Anders Sandberg

Fishing outside the reef: the illusion of control and finance

by Anders Sandberg
October 3, 2008

Humans regularly see patterns where there are none, but stress makes this tendency worse. Some new studies suggest this may be making the current market troubles worse. Jennifer Whitson and Adam Galinsky (Lacking Control Increases Illusory Pattern Perception, Science 3 October 2008 Vol. 322. no. 5898, pp. 115-117) demonstrated that when people feel they lack control, they see more illusorypatterns in noise and stock market information, perceive conspiraciesand accept superstitions more readily. But is this the key to understanding the financial turmoil?

The price of ignorance: the Durham study and research ethics

by Anders Sandberg
September 30, 2008

Ben Goldacre (who seems to be one of this blog’s favorite
sources) tears into the Durham fish oil trial. A while ago Durham County together with the company Equazen decided
to test whether giving omega-3 supplements would improve the GCSE scores of
children. Unfortunately there were clear problems with the trial design. In the
face of criticism the organisations involved refused to give out information on
the experimental setup and even claimed not to be running it as a trial (despite numerous statements to the
press). GCSE scores did not generally increase. Despite this, now positive results are claimed – largely because what is measured has been changed to suit
the data. The most vexing thing about the whole affair is that the
trial could have been done in a proper manner for the same amount of money.

I suggest it was Professor Plum, in the library, with the arsenic: the unreliability of brain experience detection

by Anders Sandberg
September 15, 2008

A woman has been convicted in Mumbai for murder, based on a new brain-based experience detection technology. As can be predicted, many regard this as Orwellian while others hope technologies like this could transform the courtroom "as much as DNA evidence has". But there are big problems. The most obvious one is the question of whether the technology actually works, let alone works well enough to be suitable for convicting somebody. The analogy with DNA evidence points at the second big problem: the legal institutions need to learn how to use it well. There are very good reasons for experts in psychology, neuroscience and forensics are troubled by this case.

Silicon dreams: digital drugs and regulation

by Anders Sandberg
August 20, 2008

A new worry has hit parents: digital drugs. The idea is that sounds can affect brain states, so by listening to the right kind of sounds desired brain states can be induced – relaxation, concentration, happiness, PMS relief or why not hallucinations? Apparently "idosers" walk around high on sound. Just the right thing for a summer moral panic – kids, computers, drugs and pseudoscience.

Education and the Fairness of Capital Punishment

by Anders Sandberg
July 1, 2008

Regardless of their views on capital punishment most people desire it to be centred on due process and fairness. But a software experiment, by showing that the likelihood of execution of people on death row can be predicted to high accuracy, paradoxically suggests a great degree of arbitrariness in how the death penalty is applied in the US. A death sentence is essentially a lottery ticket: the condemned will be executed with a certain probability and otherwise suffer a long and uncertain imprisonment. But different convicts get different probability tickets, even when the legal system and all criminal circumstances are the same.

Duck and cover: how expensive does impact safety have to be?

by Anders Sandberg
June 27, 2008

This week is Tunguska week: on June 30 1908 a large meteoroid or comet exploded with the force of 5-30 megatons above the Tunguska River in Russia. The journal Nature celebrates it with several articles about impacts, ranging from a discussion of a controversial meteorite artwork to the confirmation that most of the northern hemisphere of Mars is a gargantuan crater.

From an ethics perspective the most interesting issue is how we should protect ourselves from rare but very destructive events. Had the Tunguska impactor hit an inhabited area it could easily have killed
millions, and larger impacts could imperil our species. But big impacts are rare: how much should we pay to detect and avoid them?

My Genes, not a Doctor’s

by Anders Sandberg
June 20, 2008

California has sent cease-and-desist letters to firms offering Web gene tests to consumers. The legal reason is that California law requires a licenced physician to order any lab tests. This follows from a similar crackdown in New York. Wired responds by top 10 reasons that regulators should not hinder genetic testing. Is there any good reason to limit public access to genetic testing besides protecting incumbents and gatekeepers?

Lex Orwell: When is a Surveillance Society OK?

by Anders Sandberg
June 16, 2008

The current Swedish debate about a bill to
allow military intelligence to intercept phone and Internet
communications has produced something most unSwedish: a grassroots
"blogquake" that has upset the staid logic of traditional politics. Given the threat that the bill may fall because of MPs disobeying their party whips
(normally unheard of in Swedish politics) there is a real chance the bill is even
withdrawn at the last minute. But even if it is, this is
an issue that will return again and again: exactly how much
information should the government be allowed to gather and for what purposes?

Preventing Polka-Dot Problems: Should Measles Vaccination be Compulsory?

by Anders Sandberg
May 23, 2008

Jim Todd reports about his measles experience at BBC News. A number of years back such a report about how a case of adult measles feels would have been absurd, since so many had suffered it. A few years back it would have been absurd because measles was rare thanks to vaccination. But now, due to a reduction in vaccinations, the risk of measles is rising. Health chiefs in London are stepping up the vaccination program to try to stave off the rising number of cases. The key problem is that in many areas of London only 62% of toddlers
have been immunised, compared to the 95% that is needed to achieve herd immunity.
Vaccinated people act as firebreaks: if enough people are immune to a
disease long chains of infection become improbable, and epidemics do
not occur. Given this, should measles vaccination be compulsory?

Humane Evolution

by Anders Sandberg
May 19, 2008

Professor John Harris wonders Who’s afraid
of a synthetic human? in the Times. He argues we should support
the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill because it will help us develop
effective therapies and enhance ourselves. Science is about bettering our lot,
after all. In particular, he says, synthetic biology may help us avoid going
extinct due to our vulnerabilities and instead enable us to choose (or become)
our successors as a species.

Many people become confused by the
possibility of a posthuman future. The traditional view of the future is a
stark one: either humanity extinct, or humans roughly as they are today. The
posthuman options would be that we either change ourselves so radically that
the resulting species is so fundamentally different from humanity that we
would regard it as something entirely new, or that we create some kind of independent
beings that continue our culture even as traditional humanity retires from the
forefront (hopefully as proud parents of the new beings). The range of possible
options within these scenarios is endless, inviting equally endless and loud
speculation. That tends to distract from the key message of Harris’ essay: we
are leaving the realm of natural evolution and entering what he calls a realm
of enhancement evolution.