daniyasiddiquiEditor’s Choice
Asked: 26/08/2025In: , ,

health trackers actually improving li ...

digital health
  1. daniyasiddiqui
    daniyasiddiqui Editor’s Choice

     The Promise of Wearable Health Trackers From smartwatches that count steps to rings that track sleep, wearable health devices are now part of daily life for millions of people. They promise to get us moving more, sleeping better, and taking charge of our wellbeing. The idea is simple: if you can meRead more

     The Promise of Wearable Health Trackers

    From smartwatches that count steps to rings that track sleep, wearable health devices are now part of daily life for millions of people. They promise to get us moving more, sleeping better, and taking charge of our wellbeing. The idea is simple: if you can measure it, you can improve it. But the real question is—do they actually make us change behavior, or do they just give us more information we ignore?

     How They Do Help

    • For many people, wearable trackers serve as a gentle push toward healthier routines:
    • Awareness: Seeing how little you’ve walked in a day can be a wake-up call. Awareness often sparks change.
    • Motivation: Hitting a 10,000-step goal or closing those activity rings feels like a small victory, and small victories add up.
    • Accountability: Having your heart rate or sleep monitored makes you more mindful of daily choices—such as not scrolling in the middle of the night or going for a walk instead of sitting.
    • Gamification: Competing with friends or earning badges can make exercise entertaining instead of a chore.
    • For others, these prompts precipitate significant lifestyle shifts—more consistent movement, better sleep hygiene, or even earlier health detection.

    The Limits of Tracking Alone

    • But the personal anecdote: data does not always equate to action.
    • Short-term enthusiasm: Most people use their trackers religiously for a few weeks or months, then lose interest.
    • Obsession with numbers: Others get hung up on hitting targets (steps, calories expended) but forget the bigger picture of integrative health.
    • One-size-fits-all targets: Not everyone needs 10,000 steps daily. Individualized health is more nuanced, and trackers don’t necessarily track that.
    • Behavioral gap: You might be aware you slept poorly, but you won’t necessarily change your bedtime routine.
    • That is, trackers can tell and nudge—but real change still comes from within discipline, environment, and deeper motivation.

    What Really Drives Change

    • When tested, wearables perform best combined with:
    • Guidance or coaching (e.g., combining the data with a fitness app, trainer, or doctor’s advice).
    • Community (sharing progress with friends, participating in group challenges).
    • Intrinsic motivation (pleasure in getting well, not just to hit numbers).
    • Without these layers, trackers can turn into high-tech baubles hiding in a drawer.

    A More Human Way to See Them

    Maybe it’s not fair to expect wearables to completely overhaul us on their own. Rather, they are tools for awareness. They shed light on routines we’d otherwise ignore—like hanging out too long on our behinds, or chronically sleeping too little—and offer a chance to make a change.

    For others, that’s life-altering. For a few, it is just a push they already knew about but weren’t ready to deal with.

     So, Are They Making a Difference?

    • The reality: Yes—but with qualifications.
    • They motivate many to become more active, aware, and proactive about health.
    • Their impacts are most effective in the short-run, unless supplemented by more meaningful habit-change strategies.
    • They won’t work magic on motivation or replace effort in developing habits that stick.

     In short: wearable trackers are sort of a mirror—they reflect back your habits and may motivate you to do better. But a mirror won’t make you exercise, go to bed early, or eat well. That’s still your choice.

    See less
daniyasiddiquiEditor’s Choice
Asked: 26/08/2025In: ,

living past 100 in good health

healthnews
  1. daniyasiddiqui
    daniyasiddiqui Editor’s Choice

     The Human Dream of Longevity For centuries, humanity has sought to extend the boundaries of life—through ancient medicine, religious practices, or modern medicine. But longevity science today is different. It's not merely about adding years to life—it's adding life to years. The question isn't mereRead more

     The Human Dream of Longevity

    For centuries, humanity has sought to extend the boundaries of life—through ancient medicine, religious practices, or modern medicine. But longevity science today is different. It’s not merely about adding years to life—it’s adding life to years. The question isn’t merely “Can we live to 100?” but “Can we do it in good health, without enduring decades of frailty?”

     Where Science Stands Today

    • Aging research is progressing at a rate never before seen. Scientists are not only investigating aging as an unavoidable destiny but also as a natural process that can be slowed or even turned back. Some of the most important areas include:
    • Genetics & cellular repair: Telomere research (the protective cover at the end of DNA) and senescent cell research (the “zombie” cells that cause harm as we age) hold great potential in slowing cellular aging.
    • Nutrition & fasting: Dietary regimens such as intermittent fasting or caloric restriction have had strong correlations with longer, healthier lives in animals—and preliminary human trials are promising the same.
    • Drugs & supplements: Molecules such as metformin and NAD+ boosters are being investigated for their potential to add healthy years, rather than manage disease.
    • Regenerative medicine: Stem-cell therapies and tissue engineering are working to replace deteriorated components of the body.
    • All of these are signs that a future in which living to 100 in good health is not beyond imagination.

     Resisting Aging vs. Aging Well

    But the emotional crux of the argument is this: nobody wants to live longer if those extended years are lived in misery, dependency, or loneliness. What gets people truly excited is the prospect of being 90 and still hiking, traveling, playing with the grandchildren, or following a passion—not being bedridden.

    That’s why aging research has turned its attention away from lifespan and towards healthspan. Rather than inquiring “How do we live longer?” the more accurate question is “How do we live longer with vigor?”

     Challenges We Still Face

    Naturally, there are challenges:

    • Accessibility: Will longevity medicine be accessible only to the rich, widening the health divide?
    • Ethics: If humans live beyond 100 as a matter of course, what does this mean for population growth, work, or retirement funds?
    • Biology’s limitations: Even if aging is postponed, accidents, genetic disorders, and environmental causes are still risks.
    • And on an individual level, longer life also brings questions such as: Will I live longer than friends and loved ones? Will society care about elders if everyone is old?

    The Human Side of Longevity

    What’s lovely about this study is the way it moves our mind. Aging isn’t merely surviving death; it’s recapturing life—people having more time to dream, love, create, and give back. Think of a world where individuals in their 80s are still beginning companies, crossing the globe, or guiding next generations with decades of experience.

    For most, true hope isn’t immortality—it’s just having more years of good health, without the diseases that rob us of independence and dignity.

     So, Are We Getting Closer?

    • The short answer: Yes, cautiously.
    • Science is discovering methods to rewind the biological clock.
    • Early breakthroughs indicate human beings living beyond 100 in good health could become increasingly widespread in the years to come.
    • But it will not be one magic pill—it will be a combination of lifestyle, preventive care, and advanced treatments.
    • We might not all live to the age of 150, but it’s more and more possible that coming generations might have 100 as a new baseline for an active life instead of an exceptional milestone.

    In brief: Research into longevity is not so much a quest for immortality as a gift of more quality years. The aspiration is not endless life—it’s a longer, healthier, more fulfilling one.

    See less
daniyasiddiquiEditor’s Choice
Asked: 26/08/2025In: , ,

the future of human relationships or ...

aitechnology
  1. daniyasiddiqui
    daniyasiddiqui Editor’s Choice

     AI Companions on the Rise Only a few years back, the idea of talking with a virtual "friend" that can hear you, recall your existence, and even get fond of you felt like it was straight out of a science fiction movie. Now, though, millions of us already have AI friends—be they chatbots that act likRead more

     AI Companions on the Rise

    Only a few years back, the idea of talking with a virtual “friend” that can hear you, recall your existence, and even get fond of you felt like it was straight out of a science fiction movie. Now, though, millions of us already have AI friends—be they chatbots that act like friends, emotional support virtual partners, or voice assistants that become progressively human each year. To most, these are not just machines—these are becoming significant connections.

     Why People Are Turning to AI Companions

    The attraction makes sense. Human relationships are rewarding, but they’re also complicated. People get busy, misunderstand each other, or sometimes can’t be there when needed. AI companions, on the other hand:

    • Always listen without judgment.
    • Respond instantly at any time of day.
    • Adapt to your personality and preferences.
    • Provide comfort without the risk of rejection.
    • For the lonely, socially fearful, or just curious, it can be a lifeline. Scores of users, in fact, state that AI companions fill emotional spaces—offering daily affirmations, reinforcement, and company in a strangely lifelike manner.

    Are They Real Relationships, Though?

    Here’s the twist. A relationship is generally founded on two beings—both with emotions, ideas, and desires. With AI, the relationship is one-way. The companion doesn’t experience anything in real time; it only echoes your own. It won’t even miss you if you leave for a while—it just picks up where you left off when you come back.

    But here’s the thing: if the comfort is real, who cares whether the source isn’t? Humans already bond with fictional people in books, movies, or even pets that don’t “speak back” quite the way people do. So in that sense, AI companions might be the newest iteration of a very old human impulse: looking for connection where it feels safe and fulfilling.

     What AI Companions Can—and Can’t—Replace

    • They may replace: relaxed company, daily affirmations, social skills training, and temporary consolation in solitude.
    • They may not replace: the unanticipated depth of genuine human connection—soft talk and physical contact, inside jokes exchanged in laughter, struggles and triumphs that are shared, and the sense of being profoundly and fully understood by an individual with a life of their own.
    • Over-dependence on AI companions might end up alienating individuals more, hindering them from participating in complicated but rich human relationships.

     Passing Trend or Long-Term Future?

    • It’s not going to fade as a trend, AI friends. Human connection is forever, and technology that delivers it will endure. It’s just that AI friends will simply coexist with human relationships as an extra dimension of how we connect—like social media or text messaging did.
    • To others, AI will never be anything but an aside-tool: a solo conversation when everybody else is in bed.
    • To some, especially those who are struggling socially, it might become a central part of their emotional life.
    • Eventually, society can make “hybrid companionship”—where people rely on human and artificial intelligence relationships in all sorts of ways—”normal.”

     The Human Side of the Future

    The real problem isn’t whether or not AI companions are real—they are—it’s how we choose to utilize them. If we use them as a substitute for human connection, they can reduce loneliness and bring comfort. However, if they replace human connection, we risk moving into a society in which relationships are safe but empty.

    Finally, AI companions are reflections. They reflect back to us our needs, our words, our emotions. Whether they are a bridge or a crutch to more human connection is our decision.

    Are AI companions the future of human relationships, then? In part, yes—they will redefine what we experience as companionship. But they will not replace the messy, beautiful, irreplaceable thing of being human together.

    See less
daniyasiddiquiEditor’s Choice
Asked: 26/08/2025In:

creative jobs

aitechnology
  1. daniyasiddiqui
    daniyasiddiqui Editor’s Choice

     Creativity vs. Technical Labor In the AI Age When people think of AI taking jobs, the first image that comes to mind is usually robots replacing factory workers or algorithms replacing data analysts. But recently, something surprising has been happening: AI isn’t just crunching numbers—it’s writingRead more

     Creativity vs. Technical Labor In the AI Age

    When people think of AI taking jobs, the first image that comes to mind is usually robots replacing factory workers or algorithms replacing data analysts. But recently, something surprising has been happening: AI isn’t just crunching numbers—it’s writing poetry, generating music, creating paintings, and even drafting movie scripts. This shift has sparked a fear many didn’t expect: maybe the “safe zone” of creativity isn’t so safe after all.

    Why Creative Careers Seem Fragile

    Creative work is a lot of pattern spotting, storytelling, and coming up with something new—areas where AI has made incredible strides. Consider image generation from text prompts or AI that can write music in a matter of seconds. For businesses, this is attractive because it’s cheaper and faster than using a human. A marketing agency, for instance, might say: “Why pay a group of designers for a dozen ad options when AI can spit out hundreds on the fly?”

    That’s where the nervousness intervenes: it’s not that AI is necessarily better, but that it’s adequate enough in some cases—especially where speed and breadth are more valuable than depth.

     Why Technical Jobs May Still Have an Edge

    Technical careers—like engineers, doctors, or electricians—require accuracy, practical problem-solving, and often hands-on abilities. While AI might scan research or edit code, it simply can’t match practical uncertainty. A plumber fixing a leak, an engineer tracing hardware problems, or a surgeon making life-or-death decisions—these are tasks where human judgment, hand coordination, and adaptability shine.

    Even in technical knowledge work, there is still a human go-between between AI output and the physical world. A machine may be able to write 90% of a program, but it is a developer’s job to finish it off with polish, debug, and integrate it into complex systems.

    The Middle Ground: Not Replacement, but Collaboration

    • The future could be more about changing creative or technical work, rather than replacing it. Instead of painting it as substitution, our application of AI is better served as a co-pilot:
    • Writers can use AI to develop ideas for their drafts but write them in their own voice.
    • Designers can use AI to create ideas but use their taste and cultural awareness to refine them.
    • Developers can let AI generate routine code so that they can focus on architecture and innovation.
    • There is a new kind of work that emerges in which humans define the vision, and AI accelerates delivery.

     The Human Touch That AI Can’t Fake

    No matter how advanced AI may become, there remains something ineradically human to art, to narrative, and to invention. Creativity is not output—crap out is not equal to crap in. Creativity is lived experience, feeling, and perspective. A song written by an AI can be lovely, but without the dirty, raw history of suffering or joy that makes us care, it is not the same thing. A technically accurate solution by computer may solve an issue rationally but lack the moral or emotional component.

    That’s why the majority of experts believe AI won’t really displace technical competence or imagination—it will just make us work harder into what is uniquely human.

    So, What Work Is Safer?

    Soon:

    • Routine creative work (ad copy, stock music, generic pictures) is more at risk.
    • High-tech jobs, jobs requiring judgment, physical strength, or deep responsibility are safer.
    • Hybrid—humans who will be able to harness AI effectively and supercharge it with originality, ethics, and emotional intelligence—will be the most valuable.
    •  Put simply AI might chew faster at creative edges than technical ones. However, it can’t substitute the heart, context, and meaning humans inject into both. And the ultimate winners are people who learn how to cooperate with AI instead of fighting it.
    See less
daniyasiddiquiEditor’s Choice
Asked: 25/08/2025In: ,

current cybersecurity systems

aitechonology
  1. daniyasiddiqui
    Best Answer
    daniyasiddiqui Editor’s Choice

    Nowadays, most of the world's digital security—your bank account online, government secrets, WhatsApp messages, even your Netflix password—are protected using encryption. They rely on mathematical puzzles so challenging that even the most advanced supercomputers would take thousands of years to cracRead more

    Nowadays, most of the world’s digital security—your bank account online, government secrets, WhatsApp messages, even your Netflix password—are protected using encryption. They rely on mathematical puzzles so challenging that even the most advanced supercomputers would take thousands of years to crack them.

    But then comes the simplicity-killer: quantum computing. While traditional computers process information in bits (0s and 1s), quantum computers do so in qubits, which exist in more than one state at a time. That allows them to look for solutions in parallel, potentially doing some sort of math problems at speeds that are unfathomable.

    For cybersecurity, it is exciting and terrifying.

    Why Encryption Works Today

    • Most modern encryption (like RSA and ECC) uses problems that are easy to do one way but extremely hard the other way.
    • Finding two big primes multiplied together? Easy.
    • Figuring out which primes were multiplied (the “factoring problem”)? Essentially impossible with current technology.
    • This “hard problem” is what protects your online banking password and hackers.

     Enter Quantum Computing

    • Quantum computers, specifically Shor’s algorithm, could crack those “impossible” problems in hours or minutes. Suddenly, what was once safe for millennia could be exposed in an afternoon.
    • If quantum computers advance quickly enough, they would even have the potential to crack into:
    • Government intelligence files
    • Banking networks
    • Healthcare files
    • Private emails and personal photos kept online
    • That’s why some experts have dubbed it a “quantum apocalypse” for cybersecurity.

     But Here’s the Human Side

    It’s important to keep things in perspective. Currently, enormous, beneficial quantum computers don’t exist. We do have noisy, fragile prototypes that can do small-scale work only. Decoding the entire internet remains science fiction—at least through the foreseeable future.

    Yes, but looming on the horizon is also a threat in the guise of “harvest now, decrypt later.” Hackers or nations could be quietly vacuuming up encrypted information today, stashing it away, and holding out for quantum computers to be powerful enough to break them. Imagine intimate medical records, military communications, or bank accounts appearing years hence, naked and vulnerable.

     The Race for Post-Quantum Security

    The good news? We’re not standing still. Researchers and organizations like NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) are already developing post-quantum cryptography—new encryption methods that can withstand quantum attacks. Some approaches involve lattice-based math, code-based encryption, or even quantum key distribution (which uses the principles of quantum physics itself to secure communication).

    In a way, it’s like we’re redesigning the locks before the burglars have built the tools to break in.

     Why It Matters to Everyday People

    For all of us, cybersecurity isn’t abstract—it’s belief. It’s the belief that your pay goes into your account, that your doctor’s notes remain confidential, and that your identity isn’t commandeered in the dead of night. If quantum computers one night ripped through these defenses, it could create panic and chaos and destroy the underpinnings of virtual society.

    But if the transition to quantum-resistant systems happens in time, though, most people won’t ever know it. Just as the internet switched from “http” to “https” without fanfare, the upgrade might happen quietly in the background.

    The Bottom Line

    Will quantum computing make current cybersecurity obsolete? Yes, eventually. But it doesn’t necessarily have to be catastrophic. The race between cryptographers and quantum scientists has already started, and humankind has a history of learning to adapt its weapons to thwart new threats.

    The real question isn’t that we will have a quantum security threat—it’s whether we will be ready when it arrives. And, as with climate change or epidemics, the destiny is in the preparation, the cooperation, and the vision.

    In the end, quantum computers won’t just break old locks—they will challenge us to build stronger, smarter ones. And that’s a human one: technology disrupts, but we adapt.

    See less
daniyasiddiquiEditor’s Choice
Asked: 25/08/2025In: ,

deepfakes the biggest threat

aitechnology
  1. daniyasiddiqui
    Best Answer
    daniyasiddiqui Editor’s Choice

    When people think of election threats, images of ballot tampering or foreign hacking often come to mind. But today, a newer, less visible danger is spreading: AI-powered deepfakes—ultra-realistic videos, audio clips, and images that can convincingly impersonate real people. Unlike obvious fake newsRead more

    When people think of election threats, images of ballot tampering or foreign hacking often come to mind. But today, a newer, less visible danger is spreading: AI-powered deepfakes—ultra-realistic videos, audio clips, and images that can convincingly impersonate real people. Unlike obvious fake news articles of the past, these manipulations are designed to feel authentic, making them especially dangerous in shaping public opinion.

    Why Deepfakes Hit Hard During Elections

    Elections are about emotions. Voters respond not only to policy but to trust, personality, and image of candidates. One effective video of a politician uttering something outrageous—or an outright false audio clip of them conspiring in secret—can go viral on social media before fact-checkers even get around to it. And before the truth finally comes out, the harm is already done.

    Unlike biased headlines or rumors, deepfakes take advantage of one of our strongest impulses: trusting what we see and hear. That makes them unusually effective at eroding faith, planting seeds of doubt, or stoking rifts at times of high stakes in democracy.

     Global Issues

    • In consolidated democracies, deepfakes have the potential to polarize already fractured societies. Even voters might suspect a video is a fabrication, but it can reinforce pre-existing prejudices (“I knew that candidate couldn’t be trusted”).
    • In new democracies, where resources for fact-checking and media literacy are lacking, the dissemination of deepfakes destabilizes faith in the entire election process.
    • International borders offer no obstacle, as malicious actors can exploit deepfakes to interfere with foreign elections at minimal expense, spreading propaganda campaigns without ever leaving another country.

     Are They the Biggest Threat?

    • While deepfakes are frightening, they might not be the sole or greatest threat. Other election threats still cast a shadow:
    • Disinformation networks: Plain old-fashioned text lies on social media still reach more individuals than video.
    • Cybersecurity vulnerabilities: Hacking into voter databases or election systems can have direct effects.
    • Polarization and echo chambers: Without deepfakes, partisan media bubbles allow misinformation to more easily flourish.
    • Deepfakes are different, though, because they can destroy faith in truth itself. If enough citizens get to the point where they think “anything could be fake,” then they might no longer trust any information—including genuine, fact-checked news. That loss of faith could be the most treacherous consequence of all.

     What Can Be Done?

    • Technology vs. Technology: While AI has the capability to produce deepfakes, AI tools also have the capability to identify them—albeit only a step behind.
    • Media Literacy: Educating individuals to stop, question, and confirm prior to sharing is paramount.
    • Regulation & Responsibility: Platforms, governments, and fact-checkers will require more robust policies to detect and mark deepfakes efficiently, particularly around election time.
    • Public Awareness: If citizens assume that deepfakes are real, then they’ll be more circumspect before reaching a conclusion.

     The Human Side

    • At the center of this problem is trust—trust in leaders, in media, and in one another. Elections are not merely about votes; they are about people having faith that the process is equitable. If deepfakes erode that faith, then democracy itself seems tenuous.
    • The twist is that deepfakes are strongest not because they’re untraceable, but because they sow doubt. Even the rumor that a video could be deepfake can leave citizens uncertain what is real. That doubt is sufficient to influence emotions, and emotions tend to drive ballots more than facts.

    In short: Deepfakes are perhaps not the only election threat, but they are something peculiarly unsettling: a world in which believing is no longer seeing. Their threat is less that they will deceive everybody and more that they will cause everybody to doubt everything. The battle against them is not merely technological—it’s also cultural, political, and fundamentally human.

    See less
Load More Questions