Not exactly. But last month scientists announced that monkeys had passed genetic modifications to their offspring for the first time.
Planet of the Apes it is not; the genetic modifications merely cause the monkeys to glow green under fluorescent light.
But it is another step toward the world of Gattaca: we have achieved heritable modifications with primates, and the “same techniques would be used on chimps or other primates even closer to humans or to try to endow people with desirable genetic traits,” the article noted.
Source: Rob Stein, “Monkeys first to inherit genetic modifications,” SFGate.com, May 28, 2009. Image copyright FutureAtlas.com — usable with link and attribution
June 30th, 2009
Military affairs expert Peter W. Singer was recently asked by Slate to examine the possibilities of a Terminator-style robot takeover. Despite 12,000 unmanned vehicles and 7,000 drones now fighting alongside the US military, he suggests we have a ways to go before this might occur.
Singer states four conditions he sees as necessary:
1. “The machines would have to have some sort of survival instinct or will to power.
Not exactly. They simply have to decide, for some reason, that humans need to be subjugated or removed. It need not be survival or the desire to dominate; the reason could be irrational, or the obscure outcome of some kind of AI philosophy — they might even think they were doing us good.
2. “The machines would have to be more intelligent than humans but have no positive human qualities (such as empathy or ethics).”
They don’t have to be smarter than us: fairly stupid entities can still do a great deal of damage, particularly if they happen to have capabilities that their enemies lack. And they certainly could have positive qualities: humans have done immense amounts of evil despite our good qualities, and sometimes because of them. Religious devotion and cultural affinity drove the medieval Crusaders to commit acts of unspeakable brutality, all in the name of Christianity.
3. “The third condition for a machine takeover would be the existence of independent robots that could fuel, repair, and reproduce themselves without human help.”
These capabilities are important, but they could also coerce or enslave humans to carry out needed tasks, or even find willing human minions.
4. “A robot invasion could only succeed if humans had no useful fail-safes or ways to control the machines’ decision-making.”
True, but we have yet to devise an unbeatable fail-safe, particularly one that could control an intelligence actively trying to thwart it.
Singer notes a few facts:
- The Global Hawk drone can already take off on its own, fly 3,000 miles, and then return to its starting point and land.
- People are working on evolutionarly or self-educating software, suggestive of Skynet’s (in Terminator) ability to rewrite its own software.
- A robotics firm has already been asked by the military to create a robot that “looked like the ‘Hunter-Killer robot of Terminator.’”
(Kudos to Singer for reminding us of the need for robot insurance with a link to this video.)
Source: Peter W. Singer, “Gaming the Robot Revolution,” Slate, May 22, 2009, viewed at Brookings.edu.
June 29th, 2009
A journalist recently asked me to comment as a futurist on the supposed disaster that some foresee for 2012.
In the Drake Magazine article “The Sky Is Falling” (under Features) I am quoted as saying:
Not everyone reading into the Mayan calendar sees the end of the world. Josh Calder …. doesn’t think anything will happen. To him, the Mayan-calendar madness is just another in a long line of end of the world theories. As a futurist, Calder’s job is to predict the future for corporations and government agencies. When examining trends in consumer behavior or national security, the 2012 date has never come up in his work. “Full destruction might be achieved by an astronomical event or a physics accident, but both of these seem a very low probability,” he says.
Calder believes worrying about 2012 is a waste of time and energy. “There has never been any solid evidence of magical foreknowledge of the future,” he says. “It is illogical to think that this will suddenly change.” Astronomically, he says the end of the world is set for billions of years in the future and, though he knows of a few ways we could be in trouble, Calder doesn’t seem too worried. “With luck, we will avoid them,” he says.
Image courtesy Torley (Flickr)
May 17th, 2009
The new British version of Wired included a comment from me on genetics.
“We expect that this price will continue to drop, making some form of genetic analysis accessible to large numbers of people within the next decade,” [Linda Avey] says. Tamar Kasriel likens sequencing to a “Damocletian threat”, but Josh Calder disagrees. “The list of things we can partially prevent or prepare for is going to grow long enough that we’re going to want to do it.”
I’m not actually disagreeing with Kasriel: some ways that we could pursue genetic knowledge and biotech are indeed deeply threatening. I just suspect that collectively we are going to want to use that knowledge to prevent suffering, and that will almost inevitably blur into improvements (even if we don’t go as far as Gattaca), with different people and cultures disagreeing about the desirable and permissible boundaries of this use of genetics.
April 26th, 2009
In futurist movies, the US has often fallen under some kind of tyrannical government — see, for instance, The Handmaid’s Tale.
Americans see themselves as deeply attached to freedom, but polling data consistently reveals a minority with at least some authoritarian inclinations.
For instance, new Pew poll shows that:
- Only 31% of Americans think that torture is never justified; 42% say that it is often or sometimes justified. Sixty-five percent of Republicans say that torture is often or sometimes justified.
- Half of all Americans think that government wiretaps of suspected terrorists without court approval is “generally right;” 74% of Republicans say this.
These opinions are based on fear of attack; what more would be deemed allowable in more extreme circumstances?
March 29th, 2009
“Never Let Me Go is about to start filming, with Keira Knightly in the lead role.
It is based on the Kazuo Ishiguro novel by the same name, and if it retains half of the book’s seriousness, it may be the first solid cloning movie since The Boys from Brazil.
The topic has typically been dealt with at the level of pure sensationalism, as in The Sixth Day, or obscured with a quasi-mystical veneer, as in The Island.
Image courtesy Bosslyn (Flickr) — usable with attribution
March 22nd, 2009
Seemingly taking a cue from Futuristmovies.com’s rating system, the London Times has created a list of the 50 best movie robots, rated by plausibility, coolness, dangerousness, and comedic value.
August 1st, 2007
Astronomers have discovered the brightest supernova ever seen, and there is a star “near” Earth thought to be a candidate for a similar explosion.
This would have its positives and negatives:
- On the positive side, it would be possible to read a book at night by the light of the dying star.
- On the negative, the proximity of the blast — 7,500 light years — could make Earth vulnerable to a gamma ray blast that could severely damage the atmosphere and biosphere, even inducing an ice age. Fortunately, the odds of the blast being pointed directly at Earth are low.
Cosmiclog notes that two movies have covered supernovas:
There was a “Supernova” movie starring James Spader and Angela Bassett, as well as a “Supernova” made-for-TV movie with Tia Carrere and Luke Perry — but neither made much of a scientific or a critical splash.
May 15th, 2007
Writing in Salon, Simon Reynolds laments the science fiction futures that never arrived, and offers a term: “neostalgia”–”nostalgia for the future.” (That malady is, incidentally, an occupational hazard of the futurist.)
May 15th, 2007
Scientists have successfully given mice full color vision by inserting a human gene into mouse embryos, the WP reports.
Mice normally see in yellows, blues, and grays, and it was not known if the modified mice would be able to use the new gene, or if their brains would have to gradually adjust to the change over generations. Tests revealed that the gene was effective in the first generation.
This is important in the question of making this kind of macro change in creatures. If an animal — or person — is given a new feature or ability, such as tail, or infrared vision, will it be useless because their brains are designed to handle it? This study suggests more plasticity in the brain’s ability to adapt.
The article notes more immediate implications:
The work also points to the possibility of curing some of the millions of colorblind Americans — and even enhancing the vision of healthy people, allowing them to experience a richer palette than is possible with standard-issue eyes.
A scientist suggests that people might be given fourth color receptor — human have three — and thus be able to see a whole new world of color. One can iimagine ready adoption of vision enhancements by soldiers, including the ability to see colors invisible to normal people, and also to see in the dark without mechanical enhancements.
March 24th, 2007
Previous Posts