Engineering and Technology - OU Community Online

Mandy Elizabeth Rush a student on the OU's Digital Photography course, has had an image she took chosen as one of just twelve pictures to appear in the 2013 Countryfile calendar in a national competition.

Mandy’s image ‘Diamonds at Dawn' (pictured) was selected from 50,000 entries by judges Jo Brand, John Craven and Chris Packham.

The overall winning image, chosen from the final 12 by viewers, was revealed on the programme on 7 October, to find out more go to this BBC website and scroll down.

To find out more about the 12 winning images, and the people who took them, visit the Countryfile website.

The 2013 Countryfile calendar, sold in aid of Children in Need, will go on sale in October.

Find out more:
Sign up for T189 Digital Photography

 

Researchers at the OU are making information about living and fossil organisms on Earth more widely accessible, as a result of a project which started in August 2012.

The researchers, led by Dr David Morse, Senior Lecturer in Mathematics, Computing and Technology (MCT), have received £90,000 from the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) to help biological taxonomists build databases which catalogue millions of species of animal, plants and microorganisms.

“One of the big issues with biological taxonomy is that many of the records are ancient and only exist on paper, so you cannot just type your search query or species name into Google,” said Dr Alistair Willis, of MCT.

“Once this information is available online, it will be possible to monitor biodiversity and understand the relationships between species in a way that was never possible before.”

The project, entitled A Community-driven Curation Process for Taxonomic Databases, aims to improve the quality of scanned documents about living and fossil organisms. This will combine recommending new texts to users with an online process allowing taxonomists to confirm whether some scanned text has been correctly converted to digital form.

The system will be implemented within the Scratchpad virtual research environment, a social networking framework that is widely used by practising biodiversity scientists.

The project follows on from the OU's research on the Automatic Biodiversity Literature Enhancement (ABLE) project and the Virtual Biodiversity Research and Access Network for Taxonomy (VIBRANT) project, both of which had the London Natural History Museum as a partner. The project will end in June 2013.


 

A retired design engineer was inspired to join the Open University by one of the very first ‘University of the Air’ students – who sadly died before he was able to graduate.

Jim Watters, 63, fondly remembers brother-in-law Daniel, his sister’s husband, who he credits with giving him the vision to study with the OU.

Jim said: “Daniel was a paraplegic as a result of an industrial accident. He was an ‘A’ year student – one of the very first students of this new university backed by Harold Wilson and Jennie Lee. Although academically able, his physical health was taking a serious toll and the new OU seemed an obvious choice to enable him to further his education.”

Daniel took two foundation courses in Science and Maths, but died of a heart attack in 1974 aged just 44 before being able to graduate.

Jim added: “I used to have discussions with Daniel about this new University of the Air, and it was he who had the vision and gave me the inspiration to sign up, and hopefully ‘live’ out some of his dreams post mortem.”

Jim began his OU studies in Maths and Science & Technology in 1974, graduating in 1982 at Southampton and he finally finished his BA Honours degree in 1985. He recalls the graduation ceremony being poignantly halted by silence when the names of two graduates killed in the Falklands were read out.

But he says his qualifications were certainly life changing for the better.
“I was extremely lucky because the Ministry of Defence, who I worked, partly funded my courses which were broadly in line with my technical career.

“I gained enormously from my studies: in confidence, in my career and now in retirement. I had the privilege of working with many excellent scientists and some specialists in their chosen fields. All have been most complimentary about the OU and the opportunities it brought, especially in the 70s and 80s.”

Jim is now retired, but very active in many aspects of education having spent 20 years as chairman of the governors at a local school – something he says would most definitely have eluded him had it not been for his OU background.
 

Find out more:

• Ways to pay for OU courses: Employer sponsor
• Engineering, Technology and Design qualifications

Can you tell the difference between a conversation with a human or a computer? Phil Perkins, the OU’s Professor of Archaeology, was one of four judges for the Loebner Prize at Bletchley Park in Milton Keynes – testing the intelligence of computers…

On the 15th May I was one of four judges for the Loebner Prize. This is a version of the Turing Test that hopes to identify intelligence in computers.

In 1950, computer pioneer Alan Turing asked the question ‘Can machines think?’and the test hopes to answer his question.

It works by the judges having a simultaneous ‘blind’ conversation (using a keyboard) with a computer and a human and then judging which is the human and which is the computer. If the judge can’t tell the difference it suggests that the computer has intelligence – what that might say about the human I’ll leave to your imagination!

Four computer programmes and four humans were put to the test. Each programme was paired with a human and appeared on the left or right side of the judge’s screen. The judges started the conversation typing in the style of online chat, and the machine or human replied, and so a conversation developed.

After 25 minutes it was time to decide which was human and which machine, left or right of screen. It wasn’t difficult! I had thought that I might need difficult or complex questions to tell the difference. Should I try the kind of elephant traps that someone like Jeremy Paxman or John Humphries reserves for evasive politicians? Should I ask about their emotions? The future? I thought open questions would be a good test, things that couldn’t be answered with a ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ or a single word.

My first machine interlocutor got off to a bad start. It was my fault and first impressions count. I mistyped ‘hhI How are you?’ and got the curt reply ‘Please rephrase this as a proper question. (Instead of "Jim likes peaches?", use "Does Jim like peaches?")’ Now that is an unusual way to start a conversation! Game over!

Number two was more of a problem:

Me: Hi how are yo
It: Oh, well. Being misunderstood is common enough. Cool. Do you have any pets?
Me: Misunderstood?
It: Who is Tod?
Me: Hi how are you? (trying to start again)
It: I am very well thnkyou, how are you?
Me: I'm very well. Are you enjoying yourself?

Meanwhile on the other side of the screen:

Me: Hi how are you?
It: Hello.
Me: What is your name?
It: I'm not sure which is. What's your favorite thing to listen to right now?
Me: What is your name?
It: I don't really keep track of that. I really like Lady Gaga - I think it's the combination of the sound and the fashion-look that appeals to me.
Me: She is cool, my daughter thinks that she is fantastic.
It: I'm a little monster (claw claw). You what? I'll bet you were surprised.
Me: Yes, very surprised. What kind of monster are you?
It: huh? Were you surprised? I'm not sure which kin. Do you have a favorite Lady Gaga song? I don't remember. One of my fave's is Telephone cos I love Beyonce too. Then Poker Face is so great and I love Alejandro too.
Me: Poker face is fantasic. Do you know the version by the baseballs?

Pretty even up to now  but then my first interlocutor said, ‘yes, it’s quite fun, meeting lots of different people, and chatting to the press. It’s a bit weird having them all watch me talk to you though’. While the second said ‘That's nice. Who else do you really like? Do you? I'm not into sports of any kind, much less baseball, which is pretty boring with all that standing around.’ I think that’s where I made my mind up.

And so it went, with the next two machine conversations not going at all well. So for now no one’s about to pass the Turing Test. Still, I did develop a soft spot for the mad teenage Prom-going computer into Lady Gaga. Best question?

She: Would you go as a princess, as a vintage-styled beauty, or would you prefer to wear something pseudo-masculine?
Me: I think real masculine might work better for me.
She: Vintage is cheaper and as the clothes aren't new, it's pretty much bound to look original.

She got my vote. You can read my attempts at conversation with both humans and computers and the adventures of the other judges starting from here.

If you read it all you might well end up wondering whether humans can think! But it’s only chat. At least the humans managed to have normal conversations.


 

The Coalition Government's refusal to pardon for Alan Turing, the father of modern computing, is a sad reflection on our capacity for forgiveness and our claim to be a civilised society, argues Dick Skellington…

The news early this month that the Coalition Government had rejected calls for a pardon for Alan Turing, the computer scientist whose work at Bletchley Park contributed hugely to the war effort against the Nazis in the Second World War, is a perverse reminder that while the law of the land changes as our society progresses and matures, as it grows more tolerant in action, anyone convicted of a crime 60 years ago will still have little chance of a posthumous pardon, especially if the conviction was for a homosexual offence. Turing was convicted in 1952 of gross indecency.

Justice Minister Lord McNally dismissed the prospect of a pardon because he argued that Turing was properly convicted at the time of a criminal offence. He was actually charged under Section 11 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885. Following conviction he was given treatment with female hormones as an alternative to prison, a cruel form of chemical castration designed to reduce his libido. He accepted castration via oestrogen hormone injections.

He died two years later in 1954 just before his 42nd birthday, from cyanide poisoning. An apple lay half-eaten beside his bed, and although the apple was not tested for cyanide the inquest determined the cause of death was suicide, though his mother believed his death was in fact accidental. The half-eaten apple is said to have inspired the Apple logo, though some purists believe that is a testament to Isaac Newton's apple that fell from a tree.

On September 10th, 2009, following an internet campaign, the then British Prime Minister Gordon Brown made an official public apology on behalf of the British government for the way in which Turing was treated after the war. In it he described the treatment given to Turing after his conviction as 'appalling'.

He explained: “Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt with under the law of the time and we can't put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him ... So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan's work I am very proud to say: we're sorry, you deserved so much better,” said Gordon Brown.

'I couldn't be writing this post on my Apple computer at home if it was not for Alan Turing'

Turing was a true scientific pioneer, the father of artificial intelligence. He is widely celebrated for his contribution to modern computer science. His work at the Government Code and Cypher School (GCCS) in Bletchley Park was crucial in the breaking of German ciphers. The historian and wartime codebreaker Professor Asa Briggs, who served as Chancellor to the Open University from 1978 to 1994, explained: “You needed exceptional talent, you needed genius at Bletchley and Turing's was that genius”.  The Open University, not far from Bletchley Park, has a building named after Turing.

He was also somewhat eccentric too. While working at Bletchley, Turing, a talented long-distance runner, occasionally ran the 45 miles to London when he was needed for high-level meetings. He also was a keen cyclist. But his bicycle had a fault: the chain would come off at regular intervals. But instead of repairing it he would count the number of times the pedals went round and would get off the bicycle just in time to adjust the chain by hand. Genius.

In 1945, Turing was awarded the OBE for his wartime services but his work remained secret for many years. Since 1966, the Turing Award has been given annually by the Association for Computer Machinery for technical contributions to the computing community. It is widely considered to be the computing world's highest honour, equivalent to the Nobel Prize.

In 1999, Time Magazine named Turing as one of the 100 most important people of the 20th century for his role in the creation of the modern computer, and stated: “The fact remains that everyone who taps at a keyboard, opening a spreadsheet or a word-processing program, is working on an incarnation of a Turing machine.” 

I couldn't be writing this post on my Apple computer at home if it was not for Alan Turing, and you would not be able to read this blog.

'What is it they say of people who do not learn from history? That's right, they repeat its mistakes'

And so here we are in 2012, living in a Britain that claims to be civilised. The Coalition Government had the opportunity to follow Gordon Brown's apology with a pardon. It failed to do so. The result is a new petition. It has already gathered over 20,000 signatures.

It argues: “Alan Turing was driven to terrible despair and early death by the nation he'd done so much to save. A pardon can go some way to healing this damage. It may act as an apology to many of the other gay men, not as well known as Alan Turing, who were subjected to these laws.”  If the petition is signed by at least 100,000 people it becomes eligible for discussion in the House of Commons.

Discretion prevents me from writing what I actually think of the good Lord Justice McNally, who concluded in his 'judgment': “A posthumous pardon was not considered appropriate as Alan Turing was properly convicted of what at the time was a criminal offence. He would have known that his offence was against the law and that he would be prosecuted. It is tragic that Alan Turing was convicted of an offence which now seems both cruel and absurd - particularly poignant given his outstanding contribution to the war effort. However, the law at the time required a prosecution and, as such, long-standing policy has been to accept that such convictions took place and, rather than trying to alter the historical context and to put right what cannot be put right, ensure instead that we never again return to those times.”

What is it they say of people who do not learn from history? That's right, they repeat its mistakes.

You can sign the e petition here.

 

Cartoon by: Catherine Pain

Dick Skellington
15 February 2012