# data[].attributes.body
Regarding age, it is young adults whom would likely be most receptive. This is due to being young enough to more fully experience the developments that advances in science and technology within the last couple decades have produced. At the same time, they are old enough to have been able to for themselves see the innovation and improvement over the years, allowing them to more fully understand just how rapidly development has progressed. As stereotypical as it may be, a topic such as this is simply more likely to attract the interest of "nerds", as pondering a distant future in which these discussions are more applicable would likely fall under their typical field of interests. Due to this, people who have received post-high school education may be more likely to engage in such discussion.

I decided to make my outcome an online website, as the internet knows no geographical boundaries and no longer has high price barriers. This is important, as these are topics that ideally would receive a diversity of perspectives, as laws, either directly or indirectly, may pertain to a vast amount of people. Additionally, the internet is becoming an increasingly used vehicle of communication by all ages, including and especially young adults.

By having my project be accessible to anyone with internet, a sizable amount of people could potentially access it. However, these issues are generally more of a concern to developed nations, narrowing the audience. Furthermore, as it hopes to prompt legal action (if deemed necessary by society), it splits the audience by country, as regulation varies by nation.Therefore, though this website could certainly be used by people globally, it is more likely to be used by those in developed nations, and furthermore happens to be more American oriented, as I am focussed on United States' regulations (though discussion with people of other nationalities is certainly fine.)

The project isn't very gender specific, as any gender could take interest in such topics and have an opinion that they would like to voice.

Gallop's article: "The New Era of Communication Among Americans"

This article gives graphics displaying how in 2014 a sizable quantity of Americans utilize technology as a means of communication, a number that likely over the years has risen as well. This source assures that the creation of an online forum for discussion would be accessible to a sizable amount of people.

http://news.gallup.com/poll/179288/new-era-communication-americans.aspx

Pew Research's "Social Media Usage: 2005-2015"

The article states that in 2015 65% of American adults used social media, which is a near tenfold jump since 2005. This shows how technology and the internet are becoming a significantly more widespread medium of communication, meaning that a website would be a suitable vehicle of discussion.

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/

# data[].attributes.body
Americans generally believe that most jobs are at risk, yet believe that their specific job is safe. A 2013 Oxford study stated that 47% of all jobs in the US were at risk of being taken over by robots, and a more recent claim by the American Association for the Advancement of Science states that all jobs are at risk.

Zillman, Claire. "Americans Think Robots Will Take Lots of Jobs--But Not Their Own." Fortune.Com, 10 Mar. 2016, p. 1. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=keh&AN=113775960&site=ehost-live.

Pew Research's article: "Automation in Everyday Life"

Pew Research study provides statistics on people's views of machines taking jobs. It proved very useful in gaining insight on the population's general attitude towards the subject in an unbiased way, and it additionally provides graphics as another means of displaying the information.

http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/10/04/americans-attitudes-toward-a-future-in-which-robots-and-computers-can-do-many-human-jobs/

The Atlantic's article: "The Robot Will See You Now"

Article gives information on a technology called "Watson", which is being developed to process huge pools of information to make diagnoses. Though some may see this as a helpful tool, others may fear the competition the technology will have with human doctors. It provides insight as to a potential future application of such technology, which could be utilized as a useful base for further discussion.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/03/the-robot-will-see-you-now/309216/

"Travel agents to translators... the toll of jobs taken by robots."

Article highlights some of the jobs most at risk, as well as some that appear to currently be safe. This could be used as an argument for why regulations should be created to protect humans from being outcompeted by robots. By pointing out particular jobs impacted, it allows for more perspectives to be taken on the subject as well.

James, Salmon. "Travel Agents to Translators... The Toll of Jobs Taken by Robots." Daily Mail, 15 May 2017, p. 11. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=keh&AN=123020782&site=ehost-live.

# data[].attributes.body
As everyday genetic testing becomes more commonplace by even the general public, services continue to inform peoples on traits that they're likely to possess, romantic compatibility with partners, disorders they are prone to, and so on. While this can be interesting, there is cause for concern that people may begin to define themselves or judge others based on these results, as even just subconsciously they may conform to what the results dictate they should be like.

# data[].attributes.body
Science and technology have profoundly changed society, producing many innovations that serve to improve our daily lives. In recent years, innovations have developed at an exponential rate, with ordinary people owning now commonplace technology that a mere generation ago would have been considered ideas of pure science fiction. Even today, what may seem like impossibilities today may be normalities of tomorrow. It is of little doubt that innovations in science and technology have had many positive impacts on human society. However, it is important that humanity wields these newfound powers with great responsibility, morality, and consideration. Due to the rapid rate of innovation, at times laws simply do not keep up. Yet rather than being reactive to these developments, it is imperative that society has a proactive discussion so that society is better prepared to handle the situation before there are consequences. This site serves to facilitate discussion on such topics.

https://ponderthefuture.weebly.com/

# data[].attributes.body
Dailymail's article: "I know I was born to save Charlie instead of being born just for me: Incredible story of the saviour sibling who sparked an ethical furore"

The article provides information on a real life example of a genetically modified "saviour sibling" being used to donate STEM cells to an older sibling who had a chronic disorder. Though in this case the life of the saviour sibling was not threatened, other cases, such as for organ transplant purposes, the legality of this process was quite controversial, with different areas having different laws. Additionally, public opinion was mixed

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1389499/I-know-I-born-save-Charlie-instead-born-just-Brotherly-love-saviour-sibling.html

"The Status of the Human Embryo"

This source provides further real life cases of the controversial topic. In some cases, the legal system worked in favour of saviour siblings, and in other cases the law worked against it.

https://embryo-ethics.smd.qmul.ac.uk/tutorials/embryo-and-the-law/saviour-siblings/

# data[].attributes.body
Harvard's article: "The Patent Landscape of Genetically Modified Organisms"

Harvard's article states that even when not considering the ethical controversy of GMOs, debate still persists in legality dilemmas. The article acknowledges that the development and authorization of new GMOs are very expensive, so it is understandable why companies developing them would desire patents to protect their creation and to assure them some profit off of their work. The article then goes on to explain the legal complexity that arises from such patents, as in some occurrences farmers may intentionally or accidentally grow crops that have strains of patented GMO crops that they are not contracted to use. One such way that accidentally growing of GMO crops may be due to natural processes, as plants reproduce asexually and can spread on their own without regard of invisible property boundaries. The information provided by this article gives valuable insight on different perspectives in the odd legality case of GMO crops, as each side at times has just reason for their stance. This could be used as helpful background information to serve as a base for discussion.

http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/the-patent-landscape-of-genetically-modified-organisms/

Kurzgesagt's Video - "Are GMOs Good or Bad? Genetic Engineering & Our Food"

The video pushes a primarily pro-GMO stance, as it points out many positives, such as increasing the food supply and the resistance of crops to pests and herbicides. However, it does acknowledge the fuzzy legal issue of when GMO crops owned by a particular company naturally spread to other's fields. It is difficult to stop, but the GMO crop on one person's property technically is owned by someone else. As the video does not truly answer the question, it could serve as an interesting topic of discussion, as it is a matter that should be resolved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7TmcXYp8xu4

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyRgk8Cqmzg

Genetic testing is becoming more and more common, often for testing services such as 23andme. However, it is possible that as this continues, negative consequences could result. For example, people could be targeted based on their DNA, such as those more prone to addiction being targeted with ads to addictive substances such as alcohol. Insurance companies may also be biased based on DNA, refusing service to those more susceptible to various diseases. Employers one day may do the same.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uyRgk8Cqmzg

# data[].attributes.body
USA Today article - "When technology and society outpace the law"

A real life, right-now example of a foggy area of legality and liability regarding technology. In this case, whether the "driver" or manufacturer is liable when a Smart Car causes a vehicular accident was the cause of much confusion. Society had yet to consider the situation, so when it occurred, was at a loss.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/shinal/2016/03/01/when-technology-and-society-outpace-law/81167076/

# data[].attributes.body
This source provided additional information regarding the legality of arming drones. According to the article, regulation of such practices occur at a state rather than federal level. As of June of 2016, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont, and Wisconsin have passed legislation to regulate armed drones, though to varying extents. This site serves to prove how law often moves at a slower pace than "innovation" (if that's what this can be called) occurs, and how decisions of regulation are often not unified.ΩΩzzzzz

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/yp33ag/arming-your-drone-is-legal

A Dose of Buckley's "Guns on Drones... Yep, That's A Thing - A Dose of Buckley"

A comedic source that raises concern over the reality that putting a functional, controllable gun on a flying drone is completely legal while simultaneously poking fun at it. This source was one of the first that provided me with inspiration for my project as a whole.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFBTyMt11fg

# data[].attributes.body
Kurzgesagt's video: "Genetic Engineering Will Change Everything Forever – CRISPR"

The source provides a timeline of the development of genetic modification, especially pointing out the positives, such as increasing the food supply and for medical applications. It then goes on to explain how CRISPR works, and how it can be used to revolutionize the science. After informing about the past and present, the source provides insight on a potential future with genetic engineering, especially emphasizing how it can have phenomenal effects in fighting an immense amount of diseases. It provides further possible applications, in which humans may eventually be genetically modified for other purposes, such as an enhanced metabolism, heightened intelligence, keener senses, certain features of appearance, and so on. Though it provides much optimism, the source also points out potential risks of the technology, such as errors whilst making edits, creating unknown consequences, or the forcing of gene editing on subjects by corrupt regimes. The video then insists that it is imperative that genetic modification is not banned, banning it will likely result in it going on a secretive, dark, path, when it should actually be allowed but responsibly done and monitored.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAhjPd4uNFY

SciShow's video: "CRISPR: A Gene-Editing Superpower"

The source explains the significance of CRISPR in the field of genetic engineering as a new tool that can be used to make many strides in the science, as it makes genetic modification faster, cheaper, and more accurate. After saying that it may be exciting, it then warns that there could potentially be consequences, a at times wrong edits are still made. Yet it still does highlight positives of the science, especially for medical applications such as immunotherapy. It also brings up another interesting applicationL the extermination of mosquitos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfA_jAKV29g

# data[].attributes.body
Kurzgesagt Video - "Do Robots Deserve Rights? What if Machines Become Conscious?"

The video offers arguments for why one day the rights of robots may need to be considered, as it points out the rapid development of technology and how humans have yet to truly understand what does make a being conscience. It serves as a helpful foundation for discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHyUYg8X31c

SciShow video - "The AI Gaming Revolution"

The video highlights the timeline of how AI has developed over the years, specifically in its ability to play complicated board games, such as chess, which require complex thinking of many outcomes and thinking ahead to future moves. AI learns through "heuristics", which is the selection of choices that "may not be the best, but are good enough". Eventually, an AI called Deep Blue was able to learn enough to calculate moves complex and fast enough to defeat the world champion chess player, Garry Kasparov, in 1997. This shows how AI has, in the grand scheme of things, advanced quite quickly, and how it continues to learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhec39dVGDE

SciShow video - "AI vs. Human: The Greatest Go Tournament Ever"

The video informs about how artificial intelligence learned to become exceptional at an extraordinarily complicated game called Go. By repeatedly playing games against itself, the AI was able to learn and continuously apply its advancing skills to each game. Eventually, the AI, called Alpha Go, was pitted against the world champion Go player in five matches, in which the AI won every game. The information within the video encourages recognition of the learning capabilities of AI, which may eventually be applied to whether or not it could one day use these abilities to become conscience (or perhaps merely mimic what we would expect it to look like...?).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsbQ_HNX6Pg

SciShow Video - "The Next X Prize - Artificial Intelligence"

The video from SciShow discusses how now even the public is contributing to the advancement of artificial intelligence. Specifically, a contest is being held in which a robot will give a speech, with the goal of mimicking a human. Furthermore, the video provided background information, such as informing about the "Turing Test", a test in which artificial intelligence is analyzed as being able or unable to convince humans that the robot is human (which numerous robots have already done). In this way, the video serves to exemplify just how rapidly technology, in this case specifically artificial technology, is advancing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBSS61XaAIc

Crash Course Philosophy Videos - "Personhood" and "Artificial Intelligence and Personhood"

These two videos from Crash Course provide background on how society has no completely accepted, standard in determining what is considered a "person". It provides examples that have no obvious answers, creating thought provoking consideration for the topic. Some requirements for "personhood" include nonhumans, such as Koko the gorilla, and in the future potentially aliens or artificial intelligence. Some standards may actually exclude humans, such as fetuses or those who have committed crimes heinous enough to result in them forfeiting their "personhood". These thoughts can be applied as a fascinating, thought provoking supplement to the artificial intelligence rights debate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39EdqUbj92U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxM9BZeRrUI

Vsauce Video - "What Is

Consciousness?"

Gives points that display why the issue of "personhood" should be discussed, such as that humans don't even fully understand consciousness in themselves, that other humans may be philosophical zombies, and that humans simply may never have an answer to these dilemmas.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjfaoe847qQ

# data[].attributes.body
"Laws and Ethics Can’t Keep Pace with
Technology"

This source was useful in making the situation more "real". By providing examples of technology advances outpacing law in the past, it demonstrated that this phenomenon is far from merely theoretical. It then showcased some modern examples, revealing how technology outpacing law is yet something to consider. Furthermore, it continued on to theorize future scenarios in which the law is not currently prepared, implying that we should start considering these now before the law is overwhelmed. The source provides a good foundation that describes why my Passion Project's focus, which is to encourage public discussion on innovation in science and technology, is so imperative.

Examples:
-discrimination based on Internet profiles
-discrimination based on genetics!
-who owns your DNA?
-who is responsible when a self-driving car gets into an accident?
-the phone encryption debate is a prime example

file:///Users/sc964033/Downloads/MITTechReview-Ethics.pdf

# data[].attributes.body
SciShow video: "How to Make A Humanzee"

The source makes an argument for why the creation of a "humanzee", a cross between a human and a chimpanzee, should be considered immoral and should never been done just to satisfy raw curiosity. Some such reasons include the being likely suffering from many disorders and due the organism potentially being sentient, which would arguably make keeping it for study immoral as well as posing the possibility that its awareness of it being an unnatural experiment that is the sole member of its species could be detrimental to its mental well being. Besides setting a stance, the source additionally hints that it may in fact be possible, comparing the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees as similar to the differences between horses and zebras, which are very real.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nfg-Y9ketE

SciShow video: "The First Human-Pig Chimeras"

The video announces that a group of scientists have now successfully been able to get a pig embryo to grow with human cells through genetic engineering. Though this is but one step towards more impressive human pig chimeras, it is still an important one. Next, the video goes on to explain the potential applications human chimeras may have for medical purposes, as human organs could be grown in pigs that could be used for lifesaving transplants.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCM3UpkRms8

Mice, Men and Monsters: Opposition to Chimera Research and the Scope of Federal Regulation

The source provides background knowledge on the science of chimeras, such as current developments and potential uses, and additionally informs of helpful terminology to make navigating the topic easier. It also Furthermore, the source goes on to explain the current common views of chimeras, highlighting those who are anxious at the thought of them. Additionally, the source points out a few of the acts prohibiting the creation of chimeras, yet also discusses much of the lack of regulation the field has, which, according to the source, is worthy of great concern.

http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy.elm4you.org/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=5&sid=c2745755-ead7-4d3e-9c82-94745a3138d5%40sessionmgr4006
other link:
https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1178&context=californialawreview