But it's suddenly become very fashionable to poo-poo or sweep-aside the pending impacts of such things as the looming robotics and manufacturing revolutions, the rise of super AI, radical life extension, or the migration of humans to postbiological form. My best guesses as to why include the arrogance of the now (i.e. "we currently live at the most special of times and things will never change too significantly"), distraction (i.e. "there are other more important issues that require our attention"), fear of looking silly or losing credibility, denial, weak imaginations, and just plain ignorance.
As David Deutsch notes in his latest book, The Beginning of Infinity, humans are a remarkable species in that they serve as universal constructors. So long as the laws of physics are honoured and the requisite amounts of resources are provided, the space of all possible inventions remains massively large and profound. As for the denialism that has suddenly crept into futurist circles, the burden of proof is shifting increasingly to them; the naysayers need to explain exactly how it is that we'll never come to develop these technologies—and how their presence won't change the fabric of life and the human condition itself.
A number of scientists, engineers and futurists have dedicated their careers to predicting technological possibilities and their resultant social ramifications. With names like Eric Drexler, Robert Freitas, Aubrey de Grey, Gregory Stock, Ray Kurzweil, and Nick Bostrom, these predictions are coming from heavy-hitting thinkers; this ain't your father's Popular Science "flying car" style futurism. And in many cases, the further we progress into the future, the more credible these claims are appearing to be.
Here's a quick overview of what's been predicted—developments that will forever alter what we currently think of as normalcy and the human condition:
- Artificial superintelligence: Recursively self-improving expert systems endowed with significantly greater-than-human intelligence, capacity, and reach; the end of human primacy on the planet; an extinction risk and potential existential paradigm changer.
- Molecular nanotechnology: Manufacturing and materials construction at the molecular scale; the complete re-thinking of engineering and manufacturing; the rise of molecular assemblers (i.e. "replicators" or "fabricators") and the end of scarcity; the advent of molecular-scale robotics; the threat and promise of self-replication; and a serious existential risk.
- Robotics revolution: Hyper-automation and massive unemployment; the grim potential for robotic warfare/terrorism and the rise of machine ethics; the unpredictable impacts of the convergence of robotics with artificial intelligence; robots that can self-replicate, swarm, assemble, create emergent effects, self-organize, and repair; a potential existential risk.
- The ongoing biotechnological revolution: Enhanced and modified humans (i.e. cyborgs, genetically altered humans, postbiological beings), indefinite lifespans; regenerative medicine; advanced psychopharmaceuticals; the ongoing diminishment of corporeal importance (including possible mind transfers) and extended personhood; transgenics and animal enhancement.
- The ongoing communications revolution: Noosphere/global brain (where human minds are interlinked with our communications technology and the internet).
- The political and sociological impacts of these disruptive technologies: The demise of privacy and the rise of the surveillance state; the further diminishment of civil liberties and the onset of neo-authoritarianism.
- Megascale engineering: Assuming humanity will survive this far: The graduation of humanity to Kardashev I and Kardashev II civilizations through the advent of such things as the Dyson Sphere, Jupiter Brain and Matrioshka Brain; the onset of technogainism, remedial ecology and the reworking of Earth's entire ecosystem (including weather control); the permanent retiring of Darwinian processes on the planet.
So, just keep on thinking that the future is going to be more of the same.
4 comments:
After a Spring of reasonably good PR for Kurzweil and a summer of (related?) attacks on the plausibility of radical and disruptive change, this reminder that things will be different is much appreciated.
Of all of these the only one that seems to present a kind of absolute change is an A.I. super-intelligence. Each of the others will radically change the face of humanity, but won't really fundamentally alter the balances of power in society, and consequently the fabric of that society. There will still be the haves and the have-nots, no matter how far the standard of living is raised (even perhaps post material scarcity).
I very much doubt the Singularity will occur within a century. The brain is by no means a simple digital computer and there is evidence suggesting that the "processing power" of that hunk of cheese between your ears is thousands of times higher than Kurzweil estimated.
"As summed up by George Dvorsky last Friday, the broad trends of technology in the 21st century seem very likely to involve the progressive development of eternal youth’s tech between 2020 and 2060. Artificial superintelligence, molecular nanotechnology, enhanced and modified humans (i.e. cyborgs, genetically altered humans, postbiological beings) are keys elements of this not-so-far future. If you get to live (with help of LEV’s strategies) until 2040, you will probably have access to unlimited lifespan. Aubrey de Grey, a leading anti-aging’s expert, has predicted that the first person to live to be 1000 years old is already born. But if you can live 1000 years, why wouldn’t you be able to live 1 million’s more ?[...]"
The full article here:
http://singularitynews.co/2011/08/21/21st-century-live-forever-horcruxes/
Post a Comment