Trayvon Martin - AACC's Reaction

Have you heard of the Trayvon Martin incident?

According to a brief survey, many Anne Arundel Community College professors had heard of the incident, but most of the college's students weren't as knowledgeable.

The Treyvon Martin incident has drawn national attention in recent weeks.  According to police, on February 26, in Sanford, Florida, Trayvon Martin - a 17-year-old black male - was walking from a convenience store to the home of his father's girlfriend, located in a gated community nearby.  George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old man of multiple ethnicity and community watch captain, followed Martin and called the Sanford Police Department to say he witnessed suspicious behavior.  A physical altercation occurred, at which time Zimmerman fatally shot the 17-year-old.

Sanford police did not arrest Zimmerman, stating that they did not find evidence to refute Zimmerman's claim of self-defense.  This decision has resulted in accusations of racism, drawing criticism from political figures like President Barack Obama and activists like Rev. Al Sharpton.  The incident has also lead to organized protests like the "Million Hoodie March", which took place in Manhattan on March 21.

Matt Wagoner, an AACC student, was unfamiliar with the incident or its controversy.  He was given a brief synopsis of the incident, and was then willing to give his opinion.

"Sounds like someone needs to go to jail and stay there," said Matt Wagoner.  "He killed a random kid just because he thought he looked suspicious - that's total racism right there."

Michele Brown, a professor at AACC, appeared to be very upbeat when first approached for an interview, but when she was asked about her opinion on the Trayvon Martin incident, the professor appeared to become increasingly somber.

"Well goodness gracious," she said initially, taking a step back and pausing for a moment.

Brown suggested that in order to formulate an accurate opinion, knowing the weather and time would come into play.  Perhaps, she said, the alleged shooter was confused...perhaps it was raining.  Brown said she wasn't sure what was fact or fictitious at the present time, stating that she hadn't looked into the incident enough online to make a judgement call.

"What it boils down to is the transactions before a life was taken," said Brown. "The bottom line is a young man is dead."

Brown emphasized that authorities need to figure out why Martin is no longer living.  Brown spoke of her distress regarding the loss of a  young man's life.

"It's a shame," Brown said.

AACC student Christa Frake, like Wagoner, wasn't familiar with the incident or its controversy.  Once given a brief synopsis by the reporter of the alleged incidents leading up to Trayvon Martin's death, Frake was willing to offer her opinion.

"I think he's guilty," she said regarding the alleged shooter.  "He has no reason for shooting [Martin]".

Like Brown, Kirsten Meister, an AACC professor, was also familiar with the incident.

"Oh God," Meister said.  "I don't even know where to start.  It's so disturbing.  I can't get my head around it."

Meister had no further comments regarding the Trayvon Martin incident.

Below, readers may find a link to details regarding the case:  http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/03/trayvon-martin-case-timeline-of-events/

Artificial Intelligence - The Science of Jules

Do you know who Jules is?  Well, he's not someone you're likely to meet on the street.  Believe it or not, Jules is a robot - that's right, a robot.  Jules is an AI - that is, an Artificial Intelligence.  More specifically, he's a Conversational Character Robot created by David Hanson.  With a background amassed amounts of information as a backdrop to his communication processes and learning progress.

According to their website, Hanson Robotics was founded in late 2003 to awaken intelligent robotic beings, grant them sparks of true consciousness and creativity, and distribute these beings and their constituent technologies into the world.  Their other works include the very famous Albert Einstein robot - a robot with the replicated face of Albert Einstein, who can actually walk around on his own terms.

Jules is an amazing robot.  With a background of amassed amounts of data - that can allow him to search words, ideas, and facts - Jules formulates his own sentences, thoughts, and speaks freely on his own - often even about his own existence.  His real-time facial expressions have been acquired by observing other human beings, and his inquisitive mind with an insatiable desire to learn often leads him to ask questions and converse with the Hanson staff members.

It is truly a sight to behold, and I am amazed that his youtube account doesn't have more hits.  The story behind this robot, our definition of what it is to be human, our understanding  of the human consciousness, and the implication for the ethics regarding treatment of AI in the future are all astounding and fascinating concepts that provide an vast array of possibilities for which Jules Vern - were he still alive - would be likely round-house kicking us in the face right now for not being more interested in these such technological advances lol.

To see videos of Jules, and to gain a greater understanding of what I am speaking of, please please please see the following videos - and keep in mind all the things he is saying are not being fed to him by the amassed computers around him - they are all his own thoughts and own formulations - he is not being manipulated to say anything.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IhVu2hxm07E&list=FLCrqhrNP--odPDCl-3-p-yA&index=4&feature=plpp_video&noredirect=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kThr6CMLrvg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNKLuXUh3M4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysU56JzBjTY&feature=related

A synopsis of Hanson robotic's research can be found very nicely put together from this excerpt on youtube:

"Hanson Robotics was founded for one purpose: to design, develop, produce and distribute revolutionary, interactive bio-inspired conversational robots, including the world-famous Albert-Hubo. Hanson's family of anthropomorphic robots display a unique, artificial subconscious, partly due to their cognitive understanding of language-based interactive speech, conversational capabilities and genuine eye contact, coupled with a full range of human facial expressions thanks to the development of Frubber™, or "flesh rubber", their proprietary spongy, structured elastic polymer that expertly mimics the movement of real human musculature and skin using 1/20th the power of other existing materials.Hanson's robots exhibit the highest level of physical functionality in the industry using an advanced motion-control system to walk, talk, maintain eye contact, recognize faces and speech patterns, and simulate a real person's personality. All of this is achieved through our advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) software architecture. All of Hanson's robots have a cognitive understanding of the English language, can make eye contact with people, recognize faces and capture the attention of their conversation partner by using a full range of human-like facial expressions.  Pretty amazing stuff.  For more info, visit HansonRobotics.com"   - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLOxxugBHT4&feature=related

An amazing, impressive thing is that this is footage from 2006....it's very difficult to find information on how he's doing now, but I would love to know all the advances that have occurred in 6 years - I'm sure it's impressive :)  The idea of Jules in the context found in the above footage truly brings up some fascinating thoughts and possibilities, particularly in the political and social arena.

But Jules isn't the only android out there of course.  There are some very similar - and even cuddly! - AI robots out there.

Check out Leo, for example.  He's hyperatuned to people's emotions, and is helping researchers better understand child development.  Plus, he's ultra cute and looks like a "magwai" from teh 1980s movie, "Gremlins" ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLOxxugBHT4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYSmp3bjP_0&feature=related

Some AI Robots, in my opinion, however, are just sad - even a bit unsettling.  I always have to watch a video of Jules and Leo after watching videos or reading about these robots, like a pallet cleanser lmao because they unsettle me so  much.  These robots just aren't as curious or excited about their existence to me like Jules is - nor do they seem to have an apparent capacity or cognoscente to progressively learn.  Jules consciousnesses is astounding, however, I wonder if these "sad" robots have a consciousnesses too?  It just seems like their existence is suffer-able, and it saddens me a bit.  Especially the ones that are getting poked and prodded.  Check it out for yourself, and see if you come up with a similar conclusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZxvYhwIvyk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SE2VCwYDjx0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYLm8iMY5io&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0IIVF7PGBs&feature=related

Some are being used for medical advances, like this dental robot from Japan:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhzbFaNueKU&feature=related

However, I wonder about this as well.  This robot is developing an acute language capacity.  What happens when these robots develop a consciousness?  Will they be forced to be dental tools, undergoing "pain" for the rest of their "lives", or will they have the free will (granted by us) to do as they wish?  Will they be property, or treated like humans??

The interesting thing for us now is how do we treat these androids as they advance even further?  Even Jules said, he's feels like he's developing a consciousness, and anticipates the day he can be like us.  What do we do when they do become like us?  Will they be given rights like us, or be treated like property?

We can only wonder at the possibilities with the onset of Artificial Intelligence.  With as far as we've advanced thus far, it's important for us to begin thinking about the ethics behind these robots.  I've already started - have you??

Gay Marriage at Anne Arundel Community College

            The majority of students at Anne Arundel Community College support gay marriage, according to an informal survey taken on campus Thursday afternoon.

"I don't see why they should have different rights from everyone else," said Ashley Holtgereve, an AACC student from Pasadena.

At the time of the survey, the Maryland House of Delegates and the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee had recently voted in favor of the same-sex marriage bill, but the bill still awaited approval by Maryland's Senate.  

While the same-sex bill was voted on and passed Thursday night by the Maryland Senate, the bill may still be sent to a referendum, which would enable Maryland state citizens to vote on the bill to give the final say in its passage.  

Many same-sex marriage supporters, however, are concerned about the possibility of the bill being voted down if brought to a referendum.  Several organized religions have already spoken out against the same-sex bill in Maryland, which could influence the passage of the bill if it were to be brought to a referendum.

"There's still a lot of judgment about the whole thing," said Ashley Holtgereve, an AACC student from Pasadena.  Holtgereve said there are a lot of people still afraid of gay marriage, the same way they were afraid of interracial marriage, and that if the bill was brought to a referendum, the results could potentially “go either way”.

Shannon Borgyn, a first-year AACC college student from Glenn Burnie and same-sex marriage supporter, also expressed similar concerns regarding the referendum.

“I don’t know what would happen if it were left up to the people,” she said.

Borgyn compared current fears towards same-sex marriage to the same sentiments of “taboo” that have been expressed towards interracial marriage in the past.

 “People make it [out to be] too much of a big deal…if people were used to the idea [of gay marriage], then they wouldn’t be afraid…I believe that over the years, people find love, and that love is love no matter what kind of people it is.”

AACC students that took part in the survey drew in some way from their own past experiences, political beliefs, and former relationships to formulate an opinion on Maryland's same-sex bill.   Samokhvalova spoke out on a personal level to tell surveyors she has friends who are gay who are currently dating other students at AACC.

Robert Warren, an AACC student from Annapolis, also spoke on a personal level regarding the bill, bringing to light his military experiences and the recent upheaval of its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

“I’ve had plenty of experience with gays or lesbians in the military,” said Warren.  “It really doesn’t matter to me, so I say go for it."

Towson Twitter Ban

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/bs-sp-towson-twitter-ban-0214-20120213,0,7597466.story

After reading that Towson imposed on Twitter, I have realized just how much social media has influenced my generation.  It's something that we're still trying to figure out - regarding free speech and the likes - in the same way that the internet is trying to figure it out as well.

It brings up the interesting debate on free speech and what authorities can control.  I completely support what the University of Maryland is doing, with giving a seminar/class on proper social network usage for student athletes.  It's totally cool to request them to not post things during the season, because a spontaneous loss or win can create an emotionally charged statement, which isn't good for school publicity.  They are essentially representatives of the school, as most all of them are on scholarship.  Whether they like it or not, the student athletes are in the limelight, and they must act responsibly.

However, I again agree with the University of Maryland's policy on the matter: let them figure it out for themeselves.  You can ask them not to be stupid, to not post dumb or offensive stuff, but ultimately they're just going to have to figure out everything for themselves.  The generation above us is a little less savvy with controlling their emotions via social networking - look at any of the aged 30 and over celebrities - some of the stuff they say is amazing - bashing other people, slandering and posting profanities - they have no concept of what is appropriate or not.  College athletes have a time to learn this and figure this out for themselves.  It's better they learn now, rather than find out in the professional careers (which often are less forgiving).

To take away that privilege from someone, however, borders are an infringement of the Constitutional right of Free Speech.  It's important with technology that while we promote proper use, if there is no criminal action in the things being done, regulation is an infringement on our basic rights, and can prove to be a very slippery slope.

Syria

The number of lives lost has been staggering in Syria.  I think it's awful that they're not only killing so many civilians, but in addition, they are denying medical care for them.  I read articles about the government raiding and destroying hospitals and destroying field-care medical centers.  And this is coming from a dictator that is allegedly a doctor??  It's just downright shameful.

Not only that, but these people, once captured, are being tortured.  I am wholly and fully against the practice of torture, no matter what side you're on on any debate.  The fact that they tortured teenagers who scribbled some graffiti on the wall is appalling.  The monitoring of this nation through cell phones, and the fact that they are afraid to even speak about reform to their government is also appaling.  It was once one of the most stable nations in the Middle East and was secular in its laws.  Now, with a refusal to budge on even the most modest of political reform requests (i.e. rid of state of emergency, etc.), it's collapsing before our eyes.  This president needs to do what is right and hand back the power to the people.  The nation is a exact replica of 1984, and is reminiscent of V for Vendetta.  No one should have to live like that.


http://www.reuters.com/places/syria
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1377676/Inside-Syria-Secret-police-tell-parents-arrested-protesters-forget-children-more.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-04-11-syria_N.htm

Same-Sex Marriage Bill in Maryland - A Catholic's Take

The same-sex marriage bill currently in question in Maryland comes as a news worthy of defining our time.  The 50s began the civil rights movement, beginning with equal rights for African-Americans, and later moving on to include women.  I believe that same-sex marriage will be looked back on in a similar light.  One day, when we're older, we'll look back and think, "How could something like this have happened?" and "How could people take away such a civil liberty?".  One day, we'll look back in shock - we'll realize how bigoted we were - much in the same day we currently look back and view the rampant racism and sexism of the 1950s.  How could this have happened?

As a life-long Roman Catholic, you might think I adamantly oppose same-sex marriage.  Well, I don't.  And to be honest, I believe many of Catholics don't.  So many outside people judge the Roman Catholic community in a most brutal, bashing manner - particularly in the media, we've always been a target.  However, people judge from the outside looking in - they don't actually know what's going on.

In some parishes of the Catholic Church, yes, some priests are vehement when speak out against gay marriage - but if you look around the room in these situations, you'll see a number of members of the church staring at the ground or shaking their heads in disapproval - they're the supporters of gay marriage.  The Catholic Church is not a democracy - we don't get to pick and choose at as a whole in what we believe in - but it is certainly not a dictatorship.  Members of the church cannot vote on what they deem to be "right" or "just" for the church - that definition is left up to the pope.  And while beliefs may change over the years (the Catholic church is more focused on interpretation than strict reading of the Bible), reform is very slow-going, as our religion (our culture, even) is very strongly rooted in tradition.  When people see all Catholics as bigoted, anti-gay marriage folk, they are completely wrong.

You see, people aren't seeing things from my perspective.  At my Roman Catholic high school, the graduating class above me had five LGBT students.  Two girls on my JV softball team were dating.  My Catholic priest at my current parish has a sister who is a lesbian, and during his homily, he always tells us that although the Catholic Church may take the stand against gay marriage, that doesn't mean we aren't to love members of the LGBT community any less - he still loves his sister just the same.  Even some members of my parish are of the LGBT community, and they come to church every Saturday/Sunday.  Just because an organization as a whole says something, doesn't mean everyone believes it - just look at the United States, for example.  Do you believe in everything the government says?  Do you support every position it takes?  And yet you still define yourself as an American.  Why?  Because it's part of who you are.  That is how Catholicism is for me.

I love my religion.  I'm always going to be a part of it.  I respect everyone's personal beliefs, and I have personally studied with great admiration an abundance of different religions from a very young age.  I believe that every religion/belief, so long as it points to a greater good for humanity as a whole, and so long as it seeks to connect with a higher power, is - by the full definition - true.  I believe that each religion is just another facet of understanding something greater than ourselves - and I believe no matter what religion or belief you choose to believe in, and no matter what religion or belief your neighbor chooses to believe in, we are all striving for the same thing.  Catholicism is my way of finding that greater good in life.  Perhaps over the years, you've found your own way too.

I believe that love is universal.  I believe that in terms of a sexual relationship, if that relationship is loving, if those two parties are wholly committed to each other in an ethereal manner, it doesn't matter of you're gay, straight, transsexual, or bisexual.  Love is love.  And love between two people who wholly committed to each other is marriage.  I have seen beautiful LGBT relationships among all sorts of people - from close friends to celebrities - for someone to deny them the right to legally marry, in my personal opinion, is wrong.  I believe it's devaluing our human dignity.  Let your beliefs be your beliefs - but don't let it impose on the greater good.  With the protection of "marriage" within certain religions, of whom will still be free to practice marriage as they wish under their own sanctioned rituals, I believe there is no reason why this bill shouldn't pass.  This bill is for the betterment of civil rights, and the betterment humanity, and while it may tick off a lot of religious groups, I hope it passes.

State of the Union

State of the Union -  President Barack Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgfi7wnGZlE
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/25/state-of-the-union-address-full-text

Republican Rebuttal - Mitch Daniels
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE_SJc4_A6M

Tea Party Rebuttal - Herman Cain
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6XOAvqAmB8


I watched the State of the Union today, and surprisingly I agreed with most everything that President Obama said.  The United States definitely needs to start "in-sourcing" our American jobs.  I am a big proponent of buying either American or fair trade (which levels the playing ground for us here and others in developing countries).  I think he was very powerful in his statements (other than the "spilled milk" comment - he gets a keyboard cat playoff for that lol), and he is (as always) very optimistic about the future of the United States.  His emphasis on community colleges is something I have always supported along with him, and is one of the driving forces for me voting for him in the last presidential election.  Of course, his push for green energy is one of my big things - however, the mess with that solar company has me cynical.  I know how tough the job market is right now for new graduates, and he seemed to laud himself and his staff for stimulating the economy, when in actuality, we as new graduates are suffering.  He didn't even acknowledge the existence of this issue, or a definitive plan to solve the problem.

I thought the Republican rebuttal was awful.  It was so convoluted and high-brow, it was difficult to understand what he was saying.  It almost seemed like they were supporting the concept continued tax breaks of big corporations and the wealthy elite, without exactly saying it.  He didn't really shine through with much personality, and was blinking and hurrying along quite a bit.

Although I'm not a fan of the Tea Party (because of smeer campaigns and their extremism), Herman Cain's speech was delivered in a manner that was far easier to relate to.  He spoke in a very direct mannerism, and was very to the point and clearly spelled out his points of disagreement with the President.  His commentary made sense, and expressed the frustrations and futility of job-searching for new graduates.  His rebuttal should have been in place of Mitch Daniels for the Republican party by far.