Hãy nhập câu hỏi của bạn vào đây, nếu là tài khoản VIP, bạn sẽ được ưu tiên trả lời.
1. Yes, I think GM food is a good idea.
2. Yes, I am. Because GM foods can have enhanced nutritional content and as a viable solution to address food security and nutritional challenges.
3. No, I’m not. Because I have concerns about the potential health and environmental implications from them.
4. I am willing to pay a few tens to several hundred thousand more for organic food.
5. Yes, we will. Because GM crops can contribute to increased yields, enhanced nutrition, and improved resistance to pests and diseases, potentially helping to feed a growing population.
Hal Varian, chief economist at Google, has a simple way to predict the future. The future is simply what rich people have today. The rich have chauffeurs. In the future, we will have driverless cars that chauffeur us all around. The rich have private bankers. In the future, we will all have robo-bankers.
One thing that we imagine that the rich have today are lives of leisure. So will our future be one in which we too have lives of leisure, and the machines are taking the sweat? We will be able to spend our time on more important things than simply feeding and housing ourselves?
Let’s turn to another chief economist. Andy Haldane is chief economist at the Bank of England. In November 2015, he predicted that 15 million jobs in the UK, roughly half of all jobs, were under threat from automation. You’d hope he knew what he was talking about.
AdvertisementAnd he’s not the only one making dire predictions. Politicians. Bankers. Industrialists. They’re all saying a similar thing.
“We need urgently to face the challenge of automation, robotics that could make so much of contemporary work redundant”, Jeremy Corbyn at the Labour Party Conference in September 2017.
“World Bank data has predicted that the proportion of jobs threatened by automation in India is 69 percent, 77 percent in China and as high as 85 percent in Ethiopia”, according to World Bank president Jim Yong Kim in 2016.
It really does sound like we might be facing the end of work as we know it.
Many of these fears can be traced back to a 2013 study from the University of Oxford. This made a much quoted prediction that 47% of jobs in the US were under threat of automation in the next two decades. Other more recent and detailed studies have made similar dramatic predictions.
Now, there’s a lot to criticize in the Oxford study. From a technical perspective, some of report’s predictions are clearly wrong. The report gives a 94% probability that bicycle repair person will be automated in the next two decades. And, as someone trying to build that future, I can reassure any bicycle repair person that there is zero chance that we will automate even small parts of your job anytime soon. The truth of the matter is no one has any real idea of the number of jobs at risk.
Even if we have as many as 47% of jobs automated, this won’t translate into 47% unemployment. One reason is that we might just work a shorter week. That was the case in the Industrial Revolution. Before the Industrial Revolution, many worked 60 hours per week. After the Industrial Revolution, work reduced to around 40 hours per week. The same could happen with the unfolding AI Revolution.
Another reason that 47% automation won’t translate into 47% unemployment is that all technologies create new jobs as well as destroy them. That’s been the case in the past, and we have no reason to suppose that it won’t be the case in the future. There is, however, no fundamental law of economics that requires the same number of jobs to be created as destroyed. In the past, more jobs were created than destroyed but it doesn’t have to be so in the future.
In the Industrial Revolution, machines took over many of the physical tasks we used to do. But we humans were still left with all the cognitive tasks. This time, as machines start to take on many of the cognitive tasks too, there’s the worrying question: what is left for us humans?
Some of my colleagues suggest there will be plenty of new jobs like robot repair person. I am entirely unconvinced by such claims. The thousands of people who used to paint and weld in most of our car factories got replaced by only a couple of robot repair people.
No, the new jobs will have to be doing jobs where either humans excel or where we choose not to have machines. But here’s the contradiction. In fifty to hundred years time, machines will be super-human. So it’s hard to imagine of any job where humans will remain better than the machines. This means the only jobs left will be those where we prefer humans to do them.
The AI Revolution then will be about rediscovering the things that make us human. Technically, machines will have become amazing artists. They will be able to write music to rival Bach, and paintings to match Picasso. But we’ll still prefer works produced by human artists.
These works will speak to the human experience. We will appreciate a human artist who speaks about love because we have this in common. No machine will truly experience love like we do.
As well as the artistic, there will be a re-appreciation of the artisan. Indeed, we see the beginnings of this already in hipster culture. We will appreciate more and more those things made by the human hand. Mass-produced goods made by machine will become cheap. But items made by hand will be rare and increasingly valuable.
Finally as social animals, we will also increasingly appreciate and value social interactions with other humans. So the most important human traits will be our social and emotional intelligence, as well as our artistic and artisan skills. The irony is that our technological future will not be about technology but all about our humanity.
Toby Walsh is Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the University of New South Wales, in Sydney, Australia. His new book, “Android Dreams: the past, present and future of Artificial Intelligence” was published in the UK by Hurst Publishers in September 2017. It’s available from the Guardian Bookshop. You can read more at his blog, http://thefutureofai.blogspot.com/
Since you’re here…
… we have a small favour to ask. More people around the world are reading The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. We’ve now been funded by over one million readers. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism open to all. We believe that each one of us deserves access to accurate information with integrity at its heart.
The Guardian is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important as it enables us to give a voice to those less heard, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical.
Every contribution we receive from readers like you, big or small, goes directly into funding our journalism. This support enables us to keep working as we do – but we must maintain and build on it for every year to come. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a
I like living in the countryside because of some reasons. Environmentally speaking, it is a peaceful place. The air is fresh. The space is quiet. We can enjoy healthy natural conditions without
worrying much about environmental pollution.
As for social security, the countryside is a safer place than a city. While urban security situation is always complicated with all kinds of crimes, rural areas are much more secure because most of countrymen are friendly and ready to help one another.
I prefer to live in a city because i think that life in a city is always more exciting and more comfortable than life in a country or in a small town.
First of all, in cities there is usually something to do or somewhere to go. In the city there is a large access to education an there is easier to find good and ineresting job. Moreover there is a good selection of cinemas, galeries, theaters or restaurants, where people can spand their free time. There is always something interesting and it is impossible to be bored.
In the cities, there are a lot of good shops where we can do the shopping easily and quickly. Moreover there are many sports facilities such as swimming pools, gym halls or tennis courts where people can spend their free time and practis their favourite sports.
Young people in cities are in better situation, than young people in village or in a small town, because young city- dwallers can go to clubs, discos, and spend their leisure time. They have also more opportunities to meet someone.
However living in a big city have some disadvantages. Havy traffic is big problem. Fumes emitted into the atmosphere polutte the air and many city-dwallers suffer from serious medical disorders. Moreover there are many car accidents every day and the noise never stops. There are many cars and it is difficult to find a parking place especially in the centre. In addition the crime rate in cities is very high.
Summing up, in spite of all these disadvantages, living in a city is more exciting, interesting and never dull for me.
- What is the event?
→ The event is: birthday party
- Where and when does it happen?
→ It happen on one of my family member's birthday. It helds in my house.
- Who joins with you?
→ My family members join with me.
- What do you often do at that event?
→ I always buy a birthday cake.
- Do you like it or not? Why or why not?
→ Yes, I do. Because it's an oppotunity to bring everyone together.
Fairy tales are very good for children because the following reasons :
"If you want your children to be intelligent, read them fairy tales. If you want them to be more intelligent, read them more fairy tales." Albert Einstein
This morning the press, and public, went into uproar over headlines claiming evolutionary biologist and writer Richard Dawkins thinks fairy tales are harmful to children. After a quick look at Dawkins' personal Twitter feed, and his subsequent interview with The Guardian, it seems that his comments have been misunderstood. Nevertheless, in light of the conversation, we look at five reasons why fairy tales are in fact great for children...
1. They boost a child's imagination and cultural literacy
A child's imagination is a powerful and unique thing. It's not only used to make up stories and games, it's a key factor in their creative thoughts and can define the type of education, career and life they have. With this imagination comes a cultural literacy; fairy tales often include different cultures and ways of doing things. They teach children about cultural differences in the world outside their own gifting them a curiosity to learn new things and experience new places.
2. They teach us right from wrong
Standing strongly within fairy tales of magic horses and glass slippers is a moral backbone. It's in a fairytale's DNA to have a strong moral lesson, a fight between good & evil, love and loss, and these lessons rub off on our children.
According to The Telegraph, Mrs Goddard Blythe, director of the Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology in Chester, said: "Fairy tales help to teach children an understanding of right and wrong, not through direct teaching, but through implication."
Fairy tales help to teach children an understanding of right and wrong, not through direct teaching, but through implication
Fairy tales teach children that good will always triumph and, while this may not be true in aspects of the real world, the lesson is simple and important. Be the hero, not the villain. Learn to hope for better.
3. They develop critical thinking skills
Following on from the last point, and as Richard Dawkins has pointed out, fairy tales teach children critical thinking. They see the consequences of characters decisions and learn that what will happen to them depends on the choices they make. Not all characters can be good role models, even 'the goodies' can be damsels in distress, or reckless (or feckless) princes. What the stories do teach though, is that when bad things happen, you have decisions to make. If you make the right ones, everything might just turn out OK.
4. They can help children deal with emotions themselves
Not only do fairy tales prepare our kids for society and making moral decisions, they teach them how to deal with conflict within themselves. Child psychologist Bruno Bettelheim, who specialised in the importance of fairy tales in childhood, believed that fairy tales can aid children in dealing with anxiety they are, as yet, unable to explain. In fairy tales children are often the main character and more often than not will win against the story's evil. Readers can relate to this and find a fairy tale hero in themselves. Watch any Pixar film for guidance on this one.
5. And finally, they are great fun!
I have very fond memories of curling up in bed and disappearing into another world where dragons fly and princes fight. My memories of overwhelming excitement when my dad came home with the latest Harry Potter book still makes my smile. The games I played with my friends in our garden were indisputably improved by our imaginations, which were still swimming in last night's story.
Whether it's for indirect moral lessons, improving their imaginations or because your child can't put that book down reading fairy tales should be encouraged. Read them together, help your kids invent their own and make sure they know can win against any wicked witch.
ko biết
1.Yes,it is because pizza is delicious,blended by simple ingredients
2.Yes,it is because clean vegetables is good for health
3.No,it isn'y because vegetables is good and clean for health everyone
4.No,it isn't because vegetables is cheap for somebody
Tịks nhé!Học tôta!:))