UPDATE: Science technology finds a cure for BAD ACTING!!!

Gemenoid 4, aside from being an emerging star, is a highly sophisticated android robot built and programmed by Hiroshi Ishiguro, an engineer and professor at Osaka University and his associates at Japan's Advanced Telecommunications Research Institute International.

Advancements by robotics experts in science technology are incredible and promote innovation in the fields of biology, engineering, cognitive science, computational neuroscience, speech recognition, cognitive robotics, and numerous other scientific fields.  David Hanson, Ph.D and founder of Hanson Robotics argues that building human-like androids such as Gemenoid 4 creates "a cross-pollination among the sciences, as [humanoid robotics, and the androids created] represent a subject of scientific inquiry themselves."  

Other advocates of innovations in humanoid robotic technology cite the beneficial aspects of these robots as reasons to promote the further development of robotic technology.  Studies have been conducted that conclude that children with autism respond favorably to humanoid robots.  This could lead to the use of said robots in treatments, therapy, and social training for children who have cognitive or social struggles. Hanson also notes that NASA's Robonaut, a human-like robot capable of performing a variety of human functions in space provides a safer alternative to sending actual human beings into orbit.  In addition to these more practical usages of robots, the use of robots as entertainment should be recognized as well.  Gemenoid 4, along with numerous androids in Walt Disney World, and other theme parks provide an interactive, awe-inspiring form of entertainment.  


Although the benefits of humanoid robotics go beyond those enumerated, and seem to be viewed positively by the public, there is also an group that opposes this development.  Those who are against humanoid robotic development argue that these robots look 'grotesque' and seem to mock us.  It is argued that these robots are trying in a dangerous way to replace humans, which will only end up being a catastrophic venture as androids are not (yet) capable of experiencing emotions.  


It seems incredible that the development of the field of humanoid robotics could inspire a fear of science in many individuals, who might fear that they will succumb to the fate of many victims of human-like robots in various science-fiction movies.  David Hanson is among the scientists who deny that humanizing robots is dangerous to the human race, and even counters this argument by claiming "if we do not humanize our intelligent machines, then they may eventually be dangerous...to be safe when they gain free, creative and adaptive general intelligence, then machines must attain deep understanding and compassion towards people."

Hanson's argument seems convincing, but would be more so if the benefits of humanoid robotics were skillfully marketed to the public in scientific journals, and through other medias.  Movies like "A.I" (Artificial Intelligence, 2001) and Surrogates (2009) are exciting, yet fear inspiring depictions of robots over taking the human race.  We need to promote more realistic, beneficial aspects of robots, such as their large capacity for utility, and embodiment of enormous scientific progress in a variety of fields.  
Journalists have been helping in Japan, where Gemenoid 4 was built and revealed, by snapping pictures, writing articles, and providing extensive coverage of the development of the android, and posting it all over the media.  While this has been majorly positive for the enhancement of funds going to the humanoid robotic research field, it is not enough.  Journalists and media experts can take the vanguard in this movement, by talking about the proven benefits of humanoid robotics, and explaining how they can keep real humans safer, more informed, and entertained.  We can also promote the development of this science by letting robots star in more positively viewed roles in plays and movies, in which they are not cold, blood-thirsty machines, but instead relatable, physical evidence of praiseworthy scientific accomplishments and successes.

Photo/Video Journalism & Technology in BURMA

Professor David Johnson's view that "it is impossible for journalists to be objective," inspired the following investigation of photojournalism, video-journalism, and technology and their collective global impact in Burma.

An unaltered, un-indoctrinated photo or video is arguably the most objective account of an event that has transpired.  It is tangible evidence that the particular situation occurred and provides a momentary glimpse into said specific situation, from which one who views it can autonomously make her own deductions about what the photo depicts.

Adding captions to a photo is the first step toward its indoctrination.  Any preconceived notions that one may have had are influenced by the strength or debility of the photo's caption, and inevitably shape the viewer's perception about what has been depicted in the photo.  In the case of a video, the presence of dialogue, commentary or the addition of background music can also influence the viewer. Despite these caveats, photo- and video- journalism appear to be the most objective forms of journalism that exist...

Burma, also referred to as Myanmar, emerged onto the global news scene in 2007, when monks led a peaceful revolt against the violent, oppressive leadership of the Burmese military dictatorship.  The protests against the government that ensued ended in numerous shootings and other brutal acts documented by journalists.  The Burmese government has long been corrupt, but it seemed that the world did not notice, or care to act until the prolific release of photos and videos taken in secret, and openly (as seen below) by journalists during the peaceful protest.

The Japanese journalist in this photo was trampled and gunned to death by soldiers who were pursuing a crowd of anti-government protestors.  Journalism is highly frowned upon in Burma, as the government censors much of what transpires within the country. The media in Burma merely ignored the uprising against the government not issuing any reports or updates on it.  

Although fatally wounded, the journalist continued to take photos until he succumbed to death. His camera was then taken and both the camera and the film inside of it was destroyed by Burmese soldiers.

These images are evidence of the danger of practicing journalism in countries where governments are corrupt and are control of the media within their country.  The Burmese government wanted to restore order to the country through extreme, violent means without drawing international attention, or being internationally sanctioned by other global actors.

Although in this case the Japanese journalists' large, conspicuous camera was destroyed along with his film, the photos above are photos and still images from videos taken stealthily by Burmese journalists.  The 2008 award winning documentary "Burma VJ: Reporting from a Closed Country" shows the footage, and tells the story of these brave journalists who put themselves in grave physical danger to document and disseminate information about the abuses being perpetrated by the Burmese government. 

These journalists, referring to themselves as "The Democratic Voice of Burma," relied on technological innovation: small video cameras that were portable and easily concealed, as well as the Internet.  If caught with recording devices the journalists would be arrested and most likely killed, but they deemed the reporting of the horrific events transpiring in Burma to be worth the danger to their physical security.  The men videotaping the peaceful protests and government reactions often put their portable video cameras in bags under their arms, and would march with protesters in the streets of Rangoon.  The journalists would then smuggle their videos to colleagues in Thailand, who would upload the videos and photos taken on the Internet, and would also disseminate them to news sources across the world.

Joshua, one of the protagonists of the film, who worked in Thailand uploading the videos taken onto the Internet, relied heavily on his mobile phone for access to important contacts abroad, as well as sending instant messages on g-chat to important contacts and collaborators with the Democratic Voice of Burma who were abroad.  These conversations were crucial to the release and dissemination of the footage, and Joshua was able to maintain these contacts due essentially to technological innovation.  Messages that he would write to his contacts were expeditiously returned by Blackberry or Smartphone users in Europe.  

The footage, after being uploaded and disseminated to various news sources would end up all over the Internet, as a topic on radio talk shows, as well as on cable television across the world. This use of technology was certainly new to Burma and some other parts of Southeast Asia.  The photo- and video- journalism combination was successful, as Burma became a hot topic for debate during G20 meetings and the U.S., among other countries decided to not only to maintain their existing sanctions on Burma, but to expand them.  

After the release of the documentary about the Burma VJ, the Democratic Voice of Burma gained a much wider, global following.  It is possible to stay updated on the work that these men and women are doing in Burma by subscribing to their Twitter newsfeed (http://twitter.com/#!/burmavj), as well as following their progress through their Facebook page (http://www.facebook.com/dvb.fanpage) or going to their website (http://www.dvb.no/). 

Through their basically objective photo and video reporting, and skillful use of technology, the Democratic Voice of Burma helped to bring the issues of their country to the global stage.  With new advances in social media, the group continues to gain better financing, allowing them to purchase new technologies and to continue to report from the ground in Burma.  Although I sincerely hope that similar events do not occur again in Burma, in the case that they do, the group is ready to continue with its mission to provide updates and seek help for the Burmese people.

Photo and video journalism in Burma should inspire those with more advanced forms of technology: such as smart phones, personal computers, small and nearly undetectable video and voice recorders to reach out to journalists in developing nations who are struggling and putting their security at risk to tell the story of their nation.  A way to reach out to these nations, such as Burma would be to supply them with these new technologies.  Yet another, less expensive way to provide support to grassroots journalists is to help them to spread the news that they report- whether on a blog, news article, tweet, or Facebook status, promoting awareness is of paramount importance.

Photo and video journalism tend to be particularly influential in society, as a photo or video can often express what is much more difficult to describe with the written word.  Also, on a more practical note, these forms of journalism tend to be more captivating, as one is not forced to read an entire essay, but instead can gleam the news by merely viewing a video clip or picture.  

National Geographic magazine is a great example of a work that uses picture media to captivate its audience.  We should follow in the steps of this renowned magazine and the Burmese journalists by making cheaper digital and video cameras, and creating programs to disseminate them in places like Burma.  With access to technologies like the Flip-video, a small, relatively cheap video recorder, we will probably learn an unprecedented amount about other countries, cultures, and global issues.

Cell phones: have benefits, cause distractions

Not only can we jet across the globe and maintain contact with our friends, but we can also stream movies, use the internet, calculate the tip we should leave the waiter on a restaurant bill, purchase clothing, take pictures, play games and do various other activities all using our cell, or mobile phones.

It's difficult to imagine a life without my blackberry phone.  I routinely send emails, check the time, or send text messages about 20 or more times an hour.  This use of this technology has become ingrained in my everyday life.  While I value my cell phone for helping me to stay in contact with siblings, family members and friends who live in various parts of the U.S., there are others who depend on their cell phones for their livelihood.

Banking transactions done on mobile phones are a striking way in which the evolution of cell phone technology has had unprecedented impacts.  This is demonstrated by new functions that allow money transfers to be sent via cell phones.  This is especially important when it comes to the remittances that immigrants, notably in the United States, send to their families back home.  Its estimated that with the use of this new system of money transfer that fewer than 10% of remittance recipients in Latin America have bank accounts.  This eliminates banks fees, processing and other sources that, in the end can diminish the amount of the remittance.  

The U.S. State Department estimated that in 2010 $3.5 billion dollars in remittances were sent from Salvadoran immigrants in the U.S. to their families back in El Salvador.  Cell phone technology undoubtedly played a significant role in this process.  Lowering the transaction costs, which is often done if remittances are sent via mobile phones, means that billions of dollars flow directly back to those who are the recipients of remittances, mainly economically struggling members of developing countries.  

While mobile phones are positive forces in the instance of remittance sending, they do have qualities that are less attractive.  These devices can be a large distraction.  They are often the co-conspirators or culprits of car-crashes and unintelligible conversations.  As mobile phone technology continues to develop and evolve, we become increasingly more dependent upon it and less aware of the harms that it could inflict on ourselves and others.  

It is nearly impossible to find a public space (in many countries) where a mobile phone is not clearly visible or in use.  Teenagers, who have been familiar with mobile phone technology basically since their infancy, send text, video and picture messages to one another, without lifting their eyes from their phones, or engaging in their surrounding environment.  A conversation with those who are engrossed in reading or writing a text message often involves a lot of repetition and frustration on the part of the speaker.  I have admittedly been the culprit, but more often the victim of these unintelligible conversations.

Dr. Frank Ryan, noted for being a plastic surgeon to the celebrities, died in 2010 while driving on the California highway as he sent a "tweet" from his mobile phone.  The surgeon drove off a cliff, most likely due to the fact that he was using Internet applications on his phone at the time and not paying attention to his surroundings.  This tragic death is related to the irresponsible use of mobile phones.

As we praise revolutionary mobile phone technology, we need to remind ourselves not to abuse it.  Mobile phones can be liberating in the way of sending remittances in a less complicated, expedited manner, but they can also captivate our attention so much as to a fault.