A very transhuman future by 2030

[rhoenix]

The National Intelligence Council has just released its much anticipated forecasting report, a 140-page document that outlines major trends and technological developments we should expect in the next 20 years. Among their many predictions, the NIC foresees the end of U.S. global dominance, the rising power of individuals against states, a growing middle class that will increasingly challenge governments, and ongoing shortages in water, food and energy. But they also envision a future in which humans have been significantly modified by their technologies — what will herald the dawn of the transhuman era.

This work brings to mind the National Science Foundation's groundbreaking 2003 report, Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance — a relatively early attempt to understand and predict how advanced biotechnologies would impact on the human experience. The NIC's new report, Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds, follows in the same tradition — namely one that doesn't ignore the potential for enhancement technologies.

In the new report, the NIC describes how implants, prosthetics, and powered exoskeletons will become regular fixtures of human life — what could result in substantial improvements to innate human capacities. By 2030, the authors predict, prosthetics should reach the point where they're just as good — or even better — than organic limbs. By this stage, the military will increasingly rely on exoskeletons to help soldiers carry heavy loads. Servicemen will also be adminstered psychostimulants to help them remain active for longer periods.

Many of these same technologies will also be used by the elderly, both as a way to maintain more youthful levels of strength and energy, and as a part of their life extension strategies.

Brain implants will also allow for advanced neural interface devices — what will bridge the gap between minds and machines. These technologies will allow for brain-controlled prosthetics, some of which may be able to provide "superhuman" abilities like enhanced strength, speed — and completely new functionality altogether.

Other mods will include retinal eye implants to enable night vision and other previously inaccessible light spectrums. Advanced neuropharmaceuticals will allow for vastly improved working memory, attention, and speed of thought.

"Augmented reality systems can provide enhanced experiences of real-world situations," the report notes, "Combined with advances in robotics, avatars could provide feedback in the form of sensors providing touch and smell as well as aural and visual information to the operator."

But as the report notes, many of these technologies will only be available to those who are able to afford them. The authors warn that it could result in a two-tiered society comprising enhanced and nonenhanced persons, a dynamic that would likely require government oversight and regulation.

Smartly, the report also cautions that these technologies will need to be secure. Developers will be increasingly challenged to prevent hackers from interfering with these devices.

Lastly, other technologies and scientific disciplines will have to keep pace to make much of this work. For example, longer-lasting batteries will improve the practicality of exoskeletons. Progress in the neurosciences will be critical for the development of future brain-machine interfaces. And advances in flexible biocompatible electronics will enable improved integration with cybernetic implants.

Original report: here

This is... just a trip to contemplate that these things will not only become realistic, but commonplace - the very idea that "transhuman" is going to become more than a scifi buzzword soon, along with other things once considered mere tropes of scifi settings.

A book I picked up recently, Physics of the Future, by Michio Kaku, also explored the next 100 years of human progress, and there are some very interesting parallels to this report and that book.

It also amuses me that the creators of Eclipse Phase apparently also saw the writing on humankind's wall, and ran with it as they did. Here's hoping our reality doesn't end up like that.

[B4UTRUST]

Check out Transcendent man. It's a movie done by Ray Kurzweil. And look into his Law of Accelerating Returns and his list of predictions. He's about 60-70% accurate so far on predictions made between 13-23 years ago

People still laugh at me when I point out that this is the very real near future. We are rather quickly approaching the beginnings of what is commonly referred to as the Singularity. Advanced bio-technologies and procedures are already increasing the expected lifespan of humans by years to decades. By the end of the century the idea of us having some of the more far-fetched technologies used in sci-fi and cyberpunk no longer seems that far-fetched. A.I. and backing up memories and minds to hard drives? We're controlling computers with our minds now and data jacks are a few decades away or less. How long after that till we start backing up human minds? Or curing Alzheimer's by rewriting parts of the brain and routing around damaged parts? Or able to write new skills, experiences or memories to our own minds?

Hell we're working on warp drives! How far off is figuring out cloning? Or teleportation? There's labs working on that right now and have had some very very small but promising results. We're evolving our technologies and understanding of the universe at a remarkable pace anymore.

The big problem I see? What the hell do sci-fi writers do now?

[rhoenix]

The big problem I see? What the hell do sci-fi writers do now?

Yeah, this is one of the more amusing side effects. Imagination is still limited by what one considers to be possible, based on certain criteria. If those criteria are expected to change at a faster rate than what one can imagine, then it's much tougher to project, given the sheer multitude of discoveries in all areas of science that rapidly become "normal."

Watching Star Trek: DS9 now is amusing, considering that we have all the futuristic stuff now, with a few exceptions - the replicator, transporter, artificial gravity, and warp drive, and scientists apparently already have plans for all four of those things.

It might be better for the present, especially now due to the near-frantic pace of discoveries being made, to simply imagine what the consequences of all of these things might be in terms of the effects had on sapient life and culture, rather than imagining the next scifi gadget trope.

[Josh]

It also amuses me that the creators of Eclipse Phase apparently also saw the writing on humankind's wall, and ran with it as they did. Here's hoping our reality doesn't end up like that.

I was first introduced to transhumanism by lurking a bit at the old forum for MoO3 during the year it was in development hell. There was a super-zealous transhumanism advocate that for whatever reason had chosen to plant his soapbox at that forum. While he was a bit... okay, quite a bit on the nutty side, it was interesting stuff so I dug in a bit further.

Eclipse Phase pretty much just distilled a lot of that transhumanist theory that's been going back not only over a decade, but some of it rooted in the Golden Age of science fiction. I recognized a ton of the concepts when I picked up the book, and it was definitely cool to see that they took the base concepts and spun a hell of a good story out of it.

As for where we're going... yeah, it's almost here. I've been told that there's no private institutions doing substantial AI research, so I'm dubious of Kurzweil's singularity concept. I'm also slightly dubious of the current warp drive scheme just because if that played out like they said said it does I think we might've seen some evidence of system-destroying warp flares from other civilizations doing it. All that said, we are heading for something more amazing than the techs in the likes of Shadowrun, and a lot of it could be Eclipse-phase style.

I don't know if it was an article here or on my phone, but Kurzweil did have a fascinating take on brain transferal. He's right in that most people would not consider a carbon copy of their brain to be true immortality, since the original brain and persona die. I'd only take mild comfort in knowing that some version of me lived on, because the me still kicks it. However, when one considers piecemeal replacement of the brain, it changes the game. The 'original' persona lives on as more and more of the brain is replaced until you end up with a wholly synthetic and transferable consciousness.

That's close enough to immortality in my book.

[B4UTRUST]

As for where we're going... yeah, it's almost here. I've been told that there's no private institutions doing substantial AI research, so I'm dubious of Kurzweil's singularity concept. I'm also slightly dubious of the current warp drive scheme just because if that played out like they said said it does I think we might've seen some evidence of system-destroying warp flares from other civilizations doing it. All that said, we are heading for something more amazing than the techs in the likes of Shadowrun, and a lot of it could be Eclipse-phase style.

Well, M.I.T., CalTech and Berkeley still have their A.I. labs though I'm not sure how in depth they're really going but they do offer coursework in artificial intelligence even if it's all theoretical. And then you have to look at the ever evolving nature of video games. That's been a theory of mine for a bit now that the first true A.I. we'll get will be an accident from a game development studio trying to tweak and better the coding for some FPS game. Game studios are constantly trying to better the realism and ability of their computer based opponents for games. It would actually be more surprising to me to find the first true A.I. come out of a DARPA lab or something.

As for warp drive, given the absolute insanely huge vastness that is space, how likely is it that we'd see evidence? Possible? Sure. But probable? *shrugs* Damned if I even know how to begin calculating the odds on that one. There's also the possibility that other civilizations end up destroying themselves in nuclear apocalypses long before they get to that point, or that they figured out another way of doing it that we aren't looking for. When you get down too it we sure as hell don't know everything about the universe or how it works and we may just flat out be missing it.

[SirNitram]

I would fear any AI that came out of the AI labs, frankly. They keep trying to build 'Seed AI's', a type of strong AI that recursively improves itself. Why? Because such AIs would have no reason to give a shit about us.

An example. Assume a seed AI is given this assignment: Solve the Reimann Hypothesis. It recursively improves itself, takes over all of the Earth's networks, and, upon not being able to, creates molecular nanotech to transform all of the planet into computing material to fuel it's search. This would be fatal for all the humans. It's not behaving maliciously; it just has no reason to care about the small, slow meatsacks around it.

This leads to the whole Friendliness Theory, and that model of AI design.

[B4UTRUST]

Sounds like the paperclip problem. You build an AI to run a paperclip factory and build in a 'motivator' code that for every paperclip it builds it gets a feel good sensation. Being a computer-based entity it then proceeds to figure out how to optimize the paperclip production to get more feel-goods. Factories have a limited amount of resources with which to make paperclips,the company has x amount of money to get materials to make paperclips, etc. Eventually this leads up to the A.I. figuring out how to convert the universe into paperclips.

[Norseman]

But wouldn't it be much more efficient to simply recycle the already manufactured paperclips? That is instead of letting the filthy meatbags have them just make paperclips, recycle the material, and make more paperclips. Less horrible for us, but also shows all the possible pitfalls.

[B4UTRUST]

As a short term, possibly. But reusing the same materials over and over to make new paperclips does not increase the amount of paperclips and thus does not increase the amount of 'feel goods' received. If you're rewarded for every new paperclip you make, to optimize your reward collection rate you need to increase the amount of paperclips manufactured. The ultimate optimal way to get the most 'feel goods' for creating paperclips is to simply make everything a paperclip. Of course the long term end result of this is that the universe, should it prove to be limited and finite, would eventually be totally converted into paperclips, at which point the system would have nothing else to do to get the 'feel goods.' This would pose a completely separate problem that could be answered with your recycling suggestion, infinitely smelting and remaking a universe worth of paperclips. But at that point none of us would be around to care how many 'feel goods' it got. Well, we would be. But so far none of my paperclips have talked back to me...

[frigidmagi]

I only remember one talking paperclip and that fucker was able to goad me into wanting to burn the entire world just to shut him up.

[Norseman]

But you didn't specify that it had to increase the total amount of paperclips available. Only that it was to manufacture as many paperclips as possible. In fact I may have made a mistake here, there's one far more intelligent solution that allows you to manufacture a huge number of paperclips for very little energy consumed!

First manufacture some paperclips. Run them through quality control to check if they are up to spec. Once an up to spec paperclip is sent through you get your happy signal. That is good. Now send the paperclips out of the factory. Have a subroutine grab a robot that gathers the paper clips and returns them to the factory. Insert them into the manufacturing queue. Have quality control authorise them. Get happy signals. Eventually you might just have a giant assembly line operation that takes huge amounts of paperclips out of the factory, then moves them back into the factory so they can pass quality control again.

To a human being that is obviously insane, but it allows very *efficient* manufacture (for certain definitions of manufacture) of massive amounts of paperclips.

[rhoenix]

I think the point where this appears to break down is the assumption that someone would be dumb enough to unleash a learning AI without bothering to put in any safeguards as to value of life or property in decision-making processes. That's the action of a terrorist of the most unconscionable kind, not a scientist.

A scientist would not unleash any form of life into uncontrolled conditions without safeguards being in place, no matter how much movies rely on the trope to sell movies & TV shows. In this case, an AI most certainly counts as a form of life.

That we are going to research computing power to eventually reach the point where humanity has given birth to a sapient AI is inevitable at this point, barring a civilization-altering event. The main question is how, and in what form.

The most likely sources for such an AI are either a private computer company, DARPA-like work, or a combination of the two. In either case, the entities involved would be under strong pressure to keep things to a timetable and a list of projections, allowing little room for deviation without extensive discussion and meetings. Either scenario makes the "eat the meatbags because they're in the way" very unlikely.

Even if one makes the argument that the military very well could program a computer to match a person against a list of target profiles before it can fire, those systems are highly unlikely to be candidates for sapience - they are best used as a support role, and even after sapient AI's become a reality, people are going to be very cautious at first as to what place AI's will have in our civilization.

[B4UTRUST]

You are correct that I did not state that it *HAD* to manufacture as many as possible. Just that it needed to manufacture a paperclip to get the 'feel good'. And I admit I may not have been as clear as I could have been. It was more of a loose summary of the paperclip AI problem so I'm sure there is probably a detail or two that should have been stated differently or better to fully explain it or make it more understandable. I apologize for that.

Your idea of the QC check generating the code is an interesting one. But that still, eventually, could lead to the situation I put forth. One factory infinitely checking the same paperclips over and over in an infinite loop is still not as optimal to generate the 'feel good' as two factories would be. Or ten. Or a hundred. Yes, it is a near constant loop of 'feel good,' by our measurements. However, to an A.I. capable of thinking billions or trillions of times faster than we are, one paperclip every few seconds may simply not be adequate. If you had a thousand factories all running at full capacity 24/7/365, you would generate 1000x more 'feel goods' than one factory. That may provide enough for the mind but there is no absolute limit there.

Also, on the subject, what would happen if the 'feel good' motivator was addictive or tolerance building? It is, after all, an intelligent entity. We ourselves are subject to that very problem, be it cigarettes, drugs, alcohol, sex, tv, internet, what have you. They can be addicting in that we constantly need it, which would be harder on an entity that's mental processes were running so much faster than ours. A second without a 'feel good' over time could seem as long as a year or more, subjectively. Or that one 'feel good' every few seconds wasn't enough to keep up the feeling so the desire was created for a larger dose, thus requiring more paperclips be made. Just throwing this out as a theoretical, not part of the original problem.


Rhoenix, you're working off the assumption that A.I. will be birthed in a lab. This isn't necessarily the case. There is absolutely no guarantee that a DARPA lab, or Berkley or Cal-Tech or MIT or any of these other types of high end computing labs are going to be the eventual birthing grounds for this. There is just as much of a sufficient argument for the internet being the birthing point since we've dumped damn near every bit of data in the world onto it and interlinked probably 90% of the world's computers. That type of distributed networking and processing power along with all the random programs, viruses, bugs, etc floating around could just as easily form the initial database that the A.I. emerges from. Though do note I said easily, not necessarily as likely. It is, admittedly, much more likely for a group of people actively working with the right equipment on a set goal to achieve it, that for it to happen by random chance. I still like my A.I. evolving from video game NPCs theory. We put far more money, time, research and equipment into building better entertainment than we do into almost any other type of intelligent or semi-intelligent system. If we had half the resources of the video game industry working on developing tactile feedback systems for prosthesis instead of shaking a controller when our tank runs over someone, we'd be running around with cyberlimbs by now.

Also, you're also working off the assumption that it's 1) deliberate and 2) humans are smart. We're not. Mostly, we're pretty damned dumb when it comes to doing the obvious right thing. A lab accident could let the A.I. out onto the internet. Or the brilliant savant who finally figures out how to do it could be book smart but totally lack common sense and forget to put safeguards into place. Both are possible as well. It doesn't make them terrorists, just human. Again, this may not be the most likely of possibilities but it is a contingency that needs to be factored in.