31 August 2019 | New Scientist | 31Don’t miss
Watch
Open City
Documentary Festival,
in London from 4 to
10 September, presents
Expanded Realities,
an exhibition and
symposium about how
digital technology is
changing and enriching
non-fiction film.Visit
Ars Electronica, since
1979 the big beast of
the European science-art
scene, is contemplating
the digital revolution
in middle age. Artists,
scientists and tech
pioneers of the past four
decades will be gathered
in Linz, Austria, from
5 to 9 September.Read
The Nature of Life and
Death (Putnam) by
forensic ecologist Patricia
Wiltshire blends science
and true-crime reporting.
It reveals the microscopic
traces we leave behind
us, and how these are
used to reconstruct our
most desperate acts.
TOP:^ FORES
T,^ KELSEY
BONCATO,^ DANIEL^ OLDHA
M.
2019,^ M
IDDLE
:^ O
MAI^ U
SADriving forces
Nothing can be taken for granted in an
autonomous future, finds Simon IngsExhibition
Driverless:
Who is in control?
Science Museum, London
Until October 2020DURHAM Cathedral’s stained
glass windows inspired artist
Dominic Wilcox’s contribution
to Driverless, a tiny but
thought-provoking exhibition
at London’s Science Museum.
It occurred to Wilcox that
artificial intelligence could make
traffic collisions a thing of the
past, which means “we don’t
need the protection systems
that are built into contemporary
cars”, he told design magazine
Dezeen. “We can just have a
shell of any design.”
His Stained Glass Driverless
Sleeper Car of the Future
(pictured below) is the sort of
vehicle we may be driving when
road safety has improved to
the point where we can build
cars out of whatever we want.
It suggests a future in which
safety is no longer a set of
barriers, cages, buffers and
lights, and is instead a dance
of algorithms. Rather than
measuring out a bike lane, say,
we will have an algorithm thatdecides whether to leave a
smaller distance to the bicycle
on its left to reduce the chance
of hitting a truck on its right.
What if that causes more
cyclists, but fewer passengers,
to die every year? Such
questions aren’t new. But
they are having to be asked
again and in a different and
disconcerting form as we move
more safety systems off the
roads and into vehicles.
On show is the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology’s “Moral
Machine”, a website using more
than 40 million participants’
decisions on what to do in
certain situations to inform our
autonomous machinery design.
The findings can be unsettling:
would-be designers are more
likely to sacrifice your safety if
you are fat, a criminal or a dog.
This is a show as much about
possible futures as it is about the
present. Interviews, archival
footage, models and some
interactive displays create a
series of provocations, more
than a fully fledged exhibition.
I especially liked the look
of the MIT Senseable City Lab
and the AMS Institute’s
“Roboats”, currently on trial on
Amsterdam’s canals. These
autonomous floating platforms
form spontaneous bridges and
event platforms and can
transport goods and people.
The exhibition spends
much of its time off-road,
investigating drone swarms and
privacy, flocking behaviour and
mine clearance, ocean mapping
and planetary surveillance.
Don’t let its size put you
off: this little show is full of
big surprises. ❚An autonomous racing drone
and a car made of glass: which
©^ T future would you pick?HE
BOARD^ OF^ TRUST
EE
S^ OF^ T
HE
SCIENCE^MUSE
UMapparently “thrilled by the
project, given his interest in
how individuals can control
their minds to master their
circumstances and shape the
world”, write Cabanas and Illouz.
The message spread via
meetings, symposiums, textbooks
and journals, aided by a receptive
press. In its grand promises, there
was something for everyone. Still
more bodies paid for scholarships
and prizes. The US National
Institute on Aging and what is
now called the National Center
for Complementary and
Integrative Health both funded
research. Companies such as
Coca-Cola invested, hoping to
find ways to reduce employee
stress and promote productivity.
One of the largest grants now
comes from the US Army through
its $145 million Comprehensive
Soldier Fitness project, run closely
with Seligman and his centre.
Is there anything in all this?
Here, Cabanas and Illouz are
careful. It is hard to take down
a hugely successful area that has
globally reinvigorated psychology
departments. Still, there are many
critics who attack everything from
its theoretical simplifications to
its methodological shortcomings.
The authors write: “The field is
characterized by its popularity
as much as its intellectual deficits
and scientific underachievement.”
Though its scientific impact
is questionable, elsewhere the
impact of positive psychology
has been huge. It has reshaped
attitudes towards happiness,
changing how firms think about
staff, governments view citizens
and how we think about ourselves.
It feeds a billion-dollar wellness
industry. At least some people
have something to smile about. ❚
Douglas Heaven is a consultant for
New Scientist