[HN Gopher] Teenager invented a low-cost tool to spot elephant p...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Teenager invented a low-cost tool to spot elephant poachers
        
       Author : doener
       Score  : 212 points
       Date   : 2022-08-29 04:04 UTC (18 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.smithsonianmag.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.smithsonianmag.com)
        
       | EvanKnowles wrote:
       | I was in the Kruger this weekend, and our guide was lamenting
       | that they've already lost over 340 rhino this year, and said
       | poachers keep hacking their radios and finding out where the
       | rhino are, even when they change code they speak in.
       | 
       | I find the chance of that to be roughly zero though - clearly a
       | bunch of the guides have been paid off. This isn't a problem tech
       | can solve.
        
         | hackernewds wrote:
         | Installing your people as guides > paying off poachers.
        
         | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
         | Secret shopper and encrypted radios?
         | 
         | If the radios can be trusted, you feed bad data to specific
         | people and see when the poachers show up. Seems like there are
         | some solutions.
         | 
         | When I was in South Africa, the anti-poaching crews were
         | clearly underpaid judging by their cloths, demeanor, and gear
         | (old radios, and the ratty shotguns). If the job is so
         | important it should be better paid.
        
       | dmje wrote:
       | Annnnd my "bitter, cynical, grumpy HN type" radar just bust a cog
       | :-)
        
       | mijail wrote:
       | Kudos to her. Conservation tech is a challenging and exciting
       | test bed for "hackers" because it's a hyper dimensional
       | chessboard of constraints and strategies. It's easy to reduce the
       | solution to "just do this." From one end, poaching is lucrative
       | in areas with massive economic disparity. And from the other,
       | climate change and the pressure we put on natural resources is
       | unbalancing ecosystems driving human wildlife conflict.
       | 
       | A project I've worked on is Trailguard AI, ran by resolve.ngo,
       | the principal is Eric Dinnerstein who is the former chief
       | scientist at WWF. I can say they our running a start up in every
       | sense of the word but the result is beautiful: a satelite/ gsm
       | connected, battery powered AI enabled cryptic trail cam that can
       | be used as a swiss army knife from animal censuses, to poacher
       | detection, illegal logging truck detection and preventing human
       | wildlife content (detect tiger + sound alarm).
       | 
       | Good article on trailguard:
       | https://globalconservation.org/news/tech-parks-trailguard-ai...
        
       | abailin wrote:
       | Related in world news: France taxman deploys AI spy to spot
       | hidden swimming pools
       | 
       | https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20220829-france-taxman...
        
       | la-di-da-do wrote:
       | Now that is what I call girl power what a girl boss girl girl
       | girl! You go, girl!
        
       | vadym909 wrote:
       | Won't the poachers just change their speed and turning radius to
       | not appear as humans?
       | 
       | I've become a bit skeptical of these stories on kids doing what
       | normally experienced professionals do (research, startups). I'd
       | understand if a kid accidentally discovered or invented something
       | cool that no one else thought of. I wish kids focused on fun and
       | learning in school. Some of these stories seem like 'spike'
       | projects to help the kids college application standout.
        
         | bena wrote:
         | This _is_ the kind of shit I would be doing for fun and
         | learning in school.
         | 
         | Kids have the disposable time to dedicate to grind stuff like
         | this out. All they really need is the spark of interest, then
         | everything else takes care of itself.
        
       | TrackerFF wrote:
       | It's a nice project, from start to end. Gives you real insight
       | how "real world" ML-backed systems work. Data acquisition,
       | feature engineering, model design / tuning, etc.
       | 
       | This kind of system is what you'd expect to see in maybe a
       | graduate level ML/DL class, maybe even Bachelors thesis.
       | 
       | Whether or not it actually works for catching poachers isn't all
       | that important IMO, even though they're marketing it that way. As
       | many have mentioned, for it to really work, you'd probably need a
       | small fleet of drones - and more likely, data from satellite
       | providers. In my area of work (surveillance / intelligence), we
       | do a lot of similar stuff - students like these are awesome to
       | work with for summer internships / thesis projects.
        
         | yonaguska wrote:
         | It's neat, but the real solution is fixing the incentives for
         | poachers in the first place. It's an economic issue at its root
        
       | aaron695 wrote:
        
       | sbf501 wrote:
       | Well, if we don't solve the poacher problem, eventually it will
       | solve itself: no more rare animals to poach.
        
       | shreyshnaccount wrote:
       | I made a very very similar project in year 12 in school. (got
       | nationally ranked too). looks like they have taken it a few (very
       | important) steps further www.github.com/itsa-mee-mario/guardians-
       | of-the-wildlife. (sorry for the cheesy name ad)
        
       | whycombinetor wrote:
       | Surely you can discriminate a human from an elephant _by size
       | alone_ with a thermal camera, without needing to resort to
       | movement patterns.
        
         | remram wrote:
         | Probably measuring the size is difficult, unless your camera is
         | reporting depth? I don't know.
        
           | whycombinetor wrote:
           | If you are flying a drone overhead, you know the altitude and
           | can do basic trig to find total distance from sensor angle.
           | With even very approximate distances one should be able to
           | distinguish a 200lb, 0.4m wide, 0.2m long human from a
           | 10,000lb, 1.5m wide, 4m long elephant.
        
       | Avalaxy wrote:
       | So it doesn't detect poachers, it detects humans. And it requires
       | drones flying non-stop over gigantic masses of land.
       | 
       | Edit: having dabbled in this field myself during my studies, I
       | know from research that one of the biggest problems is simply
       | corruption among rangers. It doesn't really matter if you can
       | spot a poacher if a whole group of rangers will decide to not do
       | anything about it (because for them the financial incentive of
       | doing nothing can be HUGE). Of course the corruption problem
       | stems from very low incomes and poor living conditions in those
       | countries. If your monthly income is $100, it's quite tempting to
       | accept a $10.000 bribe.
       | 
       | Edit 2: I worked on this: https://www.hackthepoacher.com/. We
       | tried it with cell phone detection.
        
         | network2592 wrote:
         | A better solution could be hacking the supply side by flooding
         | the market with fake ivory indistinguishable from real ivory.
         | The price of ivory should go down. There will be less financial
         | incentive for the poaching and bribing. Some biologists are
         | working on this angle [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/faking-
         | elephan...
        
           | Maursault wrote:
           | This. But also putting a bounty on poachers that exceeds the
           | value of ivory, make killing poachers so profitable that for
           | every poacher, there are 20 bounty hunters. Also, education.
           | Also, counter intelligence (ingrain societies that value
           | ivory with rumors that touching ivory causes flaccidity and
           | ruins libido, which is highly contagious, etc.)
           | 
           | Also, why don't we just take all the elephants and rhinos
           | from them, establish them in the American west? We can deal
           | with the ecological issues.
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | > We can deal with the ecological issues.
             | 
             | This is a refrain heard so often (as a wild herd of fifty
             | thousand elephants goes trumpeting through downtown Salt
             | Lake City).
        
               | Maursault wrote:
               | 13,000 years ago, very elephant-like creatures roamed N.
               | America.[1] So the ecological issues are not going to be
               | a big problem. Besides, elephants stampeding through Salt
               | Lake City is not an example of an ecological issue. Call
               | Animal Control.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gomphothere
        
             | Verdex wrote:
             | "No, no, poaching elephants is actually really safe."
             | 
             | "But, but the bounty? Poacher heads go for ten times what
             | ivory goes for."
             | 
             | "That, look, scary stories that the government has to tell
             | to make the voters think that they're doing something to
             | help those poor defenseless elephants. Scare tactics. Think
             | about it, if they really were going to do anything about
             | the poachers, then they wouldn't be putting up some bounty
             | against poaching. It's an admission that they can't and
             | they won't do anything to stop us. Besides, factory has
             | been shut down for three weeks and isn't opening any time
             | soon. You want to put food on the table or not?"
             | 
             | <LATER>
             | 
             | A rifle shot rings out across the early morning plains. An
             | elephant collapses to the ground and breathes its last
             | breath.
             | 
             | "Change of plans Fred, we've got video evidence that you
             | just poached an elephant. I hear poacher heads go for ten
             | times what ivory does."
             | 
             | "You said the bounty was nothing but propaganda!"
             | 
             | "Yeah, good thing there's no bounty on liars."
             | 
             | A second rifle shot rings out across the early morning
             | plains. "Now, sure would be a shame if all that ivory goes
             | to waste."
        
               | itsyaboi wrote:
               | A long-winded example of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe
               | rverse_incentive#The_origina...
        
               | patentatt wrote:
               | Unfortunately this is accurate, much like the bounties
               | put on certain people within Afghanistan where it sure
               | seems like it was abused by certain local tribes to take
               | out some rival and profit from the US Government in the
               | process. In areas where you'd want to put a bounty on
               | people, there's bound to be enough corruption and
               | misaligned incentives to make it not work the way you
               | hoped.
        
               | alistairSH wrote:
               | That. Plus...
               | 
               | Poacher Hunter to the paying authority: "Bob was a
               | poacher. I didn't shoot him while he walked home from
               | work. I promise."
        
               | trasz wrote:
               | Your situation is still 50% success, although with
               | collateral damage (the single killed elephant).
        
               | Verdex wrote:
               | "Oh, we call him the poacher punisher. Poachers killed
               | his family, or at least that's the story. He's killed
               | hundreds of poachers, maybe even thousands. In fact, he
               | once killed an entire village of poachers. Men, women,
               | children, dogs, poachers all of them. At least according
               | to the poacher punisher. He brought back the ivory he
               | said he found on them. It's how he made his first
               | million."
               | 
               | A man kills an elephant with a rifle and then shoots the
               | rifle with another rifle. He brings in the first rifle
               | and gets a reward. Then he sells the ivory and gets a
               | second reward. I'm not convinced that this situation is
               | any improved (and certainly not a 50% success) if instead
               | of this farce he instead tricks someone who wasn't going
               | to shoot any elephants into shooting an elephant.
        
         | orangepurple wrote:
         | If the US rented a Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk equipped
         | with appropriate imaging systems to these governments the
         | poaching game might change. Lesser reliance on corrupt rangers.
         | Unfortunately I doubt these things make financial sense in the
         | name of conservation
        
         | px43 wrote:
         | It sounds to me like the group she's working with is already
         | running these drones, and they're currently digging through the
         | video manually. That's where she got all the training data to
         | make these tools.
         | 
         | Maybe it's not the most effective way to hunt for poachers, but
         | it seems to be *one* way that poachers are hunted, and a way
         | that has some obvious room for improvement by sprinkling on a
         | bit of ML magic.
        
         | cultofmetatron wrote:
         | also, drones cause major distress to elephants. it sounds like
         | bees to them. its a major reason you are not allowed to fly
         | them in chiang mai.
        
         | Someone wrote:
         | Its not only the money. Rangers get shot at, even killed, by
         | poachers every now and then (Botswana's "shoot to kill" policy
         | won't have helped there)
         | 
         | Also, like corruption, poaching also stems from very low
         | incomes and poor living conditions in those countries.
        
         | jjtheblunt wrote:
         | So pay rangers more, with bonus incentives to capture or kill
         | poachers, wanted dead or alive like famous wild west posters
         | from the 1800s?
        
         | elp wrote:
         | This was pretty much what the owner of small game park told me.
         | The drones are too high tech and expensive for them to run. He
         | said having small teams patrol every night worked better. When
         | the teams haven't been able to patrol, for example due to
         | flooded roads. He said it only took a couple of weeks before
         | the poachers started showing up again.
         | 
         | I always wonder if the better solution isn't to re-legalize
         | ivory and rhino horn. All the game farms have room full of the
         | stuff. Dumping that onto the market will kill the price, at the
         | same time there is suddenly a financial incentive to keep the
         | animals safe. Currently its $10k a horn on the black market vs
         | a bit of tourism money to incentivize keeping the parks safe.
         | 
         | The saddest part is that horn and tusks grow back so it could
         | be a renewable resource if farmed properly. The poachers only
         | kill.
        
           | ricardobeat wrote:
           | Elephant tusks are incisor teeth, nerves and all. They
           | continue growing in length during their lifetime, but would
           | be insanely painful if cut off, and cannot grow back.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | Nah, legalize poacher hunting. Most dangerous game and such.
        
             | sobkas wrote:
             | > Nah, legalize poacher hunting. Most dangerous game and
             | such.
             | 
             | Yeah that would totally not endanger(more than they already
             | are) indigenous people living there. After all everyone
             | knows how poachers look like.
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | We solve that with poacher-poacher-hunters. And it
               | continues forever!
        
               | arcticfox wrote:
               | Non-lethal methods only, obviously. It's basically a
               | combination between bounty hunting and citizen's arrest
               | laws. Not saying it couldn't be abused but it's not
               | impossible to imagine it working. You might not even need
               | bounties if people saw it as a sport.
               | 
               | It's either that or potentially corrupt park rangers
               | doing it - it's not like the existing system works great
               | for anyone involved.
        
           | sweetheart wrote:
           | The solution to a problem is never the commercialization of
           | sentient beings.
        
             | Spivak wrote:
             | You'll have a 90 degree uphill battle if you want to
             | convince people of that in general -- cows, chickens,
             | goats, lab rats, all sorts of insects, bees, all pets,
             | harvesting various animals for medicine.
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | sweetheart wrote:
               | many uphill battles have been worth fighting before. this
               | won't be the last.
        
             | pvaldes wrote:
             | > The solution to a problem is never the commercialization
             | of sentient beings.
             | 
             | Forbidding agriculture would not solve any of our problems.
             | 
             | Unless you are trying to say that hum "all sentient beings
             | are equal, but some are more equal than the other".
        
               | sweetheart wrote:
               | agriculture !== animal agriculture
        
             | buscoquadnary wrote:
             | It saved the Buffalo
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bison#Livestock
             | 
             | Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo
             | buffalo
        
               | Spivak wrote:
               | If you care about the species giving humans an incentive
               | to raise/protect them is pretty effective. If you care
               | about the individual animal this is the worst thing you
               | could do.
        
           | spiffytech wrote:
           | > Dumping that onto the market will kill the price
           | 
           | I read a story a while back that some folks are dumping
           | synthetic ivory onto the market to make prices fall.
        
             | Kranar wrote:
             | This ends up making the situation worse. Legalization
             | substantially increases demand far beyond what can be
             | produced legally and ironically the value actually goes up
             | and results in even more of the illegal product being
             | produced. Furthermore it now becomes very difficult to
             | distinguish between the legal and illegal product,
             | providing criminals with an easy cover to launder the
             | product.
             | 
             | https://www.nber.org/papers/w22314
             | 
             | Statistics Canada has reported that after the legalization
             | of weed, the black market has actually grown quite
             | substantially (in absolute terms).
             | 
             | https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-
             | medica...
             | 
             | At any rate, the point is that making things legal or
             | available can often paradoxically significantly increase
             | demand for the illegal product and in the process make it
             | much easier for the black market to operate.
             | 
             | And just to add in some controversy to the discussion, the
             | same is true of prostitution. Almost all places that have
             | legalized prostitution also have significantly higher rates
             | of human trafficking including underage prostitutes.
        
             | beebeepka wrote:
             | God bless them. I don't what makes people want ivory in the
             | first place. Pure evil
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | The problem can be better solved by getting the demand under
           | control. China, one of the historic worst offenders, actually
           | managed to do so [1], but Japan's legal market [2] still
           | entices poachers and smugglers (who supply the black market
           | in China [3]).
           | 
           | [1] https://www.worldwildlife.org/press-releases/demand-for-
           | elep...
           | 
           | [2] https://asiatimes.com/2022/05/japan-sends-wrong-message-
           | on-i...
           | 
           | [3] https://us.eia.org/campaigns/wildlife/elephants/japan-
           | ivory/
        
             | jeltz wrote:
             | Vietnam is another huge market, especially for rhino horn.
        
           | jacquesm wrote:
           | > I always wonder if the better solution isn't to re-legalize
           | ivory and rhino horn. All the game farms have room full of
           | the stuff. Dumping that onto the market will kill the price,
           | at the same time there is suddenly a financial incentive to
           | keep the animals safe.
           | 
           | Until that stock runs out and then it is back to square #1.
        
             | buscoquadnary wrote:
             | It's working for the buffalo. They were endangered until
             | someone realized you could sell their meat as an "exotic"
             | meat for more than a burger. Now the buffalo are all over
             | the place.
             | 
             | To paraphrase CGP Grey it turns out the best evolutionary
             | advantage is being useful to humans.
             | 
             | If any of the execs of Panda Express are reading this give
             | me a call I got a big idea for your brand.
        
         | kkjjkgjjgg wrote:
        
         | ajsnigrutin wrote:
         | But it was a teenage girl who "solved" something you engineers
         | couldn't, so take that!
         | 
         | I always found it funny, how journalists manage to take
         | something a kid did, without knowing the specifics, and inflate
         | the story, just because a kid did it.
         | 
         | Even if it's useless in real world, and the people working on
         | that professionally, could already tell you that...
         | 
         | Sometimes it's even a direct scam:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otjvUz7qKXc
        
           | xwdv wrote:
           | I'm not surprised someone wrote this article, I'm just
           | disappointed it managed to get upvoted so highly on HN. I
           | will flag it.
        
             | rvz wrote:
             | Exactly. Garbage articles only intended for ad money and
             | clickbait for the naive on read as far as the headline and
             | it turns out the solution is worse than projected.
             | 
             | Even this article was posted a day late for slow news day.
        
             | remram wrote:
             | Sure, break two HN guidelines in one go.
             | 
             | > If a story is _spam or off-topic_ , flag it
             | 
             | > If you flag, please _don 't also comment that you did_
        
               | swayvil wrote:
               | To be fair, accusing people of breaking guidelines also
               | breaks guidelines. Better to insert your concerns into
               | inscrutable flaghole.
        
           | orangepurple wrote:
           | The worst one I know of is the free energy kid featured on an
           | episode of Elecroboom (YouTube). The parents are clearly
           | supporting the kid's delusion which makes it even worse.
        
           | giarc wrote:
           | I wouldn't say the story is inflated. She won a few awards at
           | the "Regeneron International Science and Engineering Fair,
           | the world's largest international pre-college STEM
           | competition". I assume the judges and the people running that
           | are not just some nobodies.
        
           | sieabahlpark wrote:
        
           | throw__away7391 wrote:
           | This kind of behavior puts a lot of pressure on kids for the
           | amusement of adults as well.
        
           | alt4839483 wrote:
           | Take an existing problem ("Track poachers"). Notice that
           | elephants walk differently to humans, and that movement
           | difference can be used to identify the difference even in
           | lower res videos (surely there's simpler ways, like size and
           | shape? It's plausible that gait is actually a better way
           | though). Take an existing dataset, plug it into your
           | favourite machine learning library, and run your model over a
           | drone feed somebody else did 99% of the work for.
           | 
           | Handwave away that most of the cost in the drone is going to
           | be in getting it decent range, not a decent FLIR camera. Add
           | in a 5x bonus to media coverage because you're young, 5x
           | bonus because you're a woman in STEM, say something about how
           | important skin colour, demographics, and chromosomes are for
           | doing some mediocre programming:
           | 
           | > "What I really realized from this is how important it is
           | that women, people of color, all sorts of minorities in the
           | field of technology are at the forefront of this kind of
           | groundbreaking technology."
           | 
           | And you've got some journalists writing about you and not
           | something far more interesting and useful, because A. The
           | journalists can somewhat understand it, B. You're under the
           | age of 20, C. You're a girl in STEM, D. You're a minority,
           | and E. It's about good animals being protected from evil
           | poachers, giving it a nice simple narrative.
           | 
           | And I'm sure her winning that competition was _totally_ about
           | merit and not because they 've got a mandated 50% women
           | winning (and she's a minority, extra points!) and probably 5%
           | of submissions are by women. Or maybe it's not? Maybe it was
           | merit. Either way, implicit and explicit quotas mean that
           | it's more likely than not, and my knee-jerk reaction to this
           | is one of "she's there because she's a girl" and not "she's
           | there because of merit". What fantastic efforts to get rid of
           | stereotypes, right?
           | 
           | I'm around her age, I'm tempted to try to send something
           | similarly useless to that competition and get $10 000. But
           | why bother, when the first, second, and third place will
           | inevitably be taken up by girls with useless projects going
           | "It was _so_ difficult to get here, all I had was exclusive
           | help in the form of courses, programs, special treatment, and
           | mentors all along the way and competing against 10% of the
           | people for 50% of the spots "
        
           | jokethrowaway wrote:
           | It's definitely poor journalism but it's good for encouraging
           | this girl to keep on going.
           | 
           | It doesn't cost much and can be helpful for society in 10
           | years when she's going to be the next Elizabeth Holmes.
        
             | peterhalburt33 wrote:
             | Wait, what? The last thing we want is more Elizabeth Holmes
             | types...
        
             | llanowarelves wrote:
             | You had me in the first half
        
           | akudha wrote:
           | That is what happens when they have to constantly write
           | stories for traffic and eyeballs. Your story's life is a few
           | hours at best. So why bother being accurate? Being first and
           | clickbaity pays the bills, not being accurate.
           | 
           | The whole system needs a reboot. Without good journalism,
           | democracies can't survive
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | raman325 wrote:
           | Wow, have a little heart why don't you. Sure, this isn't
           | going to revolutionize anti-poaching, but it shows two
           | things:
           | 
           | 1. Teenagers can build cool things too! We need more kids
           | interested in STEM and females are underrepresented, so these
           | "puff" pieces are great inspiration for the next kid who
           | happens to come across it.
           | 
           | 2. All that was needed for her solution was a cheap FLIR
           | camera connected to an iPhone 6, meaning you don't have to be
           | rich/VC funded to experiment with hardware solutions.
           | 
           | This is Smithsonian Magazine, not the Wall Street Journal. I
           | say bring on more stories like this!
        
           | kzrdude wrote:
           | At the same time, I think it's ok if news stories are not
           | about only world-changing stuff. It can be about "mundane"
           | stories of "this young person did something" too. We can read
           | the story and give it space on the page, even if someone else
           | is already doing the same thing better (?)
        
             | jasode wrote:
             | _> It can be about "mundane" stories of "this young person
             | did something" too._
             | 
             | Yes of course but your well-meaning reply is missing the
             | argument made by gp: for some topics, the _readers don 't
             | have enough background knowledge to know_ that it's a
             | mundane story because the journalists are (possibly
             | inadvertently) inflating the significance.
             | 
             | E.g. compare 2 different examples:
             | 
             | - _" Teenager builds ramp to help nursing home patients in
             | wheelchairs."_ <-- Readers already have enough background
             | to know that "ramps" are common solutions to "wheelchair
             | mobility" so the significance can easily be categorized as
             | "mundane feel-good story". We can easily discount the
             | _ramp_ in the title and therefore properly appreciate that
             | it 's actually a human-interest story of a teenager doing
             | something nice.
             | 
             | - _" Teenager invents tool to spot elephant poachers."_ <--
             | Most readers have no existing knowledge of what technology
             | is already in use to judge the significance of that type of
             | story.
        
               | jasonlotito wrote:
               | This was in the article.
               | 
               | > Eikelboom cautions that Puri's model still needs to be
               | tested on raw video footage to see how well it can detect
               | poachers--the accuracy of Puri's model was tested using
               | figures already determined either human or elephant. He
               | also says other barriers already exist to using drones in
               | parks, such as the money and manpower to keep them
               | flying.
               | 
               | They also explain the technology choices and some of the
               | other challenges.
               | 
               | Your issue is with the headline.
               | 
               | If all you read is the headline, then fine, let's play
               | that game.
               | 
               | > It can be about "mundane" stories of "this young person
               | did something" too. "Yes of course"
               | 
               | Okay, that's it. You agree with the previous comment.
        
               | sangnoir wrote:
               | > for some topics, the readers don't have enough
               | background knowledge to know that it's a mundane story
               | 
               |  _Why does it matter?_ The press does context-free puff-
               | pieces _all the time_ , even for professionals allegedly
               | at the very top of their game (off the top of my head:
               | Steve Jobs, Elizabeth Holmes[1], Elon Musk, Jeff Dean,
               | and Sanjay Ghemawat to a lesser extent). Typically the
               | template is "Genius expert invents X all by himself"
               | without providing additional context for people outside
               | of tech.
               | 
               | Food for thought: do you suppose journalists are
               | exclusively wrong in tech reporting only? Or is this an
               | area you have enough context to understand the nuances?
               | 
               | 1. Sometimes the "revolutionary tech" is not just plain
               | evolutionary, but fake. But a layperson reading the
               | hagiography can't tell the difference
        
               | jasode wrote:
               | _> Why does it matter? The press does context-free puff-
               | pieces all the time, _
               | 
               | Yes, I'm very aware of the meta-game around "puff pieces"
               | which I've explained before:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30881420
               | 
               | It seems your _" Why does it matter?"_ was just a
               | rhetorical question as prelude to your comment about puff
               | pieces already existing in abundance ... But I'll answer
               | it as if you had asked that question earnestly: _It
               | matters because readers would like to know how to gauge
               | the significance of unfamiliar tech mentioned in the
               | article._
               | 
               | So we have 2 interpretations of this thread's article:
               | 
               | (a) this poacher detection tool is a true breakthrough --
               | and the inventor also happens to be a teenager; the _tech
               | itself is not hype_. The idea is truly a game changer and
               | while the inventor 's age is very young, that's a
               | footnote to the tech invention.
               | 
               | ... or ...
               | 
               | (b) the tool's tech (machine learning) is not significant
               | and may not even work in the real world -- but the
               | teenager's attempt at problem solving is showing promise
               | of future things to come; let us celebrate this young
               | person's effort.
               | 
               | A previous example of the first (a) type of story is this
               | one a teen discovering a new classical algorithm
               | comparable to a quantum algorithm:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17654220
               | 
               | That wasn't some pure human-interest puff piece about
               | teenager Ewin Tang. Instead, a respected computer
               | scientist (Scott Aaronson) said it was _legitimate new
               | work_ that advanced our understanding of the field.
               | 
               |  _> 1. Sometimes the "revolutionary tech" is not just
               | plain evolutionary, but fake. But a layperson reading the
               | hagiography can't tell the difference_
               | 
               | Right ... and readers don't want to mistakenly interpret
               | the story as type (a) when it was actually type (b). The
               | gp (Avalaxy) of the subthread tried to give us some extra
               | perspective about this story that the journalist did not.
        
               | sangnoir wrote:
               | > It matters because readers would like to know how to
               | gauge the significance of unfamiliar tech mentioned in
               | the article.
               | 
               | I agree with you on principle: and it should happen
               | across the board and not just reserved for science fair
               | submissions, but the press seems incapable of that, for
               | reasons good and bad. For one,evaluating new tech is
               | subjective (and difficult), and for another, sone news
               | puff pieces are mostly written by PR firms.
        
             | MattPalmer1086 wrote:
             | I was impressed by what she researched and developed. Now
             | she's going to optimise the flight path given the battery
             | constraints.
             | 
             | Good work, more than I achieve for the most part, and
             | something to celebrate in someone so young.
        
             | elp wrote:
             | This.
             | 
             | The world needs more feel good stories. Also if she's doing
             | AI on infrared images at 17 she's probably going to be
             | really impressive work later on.
        
               | GuB-42 wrote:
               | It depends, the followup is often unimpressive. Many
               | people who did really impressive things in their youth
               | ended up with quite mundane lives.
               | 
               | I mean it along the lines of "at 17, she is doing AI on
               | IR images, at 30 she will be fixing bugs in traffic sign
               | detection code for a big car company, with no mention of
               | her name except in commit logs".
               | 
               | And it is not a bad thing! We need people to fix bugs in
               | traffic sign detection code, and she may have a nice pay,
               | in a reputable company, with a good work-life balance. It
               | may not be impressive work, but it is work that needs to
               | be done.
               | 
               | It may not be a feel good story for the press, but I
               | believe living a mundane life certainly feels good to the
               | one living it.
        
               | Arisaka1 wrote:
               | I'm somewhat confused by statements like these because
               | they imply that the reason why we're mostly excited about
               | it is not what she achieved but where she could
               | potentially achieve many years later. Are these "years
               | later" something exclusive to young people? I mean, if
               | you're 40 years old doing exactly the same thing, and
               | you're not retiring anytime soon it's safe to assume that
               | you'll be working until your 50's and maybe beyond.
               | 
               | So then, are we celebrating the potential growth of a
               | teenager more than that of the potential growth of a
               | middle-aged person, on the grounds of potential, or are
               | we celebrating that she managed to achieve this at 17?
               | 
               | I'm trying really hard to see beyond age. I don't care if
               | someone is 16 or 36. Both can have the same years of
               | experience (say 8-10 years of programming), and yet the
               | former sounds more romantic and sellable to headliners
               | because it's easier to dream big about achievements
               | someone in their 25 will do than someone in their 45.
               | Why?
        
               | dylan604 wrote:
               | >I'm somewhat confused by statements like these because
               | they imply that the reason why we're mostly excited about
               | it is not what she achieved but where she could
               | potentially achieve many years later.
               | 
               | Did you just describe the stock market?
        
               | [deleted]
        
               | anchochilis wrote:
               | Because people who become high-achieving outliers tend to
               | distinguish themselves in their adolescence. It's the
               | start of a virtuous cycle where talent + hard work leads
               | to admission into elite institutions (universities and,
               | later, companies) which lead to positive network effects
               | which amplify the ongoing application of talent + hard
               | work.
               | 
               | It's rare for a previously unremarkable 36-year-old to
               | suddenly turn in to Jeff Bezos (for a lot of reasons, not
               | least that cognitive power peaks at age 25 so learning
               | and adapting to novel situations gets harder with age).
        
               | anchochilis wrote:
               | I see I'm getting downvoted: why?
               | 
               | I'm a thoroughly average 33-year-old, for what it's worth
               | :) I don't mean to imply that we shouldn't continue
               | strive for growth and development as we age, but I
               | certainly am not as mentally quick or energetic as I was
               | ten years ago. There is very little chance I will
               | suddenly transform into jwz or John Carmack or <insert
               | name of legendary hacker here>.
               | 
               | On the bright side, I am a better communicator and
               | strategic decision-maker, and am more satisfied with my
               | life as it is.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | xiphias2 wrote:
           | While it's often true what you write, there are real problems
           | with real impact with not enough commercial value that people
           | can do to improve the world.
           | 
           | I think it's much more interesting than a guy in yesterdays
           | HN home page making a lisp machine that almost nobody uses
           | for RISC-V which is missing a lot of more important software
           | that needs to be written by somebody.
        
           | OrangeMonkey wrote:
           | This one small trick that will make your poachers super-mad!
        
             | swayvil wrote:
             | Genius girl engineer shows all the boys what's what. Her
             | future is so $&#$# bright.
        
         | 1234letshaveatw wrote:
         | This seems overly cynical. If you detect that someone is
         | messing about with the bank door after hours you can't be
         | certain that it is a robber, but it is still helpful to know. I
         | also doubt all the rangers are corrupt. There is no reason to
         | let perfect be the enemy of good here.
        
       | SoftTalker wrote:
       | _"I was quite taken aback," the 17-year-old from Chappaqua, New
       | York, recalls. "Because I always thought, 'well, poaching is
       | illegal, how come it really is still such a big issue?'"_
       | 
       | Life lesson. If an activity can generate income, someone will do
       | it. Law notwithstanding.
        
       | msadowski wrote:
       | This reminds me of this thread on the Ardupilot forum from
       | someone in the field using drones to find poachers:
       | https://discuss.ardupilot.org/t/autonomous-anti-poaching-dro... .
       | 
       | The gist of it was that the drones were not that effective at
       | spotting poachers (8 cases in two years of operations), and even
       | if you spot them they will likely be gone by the time someone can
       | arrive there.
        
       | throwaway290 wrote:
       | I wonder if poachers quickly learn to alter behavior in presence
       | of drone noise...
        
         | scrose wrote:
         | I have a rather loud drone(DJI mini 2). From about 70m and up,
         | the noise is practically non-existent, even when hovering
         | directly overhead.
        
         | nobodyandproud wrote:
         | Drones can be very quiet. I saw my police flying playing with
         | one and it was a whisper even from 30 feet away.
         | 
         | I was surprised because I thought all drones had that
         | annoyingly loud hum.
        
       | what-imright wrote:
       | There should be laws against these 'look at my clever wiz kid'
       | articles. It's not that far off from beauty pageants and equally
       | sick and pretentious. I remember just last week here in Berkeley
       | seeing a young teenager playing Beethoven's 9th on an electric
       | keyboard, perfectly. He was playing on the street and had all of
       | $10 in change in his bowl. The look of misery on his face as his
       | fingers effortlessly worked out the melody was astounding. He
       | looked like a caged animal, living out his parent's dream in
       | captivity. $50 says he blows his brains out by his thirties. This
       | is abuse plain and simple.
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | Really? This kid clearly cares about the world and wanted to
         | apply herself to a problem. There should be a _law_ against
         | rewarding such initiative with publicity? She 's 17. When I was
         | that age, I was completely bored to death by what I was
         | "learning" in high school and I had one foot out the door.
         | 
         | With regards to that musical kid... I've got resting bitch
         | face. When I'm focused on a difficult task, it's way worse; I
         | call it "thinking murder face." I'm a musician, and if I'm
         | playing a complex piece, I couldn't smile if I tried, even
         | though I'm loving every second of what I'm doing.
        
         | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
         | Anytime there says "there aught to be a law..." there almost
         | never should be.
         | 
         | That said, I agree the whiz kid articles are dumb, but not for
         | the reasons you listed. More just _"yea, let's see how they do
         | when they don't have infinite time and zero responsibilities"_.
        
       | gigatexal wrote:
       | Unless killed for meat by indigenous folks who need it I 100%
       | support the tracking/hunting/fining/imprisoning/etc of anyone
       | that kills an Elephant for its tusks or worse for sport.
        
         | gigatexal wrote:
         | Correction: I don't support the hunting of people even if they
         | are hunters.
        
         | googlryas wrote:
         | What about villagers killing elephants who raid and destroy
         | their crops?
        
           | gigatexal wrote:
           | I'd say that's ok, too, though that's tougher since humans
           | are spreading and clearing ever more acreage of land for
           | farming that it's affecting what used to be the habit of many
           | animals not just the elephant. There's no clear, easy answer
           | here, but surely we can take a hard stance on folks that hunt
           | them for sport or the ivory trade.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-29 23:01 UTC)