̽��ֱ�� of Cambridge - future

̽��ֱ��futurist who'd like the future to slow down - just a little

lw355 — Thu, 10 Jun 2021 11:00:29 +0000

̽��ֱ��problem with being a futurist, says Richard Watson, is that change is happening a lot faster and a lot crazier these days. We talk to him about his recent work with the Entrepreneurship Centre and why thinking about a ‘preferred’ future is a good thing.

Mind Over Chatter: What is the future?

ns480 — Thu, 27 May 2021 13:22:48 +0000

Season 2, episode 1

This second series of Mind Over Chatter is all about the future - and in this first episode we’re going to be considering what the future even is… Have you ever wondered how time works? It turns out, the answer is a lot more complicated than we thought.

Join our wondering and wonderful conversation with philosopher of science Dr Matt Farr, whose work focuses particularly on what it means for time to have a direction, professor of psychology Nicky Clayton, who looks at the evolution and development of intelligence in non-verbal animals and pre-verbal children, and professor of linguistics and philosophy, Kasia Jaszczolt whose research interests combine semantics, pragmatics, and the metaphysics of time

We’ll be talking about everything from physics to linguistics… and from broken eggs to Einstein’s theory of relativity.

Subscribe to Mind Over Chatter

Key points

[04:28] - Does time actually go from past to present to future? And does time really ‘flow’?

[09:53] - How do B-theorists deal with entropy? Can you un-break an egg?

[14:12] - Recap of the first portion of the episode, reviewing A-theory, B-theory and C-theory of time

[18:58] - How the mind understands the subjective concept of time

[27:11] - ̽��ֱ��Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and how the way you talk about language affects the way you perceive and think about things

[30:21] - Recap of the second portion of the episode

[34:02] - How do the mental and linguistic concepts around time fit with philosophical concepts and physics of time?

[45:46] - Is there a conflict between the psychological and linguistic models of time and the way physics handles time?

[48:20] - Recap of the last portion of the episode

Mind Over Chatter: ̽��ֱ��Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Podcast

Mind Over Chatter: What did the future look like in the past?

ns480 — Thu, 27 May 2021 13:14:33 +0000

Season 2, episode 2

We all have theories about what the future might look like. But what did the future look like in the past? And how have the advent of new technologies altered how people viewed the future?

In this episode of Mind Over Chatter, we talked with curator of modern sciences and historian of Victorian science Dr Joshua Nall, professor of Digital Humanities and director of Cambridge Digital Humanities Professor Caroline Bassett, and Junior Research Fellow in the history of artificial intelligence, Dr Jonnie Penn in our attempt to understand how the future was thought of in the past.

Along the way we discussed utopias and dystopias, the long history of science fiction, and how the future might come back to haunt us!

Subscribe to Mind Over Chatter

Key Points

[02:15] - How did new science and technology (railways, telegraphic communication, mass printing) transform the 19th Century.

[05:00] - Futures and utopias delivered by technology as opposed to magic.

[09:30] - Charles Babbage, Ada Lovelace, computers and the idea of the mind as a factory.

[15:40] - Recap of the first part of the conversation

[24:45] - Mary Shelley and Frankenstein as an example of fiction grappling with a response to the feeling of chaos resulting from new technologies

[33:50] - Dominant beliefs and values in the 19th century that showed up in science fiction and actual scientific theories

[41:35] - Recap of second part of conversation

[50:05] - When and why did AI become scary or threatening? And the cyclical nature of unresolved fears around technology.

[54:28] - Current futures of AI and technology and the problematic idea of technology as being free and limitless versus the world ending

[56:10] - What’s coming up in technology in the next 100-ish years?

[1:03:28] - Recap of the last part of the conversation

[21:38] - How are new ideas about the future influencing the way people think about artificial intelligence and sci-fi in the 1900’s?

Mind Over Chatter: ̽��ֱ��Cambridge ̽��ֱ�� Podcast

Beyond the pandemic: prepare and plan a biosecure future

fpjl2 — Wed, 03 Feb 2021 12:44:19 +0000

COVID-19 has exposed a lack of preparedness for biological hazards – both in the UK and globally. Luke Kemp from the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk discusses findings from a series of ‘horizon scans’ he led to help identify future biosecurity risks.

Global dissatisfaction with democracy at a record high

fpjl2 — Wed, 29 Jan 2020 08:41:52 +0000

A new report, the first from the ̽��ֱ��'s new Centre for the Future of Democracy, finds that 2019 had the "the highest level of democratic discontent" since 1995.

One day of paid work a week is all we need to get mental health benefits of employment

fpjl2 — Wed, 19 Jun 2019 09:23:35 +0000

Latest research finds up to eight hours of paid work a week significantly boosts mental health and life satisfaction. However, researchers found little evidence that any more hours – including a full five-day week – provide further increases in wellbeing.

Science fiction vs science fact: World’s leading AI experts come to Cambridge

sjr81 — Mon, 10 Jul 2017 10:22:27 +0000

̽��ֱ��two-day conference (July 13-14) at Jesus College is the first major event held by the Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence (CFI) since its globally-publicised launch by Stephen Hawking and other AI luminaries in October 2016.

Bringing together policy makers and philosophers, as well as leading figures from science and technology, speakers include Astronomer Royal Martin Rees, Matt Hancock (Minister for Digital and Culture), Baroness Onora O'Neill and Francesca Rossi (IBM).

Dr Stephen Cave, Executive Director of CFI, said: “Rarely has a technology arrived with such a rich history of myth, storytelling and hype as AI. ̽��ֱ��first day of our conference will ask how films, literature and the arts generally have shaped our expectations, fears and even the technology itself.

“Meanwhile, the second day will ask how and when we can trust the intelligent machines on which we increasingly depend – and whether those machines are changing how we trust each other."

Programme highlights of the conference include:

Sci-Fi Dreams: How visions of the future are shaping development of intelligent technology
Truth Through Fiction: How the arts and media help us explore the challenges and opportunities of AI
Metal people: How we perceive intelligent robots – and why
Trust, Security and the Law: Assuring safety in the age of artificial intelligence
Trust and Understanding: Uncertainty, complexity and the ‘black box’

Professor Huw Price, Academic Director of the Centre, and Bertrand Russell Professor of Philosophy at Cambridge, said: “During two packed days in Cambridge we’ll be bringing together some of the world’s most important voices in the study and development of the technologies on which all our futures will depend.

“Intelligent machines offer huge benefits in many fields, but we will only realise these benefits if we know we can trust them – and maintain trust in each other and our institutions as AI transforms the world around us.”

Other conference speakers include Berkeley AI pioneer Professor Stuart Russell, academic and broadcaster Dr Sarah Dillon, and Sir David Spiegelhalter, Cambridge’s Winton Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk. An AI-themed art exhibition is also being held to coincide with the Jesus College event.

CFI brings together four of the world’s foremost universities (Cambridge, Berkeley, Imperial College and Oxford) to explore the implications of AI for human civilisation. Researchers will work with policy-makers and industry to investigate topics such as the regulation of autonomous weaponry, and the implications of AI for democracy.

Many researchers take seriously the possibility that intelligence equal to our own will be created in computers within this century. Freed of biological constraints, such as limited memory and slow biochemical processing speeds, machines may eventually become more broadly intelligent than we are – with profound implications for us all.

Launching the £10m centre last year, Professor Hawking said: “Success in creating AI could be the biggest event in the history of civilisation but it could also be the last – unless we learn how to avoid the risks. Alongside the benefits, AI will also bring dangers like powerful autonomous weapons or new ways for the few to oppress the many.

“We cannot predict what might be achieved when our own minds are amplified by AI. ̽��ֱ��rise of powerful AI will either be the best or the worst thing to happen to humanity. We do not yet know which.”

Professor Maggie Boden, External Advisor to the Centre, whose pioneering work on AI has been translated into 20 languages, said: “ ̽��ֱ��practical solutions of AI can help us to tackle important social problems and advance the science of mind and life in fundamental ways. But it has limitations which could present grave dangers. CFI aims to guide the development of AI in human-friendly ways.”

Dr Cave added: “We've chosen the topic of myths and trust for our first annual conference because they cut across so many of the challenges and opportunities raised by AI. As well as world-leading experts, we hope to bring together a wide range of perspectives to discuss these topics, including from industry, policy and the arts. ̽��ֱ��challenge of transitioning to a world shared with intelligent machines is one that we all face together.”

̽��ֱ��first day of the conference is in partnership with the Royal Society, while the second is in partnership with Jesus College's Intellectual Forum. ̽��ֱ��conference is being generously sponsored by Accenture and PwC.

Further details and ticketing information can be found here.

Some of the world’s leading thinkers and practitioners in the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) will gather in Cambridge this week to look at everything from the influence of science fiction on our dreams of the future, to ‘trust in the age of intelligent machines’.

Rarely has a technology arrived with such a rich history of myth, storytelling and hype as AI.

Dr Stephen Cave

̽��ֱ��text in this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. For image use please see separate credits above.

Yes

When building for the future means what it says

sj387 — Fri, 18 Oct 2013 09:13:47 +0000

When the Victorian domestic housing boom kicked off in the 19th century, the designers, developers and inhabitants of the new terraces that sprung up across the country would probably have paid scant attention to the impact of housing on the environment over the long-term. Today, with approximately 40% of the nation’s buildings built before 1944, the UK has one of the oldest and least efficient domestic stocks in Europe, accounting for around 25% of its carbon emissions.

But, with new buildings, a very different scenario is fast approaching. According to government proposals, by 2016 all new homes will have to achieve a zero-carbon status. Buildings of the future should be low-energy, sustainable and able to respond to future changes – climatic, technological, social or regulatory – in other words, be ‘future proofed’.

This represents a significant shift for the building and construction sectors, as engineer Maria-Christina Georgiadou explained: “Much of the industry is based on a philosophy of ‘build-it-now and fix-it-later’ rather than on one of anticipating future trends and drivers affecting the energy performance of buildings.

“Added to this, there is conceptual confusion on what is ‘future-proofing’ in policy making, industry and academia. Little research has been carried out on identifying design approaches that adopt a long-term perspective in the context of the energy design of housing developments.”

For the past three years, Georgiadou has been working in the Centre for Sustainable Development, part of Cambridge’s Department of Engineering, with Dr Theo Hacking and Professor Peter Guthrie to examine the design approaches available to building professionals for integrating future-proofing into the energy design of housing developments.

Although a portfolio of methods is available, Georgiadou concludes that many “underestimate or even overlook the social and economic aspects of sustainability”, and identifies a need for design strategies that will proactively manage future trends and drivers affecting the energy performance of buildings. Her aim is to propose unified guidelines.

Georgiadou has been following four ‘best-practice’ housing developments in the UK and Sweden – North West Cambridge (Cambridgeshire), West Carclaze and Baal (Cornwall), Välle Broar (Växjö) and Hammarby Sjöstad (Stockholm) – interviewing city officers, planners, developers, contractors and members of design teams involved in the energy design process.

“There was a clear difference in the approach taken in Sweden and the UK to sustainability, in general, and future-proofing, in particular,” she noted. “In Sweden the concept of ‘life cycle thinking’ emerged on the back of the 1970s oil crisis, when the municipalities sought to find alternatives to oil and switched to local wood waste, such as wood chips and sawdust. From this early on, they had environmental planning in mind, tending to construct in timber, which they have in abundance and is a sustainable material with potential for reuse and recycling at the end of the house’s life compared to concrete. Building professionals in Sweden are also familiar with Lifecycle Assessment tools used to assess the environmental impact of building solutions from ‘cradle to grave’.”

On the other hand, she finds that developments in the UK place greater emphasis on accommodating risks and uncertainties “so that the design can be resilient to the occurrence of high-impact events such as hotter summers due to climate change. ̽��ֱ��UK planning system and energy policy is focused on flexibility and adaptability, which cascades down into the design of buildings,” she added.

But which approach is best for thinking about the future of residential buildings? “ ̽��ֱ��best case is a combination of both,” said Georgiadou, whose research is funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and the Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation in Greece.

“Buildings are already being designed and constructed to use less energy and reduce carbon emissions, but long-term future-proofing to climate change is still in its infancy,” she added. “My research has identified the lack of a robust evidence-based framework as to how buildings can be future-proofed in terms of the selection of energy-related design responses right from the earliest stages of the project’s lifespan.”

To encourage a long-term view of the sustainability of buildings, the UK government has adopted the Government Soft Landings (GSL) scheme, which will be mandatory by 2016. “With GSL, the designers and constructors are required to monitor the buildings once built, to increase operational efficiency and understanding of the actual energy performance,” she explained. “This is in addition to the Code for Sustainable Homes, which is the tool by which the carbon rating of all new buildings is being measured.”

For the UK, Georgiadou believes one aspect of the solution is to build assessment criteria that explicitly promote a futures perspective into the Code for Sustainable Homes: “ ̽��ֱ��highest Code level aims for ‘zero carbon’ dwellings. However, fieldwork in the two UK cases revealed that this target may be hampered by the failure to consider the full lifecycle of the selected materials, building components and energy systems.”

She has now created a ‘knowledge map’ that can be used in any decision-support context for the energy design of residential buildings, with the potential to be expanded to cover other building types (such as offices, commercial, retail) as well as integration with other areas including water and waste management.

Evidence also shows that the focus of new buildings was predominantly on energy-efficiency measures and mitigation of carbon emissions now – what Georgiadou refers to as the “low hanging fruit” – and not on the adoption of adaptation strategies to address the increasing frequency and severity of temperature extremes that may lead to overheating of homes in the future.

“It’s the ability to respond to upcoming changes that defines future-proofing,” said Georgiadou. “This must be at the heart of strengthening building codes and energy-related standards at the start of the energy design process if we are to increase the likelihood of dwellings remaining ‘fit for purpose’ under a set of plausible energy futures. This would be a shift away from the short-term mindset that still dominates design and construction practices.”

For more information, please contact the Centre for Sustainable Development.

Too little attention is being paid to the long-term sustainability of new buildings in a changing climate according to a new study that makes recommendations for ‘future-proofing’ best practice.

It’s the ability to respond to upcoming changes that defines future-proofing

Maria-Christina Georgiadou

Kevin Dooley

Crane

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Licence. If you use this content on your site please link back to this page.

Yes