Oceans Are Getting Louder, Posing Potential Threats to Marine Life
海洋愈來愈吵 危及海洋生態系
By Jim Robbins

Slow-moving, hulking ships crisscross miles of ocean in a lawn mower pattern, wielding an array of 12 to 48 air guns blasting pressurized air repeatedly into the depths of the ocean.
龐大笨重且緩慢移動的多艘船隻，像割草般在幾哩海洋中縱橫交錯，使用一個陣列12到48支的空氣槍，把加壓空氣反覆噴射到海裡深處。

The sound waves hit the sea floor, penetrating miles into it, and bounce back to the surface, where they are picked up by hydrophones. The acoustic patterns form a three-dimensional map of where oil and gas most likely lie.
聲波擊中海床後，穿透入內好幾哩，而後回彈到海面，被水聽器接收。這些傳聲模式構成石油與天然氣最可能蘊藏處的3D地圖。

The seismic air guns probably produce the loudest noise that humans use regularly underwater, and it is about to become far louder in the Atlantic. As part of the Trump administration’s plans to allow offshore drilling for gas and oil exploration, five companies have been given permits to carry out seismic mapping with the air guns all along the Eastern Seaboard, from central Florida to the Northeast, for the first time in three decades.
震測氣槍的聲音很可能是人類經常在海面下製造的最大噪音，而且這種噪音還將在大西洋變得大上很多。在美國川普總統政府開放近海油氣鑽探的計畫之下，五家公司獲准沿著美國東岸海床，從佛州中部到美國東北部，用氣槍進行震測繪製地圖，開30年來之首例。

The surveys have not started yet in the Atlantic, but now that the ban on offshore drilling has been lifted, companies can be granted access to explore regions along the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific.
測探工作尚未在大西洋展開，不過既然近海鑽鑿禁令已解除，企業就有權在墨西哥灣與太平洋海域探勘。

And air guns are now the most common method companies use to map the ocean floor.
而使用氣槍是目前企業繪製海床地圖最常見的方法。

“They fire approximately every 10 seconds around the clock for months at a time,” said Douglas Nowacek, a professor of marine conservation technology at Duke University. “They have been detected 4,000 kilometers away. These are huge, huge impacts.”
美國杜克大學海洋保育科技教授諾瓦契克說：「氣槍大概每10秒就發射一次，日夜不停，一次持續好幾個月。響聲在4000公里外都能偵測到。這是非常巨大的衝擊。」

The prospect of incessant underwater sonic tests is the latest example cited by environmentalists and others of the growing problem of ocean noise, spawning lawsuits against some industries and governments as well as spurring more research into the potential dangers for marine life.
海面下音波試驗持續不斷的可能性，是環保等各界人士提到海洋噪音問題日益嚴重時援引的最新案例，引發針對一些產業和政府的訴訟，並激起更多有關音波試驗對海洋生物可能危害的研究。

Some scientists say the noises from air guns, ship sonar and general tanker traffic can cause the gradual or even outright death of sea creatures, from the giants to the tiniest – whales, dolphins, fish, squid, octopuses and even plankton.
一些科學家指出，氣槍、船隻聲納和一般油輪來往的噪音，會使海中生物逐漸或甚至立刻死亡，從巨型到最小的都有，包括鯨魚、海豚、魚、墨魚、章魚，甚至浮游生物。

Other effects include impairing animals’ hearing, brain hemorrhaging and the drowning out of communication sounds important for survival, experts say.
專家指出，其他衝擊包括損害動物聽力、使動物腦部大出血和蓋過對存活很重要的溝通聲音。

So great is the growing din in the world’s oceans that experts fear it is fundamentally disrupting the marine ecosystem, diminishing populations of some species as the noise levels disturb feeding, reproduction and social behavior.
全球海洋日趨喧鬧如此嚴重，以致專家擔心會從根本上擾亂海洋生態系統，並因為嘈雜程度妨礙進食、繁殖和社交行為，使一些物種數量減少。

A 2017 study, for example, found that a loud blast, softer than the sound of a seismic air gun, killed nearly two-thirds of the zooplankton in three-quarters of a mile on either side. Tiny organisms at the bottom of the food chain, zooplankton provide a food source for everything from great whales to shrimp.
例如，一份2017年的研究顯示，一次比震測氣槍聲音柔和的巨響，就造成長度0.75哩海域的兩端都有近三分之二浮游動物死亡。浮游動物是食物鏈底端的迷你微生物，是從大鯨魚到蝦子等各種海中生物的食物來源。

原文參照：
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/22/science/oceans-whales-noise-offshore-drilling.html

2019-02-24 聯合報．D4．紐約時報賞析 李京倫

說文解字看新聞 李京倫

本文談人類探勘海底油氣時製造噪音，不只干擾海中生物安寧，還危及牠們的性命。

文中提到噪音時用了noise和din，din比noise大聲且持久，尤指一堆不協調的聲音，如din in the bar、din of the traffic。使用din時不加s。din也能當動詞，din something into someone是透過不斷重複，讓某人記住某觀念。

noise可指一個聲音，也可當集合名詞指一堆噪音。makes noises about something是含蓄表明對某件事的態度。makes the right noises是指出於義務而表現出關心或興趣，不是真感興趣。

本文談到擾亂時用了disrupt和disturb。disrupt指導致一件事中斷，而且破壞秩序或規律，例如地鐵發生爆炸案導致地鐵停擺，或病毒導致電腦當機，都是disrupt。

disturb則指干擾對方安寧或平靜，而不是干擾事情進行，例如鄰居家小孩喧嘩disturb我家的安寧。微風吹拂池面可以說A soft breeze gently disturbed the surface of the pool.

Why Do We Hurt Robots?
我們為何要傷害機器人？
By Jonah Engel Bromwich

A hitchhiking robot was beheaded in Philadelphia. A security robot was punched to the ground in Silicon Valley. Another security bot, in San Francisco, was covered in a tarp and smeared with barbecue sauce.
一個搭便車機器人在美國費城被斬首。一個保全機器人在矽谷被打倒在地。另一個保全機器人在舊金山被蓋上防水布，並塗滿烤肉醬。

Why do people lash out at robots, particularly those that are built to resemble humans? It is a global phenomenon. In a mall in Osaka, Japan, three boys beat a humanoid robot with all their strength. In Moscow, a man attacked a teaching robot named Alantim with a baseball bat, kicking it to the ground, while the robot pleaded for help.
為什麼人們會對機器人－尤其是設計得像人類的－下狠手？這是個全球現象。在日本大阪一家商場裡，三個男孩用盡全力毆打一個人形機器人。在俄國莫斯科，一名男子用棒球棒攻擊一個名叫艾倫提姆的教學機器人，並在機器人呼喊救命時將它踹倒在地。

Why do we act this way? Are we secretly terrified that robots will take our jobs? Upend our societies? Control our every move with their ever-expanding capabilities and air of quiet malice?
我們幹嘛要這樣？我們是否暗暗害怕機器人會搶走我們的工作？會顛覆我們的社會？會藉著不斷擴展的能力，在無聲無息的怨恨氛圍中控制我們的一舉一動？

Comedian Aristotle Georgeson has found that videos of people physically aggressing robots are among the most popular he posts on Instagram under the pseudonym Blake Webber. And much of the feedback he gets tends to reflect the fear of robot uprisings.
喜劇演員喬治森發現，他在Instagram上以化名韋伯發布的影片中，人類對機器人動粗的影片最受歡迎，而他收到的大部分回應反映出人們對機器人叛亂的恐懼。

Georgeson said that some commenters approve of the robot beatings, “saying we should be doing this so they can never rise up. But there’s this whole other group that says we shouldn’t be doing this because when they” – the robots – “see these videos they’re going to be pissed.”
喬治森說，一些評論者贊成毆打機器人，「他們說我們應該這麼做，這樣機器人就永遠不會造反。不過有另一批人說不該這麼做，因為它們（機器人）看到這些影片會生氣」。

But Agnieszka Wykowska, a cognitive neuroscientist and editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Social Robotics, said that while human antagonism toward robots has different forms and motivations, it often resembles the ways that humans hurt each other. Robot abuse, she said, might stem from the tribal psychology of insiders and outsiders.
不過，認知神經科學家、「國際社交機器人學期刊」總編輯阿格涅茲卡．韋考斯卡說，雖然人類對機器人的敵意有不同的形式和動機，卻常常與人類互相傷害的方式類似。她說，人類對機器人的虐待可能源自內外有別的部落心理。

“You have an agent, the robot, that is in a different category than humans,” she said. “So you probably very easily engage in this psychological mechanism of social ostracism because it’s an out-group member. That’s something to discuss: the dehumanization of robots even though they’re not humans.”
韋考斯卡說：「我們讓機器人做代理人，而它不是我們的同類，所以我們可能非常容易產生社會排斥心理，因為它是異類成員。雖然機器人不是人類，但機器人的去人性化問題值得討論。」

Paradoxically, our tendency to dehumanize robots comes from the instinct to anthropomorphize them. William Santana Li, chief executive of Knightscope, the largest provider of security robots in the United States (two of which were battered in San Francisco), said that while he avoids treating his products as if they were sentient beings, his clients seem unable to help themselves.
矛盾的是，我們將機器人去人性化的傾向，來自於為機器人賦予人性的本能。美國最大保全機器人供應商騎士視界生產的兩個機器人在舊金山被打爛，執行長李說，他避免把自己的產品視為有感情的生物，客戶卻似乎沒辦法做到這一點。

“Our clients, a significant majority, end up naming the machines themselves,” he said.”There’s Holmes and Watson, there’s Rosie, there’s Steve, there’s CB2, there’s CX3PO.”
他說：「絕大多數客戶都會親自為這些機器取名，有叫福爾摩斯和華生的，有叫蘿西的，還有叫史提夫、CB2、和CX3PO的。」

Wykowska said that cruelty that results from this anthropomorphizing might reflect “Frankenstein syndrome,” because “we are afraid of this thing that we don’t really fully understand, because it’s a little bit similar to us, but not quite enough.”
韋考斯卡說，賦予人性引發的這種殘忍可能是「科學怪人症候群」的表現，因為「我們害怕這個我們並不真正完全了解的東西，因為它跟我們有點像，卻又不夠像」。

原文參照：
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/19/style/why-do-people-hurt-robots.html

2019-02-24 聯合報．D4．紐約時報賞析 李京倫