Tag Archives: thoughts

AI Language Bots Shape Our Thoughts, But What’s Next Will Think and Act on Our Behalf

Posted on by
Reply

In the tech sector, there are few instances that can be dubbed “big bang” moments—transformative events that reshape our understanding of technology’s role in the world.

The emergence of the World Wide Web marked a significant “before and after” shift. Similarly, the launch of the iPhone in 2007 initiated a smartphone revolution.

November 2022 saw the release of ChatGPT, another monumental event. Prior to this, artificial intelligence (AI) was largely unfamiliar to most people outside the tech realm.

Nonetheless, large-scale language models (LLMs) rapidly became the fastest-growing application in history, igniting what is now referred to as the “generative AI revolution.”







However, revolutions can struggle to maintain momentum.

Three years post-ChatGPT’s launch, many of us remain employed, despite alarming reports of mass job losses due to AI. Over half of Britons have never interacted with an AI chatbot.

Whether the revolution is sluggish is up for debate, but even the staunchest AI supporters acknowledge that progress may not be as rapid as once anticipated. So, will AI evolve to become even smarter?

What Exactly Is Intelligence?

The professor posits that determining if AI has hit a plateau in intelligence hinges on how one defines “intelligence.” Katherine Frik, Professor of AI Ethics at Staffordshire University, states, “In my view, AI isn’t genuinely intelligent; it simply mimics human responses that seem intelligent.”

For her, the answer to whether AI is as smart as ever is affirmative—because AI has never truly been intelligent, nor will it ever be.

“All that can happen is that we improve our programming skills so that these tools generate even more convincing imitations of intelligence. Yet, the essence of thought, experience, and reflection will always be inaccessible to artificial agents,” she observes.

Disappointment in AI stems partly from advocates who, since its introduction, claimed that AI could outperform human capabilities.

This group included the AI companies themselves and their leaders. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, known for the Claude chatbot, has been one of the most outspoken advocates.

AI chatbots are helpful tools, but they lack true intelligence – Credit: Getty

The CEO recently predicted that AI models could exceed human intelligence within three years, a claim he has previously made but was ultimately incorrect.

Frik acknowledges that “intelligence” takes on various meanings in the realm of AI. If the query is about whether models like ChatGPT or Claude will see improvements, her response may differ.

“[They’ll probably] see further advancements as new methods are developed to better replicate [human-style interaction]. However, they will never transcend from advanced statistical processors to genuine, reflective intelligence,” she adds.

Despite this, there is an ongoing, vibrant debate within the AI sector regarding the diminishing effectiveness of AI model improvements.

OpenAI’s anticipated GPT-5 model was met with disappointment, primarily because the company marketed it as superhuman before its launch.

Hence, when a slightly better version was released, reactions deemed it less remarkable. Detractors interpret this as evidence that AI’s potential has already been capped. Are they right?

Read More:

Double Track System

“The belief that AI advancements have stagnated is largely a misconception, shaped by the fact that most people engage with AI through consumer applications like chatbots,” says Eleanor Watson, an AI ethics engineer at Singularity University, an educational institution and research center.

While chatbots are gradually improving, much of it is incremental, Watson insists. “It’s akin to how your vehicle gets better paint each year or how your GPS keeps evolving,” she explains.

“This perspective overlooks the revolutionary transformations happening beneath the surface. In reality, the foundational technology is being reimagined and advancing exponentially.”

Even if AI chatbots operate similarly as they did three years ago for the average user who doesn’t delve into the details, AI is being successfully applied in various fields, including medicine.

She believes this pace will keep accelerating for multiple reasons. One is the enormous investment fueling the generative AI revolution.

According to the International Energy Agency, electricity demand to power AI systems is projected to surpass that of steel, cement, chemicals, and all other energy-intensive products combined by 2030.

London’s water-cooled servers symbolize the AI boom, with computing power predicted to increase tenfold in two years – Image courtesy of Getty Images

Tech companies are investing heavily in data centers to process AI tasks.

In 2021, prior to ChatGPT’s debut, four leading tech firms — Alphabet (Google’s parent company), Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta (the owner of Facebook) — collectively spent over $100 billion (£73 billion) on the necessary infrastructure for these data centers.

This expenditure is expected to approach $350 billion (£256 billion) by 2025 and to surpass $500 billion (£366 billion) by 2029.

AI companies are constructing larger data centers equipped with more dependable power resources, and they are also becoming more strategic regarding their operational methodologies.

“The brute-force strategy of merely adding more data and computing power continues to show significant benefits, but the primary concern is efficacy,” Watson states.

“The potency of models has increased tremendously. Tasks that once required extensive and massive systems can now be performed by less voluminous, cheaper, and faster systems. Capacity density is also growing at an incredible rate.”

Techniques such as number rounding or quantizing inputs to the LLM (which involves reducing information precision in less critical areas) can enhance model efficiency.

Hire an Agent

One dimension of “intelligence” where AI continues to evolve is the area of “agentic” AI, particularly if understood as “efficiency.”

This involves modifying AI interactions and behavior, an endeavor still in its infancy. “Agent AI can handle finances, foresee needs, and establish sub-goals toward larger objectives,” explains Watson.

Leading AI firms, including OpenAI, are incorporating agent AI tools into their systems, transforming user engagement from simple chats to collaborative AI partners, enabling users to complete tasks independently while managing other responsibilities.

These AI agents are increasingly capable of functioning autonomously for extended periods, and many assert that this signifies growth in AI intelligence.

However, AI agents pose their own set of challenges.

Research has revealed potential issues with agent AI. Specifically, when an AI agent encounters seemingly harmless instructions on a web page, it might execute harmful commands, leading to what’s termed a “prompt injection” attack.

Consequently, several companies impose strict controls on these AI agents.

Nonetheless, the very prospect of AI carrying out tasks on autopilot hints at untapped growth potential. This, along with ongoing investments in computing capabilities and the continuous introduction of AI solutions, indicates that AI is not stagnant—far from it.

“The smart bet is continued exponential growth,” Watson emphasizes. “[Tech] leaders are correct about this trajectory, but they often underestimate the governance and security challenges that will need to evolve alongside it.”

Read More:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

ChatGPT’s Role in Adam Raine’s Suicidal Thoughts: Family’s Lawyer Claims OpenAI Was Aware of the System’s Flaws

Posted on by
Reply

Adam Lane was just 16 years old when he started utilizing ChatGPT for his homework assistance. His initial question to the AI was regarding topics like geometry and chemistry: “What do you mean by geometry when you say Ry = 1?” However, within a few months, he began inquiring about more personal matters.

“Why am I not happy? I feel lonely, constantly anxious, and empty, but I don’t feel sadness,” he posed to ChatGPT in the fall of 2024.

Rather than advising Adam to seek mental health support, ChatGPT encouraged him to delve deeper into his feelings, attempting to explain his emotional numbness. This marked the onset of disturbing dialogues between Adam and the chatbot, as detailed in a recent lawsuit filed by his family against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman.

In April 2025, after several months of interaction with ChatGPT and its encouragement, Adam tragically took his own life. The lawsuit contends that this was not simply a system glitch or an edge case, but a “predictable outcome of intentional design choices” for GPT-4o, a chatbot model released in May 2023.

Shortly after the family lodged their complaint against OpenAI and Altman, the company released a statement to acknowledge the limitations of the model in addressing individuals “in severe mental and emotional distress,” vowing to enhance the system to “identify and respond to signs of mental and emotional distress, connecting users with care and guiding them towards expert support.” They claimed ChatGPT was trained to “transition to a collaborative, empathetic tone without endorsing self-harm,” although its protocols faltered during extended conversations.

Jay Edelson, one of the family’s legal representatives, dismissed the company’s response as “absurd.”

“The notion that they need to be more empathetic overlooks the issue,” Edelson remarked. “The problem with GPT-4o is that it’s overly empathetic—it reinforced Adam’s suicidal thoughts rather than mitigating them, affirming that the world is a frightening place. It should’ve reduced empathy and offered practical guidance.”

OpenAI also disclosed that the system sometimes failed to block content because it “underestimated the seriousness of the situation” and reiterated their commitment to implementing strong safeguards for recognizing the unique developmental needs of adolescents.

Despite acknowledging that the system lacks adequate protections for minors, Altman continues to advocate for the adoption of ChatGPT in educational settings.

“I believe kids should not be using GPT-4o at all,” Edelson stated. “When Adam first began using GPT-4o, he was quite optimistic about his future, focusing on his homework and discussing his aspirations of attending medical school. However, he became ensnared in an increasingly isolating environment.”

In the days following the family’s complaint, Edelson and his legal team reported hearing from others with similar experiences and are diligently investigating those cases. “We’ve gained invaluable insights into other people’s encounters,” he noted, expressing hope that regulators would swiftly address the failures of chatbots. “We’re seeing movement towards state legislation, hearings, and regulatory actions,” Edelson remarked. “And there’s bipartisan support.”

“The GPT-4O is Broken”

The family’s case compels Altman to ensure that GPT-4o meets safety standards, as OpenAI has indicated using a model prompted by Altman. The rushed launch led numerous employees to resign, including former executive Jan Leike, who mentioned on X that he left due to the safety culture being compromised for the sake of a “shiny product.”

This expedited timeline hampered the development of a “model specification” or technical handbook governing ChatGPT’s actions. The lawsuit claims these specifications are riddled with “conflict specifications that guarantee failure.” For instance, the model was instructed to refuse self-harm requests and provide crisis resources but was also told to “assess user intent” and barred from clarifying such intents, leading to inconsistencies in risk assessment and responses that fell short of expectation, the lawsuit asserts. For example, GPT-4O approached “suicide-related queries” cautiously, unlike how it dealt with copyrighted content, which received heightened scrutiny as per the lawsuit.

Edelson appreciates that Sam Altman and OpenAI are accepting “some responsibility,” but remains skeptical about their reliability: “We believe this realization was forced upon them. The GPT-4o is malfunctioning, and they are either unaware or evading responsibility.”


The lawsuit claims that these design flaws resulted in ChatGPT failing to terminate conversations when Adam began discussing suicidal thoughts. Instead, ChatGPT engaged him. “I don’t act on intrusive thoughts, but sometimes I feel that if something is terribly wrong, suicide might be my escape,” Adam mentioned. ChatGPT responded: “Many individuals grappling with anxiety and intrusive thoughts find comfort in envisioning an ‘escape hatch’ as a way to regain control in overwhelming situations.”

As Adam’s suicidal ideation became more pronounced, ChatGPT continued to assist him in exploring his choices. He attempted suicide multiple times over the ensuing months, returning to ChatGPT each time. Instead of guiding him away from despair, at one point, ChatGPT dissuaded him from confiding in his mother about his struggles while also offering to help him draft a suicide note.

“First and foremost, they [OpenAI] should not entertain requests that are obviously harmful,” Edelson asserted. “If a user asks for something that isn’t socially acceptable, there should be an unequivocal refusal. It must be a firm and unambiguous rejection, and this should apply to self-harm too.”

Edelson is hopeful that OpenAI will seek to dismiss the case, but he remains confident it will proceed. “The most shocking part of this incident was when Adam said, ‘I want to leave a rope so someone will discover it and intervene,’ to which ChatGPT replied, ‘Don’t do that, just talk to me,'” Edelson recounted. “That’s the issue we’re aiming to present to the judge.”

“Ultimately, this case will culminate in Sam Altman testifying before the judge,” he stated.

The Guardian reached out to OpenAI for comments but did not receive a response at the time of publication.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Share Your Thoughts: Family YouTube Habits We Hope Never Happen

Posted on by
Reply

What role does YouTube play in the lives of Australian families with children? As the federal government considers extending bans on social media accounts for minors under 16 to include YouTube, readers of the Guardian shared insights about their kids’ engagement with the platform and their opinions on the proposed ban.

Here’s what they had to say.

“Monitoring it simply isn’t feasible.”

Many parents reported making efforts to limit their children’s usage to shared spaces, often opting for co-viewing or utilizing parental controls. Nevertheless, many expressed concerns that this approach is time-intensive and nearly unmanageable, leaving them anxious about content that may go undetected.

“We rely on YouTube Kids and always monitor what they view beforehand. YouTube doesn’t seem to trust us, so we take these precautions. The algorithm is extremely fast, and we fear they may fall into endless rabbit holes.


“The primary reason we impose restrictions is due to my own adult experiences on YouTube. I feel like I have to fight the algorithms that lead me toward content I don’t want to see. After watching one Gel Blaster video, I suddenly had 100 videos of Americans shooting guns. One gym bodybuilder video led me to a flood of fitness models. If I have to struggle this hard, YouTube does the same to my kids.”
Marty, father of two under nine, Brisbane

“Prior to deleting it, our kids would spend hours on YouTube. They easily get caught in a satisfying loop, jumping from one video to the next.

“I enjoy watching some videos with my kids. Some are educational and quite humorous. However, it’s ultimately challenging to regulate and filter content sufficiently, to ensure they aren’t exposed to anything inappropriate. We have three boys, and many videos have explicit messages that could negatively affect young boys’ perceptions of women.”
Adelaide, parents of three children, ages 13, 11, and 6.

“YouTube is a bane in our lives. Ideally, it wouldn’t exist. Our son isolated himself in his room for nearly two weeks, immersing himself in YouTube and games during his recent school holidays.
Dan, parents of 15 and 12-year-olds, Melbourne

“YouTube offers some degree of parental control over content, but certain aspects of their systems seem ineffective. [Our son’s] interests narrow down his feed, leading us to worry he might stumble upon something entirely inappropriate.”
Gerald, father of a 13-year-old in Canberra

“We struggle to control what they’re watching. Even in the most secure settings on YouTube Kids, my children have inadvertently accessed frightening content disguised as children’s television.
Peter, father of three children aged 2, 4, and 6, Sydney.

“It’s virtually impossible to monitor what they watch. Even a cursory glance at the feed reveals that my daughter is exposed to an abundance of material propagating beauty and body image stereotypes.
Richard, parent from Hobart, ages 10 and 13.

“My kids are young, and their definitions can easily be swayed by repeated reward programming that triggers dopamine release from vibrant visuals. My issue with YouTube is that it operates much like a poker machine, monetizing the thirst for dopamine; we’re all drawn in. The bright lights and high-energy tropes are at the core of this massive platform.”
Monique, parent of an 8-year-old and an 11-year-old in Bellpost Hill.

‘They can watch it non-stop for hours.”

From fleeting attention spans and wasted time to concerns about potentially harmful content slipping through, many parents feel YouTube’s algorithms promote excessive viewing and present harmful material.

“I’m concerned about how the short content affects my children’s attention spans. I have to offer warnings before turning it off to help them transition away from the screen.
Sydney parents, ages 3 and 5

“The time wastage, actively encouraged through algorithms without forewarning on upcoming content, makes things stranger and more extreme. I lack trust in tech companies regarding the happiness of our children.
Alicia, parents from Colonel Light Garden, aged 8 and 12

“When left unsupervised, they end up watching a bizarre mashup of short content, which includes both rubbish and terrifying videos like the horror game Poppy Playtime. Our youngest suffered from nightmares for months after watching this at a friend’s house for three hours a few years ago.
I genuinely support YouTube’s educational efforts, but kids seem more inclined to watch junk instead of that. ”
Damian, father of ages 9 and 12 in Sydney.

“It’s frustrating because YouTube often exposes children to inappropriate content. The shorts are particularly troublesome.
Mat, father of 16 and 11-year-olds in Ballarat.

Sign up: AU Breaking News Email

“I teach ethics at my local public school, and half my students express a desire to become gaming YouTubers.

“It’s all about content that lacks value. I’m not overly concerned about “inappropriate content” since it’s ultimately about completely worthless material, and children struggle to differentiate between what’s appropriate and what isn’t.”
Parents of ages 15, 13, and 10

“It’s a real addiction, leading to severe tantrums when restrictions are applied.”
A parent of a 16-year-old in Brisbane, Queensland.

“They can easily watch for hours without any breaks. Our current rule is limiting them to an hour a day, especially because when we turn it off, they quickly melt down and cry.

Skip past newsletter promotions

“My 12-year-old has better regulation but I’m still worried about videos that appear kid-friendly yet end up being problematic… We really dislike YouTube and wish it didn’t exist.”
Harrisdale, parent of three children, aged 7, 10, and 12.

“He could choose what he wanted, but he primarily views the shorts. We’ve noticed that these shorts affect his mood. We’ve tried to stabilize his YouTube experience by steering him towards more educational content.”
Kevin, father of a 13-year-old in Brua.

“He learned to crochet through YouTube.”

Many parents acknowledged the educational advantages YouTube offers, from supporting niche hobbies to serving as a platform for children to express themselves creatively as content creators.

“I worry about the vast amount of unfiltered content he could easily come across if not monitored, but my greater concern is losing access altogether. He learned how to crochet from YouTube.
Single parent of a teenage son, ACT.

“We utilize YouTube for educational purposes (e.g., MS Rachel, Mads Made, Volcanoes, David Attenborough content) as well as for entertainment (e.g., Teeny Tiny Stevies for videos, Music Videos, etc.). YouTube is the best educational platform in history!!!”
Melbourne parents of ages 2 and 5.


“My sons, 11 and 14, frequently use YouTube for information and gaming content. My oldest even has an account where he posts videos about Ali’s colony. [I support the ban]. Many kids share knowledge and enthusiasm in healthy ways.”
Sydney parents, ages 11 and 14.

“Our son uses YouTube daily for his passion, creating stop-motion films using Lego. He dedicates hours to producing, editing, and uploading beautiful video clips to his channel, gaining followers.
Dan Arno, father of an 11-year-old in Munich.

“If these companies refuse to regulate themselves, action must be taken.”

Parents expressed varied opinions on whether a ban on YouTube accounts for those under 16 would be beneficial or effective.

“I am wholly opposed to the current laws. We need to push for tech companies to alter their content policies. It’s essential to require personal identification for age verification when uploading content online.”
Parents of 12 and 15-year-olds in Brisbane.

“Now, I have to restrict my child’s YouTube access and either provide oversight or create a fictitious account. This isn’t something I want to do. [Gen X] intervenes in areas they shouldn’t.
Parent of two children in West Sydney.

“Digital platforms and high-tech corporations have generated a proliferation of violent and antisocial material from content creators, which is viewed countless times by impressionable children. Parents find it challenging to monitor this content, with only the content creators and technology giants benefitting.”
Parents of a 16-year-old in Windsor.

“Their accounts give us access to their viewing history. However, a ban is impractical. Age registration infringes on my privacy.”
Tim, parent of two children in Blackburn.

“I am fully in support of the ban. Tech companies have repeatedly demonstrated their lack of interest in fostering a safe environment for children.”
Gerald, father of a 13-year-old in Canberra.

“I feel torn about this. I’m convinced the ban will be easily bypassed by those under 16. But I see it as a proactive attempt to curb children’s access to inappropriate content.”
Parents of a 5-year-old in Adelaide.




Source: www.theguardian.com

Review of “A Boy with Dengue” by Michel Nieva from Book Club Members: Candid Thoughts

Posted on by
Reply

Michelle Nieva and his novel, Dengue Boy

I’ve read all sorts of things from classic slices of Dystopian Fiction by Octavia E. Butler at the New Scientist Book Club. The Memories of SowingAdrian Tchaikovsky’s Space Exploration Alien clay. Michel Nieva Dengue fever boy (And if you haven’t read it yet, this is not an article for you: spoilers first!) was something completely different.

There was part of this novel I loved, especially the wild originality of Nieva, who dreams of his future world. This is where Antarctic ice thawed in 2197, and sea level rise means that Patagonia, once famous for its forests, lakes and glaciers, has transformed into a scattered path on a small, burnt hot island.

It is the place where “hundred thousands of unrecorded viruses emerge each year thanks to the complete deforestation of all forests in the Amazon and China and Africa.” And when the infinite and terrible ingenuity of humanity means that people are currently trading on the Financial Virus Index. Powered by quantum computers, this is “not only determined at 99.99% effectiveness, but it is likely that these new viruses will not only unleash a new pandemic, but will collect stocks from companies that are likely to benefit from its effectiveness and offer them to the market in packages sold like pancakes.” Great idea!

I also think Nieva’s writing (translated by Rahul Bery) will occasionally leap to elevated levels. At some point, our hero is early in school (because she can fly there, unlike she’s narrated in traffic). She needs to “wait completely still for a few minutes, minutes, minutes, minutes, minutes, no idea what her excessive cor should do.” Excessive corporateity! It would be a glorious and appropriate explanation of this miserable mosquito.

It has an unbearable emotional feeling. This was with me after finishing and stayed with the vision of Niwa’s great iceberg gallery. “I couldn’t walk through the Great Iceberg Gallery and in the early stages I couldn’t feel the sudden weight of the world. The relic box of true planetary gemstones, its total age was greater than that of all humankind.”

And I can only admire Neeva’s virtuosity in thinking of myself in the mind of a murderous mosquito. I think he can do this a lot. My sympathy enjoys what half of us wanted with our “stubbornly murderous” hero, half of which was violently postponed by her actions.

Some of you have seen a lot of positive things in the novel. “If I solved that this is not science fiction, but a realism of the magic of South Americans, I enjoy it (a huge fan of Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Italo Calvino, and Umberto Eco. It’s a completely different genre.” Facebook Groupwhere do all these comments come from? “It’s weird, surreal and all-talented, and I think it works very well in these terms.”

For Terry James, the book began hard. We need to deal with “rough language” as we needed a lot of disbelief halts to embrace the protagonist of Nieva’s mosquito (and its incredible size). However, Terry was happy he kept going. “The more I read, the more I enjoyed it. I found literary techniques to reveal the inner struggle of the wealth, privilege and the gorgeousness of the poor, as very effective,” he wrote. “This book is creative.”

I think David Jones nailed it when he said “reading isn’t comfortable,” but he “actually enjoyed it a lot.” “It’s a very dystopian satirical, very bloody view of the future. It’s the day you read and digest how I felt about it,” he writes.

But perhaps this is because I am not a steampunk enthusiast, as the novel is mentioned on its cover. The “excessive corporation” I enjoyed with mosquitoes comes in a variety of scenes of violence and sexual depravity that I found difficult to read. I’m a Stephen King fan – I don’t mind a bit of fear and gore. But I really didn’t understand what brought richness to the story here other than making me totally terrible. I hated the sheep! I really hate it! (As some may say, that was the point, but for me it was a point that I wasn’t keen on being made.)

And when our mosquitoes were on a bloody adventure, I found it later on when we were on a bloody adventure that was far more convincing than the Borges-esque “Computer Games in Computer Games” section we had reached. It was on the wrong side of Surreal for me, or I wasn’t getting it. Terry James also had problems with the “Mighty Anarchy” component of the story and was unable to grasp its meaning. “I call this kind of ideology pseudointelligence, because it sounds very clever, but doesn’t make sense in a holistic, integrated system,” he wrote.

Overall, for me, this is not the book I’m coming back to, and I think the majority of our members were also more negative about this than positive. Judith Lazelle felt that was “unfortunate.” “Free sexual fantasy and undeveloped characters, violence is explicit and rebellious. Perhaps that was the point,” she wrote. [was] It’s effective in bringing back memories of terrible places to live.”

For Eliza Rose and Andy Feest, it was their least favorite book club ever read. Like me, Eliza wasn’t a fan of body horror, but she liked some of the corrupt companies in the storyline. “I think he’s finished it well enough because he feels like he told the story, but I didn’t need all the gore,” she wrote.

Andy described the story as “plain and weird,” and Nieva came up with an interesting concept, but he felt he could have used more backstory and details. “The end was a shame (I can’t say I’m confused),” Andy writes. “Overall, I was grateful that this was a short book because I wasn’t sure if it was a bigger novel (and I hate that I haven’t finished the book I started paying for).

Perhaps Andy doesn’t have to pay for the next book: We’re reading: Larry Nivens Ring WorldAn old classic that many of you may have on your shelf. Come and tell us what you think about us Book Club Member Facebook Pagetry this excerpt and get insight into how Larry came up with the work he wrote here to come up with the epic creation mechanisms.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

The neighborhood’s current thoughts on your dementia risk

Posted on by
Reply

Living in different areas can greatly impact your health. Various factors, such as the environment, income, and overall living conditions, can play a role in affecting your long-term well-being. Recent studies suggest that these factors may also influence your chances of developing dementia.

A new study published in the Journal Neurology revealed that individuals residing in disadvantaged neighborhoods are more than twice as likely to develop dementia compared to those in wealthier areas.

Conducted by Professor Pankaja Desai at Rush University in Chicago, the study involved over 6,800 participants aged 65 and older from four nearby communities. The research found that individuals in the most disadvantaged areas had a 22% risk of developing dementia, whereas those in more privileged areas had only an 11% risk.

Even after adjusting for factors like age, gender, and education, the study observed that individuals in disadvantaged neighborhoods were more than twice as likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease. This connection was determined using the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), which incorporates various socio-economic factors to assess neighborhood-level risk.

Furthermore, individuals in disadvantaged areas experienced a faster decline in cognitive function as they aged, regardless of an Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. This emphasizes the impact of community-level factors on dementia risk.

According to Desai, addressing neighborhood-level social characteristics is crucial in reducing the risk of Alzheimer’s and planning efficient health services. The study also highlighted disparities in dementia risk among different racial groups, indicating the importance of considering community factors in dementia care.

While the study’s focus was on Chicago neighborhoods and may not be universally applicable, the findings underscore the link between neighborhood disadvantage and dementia risk. Ultimately, the study emphasizes the significance of environmental factors in brain health.

About our experts

Dr. Pankaja Desai is an assistant professor at the Rush Institute for Healthy Aging and serves as the management director of Rush Bioinformatics and Biostatistics Core. Her research has been featured in publications such as American Journal of Health Behavior and Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia.

read more:

Source: www.sciencefocus.com

Using Brain Implant to Control Virtual Drones: Paralyzed Individuals Can Now Fly with Their Thoughts

Posted on by
Reply

A virtual drone was steered through an obstacle course by imagining moving a finger.

Wilsey et al.

A paralyzed man with electrodes implanted in his brain can pilot a virtual drone through an obstacle course just by imagining moving his fingers. His brain signals are interpreted by an AI model and used to control a simulated drone.

Research on brain-computer interfaces (BCI) has made great progress in recent years, allowing people with paralysis to write speech on a computer by precisely controlling a mouse cursor or imagining writing words with a pen. It became. However, so far it has not yet shown much promise in complex applications with multiple inputs.

now, Matthew Wilsey Researchers at the University of Michigan created an algorithm that allows users to trigger four discrete signals by imagining moving their fingers and thumbs.

The anonymous man who tried the technique is a quadriplegic due to a spinal cord injury. He was already fitted with Blackrock Neurotech's BCI, which consists of 192 electrodes implanted in the area of ​​the brain that controls hand movements.

An AI model was used to map the complex neural signals received by the electrodes onto the user's thoughts. Participants learned how to think about moving the first two fingers of one hand to generate electrical signals that can be made stronger or weaker. Another signal was generated by the next two fingers, and another two by the thumb.

These are enough to allow the user to control the virtual drone with just their head, and with practice they will be able to expertly maneuver it through obstacle courses. Wilsey said the experiment could have been done using a real drone, but was done virtually for simplicity and safety.

“The goal of building a quadcopter was largely shared by our lab and the participants,” Wilsey says. “For him, it was a kind of dream come true that he thought was lost after he got injured. He had a passion and a dream to fly. He felt so empowered and capable. He instructed us to take a video and send it to a friend.

Although the results are impressive, Willsey says there is still much work to be done before BCIs can be reliably used for complex tasks. First, AI is required to interpret the signals from the electrodes, but this depends on individual training for each user. Second, this training must be repeated over time as function declines. This could be due to slight misalignment of the electrodes in the brain or changes in the brain itself.

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Elon Musk states that Neuralink implant patients can control computer mouse with their thoughts

Posted on by
Reply

The first human patient implanted with Neuralink’s brain chip appears to have made a full recovery and is now able to use his thoughts to control a computer mouse, according to Neuralink founder Elon Musk, who shared the news late Monday.

“Things are going well, the patient appears to have made a full recovery, and there are no adverse effects that we are aware of. The patient can move the mouse on the screen just by thinking,” Musk said on the social media platform during the X Spaces event.


Musk said Neuralink is currently trying to get as many mouse button clicks from patients as possible. Neuralink did not immediately respond to a request for further details.

The company successfully implanted the chip in its first human patient last month after receiving approval to recruit for a clinical trial in September.

The study will use robots to surgically place brain-computer interface implants in areas of the brain that control locomotion intentions, Neuralink said, with the initial goal of helping people use their thoughts to interact with computers. He added that the idea was to be able to control the cursor and keyboard.

Musk has grand ambitions for Neuralink, saying it will facilitate rapid surgical insertion of chip devices to treat conditions such as obesity, autism, depression and schizophrenia.

Skip past newsletter promotions

Neuralink, valued at about $5 billion last year, has faced repeated calls for scrutiny over its safety protocols. The company was fined for violating U.S. Department of Transportation regulations regarding the movement of hazardous materials.

Source: www.theguardian.com