Artificial Intelligence - the potential threat is wildly underestimated

                                                                                                                                              Shutterstock

As artificial intelligence (AI) is now being rolled out across multiple platforms and usages, the warning from key people in the industry should take on a stronger emphasis.  In May 2023, hundreds of industry leaders from Open AI, GoogleDeepMind, Anthropic and other key technology companies issued a stark warning on the risks of AI and the need for a pause in AI deployment, new laws and Government regulatory oversight. 

AI applications at present already cover a range of industries and functions including:

• smart assistants
• automated self driving vehicles
• virtual travel assistants
• marketing chatbots
• manufacturing robots
• healthcare management
• automated financial investing

The rollout has continued apace despite the warning from 2023.

The potential threat of artificial intelligence, machine learning and self awareness in previous years has largely been portrayed in the realm of science fiction books and notably in films such as The Terminator (1984) by James Cameron and the various versions that followed in that film franchise. In the 1970s, another film that addressed the issue was Colossus: The Forbin Project which concluded with dire consequences for most of the human race. Another sci fi film, Demon Seed (1977) actually includes the use of fake imagery using AI to fool human beings and the eventual transcending of computer intelligence into human form. The use of robots that eventually transform into self aware life is covered in a variety of forms from the foundational story of the television series  Battlestar Galactica through to feature film, Bladerunner (1982) by Ridley Scott which was based on Philip K Dick's novel When Androids Dream of Sheep. A theme throughout is the underestimation by human beings of the impact and potential risk in relation to what they have created.

AI is a powerful tool but it is one where the human control element can be reduced to almost tokenistic. The risks are very real of -

• misuse of AI by criminal groups (which already occurs in part)
• using AI as a weapon by state actors for the furtherance of strategic or tactical gain
• machine learning growing exponentially such that the programmers and code writers no longer are able to understand what is being produced 
• machine to machine learning whereby the links between software produces inherent errors or unforseen negative effects
• high speed decision making by AI which are difficult for humans to prevent or rectify.

The images below are AI generated by the publisher of this blog and serve as simple examples of the most basic form of AI:

Shutterstock - AI generated

The first example, is a Major-General in the British Army circa early 20th century being a historical photograph. The second example is printed below and serves as a complete contrast, being a young woman in evening dress with a shawl. There are technical errors contained in these images however much more sophisticated versions are possible from more complex AI systems. It is easy to see how deep image fakes of known public figures can be produced with minimal effort.

Shutterstock - AI generated

PFAS - the forever global contamination

                                                                                                                                    Shutterstock

PFAS leaching and contamination remains the most extraordinary environmental event across the entire planet. PFAS substances comprise a group of over 4,000 chemicals and are found in a range of applications such as:

• Water and stain protection for carpets, fabric, furniture and apparel
• Paper coating (including a range of food packaging)
• Metal plating
• Photographic materials
• Aviation hydraulic fluid
• Cosmetics and sunscreen
• Medical devices
• Ingredients in fire-fighting foam (a particular substance of impact in Australia)

PFAS chemicals are effective in resisting heat, stains, grease and are film forming in water. As a result they are called 'forever chemicals" and  have permeated across the planet and largely into the biology of most human beings. The chemicals are known to be carcinogenic but the overall level of exposure and the length of time required to be fully toxic has yet to be determined. In some towns and villages where contamination has been substantial, the health effects are already apparent. 

As knowledge and information has come to light with growing public awareness, consumer products such as kitchenware with labelling stating "non PFAS" have increasingly become available.

For further information click here: Australian Government PFAS website

PFAS chemicals

 Chemicals, forever: how do you fix a problem like PFAS?

EdBelkin/Shutterstock

Sarah Wilson, University of Technology Sydney and Rachael Wakefield-Rann, University of Technology Sydney

A landmark legal settlement has once again focused our attention on the dangers of “forever chemicals”.

This class of chemicals, technically known as per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are widely used to make nonstick or waterproof products. The problem is, the chemicals move easily around the environment, pollute groundwater and rivers, are often carcinogenic – and they don’t degrade.

This month, one of the largest makers of these chemicals, 3M, had its offer of A$16 billion to clean up PFAS-contaminated waterways approved by a US court. It’s just the latest in a series of PFAS lawsuits across the United States.

While increased attention is welcome, there’s no guarantee of success. Removing and destroying PFAS from wastewater streams across a single US state, Minnesota, would cost a minimum of $21 billion over 20 years. Globally, a recent report by the chemical safety nonprofit ChemSec found the costs of PFAS remediation alone amount to around $26 trillion per year – not including rising healthcare costs from exposure to PFAS, or damage to the environment. The 3M settlement is just the tip of the iceberg.

The problem now is how to actually clean up these chemicals – and prevent further pollution.

Remediation is expensive – and uncertain

In Australia, contamination is worst in firefighter training grounds and on defence force bases, due to the long-term use of firefighting foams full of PFAS. The discovery of this contamination triggered a wave of lawsuits. The Department of Defence has since paid out more than $366 million in class action lawsuits.

Defence has also assumed responsibility for managing, remediating and monitoring PFAS contamination on and around its bases. In 2021, the department began to actively set about remediation.

That sounds promising – find the pollution and fix the problem. But the reality is much more complicated.

A 2022 parliamentary inquiry described PFAS remediation as an emerging and experimental industry.

This is correct. There’s a great deal of basic scientific research we have to do. This is not a simple problem. These chemicals seep into the soil and groundwater – and stay there. It’s hard to get them out.

As a result, most remediation work at defence bases to date has been part of research and development, rather than a wide-scale permanent cleanup.

To help, the defence department has brought in three major industry partners, including Emerging Compounds Treatment Technologies. We don’t know how they are doing the cleanup or if their methods work, as this information is not publicly accessible. The three companies have sought intellectual property protection to support their technological advantage in the growing PFAS remediation market.

One of the companies, Venetia, told the parliamentary inquiry:

[there] are still significant gaps in knowledge in keys areas such as human health toxicology, PFAS behaviour in the environment and remediation of PFAS in soil and water

PFAS is a much bigger problem

Significant PFAS contamination has now been reported in:

– Melbourne’s West Gate Tunnel construction site. Soil contamination at the most polluted site is hundreds of times worse than a threshold set by the state’s environmental protection agency

– Western Australian mines

– WA waste management facilities

– Southeast Queensland water reclamation plants

– Perth’s public and private airports

– Operating and closed landfills.

The full extent of PFAS contamination in Australia is still emerging. Recent research has found Australia is one of several toxic hotspots for PFAS, relative to the rest of the world.

Getting forever chemicals out of groundwater is going to be hard – but necessary. Mumemories/Shutterstock

Worse, current monitoring practices are likely to be underestimating how much PFAS is lingering in the environment, given we usually only track a handful of these chemicals – out of more than 16,000.

Experts have called for:

improved understanding of the range of PFAS embodied in consumer and industrial products […] to assess the environmental burden and develop mitigation measures

The more we look, the more alarming the picture appears. Emerging research has found PFAS in consumer products such as cosmetics, packaging, waterproofing, inks, pesticides, medical articles, polishes and paints, metal plating, pipes and cables, mechanical components, electronics, solar cells, textiles and carpets.

The size and complexity of PFAS contamination suggests we are in for a very long and expensive process to begin cleaning it up – especially given we are still making and using these chemicals.

How should we respond?

To start addressing the problem, here are three important steps.

1. Introduce a “polluter pays” principle.

The introduction of this concept is what forced 3M to pay up in the US. Australia has yet to follow suit, which is why the public has been footing the bill. If we introduce this legal principle, manufacturers will have to take responsibility. This would make it much less attractive for companies to make polluting products – and shift the burden from taxpayers to the companies responsible. Australia’s government is considering pursuing similar legal action against 3M.

2. Set PFAS contamination standards in line with other OECD countries, or better.

Earlier this month, the US implemented the first legally enforceable national drinking water standards for five PFAS compounds and two PFAS mixtures. Australia’s current acceptable drinking water guidelines allow up to 140 times more PFAS in our water than these strict new US standards. In the US, these new standards are drawing new investment in remediation.

3. Take it seriously.

For years, many of us thought all you had to do to avoid PFAS was not to buy nonstick pans. But these chemicals are now everywhere. They’re highly persistent and don’t leave our bodies easily. Every single person on the planet is now likely to have detectable levels of PFAS in their blood. Reducing this dangerous chemical load is going to take a lot of work to clean up existing hotspots, stop further production, and prevent recirculation of PFAS in recycled products or in our food.

The 3M settlement is a good start. But it’s only a start. Tackling this problem is going to be hard, but necessary.

Sarah Wilson, PhD Candidate in Quantum Technology & Innovation Governance, Institue for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney and Rachael Wakefield-Rann, Senior Research Consultant, Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Earth Day 2024 - 22nd April

 

Earth Day 2024 website link: Earth Day - plastics

Plastics, particularly microplastics, have inflitrated much of the planet and its ecosystems. Once considered a wonder of industrialisation, these substances now constitute a current and increasing threat to survival for life globally.

ANZAC Day 2024 - historical images

Australians at war (courtesy of the Australian War Memorial, Canberra, Australia)

photo: the Australian Light Horse camp at Belah, Palestine, 1918

Photo: an Australian Machine Gun Battalion, England, Aug 1940

Photo: the 2nd AIF marches past in Sydney, January 1940

ANZAC Day the 25th April - the importance of remembering

                                                                                                      Shutterstock

ANZAC Day falls on the 25th of April each year and now commemorates the service of Australians in many military conflicts across the world. The date originates from the landing of Australian and New Zealand troops on the coast of the Gallipoli peninsula on the morning of 25 April 1915 - the peninsula was fiercely defended by Ottoman Turkish forces and ultimately cost the lives of over 8,000 Australian service members before they were evacuated at the end of 1915.

At this time of continuing conflict in Eastern Europe, in the Middle East and simmering civil conflicts in other regions, the "Ode" printed below continues to resonate.

"For the Fallen"  by Laurence Binyon, published 21 September 1914, the fourth stanza of the poem - 

They shall not grow old, as we that are left grow old:

Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning

We shall remember them.

Lest we forget.

Cosmetics and fitness exercise: the combination may not work

                                                                                                Shutterstock

 

Cosmetics and fitness training - do they belong together ? Apparently no. There is a certain common sense logic to it - having foundation on the skin while exercising prevents skin pores from opening and releasing sebum. Sebum is a waxy. oily substance produced by the sebaceous glands that protects the health of skin.

A research study from Texas A & M University - San Antonio using a cohort of 43 college students (20 men and 23 women) monitored pore size and sebum production after the use of a skin cleanser and then application of foundation in a single layer on the participants faces.  The participants then ran for 20 minutes on a treadmill after which skin measurements were taken and the level of sebum assessed. Perhaps not surprisingly, it was found that the size of skin pores increased in areas of skin where there was no foundation applied in comparison to where it had been applied. It was concluded that the foundation cosmetic restricted pores from "..naturally enlarging during exercise, prevcenting the release of sebum and sweat, which moisturises and cools the skin" [Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology].

This research is probably not earth shattering in any measure as similar findings have been found for film/television production make-up, large body ink tattooes and body paint which prevents the skin "from breathing". It does however provide a measure of actual evidence to support the perspective that natural appearance is best.

So be safe, be sweaty !

9,000 to 10,000 steps a day - does it really help with health ?

                                                       Shutterstock

Taking long walks amounting to 10,000 steps has long been cited in the media and in various health related publications as beneficial for reducing heart disease and improving general health, however the origin of this claim and the evidence behind it, has long been a mystery. One suggestion is that the source of this claim comes from a marketing campaign promoting pedometers - which seems very plausible. Specific evidence of the health benefits has been minimal.

One study has now been released by the University of Sydney and published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine. This study involved 72,000 participants with an average age of 61 whom wore a movement tracking accelerometer on their wrists for one week. Over an average of 7 years, these participants were tracked and adjusting for factors relating to illness and death (diet, smoking, other forms of exercise), the optimal number of steps per day for a health benefit were between 9,000 and 10,000. This number of steps was calculated to provide a 39 % lower risk of dying duirng the follow-up period (the 7 years) and a 21 % lower risk of a heart-related incident. Happy walking !

Link to the article: British Journal of Sport Medicine

Easter 2024

                                                                                                Shutterstock

Easter, a time of year associated with the Easter bunny, chocolate Easter eggs and for the religious, ceremonies such as the Stations of the Cross representing the death of Jesus Christ or Easter Sunday services. For many people, the public holidays bring a much wanted long weekend period to rest, have a break, see family and friends or pursue interests which are often harder to fit into busy working weeks. In a much troubled world with extreme uncertainties, wherever you may be, happy Easter !

Price of coffee

Think $5.50 is too much for a flat white? Actually it’s too cheap, and our world-famous cafes are paying the price

Emma Felton, University of South Australia

Even in a stubborn cost-of-living crisis, it seems there’s one luxury most Australians won’t sacrifice – their daily cup of coffee.

Coffee sales have largely remained stable, even as financial pressures have bitten over the past few years.

So too have prices. Though many of us became upset when prices began to creep up last year, they’ve since largely settled in the range between $4.00 and $5.50 for a basic drink.

But this could soon have to change. By international standards, Australian coffee prices are low.

No one wants to pay more for essentials, least of all right now. But our independent cafes are struggling.

By not valuing coffee properly, we risk losing the internationally renowned coffee culture we’ve worked so hard to create, and the phenomenal quality of cup we enjoy.

Coffee is relatively cheap in Australia

Our recent survey of Australian capital cities found the average price of a small takeaway flat white at speciality venues is A$4.78.

But in some international capitals, it’s almost double this, even after adjusting for local purchasing power parity.

In London, a small flat white costs about A$6.96. Singapore, A$8.42. In Athens, as much as A$9.95.

The cafe business is getting harder

Over the past few decades, coffee prices haven’t kept pace with input costs. In the early 2000s, after wages, food costs, utilities and rent, many cafes earned healthy profit margins as high as 20%.

The most recent data from IBISWorld show that while Australian cafe net profits have recovered from a drop in 2020, at 7.6%, they remain much lower than the Australian average business profit margin of 13.3%.

For an independent owner operating a cafe with the average turnover of A$300,000, this would amount to a meagre A$22,800 annual net profit after all the bills are paid.

What goes into a cup?

Just looking at the cost of raw inputs – milk, beans, a cup and a lid – might make the margin seem lucrative. But they don’t paint the whole picture.

Chart: The Conversation. Data: Pablo and Rusty's Coffee Roasters, CC BY-SA

Over the past few years, renting the building, keeping the lights on and paying staff have all become much bigger factors in the equation for coffee shop owners, and many of these pressures aren’t easing.

1. Green coffee price

Increasingly subject to the effects of climate change, the baseline commodity price of green (unroasted) coffee is going up.

Arabica – the higher quality bean you’re most likely drinking at specialty cafes – is a more expensive raw product. Despite levelling off from post-pandemic highs, its price is still trending up. In 2018, it sold for US$2.93 per kilogram, which is projected to increase to US$4.38 dollars in 2025.

Robusta coffee is cheaper, and is the type typically used to make instant coffee. But serious drought in Vietnam has just pushed the price of robusta to an all-time high, putting pressure on the cost of coffee more broadly.

2. Milk prices

The price of fresh milk has risen by more than 20% over the past two years, and remains at a peak. This has put sustained cost pressure on the production of our most popular drink orders: cappuccinos and flat whites.

3. Wages and utilities

Over the past year, Australian wages have grown at their fastest rate since 2009, which is welcome news for cafe staff, but tough on operators in a sector with low margins.

Electricity prices remain elevated after significant inflation, but could begin to fall mid-year.

Specialty vs. commodity coffee: why price expectations create an industry divide

One of the key factors keeping prices low in Australia is consumer expectation.

For many people coffee is a fundamental part of everyday life, a marker of livability. Unlike wine or other alcohol, coffee is not considered a luxury or even a treat, where one might expect to pay a little more, or reduce consumption when times are economically tough. We anchor on familiar prices.

Because of this, it really hurts cafe owners to put their prices up. In touch with their customer base almost every day, they’re acutely aware of how much inflation can hurt.

Many specialty operators source and roast their own beans. Maksim Goncharenok/Pexels, CC BY

But in Australia, a huge proportion of coffee companies are also passionate about creating a world-class product by only using “specialty coffee”. Ranked at least 80 on a quality scale, specialty beans cost significant more than commodity grade, but their production offers better working conditions for farmers and encourages more sustainable growing practices.

Although not commensurate with the wine industry, there are similarities. Single origin, high quality beans are often sourced from one farm and demand higher prices than commodity grade coffee, where cheaper sourced beans are often combined in a blend.

Running a specialty cafe can also mean roasting your own beans, which requires a big investment in expertise and equipment.

It’s an obvious example of doing the right thing by your suppliers and customers. But specialty cafes face much higher operating costs, and when they’re next to a commodity-grade competitor, customers are typically unwillingly to pay the difference.

Approach price rises with curiosity, not defensiveness

When cafe owners put up their prices, we often rush to accuse them of selfishness or profiteering. But they’re often just trying to survive.

Given the quality of our coffee and its global reputation, it shouldn’t surprise us if we’re soon asked to pay a little bit more for our daily brew.

If we are, we should afford the people who create one of our most important “third spaces” kindness and curiosity as to why.

Emma Felton, Adjunct Senior Researcher, University of South Australia

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.