WHY Future Doesn’t NEED US- A Reflection PDF

Preview

Summary

WHY THE FUTURE DOESN’T NEED US: A REFLECTIONWritten by Fatma Mae M. TomawisBill Joy, the brilliant author of "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" (published on Wired, April 2000) discusses the powerful 21st-century technologies — robotics, genetic engineering, and how nanotechnology is on the verge of m...

Description

WHY THE FUTURE DOESN’T NEED US: A REFLECTION Written by Fatma Mae M. Tomawis Bill Joy, the brilliant author of "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" (published on Wired, April 2000) discusses the powerful 21st-century technologies — robotics, genetic engineering, and how nanotechnology is on the verge of making humans extinct. A critical journal of why the future doesn't need us, humans. Ray and Bill both gave talks at George Gilder's Telecosm conference. Ray handed Bill a partial preprint of his then-upcoming book The Age of Spiritual Machines, which depicted a future he imagined. Bill was particularly concerned by a chapter that described a dystopian scenario: The New Luddite Challenge, which is building intelligent machines that can do everything better than humans. All work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines, and no human effort will be required. The machines may be allowed to make all of their own decisions without human oversight. In short, the Luddite Challenge is that people will let machines make more of their decisions for them, simply because machine-made decisions will produce better results than human-made decisions. Bill also mentioned that humans are driven to quick familiarity and unquestioned acceptance. robotics, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology show a different threat than previous technologies. Robots, synthetic creatures, and nanobots, in particular, have a deadly amplification factor: they can self-replicate. A bomb is only blown up once, but one bot can swiftly multiply and spiral out of control. Uncontrolled self-replication in these modern technologies poses a considerably bigger risk: the risk of significant physical damage. Each of these technologies holds untold promise: Kurzweil's vision of near immortality in his robot fantasies propels us ahead; genetic engineering may soon provide treatments, if not outright cures, for the majority of ailments; and nanotechnology and nanomedicine can address many more ills. Together, they have the potential to greatly increase our average life span and improve our quality of life or a series of minor, individually sensible advancements leads to the buildup of immense power and, by extension, tremendous risk. Bill shared his experiences on how his work has made a significant difference in our society today, as well as the benefits and drawbacks of technology to us humans, including military power, political aspects, health aspects, and our overall daily life. I'm still in awe of how brilliant technology is. Consider living at a time when technology has not yet been developed. Thanks to the industrial revolution, we now have access to all of the possibilities made possible by technology. My first thought after reading the entire piece was, "Wow, how can a small machine solve a problem, check a solution, and have the intelligence to determine the correct and wrong, truth and the lie?" All of this is programmable on a computer. These programs can also be transformed into machines that have a significant impact on society. But let's take a look at both sides of the coin. Going into the beneficial benefits of the technologies listed in the journal, the first that I observed is for security purposes. As

previously said, machine-made decisions are more accurate than human-made decisions. For example, when we go to the mall and check customers' belongings, the guard may accidentally miss detecting a metal or deadly weapon, especially if the perpetrator is very good at concealing it, but with the help of technology, people's security has been tightened due to, for example, metal detectors. Second, it will enhance the medical field, particularly in the discovery of cures and therapies for the illness. Unbounding the Future: The Nanotechnology Revolution, co-authored by Drexler, imagines some of the changes that might occur in a world where molecular-level "assemblers" could enable cures for cancer and the common cold through immune system augmentation, essentially complete environmental cleanup, incredibly inexpensive pocket supercomputers—in fact, assemblers could manufacture any product at a low cost. There are still many flaws in our current healthcare system, years of research are still needed but imagine the advances it can bring years from now thanks to the great ideas of our innovators. Looking at the negative consequences of these amazing ideas, I realized that we can become too dependent on technology, and humans will no longer have any duties. What would humanity do if we become overly reliant on technology? It will undoubtedly disrupt the pattern of how society functions, with humans at the bottom of society. “Human work will no longer be necessary, the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system.” as mentioned in the journal. In addition, It may also be out of control; because it is programmed, there is a possibility that it will self-replicate or create problems that are out of control; the problem with technology is that when it is not functioning properly, everything is affected; for example, if our internet provider experiences a problem, all of our works and tasks that are connected to the internet will be affected. “The gray goo threat makes one thing perfectly clear: We cannot afford certain kinds of accidents with replicating assemblers. It is even possible that self-replication may be more fundamental than we thought, and hence harder—or even impossible—to control.” When it comes to the threat that these technologies provide to the medical industry, of course, we need subjects for our experiments. These subjects can take the form of humans, animals, or nature, which is a huge sacrifice. What I'm trying to say is that ethical concerns may arise. Since we are in the process of discovery, we must obtain findings through testing and observation, which may or may not be successful. There is no guarantee of a favorable outcome, but the sacrifice and risk are still larger. To summarize, I completely agree with Bill when he says that technology and humans should be balanced, that it is preferable to coexist with technologies rather than have technologies superior to humans. We must proceed with extreme caution due to all of the possibilities that may occur in the future. Technology should be used to benefit and improve human existence rather than to destroy it. Finally, technology is good when employed with great meaning, goal, and purpose, but it is evil when used for power, dominance, and control. I would recommend this journal to anyone who wants to ponder on what is occurring with technology right now and all of the possibilities in the future; it would also be a great eye-opener for people to adopt new technologies with caution....