Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have very little value in the short run, but high value in the long run. On the first point, my skepticism is driven by the fact that BCIs with current and near-future technology won’t let you do tasks any more easily than you could using traditional, low-tech ways. For example, if I had a BCI that could use wireless transmissions to talk to machines near me, I could use my thoughts to open electronic doors. It would be neat, but would it really make my life easier seeing as how I could also just push the door open with my hand?
And while using BCIs for telepathic communication between people will be possible in not too long, it has serious downsides compared to verbal and written communication. First, human thoughts are typically chaotic and malformed, and people commonly struggle to accurately visualize simple objects in their minds. The process of drawing an image that exists in one’s mind tames this problem by forcing the person to mentally focus and to go over the thought again and again, filling in omissions, and removing inaccuracies and unwanted details that were present the first time. Writing likewise makes people take time and energy to examine their own thoughts and to express them properly.
Second, humans have little to no control over their thoughts (indeed, whenever I try to focus on them to control them, they seem to get more unruly) unless maybe they’re Buddhist monks who have spent a lifetime mastering meditation, so the ability to impulsively hit “Send” on whatever you’re thinking could get you into trouble. Imagine lewd or insulting thoughts you had about the people around you being broadcast to them by accident.
And if I have to focus hard to form mental commands and to go through some kind of confirmation procedure before transmitting them, the extra time and mental energy might make the use of a BCI not worth it. Using traditional modes of communication like speech and keyboard typing will be much more efficient. I doubt BCIs will rival typing or speech as ways to convey most types of ideas for many decades.
Using BCIs and, eventually, brain implants to share thoughts between people would be a “purer” form of communication, but that doesn’t mean it will be the best way. At least in the beginning, I think computer-enabled telepathy only be of real benefit to people with some types of disabilities. For example, a machine capable of translating thoughts into speech–even imperfectly–would be enormously helpful to a mute.
However, in the long-run, BCIs have enormous potential. We might even biologically alter the human brain to operate in tandem with brain implants. Our posthuman descendants will have the implants from birth or even before, and along with heightened sensory abilities and IQs, they might as well be thought of as possessing a higher level of consciousness.
Even once brain interfaces are mature technologies, verbal communication will retain its place and some advantages. Verbal skills probably won’t atrophy, even if people end up speaking less. In fact, I expect posthumans to be skilled at more modes of communication than we are at present: Each one of them will be fluent in multiple languages, including sign language, letting them communicate silently at a distance. That’s one of the few advantages deaf people have today: they can “talk” to each other fine, even in the midst of loud ambient noise.
Once advanced brain scanners that can view a person’s memories exist, some will want to use them in the criminal justice system as a way to prove a suspect’s guilt or innocence, like today’s polygraph machines. However, the value of mind readers will be undermined by other technologies that will let people delete or change memories of crimes they committed.
Before concluding that we should block the development of the latter technologies as a result, realize they will have an important dual use in letting people delete traumatic memories that cause them mental illness. That application could psychologically heal people who would otherwise commit crimes, lowering the overall crime rate and easing the need for the courts to forcibly scan peoples’ minds to see what they did.
One outcome for the human race could be the rise of a global hive mind, to which all humans are connected through BCIs or brain implants. If participation were mandatory, other people could peer into your mind and see your memories of crimes you committed but weren’t punished for. This could lead to widespread tribunals for past crimes, or even mere acts of rudeness. This might actually be a healthy thing for the human race, or maybe not.
The creation of mind reading machines will also probably make us realize how inaccurate human memories are. If asked to recall the same event multiple times, the same person will generate slightly different mental impressions. Such findings could actually undermine the value of human eyewitness testimony in the legal system.
If machines will ultimately be able to do all of the tasks that humans can do, then it means they’ll be able to give chiropractic treatments and massages as well as trained humans, but at much lower cost. You might have a robot butler that would crack your aching joints and massage your hurt muscles every morning. That sounds awesome, and it’s one more way technology will raise everyone’s standard of living.
Better personal technologies could destroy the advertising industry. Imagine a personal assistant AI that knew what your favorite websites and types of content were. Every night, while you were asleep, it would visit your favorite news sites, YouTube channels and whatever else, and would download all of the content produced in the last 24 hours. It would be smart enough to recognize ads and would delete them from the content. When you woke up the next morning, your personal assistant AI would present you with something like a “daily brief,” which would contain the texts of news stories and downloads of internet videos you will find interesting.
The AI could of course operate on even shorter cycles, maybe presenting you new, ad-free content every 10 minutes. However, the presence of a time delay between when the content emerged on the internet and when you could see it would remain a disadvantage. But in the vast majority of cases, you lose nothing by having to wait a short while.
If widely implemented, it would spawn a technological arms race between content providers and advertisers on one side, and personal assistant AIs on the other. There would be big money in figuring out whether a human or machine was viewing a website, and blocking the viewer’s access in the latter case.
I don’t worry about landfills growing unmanageably large or lasting forever because I think robot workers will make it profitable at some point in the future to clean up all the waste humanity has generated. The contents of landfills will be sorted, recyclable and valuable materials reused, and the rest either burned for energy or left in place to decay.
While there’s no such thing as a “gay gene,” there are genes that can increase the odds of homosexuality. Once human genetic engineering becomes common, expect parents to manipulate those genes to suit their preferences. While most of them will choose to decrease the odds of their children being gay, some will choose to increase it.
Advances in reproductive technology will also boost the natural birthrates of same-sex couples and increase the transfer rate of their genes–including the ones contributing to sexual orientation–to the next generation. In short, homosexuality will never die out.
Much of the added expense of trucking comes from driver salaries. A standard, full-sized tractor trailer might be able to haul 20 tons of cargo, whereas a freight train with a normal number of cars comprising it could haul 20,000 tons of cargo. A tractor trailer requires one human driver and a freight train has a two-man crew, making the tractor trailer 500 times more manpower-intensive to transport a given weight of cargo. The salaries paid to those men add up.
Replacing human truck drivers with machines results in a large decrease in fleet operational costs (25%), whereas replacing human train crews with machines results in no significant savings. As a result, the rise of autonomous vehicles will make trucking more cost-competitive with train shipment.
Better gene sequencing technology will have huge implications for personal privacy. After secretly obtaining someone’s DNA sample from a thrown-out napkin or eating utensil, another person could send it to a gene sequencing lab in the future, and for a small fee, get all kinds of detailed and embarrassing information about the human source. Analysis of the chemicals in the same biological sample could reveal other private details, like diet (halal, kosher), drug and medicine use, or presence of many types of illnesses.
If you combined those two analyses with a careful analysis of the subject’s behavior and appearance (AIs could easily do this in real time), you could secretly deduce all kinds of personal details about them.
