Latest news with #Einsteins
Epoch Times
26-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Acknowledging Inequality in Trade Negotiations
Commentary Inequality is all around us. It is a ubiquitous fact of life, whether we are comparing individuals or societies. Nobody 'planned' inequality. No, let me modify that statement. It's true that individual and social inequality occur naturally; however, tyrannical political beliefs and ideologies can add an artificial political inequality that is created by using force against one's fellow human beings. Individuals who embrace the ideology of egalitarianism apparently think that nature is inherently unfair for having produced various types of inequality. Individuals differ in intellectual capacity (few Einsteins), physical attributes (few Aaron Judges), creativity (few Paul McCartneys), entrepreneurial genius (few Elon Musks), aptitudes (not everyone can fix plumbing, program computers, or manage a classroom of children) and attitudes (focused and driven, or easy-going and unambitious), etc. These marked differences inevitably lead to economic inequality, a fact that drives egalitarians crazy. They believe that the natural order that leads to economic inequality is an inherent defective of creation, and that it is up to the egalitarians to 'fix' what they perceive as this fundamental defect by using government power to rearrange the existing situation. Other people (I am thinking in particular of some free-market economists here) embrace and applaud our natural differences and inequality. They say that our differences play a major factor in the development of the division of labor, in which individuals tend to specialize in areas where they see the most potential for satisfactory achievement and personal success. Whether you are favorably or unfavorably disposed toward individual inequality, at the very least we all should acknowledge that inequality exists. Where we differ is what, if anything, anybody—whether through private initiatives or government programs—should do about inequality. Rather than debate egalitarianism here (I have offered Related Stories 5/22/2025 5/21/2025 One example of this blind spot is when our country Why do you think Brazil or Malaysia, for example, don't impose as costly a set of environmental regulations burden on their businesses as Uncle Sam does on American businesses? (Please note: I am not defending or justifying any of the very real trade barriers that foreign countries deliberately employ against the United States.) Is that evidence of some devious plot to enable their producers to gain a cost advantage against American competitors? No, the reason is much simpler than that: Those countries are not as wealthy as the United States, thus they cannot afford as expensive a set of regulations as we have here. Poorer countries have not yet achieved sufficient economic growth to be able to pay for environmental regulations as stringent as American enterprises must obey. Look at our own country in the 1960s. Air and water pollution were severe problems. Why were American producers allowed to inflict so much pollution on the environment? It was because we had other, more pressing economic priorities. Thank goodness, Americans got to the point where a majority strongly concluded, 'Enough! Let's do something about all this pollution.' Consequently, responding to popular pressure, government regulation greatly reduced pollution. In technical terms, we had arrived at the point on the Do you think the people in poorer countries prefer to live with pollution? I don't. Rather, I am confident that they will vote for less pollution just as soon as they feel they can afford it. (Note: This is the expected path in democratic countries. Dictatorships such as the Chinese Communist Party are not responsive to the popular will, which is why communist countries tend to be the most polluted countries.) Until poorer countries become richer, is it just for us to penalize them by imposing protective tariffs against them simply because they cannot afford as much regulation as we have? There is an added danger of the White House threatening to impose punitive tariffs on countries for having less stringent environmental regulations than we do. President Trump is having a hard enough time convincing Congress to adopt his economic agenda. Does he really think he can dictate what domestic policies our trading partners should have? We need to recognize and respect the sovereignty of those nations. If anything, such demands will anger foreign citizens, just as he already has angered Canadian citizens (among others) by presuming to tell them what they should do. The result will be that foreign countries will circle the wagons against American attempts to dictate policies to them. Only if the true agenda is to scuttle trade with foreign countries would it make sense to tell them what domestic regulations they should have. If, on the other hand, we truly want to facilitate trade, then we should refrain from making such demands. Finally, here is an outside-the-box thought: Maybe instead of asking foreign countries to ramp up regulation, we should consider reducing regulations in our own country to make American producers more competitive in international markets. When it comes to pollution, usually it is just the last few percentage points of pollution eliminated where exorbitant marginal costs occur. If it costs twice as much to eliminate 97 percent of a pollutant as it does to eliminate 94 percent, then maybe settling for 94 percent is a change worth considering. I know that such a suggestion is sacrilegious to hard-core greens, but let us be mindful of the old adage about not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good (or the excellent). Perhaps it is our own policies that need to be modified. The fact is that we have more control over our own government than we do over the governments of foreign countries. Let's accept the inequality of nations and fix what we can here at home. Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
Hamilton Spectator
01-05-2025
- Science
- Hamilton Spectator
Alpha Dogs: Leading the Pack, Season Summary for Humberview Secondary School Robotics Team
The Alpha Dogs robotics team from Humberview Secondary School wrapped up their 12th season by competing in the FIRST Robotics World Championships held last week in Houston, TX. FIRST is a global non-profit dedicated to inspiring students to pursue careers in STEM. The competition placed the Alpha Dogs in the Galileo division, where they demonstrated their skills by going undefeated through the 10 qualification matches held on Thursday, April 17, and Friday, April 18. It was here at the World Championships that the Alpha Dogs completed their long-term goal of competing in the Einsteins, the inter-divisional playoffs. Although they were eventually eliminated from the playoffs, the team finished in an impressive 6th place overall. Their global ranking is now 22nd out of 3690 teams, placing them in the top one percent. In Canada, they ranked 4th out of 193 teams, and 4th in Ontario out of 130 teams. This successful season has been a long time coming, as over their twelve years as a team, they've made numerous changes to strengthen not only their robots but their teamwork. Becky Krauter, a mentor for the team and teacher at Humberview Secondary School, recounted what it was like when the team started. Before they had use of Bolton Agricultural Society's President's building as a field, the team would painstakingly remove the tables from the cafeteria in their school at the end of the day to use as their practice field, only to put all the tables and chairs back hours later and repeat the next day. 'So that's been a huge game changer for us,' said Krauter. 'And we've noticed a huge growth in our ability to be successful.' Successful they were, Krauter stated how Einsteins had been elusive to the team for many years. 'To be able to actually get there and compete was hugely exciting. The kids felt that huge sense of accomplishment of meeting that goal,' she said. 'For us as mentors it was huge because this has been sort of where we wanted the kids to get next. To be able to achieve that was really amazing, and then to go one further and actually win our first match was like icing on the cake.' Krauter stated that although only senior team members could go, the entire team was cheering them on from home. For Krauter, this was not the only accomplishment she saw, as the team demonstrated exceptional commitment throughout the season. The team logs their hours, and this season, they amassed over 5,500 hours in total among the approximate 45 active students. 'They're passionate. They have excellent problem-solving skills, and they have excellent technical skills,' said Krauter. At FIRST, the teams compete while maintaining two core values, Gracious Professionalism and Coopetition. According to the FIRST website, 'Gracious professionalism proves that fierce competition and mutual gain coexist. Participants compete intensely while treating each other with respect and empathy.' Coopetition means that teams help and cooperate with each other, even as they compete. It's about learning from teammates, teaching others, collaborating with mentors, managing and being managed. It's these two values that Krauter has loved about robotics since she joined as a mentor seven years ago. 'As a teacher, I think these are huge skills or qualities that I really want the students to be learning,' she said.
Axios
13-03-2025
- Science
- Axios
AI's creative block
Tech evangelists predict the arrival of "superintelligence" any year now, but others doubt AI will ever produce its own Leonardos and Einsteins. Driving the news: In a post on X Tuesday, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman touted the company's development of "a new model that is good at creative writing" and showed off its work — a thousand-word "metafictional" composition on "AI and grief." Why it matters: Creativity could be the final hurdle for AI to leap in proving it's humanity's peer — but until then, many see it as the last bastion of humanity's irreplaceability. The big picture: Whether telling stories or researching scientific breakthroughs, today's generative AI isn't very good at creative leaps and novel insights. It's bounded by what it "knows" — the data it is trained on — and how it "thinks," by guessing the next word or pixel that best fulfills its prompt. In science, our AI models aren't going to push the boundaries because they're too eager to please people and prove their utility, Thomas Wolf, HuggingFace's co-founder and chief science officer, wrote on X last week. Wolf called AI that does research "yes-men on servers." "To create an Einstein in a data center, we don't just need a system that knows all the answers, but rather one that can ask questions nobody else has thought of or dared to ask," Wolf argued. The benchmarks we're using to gauge AI's advances "consist of very difficult questions — usually written by PhDs — but with clear, closed-end answers... Real scientific breakthroughs will come not from answering known questions, but from asking challenging new questions and questioning common conceptions and previous ideas." Getting AI to produce compelling art looks even more unlikely. Most work produced by AI is literally derivative. Of course, most artists, especially at the start of their careers, learn by imitation, and many human artworks are effectively collages, rewrites or remixes. But memorable artists develop distinctive voices by mixing their own experiences and obsessions with whatever they've learned from the artists they admire — and even their collages "sound like them." People seek out art because hearing those voices inspires them, leaving them feeling connected with the artist in a way that they cherish. The short story Altman posted showed formal facility — but many of the responses on X found it, as I did, more exercise than expression. Between the lines: Plenty of artists will find AI a valuable creative tool or an aid to brainstorming, just as many researchers will employ it to speed their work. But creation is likely to remain hard work for human beings. It takes effort to wrestle a vague idea in your head into words, images or any other material for an audience to encounter. This is the sort of friction that AI visionaries sometimes promise to liberate us from. Yes, but:"Friction-free art" is inert. What sends off sparks is the struggle of a person's urge to express something against the limits of form and medium. The bottom line: LLMs are like youngsters who have read a lot but do not have experience of the world. And right now there's not much of a way for AIs to get it. An LLM has never felt sunlight on its arm or raindrops on its head, known a parent or a child, given birth or faced death. It doesn't feel the need to share such experiences or to shape them into works of writing, or music, or any other form. What's next: Maybe the fusion of generative AI with robotics will surprise us, and an embodied LLM will find itself moving toward something humans might recognize as art. But it's very possible AI will never be truly creative because it has no impulse to play around for the heck of it, to impress peers or best rivals, or to leave a little mark on the world. People give AI prompts, whereas human artists get their prompts from their own lives.
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Science
- Yahoo
Atlanta elementary students get first-hand experience with STEM activities
Some future Einsteins are already hard at work in southeast Atlanta, and most of them are in the second grade. [DOWNLOAD: Free WSB-TV News app for alerts as news breaks] Channel 2′s Berndt Petersen met the young masters of science, technology, engineering, and math—what the cool kids call STEM. The Atlanta Hawks and State Farm Insurance teamed up to bring the Secrets of Science event to children who attend the Good Neighbor Clubs, the team established across the city. One location is Coan Park. TRENDING STORIES: STORY 1 STORY 2 STORY 3 'The kids are extremely excited to learn about STEM. We're teaching them about the water cycle and how to make slime. We know how kids love slime,' Portia Benbow, Atlanta Hawks Director of Community Impact, said. The science teachers were from the Children's Museum of Atlanta. The goal is to give children, many from underserved areas, a head start with STEM and have a little hands-on fun while they're at it. 'Even making gloopy-glop, also known as slime. We want STEM to be fun. Fun is really where the kids get to learn and explore,' Shanita Drake of State Farm Insurance said. [SIGN UP: WSB-TV Daily Headlines Newsletter]
