Conceptual Research & Reflection Project

Concept #23. HUMAN-COMPUTER INTERFACES

“The internet lessens the recognition of difference between humans and computers because, at a distance, it often feels similar to communicate and act on the Internet regardless of whether one is speaking with a human or machine.” (Allen, n.d.)

Years before computers became common household items and the internet became reality, man envisioned a time when everyone would communicate with mechanical beings on an easy, individual basis. Most sci-fi movies had a “friendly robot” or computer which would do the verbal bidding of its master, understanding almost everything that was said to it.

However, the scientists and computer programmers knew that reality wouldn’t be so easy and rosy.

In 1950 Alan Turing posed a question “Can machines think?” (as cited abelard 1999). He went on to develop a game called “The Imitation Game”, where the aim was for an interrogator to pose questions to an unseen answerer, with the goal of determining if the participant was a human or a machine at the end of 5 minutes of questioning. The final decision was to be based on whether or not the participant could form answers that were not merely imitations or paraphrasing of the questions, but give a cognitive answer, even using different concepts and ideas. This became known as “The Turing Test” and is one of the benchmarks used to determine if a computer program has intelligence. When talking about the test today, if after 5 minutes you cannot decide if you are talking to a person or a computer when having a text based conversation, then the program is said to have “passed the Turing Test”.

Since I’ve been online (Feb 1999) a number of chatsites have tried “chatbots” (chatting robots, or bots) in their sites to encourage visitors. The aim was for it to look like at least one “person” was always in the site to greet visitors and hopefully encourage them to stay and induce others to enter and chat. As far as I’m aware most of these failed, and they didn’t pass the Turing Test. They could be easily programmed to greet an incoming chatter by name, and provide some details about “themselves” (as human chatter might), but after a couple of exchanges, it became obvious it was a bot when the only conversation it could have was to either repeat set phrases or to paraphrase the incoming chatter’s own words. Obviously some bots are more sophisticated than others, and depending on the previous chatting experiences of the human, some chatbots could seem real.

In some respects I disagree with Allen’s (n.d.) statement at the beginning of this concept because, at our current state of development, I feel while it may be harder to discern the difference between chatting with humans and bots online, it is not impossible because Artificial Intelligence machines have not yet reached the capability of being able to hold random conversations with humans. Logical “brains” have not yet been able to replicate the thought processes of “messy” biological brains.

Whether this is a good thing or bad at the moment, I don’t know – many people worry about “robots taking over”, while others pray for the day of 100% unemployment because robots look after everything. However, reading Asimov may give mankind some tips!

Reference:

abelard, (1999) Computing machinery and intelligence – a.m. turing, 1950, Retrieved January19 2009 from http://www.abelard.org/turpap/turpap.php

Allen, M., (n.d.) Concept #23. Human-computer interfaces, Curtin University of Technology, WA, Retrieved from http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home
________________________________________
In 1990, Loebner underwrote a contest designed to implement the Turing Test. He pledged a number of prizes and medals to developers and programmers to develop a machine that could be said “to think”. The 2008 winner produced their creation Elbot. So far, the major prize remains unclaimed.

While the yearly winner may in fact spend a lot more than their winnings in developing their machine, I feel that this is an incentive to developers and programmers to try to advance computing to where we may no longer know if we are conversing with another human or a computer.

Reference:

Loebner, H., (2007) The Loebner Prize in Artificial Intelligence, Retrieved January19 2009 from http://www.loebner.net/Prizef/loebner-prize.html

________________________________________
Turing (1950) believed that within 50 years computers would have a program storage capacity of 109 which would enable them to play the game so well that an average person would only have a 70% chance of success. Current computers have a storage capacity far exceeding this size, and yet are unable to carry on a human-like conversation.

I feel part of the problem is that while computers can be taught to mimic a certain amount of human speech (hands free programs, chatbots), they are still unable to actually undertake Natural Language Processing, and therefore can’t “chat” – in any language.

Reference:

Turing, A.M., (1950) Contrary views on the main question, Computing machinery and intelligence, (Ch6, para2) Retrieved January19 2009 from http://loebner.net/Prizef/TuringArticle.html

________________________________________

Concept 17. THE IMPACT OF TEXT-BASED REAL-TIME CHAT

“Real-time internet-based text chat is a significant part of contemporary internet use.” (Allen n.d.)

Think about the shift worker, coming home at 3am, tired but too wired to sleep, can’t call anyone to talk to, nothing’s open, can’t visit anyone. Sleep isn’t beckoning, but they’ve got to get out of their dirty clothes, so they shower and start their computer, open their instant messaging program or favourite chat-room and there are a multitude of people who are willing to “talk” to them.

No-one needs to see what they are wearing, no prying eyes can “inspect” the room behind them and scrutinise their belongings, they can choose to participate in multiple conversations without having to worry about having missed something that was said by a quiet voice or having a loud voice overshadowing everything. Having private conversations and public conversations all at once, allowing their eyes and brain to transmit information to their fingers to reply to the chatters they choose to respond to.

In text, no-one needs to see the things a chatter doesn’t want them to see. Disabilities, advantages and disadvantages – can all be ironed out in text. While body language may no longer be available for non-verbal communication, a lot of chatters take that into consideration and give clues into hidden meanings behind their words, or even use more detailed descriptions in the first place. Chatters who wish to be obstructive can cause problems by not using clues to their meanings, but they soon discover that if they wish to find people to “talk” with, they need to give clues.

If a chatter is involved in an important conversation, there is always the ability of being able to save relevant pieces of text. Put that phone number or link to a site somewhere “safe”, recall the details of a previous conversation or save your own copy of that baby picture in the family album.

In chat with multiple people, think of being at a party. Only a couple of conversations at a time can generally be pursued, and if one is a private conversation it generally means no other conversations can be entered into at the same time. With text-based real-time chat, public and private conversations can be undertaken simultaneously, each without disturbing the other. Obviously the speed of typing will dictate the number of conversations that can be entered into at any one time, but it isn’t necessary to only concentrate on one conversation unless that is what is desired.

Is text-based real-time chat a significant part of internet use? I think so, after all, it offers most of the speed of a telephone call; the ability of a letter to be able to show words and pictures; the privacy of not having someone watching your surroundings; the luxury of time to “think out” your replies; the ability to track a number of conversations at once, both private and public; the flexibility of different time-zones, allowing chatters to converse at their convenience; the discretion to be able to multi-task without causing offence to others; and the quietness of keyboard to be able to chat with multiple people without disturbing anyone else in the household.
Reference:

Allen, M., (n.d.) Concept #17. The impact of text-based real-time chat, Curtin University of Technology, WA, Retrieved from http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home
________________________________________
If there is one group of people who have grasped the concept of text-based real-time chat, it’s teenagers. Barker (2006) finds that this isn’t just online, but on their phones as well. Who needs to talk on their phone anymore – just text! Instead of using the phone all night, a large number of teens now prefer to spend their time texting online or on the phone, interacting with their peers, passing information, broadening their networks and playing games all via the written word and their keyboards. Are teenagers losing the power of speech, or just using an alternate method of communication?

Reference:

Barker, O., (2006, 29May). Technology leaves teens speechless. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2006-05-29-teen-texting_x.htm?POE=TECISVA

________________________________________
In 1991, a coup d'état attempt was staged on the capitol of the Soviet Union. A group of Communist Party Leaders prevented journalists from reporting events by enforcing a media blackout. Journalists turned to internet-based real-time text chat (IRC) to garner information on the offensive from colleagues and eyewitnesses. The application was also used by journalists to share news during the Gulf War. (De Hoyos, n.d.)

These are two examples where text-based real-time chat has proven to have been significant part of contemporary internet use. Without it, information may never have been fully disseminated about these world-changing situations until it was completely rewritten.

Reference:

De Hoyos, B., (n.d.) The world’s first IMs - Peer-to-Peer Protocol, Talkers and IRCs, IM History – the early IMs, Referenced January20, 2009, from http://im.about.com/od/imbasics/a/imhistory_2.htm

________________________________________

Concept 18. Non-speech communication through text: audience and authors’ responsibilities

“The responsibility for effective chatting lies not merely with the author of a particular comment, but with its audience…if IRC is to be rich and valuable as a form of communication (and it can be), then both those saying things and those reading them must share the tasks of making it so.” Allen (n.d.)

Imagine every emotion and feeling people go through when talking with someone, all the common expressions they use regularly to describe certain things and all the “hidden” non-verbal clues everyone gives out during the course of a simple conversation. Now think about how to convey all this information to someone through words alone.

Imagine receiving a message from someone whose idiosyncrasies of speech are entirely different to yours, and you’re left confused as to how you are meant to interpret the message. They don’t even have to be from another country or culture, you can be left in the dark by simply receiving a message from a friend if it doesn’t have any hint as to whether they are being serious or sarcastic or silly.

In text-based chat, it falls to both the author and the audience to have some way to communicating feelings and non-verbal body language during the course of a conversation. Without any of these clues, conversation can become dry and humourless, simple situations could escalate into arguments or degenerate into confusion if there is no form of body language. And just because you don’t have a body in text-based chat, doesn’t mean you can’t have body language!

Most people are now aware of the simple smiley face :) that means someone is smiling at you, and anyone who regularly sends or receives text messages will have received a number of them. This is a simple form of body language, and is usually understood by both the sender and receiver of a message. Depending on the words it accompanies, it generally means the message is happy, or the sender is sending “good feelings” to the receiver. People are also used to reading about body language in books, but in text-based chat, there usually isn’t the time or the space to write a novel.

A lot of text-based chat rooms not only use the various “web-wide accepted” forms of written body language, but also have other actions that might be common in their rooms. One form is to use asterisks or brackets around actions. This separates the actions from spoken words, and allows another form of body language. If a person enters the chat room and posts a message like {“hi” *walks across the room and sits on the couch*}, it is generally taken that the person is saying hello and imitating the action (at least mentally) of walking across the room and sitting on the couch – usually a fairly relaxed and open action. Whereas if someone types a message and then uses the term *frown* they may be annoyed or confused about something.

Just as you might learn to decipher the tone of a conversation in real life, by watching carefully and asking questions in text-based chat rooms, most people gradually learn the more accepted forms of expression that would normally make up the non-verbal body language they use during a conversation. Once both the author and audience are using very much the same terms, misunderstandings are a lot less likely to occur, and text-based chat becomes a rich and valuable form of communication.

Reference:

Allen, M., (n.d.) Concept #18. Non-speech communication through text: audience and authors’ responsibilities, Curtin University of Technology, WA, Retrieved from http://webct.curtin.edu.au/SCRIPT/305033_b/scripts/serve_home

________________________________________
There are a number of ways to express non-verbal language in text-based chat. It’s common to use a number of different acronyms to show different feelings or expressions. One very common thread throughout most text-based chat is the idea that typing in all capital letters is shouting, and is generally classed as being rude. (TeleComputer Services 2009) Acronyms are also very handy for slow or disabled typists and can be a quick and easy way to type an expression or feeling, or even post an entire sentence. (Disabled-World.com, 2008) Chat rooms often have their own ways to display body language, which quickly becomes clear to newcomers.

TeleComputer Services (2009) Acronyms Online, Retrieved January20, 2009, from http://acronymsonline.com/lists/chat_acronyms.asp
Disabled-World.com (October9, 2008) Text shortcuts for chat rooms messenger programs and SMS texting. Retrieved January20, 2009 from http://www.disabled-world.com/chat/text-shortcuts.shtml
________________________________________
In the early days of college bulletin boards in the US, a problem was noted amongst the participants in being able to decipher the meaning of another person’s message. Was it serious or in jest? If a joke was posted, and the message misunderstood, a lengthy diatribe could follow (Fahlman, n.d.). So in 1982, Scott Fahlman suggested the use of the characters :-) to show when a message was meant to be lighthearted. From this simple start we now have a spin off of multiple text based characters all meant to show various forms of emotions and make reading text more personal.

Reference:

Fahlman, S.E., (n.d.), Smiley Lore :-), Retrieved January21 2009, from http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~sef/sefSmiley.htm

________________________________________

Concept #26. Privacy and Security

“The internet is a profoundly ‘open’ system and advanced Internet users are cautious about either accepting or sending material from and to unknown sources and are careful in releasing information about themselves in any form.” (Allen, n.d.)

Before people ever start to use the internet, one thing they should think about is to be very careful about whom they give their personal details to. Just like in real life, not everyone is friendly and helpful online, and while the people or even the websites that are visited may seem friendly and helpful, there may be a hidden agenda to their assistance.

The agenda could be something as innocuous as gathering information about your computer to allow you to open the website easily the next time you visit, it could be information about your browsing and shopping habits to offer you “targeted advertising”, it could be gathering information to send “spam” (unwanted correspondence) to your email address, or it could be as harsh as someone wanting access to your computer to use it for things like Denial of Service attacks on other computers or someone gathering information for the purpose of stalking you (cyber-stalking) or stealing your identity.

Cyber-stalking and identity theft, while becoming more prevalent, seem to not be as commonplace as gathering information regarding browsing and shopping habits, but all involve a certain degree of invasion of privacy. Just because someone visits a particular website or buys something (either online, or increasingly, in shops that are asking for personal details from their customers), doesn’t mean they wish to have more advertising supposedly specifically aimed at them.

There are a number of ways that someone can keep their “online profile” and details as low as possible and try to protect their privacy. Being aware of what personal details are given to various websites or people you chat with is one way. If a website requests email details for registration or for receiving something like a newsletter, one of the easiest ways to keep most personal details private is to set up a free website like hotmail or yahoo, with limited personal details in it and use that. This often also tends to keep your “main” email site fairly free of spam.
Some sites, particularly those offering free downloads may also be loaded with spyware, malware, adware and various viruses, trojans and worms.
Generally adware is simply a pain. It is software that periodically causes targeted advertisements to show up on a user’s computer (PCMag n.d.). If it is installed on a user’s computer without their knowledge, it is generally classed as spyware, and often collects further information on a users browsing and shopping habits to report to a third party (PCMag n.d ). Malware however is designed to cause major problems in computers (PCMag n.d.), along with viruses, worms, trojans and a number of other “nasties”.
Having a good firewall and virus protection is important too. If the firewall and virus protection are up to date, and people are aware and careful about the information they release on the internet, then most people have no problems with the various “net nasties” that can infect their computers or impinge on their lives.

References:

PCMag.com (n.d.), Adware, Encyclopedia, Retrieved 22January 2009, from
http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=adware&i=37577,00.asp
PCMag.com (n.d.), Malware, Encyclopedia, Retrieved 22January 2009, from http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0%2C2542%2Ct%3Dmalware&i%3D46552%2C00.asp

PCMag.com (n.d.), Spyware, Encyclopedia, Retrieved 22January 2009, from
http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0%2C2542%2Ct%3Dspyware&i%3D51898%2C00.asp

________________________________________
The weakest link in any security system is the human element. Ledford (n.d.) defines social engineering as “the practice of deceiving someone, either in person, over the phone, or using a computer, with the express intent of breaching some level of security either personal or professional.” A lot of people are wary of giving out information online, but will gladly hand it out over the phone or throw out paperwork with names, addresses and banking or billing details. Granger (2001) shows instances where social engineering has resulted in theft and fraud on a large scale, which can also relate on the smaller scale to the individual.

Reference:

Ledford, J., (n.d.), Social Engineering, About.com: Identity Theft, Retrieved January22 2009 from http://idtheft.about.com/od/glossary/g/Social_Engineer.htm

Granger, S., (2001) Social Engineering Fundamentals, Part I: Hacker Tactics, Retrieved January 22 2009 from http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1527

________________________________________
Identity theft is one of the fastest growing types of consumer frauds (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 2004), and a lot of governments around the world are looking into more sophisticated ways of stopping identity theft. Some of the various methods being considered are biometrics, scanning software, two or three factor user authentication and tokens. These methods are available for general use in one form or another, but are generally considered too expensive for the home user. Most users find that a good firewall and virus protection are sufficient for their home computers, but more visibility needs to be cast on the privacy and security problem of social engineering.

Reference:

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (2004), Putting an end to account hi-jacking identity theft, Retrieved January22 2009 from http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/idtheftstudy/identity_theft.pdf