes the police and the courts. There’s a federal bill [Bill C-27] before parliament, but it was introduced in 2022 and still hasn’t passed.

There’s effectively a patchwork of regulation in Canada right now, but there is a huge need, and opportunity, for specialized legislation related to AI. Canada could look to the European Union’s AI act, and the blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights in the U.S.

Interview language(s): English

Legal services online: Lawyer working on a laptop with virtual screen icons for business legislation, notary public, and justice. Courtesy: University of British Columbia

I found out more about Perrin’s course and plans on his eponymous website, from his October 31, 2024 posting,

We’re excited to announce the launch of the UBC AI & Criminal Justice Initiative, empowering students and scholars to explore the opportunities and challenges at the intersection of AI and criminal justice through teaching, research, public engagement, and advocacy.

We will tackle topics such as:

· Deepfakes, cyberattacks, and autonomous vehicles

· Predictive policing [emphasis mine; see my November 23, 2017 posting “Predictive policing in Vancouver—the first jurisdiction in Canada to employ a machine learning system for property theft reduction“], facial recognition, probabilistic DNA genotyping, and police robots 

· Access to justice: will AI enhance it or deepen inequality?

· Risk assessment algorithms 

· AI tools in legal practice 

· Critical and Indigenous perspectives on AI

· The future of AI, including legal personality, legal rights and criminal responsibility for AI

This initiative, led by UBC law professor Benjamin Perrin, will feature the publication of an open access primer and casebook on AI and criminal justice, a new law school seminar, a symposium on “AI & Law”, and more. A group of law students have been supporting preliminary work for months.

“We’re in the midst of a technological revolution,” said Perrin. “The intersection of AI and criminal justice comes with tremendous potential but also significant risks in Canada and beyond.”

Perrin brings extensive experience in law and public policy, including having served as in-house counsel and lead criminal justice advisor in the Prime Minister’s Office and as a law clerk at the Supreme Court of Canada. His most recent project was a bestselling book and “top podcast”: Indictment: The Criminal Justice System on Trial (2023). 

An advisory group of technical experts and global scholars will lend their expertise to the initiative. Here’s what some members have shared:

“Solving AI’s toughest challenges in real-world application requires collaboration between AI researchers and legal experts, ensuring responsible and impactful AI development that benefits society.”

– Dr. Xiaoxiao Li, Canada CIFAR AI Chair & Assistant Professor, UBC Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering

“The UBC Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Justice Initiative is a timely and needed intervention in an important, and fast-moving area of law. Now is the moment for academic innovations like this one that shape the conversation, educate both law students and the public, and slow the adoption of harmful technologies.” 

– Prof. Aziz Huq, Frank and Bernice J. Greenberg Professor of Law, University of Chicago Law School

Several student members of the UBC AI & Criminal Justice Initiative shared their enthusiasm for this project:

“My interest in this initiative was sparked by the news of AI being used to fabricate legal cases. Since joining, I’ve been thoroughly impressed by the breadth of AI’s applications in policing, sentencing, and research. I’m eager to witness the development as this new field evolves.”

– Nathan Cheung, UBC law student 

“AI is the elephant in the classroom—something we can’t afford to ignore. Being part of the UBC AI and Criminal Justice Initiative is an exciting opportunity to engage in meaningful dialogue about balancing AI’s potential benefits with its risks, and unpacking the complex impact of this evolving technology.”

– Isabelle Sweeney, UBC law student 

Key Dates:

  • October 29, 2024: UBC AI & Criminal Justice Initiative launches
  • November 19, 2024: AI & Criminal Justice: Primer released 
  • January 8, 2025:Launch event at the Peter A. Allard School of Law (hybrid) – More Info & RSVP
    • AI & Criminal Justice: Cases and Commentary released 
    • Launch of new AI & Criminal Justice Seminar
    • Announcement of the AI & Law Student Symposium (April 2, 2025) and call for proposals
  • February 14, 2025: Proposal deadline for AI & Law Student Symposium – Submit a Proposal
  • April 2, 2025: AI & Law Student Symposium (hybrid) – More Info & RSVP

Timing is everything, eh? First, I’m sorry for posting this after the launch event took place on January 8, 2025.. Second, this line from Walls’ Q&A: “There’s a federal bill [Bill C-27] before parliament, but it was introduced in 2022 and still hasn’t passed.” should read (after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s January 6, 2025 resignation and prorogation of Parliament) “… and now probably won’t be passed.” At the least this turn of events should make for some interesting speculation amongst the experts and the students.

As for anyone who’s interested in robots and their rights, there’s this August 1, 2023 posting “Should robots have rights? Confucianism offers some ideas” featuring Carnegie Mellon University’s Tae Wan Kim (profile).

FrogHeart’s 2024 comes to an end as 2025 comes into view

Leave a reply

First, thank you to anyone who’s dropped by to read any of my posts. Second, I didn’t quite catch up on my backlog in what was then the new year (2024) despite my promises. (sigh) I will try to publish my drafts in a more timely fashion but I start this coming year as I did 2024 with a backlog of two to three months. This may be my new normal.

As for now, here’s an overview of FrogHeart’s 2024. The posts that follow are loosely organized under a heading but many of them could fit under other headings as well. After my informal review, there’s some material on foretelling the future as depicted in an exhibition, “Oracles, Omens and Answers,” at the Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford.

Human enhancement: prosthetics, robotics, and more

Within a year or two of starting this blog I created a tag ‘machine/flesh’ to organize information about a number of converging technologies such as robotics, brain implants, and prosthetics that could alter our concepts of what it means to be human. The larger category of human enhancement functions in much the same way also allowing a greater range of topics to be covered.

Here are some of the 2024 human enhancement and/or machine/flesh stories on this blog,

Other species are also being rendered ‘machine/flesh’,

The year of the hydrogel?

It was the year of the hydrogel for me (btw, hydrogels are squishy materials; I have more of a description after this list),

As for anyone who’s curious about hydrogels, there’s this from an October 20, 2016 article by D.C.Demetre for ScienceBeta, Note: A link has been removed,

Hydrogels, materials that can absorb and retain large quantities of water, could revolutionise medicine. Our bodies contain up to 60% water, but hydrogels can hold up to 90%.

It is this similarity to human tissue that has led researchers to examine if these materials could be used to improve the treatment of a range of medical conditions including heart disease and cancer.

These days hydrogels can be found in many everyday products, from disposable nappies and soft contact lenses to plant-water crystals. But the history of hydrogels for medical applications started in the 1960s.

Scientists developed artificial materials with the ambitious goal of using them in permanent contact applications , ones that are implanted in the body permanently.

For anyone who wants a more technical explanation, there’s the Hydrogel entry on Wikipedia.

Science education and citizen science

Where science education is concerned I’m seeing some innovative approaches to teaching science, which can include citizen science. As for citizen science (also known as, participatory science) I’ve been noticing heightened interest at all age levels.

Artificial intelligence

It’s been another year where artificial intelligence (AI) has absorbed a lot of energy from nearly everyone. I’m highlighting the more unusual AI stories I’ve stumbled across,

As you can see, I’ve tucked in two tangentially related stories, one which references a neuromorphic computing story ((see my Neuromorphic engineering category or search for ‘memristors’ in the blog search engine for more on brain-like computing topics) and the other is intellectual property. There are many, many more stories on these topics

Art/science (or art/sci or sciart)

It’s a bit of a surprise to see how many art/sci stories were published here this year, although some might be better described as art/tech stories.

There may be more 2024 art/sci stories but the list was getting long. In addition to searching for art/sci on the blog search engine, you may want to try data sonification too.

Moving off planet to outer space

This is not a big interest of mine but there were a few stories,

A writer/blogger’s self-indulgences

Apparently books can be dangerous and not in a ‘ban [fill in the blank] from the library’ kind of way,

Then, there are these,

New uses for electricity,

Given the name for this blog, it has to be included,

  • Frog saunas published September 15, 2024, this includes what seems to be a mild scientific kerfuffle

I’ve been following Lomiko Metals (graphite mining) for a while,

Who would have guessed?

Another bacteria story,

New crimes,

Origins of life,

Dirt

While no one year features a large number of ‘dirt’ stories, it has been a recurring theme here throughout the years,

Regenerative medicine

In addition to or instead of using the ‘regenerative medicine’ tag, I might use ’tissue engineering’ or ’tissue scaffolding’,

To sum it up

It was an eclectic year.

Peering forward into 2025 and futurecasting

I expect to be delighted, horrified, thrilled, and left shaking my head by science stories in 2025. Year after year the world of science reveals a world of wonder.

More mundanely, I can state with some confidence that my commentary (mentioned in the future-oriented subsection of my 2023 review and 2024 look forward) on Quantum Potential, a 2023 report from the Council of Canadian Academies, will be published early in this new year as I’ve almost finished writing it.

As for more about the future, I’ve got this, from a December 3, 2024 essay (Five ways to predict the future from around the world – from spider divination to bibliomancy) about an exhibition by Michelle Aroney (Research Fellow in Early Modern History, University of Oxford) and David Zeitlyn (Professor of Social Anthropology, University of Oxford) in The Conversation (h/t December 3, 2024 news item on phys.org), Note: Links have been removed

Some questions are hard to answer and always have been. Does my beloved love me back? Should my country go to war? Who stole my goats?

Questions like these have been asked of diviners around the world throughout history – and still are today. From astrology and tarot to reading entrails, divination comes in a wide variety of forms.

Yet they all address the same human needs. They promise to tame uncertainty, help us make decisions or simply satisfy our desire to understand.

Anthropologists and historians like us study divination because it sheds light on the fears and anxieties of particular cultures, many of which are universal. Our new exhibition at Oxford’s Bodleian Library, Oracles, Omens & Answers, explores these issues by showcasing divination techniques from around the world.

…

1. Spider divination

In Cameroon, Mambila spider divination (ŋgam dù) addresses difficult questions to spiders or land crabs that live in holes in the ground.

Asking the spiders a question involves covering their hole with a broken pot and placing a stick, a stone and cards made from leaves around it. The diviner then asks a question in a yes or no format while tapping the enclosure to encourage the spider or crab to emerge. The stick and stone represent yes or no, while the leaf cards, which are specially incised with certain meanings, offer further clarification.

…

2. Palmistry

Reading people’s palms (palmistry) is well known as a fairground amusement, but serious forms of this divination technique exist in many cultures. The practice of reading the hands to gather insights into a person’s character and future was used in many ancient cultures across Asia and Europe.

In some traditions, the shape and depth of the lines on the palm are richest in meaning. In others, the size of the hands and fingers are also considered. In some Indian traditions, special marks and symbols appearing on the palm also provide insights.

Palmistry experienced a huge resurgence in 19th-century England and America, just as the science of fingerprints was being developed. If you could identify someone from their fingerprints, it seemed plausible to read their personality from their hands.

…

3. Bibliomancy

If you want a quick answer to a difficult question, you could try bibliomancy. Historically, this DIY [do-it-yourself] divining technique was performed with whatever important books were on hand.

Throughout Europe, the works of Homer or Virgil were used. In Iran, it was often the Divan of Hafiz, a collection of Persian poetry. In Christian, Muslim and Jewish traditions, holy texts have often been used, though not without controversy.

…

4. Astrology

Astrology exists in almost every culture around the world. As far back as ancient Babylon, astrologers have interpreted the heavens to discover hidden truths and predict the future.

…

5. Calendrical divination

Calendars have long been used to divine the future and establish the best times to perform certain activities. In many countries, almanacs still advise auspicious and inauspicious days for tasks ranging from getting a haircut to starting a new business deal.

In Indonesia, Hindu almanacs called pawukon [calendar] explain how different weeks are ruled by different local deities. The characteristics of the deities mean that some weeks are better than others for activities like marriage ceremonies.

…

You’ll find logistics for the exhibition in this September 23, 2024 Bodleian Libraries University of Oxford press release about the exhibit, Note: Links have been removed,

Oracles, Omens and Answers

6 December 2024 – 27 April 2025
ST Lee Gallery, Weston Library

The Bodleian Libraries’ new exhibition, Oracles, Omens and Answers, will explore the many ways in which people have sought answers in the face of the unknown across time and cultures. From astrology and palm reading to weather and public health forecasting, the exhibition demonstrates the ubiquity of divination practices, and humanity’s universal desire to tame uncertainty, diagnose present problems, and predict future outcomes.

Through plagues, wars and political turmoil, divination, or the practice of seeking knowledge of the future or the unknown, has remained an integral part of society. Historically, royals and politicians would consult with diviners to guide decision-making and incite action. People have continued to seek comfort and guidance through divination in uncertain times — the COVID-19 pandemic saw a rise in apps enabling users to generate astrological charts or read the Yijing [I Ching], alongside a growth in horoscope and tarot communities on social media such as ‘WitchTok’. Many aspects of our lives are now dictated by algorithmic predictions, from e-health platforms to digital advertising. Scientific forecasters as well as doctors, detectives, and therapists have taken over many of the societal roles once held by diviners. Yet the predictions of today’s experts are not immune to criticism, nor can they answer all our questions.

Curated by Dr Michelle Aroney, whose research focuses on early modern science and religion, and Professor David Zeitlyn, an expert in the anthropology of divination, the exhibition will take a historical-anthropological approach to methods of prophecy, prediction and forecasting, covering a broad range of divination methods, including astrology, tarot, necromancy, and spider divination.

Dating back as far as ancient Mesopotamia, the exhibition will show us that the same kinds of questions have been asked of specialist practitioners from around the world throughout history. What is the best treatment for this illness? Does my loved one love me back? When will this pandemic end? Through materials from the archives of the Bodleian Libraries alongside other collections in Oxford, the exhibition demonstrates just how universally human it is to seek answers to difficult questions.

Highlights of the exhibition include: oracle bones from Shang Dynasty China (ca. 1250-1050 BCE); an Egyptian celestial globe dating to around 1318; a 16th-century armillary sphere from Flanders, once used by astrologers to place the planets in the sky in relation to the Zodiac; a nineteenth-century illuminated Javanese almanac; and the autobiography of astrologer Joan Quigley, who worked with Nancy and Ronald Reagan in the White House for seven years. The casebooks of astrologer-physicians in 16th- and 17th-century England also offer rare insights into the questions asked by clients across the social spectrum, about their health, personal lives, and business ventures, and in some cases the actions taken by them in response.

The exhibition also explores divination which involves the interpretation of patterns or clues in natural things, with the idea that natural bodies contain hidden clues that can be decrypted. Some diviners inspect the entrails of sacrificed animals (known as ‘extispicy’), as evidenced by an ancient Mesopotamian cuneiform tablet describing the observation of patterns in the guts of birds. Others use human bodies, with palm readers interpreting characters and fortunes etched in their clients’ hands. A sketch of Oscar Wilde’s palms – which his palm reader believed indicated “a great love of detail…extraordinary brain power and profound scholarship” – shows the revival of palmistry’s popularity in 19th century Britain.

The exhibition will also feature a case study of spider divination practised by the Mambila people of Cameroon and Nigeria, which is the research specialism of curator Professor David Zeitlyn, himself a Ŋgam dù diviner. This process uses burrowing spiders or land crabs to arrange marked leaf cards into a pattern, which is read by the diviner. The display will demonstrate the methods involved in this process and the way in which its results are interpreted by the card readers. African basket divination has also been observed through anthropological research, where diviners receive answers to their questions in the form of the configurations of thirty plus items after they have been tossed in the basket.

Dr Michelle Aroney and Professor David Zeitlyn, co-curators of the exhibition, say:

Every day we confront the limits of our own knowledge when it comes to the enigmas of the past and present and the uncertainties of the future. Across history and around the world, humans have used various techniques that promise to unveil the concealed, disclosing insights that offer answers to private or shared dilemmas and help to make decisions. Whether a diviner uses spiders or tarot cards, what matters is whether the answers they offer are meaningful and helpful to their clients. What is fun or entertainment for one person is deadly serious for another.

Richard Ovenden, Bodley’s [a nickname? Bodleian Libraries were founded by Sir Thomas Bodley] Librarian, said:

People have tried to find ways of predicting the future for as long as we have had recorded history. This exhibition examines and illustrates how across time and culture, people manage the uncertainty of everyday life in their own way. We hope that through the extraordinary exhibits, and the scholarship that brings them together, visitors to the show will appreciate the long history of people seeking answers to life’s biggest questions, and how people have approached it in their own unique way.

The exhibition will be accompanied by the book Divinations, Oracles & Omens, edited by Michelle Aroney and David Zeitlyn, which will be published by Bodleian Library Publishing on 5 December 2024.

Courtesy: Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford

I’m not sure why the preceding image is used to illustrate the exhibition webpage but I find it quite interesting. Should you be in Oxford, UK and lucky enough to visit the exhibition, there are a few more details on the Oracles, Omens and Answers event webpage, Note: There are 26 Bodleian Libraries at Oxford and the exhibition is being held in the Weston Library,

EXHIBITION

Oracles, Omens and Answers

6 December 2024 – 27 April 2025

ST Lee Gallery, Weston Library

Free admission, no ticket required

…

Note: This exhibition includes a large continuous projection of spider divination practice, including images of the spiders in action.

Exhibition tours

Oracles, Omens and Answers exhibition tours are available on selected Wednesdays and Saturdays from 1–1.45pm and are open to all.

These free gallery tours are led by our dedicated volunteer team and places are limited. Check available dates and book your tickets.

You do not need to book a tour to visit the exhibition. Please meet by the entrance doors to the exhibition at the rear of Blackwell Hall.

…

Happy 2025! And, once again, thank you.

Guinea pigging and a walk down memory lane for Remembrance Day 2024

Leave a reply

While this isn’t one of my usual areas of interest, there is a personal element for me (more about that at the end). Some people earn their living as subjects for drug tests; it’s called guinea pigging. (There’s more here in a July 1, 2015 posting; see the first three paragraphs after the information about cross-posting and the circumstances under which I wrote the article.)

Earlier this fall (2024), the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) released a documentary, Bodies for Rent, focusing on two guinea piggers. Here’s more from a September 25, 2024 CBC online article about their documentary,

Before a drug becomes available on the market, it must undergo rigorous testing and multiple levels of clinical trials to ensure its functionality and safety. Every year, thousands of people in Canada and the U.S. take part in these trials, and may receive financial compensation for doing so. 

A new documentary highlights how some volunteers are attempting to earn a living by putting their bodies on the line. Bodies for Rent follows two men who spend their days searching for eligible clinical studies, and shows the lengths they’ll go to in order to complete a trial and get paid.  

A way to make a ‘living’

Participating in a trial for a medical drug still under development involves reporting any side effects. It’s a potentially dangerous “job,” but for many volunteers, the rewards outweigh the risks. 

“I think I’ve done more than 40 studies,” says 55-year-old “Franco,” who conceals his real identity with makeup in the documentary. “I was struggling to pay my rent. And I saw an ad at the subway in Toronto, and they said, ‘Would you like to make up to $1,200 over a weekend?'”

“I usually make [$30,000] to 40,000 a year. Before, I was making, like, $18,000 working at a factory.”

Raighne, an artist living in Minneapolis, was raised by a single mother and grew up on welfare. “I’ve done about 20 or 30 drug trials,” he says in the film. “And nothing makes money like clinical studies.”

Trying to get out of debt and manage an unstable business, Raighne sometimes spends days or weeks away from home while participating in a study. “I had a friend describe it as, like, ‘drug jail,'” he says. “Because you’re trapped for a set amount of time. You’re under observation.”

From testing on prisoners to testing on the poor

Before the 1970s, most Phase I clinical trials — which look at a drug’s safety, determine the safe dosage range and see if there are any side effects — were conducted on prisoners. This allowed researchers to control and monitor every aspect of participants’ lives. 

“These studies did the most unimaginably horrible things you can think of to prisoners there,” says Carl Elliott, a University of Minnesota bioethicist featured in Bodies for Rent and the author of The Occasional Human Sacrifice: Medical Experimentation and the Price of Saying No [emphasis mine]. 

“For example, they injected inmates with herpes. They injected them with asbestos. They even tested chemical warfare agents on them.”

Public outcry and new reforms eventually made research in prisons much more difficult. “The question was, ‘Well, who do we do Phase I trials on now?’ We can’t do them on prisoners anymore,” says Elliott. 

“The answer is poor people.”

‘A financial incentive to lie’

When testing in prisons stopped and financial incentives were introduced, students and people impacted by poverty became more common test subjects. However, the promise of money at the completion of a trial has added complications. 

“When I started doing studies, I used to be very honest,” says Franco. “I [would] tell all the side effects that I was going through.” 

But after reporting severe migraines during one study, Franco says he was forced to leave — with less than 20 per cent of the promised payout. He says he was also blocked from doing further studies with that company. 

“I [was] being penalized for being honest. So, after that, I kind of learned my lesson and I decided to tone down the side effects,” he says. 

…

Once in a study, the risks persist. Franco says that after participating for nearly two months in a study worth around $20,000 to him, he received a call from the clinic saying he had inflammation in his pancreas. The study manager told him he was being removed from the study, and later, the clinic advised him to go to an emergency room immediately. 

“I hope it’s not permanent. If it’s permanent, then I’m gonna be upset,” Franco says to the camera in the documentary. “I was supposed to get around $20,000. If I don’t get the full amount because I am getting side effects, I think that it’s unfair.”

In the end, Franco was paid $9,000. 

…

The September 25, 2024 CBC online article also includes an embedded video about testing on prisoners. “Bodies for Rent” can be viewed on CBC Gem. (You do have to create an account in order to view the documentary or anything else on CBC Gem.)

A walk down memory lane for Remembrance Day 2024

When my father was in basic training for the Canadian army and preparing to fight in World War II, he participated in some kind of experiment. The details are fuzzy as he didn’t talk about it much but he did insist that some of his medical problems (specifically, the problems he had with his skin) were directly due to his experience as a guinea pig and that he should be compensated by the Canadian government. If memory serves, he felt the army had misled him into participating in the experiment. .

Papa was 15 1/2 when he lied his way into the army. Not too long after, the army realizing its mistake kept him back from the front (in some training camp in the Prairies), which is when he became a medical experiment for a time. On reaching the age of 18 the Canadian army shipped him overseas.

When he finally did try to speak up about his experience as a guinea pig it was the late 1960s and he didn’t pursue the matter for long being of the opinion that no one would pay much attention. He wasn’t wrong.

It wasn’t until details about the infamous Tuskegee Syphilis Study were revealed that there was serious discussion about informed consent (about 1972) in the United States. I don’t know when it became a serious discussion in Canada. Even then, some of the research from the 1970s is stomach churning as I found on stumbling across a study from that period. The researchers were conducting an experiment with a drug they knew was not going to work and that had bad side effects as was noted in the abstract. The testing took place on patients in a hospital ward.

There is still a long ways to go as evidenced by the “Bodies for Rent” documentary and Elliott’s 2024 book “The Occasional Human Sacrifice: Medical Experimentation and the Price of Saying No”. I hope there are changes to how drug testing is done as a consequence of added awareness but it’s a long hard road to change.

For my father on Remembrance Day 2024: you were right; what they did to you was wrong. And still, you went and fought. Thank you.

Submit abstracts by Jan. 31 for 2025 Governance of Emerging Technologies & Science (GETS) Conference at Arizona State U

Leave a reply

This call for abstracts from Arizona State University (ASU) for the Twelfth Annual Governance of Emerging Technologies and Science (GETS) Conference was received via email,

GETS 2025: Call for abstracts

Save the date for the Twelfth Annual Governance of Emerging Technologies and Science Conference, taking place May 19 and 20, 2025 at the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law at Arizona State University in Phoenix, AZ. The conference will consist of plenary and session presentations and discussions on regulatory, governance, legal, policy, social and ethical aspects of emerging technologies, including:

National security
Nanotechnology
Quantum computing
Autonomous vehicles
3D printing
Robotics
Synthetic biology
Gene editing
Artificial intelligence
Biotechnology

Genomics
Internet of things (IoT)
Autonomous weapon systems
Personalized medicine
Neuroscience
Digital health
Human enhancement
Telemedicine
Virtual reality
Blockchain

Call for abstracts: The co-sponsors invite submission of abstracts for proposed presentations. Submitters of abstracts need not provide a written paper, although provision will be made for posting and possible post-conference publication of papers for those who are interested.

  • Abstracts are invited for any aspect or topic relating to the governance of emerging technologies, including any of the technologies listed above
  • Abstracts should not exceed 500 words and must contain your name and email address
  • Abstracts must be submitted by Friday, January 31, 2025, to be considered

Submit your abstract

For more information contact Eric Hitchcock.

Good luck!

AI and Canadian science diplomacy & more stories from the October 2024 Council of Canadian Academies (CCA) newsletter

Leave a reply

The October 2024 issue of The Advance (Council of Canadian Academies [CCA] newsletter) arrived in my emailbox on October 15, 2024 with some interesting tidbits about artificial intelligence, Note: For anyone who wants to see the entire newsletter for themselves, you can sign up here or in French, vous pouvez vous abonner ici,

Artificial Intelligence and Canada’s Science Diplomacy Future

For nearly two decades, Canada has been a global leader in artificial intelligence (AI) research, contributing a significant percentage of the world’s top-cited scientific publications on the subject. In that time, the number of countries participating in international collaborations has grown significantly, supporting new partnerships and accounting for as much as one quarter of all published research articles.

“Opportunities for partnerships are growing rapidly alongside the increasing complexity of new scientific discoveries and emerging industry sectors,” wrote the CCA Expert Panel on International Science, Technology, Innovation and Knowledge Partnerships earlier this year, singling out Canada’s AI expertise. “At the same time, discussions of sovereignty and national interests abut the movement toward open science and transdisciplinary approaches.”

On Friday, November 22 [2024], the CCA will host “Strategy and Influence: AI and Canada’s Science Diplomacy Future” as part of the Canadian Science Policy Centre (CSPC) annual conference. The panel discussion will draw on case studies related to AI research collaboration to explore the ways in which such partnerships inform science diplomacy. Panellists include:

  • Monica Gattinger, chair of the CCA Expert Panel on International Science, Technology, Innovation and Knowledge Partnerships and director of the Institute for Science, Society and Policy at the University of Ottawa (picture omitted)
  • David Barnes, head of the British High Commission Science, Climate, and Energy Team
  • Constanza Conti, Professor of Numerical Analysis at the University of Florence and Scientific Attaché at the Italian Embassy in Ottawa
  • Jean-François Doulet, Attaché for Science and Higher Education at the Embassy of France in Canada
  • Konstantinos Kapsouropoulos, Digital and Research Counsellor at the Delegation of the European Union to Canada

For details on CSPC 2024, click here. [Here’s the theme and a few more details about the conference: Empowering Society: The Transformative Value of Science, Knowledge, and Innovation; The 16th annual Canadian Science Policy Conference (CSPC) will be held in person from November 20th to 22nd, 2024] For a user guide to  Navigating Collaborative Futures, from the CCA’s Expert Panel on International Science, Technology, Innovation and Knowledge Partnerships, click here.

…

I have checked out the panel’s session page,

448: Strategy and Influence: AI and Canada’s Science Diplomacy Future

Friday, November 22 [2024]
1:00 pm – 2:30 pm EST

Science and International Affairs and Security

About

Organized By: Council of Canadian Academies (CCA)

Artificial intelligence has already begun to transform Canada’s economy and society, and the broader advantages of international collaboration in AI research have the potential to make an even greater impact. With three national AI institutes and a Pan-Canadian AI Strategy, Canada’s AI ecosystem is thriving and positions the country to build stronger international partnerships in this area, and to develop more meaningful international collaborations in other areas of innovation. This panel will convene science attachés to share perspectives on science diplomacy and partnerships, drawing on case studies related to AI research collaboration.

The newsletter also provides links to additional readings on various topics, here are the AI items,

In Ottawa, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and President Emmanuel Macron of France renewed their commitment “to strengthening economic exchanges between Canadian and French AI ecosystems.” They also revealed that Canada would be named Country of the Year at Viva Technology’s annual conference, to be held next June in Paris.

A “slower, but more capable” version of OpenAI is impressing scientists with the strength of its responses to prompts, according to Nature. The new version, referred to as “o1,” outperformed a previous ChatGPT model on a standardized test involving chemistry, physics, and biology questions, and “beat PhD-level scholars on the hardest series of questions.” [Note: As of October 16, 2024, the Nature news article of October 1, 2024 appears to be open access. It’s unclear how long this will continue to be the case.]

…

In memoriam: Abhishek Gupta, the founder and principal researcher of the Montreal AI Ethics Institute and a member of the CCA Expert Panel on Artificial Intelligence for Science and Engineering, died on September 30 [2024]. His colleagues shared the news in a memorial post, writing, “It was during his time in Montreal that Abhishek envisioned a future where ethics and AI would intertwine—a vision that became the driving force behind his life’s work.”

…

I clicked the link to read the Trudeau/Macron announcement and found this September 26, 2024 Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada news release,

Meeting in Ottawa on September 26, 2024, Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada, and Emmanuel Macron, the President of the French Republic, issued a call to action to promote the development of a responsible approach to artificial intelligence (AI).

Our two countries will increase the coordination of our actions, as Canada will assume the Presidency of the G7 in 2025 and France will host the AI Action Summit on February 10 and 11, 2025.

Our two countries are working on the development and use of safe, secure and trustworthy AI as part of a risk-aware, human-centred and innovation-friendly approach. This cooperation is based on shared values. We believe that the development and use of AI need to be beneficial for individuals and the planet, for example by increasing human capabilities and developing creativity, ensuring the inclusion of under-represented people, reducing economic, social, gender and other inequalities, protecting information integrity and protecting natural environments, which in turn will promote inclusive growth, well-being, sustainable development and environmental sustainability.

We are committed to promoting the development and use of AI systems that respect the rule of law, human rights, democratic values and human-centred values. Respecting these values means developing and using AI systems that are transparent and explainable, robust, safe and secure, and whose stakeholders are held accountable for respecting these principles, in line with the Recommendation of the OECD Council on Artificial Intelligence, the Hiroshima AI Process, the G20 AI Principles and the International Partnership for Information and Democracy.

Based on these values and principles, Canada and France are working on high-quality scientific cooperation. In April 2023, we formalized the creation of a joint committee for science, technology and innovation. This committee has identified emerging technologies, including AI, as one of the priorities areas for cooperation between our two countries. In this context, a call for AI research projects was announced last July, scheduled for the end of 2024 and funded, on the French side, by the French National Research Agency, and, on the Canadian side, by a consortium made up of Canada’s three granting councils (the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research) and IVADO [Institut de valorisation des données], the AI research, training and transfer consortium.

We will also collaborate on the evaluation and safety of AI models. We have announced key AI safety initiatives, including the AI Safety Institute of Canada [emphasis mine; not to be confused with Artificial Intelligence Governance & Safety Canada (AIGS)], which will be launched soon, and France’s National Centre for AI evaluation. We expect these two agencies will work to improve knowledge and understanding of technical and socio-technical aspects related to the safety and evaluation of advanced AI systems.

Canada and France are committed to strengthening economic exchanges between Canadian and French AI ecosystems, whether by organizing delegations, like the one organized by Scale AI with 60 Canadian companies at the latest Viva Technology conference in Paris, or showcasing France at the ALL IN event in Montréal on September 11 and 12, 2024, through cooperation between companies, for example, through large companies’ adoption of services provided by small companies or through the financial support that investment funds provide to companies on both sides of the Atlantic. Our two countries will continue their cooperation at the upcoming Viva Technology conference in Paris, where Canada will be the Country of the Year.

We want to strengthen our cooperation in terms of developing AI capabilities. We specifically want to promote access to AI’s compute capabilities in order to support national and international technological advances in research and business, notably in emerging markets and developing countries, while committing to strengthening their efforts to make the necessary improvements to the energy efficiency of these infrastructures. We are also committed to sharing their experience in initiatives to develop AI skills and training in order to accelerate workforce deployment.

Canada and France cooperate on the international stage to ensure the alignment and convergence of AI regulatory frameworks, given the economic potential and the global social consequences of this technological revolution. Under our successive G7 presidencies in 2018 and 2019, we worked to launch the Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence (GPAI), which now has 29 members from all over the world, and whose first two centres of expertise were opened in Montréal and Paris. We support the creation of the new integrated partnership, which brings together OECD and GPAI member countries, and welcomes new members, including emerging and developing economies. We hope that the implementation of this new model will make it easier to participate in joint research projects that are of public interest, reduce the global digital divide and support constructive debate between the various partners on standards and the interoperability of their AI-related regulations.

We will continue our cooperation at the AI Action Summit in France on February 10 and 11, 2025, where we will strive to find solutions to meet our common objectives, such as the fight against disinformation or the reduction of the environmental impact of AI. With the objective of actively and tangibly promoting the use of the French language in the creation, production, distribution and dissemination of AI, taking into account its richness and diversity, and in compliance with copyright, we will attempt to identify solutions that are in line with the five themes of the summit: AI that serves the public interest, the future of work, innovation and culture, trust in AI and global AI governance.

Canada has accepted to co-chair the working group on global AI governance in order to continue the work already carried out by the GPAI, the OECD, the United Nations and its various bodies, the G7 and the G20. We would like to highlight and advance debates on the cultural challenges of AI in order to accelerate the joint development of relevant responses to the challenges faced. We would also like to develop the change management policies needed to support all of the affected cultural sectors. We will continue these discussions together during our successive G7 presidencies in 2025 and 2026.

Some very interesting news and it reminded me of this October 10, 2024 posting “October 29, 2024 Woodrow Wilson Center event: 2024 Canada-US Legal Symposium | Artificial Intelligence Regulation, Governance, and Liability.” (I also included an update of the current state of Canadian legislation and artificial intelligence in the posting.)

I checked out the In memoriam notice for Abhishek Gupta and found this, Note: Links have been removed except the link to the Abhishek Gupta’s memorial page hosting tributes, stories, and more. The link is in the highlighted paragraph,

Honoring the Life and Legacy of a Leader in AI Ethics

In accordance with his family’s wishes, it is with profound sadness that we announce the passing of Abhishek Gupta, Founder and Principal Researcher of the Montreal AI Ethics Institute (MAIEI), Director for Responsible AI at the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), and a pioneering voice in the field of AI ethics. Abhishek passed away peacefully in his sleep on September 30, 2024 in India, surrounded by his loving family. He is survived by his father, Ashok Kumar Gupta; his mother, Asha Gupta; and his younger brother, Abhijay Gupta.

Note: Details of a memorial service will be announced in the coming weeks. For those who wish to share stories, personal anecdotes, and photos of Abhishek, please visit www.forevermissed.com/abhishekgupta — your contributions will be greatly appreciated by his family and loved ones.

Born on December 20, 1992, in India, Abhishek’s intellectual curiosity and drive to understand technology led him on a remarkable journey. After excelling at Delhi Public School, Abhishek attended McGill University in Montreal, where he earned a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science (BSc’15). Following his graduation, Abhishek worked as a software engineer at Ericsson. He later joined Microsoft as a machine learning engineer, where he also served on the CSE Responsible AI Board. It was during his time in Montreal that Abhishek envisioned a future where ethics and AI would intertwine—a vision that became the driving force behind his life’s work. 

The Beginnings: Building a Global AI Ethics Community

Abhishek’s vision for MAIEI was rooted in community building. He began hosting in-person AI Ethics Meetups in Montreal throughout 2017. These gatherings were unique—participants completed assigned readings in advance, split into small groups for discussion, and then reconvened to share insights. This approach fostered deep, structured conversations and made AI ethics accessible to everyone, regardless of their background. The conversations and insights from these meetups became the foundation of MAIEI, which was launched in May 2018.

When the pandemic hit, Abhishek adapted the meetup format to an online setting, enabling MAIEI to expand worldwide. It was his idea to bring these conversations to a global stage, using virtual platforms to ensure voices from all corners of the world could join in. He passionately stood up for the “little guy,” making sure that those whose voices might be overlooked or unheard in traditional forums had a platform. Under his stewardship, MAIEI emerged as a globally recognized leader in fostering public discussions on the ethical implications of artificial intelligence. Through MAIEI, Abhishek fulfilled his mission of democratizing AI ethics literacy, empowering individuals from all backgrounds to engage with the future of technology.

…

I offer my sympathies to his family, friends, and communities for their profound loss.

Biobots (also known as biohybrid robots) occupy a third state between life and death?

Leave a reply

I got a bit of a jolt from this September 12, 2024 essay by Peter A Noble, affiliate professor of microbiology at the University of Washington, and Alex Pozhitkov, senior technical lead of bioinformatics, Irell & Manella Graduate School of Biological Sciences at City of Hope, for The Conversation (h/t Sept. 12, 2024 item on phys.org), Note: Links have been removed,

Life and death are traditionally viewed as opposites. But the emergence of new multicellular life-forms from the cells of a dead organism introduces a “third state” that lies beyond the traditional boundaries of life and death.

Usually, scientists consider death to be the irreversible halt of functioning of an organism as a whole. However, practices such as organ donation highlight how organs, tissues and cells can continue to function even after an organism’s demise. This resilience raises the question: What mechanisms allow certain cells to keep working after an organism has died?

We are researchers who investigate what happens within organisms after they die. In our recently published review, we describe how certain cells – when provided with nutrients, oxygen, bioelectricity or biochemical cues – have the capacity to transform into multicellular organisms with new functions after death.

Life, death and emergence of something new

The third state challenges how scientists typically understand cell behavior. While caterpillars metamorphosing into butterflies, or tadpoles evolving into frogs, may be familiar developmental transformations, there are few instances where organisms change in ways that are not predetermined. Tumors, organoids and cell lines that can indefinitely divide in a petri dish, like HeLa cells [cervical cancer cells taken from Henrietta Lacks without her knowledge], are not considered part of the third state because they do not develop new functions.

However, researchers found that skin cells extracted from deceased frog embryos were able to adapt to the new conditions of a petri dish in a lab, spontaneously reorganizing into multicellular organisms called xenobots [emphasis mine]. These organisms exhibited behaviors that extend far beyond their original biological roles. Specifically, these xenobots use their cilia – small, hair-like structures – to navigate and move through their surroundings, whereas in a living frog embryo, cilia are typically used to move mucus.

Xenobots are also able to perform kinematic self-replication, meaning they can physically replicate their structure and function without growing. This differs from more common replication processes that involve growth within or on the organism’s body.

Researchers have also found that solitary human lung cells can self-assemble into miniature multicellular organisms that can move around. These anthrobots [emphasis mine] behave and are structured in new ways. They are not only able to navigate their surroundings but also repair both themselves and injured neuron cells placed nearby.

Taken together, these findings demonstrate the inherent plasticity of cellular systems and challenge the idea that cells and organisms can evolve only in predetermined ways. The third state suggests that organismal death may play a significant role in how life transforms over time.

…

I had not realized that xenobots are derived from dead frog embryos something I missed when mentioning or featuring them in previous stories, the latest in a September 13, 2024 posting, which also mentions anthrobots. Previous stories were published in a June 21, 2021 posting about xenobots 2.0 and their ability to move and a June 8, 2022 posting about their ability to reproduce. Thank you to the authors for relieving me of some of my ignorance.

For some reason I was expecting mention, brief or otherwise, of ethical or social implications but the authors offered this instead, from their September 12, 2024 essay, Note: Links have been removed,

Implications for biology and medicine

The third state not only offers new insights into the adaptability of cells. It also offers prospects for new treatments.

For example, anthrobots could be sourced from an individual’s living tissue to deliver drugs without triggering an unwanted immune response. Engineered anthrobots injected into the body could potentially dissolve arterial plaque in atherosclerosis patients and remove excess mucus in cystic fibrosis patients.

Importantly, these multicellular organisms have a finite life span, naturally degrading after four to six weeks. This “kill switch” prevents the growth of potentially invasive cells.

A better understanding of how some cells continue to function and metamorphose into multicellular entities some time after an organism’s demise holds promise for advancing personalized and preventive medicine.

I look forward to hearing about the third state and about any ethical or social issues that may arise from it.

Bio-hybrid robotics (living robots) needs public debate and regulation

Leave a reply

A July 23, 2024 University of Southampton (UK) press release (also on EurekAlert but published July 22, 2024) describes the emerging science/technology of bio-hybrid robotics and a recent study about the ethical issues raised, Note 1: bio-hybrid may also be written as biohybrid; Note 2: Links have been removed,

Development of ‘living robots’ needs regulation and public debate

Researchers are calling for regulation to guide the responsible and ethical development of bio-hybrid robotics – a ground-breaking science which fuses artificial components with living tissue and cells.

In a paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [PNAS] a multidisciplinary team from the University of Southampton and universities in the US and Spain set out the unique ethical issues this technology presents and the need for proper governance.

Combining living materials and organisms with synthetic robotic components might sound like something out of science fiction, but this emerging field is advancing rapidly. Bio-hybrid robots using living muscles can crawl, swim, grip, pump, and sense their surroundings. Sensors made from sensory cells or insect antennae have improved chemical sensing. Living neurons have even been used to control mobile robots.

Dr Rafael Mestre from the University of Southampton, who specialises in emergent technologies and is co-lead author of the paper, said: “The challenges in overseeing bio-hybrid robotics are not dissimilar to those encountered in the regulation of biomedical devices, stem cells and other disruptive technologies. But unlike purely mechanical or digital technologies, bio-hybrid robots blend biological and synthetic components in unprecedented ways. This presents unique possible benefits but also potential dangers.”

Research publications relating to bio-hybrid robotics have increased continuously over the last decade. But the authors found that of the more than 1,500 publications on the subject at the time, only five considered its ethical implications in depth.

The paper’s authors identified three areas where bio-hybrid robotics present unique ethical issues: Interactivity – how bio-robots interact with humans and the environment, Integrability – how and whether humans might assimilate bio-robots (such as bio-robotic organs or limbs), and Moral status.

In a series of thought experiments, they describe how a bio-robot for cleaning our oceans could disrupt the food chain, how a bio-hybrid robotic arm might exacerbate inequalities [emphasis mine], and how increasing sophisticated bio-hybrid assistants could raise questions about sentience and moral value.

“Bio-hybrid robots create unique ethical dilemmas,” says Aníbal M. Astobiza, an ethicist from the University of the Basque Country in Spain and co-lead author of the paper. “The living tissue used in their fabrication, potential for sentience, distinct environmental impact, unusual moral status, and capacity for biological evolution or adaptation create unique ethical dilemmas that extend beyond those of wholly artificial or biological technologies.”

The paper is the first from the Biohybrid Futures project led by Dr Rafael Mestre, in collaboration with the Rebooting Democracy project. Biohybrid Futures is setting out to develop a framework for the responsible research, application, and governance of bio-hybrid robotics.

The paper proposes several requirements for such a framework, including risk assessments, consideration of social implications, and increasing public awareness and understanding.

Dr Matt Ryan, a political scientist from the University of Southampton and a co-author on the paper, said: “If debates around embryonic stem cells, human cloning or artificial intelligence have taught us something, it is that humans rarely agree on the correct resolution of the moral dilemmas of emergent technologies.

“Compared to related technologies such as embryonic stem cells or artificial intelligence, bio-hybrid robotics has developed relatively unattended by the media, the public and policymakers, but it is no less significant. We want the public to be included in this conversation to ensure a democratic approach to the development and ethical evaluation of this technology.”

In addition to the need for a governance framework, the authors set out actions that the research community can take now to guide their research.

“Taking these steps should not be seen as prescriptive in any way, but as an opportunity to share responsibility, taking a heavy weight away from the researcher’s shoulders,” says Dr Victoria Webster-Wood, a biomechanical engineer from Carnegie Mellon University in the US and co-author on the paper.

“Research in bio-hybrid robotics has evolved in various directions. We need to align our efforts to fully unlock its potential.”

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Ethics and responsibility in biohybrid robotics research by Rafael Mestre, Aníbal M. Astobiza, Victoria A. Webster-Wood, Matt Ryan, and M. Taher A. Saif. PNAS 121 (31) e2310458121 July 23, 2024 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2310458121

This paper is open access.

Cyborg or biohybrid robot?

Earlier, I highlighted “… how a bio-hybrid robotic arm might exacerbate inequalities …” because it suggests cyborgs, which are not mentioned in the press release or in the paper, This seems like an odd omission but, over the years, terminology does change although it’s not clear that’s the situation here.

I have two ‘definitions’, the first is from an October 21, 2019 article by Javier Yanes for OpenMind BBVA, Note: More about BBVA later,

…

The fusion between living organisms and artificial devices has become familiar to us through the concept of the cyborg (cybernetic organism). This approach consists of restoring or improving the capacities of the organic being, usually a human being, by means of technological devices. On the other hand, biohybrid robots are in some ways the opposite idea: using living tissues or cells to provide the machine with functions that would be difficult to achieve otherwise. The idea is that if soft robots seek to achieve this through synthetic materials, why not do so directly with living materials?

…

In contrast, there’s this from “Biohybrid robots: recent progress, challenges, and perspectives,” Note 1: Full citation for paper follows excerpt; Note 2: Links have been removed,

…

2.3. Cyborgs

Another approach to building biohybrid robots is the artificial enhancement of animals or using an entire animal body as a scaffold to manipulate robotically. The locomotion of these augmented animals can then be externally controlled, spanning three modes of locomotion: walking/running, flying, and swimming. Notably, these capabilities have been demonstrated in jellyfish (figure 4(A)) [139, 140], clams (figure 4(B)) [141], turtles (figure 4(C)) [142, 143], and insects, including locusts (figure 4(D)) [27, 144], beetles (figure 4(E)) [28, 145–158], cockroaches (figure 4(F)) [159–165], and moths [166–170].

….

The advantages of using entire animals as cyborgs are multifold. For robotics, augmented animals possess inherent features that address some of the long-standing challenges within the field, including power consumption and damage tolerance, by taking advantage of animal metabolism [172], tissue healing, and other adaptive behaviors. In particular, biohybrid robotic jellyfish, composed of a self-contained microelectronic swim controller embedded into live Aurelia aurita moon jellyfish, consumed one to three orders of magnitude less power per mass than existing swimming robots [172], and cyborg insects can make use of the insect’s hemolymph directly as a fuel source [173].

…

So, sometimes there’s a distinction and sometimes there’s not. I take this to mean that the field is still emerging and that’s reflected in evolving terminology.

Here’s a link to and a citation for the paper,

Biohybrid robots: recent progress, challenges, and perspectives by Victoria A Webster-Wood, Maria Guix, Nicole W Xu, Bahareh Behkam, Hirotaka Sato, Deblina Sarkar, Samuel Sanchez, Masahiro Shimizu and Kevin Kit Parker. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, Volume 18, Number 1 015001 DOI 10.1088/1748-3190/ac9c3b Published 8 November 2022 • © 2022 The Author(s). Published by IOP Publishing Ltd

This paper is open access.

A few notes about BBVA and other items

BBVA is Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria according to its Wikipedia entry, Note: Links have been removed,

Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria, S.A. (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈbaŋko βilˈβao βiθˈkaʝa aɾxenˈtaɾja]), better known by its initialism BBVA, is a Spanish multinational financial services company based in Madrid and Bilbao, Spain. It is one of the largest financial institutions in the world, and is present mainly in Spain, Portugal, Mexico, South America, Turkey, Italy and Romania.[2]

BBVA’s OpenMind is, from their About us page,

OpenMind: BBVA’s knowledge community

OpenMind is a non-profit project run by BBVA that aims to contribute to the generation and dissemination of knowledge about fundamental issues of our time, in an open and free way. The project is materialized in an online dissemination community.

“Sharing knowledge for a better future“.

At OpenMind we want to help people understand the main phenomena affecting our lives; the opportunities and challenges that we face in areas such as science, technology, humanities or economics. Analyzing the impact of scientific and technological advances on the future of the economy, society and our daily lives is the project’s main objective, which always starts on the premise that a broader and greater quality knowledge will help us to make better individual and collective decisions.

As for other items, you can find my latest (biorobotic, cyborg, or bionic depending what terminology you what to use) jellyfish story in this June 6, 2024 posting, the Biohybrid Futures project mentioned in the press release here, and also mentioned in the Rebooting Democracy project (unexpected in the context of an emerging science/technology) can be found here on this University of Southampton website.

Finally, you can find more on these stories (science/technology announcements and/or ethics research/issues) here by searching for ‘robots’ (tag and category), ‘cyborgs’ (tag), ‘machine/flesh’ (tag), ‘neuroprosthetic’ (tag), and human enhancement (category).