The End of the World Is Coming

DATE: 06/11/2003 01:59:17 PM
-----
-----
EXTENDED BODY:
My friend Jeff is going to begin a Ph.D in evolutionary computing this fall.  After reading some of the links on his website, I asked him: "How does it feel to know that your studies may contribute to the end of the world?"

What I am about to describe may seem to you like a sci-fi movie.  Or, it may simply seem ridiculous.  Sadly, it is very real.  We are on the cusp of obliterating the human race - without using nuclear bombs of chemical weapons.  The biggest threats to humanity lie in two areas: genetic engineering and evolutionary computing.  

You're skeptical, I know.  If you doubt, <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html">then read this</a>.  It's very, very long, but it's worth at least skimming the whole thing.  The thrust of his message is that we are very close to creating machines that can think and self-replicate.  Once that happens, the Pandora's Box will be open for good.  The Borg in <i>Star Trek?</i>  The machines in <i>The Matrix?</i>  <i>Terminator?</i>  You betcha.  

Think about it: we already are at a point in history where we use machines to perform calculations too complex for human beings to perform.  It seems inevitable that we will become dependent on the advanced tasks these machines are able to perform.  We already possess machines capable of limited independent thought.  Once those sophisticated machines could reproduce themselves, what would they need us for?  And how could human beings possibly compete against them for resources?

It's not that I haven't thought about this before.  It's just that whenever I did, I reasoned, "Who would be stupid enought to let technology get so out of hand?"  I know realize that I was an idiot for making that assumption.  Humankind specializes in letting things get out of hand!  One could just as easily ask, "How could someone develop and use nuclear weapons on people?"  "How could someone develop a pesticide and use it without checking to see how it affects other animals?"  "How could people overuse antibiotics to the point where new, super-bacteria develop that are immune to them?"  Human curiosity, arrogance, immorality and stupidity know no bounds.  

The problem is, we have let even our simpler creations get out of control.  With pesticides and nukes, we have been able to implement retroactive controls.  However, once we cross the threshold of creating reproductive, evolving machines, there is no turning back.  There won't be any way to correct the foolhardy mistakes of some overzealous scientist.  Once the technology is out there, it's out there.  

Genetic tampering is just as frightening.  The possibility for destruction at least equals (if not exceeds) the potential for 'miracle' cures that entices institutiuons to fund genetic research.  As the article notes, we might accidentally create a new species of plant which hass no nutritional value, is immune to pesticides, and is so genetically superior that it chokes away all other plant life on this planet.  Considering our limited "success" with bacteria, is it really so hard to imagine?

My favorite columnist, Gregg Easterbrook (also known as Tuesday <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/archive?columnist=easterbrook_gregg&root=page2">Morning Quarterback</a>) wrote a column for the New York Times entitled, "Food for the Future: Someday, rice will have built-in vitamin A. Unless the Luddites win."  The phrase Luddite is a derogatory one, used by scientists to decribe those who wish to impede scientific progress out of fear.  

This is one time where I'll have to disagree with Mr. Easterbrook.  If the Luddites lose, we might have rice with built-in Vitamin A.  Or we might create some kind of fucked-up cross-species mutant which ruins farming and irreparably damages the world's ecosystem.  When you look at ti that way, do we really NEED rice with built-in vitamin A?  What in world history makes you think that kind of genetic tampering will be successful - or even stop at that point - without severe, negative repercussions?

In any case, if Bill Joy is right, the seeds for the destruction of the human race may be firmly planted by 2030.  The fact that he is very uncomfortable being in his field and being linked to that level of responsibility suggests the end of the world is coming.


-----
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: mike
URL:
DATE: 06/13/2003 09:45:42 AM
As long as the computers don't figure out Ctrl alt del, we're cool.

It's like a trump card.

Although, being in a world run by machines that look like the Terminator 3 chick might not be all that bad.
-----
COMMENT:
AUTHOR: Jeff
DATE: 06/11/2003 05:39:15 PM
Yep, we're fucked. Think end of Spielberg's AI. We're fodder for a future museum's "our natural ancestors" collection. This bit is especialy important:

The problem is, we have let even our simpler creations get out of control. With pesticides and nukes, we have been able to implement retrocctive controls. However, once we cross the threshold of creating reproductive, evolving machines, there is no turning back. There won't be any way to correct the foolhardy mistakes of some overzealous scientist. Once the technology is out there, it's out there.
-----

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit