Thursday, July 13, 2017

One for the good-move side of the ledger

There's nobody who shouldn't be able to cheer this:

Six teenage girls from Afghanistan had been chosen to compete in the first ever FIRST Global Challenge, held in Washington, D.C. The inaugural competition gives teams from around the world the opportunity to show off the robots they've created. Yet, the U.S. State Department denied the Afghan girls team visas – twice. As such, the girls were planning to instead participate in the contest via Skype.
Learning of the predicament, President Trump sought out National Security Council officials to act on the contestants' behalf. Those officials then contacted Homeland Security, which approved the girls entry via the “parole” system that allows visitors to stay in the U.S. for 10 days.
“The State Department worked incredibly well with the Department of Homeland Security to ensure that this case was reviewed and handled appropriately,” Dina Powell, Trump's deputy national security adviser for strategy, said in a statement. “We could not be prouder of this delegation of young women who are also scientists — they represent the best of the Afghan people and embody the promise that their aspirations can be fulfilled. They are future leaders of Afghanistan and strong ambassadors for their country.” 

The all-girls team dominated the science and technology competition in Afghanistan – an impressive feat in a country where 66 percent of girls ages 12 to 15 are out of school, reports Human Rights Watch. The organization provided more stunning statistics.
In a country where only 37 percent of adolescent girls and 19 percent of adult women are literate, donor countries should be sweeping these girls up to see how their achievement can be replicated – not slamming the door in their faces.

Now, that's the America we like to see. (And the Afghanistan we like to see!) You go, girls!


25 comments:

  1. Clock move backwards to earlier in the day now? I see it as another grand stand by the Donald. He is always playing to his base. And, hey, great future in the world of work for the future. A future where robots take a large portion of our jobs and eventually, of course, learn to program themselves. I'd think you would champion the reading of Chaucer for these young ladies.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Of course we must not build and program robots for our pleasure, but pain (job loss) is of course OK.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The point is hardly Donald Trump. Ditto robots. Any attempt to make some kind of dent in the pure feel-good quality of this story is nothing but sick.

    ReplyDelete
  4. http://reason.com/archives/2017/07/11/the-myth-of-technological-unem

    ReplyDelete
  5. For every link you produce regarding the beneficent use of robots, such as adding jobs, I can produce 10 showing how they are going to take them. Many of them And my thoughts on the "enemy" being denied visas is that, without researching it, is that the State Dept. likely was following criteria set forth by some administration (maybe Obama/Clinton's, I dunno) in denying them visas, and here comes the Executive Orderer in Chief (cheers from the peanut gallery) bullying his way into yet another big media opportunity, cameras flash, feel good smiley smiles, just as he has now ordered the Senate (Democrats need not apply) to pass a GD health care bill, like yestersay. Just like he tweets to his base, just like, in less than 6 months a 64 year old armistice is in jeopardy and the masses who are mostly interested in more jobs, not fewer (STEM grads always excepted, of course)cower in fear over a regime (and a China) that has changed little in those 64 years, wanting that little bastard with the weird haircut like gone, outta here, pronto, damned if we aren't ready to drop a few quick ones and finally put an end to all this crap. Woot!

    ReplyDelete
  6. The insurance industry where I have been engaged for over 30 of my 40 working years, for instance, employs over 3 million people in the US. Marketing, underwriting and claims are already being transformed by artificial intelligence which can multi-task without error, work 24/7. There are already companies being established that are nearly entirely virtual, from sales, to underwriting through claims adjustment and payment. For instance, you are involved in an auto accident. You simply allow access to your vehicle's "little black box" which downloads all the applicable data, you email cell phone pics of your damage in, AI completes an estimate, emails it to the body shop of your choice and issues a check to your account. The black box is instrumental in determining liability. Police reports are added to the mix (ordered and received virtually), letters are mailed, a robot responds to your call (within 5 years it is postulated that the robot voice will be indistinguishable from a human voice). The digitally savvy (er including my grandkids over the age of 6) can buy their insurance with their cell phones. Underwriting can be done completely and more accurately via AI. That's just an example from the auto insurance world. And, the Watson of choice can access all the necessary knowledge needed from the entire internet within seconds, access all the information from the company manuals, the local, state and federal laws, and spit out thorough and compreshensive reports in seconds. 24/7. More later on the use of drones in catastrophe losses. No humans, just a fly over, assesses the damage, writes an estimate, prints a check and a robocall (remember, indistinguishable from a human voice) is available for humans who need more TLC. The insured snaps a few pictures inside and, believe it or not, an interior estimate with accurate measurements can be written, emailed to the contractor of choice and a check sent out, all without human intervention or much of it. For your field, kiss it goodbye bippy, articles are already being written that are indistinguishable from human writing. I can go on and on, cite great thinkers, rich business magnates, newspaper, magazine articles and many many books in support of my theory. You ain't seen nothin' yet and that is why your tired old thinking expostulated in the reason article is jut not cutting it in this brave new world of AI. I did not get any real sense that the reason article author really knew what he was talking about. He was inferring from the past about the future, but this is far far different, still blaming everything but the technology. The fact that he blames human unions for one thing is indicative of his misogohumanistic stance (I know that's a word, because the spellcheck told me so).

    ReplyDelete
  7. "not a word"==human error there, spell check did catch it, a little red line appeared under the word but this is antiquated (er free, e.g. substandard) technology we're playing with here.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I really didn't think ingenuity-hatred would raise its anti-advancement head so soon after the breaking of this story.

    Have you really considered your position? These girls, excelling in a technological field generally peopled by males, have distinguished themselves in one of the most sexist countries in the world. And they will finally get to come to the United States, which has to be a huge thrill for them. To put some kind of negative spin on it indicates a worldview so dark I can't comprehend it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The negative spin is not at all on the girls. It is on Trump's grandstanding and general overall bullying. It has nothing to do with the girls. That's fine. We've always had international cooperation like this. I don't see what is so special about it, unless it is that these girls were allowed to achieve in technology in a backward Muslim country. What did the State Department do wrong in denying them visas? Is the State Department the enemy here? I'd like to know what criteria the State Department used in denying them visas. And what, pray tell, does this tell us about anything having to ddo with sexism in America? Not a damned thing. And if Afghanistan is sexist, among other things, well, they're going to get in line. I never doubted the power of the female of the species. They excel the male in many many areas. What kind of dark world view am I espousing? Dude, you've known me for over 30 years. You know who I am. I have a daughter, a sister and 3 girl grand children. I want them to achieve and applaud the achievement of girls everywhere. Gimme a break that you can't comprehend my dark worldview. Something must have been lost in the communication here. We've had echanges with the so-called enemy (and former enemies) during my entire lifetime, so applaud Big Bully DJT in this, to me, is simply ludicrous. I think you like him way more than you let on. This is the kind of stuff Dems usually do. And not for showboating either.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Well, maybe dropping the mother of all bombs had this effect on the evil Afghanis, I dunno. And this combined with Trump's special sauce of force, will usher in a new world of peace, love and robots for the benefit of all mankind. Jimmy Carter would have done that and kept quiet about it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I do not hate ingenuity at all. I am just setting you straight on the effect AI and robotics might have on it all. You are always pressing for responses, even alleging I am not responding because I do not have an answer. This wave is unstoppable and I intend to ride it and, however I may, teach my grandchildren to ride it too. Your ilk took away health insurance, pensions, even the source of the daily bread for millions, then blamed everthing and everybody for the simple greed, which has always been and always will be, of getting things done cheaper elsewhere. And I am to expect a humanitarian outlook for the invisible hand. You don't have to let us eat cake. We will spit it out at your robots, Mr. Man! We know you'd still have slaves if you could. You paid millions of illegals to come over here to do the work cheaper and now you want them gone because they are a drag on the economy. What do you think they came here for, burgers and fries?

    ReplyDelete
  12. To hear the Donald tell it, all the Mexicans much closer to home, er, like here are murderers and thieves. My church welcomes them and you will find the parking lots full in every community where they are found and families just like yours and mine attending. And many of them have to be illegals. Treat "the other" kindly wherever they are, and Mr. Travel Ban ain't getting any mileage out of this from me. Then again, I am not a fan of Championship Wrestling or stupid reality shows either. Get this guy out of here will you please!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Do you honestly think Obama would not have done the same thing? And he would not have made an issue out of how and what he did. Shit, he had been trying to stop the killing over there. And this is going to do it? Your dark world view has you trashing our schools right here in our great land.

    ReplyDelete
  14. What's special about it is that the bureaucracy at the State Department was going to deny them entry and that hs been reversed.

    Howe am I part of some sort of "ilk" that "took away pensions and health care" from anybody? Many American businesses saw that it was no longer possible to fund these things and scaled back. There was never any right to them ion the first place.

    How am I any part of any group that paid millions for illegals to come over here? =This blog is on record as being against the hiring of illegals.

    Please try not to display your ignorance so embarrassingly.

    ReplyDelete
  15. It's sick to the point of vomit-inducing to make this about Donald Trumps' motives.

    ReplyDelete
  16. We dropped the mother of all bombs to wipe out as many jihadists as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  18. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  19. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  22. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete