c

1. A Subtle Way to Seek Attention When a man scratches a woman’s palm, it could be a discreet attempt to capture her attention. This gesture might signify that he wishes to communicate something but is hesitant to express it verbally. The act serves as a gentle nudge to focus on him, signaling his interest in engaging her in conversation or sharing a moment. c

Why Men Prefer Slim Women: A Deep Dive into Biological, Cultural, and Psychological PerspectivesThe concept of physical attraction has fascinated humans for centuries. People’s preferences in partners can vary widely, influenced by factors such as culture, upbringing, media, and individual psychology. Among these preferences, a recurring stereotype suggests that many men tend to prefer slimmer women. But why is this the case? Is it driven purely by biology, shaped by cultural standards, or influenced by modern trends in media and fashion? c

The world of bugs and insects is as magnificent as it is terrifying. When it comes to the small variants we’re usually okay in dealing with them, but most people prefer when the bigger bugs stay a safe distance away. And by safe distance, we mean “stay still in eyesight but give me enough room to start running if you move.” But since you clicked on this article, you’re probably someone that doesn’t mind the occasional creepy critter and you’re thrilled to join our ride through the wonderful world of big bugs. c Tarantula Hawk Wasp While this wasp may not be as big as some of the other creatures on this list with a size of only 5 cm, it deserves a spot for being the biggest wasp and getting its name because it literally hunts and kills tarantulas. Also, this cute lady paralyzes its prey, pops a single egg in it and then lets the larva eat the victim. Atlas Beetle This 13 cm long subtype of rhinoceros beetle can be found in Indonesia and, like all rhino beetles, can be pretty fiesty and aggressive if you run into one. You can find the reason for its name in the fact that its mandibles look like they could hold up the sky, much like Atlas had to.

In an unexpected and shocking announcement, Jimmy Kimmel, the beloved host of Jimmy Kimmel Live!, revealed that his long-running late-night talk show will officially come to an end on January 20, and he will be leaving the United States to move to Canada forever. The surprising statement has left fans and the entertainment world in disbelief, as Kimmel has been a fixture of American late-night  television for over a decade. c

It’s well known that Biden has a history of touching and sniffing the hair of little girls- the dude is a pervert. c

c

We’re bombarded with messaging trying to hijack our quick fear responses, says UC Berkeley political scientist Marika Landau-Wells. Brain research could tell us more about how to change our perception of what’s dangerous and what’s not. c January 27, 2025 Key takeaways We learn what to be afraid of; once we fear something, it’s hard to change our perception. We’re bombarded with messaging trying to hijack our quick fear responses. Research on how the brain processes fear could help us persuade people to see dangers differently and influence how world leaders make decisions. Follow Berkeley Voices, a Berkeley News podcast about the people and research that make UC Berkeley the world-changing place that it is. Review us on Apple Podcasts. See all Berkeley Voices episodes.  Against her mom’s warnings, UC Berkeley political scientist Marika Landau-Wells watched Arachnaphobia as a kid. Ever since, she has been terrified of spiders. But over the years, she has learned to reason with her quick fear response — No, that spider is not 8 feet in diameter — and calmly trap them and put them outside. Marika Landau-Wells is an assistant professor of political science at UC Berkeley.Aidan Milliff We all encounter problems like this, she says, where we have quick reactions to things we’ve learned to fear. It might be something that is actually dangerous that we really should quickly react to, but it could also be a tiny, non-threatening spider. Each time, we have to decide what kind of problem it is and then how to respond. She says this task is especially hard today because we’re inundated with messages trying to hijack our fear response, from junky online ads to the way politicians speak. Landau-Wells studies how we make these kinds of decisions, and what influences how we act, especially in situations where there’s a lot on the line. Her research reveals just how hard it is to tell the difference between a threat that requires your attention and one that you can ignore, and could influence how world leaders make decisions about how to keep their countries safe. This is the fourth episode of our eight-part series on transformation. In eight episodes, we’re exploring how transformation — of ideas, of research, of perspective — shows up in the work that happens every day at UC Berkeley. New episodes of the series come out on the last Monday of each month.

UC Berkeley Professor Timothy Tangherlini uses lessons from folklore and AI to understand how social media fuels the spread of conspiracies, and how we can use storytelling tools to stem the tide of misinformation. c February 5, 2025 Even in the face of overwhelming evidence, false narratives can be incredibly sticky. Many people insist that the earth is flat, that childhood vaccines cause autism, or that climate change is a hoax, despite ample scientific evidence to the contrary. “Stories are very powerful,” said Timothy Tangherlini, a UC Berkeley professor in the Department of Scandinavian and the School of Information. “We’re much more comfortable with hearing stories that confirm our beliefs than ones that challenge them.” Tangherlini sees narratives like these, and the many other conspiracies that are rife in today’s internet culture, as a type of modern-day folklore. As a computational folklorist, he uses AI tools to study how social media networks have accelerated the spread of conspiracies and false beliefs, and what, if anything, we can do to slow them down. Following an election cycle dominated by conspiracies and hoaxes — from elites controlling the path of hurricanes, to 20 million missing votes for Kamala Harris and immigrants eating people’s pets — Tangherlini’s work is more relevant than ever. Berkeley News spoke with Tangherlini about why conspiratorial thinking has flourished in recent years and how we might spread stories of inclusion and truth that are powerful enough to stem the tide of false belief. UC Berkeley News: What motivated you to study conspiracy theories through the lens of folklore and storytelling? Timothy Tangherlini: I think of conspiracy theories as narrative constructs, as fictional. And they can be very powerful because they are stories. Narratives are very efficient at encapsulating norms, beliefs and values — and when we tell them over and over, they get pared down to the most efficient kernel of narrative weight. Timothy Tangherlini is a UC Berkeley professor in the Department of Scandinavian and School of Information, director of the Graduate Folklore Program and associate director of the Berkeley Institute for Data Science.UC Berkeley These belief narratives — stories that we tell each other that we believe to be true — can influence belief, and these beliefs then create a feedback mechanism, so that once you’ve got a belief, it’s very hard to change it. You start to seek out narratives that confirm your beliefs. I’m particularly fascinated by the fact that so many of these stories wind up being about outside threats. Often, it’s the Ghostbusters question: When ghosts appear in the neighborhood, who are you going to call? Or, how are we going to deal with some sort of threat to the integrity of our community? These threats can then force real world action, an example of which we saw with the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol attack. The question becomes: How do you interrupt these kinds of narratives when they start to have a significant impact on democratic institutions and civil society? We’re living in a world that seems rife with conspiracy theories. What is it about our current society that makes it so prone to conspiracies? We as humans tend to surround ourselves with people who have similar beliefs, and we also align our beliefs with the people around us. You might believe things, but you want to be part of the group, so you adjust your beliefs — you negotiate the boundaries of belief. On social media, your idea that the people that you’re interacting with share your beliefs, values and norms may not apply — in part because many of them may actually be robots. Tim Tangherlini This process has been profoundly interrupted by the advent of social media. The groups that we interact with online are no longer the close, homogeneous groups that we are used to and were socialized in, so the social brakes that used to be there have come off, and the speed and directionality of messaging has changed magnitude — things can get out much faster. People have also worked really hard to erode our trust in the media. We used to have newspapers of record, like the New York Times or the LA Times. You might not have agreed with their opinions, but you could trust the underlying reporting. Now there’s been a concerted effort to challenge the underlying reporting itself. And with the advent of generative AI, it’s also possible to generate not only audio recordings but also visual recordings — deep fakes — and newspaper articles that give the illusion of being true, but really aren’t. As soon as you start losing confidence in your news sources, then you’re going to turn to these other narrative sources — those could be your friends, they could be your family, or they could be people who you think share your values on the internet. Could you talk a little bit more about these social brakes and how social media has interrupted them? We’re all part of groups in real life, even if they are just friend groups or families. When I start talking, my family will often shut me down because they know that I just talk too much, right? Or, if I was out with friends for tacos and beer and I said, “Well, did you hear what happened in Roswell?” my friends would respond, “Shut up, Tim.” Those are the kinds of social brakes that we’re all familiar with. It can be as simple as that. But there are effectively no social brakes on social media. You might be interacting with people who just love to see a train wreck, and so they give you a thumbs up and away you go, off to the races. And on social media, your idea that the people that you’re interacting with share your beliefs, values and norms may not apply, in part because many of them may actually be robots. I like to point out that no one sits down to pizza and beer with robots, but on social media, that’s what many of your engagements are. … Read more

Dorsal Grasper provides an intuitive, collaborative grasping approach February 10, 2025 by Marni Ellery More than 15 million people worldwide are living with spinal cord injury (SCI), which can affect their sensory and motor functions below the injury level. For individuals with SCI between C5 and C7 cervical levels, this can mean paralysis affecting their limbs and limited voluntary finger and wrist flexion, making it difficult to grasp large, heavy objects. c The Dorsal Grasper, with its supernumerary robotic fingers, can expand the range of graspable objects and workspace. (Photo by Adam Lau/Berkeley Engineering) Another unique feature is the device’s use of robotic fingers to grasp with the back of the hand. Today, robotic wearables often fit around the person’s fingers, which creates a tension between what the person and the robot each want to do. With supernumerary grasping, both the person and robot are free to act as they see fit. And while grasping with the back of the hand may look a little silly, we believe it has great advantages that could one day allow the Dorsal Grasper to be an accessible and effective device. Drew: This population also generally uses wheelchairs to get around. So it can be hard to approach certain surfaces head-on, like counters or the refrigerator, to grab something, given that the legs are in the way. And with limited trunk control and overall body mobility, that kind of graspable workspace, or being able to reach things off a counter, is really restricted. This device stands out in that you can grasp with one hand pretty much anywhere you can reach that arm, which greatly expands your workspace. And you can grasp larger objects by using the supernumerary robotic fingers. What did you learn from your latest in-lab tests of the Dorsal Grasper? Jungpyo: Based on our in-lab testing with the Dorsal Grasper, we found that subjects could reach their hand out and rotate their hand a lot. So they could simply rotate their head to see the location and then easily grasp the object. This was possible because the robotic finger could be controlled with just wrist extension, something they use all the time. In follow-up interviews, many subjects mentioned that this control method made operating the device feel really intuitive. Hannah: And we achieved such intuitive operation without relying on any fancy components, like EMG [electromyography] sensors or neural interfaces. Jungpyo: The person is a partner, controlling the robotic finger and wrist extension. For example, sometimes the force of the robotic finger is not enough to grasp a heavy object. In that case, a person can extend their wrist more and increase grasping force, so they can successfully achieve this grasping. And if we want to drop an object of any size, we can simply release our wrist and grasping force and drop the object immediately, without waiting for a robotic response. Compared to a fully robotic system, the Dorsal Grasper allows for a faster response. How does the Dorsal Grasper help advance the field of assistive technology? Drew: A lot of devices seek to replace or do the same type of grasping that people are doing already, and the Dorsal Grasper isn’t trying to do that at all. I haven’t seen a lot of devices that adequately support intent detection, which is a significant challenge within the field. With Dorsal Grasper, we’re able to use people’s residual strength and their ability to move their wrist. That partial body power allows the device to read their intention to grab things, which allows for fewer false positives, or fewer accidental grasps. And this then makes it a little bit easier to use the device. And it’s not about just the device, but how we’re assessing the device. We’re not simply creating tasks that highlight the benefits of the robot, but rather we’re looking at ways that this device might be able to help someone in real life. Often this process involves applying my own lived experience as a person with SCI. Drew, you’re about to wrap up your Ph.D. and have been working on this project for many years. What’s changed since you first started this research? Drew: What’s changed the most is how I think about usability and design. I’ve become more critical of how devices can be used and how they can also get in the way. I think a lot of these devices are looked at in a very narrow scope of, “here’s a couple sets of tasks that we’re going to demonstrate in a lab.” But that doesn’t necessarily translate. That said, I truly did not have an appreciation for how difficult of a design challenge this would be: To build something that a user would not only want to wear because it’s comfortable, but also looks okay and isn’t going to stand out in the grocery store or look weird unless they want it to look futuristic — and some users do. Again, it’s going to need to be easy enough to take on and off. Otherwise, it’s going to just get discarded and stuffed in a closet and never get used. What have you learned from working with subjects while testing the Dorsal Grasper? Hannah: We’ve realized that even though someone has tetraplegia, they might still retain a lot of dexterity and ability. And we’ve grown an appreciation for the abilities that a person has in the absence of the device that we’re introducing. Our testing allows us to then see if the introduction of the device might negatively impact them or add new abilities. Drew McPherson and Hannah Stuart demonstrate the newest version of the Dorsal Grasper in the Embodied Dexterity Group’s lab at UC Berkeley. (Photo by Adam Lau/Berkeley Engineering) So we specifically included evaluation of people wearing the device but not using it. This comes back to that idea that Drew was talking about: Do you have to take it on and off? Is it practical? Is it useful? The first thing a device needs to do is not get … Read more