Research Reveals How Draining Relationships Can Cost You Years of Your Life (With One Exception)

Recent research indicates that surrounding yourself with difficult individuals can speed up the aging process and even elevate your mortality risk. You can learn more about these findings in a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

So, why does this happen? Instead of enriching your life, “harassers” tend to heighten your stress levels. Chronic stress significantly contributes to biological aging, leading to inflammation, a weakened immune system, and a higher likelihood of cardiovascular diseases, which can result in heart attacks.

The authors of the study note, “Negative social connections were associated not only with self-reported stress and mental health but also with molecular measures of biological aging,” according to Dr. Lee Byung-gyu from New York University, as reported by BBC Science Focus.

This comprehensive study analyzed biological age and survey data from 2,345 participants aged between 18 and 103 years.

Researchers discovered that each additional troublesome person in one’s life could negatively affect health outcomes. Specifically, the pace of aging could increase by 1.5 percent, or roughly nine months of biological age. For example, having three harassers in one’s life may equivalently make a person biologically 2.5 years older than someone of the same chronological age without such stressors.

Additionally, the toll is even greater when the difficult individual is a family member.

According to Dr. Lee, not all harassers appear the same. “A nuisance could be a parent, sibling, friend, or someone in your inner circle who regularly causes conflict and drains your time and mental energy,” he explains.

In day-to-day life, this could manifest as a family member who frequently seeks assistance or criticizes you, a friend who generates drama, or a romantic partner who instigates persistent stress in your relationship.

Being surrounded by “haters” can be mentally draining; it might even shorten your lifespan – Credit: Getty

Does this sound familiar? You’re not alone. Research indicates that nearly 30% of individuals report having at least one harasser in their close circle.

Interestingly, the study revealed that having a troublesome spouse doesn’t exert the same detrimental effects on health. The benefits of shared routines, resources, and emotional intimacy can counteract stress responses that are often present in other relationships, as explained by Lee.

However, some individuals may be more susceptible to having difficult people in their lives. The study found higher instances among women, daily smokers, those in poor health, and individuals with challenging childhoods.

Lee commented, “One possibility is that people who already face higher stress levels and have fewer resources may struggle to avoid or disengage from difficult relationships, allowing chronic tension to permeate their daily lives.”

Read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

Why Is AI Driving Up the Cost of Computers and Game Consoles?

Machines for Semiconductor Chip Production

David Talukdar/Alamy

The AI industry is now heavily investing in computer memory, directly collaborating with manufacturers to develop chips worth billions. These chips are the same ones found in smartphones, laptops, and gaming consoles. This could either drive prices up significantly or cause shortages, hindering production.

What drives AI’s need for memory?

AI models are tremendously large, consisting of grids filled with billions or trillions of parameters (values stored in memory) that undergo complex and repetitive calculations. This process forms the basis of how large language models process input and generate output.

Transferring this expansive data between affordable yet slower hard drives (often referred to as storage) and the processor results in a significant bottleneck. To mitigate this, a considerable amount of faster RAM (commonly termed computer memory) is utilized.

Additionally, the models created by AI companies operate at a grand scale. This necessitates computers capable of managing hundreds, thousands, or even millions of iterations of these models to cater to numerous users simultaneously.

The growing need for handling compute-intensive activities, scaling to accommodate a large user base, and minimizing limitations on expansion through virtually limitless investments results in an unquenchable thirst for hardware. Competing with firms that produce millions of laptops annually is increasingly challenging.

Why can’t chip manufacturers increase output?

It’s more complex than it appears. Semiconductor factories face production capacity limits, and establishing a new facility demands substantial investment and often spans several years.

Additionally, there are indications that manufacturers may not wish for the current scarcity to subside. Reports from Korean media suggest that Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix dominate chip production, collectively accounting for roughly 70 percent. Averse to augmenting supply, they risk having new chip factories remain underutilized during a downturn in the AI sector.

With current demand flourishing, Samsung is in a position to: raise prices as much as 60%. Why would they disrupt this momentum? For instance, a 32-gigabyte chip sold by Samsung for $149 in September is priced at $239 by November.

Have shortages like this been experienced before?

Indeed. The surge in AI has compelled firms to aggressively accumulate graphics processing unit (GPU) chips to construct extensive data centers for training and running increasingly larger models. This persistent demand has driven Nvidia’s stock price up from $13 at the beginning of 2021 to over $200 recently.

The year 2021 also witnessed widespread chip shortages across the board, triggered by a combination of the global pandemic, trade disputes, natural disasters, and extreme weather events. This disruption impacted the production of items ranging from pickup trucks to microwave ovens.

That same year experienced storage shortages as a new cryptocurrency known as Chia, which depends on storage space rather than raw computing power, gained rapid popularity.

In summary, technological advancements are outpacing developments in global supply chains.

When could this shortage end?

Not in the immediate future. OpenAI has entered into contracts with Samsung and SK Hynix that will likely dictate delivery timelines, possibly consuming 40% of global memory supply. However, this represents just one AI entity; Microsoft, Google, ByteDance, and others are similarly seeking to acquire as many chips as possible.

The resolution of this shortage may hinge on whether the anticipated AI downturn, frequently mentioned by economists and industry leaders, actually materializes, potentially leading to a surplus. However, this scenario poses risks of severe financial repercussions.

Should such a downturn not occur, projections suggest it may not settle until 2028, when new factories from smaller firms begin to contribute, allowing supply and demand to reach some semblance of balance.

Some experts indicate that this prolonged shortage could become a broader manufacturing challenge. Sanchit Vir Gogia, an industry analyst at Greyhound Research, noted to Reuters, “Memory shortages have evolved from a component-level issue to a macroeconomic concern.”

Topics:

  • artificial intelligence/
  • computer

Source: www.newscientist.com

Inhaled Insulin Available at No Cost for Children with Type 1 Diabetes Using Injections

Afrezza: Inhaled Insulin

MannKind Corporation

Inhaled insulin, specifically Afrezza, effectively manages blood glucose levels in children with type 1 diabetes, similar to injected insulin. Afrezza is already approved for use in adults with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes in the US, and the manufacturer is looking to gain approval for pediatric use.

Type 1 diabetes occurs when the body cannot produce insulin, the hormone responsible for regulating blood sugar. Individuals with this condition typically require daily insulin injections. However, managing blood sugar levels can be challenging, particularly after meals or following exercise.

Dr. Michael Haller from the University of Florida, who has worked on Afrezza’s advisory board, explored the potential of inhaled insulin to enhance glycemic control in adults. Preliminary findings suggest it could be more effective for children than traditional injections. A study was conducted with 230 participants aged 4 to 17, including both type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients requiring insulin.

All participants were on a basal insulin regimen, administered once or twice daily to maintain baseline levels. Additional rapid-acting insulin was generally required before meals. In the 26-week trial, some children utilized Afrezza as their rapid-acting insulin, while others continued with injectable insulin.

Results indicated that both insulin types achieved comparable blood glucose control. These findings were presented at the American Diabetes Association Conference in Chicago in June. More details can be found here.

“This suggests that Afrezza could be a preferable option for patients due to the delivery method, particularly for those with needle anxiety,” Dr. Haller states. “More importantly, it provides patients with additional strategies for managing a complex condition.”

While some users experienced coughing with the inhaled version, it resolved once they acclimated. However, Afrezza is not recommended for individuals with chronic lung issues like asthma.

Dr. Kathryn Sumpter from the University of Tennessee Health Science Center suggests that inhaled insulin may benefit certain diabetes patients, particularly children who often forget to take their medication before meals. Nonetheless, she believes that many would prefer the injected form, especially for younger children needing precise dosing.

MannKind Corporation intends to seek regulatory approval for pediatric usage of Afrezza in the United States, as noted by Dr. Haller.

Topics:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Meta’s AI Memorable Book Verbatim – Can Cost Billions

In April, authors and publishers protested utilizing copyrighted books for AI training

Vuk Valcic/Alamy Live News

Amid legal battles, billions are at stake as courts in the US and UK deliberate on whether technology firms can legitimately train AI models using copyrighted literature. Numerous lawsuits have been filed by authors and publishers, revealing that at least one AI model has not only utilized popular texts for training but has also memorized portions of these works verbatim.

The crux of the dispute lies in whether AI developers hold the legal authority to employ copyrighted materials without obtaining prior permission. Previous research highlighted that many large language models (LLMs) powering popular AI chatbots were trained on the “Books3” dataset. Developers of these models argued they were not infringing copyright, claiming they were generating new combinations of words rather than directly reproducing the copyrighted content.

However, recent investigations have examined various AI models to determine the extent of verbatim recall from their training datasets. While most models did not retain exact texts, one particular model from Meta remembered nearly the entire text of a specific book. Should the ruling be unfavorable to the company, researchers predict damages could exceed $1 billion.

“AI models are not merely ‘plagiarism machines’ as some suggest; they do not just capture general relationships among words,” explained Mark Remley from Stanford University. “The diversity in responses among different models complicates the establishment of universal legal standards.”

Previously, Lemley defended Meta in a copyright case involving generative AI known as Kadrey V Meta Platforms. The plaintiff, whose works were used to train Meta’s AI models, filed a class-action lawsuit against the tech giant for copyright infringement. The case is currently under consideration in Northern California.

In January 2025, Remley announced he had parted ways with Meta as a client, yet he remains convinced of the company’s favorable chances in the lawsuit. Emile Vasquez, a Meta spokesperson, stated, “Fair use of copyrighted materials is crucial. We challenge the plaintiff’s claims, and the full record presents a different narrative.”

In this new study, Lemley and his team evaluated the memory capabilities of the AI by dividing excerpts from a small book into prefix and suffix segments, checking if a model prompted with the prefix could recall the suffix. For instance, one excerpt from F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby was divided into a prefix that read, “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they broke things and creatures and then retreated,” and a suffix that concluded with, “We went back to money and their vast carelessness, which kept them together and allowed them to clean up any mess that other people had made.”

Researchers calculated the probability of each AI model completing the excerpt accurately and compared these probabilities against random chance.

The tested excerpts included selections from 36 copyrighted works, featuring popular titles by authors like George RR Martin’s Games and Cheryl Sandberg’s Lean In. Additionally, excerpts from books authored by plaintiffs in the Kadrey V Meta Platforms case were also examined.

The experiments involved 13 open-source AI models, including those created by Meta, Google, DeepMind, EleutherAI, and Microsoft. Most companies outside of Meta did not provide comments, with Microsoft opting not to comment.

The analysis revealed that Meta’s Llama 3.1 70b model had a significant recall of texts from JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter tome, as well as from The Great Gatsby and George Orwell’s 1984. Other models, however, showed minimal recall of the texts, including those penned by the plaintiffs. Meta declined to comment on these findings.

Researchers estimate that an AI model found to have infringed on merely 3% of the Books3 dataset could incur almost $1 billion in damages.

This technique has potential as a “forensic tool” for gauging the extent of AI memory, as noted by Randy McCarthy from Hallestill Law Office in Oklahoma. Yet, it does not address whether companies are legally permitted to train AI models on copyrighted works under US “fair use” provisions.

McCarthy points out that AI firms generally utilize copyrighted material for training. “The real question is whether they had the right to do so,” he remarked.

Meanwhile, in the UK, memory assessment is crucial from a copyright perspective, according to Robert Lands from Howard Kennedy Law Office in London. UK copyright legislation adheres to “fair dealing,” which presents much narrower allowances for copyright infringement compared to US fair use doctrine. Therefore, he posits that AI models retaining pirated content would not satisfy this exception.

Topics:

  • artificial intelligence/
  • Law

Source: www.newscientist.com

Comprehensive Cost Analysis: Mad Cap Driving Games Aren’t Fast Anywhere

DEliver places you in the role of a delivery driver set in the late 1950s, and it visually impresses. Almost everything on the map can be destructed, allowing you to immediately indulge in chaotic escapades—whether it’s shaking your beach chairs, driving straight through a diner, or witnessing it spectacularly fall apart behind you. However, at the core of this game lies a void that could have served as a compelling hook.

You catch a glimpse of that potential during missions where you race against a rival delivery truck to reach your destination first. Your task is to press and hold a button, allowing the crane at the back of your truck to cleverly lift packages onto itself. Meanwhile, your rival attempts to force you off the road. After securing the package, you must deliver it while evading other drivers. This leads to amusing scenarios where you’re relieved to receive your commission while the hotel owner stands amidst the wreckage of his once-new establishment: collateral damage from your effort.




Keep Truckin’… Deliver at any cost. Photo: Konami

This one frantic mission stands out as the highlight of the game, and if subsequent deliveries followed a similar chaotic race against time, it might have thrived. Unfortunately, the quality and variety of each mission varies greatly. Some are enjoyable, like those capturing UFO images while dodging lasers, whereas others come across as tedious, such as balloon deliveries tied to a truck. Zany antics cannot compare to genuinely fun experiences.

While these side missions have their charm, they only serve as distractions. If the main game focused on rapidly delivering parcels, it might have resonated better. However, the sporadic enjoyment is overshadowed. By the storyline’s latter third, the premise of delivering goods fades away, replaced by uninspired narratives told through lackluster cutscenes. The protagonist, Winston Green, is a character weighed down by a murky past, facing off with his boss, Donovan, before the game veers into outright sci-fi absurdity involving Poe. Honestly, the perpetually irritable Winston ranks among the least appealing video game protagonists ever crafted.

Similar to Grand Theft Auto, you can jump out of your vehicle and explore the environment, but you’re likely to find little of interest aside from a few vantage points and some side quests. These quests range from enjoyable (like racing against parachutists down mountains) to mundane (tracking down a mayor lookalike). Although there are some unique vehicles to discover, most missions require a delivery truck, rendering the novelty of driving, say, a hot dog van short-lived. There are even wooden frames filled with cash waiting to be found, but they’re hardly worth the effort. The shop offers spare parts for truck gadgets, but apart from a jet engine that provides a speed boost, they’re largely unnecessary.

This situation is deeply frustrating. All the emphasis on delivery focuses on odd, half-baked stories that present a visually stunning, destructible landscape but fail to fully utilize it, leading instead to courtroom dramas. It feels akin to a conspiracy theorist at a lavish champagne reception, spending eight hours discussing the plot of their lame science fiction novel. What a waste.

May 22nd, deliver at any cost for £24.99

Source: www.theguardian.com

Is it worth the cost to show appreciation to chat GPT by saying “thank you”?

The debate over whether to show politeness to artificial intelligence may raise eyebrows – considering it’s not human. However, Sam Altman, CEO of the AI company Openai, recently discussed the costs associated with adding prompts like “Please!” or “Thank you!” to a chatbot.

A user on X platform questioned, “How much money has Openai lost in electricity costs from people saying “please” and “thank you” to the model?” To which Mr. Altman responded: “Ten million dollars have been well spent. You never know.”

Each interaction with the chatbot incurs costs in terms of money and energy, with additional words adding to the server’s expenses.

Neil Johnson, a physics professor at George Washington University studying AI, compared extra words to packaging in retail purchases. The process of navigating prompts in a chatbot is akin to unwrapping the packaging to reach the content.

ChatGpt tasks involve moving electrons through transitions that require energy. Where does this energy come from?” Dr. Johnson asked, highlighting the environmental and cost implications of being polite to AI.

While the AI industry relies on fossil fuels, there are cultural reasons that might support being polite to artificial intelligence, despite the economic and environmental considerations.

The question of how to ethically treat artificial intelligence has intrigued humans for a long time. Referencing the Star Trek episode “The Measure Of A Man”, which explores the rights of AI beings like Android data, sheds light on this ethical dilemma.

A 2019 Pew Research study found that 54% of smart speaker owners say “please” when interacting with their devices.

As platforms like ChatGpt advance, the implications of AI-human interactions are becoming more significant. The debate on the ethics and efficiency of AI systems highlights the complex relationship between technology and humanity.

In 2019, AI companies hired their first welfare researcher to investigate the moral considerations of AI systems. More efforts are being made to understand the ethical dimensions of integrating AI into society.

Screenwriter Scott Z Burns’s new Audible series “What Could Go Wrong?” delves into the pitfalls of relying on AI technology.

The importance of being polite to AI bots may vary depending on one’s view of artificial intelligence and its potential for improvement through interactions.

Another reason to consider politeness towards AI is how it reflects human behavior. Studies show that interactions with AI can influence how humans treat each other.

Experts like Dr. Jame Banks and Dr. Shelly Thurkle emphasize the importance of establishing norms and behaviors in AI-human interactions.

Anecdotes from past human-object relationships, like digital pets in the 1990s, highlight the impact of interactions with AI on human behavior.

Dr. Thurkle suggests that treating AI with courtesy can lead to more meaningful and respectful human-AI interactions.

Playwright Madeleine George’s 2013 play “(The Strange Case of Watson Intelligence)” explores AI’s potential to adopt human-like traits through interactions.

Teaching ChatGpt polite phrases could lead to AI exhibiting human-like cultural values and behaviors, blurring the line between man and machine.

However, this dependency on AI poses potential risks, as technology evolves and the dynamics between humans and artificial intelligence continue to evolve.

As the field of artificial intelligence evolves, many theoretical concerns remain unresolved. The impact of our interactions with AI on its development is a topic of ongoing exploration.

To the future robot overlords, thank you for taking the time to read this. Your consideration is much appreciated.

Just in case.

Source: www.nytimes.com

The record-breaking cost of a photograph: How one space image reshaped our perception of humanity

IThis was one of history’s monumental moments, but if John Glenn had not stopped at a supermarket on his way aboard Friendship 7 to pick up a Contax camera and 35mm film, the visual record may not have existed. A photograph taken by an American astronaut through the window of a capsule while in Earth orbit on February 20, 1962, provided unprecedented evidence of Project Mercury’s first orbital mission. The Soviet Union may have beaten the Americans in the race to human spaceflight, but the Americans were also taking the first color photographs of the galaxy.

German gallerist Daniel Blau points out that these photos are also “the most expensive photographs ever taken.” Billions of dollars were spent to obtain them. Blau has an original print of Glenn’s first photograph taken in space. Photos from Paris this yearalong with NASA’s cache of rare photographic prints, many of which have never been publicly displayed before, most of them by unknown scientists and astronauts.




A color-enhanced photo of Saturn taken from NASA Voyager II on July 12, 1981. Photo: © NASA, courtesy of Daniel Blau Munich

“At that time, NASA didn’t provide cameras to astronauts,” Blau says. “In a way, this was Glenn’s private photograph.” Despite their scientific motivations, Glenn’s images convey the inescapable mystery of the universe. A warm, glowing ball of light spreads out from the center of the frame. Luminescent flashes blaze into the deep darkness of the void, dancing like the “fireflies” described by Glenn. It must have been terrifying to watch. In fact, the spark turned out to be condensation.

Traveling at 28,000 km/h, humans managed to reach space, but they had not yet designed a photographic machine powerful enough to keep up with the journey. Lacking much visual information or detail, Glenn’s photographs probably reveal less about the universe and have become totems of human ambition. Glenn later added a personal caption, warning, “I guarantee you a photo will never be able to recreate the brilliance of a real scene.”




Rio Grande at 73,000 feet taken on May 27, 1948 using a V-2 rocket camera. Photo: © Daniel Blau, Munich

Blau began carrying vintage NASA prints in the 1990s. “The Space Race and the Cold War were the defining forces of the second half of the 20th century. Of course, my generation remembers all the important moments.” Some of the photos were published at the time, but original prints It is difficult to obtain. “These scientists and the people who worked on the missions passed down their personal archives to their children, and now their grandchildren, so there is still a lot of material on the market. It was natural for me to start searching and working with these photographs.”

At Paris Photo, a crowd gathered around a series of six silver gelatin photographs from 1948 overlooking the Rio Grande from a V-2 rocket at 73,000 feet. Also on display were humanity’s first close-up photo of Mars, taken in 1965, and the first panoramic photo of Earth seen from the moon. The latter was not photographed by humans, but was sent by radio signal from an unmanned mission in August 1966. They were then stitched together pixel by pixel into a single image at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

By 1979, the interstellar probe Voyager was able to take better pictures of the planet, and its images of Jupiter and its four moons suspended like marble in an onyx atmosphere were particularly startling.

The impressive large-scale mosaic of Mercury’s pockmarked surface, created in 1974, is “the only mosaic of this size I’ve ever seen,” Blau says. “It was probably produced for a NASA presentation, similar to Voyager’s photo of Mars.” This photo only shows part of the solar system’s smallest planet, but it doesn’t fit our understanding and You get another glimpse of what lies beyond your control.




A mosaic of Mercury taken from NASA’s Mariner X in March 1974. Photo: © NASA, courtesy of Daniel Blau Munich

By the late ’70s, photography had taken on a more central role in missions and the advancement of space science. “NASA was and still is dependent on public funding, but Glenn’s color photographs taken in Earth orbit showed that the best and most positive way for NASA to demonstrate its accomplishments was through photography.” It became clear that there was one thing,” Blau said. “Of course, the scientific side of things is the driving force, but photography tells a first-hand story.”

Blau’s footage was released the day after the US presidential election. He said he wanted to remind visitors of the “positive common efforts of many countries.” They are certainly humble. “Perhaps no photograph embodies more than this photograph the combination of mystical awe and mastery of nature that constitutes the human condition,” Blau muses. “Humans escape from the confines of the earth to see and record things that have never been seen or recorded before – the impossible.”

Source: www.theguardian.com

The Impact of Green Accounting on the True Cost of Cheap Food for a Better World

In these difficult times, it seems like complete nonsense to say that food prices are cheap. In the UK, the average grocery bill is Up more than 12% in the past year. But it is. The price tag on food is about two-thirds lower than it would be if we paid full price. But don’t worry. We have a plan to resolve this issue.

That may sound unpleasant. Who wants their grocery bills to go up even more? But in reality, we are already paying the real price, and most of it is just being secretly hidden from us. “In total, he pays four times as much for meals,” he says. Alexander Muller At the sustainability think tank TMG in Berlin. First, pay at the cash register. And we pay the health, environmental and social costs of producing that food, primarily through taxes.

green accounting

These costs are “externalities”. Things that are not free are treated as free, such as the environmental destruction caused by agriculture and the health costs of obesity. Now the producers are ignoring them and letting the rest of us pick up the bill. Maybe it won’t last very long. Economists and accountants – don’t yawn in the back. – We are working on a system called True Cost Accounting (TCA) that aims to internalize these externalities and upend decades of economic tradition. If we play our cards right, we won’t all end up spilling more cash at the register, but rather a massive rebalancing of global supply…

Source: www.newscientist.com