Compensation for machines...

When designing robots, or machines in general that try to emulate the tasks of humans, it is most often the tasks we find easiest that are most challenging to implement in the machine. Much of this is down to us not understanding the way that the human body works. But just as in the past when it was instead the problem of insufficient computing power, we are catching up fast. Often in the past, it was looking at how some aspect of the human body didn't work correctly that enabled deduction of how it normally does work. Now, in addition, scientists are increasingly able to look directly at how the body (and in particular the brain) is working and are able to analyse its normal working state.

Going a stage further, it is now not uncommon for studies to be done which look at how the body adapts to circumstances when the normal body gets damaged and has to compensate. Robots have been built for some time now which can walk, run and climb stairs. The latter was often a joke levelled at the Daleks who have been ever-popular in the Sci-Fi series Doctor Who. Robots that are agile in movement are most useful, firstly in robot warfare but later more commonly in other applications as the technology passes from military to civil applications in the usual way. Scientists are now already studying, with the help of amputee animals, how the body can compensate for the loss of a limb which is central to movement and thus how the animal can remain an effective mover. One such example is described in an article on BBC News.

In the future, machines will not only be more capable than the human brain in terms of computational ability, but also harness an understanding of strategies which can be employed when their control of a robot device is affected by damage or malfunction. This will put them in an excellent position to cope with situations which are not originally envisaged in their design. Robotic machines are still very much in their infancy, but are likely to grow up quickly.

Artificial life...

The Venter institute in the USA has succeeded in transplanting synthetic DNA into a host cell to create the most primitive artificial life. This has drawn the usual criticism of how much danger this potentially brings when any advance of this type is made. The ethical debates will go on, and the regulations will be reviewed.

But in the end this is going to be commonplace in the future. We will come to rely on organisms that are man-made to do all sorts of clever and desirable things. These could include providing useful fuels or vaccines. Of course there are risks that bad artificial bacteria will escape in the wild either accidentally or due to war/terrorism. But there are risks associated with many other things humans do ... we had the same debates about nuclear power generation for example. But these advances won't be halted. We will all benefit from them in the fullness of time. And yes the debates will go on. I hope the good results of this work will quickly be commercialised into solutions for some of the big problems the world faces. It's just a case of how long this will take.

Medicine or Modification?

Biotechnology is advancing at significant speed. There is plenty of scope for helping people who are blighted by disease or disability through new technology. New and better prosthetics are on the cards as are other means of helping people move, see, hear, or talk to others. However it will soon be a case of getting into the greyer area of whether we are fixing problems that people have or simply enhancing what people lack.

Society will need to make decisions which were previously unnecessary; decisions such as which body parts should be replaced and which should not. Does society want some people to have super-human power, while others do not. Brain implants will be possible. Will that change who a person is and what they can be held responsible for? When do we judge people to be human or simply a machine with some human characteristics? Personal enhancement may be much more than just cosmetic surgery in future. Some employers may want to enhance their employees to allow them to perform better. There will be a new way to categorise people as haves and have nots.

Human-Computer Interaction

I think it is time that Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) leaves the realms of the computer science educational syllabus and the job titles of psychology-trained IT-literate professionals, and hits the streets in high tech devices that people want to use. This means expanding the current expectation of how people interact with machines.

As I mentioned in my previous tablet related post, gesture-based interaction is about much more than touch screens on phones. Gestures may mean those made by fingers and hands, but also those made by moving the head or the face. I have met robots that can assess and act on human facial expressions. I have used gestures in free space, rather than on a capacitive glass surface, to direct what a machine should do. That was years ago, and so products could soon launch which use such techniques. Some gaming consoles such as Wii have already shown how human movement can be interpreted. Eye tracking is already used by systems such as flight simulators and also in laboratory test situations when studying human cognition and behaviours. The movement of the eye can convey a great deal of intent.

Voice recognition and synthesis have both advanced to a very usable stage and are also ready to augment humans' interactions with computer devices. I already have a pretty natural dialogue with my car and with my phone/music player. Finally, some wireless systems being developed can not only convey information but also detect movement and presence in a similar fashion to radar.

Some lab demonstrations have also shown how people can control devices simply by thinking about what they want to achieve.
Interacting with devices of the future may never be the same again!

Chips a decade from now...

As we leave one decade behind and enter 2010, I'm looking ahead another decade as to how some of the manufacturing challenges of the silicon chips, which power so many things, are likely to be overcome. Current chip geometry is already at an incredible small scale compared to even a few years ago, at around 45nm with plans to move towards 22nm. But then there are challenges in actually mounting the electronic components onto the chip while preserving necessary structure. One technique, based on research which shows that DNA strands may be used as a kind of scaffolding, could reduce this down to around 6nm. The research shows that the DNA can self-organise itself on the silicon base.

Other research has shown that DNA can also be used to store and manipulate data and perform simple computations. Computing on this biological scale would enable considerable advances in computer performance. The closer together the components on a chip can be placed, the faster and smaller computers can be. Such DNA based chips are 10-15 years away, but many people celebrating new year's eve this year will remark how quickly the last decade seems to have passed!

Birthday Time

So I become another year older today.  So I decide to have the day off work.  I fill my day doing all those things I really enjoy doing.   It would be great if instead of taking time out to write this blog entry I could simply think about what I want to post and it just happens.  Not actually so far fetched.  We already have bio-tech labs on the planet where scientists are experimenting with body implant devices which will allow a person to think about a muscle movement and convert that spinal cord signal into control signals for an artificial prosthetic limb.  Thought control of other things will follow.  Coupled with life recording systems, especially for those special occasions like birthdays, the content will automatically be made available with the process.  In the meantime, its fun to log on and write the blog by hand!  And I think I will be doing it this way for quite a few birthdays yet.

Clearing up time?

So you had a nice Christmas dinner? You were feeling all full and content after the various courses.  Or perhaps feeling rather stuffed like the turkey that appeared on so many dinner tables?  Either way, when you ventured back into the kitchen afterwards, it is likely that you were confronted with a significant cleaning task!  Wouldn't it be great if in future, many surfaces or materials were self-cleaning?  Well this could well be the case.  Nano-sized bio-organisms will be produced that use light as an energy source and will target the molecules of whatever dirt or foreign bodies are present.  This could not only be applied to kitchen surfaces but also clothing, destroying all the molecules that otherwise cause unpleasant odours to be emitted!  Such auto cleaning is some decades away as yet so unfortunately can't help with this Christmas or next!  

Christmas card futures?

Ok so who really enjoys writing their Christmas cards each year?  Putting decorations up - maybe, choosing gifts for friends and family - possibly, but writing all those cards ?  And here in the UK particularly, the greetings card industry has really expanded beyond common sense ... there are cards for everything ...  My computer already prints all the labels from my "xmas card group" in my address book so at least the envelopes don't need writing.  But a trigger in the calendar could cause the computer to prompt me whether I would like them printed off, in time to post even the overseas ones.  And the cards themselves could be formed from the list and a suitable design produced from some template.  Some recipients do now get e-cards from me.  But I still have to organise it all. 

In the future, I just want to be prompted to think about the card greetings and have it all produced for me.  And a little further ahead I want the greetings to be triggered in my mind and for the recipients to feel the greeting in their heads and hearts.  This would save a lot of recycled paper and card and still maintain a personal touch to the greetings.  Some folk occasionally ask me why I cover future biotech in the context of future communications.   This is one example of why.  

Getting under your skin ...

Various developments are often popping up in the area of sensing and new sensor technology.  Scientists in Belgium have now announced a way of using optical components such as waveguides, light sources and detectors in a flexible substrate, potentially offering a new type of pressure sensor.  Because the form of the substrate may be a flexible foil type of structure, it is possible to imagine its use as an artificial skin material.  This might have applications in robots or indeed other machinery where such a sense is of use. 

A thin layer of silicone is arranged between two polymer waveguide layers and the amount of crosstalk detected indicates the pressure applied.  in the absence of any pressure, there is no leakage between the layers.  This makes for a potentially very cheap pressure sensor.  The ultimate aim of the researchers is to make a stretchable skin which is sensitive to pressure, touch and deformation.  

IET Annual Healthcare Lecture

It was a pleasure to deliver the keynote presentation at this year's IET Healthcare lecture at the organisation's headquarters in Savoy Place, London this evening.  It was also my pleasure to give out some prizes to the leading students recognised by the organisation before starting to speak.  

So what if your ageing relatives are cared for by robots?  And what if the only way to control a pandemic outbreak was to chip and track humans?  And what if your surgeon told you he wasn't going to be in the room with you when he carries out your operation?   These are all topics which I mentioned as part of glimpsing the future on this particular occasion.  

The questions afterwards were very good, understandably given the calibre of the audience present!   But the most interesting part for me as always, was the discussion over dinner where I could hear from some of the audience about their views and their work.  

Healthcare in 7 minutes?

General practitioners (GPs) and family doctors have on average about seven minutes for the consultation with each patient who visits them, within the National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom.  These GPs are increasingly being offered more technology support in their work, more complex drugs to prescribe, and more options for followup treatments.  The future vision for healthcare often points towards more individual care, more targeted prescriptions and drugs for each patient.  Biotechnology marches on towards such a vision.  It is difficult to align these two things.  It is difficult to see how even the best doctors will cope with an even more complex world with so little time available to them.  I wonder if more intelligent pre-briefing of patient records will even scratch the surface in respect of making their task any easier.

Dogs or robots?

I read recently how a biotech firm in Korea (RNL Bio) and the Seoul National University had trained a pit bull terrier to perform certain domestic tasks such as removing laundry from a washing machine, fetching things from the fridge, amongst others.  Then they cloned five other dogs from this well trained parent.  Articles were subsequently written about whether dogs trained in this way could rival and be better than domestic robots.  I suspect that some would have opinions about the ethical aspects of the canine solution to domestic automation.  

Actually, I would still prefer a robot anyway.  There are plenty of reasons why the dog could choose not to follow its training on any particular day.  The dog will also eventually tire from domestic work.  The programming "breadth" possible for a robot should out-strip the number of tasks that a dog can be trained to do.  Finally, the dog will always require more maintenance, and have a more limited lifespan.  Unless its training extends to clearing up after itself then I still prefer the robot alternative, all of the previous points not withstanding!   

What is perhaps more interesting than to debate the merits of robot versus dog, is to wonder what might be the motivation behind the scientists who chose to train and clone the pit bulls?  Which species of animal do would be considered next?  

Innovation & open thinking ...

I have written blog entries before about how companies such as Apple innovate in the marketplace and drive others in their sector to innovate too at a faster pace than would otherwise be the case.  This is extremely important.  I have also been involved in a training event this week which was focused at improving the ways that messages are given in presentations, through specific techniques which exploit the characteristics of conversation.  

Often as BT Futurologist, I find myself being asked to give a keynote at some event which attempts to "open the minds" of those in the audience.  One of the desirable side effects of that is hopefully that the experts of their own domains in the audience begin to wonder what the impact of the future scenarios and developments that I describe might be on their worlds.  This may in turn stimulate thoughts of innovation within their organisations aimed at mitigating the impact that they have identified.  

One day, we will have direct machine to human brain interfacing which will allow the programming of an open mind!  Until then Futurologists like me will continue to try and open up minds, partly using the techniques I mentioned at the start! 

Synthetic Biology

Synthetic biology is bringing an engineering approach to biology.  In the same way as one uses electronic components such as transistors to engineer electronic circuits such as a radio, in synthetic biology, scientists are using DNA components to engineer new biological systems and devices.  

There are seemingly two separate goals currently being sought within the field of synthetic biology at the moment.  The most headline grabbing is that which seeks to define and build completely new forms of life.  The other less glamorous seeks to modify existing biological life forms to effectively put viruses and bacteria to work as biological machines to solve particular problems.  The advances in understanding DNA over recent years opens the door to both of these. Huge benefits could accrue from successful applications of such biological machinery.  One example could be a liquid that changes colour when sprayed onto a surface if there is some particular bacteria present. 

The dangers of this technology are many.  Any errors in synthetic biological research could release a virus into the world (either deliberately or accidentally) which can multiply itself before we know how to cope with the escape.  There is also the possibility of biological terrorism from this type of material falling into the wrong hands.  Finally synthetic biology raises interesting questions about what life is and what should humans do and how far the creation of living organisms should go!   

How easy is sharing media online?

Today we have lots of ways that have been devised to let people share media online.   Whether it be Picasa or Flickr for photos or video sites like YouTube or GoogleVideo, or mechanisms embedded into applications such as photocasting or web galleries supported by Apple's iLife suite, there are many options for the net-savvy to share their digital stuff with other people.  But is this really what we ideally want?  My mum is still struggling with moving to a digital camera from film, and she's not alone when it comes to being less than confident or enthusiastic about the new online world and how it complements her new digital devices.  There are many 'mums' out there!

What I mean is that surely we would like these sharing methods to be more direct and intuitive.  Just knowing what is out there and good to use is baffling enough for many.  Most Flickr or Picasa users chose that particular way to share their photos because a friend already used it to share some with them!  It was by word of mouth or in some sense viral.  And it's not just about discovery of mechanism either.  

When my mum shared a traditional photo with someone, she probably ordered a copy of the print, and either sent it by mail or physically handed it to someone.  She didn't have to concern herself about whether the picture would fall into the wrong hands as a side effect of the sharing.  Neither did she have to worry about the capacity of the person storing a copy.  And there was often no need for her to point the copy out to the people she sent it to either - if it was included or passed on, it was self explanatory.  In the online world, all of these additional things often cross people's minds.   It's extra stuff to think about - and there is plenty more.  

In the far future, we want to be able to simply think about the idea of sharing media (and other things) with particular people and it happens.  When biotechnology advances allow this intimate interfacing between human and machine, we will be back to a more simplistic world of naturally conveying digital content between people.  The underlying mechanisms will simply make it happen, and utilise the appropriate networks and devices to achieve it.  

In the meantime, lets hope there will be some significant improvements in the way we deal with sharing the enormous and ever-increasing amount of digital content we are creating.  Storage will soon be a commodity item - it is how and to whom we expose what is stored that is important.  If such improvements are made, maybe more 'mums' will be comfortable with climbing fully aboard the technology train.