Internet Communication

When language is used by non native speaks, they tend to simplify the language. It is evident that English, as a lingua franca - “a language systematically used to communicate between persons not sharing a mother tongue” (Wikipedia, n.d.) is evolving with development of new abbreviations and slang, and easing grammar structure to simplify the language . Bill Templer (2009), notes that “we need a slimmer, sustainable lingua franca specially for trans-cultural working-class communication needs, a kind of 'convivial' English for the Multitude counterposed to English for Empire”.
At the same time, as human being we are constantly expressing emotions though facial expressions and gestures. In conversation, words, as well as body language are used to express our feeling, and in many cases slang is used to convey the message.
Similar process is happening to the language used for the online communication. For example, in China “as a result of the rapid development of computer-mediated communication, there has emerged a distinctive variety of Chinese language, which is generally termed Chinese Internet Language” (Gao, Liwei. 2006). English is not an exception and new abbreviations such as LOL (Laughing Out Loud), ROFL (Rolling On Floor Laughing), WILCO (Will Comply) *$ (Starbucks) and W8 (Wait) are widely used in online forums and chat rooms. Furthermore, according to Alla Markh (2004), different communicative situations involve different style of languages. Lexical and stylistic items of one style can be transferred to another style, in other words those can influence each other to a certain extent. For example, in the modern English language, abbreviation LOL appears not only in chats where it derives from, but also in the written and spoken language.
David Crystal (2009) explains that “abbreviations are a natural, intuitive response to a technological problem”. He argues that texters would not be able to use the technology (mobile phones, forums and chats) at all without having at least base knowledge in standard English writing system. In addition, the creation of abbreviation and slang should not be attributed to a younger generation influenced by the Internet. For example, the words “wot” (“what”) and “cos” (“because”) are part of English literary tradition and were used by Charles Dickens and Mark Twain. Furthermore, those words were given entry to Oxford English dictionary in the 19^th century demonstrates that the language evolves with time to keep pace with society.

Bibliography

• Crystal, David 2009, Txtng: frNd or foe?The Linguist, The Threlford Memorial Lecture, 47 (6), 8-11. Available from: http://www.davidcrystal.com/DC_articles/Internet16.pdf (accessed December 5, 2010).
• Gao, Liwei. 2006. "Language contact and convergence in computer-mediated communication." World Englishes 25, no. 2: 299-308. Academic Search Complete, (accessed December 5, 2010).
• Markh, Alla (2004), Nonverbal Means of Expressiveness in Internet Communication. On the Material of English and Russian Chats. International Higher School of Practical Physiology.
• Netlingo (2010), The List of Chat Acronyms & Text Message Shorthand [online]. Available from: http://www.netlingo.com/acronyms.php (accessed December 5, 2010).
• Templer, Bill. 2009. "A Two-Tier Model for a More Simplified and Sustainable English as an International Language." Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies (JCEPS) 7, no. 2: 187. EDS Foundation Index, EBSCOhost (accessed December 5, 2010).
• Wikipedia (n.d.), Lingua franca [online]. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lingua-franca (accessed December 5, 2010).

Benefits and the Perils of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial Intelligence is a field of computer science which is seeking to build a set of machines that can complete some complex task without human intervention (Brookshear 2007).
Today, artificial intelligence (AI) is widely used in number of different domains to support human decision making. Although an intelligence of a decision making machine is a questionable matter as those could be seen as a algorithmic processes, the benefits of utilizing machines to aid out decision are unquestionable. Combining uninterruptable operability, higher computing power and appropriate algorithm, a machine has far superior problem solving ability. Those include market predictions in financial sector, weather forecast and biological simulations in engineering and exact science, as well as management and medical fields. For examples, computers are used in medical field to process (MRI) images to recognize tumours, or in linguistics to aid understanding of language acquisition process. Furthermore, artificial intelligence is used by space agencies (NASA) for automated lunar and planetary terrain analysis and aviation systems to aid navigation during poor visibility conditions (Zia-ur Rahman at. al., 2007).
In many cases, we (human) are exposed to information which can be considered confidential, sensitive or ethical. In those cases, the decision taking process includes moral judgements. According to Blay Whitby (2008) “these include systems that give advice on patient care, on social benefit entitlement, and even ethical advice for medical professionals”. Even in more traditional information technology domains, data such as usage statistics analysis could be seen as ethical and need to be handled appropriately. Therefore, the philosophical debate and possible development of moral status of artificial intelligence should be examined carefully.
In 1976, Isaac Asimov proposed ‘‘three laws of robotics’’ which are considered by some as an “ideal set of rules for such machines” (Susan Leigh Anderson, 2008):

1. A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first law.
   
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law.
   

Susan Leigh Anderson (2008) argues that the rules proposed by Issac Asimov three laws of robotics are “an unsatisfactory basis for machine ethics”. The question of “meta-ethics” and development in artificial intelligence moral judgement could be seen as major obstacles needed to be overcome.

Bibliography

• Anderson, Susan Leigh. 2008. "Asimov’s “three laws of robotics” and machine metaethics." AI & Society 22, no. 4: 477-493. Computers & Applied Sciences Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed November 28, 2010).
• Bringsjord, Selmer. 2008. "Ethical robots: the future can heed us." AI & Society 22, no. 4: 539-550. Computers & Applied Sciences Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed November 28, 2010).
• Brookshear J.G. (2007) Computer Science: An Overview, (9th Ed). Boston: Pearson Education Inc. P452-500
• Whitby, Blay. 2008. "Computing machinery and morality." AI & Society 22, no. 4: 551-563. Computers & Applied Sciences Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed November 28, 2010).
• Zia-ur Rahman,Daniel J. Jobson, Glenn A. Woodell (2007), Pattern Constancy Demonstration of Retinex/Visual Servo (RVS) Image Processing, NASA, Available from: http://dragon.larc.nasa.gov/VIP/pattern_constancy_demonstration_report.pdf (accessed November 28, 2010).

Comparison of CISC vs. RISC Architecture

Both RISK (Reduced Instruction Set Computing) and CISC (Complex Instruction Set Computing) are CPU architectures with different design philosophies. RISK design principles is based on the idea that it more efficient to execute a large number of simplified infrastructures instead of single complex instruction. One famous example which inspired RISK architecture philosophy is DEC VAX index instruction which was, according to John Bayko (2003), 45% to 60% faster when replaced by a number of simple instructions in a loop. As a result of larger number of instructions, execution program were more complex and required more main memory space. Examples of CPU based on the RISK design are DEC Alpha, ARC, ARM, AVR, MIPS, Power, and SPARC.
CISC, on the other hand, is a direct competitor to RISK. It is based on a general lack of main memory to store large number of instructions when executing the program. Instead, a single instruction would result in number of low level operations such as memory read, arithmetic operation and memory write, resulting in a more dense code. In addition, high level programming languages were not available in the early days of the computer history therefore hardware designers tried to architect a set of complex instructions that would do as much as possible on behalf of compilers. CISC as a term was mainly used to contrast to RISK architecture and was basically used to described computer architectures such as the IBM S/370, DEC VAX, Intel x86, and Motorola 680.
The main strengths of the RISK architecture are in the number of available registers and the computation speed (of simple instructions). The disadvantage, as note previously, is a larger code size resulting in higher memory requirements. Although previously RISK based architecture was assosiated with a more complex development process, it slowly becomes irrelevant with introduction of higher level software development languages. Since RISK architecture excels in higher throughput of arithmetic actions (both integer and float point), is more applicable to systems requiring high computing power such as image processing, biological and geographical simulations, and trading applications.
The fundamental advantage of CISC architecture is a more dense code with requires fewer accessed to main memory, and although there are constant advancements in the RAM technology, both in clock speed and size, the main memory is still slower then CPU registers. The disadvantages are a more complex hardware architecture and the need to translate (transcode) even a single simple instruction which make CISC processors less efficient than RISK. Based on that, CISC processors are more applicable to desktop environment where frequent access to main memory is required.
However, according to Gao Y., Tang S. and Ding Z. (n.d.) “In 90's, the trend is migrating toward each other, RISC machines may adopt some traits from CISC, while CISC may also do it vice versa”. This is evident in the evolution of the Intel microprocessors which are converting, starting with Intel Pro family, CISC based instructions to micro-ops (RISC instructions).

Bibliography

• Bayko, J. (2003), Great Microprocessors of the Past and Present (V 13.4.0) [online]. Available at: http://www.cpushack.com/CPU/cpu.html (accessed on 16 October 2010).
  
• DeMone P. (2000), RISC vs. CISC Still Matters [online]. Available at: http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT021300000000 (accessed on 16 October 2010).
  
• Gao Y., Tang S. and Ding Z. (n.d.), Comparison between CISC and RISC [online], Available at: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/grads/z/Howard.Zhou/micellaneous/gre_cs_sub/risc_cisc.pdf (accessed on 16 October 2010).
• Wikipedia (n.d.), Reduced instruction set computing [online], Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reduced_instruction_set_computing (accessed on 16 October 2010).
• Wikipedia (n.d.), Complex instruction set computing [online]. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complex_instruction_set_computer (accessed on 16 October 2010).