Anyone think that Robots could rule the world? Read this!

[Guest]

Technotopia & the Death of Nature
Clones, Supercomputers, and Robots
by James Bell

There is no question that technological growth trends in science and industry are increasing exponentially. There is, however, a growing debate about what this runaway acceleration of ingenuity may bring. A number of respected scientists and futurists now are predicting that technological progress is driving the world toward a "Singularity" - a point at which technology and nature will have become one. At this juncture, the world as we have known it will have gone extinct and new definitions of "life," "nature" and "human" will take hold.

"We are on the edge of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth," San Diego University Professor of Computer Science Vernor Vinge first warned the scientific community in 1993. "Within 30 years, we will have the technological means to create superhuman intelligence. Shortly after, the human era will end."

Some scientists and philosophers have theorized that the very purpose of life is to bring about the Singularity. While leading technology industries have been aware of the Singularity concept for some time, there are concerns that, if the public understood the full ramifications of the Singularity, they would be reluctant to accept many of the new and untested technologies such as genetically engineered foods, nano-technology and robotics.

Machine Evolution
A number of books on the coming Singularity are in the works and will soon appear. In 2003, the sequel to the blockbuster film The Matrix will delve into the philosophy and origins of Earth's machine-controlled future. Matrix cast members were required to read Wired editor Kevin Kelly's 1994 book Out of Control: The Rise of Neo-biological Civilization. Page one reads, "The realm of the born - all that is nature - and the realm of the made - all that is humanly constructed - are becoming one."

Meanwhile, Warner Brothers has embarked on the most expensive film of all time - a $180 million sequel called Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines. The film is due out in 2003; a good decade before actual machine evolution is predicted to accelerate "out of control," plunging human civilization towards the Singularity.

Central to the workings of the Singularity are a number of "laws" - one of which is known as Moore's Law. Intel Corp. cofounder Gordon E. Moore noted that the number of transistors that could fit on a single computer chip had doubled every year for six years from the beginnings of integrated circuits in 1959. Moore predicted that the trend would continue, and it has - although the doubling rate was later adjusted to an 18-month cycle.

Today, millions of circuits are found on a single miniscule computer chip and technological "progress" is accelerating at an exponential rather than a linear growth rate.

Stewart Brand, in his book The Clock of the Long Now, discusses another law - Monsanto's Law - which states that the ability to identify and use genetic information doubles every 12 to 24 months. This exponential growth in biological knowledge is transforming agriculture, nutrition and healthcare in the emerging life-sciences industry.

In 2005, IBM plans to introduce "Blue Gene," a computer that can perform one million-billion calculations-per-second - about 1/20th the power of the human brain. This computer could transmit the entire contents of the Library of Congress in less than two seconds. According to Moore's Law, computer hardware will surpass human brainpower in the first decade of this century. Software that emulates the human mind - "artificial intelligence" - may take a few more years to evolve.

Reaching Infinity
The human population also is experiencing tremendous exponential population growth. Dan Eder, a scientist at the Boeing Artificial Intelligence Center, notes that "human population growth over the past 10,000 years has been following a hyperbolic growth trend... with the asymptote [or the point of near-infinite increase] located in the year 2035 AD." An infinite number of humans is, of course, impossible. Scientists predict our numbers will hover around 9 billion by mid-century.

Eder points out that the predicted rise of artificial intelligence coincides with the asymptote of human population growth. He speculates that artificial life could begin to multiply exponentially once biological life has met its finite limits.

Scientists are debating not so much if it will happen, but what discovery will set off a series of Earth-altering technologic events. They suggest that advancements in the fields of nanotechnology or the discovery of artificial intelligence could usher in the Singularity.

Technologic Globalization
Physicists, mathematicians and scientists like Vernor Vinge and Ray Kurzweil have identified through their accelerated technological change theories the likely boundaries of the Singularity and have predicted with confidence the effects leading up to it over the next couple of decades.

The majority of people closest to these theories and laws - the tech sector - can hardly wait for the Singularity to arrive. The true believers call themselves "extropians," "post-humans" and "transhumanists" and are actively organizing not just to bring the Singularity about, but to counter what they call "techno-phobes" and "neo-luddites" - critics like Greenpeace, Earth First! and the Rainforest Action Network.

The Progress Action Coalition [Pro-Act, www.progressaction.org], which was formed in June 2001, fantasizes about "the dream of true artificial intelligence... adding a new richness to the human landscape never before known." The Pro-Act website features several sections where the strategies and tactics of environmental groups and foundations are targeted for "countering."

Pro-Act, AgBioworld, Biotechnology Progress, Foresight Institute, the Progress Freedom Foundation and other industry groups that desire accelerated scientific progress acknowledge that the greatest threat to technologic progress comes not just from environmental groups, but from a small faction of the scientific community - where one voice stands out.

The Warning
In April 2000, a wrench was thrown into the arrival of the Singularity by an unlikely source - Sun Microsystems' Chief Scientist Bill Joy. Joy co-founded Sun Microsystems, helped create the Unix computer operating system and developed the Java and Jini software systems - systems that helped give the Internet "life."

In a now-infamous cover story in Wired magazine, "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us," Joy warned of the dangers posed by developments in genetics, nanotechnology and robotics. Joy's warning of the impacts of exponential technologic progress run amok gave new credence to the coming Singularity. Unless things change, Joy predicted, "We could be the last generation of humans." Joy has warned that "knowledge alone will enable mass destruction" and termed this phenomenon "knowledge-enabled mass destruction" (KMD).

The Times of London compared Joy's statement to Einstein's 1939 letter to President Roosevelt, which warned of the dangers of the nuclear bomb.

The technologies of the 20th century gave rise to nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) technologies that, while powerful, require access to vast amounts of raw (and often rare) materials, technical information and large-scale industries. The 21st century technologies of genetics, nanotechnology and robotics (GNR) however, will require neither large facilities nor rare raw materials.

The threat posed by GNR technologies becomes further amplified by the fact that some of these new technologies have been designed to be able to "replicate" - i.e., they can build new versions of themselves. Nuclear bombs did not sprout more bombs and toxic spills did not grow more spills. If the new self-replicating GNR technologies are released into the environment, they could be nearly impossible to recall or control.

Globalization and Singularity
Joy understands that the greatest dangers we face ultimately stem from a world where global corporations dominate - a future where much of the world has no voice in how the world is run. The 21st century GNR technologies, he writes, "are being developed almost exclusively by corporate enterprises. We are aggressively pursuing the promises of these new technologies within the now-unchallenged system of global capitalism and its manifold financial incentives and competitive pressures."

Joy believes that the system of global capitalism, combined with our current rate of progress, gives the human race a 30 to 50 percent chance of going extinct around the time the Singularity happens. "Not only are these estimates not encouraging," he adds, "but they do not include the probability of many horrid outcomes that lie short of extinction."

Nobel Prize-winning atmospheric chemist Paul Crutzen contends that if chemists earlier in the last century had decided to use bromine instead of chlorine to produce commercial coolants (a mere quirk of chemistry), the ozone hole over Antarctica would have been far larger, would have lasted all year and would have severely affected life on Earth. "Avoiding that was just luck," stated Crutzen.

It is very likely that scientists and global corporations will miss key developments (or, worse, actively avoid discussion of them). A whole generation of biologists has left the field for the biotech and nanotech labs. As biologist Craig Holdredge, who has followed biotech since its early beginnings in the 1970s, warns: The science of "biology is losing its connection with nature."

Yet there is something missing from this discussion of the technologic singularity. The true cost of technologic progress and the Singularity will mean the unprecedented decline of the planet's inhabitants - an ever-increasing rate of global extinction.

The World Conservation Union (IUCN), the International Botanical Congress and a majority of the world's biologists believe that a global "mass extinction" already is underway. As a direct result of human activity (resource extraction, industrial agriculture, the introduction of non-native animals and population growth), up to one-fifth of all living species - mostly in the tropics - are expected to disappear within 30 years. "The speed at which species are being lost is much faster than any we've seen in the past - including those related to meteor collisions," University of Tennessee biodiversity expert Daniel Simberloff told the Washington Post.

A 1998 Harris poll of the 5,000 members of the American Institute of Biological Sciences found 70 percent believed that what has been termed "The Sixth Extinction" is now underway. A simultaneous Harris poll found that 60 percent of the public were totally unaware of the impending biological collapse.

At the same time that nature's ancient biological creation is on the decline, artificial laboratory-created bio-tech life forms - genetically modified tomatoes, genetically engineered salmon, cloned sheep - are on the rise. Already more than 60 percent of food in US grocery stores contain genetically engineered ingredients - and that percentage is rising.

Nature and technology are not just evolving: They are competing and combining with one another. Ultimately there could be only one winner.

[TrailerParkJawa]

This sounds a lot like chicken little doomsday stuff. People have been saying we are going to destroy ourselves forever.

Im not saying endless growth isnt bad, I just dont see ourselves going extinct.

My view of the earth a hundred years from now, its most of the developed world will be like Europe. Crowded and expensive, but still a decent standard of living.

[Mr Bean]

Nature and technology are not just evolving: They are competing and combining with one another. Ultimately there could be only one winner.

Geee Spot the Contradiction?


Genetic Engering is simply taking the "Random" out of evolution

Oooh no we created a planet that is immune to a thousand virus, grows bigger lasts longer, tasts better, uses less water, Downside fokes?

[Sea Skimmer]

Right..

[Pu-239]

I don't believe in a doomsday. I do believe the quality of life will go down the drain and the future will be bleak. Too many people on the planet. We'll never colonize the moon, due to political reasons. Hell we'll never get anything done due to political and economic reasons. Corporations do not like to spend money on R&D for the heck of it, unless they believe they will make a LOT of money.

[Pu-239]

we'll have too many conservatives and fundies holding back progress on things such as cloning, etc.

[Wicked Pilot]

You can't play God like this! Haven't any of you fools ever seen Jurassic Park, or Attack ot the Clones?!

[Mr Bean]

Haven't any of you fools ever seen Jurassic Park, or Attack ot the Clones?!

But those where GOOD THINGS!

Remeber
Popluation Control!
The Hard way....

[Alferd Packer]

Feh. Just use Asimov's three Laws of Robotics, and the machines will be easily controllable.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

One issue with robotics is that some worker might lose thier jobs to these robot workers. I was thinking that a worker could "buy" a robot, and that robot would do the work he would usually do. The worker would receive the wages, but the robot would do the work. That way, nobody oses their job, and people can make money by letting a robot do their work.

[Damaramu]

Reminds me of that Saturday Night Live skit about Robot Attack Insurance.

The elderly folk were randomly attacked by robots, which were the big boxy, trashcan variety as seen in old serials.

[Wicked Pilot]

One issue with robotics is that some worker might lose their jobs to these robot workers.

That happened years ago, and it worked out just fine. Try to stay current.

[Shinova]

The only thing I'm worried about is that global corporations may "overdo it" and rush ahead to develop the latest products without considering ramifications. It might end up blurring the life between life and technology. The two should coexist, not merge. A Culture type of society would be awesome, but a merged one...no.


Personally, I think the world is headed in the wrong direction in terms of technology. Everyone's putting big emphasis on small--faster microchips, nanotechnology, etc.

I think people should put at least equal focus on big--better space technology in other words.

Just my two cents on this issue.

[EmperorChrostas the Cruel]

The dangers of genetic engineering are bigger than you think. (Mr. Bean)
So we grow a plant that is more resistant to viruses, Great. Grows faster, good. Causes long term damage to the immune system, due to low level allergen factor. Not so good. Gets domiant mutation, starts to kill small percentage of humans most alergic to it.

One true case, for the pooh poohers. Monsanto engineered a type of corn that produces an insecticide from within. The corn cross fertilised with normal corn, with totaly unexpected results. The plants poison storage, normaly in the plant itself, started showing up in the pollen. The corn field was in the path of the migrating Monarch butterflies. Large numbers of dead migrants started apearing. A few thousand acres of this stuff, in the right place, can make a species go extinc.
One other little gem. Monsanto has been working on the "terminator" grains. These grains, while produceing many times the yield of normal seeds, do not produce viable fertile seeds. They are good to eat, but can't be planted. This was done, to get foriegn farmers to become dependant on the seed companies, for new fertile seeds every year, like most American ones are. The foriegners have this bad habbit of bying the inproved seeds, and using part of the superior yield for seeds, no longer need the seed companies. If THIS crap gets out and cross fertilizes with the regular stuff, we are looking at the killing off of the ENTIRE GRAIN FAMILY. Think about life on earth with no grains (corn, rice, wheat, barly,) to feed humans. Think about no grasses, or alphalpha, on earth, to feed our food animals.(Grass is a grain) Hell, LOTS of wild animals eat wild grasses. Mass starvation, until the legumes and tubers can fill the gap. And the upswing of methane production do to all those beans being eaten!
All this, because some corporation wanted a guarentied anual income.(Pay or don't farm!)

These are the only examples I can come up with now, but we are playing way too fast and loose with new lifeforms here. The unintended consequence factor here is just to great for the level of caution being displayed here.

If the wrong engineered lifeform gets out, hope we get lucky, and the hole we knock in the eco web doesn't inculde us.

[EmperorChrostas the Cruel]

I do hate to sound alarmist, but this will be the first time in history that an accident, or malicious act of a college student can make the world empty of humans.
Before, we needed expencive, hard to get, and needed in large quantities stuff to kill ourselves.

[The Dark]

The only thing I'm worried about is that global corporations may "overdo it" and rush ahead to develop the latest products without considering ramifications. It might end up blurring the life between life and technology. The two should coexist, not merge. A Culture type of society would be awesome, but a merged one...no.


Personally, I think the world is headed in the wrong direction in terms of technology. Everyone's putting big emphasis on small--faster microchips, nanotechnology, etc.

I think people should put at least equal focus on big--better space technology in other words.

Just my two cents on this issue.

Have you read about that guy in England, Warwick? He's already done some cyborg experiments. I'll see if I can find that issue of Discover that talked about his newest one, communicating nerve signals between himself and his wife.

[Utsanomiko]

I'm still waiting for those solar-powered cars and household robots I was promised to get two years ago. That, and a place to buy gasmasks to use, since the air has "become so polluted that it's unbreatheable in the 21st century."

[Enlightenment]

Unfortunately these issues are a lot more real than a lot of people either understand or are prepared to admit.

A team of specialists have already used off-the-shelf biotech equipment to assemble a simple virus from a genetic sequence. Within a decade the equipment and knowhow will be widely enough available for a sufficiently dedicated individual to make viruses in his or her basement. If this dedicated individual either inadvertantly or deliberately alters the wrong (or 'right') portions of the DNA sequence the resulting virus will be able to elude existing detection and vacination methods. The potential is quite clearly there for a deranged or careless person to--for instance--make an airborne version of AIDS. The danger here is quite literally one of a unique armageddon in every nut's garage.

Computer technology is just as dangerous but in a different way. Assuming Moore's Law holds up (and Palladium doesn't gut the industry), within twenty years processors will be sufficiently powerful to run neural networks on the same scale as the human brain. This is the point where human-equivalent AI becomes possible. Even if it takes another decade after that to develop true AI, the hardware the AIs will be operating on a timescale so short that they will be to us as we are to monkeys. Humanity will no longer be the predominent species on the planet; the effects of this could be extremely unpleasent to put it mildly.

Even if the AIs don't take over there will be economic consequences. Strong AIs will be able to do anything humans can except for a lot less money. Capitalism has no limiting factors: if XYZCorp can make six times the profit by firing all its human employees and purchasing AIs, XYZCorp will switch to sillicon labor. Repeat globally until the (now AI-based) economy is reaching record levels while the rest of humanity has been made economically obsolete save for a few thousand extremely wealthy executives who sit at the top of the AI-based corporations. Sooner or later the whole thing crashes because capitalism will have put all its consumers in a position where they can't afford to consume.

Any way one wishes to view it, the singularity has one hell of a jagged edge.

[Uraniun235]

The article is worthless; what are we supposed to do about this threat to humanity? Just lay down and die knowing what killed us?

Sounds like alarmist science-fiction to me; hell, in the 60's they were predicting hundreds of millions dying of starvation in the 70s. There's a lot of starving people, true, but not the mass die-offs that "The Population Bomb" was saying would happen.