Robo-Venus Flytrap Could Help Bots Grasp Objects..

An artificial Venus flytrap can open and then close on cue, just like its namesake in nature, according to a new study. Scientists said this flexible gripping device could give soft robots a way to grasp and release objects autonomously, without the need for programming or computer-controlled parts.

"If you want to make something intelligent, oftentimes it's made using computers and some control circuitry that incorporates sensors and detectors. You have a system with many different pieces that have to be integrated to make the device work," said the study’s lead researcher Arri Priimagi, an associate professor of chemistry and bioengineering at Tampere University of Technology in Finland. [Biomimicry: 7 Clever Technologies Inspired by Nature]

Priimagi and his colleagues described their device in a study published online today (May 23) in the journal Nature Communications.

Although the device could serve in a range of applications, from biomedical manipulators to microchip-assembly lines to warehouse robots that stock shelves, Priimagi said he hasn't devoted much time to thinking about how the technology might be used.

"This wasn't application-driven," he said.

In nature, the carnivorous Venus flytrap waits with its jaw-like leaves open until an insect descends to drink from a nectar gland inside the plant. Last year, a study published in the journal Current Biology by researchers at the University of Würzburg in Germany, showed that the plant doesn't react instantly if a fly lands on it. Instead, hair-like sensors inside the flytraps' leaves need to be triggered twice in 20 seconds for the jaws to close, and five times to trigger the production of digestive enzymes, the scientists found.

Priimagi's gripper doesn't trap or ingest insects, but it does use a stimulus in order to close its trap, he said. What's more, the power source, sensors and devices that convert energy into motion are combined into one simple device.

The device has two main components: an optical fiber stem and a leaf made from a light-responsive liquid crystal elastomer. When open, the leaf and the fiber form a capital letter "T."

When light in the fiber-optic stem shines up through the leaf and out into the air, it creates a cone-shaped beam. If an object passes into the beam, light scatters back to the bendy leaf, triggering molecules inside the material that respond by changing shape. This changing of shape generates heat, causing the molecules to misalign, and this creates a bend in the elastomer. The leaf closes, opening when the light is turned off.

The leaf is tiny: a strip measuring no longer than 0.4 inches (1 centimeter) and thinner than a strand of human hair. But because it's made of soft material that becomes even softer when it heats up a bit, the leaf's gripping strength is high, the researchers said. It's able to grasp objects that have a mass hundreds of times higher than itself, the scientists added.

In lab experiments, the team showed that the device could grab objects of any shape, including round or square objects, as well as random bits of Styrofoam and thin sheets covered with reflective material, such as aluminum foil. The scientists used lasers for the study, but Priimagi said they could do the same with LEDs or even with white light.

"We just need light and optical fibers," he said.

Priimagi said his team has more work to do, such as experimenting with different colors of light, finding ways to move heavier objects and making the device snap shut more quickly, the way a real Venus flytrap does.

Thanking you so much .

Al

Spray-On Touch Screens? How to Turn Any Flat Surface into a Touchpad..

With just a can of spray paint, researchers can turn flat surfaces of any shape or size —ranging from walls to furniture to even musical instruments — into touchpads, according to a new study.

The technique, dubbed Electrick by its inventors from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, relies on electrodes attached to an object made of or coated with any slightly conductive material. While not as precise as smartphone touch-screen technology, the resulting touchpads are still accurate enough to allow basic control functions, such as using a slider or pushing a button, the researchers said.

"The technology is very similar to how touch screens work," said Yang Zhang, a Ph.D. student at Carnegie Mellon's Human-Computer Interaction Institute (HCII). "When the user's finger touches on an electric field, it will shunt a fraction of the current to the ground, and by tracking where the shunting of the current happens, we can track where the user touches the surface." [10 Technologies That Will Transform Your Life]

The technique is known as electric field tomography and uses an array of electrodes to detect the position where the touch occurred.

In a video demonstrating Electrick's capabilities, the researchers added touch control to a model of a human brain made of Jell-O, a guitar and a section of a wall. When a person touched parts of the Jell-O brain, for example, he or she could to see on a computer screen the name of that particular part of the brain.

The researchers said the technology could be used for educational purposes, by hobbyists and in other commercial applications.

"The goal of this technology is to enable touch sensing on everything," Zhang said. "Touch has been very successful. It's a very intuitive way to interact with computer resources. So, we were wondering whether we could enable these touch-sensing capabilities in many more objects other than just phones and tablets."

Brain-Hacking Tech Gets Real: 5 Companies Leading the Charge.The new invention in physics

There's been a lot of hype coming out of Silicon Valley in recent months about technology that can meld the human brain with machines. But how will this tech help society, and which companies are leading the charge?

Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk made waves in March when he announced his latest venture, Neuralink, which will design so-called brain-computer interfaces (BCIs). Initially, the BCIs will be used for medical research, but the ultimate goal is to prevent humans from becoming obsolete, by enabling people to merge with artificial intelligence.

While these may seem like lofty goals, Musk is not the only one who's trying to bring humans closer to machines. Here are five companies that have doubled down on hacking the brain.

Neuralink :

DEFINITION AND ITS UTILIZATION

According to Musk, the main barrier to human-machine cooperation is communication "bandwidth."

This means that using a touch screen or a keyboard is a slow way to communicate with a computer. Musk's new venture aims to create a direct "high-bandwidth" link between the human brain and machines.

What that system would actually look like is not entirely clear yet. Words like "neural lace" and "neural dust" have been bandied about, but all that has really been revealed is a business model. Neuralink has been registered as a medical research company, and Musk said the firm will produce a product to help people with severe brain injuries within four years.

This will lay the groundwork for developing BCIs for healthy people, thus enabling humans to communicate by "consensual telepathy," which could be ready within five years, Musk said. Some scientists, particularly those in the neuroscience community, are skeptical of Musk's ambitious plans.

Facebook:-

ITS IMPACT ON COMMON LIFE:-

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEW THINKING.,

Not to be outdone, just a few weeks after Musk launched Neuralink, Facebook announced that it is working on a way to let people type with their thoughts.

The goal is to build a device that would allow people to "type" up to 100 words per minute, according to Regina Dugan, head of the company's secretive Building 8 research group. Dugan also suggested that the device could work as a "brain mouse" for augmented reality (AR), removing the need to track hand movements to control cursors, The Verge reported.

Facebook has also been light on the details of its plans. The company has said it does not think implants are feasible in the long term, so it's focusing on developing some kind of cap that could track brain activity noninvasively, most likely using optical imaging.

But this technology doesn't exist yet. So, in the meantime, Facebook said that, within two years, it plans to create a prototype medical implant that would pave the way for future devices.

Kernel:-

Musk wasn't the first wealthy entrepreneur to dive into the underdeveloped neurotechnology space. Last August, Bryan Johnson, founder of the online payments company Braintree, invested $100 million into the startup called Kernel.

The company's initial goal was to develop a chip that could record memories and redeliver them to the brain, based on research by Theodore Berger, a biomedical engineer and neuroscientist at the University of Southern California. But six months later, the two parted ways due to the long timescales involved, reported MIT Technology Review, and the company is now focusing on technology similar to Neuralink.

Kernel plans to build a flexible platform for recording and stimulating neurons, with the goal of treating diseases such as depression and Alzheimer's. But like Musk, Johnson is not afraid to discuss the prospect of using the technology to augment human abilities and merge with machines.

"There's this huge potential to co-evolve with our technology," Johnson told CNBC.

Motivation :-

Unlike some other companies in this burgeoning industry, Emotiv actually makes products — electroencephalography headsets that record brain activity noninvasively.

The technology is lower fidelity than the kinds of neural implants other companies, such as Neuralink, are considering, but it is more established. The company has a research-grade device, called EPOC+, which sells for $799. But it also produces a more consumer-oriented headset, called Insight, which retails for $299.

Emotiv also produces a variety of software products that allow users to visualize their brain activity in 3D; measure their brain fitness; and even control drones, robots and video games, reported The Daily Dot. The company was selected to be part of the Disney Accelerator program in 2015, with the aim of creating a "wearable for the brain."

DARPA

Although it's not a company itself, the U.S. military's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency announced a $60 million program last year to develop an implantable neural interface in collaboration with a consortium of private companies.

The project, which is a part of former President Barack Obama's BRAIN Initiative, is ambitious. DARPA wants a device that can record 1 million neurons simultaneously and stimulate at least 100,000 neurons in the brain. DARPA also wants the device to be wireless, the size of a nickel and ready in four years, which is an incredibly aggressive deadline, according to MIT Technology Review.

Potential applications include compensating for sight or hearing problems because the device could feed digital auditory or visual information directly into the brain. The exact technological approach is unclear at this stage, but the project has the heft of some major engineering giants, such as Qualcomm, behind it,  Quartz reported.

There must be a thorough inquiry into the lead-up to the deaths in Thoothukudi

he protest against the copper smelter plant of Sterlite Copper in Thoothukudi has witnessed its deadliest turn so far, with the death of 12 people in police firing. It was clear the movement would put up a show of strength on May 22, the 100th day of this phase of protests — in fact, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court had predicted that it was “likely to trigger a law and order situation” and declared that the “protesters do not have any intention of conducting a peaceful protest”. Yet, the Tamil Nadu government failed to gauge the intensity of what was coming. It is a tragic irony that such an angry and violent demonstration could have been staged at a time when the plant is not operational and after the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board refused to renew its consent to operate. It raises questions about the government’s failure to drive this point home forcefully, and casts a doubt about the real intent of some of the protesters, possibly a small section comprising hardline groups. The immediate task is to compensate the public for its losses and end the alienation of the affected communities through talks. But the commission of inquiry headed by retired judge Aruna Jagadeesan must examine why 12 lives were brutally snuffed out, more specifically, the chilling accusation that snipers were deployed by the police force to pick out protesters in a premeditated manner. Any police response must be commensurate with the gravity of the situation; there is no place for heavy-handedness and a disproportionate use of force. The inquiry must establish who gave the orders to fire and on what basis. Also, why the police failed to intervene well before the protest developed an angry head of steam.

Sterlite stakes claim to be India’s largest copper producer and is a major presence in Tamil Nadu’s industrial mix. But it has had mixed fortunes over the two decades of its production, including periods when it was under administrative orders of closure, a ₹100-crore fine imposed for pollution by the Supreme Court in 2013, and consistent opposition from fishermen. Now, there is a fresh injunction and the Madras High Court has restrained it from a proposed capacity expansion plan. This, together with the decision to not renew consent for operation, gives a moment for pause for all sides. An urgent process, such as an all-party meeting, is needed to heal the wounds, and infuse confidence in the community. A credible environmental audit should be undertaken, without compromising on the ‘polluter pays’ principle. The TNPCB, which usually scores poorly on transparency, should commission credible experts to assess the quality of air and water in Thoothukudi. Only such verifiable measures will build public confidence, and make orderly industrialisation viable.

The proposed change to the Bankruptcy Code must treat homebuyers a step above lender.. . .

Eomebuyers parted of their money by real estate developers have some relief coming their way. The Union Cabinet has cleared an ordinance amending the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), a law which came into force in November 2016 to hasten the process of winding up failed businesses. While the government refused to divulge specific details of the amendment, the change to the law is expected to help offer better treatment to homebuyers when it comes to recovering their dues from bankrupt companies. A 14-member panel formed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs had recommended last month that homebuyers should be treated as financial creditors during the bankruptcy resolution process. It is yet to be known whether homebuyers will be treated better or worse than banks and other financial lenders under the amended law. But there is a sound reason to treat them a step above these traditional lenders. Economically speaking, homebuyers are not creditors but only customers to real estate developers. Unlike traditional creditors such as banks and institutional investors, they do not offer their money in expectation of excess returns. Homebuyers simply want the delivery of a good that was promised to them. It is thus unfair to push homebuyers, who did not choose to risk their money on an uncertain venture in the first place, down the pecking order when it comes to sharing the spoils of a bankrupt entity.

Until now, homebuyers have had to knock on the doors of the courts to uphold their rights, while other stakeholders benefited significantly at their cost. The travails of several homebuyers in the Jaypee insolvency case, in which the Supreme Court had to intervene in favour of homebuyers in the bankruptcyresolution process, is a case in point. The amendment, if it meets expectations, could also reduce the inconsistencies between the IBC and the Real Estate Regulation Act (RERA). While RERA was introduced with the goal of protecting the rights of buyers by ensuring the timely and honest delivery of homes, they have had to be content with a relatively low status among the various stakeholders in a bankruptcy proceeding. In fact, buyers have been treated as unsecured creditors. The removal of this inconsistency can help courts deliver better justice to homebuyers in the future. Along with RERA, the proposed amendment can go a long way in stopping unscrupulous real estate developers from fleecing homebuyers with promises that they cannot really keep. While upholding homeowner rights could cause pain to wayward real estate developers and large creditors like banks, it will help in the development of a transparent and more efficient real estate market.

PM Modi’s meeting with the Russian President signals a necessary recalibration Riko Mahato

With his visit to Sochi to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin for a day-long “informal summit”, Prime Minister Narendra Modi appeared to set a new normal in his foreign policy outreach. As was his Wuhan meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, the Sochi visit was aimed at resetting and rebalancing bilateral ties that have weakened over the past few years. The special understanding between India and Russia has frayed, with India drifting closer to the U.S. and Russia to China. The personal touches — hugs, handshakes, a boat ride on the Black Sea — projected the impression of two strong leaders addressing each other’s concerns “man to man”. Substantively, Mr. Modi’s visit was premised on a number of new realities facing India. First, India’s existing dependence on Russian military hardware, with orders for about $12 billion more in the pipeline, must not be jeopardised at any cost. These have been made more difficult by a new U.S. law (Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act) that would hit India’s big-ticket hardware purchases and energy deals from Russia, and Mr. Modi would have wanted to reassure Mr. Putin that India will not bow to such pressure. Second, Russia’s recent military exercises and helicopter sales to Pakistan as well as its outreach to the Afghan Taliban have been viewed with deep concern by India, which has sought to extract assurances that this would not in any way hurt its national security interests. Third, the new push to strengthen ties is driven by the global instability that the Donald Trump administration has set off. India appears to have decided it can no longer depend on consistency in the U.S.’s foreign policy.

As a result, the recalibration of Mr. Modi’s foreign policy from its perceived Western tilt to a more even-handed approach of aligning with all in India’s interests is welcome. Informal summits of the kind in Sochi and Wuhan are also useful to break the ice and reset relations when needed. But a comprehensive shift in foreign policy must be accompanied by greater transparency. If India is contemplating a turnaround from its earlier postures with world powers, it needs to explain the change of course. The secrecy surrounding Mr. Modi’s dashes to Wuhan and Sochi is intriguing since he is already scheduled to meet both Mr. Xi and Mr. Putin at least twice in the next two months, at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Qingdao and the BRICS summit in Johannesburg. Even more curious are the official outcomes of the informal summits that India and China will cooperate in Afghanistan, while India and Russia will coordinate on the Indo-Pacific. Both have hitherto only been referenced in India’s ties with the U.S. and its allies, Europe, Japan and Australia. Without clarity, at a time of global flux India may appear to be attempting to travel in two boats at once.

Missed opportunity: on cancellation of Trump-Kim summit . . .

American President Donald Trump’s abrupt decision to call off his planned June 12 meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in Singapore has not only dashed hopes of a breakthrough but also heightened risks of a confrontation on the Korean peninsula. It brings a very unusual spell of diplomacy full circle. Unlike the standard practice of announcing landmark summits after working out an understanding on the agenda through quiet diplomacy, Mr. Trump accepted Mr. Kim’s invitation in March and let it be known to the public immediately. That was surprising given the acrimony in both Mr. Trump’s and Mr. Kim’s public utterances over the past year. Once Mr. Trump had cleared the summit proposal, North Korea also moved fast, making a series of gestures meant to smoothen the path for the meeting. In end-April, there was a summit between Mr. Kim and South Korean President Moon Jae-in at a border village in the demilitarised zone. The North pledged to halt nuclear and missile tests, and released three Korean-Americans. And, hours before Mr. Trump cancelled the summit on Thursday, it dismantled its Punggye-ri nuclear test site — critics say it was already inoperable, but that was a symbolic gesture nonetheless.


The United States should have taken into account these steps by the North rather than harp on the rhetoric. It could also have made some goodwill gestures to lighten the air, such as cancelling a joint military exercise with South Korea. But it went ahead with the military drill, with Pyongyang slamming both Washington and Seoul even as preparations for the summit were under way. Besides, Mr. Trump’s new National Security Adviser, John Bolton, angered the North Koreans by suggesting that Mr. Kim could follow the 2003 Libyan disarmament model. This was followed by Vice President Mike Pence’s threat that Mr. Kim could meet the same fate as Muammar Qadhafi — who was killed by rebels after a NATO-led invasion in 2011 — if he failed to reach a deal with the U.S. This triggered the unravelling of the summit, with the North once again warning the U.S. of a nuclear showdown. Despite the setback, hopes for an eventual one-to-one meeting still exist. In a letter to Mr. Kim, Mr. Trump said the North was welcome to return to talks if it changed its attitude towards the U.S. Pyongyang also issued a conciliatory response, saying that it hoped the U.S. President would reconsider his decision to “unilaterally” cancel the summit. Both Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim should keep in mind the larger goal of de-escalation of tension, if not outright denuclearisation, on the peninsula and work to reschedule the summit. The only sound way to address the Korean nuclear crisis is diplomacy.