How key research is shaping the decisive century
By Ryan Stone
One could argue that September 1, 1939 was the deciding moment of the last century, when Germany invaded Poland. Some might say the most important day was October 29, 1969, when the first ARPANET link was created between UCLA and Stanford, starting the embryonic internet. One could argue that November 7, 1917, the Bolshevik Revolution, was the prime moment, setting the stage for a dual-superpower political polarization that threw two of the world’s most belligerent countries into civil paranoia and nuclear proliferation that threatened to destroy civilizations worldwide.
While we don’t know what the defining, pivotal moment of this century will be, there is little question that it will be the defining moment for humanity, a century in which your children and grandchildren will have to grapple with the simultaneous threats of overpopulation mixed with first-world hunger and the devastation of unchecked global warming. If we make the right choices, then all could be well for another hundred years or even forever. If we keep acting like children, it could be the end of us all, and, well, a few of us would deserve it. So, while current breakthroughs mean that we will soon be able to do everything from communicating with vegetative-state patients to manually downgrading hurricanes, that pivotal moment which sends us into an Alliance-esque dystopian future, a Mad Maxx wasteland, or a Star Trek post-scarcity wonderland, is yet to come.
True to our species, the future will most likely be a mix of all three. Future politicians may still be able to lie, but portable truth detectors could make lying impossible. Sound hokey? Soldiers in Afghanistan are already using portable lie detectors to help determine good guys from bad. The device looks like a large calculator and flashes red for lies and green for truth, at least in theory. Creators of the technology argue that the units are untested, have a gross margin of error, and could get innocent people killed, but that hasn’t stopped the military from fast-tracking them to the front lines. While it’s not perfect yet, there’s no reason to say that it won’t advance like all other portable technology, eventually finding its way into the private sector and civilian life. If anything, it should make for some interesting wedding vows one day.
Then again, if people can’t lie, whole swaths of our entire culture will disappear or change altogether. Most of the major news networks will have to restructure. Job interviews will be a lot shorter, and it’ll be open relationships or nothing at all for the friskier bunch. But a lot of that depends on how fast artificial intelligence develops. The last century passed without the summer blockbuster AI breakthroughs that everyone wanted to see, but there have actually been huge leaps in AI technology and theory over the past three decades. There is no question that, probably in the next twenty years, you or your children will see “intelligent” computers. The bonus is that computers don’t lie (yet). The moral is that, if people won’t tell the truth, then we can certainly build something to tell the truth for us. Something besides a teleprompter, anyway.
What is hokey? There is no technological advancement that can advance human compassion and mercy, no piece of hardware that can make you grasp the meaning of the word “community” instantly, with all its implications and inherent necessity. There’s no technology that can turn us into an understanding, sharing culture, rather than a materialistic bunch of droning one-liners, at least not yet. There is one certainty, though. If global famine does break out, the United States is one of the worst possible places to be. It’s a nation where private property has preeminence over human life, and everyone has a gun. So, if that pivotal moment comes, and things go south, I’d say move to the country where people have learned to share. Better yet, move to the country where people have learned to share with other races and religions. I know you’re scratching your head. It’s called Sweden.
My own interpretation has a lot to do with whether or not certain people truthfully acknowledge the state of affairs in the world. Whether it comes from a politician with a truth gun to his head or a computer with an i75 thousand-core processor, as long as the answer doesn’t come out “42,” maybe a better society can come out of it, rather than another hundred years defined largely by starvation and war. If you think that sounds bleak, just take a look at the quality of life for most humans (and some Americans) over the last century.
We can do better.