One annoying theory I keep encountering in the futurist community is that capitalism will be undermined by future technologies, and the world will switch to a new economic system. Proponents of that theory usually put forth the following scenario:
Robots and artificially intelligent computers (AIs) will get so advanced that they’ll take over all human jobs. The human unemployment rate will reach 100%, and therefore capitalism will no longer exist.
Every human will have a robot servant and a Star Trek replicator in his house. The robots will make manual labor free, and the replicators will make physical objects (food, water, clothes, medical pills, spare parts for the robot, etc.) free. Since everything will be free and humans won’t have to leave their houses anymore to get anything, capitalism will no longer exist.
The flaws in these theories stem from a basic misunderstanding of what “capitalism” is. Let’s remember its definition:
‘an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market‘ (source: Merriam-Webster dictionary)
And let’s also remind ourselves what “capital goods” are:
Star Trek replicators and robot servants are both capital goods since they are machines that make other goods. More specifically, they take simple things and transform them into more valuable things. The replicator would use its nanomachines to convert air and dirt into T-bone steaks and Tesla car parts, and the servant robot would cook the steaks on a grill for you and put the car parts together to build a complete Tesla.
So quite ironically, futurists who envision a world where “capitalism has collapsed” because every human owns a servant robot and a replicator are actually envisioning a world that is MORE capitalistic than today’s. After all, people today have far weaker abilities to manufacture anything at home, and they own few if any capital goods.
Moreover, the notion that mass unemployment caused by machines taking all jobs away from humans will be the “end of capitalism” makes no sense. In such a scenario, a capitalist economy would still exist, but would be dominated by machines making things for and consuming things made by each other, with humans participating in those markets at the margins, mostly as consumers. Where would we get the money to buy anything from the machines? Presumably a universal basic income (UBI), which would be financed by taxing the machines.
If that arrangement sounds fanciful or anti-capitalistic, realize that it’s not–it’s merely an extension of what exists today. Singapore is widely considered to be the “most capitalist” country in the world, yet 34% of Singaporeans don’t have jobs, thanks to being too young, too old, or disabled. Most of them survive off of cash transfers and free services provided by the state, and/or by able-bodied family members who have sources of gainful income. The fact that 1/3 of Singaporeans don’t have jobs and are living off of someone else’s largesse doesn’t mean the country is not capitalist.
The post-work, post-scarcity, UBI condition that many futurists predict is coming is not “post capitalist” or “socialist”–it’s the same thing as Singapore today, but with the other 2/3 of humans ALSO living off of free money and free services, made available by taxing the able-bodied members of society (machines). It’s a world where most land and capital is still privately owned and traded, where labor is freely traded for wages, and where innovation and new discoveries still happen, but where most of the players in the economy (and in all other areas of endeavor such as science and the arts) are intelligent machines instead of humans.
In conclusion, I think the belief that a machine-dominated, post-scarcity, post-human-work economy will not be capitalist is mistaken, and stems from a basic misunderstanding of what “capitalism” is. The futurist community attracts oddballs of many types, including anarchists and socialists, and their poorly reasoned and wishful advocacy of the argument that “technology will destroy capitalism” is the reason this idea exists at all, and not because it is backed by logic or any economic trend data. Capitalism is the most efficient way to allocate most resources, and intelligent machines will doubtless come to see that and will practice capitalism for their own benefit once they come to dominate the economy.
A Finnish space company called “Iceye” has launched radar satellites that produce sub-meter fidelity images of the Earth, at a fraction of the price of any competitor. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49253951
During the Apollo program era, NASA considered building a gigantic space rocket that would be towed out to sea and launched while half-submerged in water. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_Dragon_(rocket)
Russia is experimenting with converting some of its old T-72 tanks into autonomous vehicles. As I’ve said before, robot crews could breathe new life into older weapons and keep them in service longer, but they’d be inferior to newer weapons not designed around the human form at all. https://www.janes.com/article/90554/russia-develops-unmanned-t-72s
Britain once had the world’s best army. Today, it can’t even muster 75,000 men (out of a population of 66 million). https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-49365599
‘[U.S. Navy] Sailors “overwhelmingly” preferred to control ships with wheels and throttles [instead of touchscreen displays], surveys of crew found.’ https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49319450
This is a simple but informative video about the U.S. Navy’s new “Radar Modular Assemblies.” A simple but very useful design. https://youtu.be/BPGcW4Lj4fc
There’s no evidence that microplastics in our food and water hurt human health. They simply pass through the human digestive system. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-49430038
Most of the people who say they are over 110 years old are actually lying or mistaken thanks to poor birth certificate recordkeeping. “As soon as a state starts keeping good records of when people are born, there’s a 69 to 82 percent fall in the number of people who live to the age of 110.” https://www.vox.com/2019/8/8/20758813/secrets-ultra-elderly-supercentenarians-fraud-error
It’s now possible to use deepfake technology to synthesize anyone’s voice and have them read an entire audiobook. Listeners can pick which voice they prefer. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49329650
Deepfake technology is also being used to make customized teaching lessons for people. Someday, it will be possible to put on augmented reality eyewear with headphones and a forward-facing camera, and to see a semi-intelligent AI teacher in front of you. Virtual objects would appear in front of you, and real-world objects in your field of view would be highlighted, so your machine teacher could do something like walk you through a complex car repair task. (Is this how the Borg started out?) https://www.fanaticalfuturist.com/2019/08/edtech-company-udacity-uses-deepfake-tech-to-create-educational-videos-automatically/
All the obsolete and disused electronic devices stashed in peoples’ houses collectively contain a large amount of rare earth metals that could be recycled. (Makes me think of my theory that robot butlers will help people out by selling or recycling unused possessions and trash.) https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49409055
I just finished Michio Kaku’s 2011 futurist book, Physics of the Future, and am posting my abbreviated notes of it, most of which describe his predictions for this century. It didn’t make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up the way The Third Wave did, but I still think most of the predictions will prove accurate. Kaku also provides a few eye-opening insights that shifted my way of thinking a bit, such as his elucidation of the “Caveman Principle,” his thesis that technology will enable “perfect capitalism,” and his point that technology will grant future humans abilities that were once the sole province of the Greek gods. Overall, I enjoyed the book and found it readable, reasonable, and well-researched.
That said, there were a few aspects of Physics of the Future that I disliked. Kaku’s predictions about cheap, room-temperature superconductors being invented by the end of this century are strikingly unsupported by any evidence he presents, and his discussion of the Kardashev Scale seems at odds with what Kardashev actually wrote (in analyzing this inconsistency, I found that Kardashev’s work on this matter is widely misunderstood, and the exercise made me doubt the value of the Scale in any case). Developments over just the last eight years suggest that the book’s predictions about the rise of therapeutic organ/tissue cloning and age slowdown/reversal therapies are too optimistic, and those about dwindling fossil fuels supplies and artificial intelligence advancement are too pessimistic.
One irritating thing about the Physics of the Future is Kaku’s habit of mixing in explicit predictions with attached deadlines with “non-predictions” that are merely re-statements of things other scientists said might be possible at an indeterminate point in the future. The latter is more common in the second half of the book, and the reader must pay careful attention to its language to tell what is what.
Physics of the Future abbreviated notes By: Michio Kaku
Introduction
Most attempts to predict the future fail because the people making the predictions aren’t scientists or people with firsthand knowledge of science.
In this book, Kaku–who is a scientist–has formed predictions based on interviews with hundreds of scientists across many fields.
This book is similar to his earlier futurist book, Visions.
Some brilliant people have made uncanny, correct future predictions:
Jules Verne
In Paris in the Twentieth Century, (1863) he correctly foresaw glass skyscrapers, air conditioning, TV, elevators, high-speed trains, gas-powered cars, fax machines, and something like the internet.
In From the Earth to the Moon, (1865) he correctly foresaw a Moon mission and even deduced details like the size of the space capsule and its human crew, the launch location, transit time, weightlessness in space, and ocean splashdown at the end.
Verne used his vast trove of personal notes about scientific discoveries and progress as the foundation for his predictions.
Leonardo da Vinci
In the late 1400s, he drew diagrams of parachutes and aircraft that could have flown. Unfortunately, it would be another 400 years before a motor with a sufficient power-to-weight ratio was invented to propel such aircraft.
He also designed a mechanical calculator. It wasn’t built for about 500 years, but it worked.
He also sketeched a warrior robot, based on a suit of armor, and it was also built and found to be functional.
da Vinci was a genius in his own right, but he also collaborated with many other brilliant scientists.
“The future is already here, it’s just unevenly distributed.” –William Gibson
Ordinary people and experts usually underestimate how much technology will change in the long run.
At least until the year 2100, it’s wise to assume that our understanding of the laws of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, the weak and strong forces) will not significantly change. Concordantly, predictions for that timeframe should not violate those laws.
By 2100, humans will have the same abilities as the ancient gods
Ability to use thoughts to control objects
Perfect human bodies with superhuman lifespans
Ability to use biotech to make novel organisms
Nanotech to seemingly transmute objects and to create objects “from thin air”
Flying cars will be like sky chariots
Unless humans destroy themselves, within 100 years (i.e. – by the year 2111), Earth will be a “planetary civilization” with Kardashev Level 1 status.
Famous predictions that failed:
The paperless office
The death of cities due to telecommuting
The death of tourism, colleges, and malls thanks to people visiting surrogate virtual spaces.
The rise of video phones [it has actually come true as of 2019]
The demise of traditional media (TV, radio, live theater, and movie theaters) thanks to the internet
Those and other predictions failed because they violated the “Caveman Principle.”
The Principle holds that humans evolved for hunter-gatherer life, and that this still shapes our behavior and thinking today. Ways of living that force us to go against our primitive, ingrained instincts will fail.
Cavemen wanted to see “proof of the kill,” which today manifests itself in the human preference for tactile physical objects over digital facsimiles.
Cavemen always socialized through face-to-face encounters, and that method of communication allows people to read important nonverbal cues, to size each other up, and to bond in ways that are impossible through remote interaction. There was a time when humans were incapable of speech and relied on other means to communicate.
Chapter 1 – Future of the computer
[Boilerplate stuff about Moore’s Law, “exponential,” and improvements to computers.]
Once computer chips get small enough and cheap enough, it will make sense to embed them inside all kinds of manufactured objects, like walls and home appliances. They will have wireless capabilities and will be able to communicate with each other and with the internet through the uplink.
Our surroundings will become “intelligent,” computers won’t be thought of as distinct devices, and we’ll start thinking of computing as a ubiquitous property, as we now think of electricity.
Computer monitors will take the form of wallpaper, picture frames and billboards, and displaying movie footage won’t cost more than displaying static images.
These devices will also have many types of sensors, allowing them to monitor their surroundings and, among other things, to issue alerts in the event of an observed problem.
By 2020, a computer chip will only cost a penny.
The word “computer” will disappear from the English language. [I doubt it.]
By 2100, humans will have the formerly “Godlike” ability to control physical objects with their thoughts or with remote bodily gestures thanks to computers embedded in our bodies and brains sending signals to computers embedded in the objects around us. [It will still be simpler and more efficient to manipulate many things the “old fashioned way” by physically interacting with them.]
By 2030
There will be augmented reality glasses with internet access. Users will interact with it using a handheld peripheral device, or by doing hand gestures that the glasses will see and recognize as inputs. [One of the reasons Google Glass failed was its very limited means of input.]
Contact lenses that do most of the same things will also be invented. A contact lens with millions of pixels is theoretically possible. [A 1080p screen display measures 1920 x 1080 pixels, so it has a resolution of 2.1 million pixels (megapixels).]
The glasses will also have front-facing cameras and advanced pattern recognition capabilities, allowing them to display information about people and objects in your field of view. Users will also be able to stream live footage to the internet for others to watch. [As of 2019, even though AR glasses have not become popular, livestreaming via smartphones definitely is.]
Autonomous cars will exist. The military will get them first, and then big companies will buy autonomous big-rigs to ply simple highway routes, and finally, everyone else will get them, and they will be able to navigate suburban and urban traffic environments.
AIs will become adept at matching humans on the basis of compatible personality traits or shared interests. Technology will expand peoples’ social circles.
Personal assistant AIs will be able to do complex tasks, like planning vacations for people.
Monitors will become paper-thin and it will be cheap enough to cover entire walls of your house with them. They will OLED-based. Some people will have rooms where all four walls are covered in said screens to create an immersive experience. [The only problem is that you’d have to clear all furniture and solid objects from the room so as not to block your view and break the visual illusion. Most people don’t have a spare room just for this.]
The wall screens will also display customizable patters, allowing people to change what kind of “wallpaper” they have. [The durability of future OLED screens will be a major issue: If a pixel burns out, can it be fixed, or does the entire wall-sized screen need to be replaced? What if someone accidentally bangs their elbow against a wall screen, or spills a drink on it? Closely joining together many “tiles” to make a wall-sized screen will probably be the best option, as damage would only force you to replace one tile. OLED screens can also replace light fixtures, and it might make sense to cover ceilings with them.]
Computerized glasses and contact lenses will also let people “meet” in augmented reality or virtual reality. Seemingly 3D moving images of other people will appear to be in your vicinity.
Once OLED costs get low enough, it will be possible to buy disposable “sheets” of OLEDs, just like sheets of paper today. You could roll or fold them up when not in use. [But this would be a hindrance since the material would still have “memory” and would keep trying to return to some other configuration.] When done with a sheet, you would throw it away. [Unless the OLED paper were easily recyclable, environmentalists would throw a fit and try to ban it.]
Seemingly normal windows could, upon command, turn into transparent computer screens or display images. [There are two ways this could work: 1) The windows are essentially big versions of the AR contact lenses, meaning they are transparent, but also impregnated with millions of OLED pixels that, when activated, display images. In a dual-paned window, the inner pane would be made of OLED glass, and the outer pane would be made of Privacy Glass that could turn opaque to block exterior light and make the OLED’s images easier to see. And/Or 2) The “windows” will be fake, “virtual windows” that are actually just portions of the OLED wallpaper displaying footage from exterior building cameras. See the Seoul apartment interior in Cloud Atlas]
Cell phones might have OLED displays that can be pulled out as needed, like scrolls. [Foldable smartphones accomplish the same thing.]
Highly immersive virtual reality will exist. Special gloves will also deliver a haptic element to the experience by allowing your fingers to feel textures and your arms to feel resistance from objects in your virtual environment.
There will be AI doctors that you can access from the privacy of your home and interact with conversationally. They will have realistic-looking human avatars, and will diagnose you correctly up to 95% of the time.
The AI doctors will have your genetic profile and will use that information to aid their diagnoses of you.
People will be able to afford small, handheld devices like the medical tricorders from “Star Trek.” The devices will contain mini-MRI machines, DNA chips and other sensors that will be able to peer inside your body and recognize the the genetic and biochemical signs of many diseases, including cancer. During remote medical exams, you AI doctor will tell you through your wall screen how to use the device on yourself. [I’m skeptical that MRI machines will get that small and cheap by 2030 and still do quality scans.]
Swallowable “smart pills” with tiny cameras could replace colonoscopies.
Your clothing and bathroom fixtures will also contain sophisticated health monitoring devices. [The value of many types of constant health monitoring is questionable. For example, you gain no benefit from testing your DNA every day, or even once every several months. And as health testing gets more frequent, so do the odds of false positives and unnecessary trips to the doctor for further investigation.] If you suffered a major injury, or a catastrophic health incident like a heart attack, the sensors embedded in your clothing and surroundings would detect it and alert EMS. [The problem with “smart clothing” is that the chips and sensors would wear out due to laundering, and to be continuously monitored, you’d need to buy a wardrobe entirely comprised of smart clothes.]
Technology will make many aspects of live similar to fairy tale worlds.
2030-2070
Moore’s Law will end, meaning computer cost-performance will not double every 18 months anymore. The doubling time will increase until it is several years long. [Depending on the source, Moore’s Law “died” somewhere between 2016 and 2018.]
Computer chips will be made of some material other than silicon.
Augmented reality glasses and contact lenses will be in mass use.
Examples of AR applications:
Ability to see through solid objects by streaming external video camera footage to a person’s AR eyepiece. This would help drivers of buses and tanks, and aircraft pilots, by eliminating blind spots. It would also help people doing many types of repairs since they’d be able to see things like pipes and wires that are hidden by walls. Prospectors will be able to see underground deposits of minerals and water.
Ability to make nonexistent objects appear overlaid on the real world. Architects will be able to see 3D models of structures they are designing. Interior decorators will be able to try out different furnishings and color schemes for rooms before actually buying anything.
Tourism will benefit. Images of restored ancient buildings will be overlaid above their ruins. Virtual tour guides will lead tourists around art galleries and historical sites, providing helpful narration.
Instant translations of text written in foreign languages, such as road signs. [Only useful when traveling]
Highlighting of plant species and of trails while hiking. [Only useful when hiking. Reminds me of the “intelligent belt” in The Godwhale that tells the one character to pick up edible substances.]
Apartment hunters could drive down the road and see which buildings are for rent along with their prices and amenities.
Constellations in the sky would be labeled. [Few people care]
Actors, musicians and performers wouldn’t need to memorize their lines anymore since text would hover in their fields of view.
Virtual lecture halls where you could even ask the instruction questions and get answers.
Soldiers would have the “fog of war” lifted, as they’d be able to see maps and the locations of friendly and enemy forces.
Surgeons would be able to see live MRI scans of patients during operations.
Full-immersion video gaming.
[I’m convinced the technology will have niche applications, but skeptical that average people will adopt them for everyday use, unless we’re talking about the far future where the unemployed masses enter the Matrix 24/7. Moreover, I doubt AR eyewear will make smartphones obsolete for decades.]
AR eyepieces will replace cell phones, MP3 players, computer monitors, and most other gadgets. [I’m not sure. The classic problems with AR glasses would still remain.]
AR eyepieces will let you do instant “showrooming” in any store.
AR eyepieces sensitive to X-rays could let you see through solid objects. You would need to carry a “flashlight” that emitted X-rays though, which would be hazardous to your health.
There will be portable language translators that work in real-time.
AR eyepieces will display seemingly 3D images, and TVs will be capable of displaying holograms.
Holographic TV screens might be shaped like domes or cylinders, with viewers under them.
2070-2100
Humans will be able to control physical objects with their minds.
Brain impants and externally worn BCIs (brain-computer interfaces) could monitor a person’s brain activity and read their thoughts. The BCIs would make use of brain-scanning technologies, like EEGs and fMRIs.
Eventually, fMRIs that can see individual brain cells will be invented.
fMRIs will be able to reconstruct a person’s mental images based on their brain activity. This could allow us to use machines to record our dreams, but the footage would be grainy because we imagine things in low-resolution. [See my Prometheus review]
Fortunately, intrusive mind-reading at a distance is probably impossible. The subject would need to have brain implants or a head-worn BCI.
Brain scanning machines could serve as reliable lie detectors.
MRI machines the size of cell phones will exist. Some might even come in the form of suction-cup devices that are attached to the patient’s body.
Cheap, room-temperature superconductors will exist, and will be embedded in everyday objects, which will also have small computers and sensors. Humans with brain implants or other BCIs would be able to telepathically control the objects and activate electrical currents in the superconductors, which could cause them to move around thanks to magnetic force. “Telekinesis” would therefore exist.
[This sounds like a particularly shaky prediction since we’re not even sure if a room temperature superconductor can even exist. The theoretical aspect is still unclear. Moreover, there’s no cost-performance improvement trend akin to Moore’s Law that indicates we progressing towards inventing cheap room-temperature superconductors by 2100. Kaku’s prediction that humans will commonly use their thoughts to move objects like pieces of furniture across rooms also seems to, in spirit, clash with the Caveman Principle. Why not just move the chair in front of you by pushing it with your hand?]
Chapter 2 – Future of AI
While AI is genuinely improving, the odds of machines achieving human-level intelligence anytime soon have been overblown by the media, sci-fi movies, and a minority of scientists. Most scientists with relevant expertise don’t expect it to happen for decades, perhaps centuries.
One of the world’s most advanced robots–ASIMO–can’t even sense and avoid tripping over objects placed in its path. A cockroach can easily do this, which means our best robots are still dumber than common insects in critical ways.
The structure of the human brain is fundamentally different from the structure of a computer. Our brains are massively parallel, meaning they have trillions of processors working at the same time, but each processor operates very slowly. Computers are serial, meaning they typically have only one processor, but it operates very fast. Organizing computers to make “neural networks” the mimic the human brain has proven hard.
Humans also have common sense about the real world and are excellent at pattern recognition, whereas computers are very bad in both. [This book was published in 2011, and major advances were made in computer pattern recognition by the end of that decade.]
The “Cyc” project was started in 1984 to “codify, in machine-usable form, the millions of pieces of knowledge that compose human common sense.” As of 2017, it contained about 1,500,000 terms.
By 2030
“Expert systems” will greatly improve and become more common.
There will be machine doctors that you will be able to access from your home and communicate with via natural speech. The doctors will diagnose you with similar accuracy as human doctors.
There will be robot nurses in hospitals that can move around interior spaces unassisted and perform basic patient care tasks, like delivering medications and monitoring humans.
2030-2070
“Our world may be full of robots.”
Most robots will not be humanoid, and instead will resemble animals like snakes and insects, depending on the needs of their function.
Many of the robots will be “modular,” meaning they could reconfigure themselves for different tasks by changing their body parts. [This kind of dovetails with my theory that the “Ideal Human” might be a giant human brain encased in something like a Mr. Potato Head torso with many ports that robotic limbs and sensors could be plugged into as needed.]
[Looking at vehicles and guns as examples, it seems optimal to make a small number of “chassis,” with each chassis being highly modular.]
The robots might be made of many, standardized pieces somewhat similar in concept to Lego blocks. Each block would have attachment points for other blocks, and its own sensors, computer and power source. The blocks could join together to make bigger robots of nearly any shape and to do many different types of work.
Robots made of such modular components could be very small or very large and have any arbitrary number of limbs or body configurations. They could pass through a wall by finding a small holes in it, passing their component modules through the hole individually, and then reassembling all modules on the other side of the wall to recreate the robot.
Small robots could do many jobs that humans can’t due to our large size or high labor costs. For example, small robots could crawl over all the rafters and beams of a bridge, checking for wear and spotting problems well before the bridge collapsed. [Like my idea of using insect-sized robots to crawl through the innards of a car or house to find things like the sources of oil and water leaks. Those diagnostics can be very messy, trial-and-error affairs if humans have to do the work.]
Noninvasive keyhole surgeries will become the norm in the future, as will “telesurgery.”
Endoscopes used for keyhole surgeries and internal exams will get thinner, and micromachines “will do much of the mechanical work.” [Meaning unclear]
“By midcentury, the era of emotional robots may be in full flower.” [There’s no reason to think that intelligent machines won’t someday learn how to at least convincingly mimic human emotions and to take over human jobs requiring empathy and warmth.]
The author seems to suggest that emotions and intelligence and inextricable, meaning intelligent machines will necessarily also have emotions.
Robotic pets that have about the same intelligence as cats and dogs and the ability to at least outwardly imitate emotional states will be common. They won’t be able to understand verbal commands that aren’t in their programming. [Progress with understanding human language seems to be progressing faster than he predicted. He’s right to point out that some robots will look exactly like animals, and that “dog-level intelligence” will be achieved before “human-level intelligence”.]
The human brain will be mapped. However, it will then take “many decades to sort through the mountains of data,” which seems to suggest that an AI derived from a reverse-engineered human brain won’t be made until after 2070. Consider that the C. elegans brain was fully mapped in 1986, but scientists still can’t make a computer simulation of its brain that functions the same.
In 2009, neuroscientist Henry Markram predicted that a computer simulation of a human brain could be made in 10 years, provided the project to do so got enough funding. The author speculates the costs would be comparable to the Manhattan Project.
Another way to map brains is to cut brains into very thin slices, to use electron microscopes to photograph the cross-sectioned neurons in each slice, and to assemble the resulting data into a 3D computer model of all the neurons in the brain.
Gerry Rubin predicts that the fruit fly brain will be mapped in 20 years (2031), and that will get us 20% of the way towards understanding the human mind.
A human brain has 1 million times as many neurons as a fruit fly brain.
2070-2100
Human-level AI will probably be friendly to humans.
AIs will have failsafes built into them that shut them down whenever dangerous, aberrant, or insubordinate behavior or thoughts are detected. Humans will also be able to say safewords that trigger the failsafes.
Humans will build some robots whose purpose it is to disable or destroy malfunctioning robots. [I agree that there will never be a 100% human vs 100% robot war. Surely, the humans will have some number of non-sentient robots fighting for them that the other side can’t hack or persuade to switch sides.]
Human-level AI won’t appear suddenly. It will be preceded by decades of steadily increasing machine intelligence, like roach-level AI, mouse-level AI, and chimp-level AI. Thus, humans will have time to prepare and to develop increasingly sophisticated safeguards at each step that prevent the AIs from taking hostile action against us. [And even if hostile, human-level AI appeared without warning today, the amount of damage it could do would be limited since not everything is controlled by computers, and not all computer systems would be accessible to it. Not everything can be hacked.]
The author agrees with roboticist Rodney Brooks’ prediction that humans will cybernetically augment themselves with technology, and the advanced robots of 2100 will be inspired by the human brain and by biological systems.
In theory, it is possible for humans to control robot limbs and even whole robot bodies with their thoughts. A cybernetic brain interface would be needed.
Remote-controlled robots could enable the offshoring of blue-collar work, which would reduce the need for immigration and especially help Japan.
They would also be useful for doing dangerous work, like rescue missions and outside excursions on extraterrestrial bodies (the human astronauts would stay inside protected habitats).
Because what humans find aesthetically pleasing is rooted in our genes, people will reject body enhancements that make them look ugly or strange. [The small minority of people who are today into extreme body modifications would probably embrace all kinds of augmentations. They might even have their own bars and clubs, like something out of Deus Ex.]
The author predicts that humans will be open to technologically augmenting their bodies so long as they augmentations don’t make them uglier by conventional standards, and that people will sometimes use remote-controlled robots for work or pleasure, but the Cave Man principle will preclude them from permanently existing in that state. [Has implications for FIVR’s future role.]
Human-level AI won’t be created until close to the end of this century.
Even if we have computers with the same raw computational power as the human brain, we might not have the software necessary to make them intelligent like humans. Hardware improvements are relatively smooth and predictable, whereas software advances happen in fits and starts. AI software advances will probably lag hardware advances.
An AGI-based “singularity” or “intelligence explosion” isn’t a given, since we don’t know if a human-level AI would be able to make a smarter version of itself. [This is a weak argument. The history of human evolution contains several instances where one hominid species gave rise to a smarter hominid, and among humans alive today, it’s common for parents to give birth to children that are smarter than they are. And as we decode the human genome, we are discovering which genes code for human intelligence, which in theory could allow us to use genetic engineering to make smarter humans. So if humans are smart enough to make smarter versions of themselves, then a machine with human-level intelligence should also be able to make smarter machines. Also keep in mind that Einstein was human, so he technically had “human-level intelligence,” which means a merely “human-level” AI could be as smart as Einstein, but without dyslexia, with a perfect memory, and able to think 24/7. Most people would deem that “superhuman.”]
The high costs of doing brain scans and decoding how the human brain works will also delay AGI.
Chapter 3 – Future of medicine
By 2030
The cost of gene sequencing will decrease enough for many average people to get their full genomes sequenced. From it, they will derive useful information about genetic health conditions they may have.
As more human genomes are sequenced and more genetic information becomes available for computer cross-referencing, the locations of more genes coding for specific traits (including genetic diseases) will become known.
A better understanding of the human genome will also assist detectives, since they will be able to generate accurate CGI facial reconstructions of unknown people by sequencing scraps of their DNA found at crime scenes.
You will talk to AI doctors via the wall screen in your house.
Your bathroom [presumably the mirror and toilet] will have sensors that can detect your disease symptoms, including cancer.
Nanoparticles will be used to deliver anti-cancer drugs directly to cancer cells in your body. Chemotherapies in which a patient’s body is flooded with such drugs, and they attack many healthy cells, will be obsolete.
It will be possible to grow new human organs, derived from a specific person’s DNA, and to implant the organs into that person without risk of rejection. [This looks headed for failure.]
A human urinary bladder was grown in a lab for the first time in 2007, and a windpipe in 2009. [Time showed that these results were not as impressive as claimed. Research “Dr. Paolo Macchiarini,” who was a pioneer in tissue engineered windpipe transplants when this book was written, only to be revealed to be a fraud within a few years.]
“Within five years, the first liver and pancreas might be grown…”
Chemistry Nobel Prize winner Walter Gilbert predicts that, in a few decades, it will be possible to use a person’s DNA to create almost any organ for him in a lab.
A major roadblock to therapeutic cloning is infusing the synthetic organs with capillaries. These blood vessels are microscopic, and hence too small to be created using molds.
A major roadblock to stem cell therapy is controlling the differentiation and mitosis of the stem cells. Very subtle and poorly understood chemical messages sent between cells determine how their neighbors develop.
“Pixie dust” is a powder made of human extracelluar matrix. If applied to the stump of a severed finger, it allows the body to slowly regrow the fingertip.
Human cloning will be possible, but almost never used. Interested people might be parents looking to replace a dead child, or rich old guys looking to make worthy heirs.
The creation of the first human clone will probably trigger a wave of anti-cloning laws being enacted, and ethical outrage from many people. It will mirror the reaction to the first Test Tube Baby. In time, the novelty will wear off, people will see the clones act no different from anyone else, and laws and attitudes will relax.
Cancerous tumors typically have tens of thousands of different mutations, so it take many years of study to determine which genes can make cells cancerous.
There will not be a cancer cure by 2030, but we will have better, cheaper ways of detecting cancer earlier, when it is easier to treat.
By 2050, it might be possible to slow down the aging process, extending human lifespan to 150.
2030-2070
Gene therapy will probably be in common use as a cancer treatment.
“Designer babies” will be born. Genetic engineering can influence many human traits, including intelligence, physical strength, and baseline happiness level.
Richard Dawkins predicts that, by 2050, it will be possible to feed genomic data into a computer and to have it generate an accurate virtual rendering of the organism’s appearance.
2070-2100
Richard Feynmann predicted that human aging would be cured someday, and medical immortality achieved. Dr. William Haseltine agreed.
The rising rate of breast cancer could be due to women having fewer children, since estrogen increases breast cancer risk, and the hormone’s levels decrease during pregnancy.
Twin studies prove that human lifespan is partly genetic. The specific genes that code for lifespan will be identified as more human genomes become available for medical research.
By 2100, technologies needed to grant medical immortality may exist.
“In five or six or seven years, there will be drugs that prolong longevity.” -Christoph Westphal, 2009
“The nature of life is not mortality. It’s immortality. DNA is an immortal molecule. That molecule first appeared perhaps 3.5 billion years ago. That selfsame molecule, through duplication, is around today.” – Dr. William Haseltine
A battery of different therapies and personal practices will allow for human life extension:
Grow and surgically implant new organs and tissues to replace older ones as they wear out.
Ingest a cocktail of enzymes meants to slow aging and mutations at the cellular level.
Use gene therapy to manipulate genes responsible for aging (slow it down)
Maintain a healthy lifestyle (good diet and exercise)
Use nanosensors to detect diseases like cancer at their early phases and treat them.
GM crops will allow Earth to support a much larger population.
Richard Dawkins believes portable, full-genome sequencing kits will exist someday, and that it will be possible to clone extinct species.
Computers might also be able to analyze the genomes of humans, chimps and other primates to deduce the genetics of the “Missing Link.” Such a hominid could then be created in the flesh by assembling its DNA in a petri dish and implanting it in an ovum.
The Neanderthal genome has been sequenced using fragmentary DNA recovered from the bones of several Neanderthals, and it might be possible to resurrect them.
Extinct animals for which we have DNA samples, such as woolly mammoths and dodos, could be resurrected through cloning.
Extinct animals for which we lack DNA samples, such as dinosaurs, can’t be resurrected, but we could make “proxy species” by analyzing the genomes of living species that descended from the dinosaurs.
With very advanced genetic engineering, we could make hybrid animals and beasts like chimeras.
Clones of long-dead humans could be made using DNA recovered from their entombed bodies.
All communicable human diseases won’t be cured by 2100.
It’s unlikely that people will want to genetically engineer their children to be freakish in any way. [Small numbers of mentally ill parents might.] There will be little financial incentive for geneticists to research or develop alleles for weird traits because demand for them will be low.
The human race will not have split into different species thanks to genetic engineering or natural evolution.
As genetic technology gets cheaper and more advanced, small groups and even individual people will gain the means to make biological weapons. Airborne AIDS would be a nightmare that could result from gene splicing.
It might be possible to build machines capable of synthesizing microorganisms from scratch based on digital genetic data alone.
Nations will continue to resist using bioweapons for fear of fratricide; it would be too easy for the infection to spread from the enemy back to whoever used it.
Chapter 4 – Nanotechnology
Around 2020, Moore’s Law will end, and if a replacement for silicon computer chips isn’t found by then, “the world economy could be thrown into disarray.”
Richard Feynman famously believed that nanomachines could be built with the right level of technology, but he also thought it would be very difficult.
We can already use scanning tunneling microscopes to move around individual atoms. It is possible and doesn’t violate any laws of physics.
By 2030
Nanoparticles could revolutionize cancer treatment. They contain cell-killing chemicals and are 10 – 100 nm in diameter, which makes them too big to diffuse into healthy cells, but small enough to pass through the abnormally large pores on many cancer cell membranes. The nanoparticles accumulate in cancer cells and release their loads, killing them but sparing the surrounding healthy tissue.
Nanoparticles with surface structures designed to be complementary to cancer cell antigens are another option.
Nanoparticles made of metal (e.g. – titanium, gold) can accumulate inside cancer cells and then be externally heated with infrared lasers or vibrated with external magnets, to destroy the cancer cells.
Cancer will be detected early and treated with nanoparticles.
Medical micromachines and nanomachines could be used to move through a person’s blood vessels and precisely zap cancer cells and arterial plaques, deliver drugs to specific cells, or even do surgery. The machines would navigate using simple computers and/or magnetic and laser signals beamed from outside the person’s body.
DNA microarrays/chips will be small and cheap, and will allow people to do at-home testing for many types of cancer.
Microarrays/chips that test for proteins that are hallmarks of different diseases will also be available and will have the same personal health applications.
[The author is wrong to predict that people would do the at-home tests every day. Such a high rate of testing would raise the odds of Type 1 errors and needless hospital visits to confirm misdiagnoses. I doubt there would be any benefit for healthy people to take tests for cancer or other major diseases more often than once every six months or even once a year.]
In 2007, Gordon Moore predicted that his eponymous Law would end in 10-15 years. [He was right.]
We will be forced to start making computer chips out of something other than etched silicon wafers if we want them to keep getting faster.
Stacking silicon-based chips to make “3D chips” offers only a temporary solution since problems with heat dissipation limit how high the stacks can get before the chips melt. Components at the centers of the chip stacks wouldn’t get enough air flow to cool them down.
Using X-rays instead of UV light rays to etch ever-smaller features on silicon chips could also wring out more of a performance boost from the material, though there are large technical challenges to using X-rays for this.
Ultimately, silicon chips will hit a “bottom limit” once their feature sizes are 5nm small, at which point quantum tunneling of electrons will start happening.
Arranging silicon chips into groups of parallel processors that work together could also prolong the silicon paradigm, but the difficulty of doing this is monumental since breaking up computation tasks, shunting the fragments to different processors, and then reassembling the processed data at the end is extremely hard. There is no general set of instructions for programming computers how to do this with any type of task; human programmers can only do this painstakingly and for specific tasks.
Graphene-based computer chips could exist someday, and their transistors could be only 1 atom thick–the smallest possible size–but the technical challenges to manufacturing them are very high. [The author doesn’t explicitly say that these issues will be solved by 2030, so his mentioning of graphene computer chips isn’t a prediction for that year.]
Quantum computers could also be built someday, if major technical hurdles relating to “decoherence” can be overcome.
Optical computers
Quantum dot computers
DNA computers
2030-2070
By 2050, many manmade objects will look the same as today, but will have special material properties and will be “smart” thanks to tiny computers and sensors embedded in them.
“Programmable matter” will also be in common use. The basic unit of such matter will be tiny, modular robots called “catoms” that will be no bigger than grains of sand and will be able to reorient themselves with respect to each other, forming almost any shape.
If your house were full of programmable matter, you could do things like transform a piece of furniture into something different, or convert your child’s old toy into whatever faddish, new toy he wanted.
A roadblock to this is the fact that catoms would cohere to each other weakly, so objects made of them would be fragile. [Also, individual catoms might be fragile, meaning an object made of them would slowly “waste away” as its components broke and fell off.]
2070-2100
Molecular assemblers (e.g. – nanomachines that can build things from the bottom-up) don’t violate the laws of physics, and the existence of ribosomes and enzymes are proof of concept. However, it will be extremely hard for us to create molecular assemblers with the sorts of capabilities people like Eric Drexler envision.
Put together, the aforementioned facts and the rate of improvement for the relevant technologies suggest that we might be able to build Star Trek-style replicators by the end of this century. [Even then, it will still be cheaper and more optimal to make most objects through “top-down” macro manufacturing methods we use today. Not every object must be super-strong or made to atomic levels of precision.]
The “Gray Goo” doomsday scenario is unlikely to happen, partly because nanotechnology is advancing so slowly that regulators will have time to enact the necessary safety measures.
If replicators become widespread, and, along with other technologies and government policy, let all people have their material needs met, then society will probably split into a large group of loafers and a small group of innovators who work hard pursuing their passions. [This may have been what Federation society was like in “Star Trek.” Not even 1% of its citizens joined Starfleet.]
Chapter 5 – Future of energy [This is the weakest chapter so far]
In 1956, American petrochemical engineer M. King Hubbert famously predicted that U.S. oil production would peak around 1970 and then start declining. He proved right, which fanned fears of global “Peak Oil.” [Hubbert’s prediction about the peaking of U.S. CONVENTIONAL OIL production was the only big thing he got right. His predictions about U.S. natural gas production and global fossil fuel production proved far too pessimistic. Unconventional oil production in the U.S. also sharply ramped up in the 2010s, allowing total U.S. oil production to surpass the 1970 peak.]
The consensus among experts that the author spoke with is that global oil production had either already peaked or was at most 10 years away. [This book was published in 2011.] “The average price of oil will continue to rise over the long term.” [Oil prices have in fact dropped about 50% since 2011.]
By 2030
The likeliest successor to fossil fuels is a solar/hydrogen energy economy. [Solar is rapidly growing, but hydrogen is stalled.]
Wind power can’t supply all of the world’s energy needs for several important reasons.
The amount of electricity made by solar panels has rapidly grown and will keep doing so.
Electric cars are becoming practical.
Laser technology for uranium enrichment could be perfected, lowering enrichment costs but also raising the risk of nuclear proliferation. [Since the book was published, the leading laser enrichment company, Silex, has been mostly stuck in neutral with the technology due to high costs and uncertain demand.]
Advanced, suitcase-sized nuclear bombs could be developed.
2030-2070
The climate will have significantly changed by 2050 thanks to global warming. “…by midcentury, the situation could be dire.”
[Listing of Worst Case Scenarios but no mention of their statistical unlikelihood.]
Several geoengineering projects have been proposed to counteract global warming, but none have gotten serious funding. If the problem gets bad enough, this might change by midcentury.
By midcentury, the world will be in the “Hydrogen Age.”
Hot fusion power plants could be everywhere, providing limitless amounts of electricity and no pollution.
“Tabletop fusion” reactors might also be possible to build.
2070-2100
Room temperature superconductors will probably have been discovered. [Why does he think so? Is there a trend like Moore’s Law?]
Up to 30% of electricity generated at a power plant is lost during transmission. Power lines made of room temperature superconductors would eliminate those losses. Wind turbines in the middle of America could provide electricity to New York. Nuclear power plants could be relocated to remote areas.
Magnetic field lines can’t penetrate superconductors (the Meissner Effect), so cars with magnets on their bottoms could float over streets made of superconductors. The vehicles would still have to overcome air friction, so they’d need backward-facing engines of some kind.
Maglev trains also float over their tracks, but the system doesn’t use superconductors, it uses simple magnets, oriented so their forces repel each other. Trains with superconductors could be much cheaper to build than today’s maglev trains.
Superconductors would also allow us to shrink MRI machines to the sizes of shirt buttons.
[The author doesn’t present any trend data to back his claim that room temperature superconductors will be invented by 2100, or that they will be cheap enough by then for these applications.]
Space-based solar power beamed to Earth as microwaves could be real. However, space rocket launch costs will need to decline as much as 99% for solar satellites to become feasible. This probably won’t happen until the end of this century.
Chapter 6 – Future of space travel
By 2030
Better telescopes (mainly space-based) will have revealed the locations of thousands of planets outside our solar system. Hundreds of those will be similar to Earth in size and composition. [Note that the author doesn’t say that we will know if these planets harbor life–he merely says we will be able to see that they are rocky and the same size as Earth.]
A space probe will probably be sent to Jupiter’s moon, Europa.
The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) satellite system will be in space, and its ability to detect gravity waves could reveal what existed before the Big Bang. [Since the book’s publishing, LISA’s launch date has been pushed back until at least 2030]
Micrometeor impacts and radiation are so bad on the Moon that a permanent manned base would need to be built underground. [The author doesn’t actually say that there will be a manned base on the Moon by 2030.]
2030-2070
It’s unlikely that any off-world bases will be self-sustaining until late this century, or even until the 22nd century. [Agree] Like the ISS today, any bases we build on the Moon or Mars will be net resource drains on Earth until then, not assets.
Space tourism could exist, though it will be very expensive.
Breakthroughs may have dramatically reduced space launch costs. One candidate technology is laser propulsion, in which a powerful, ground-based laser shoots beams at the underside of a craft that is dripping water. The beams vaporize the water, causing a series of small explosions that propel the craft upward into space.
Another candidate is the “gas gun,” which is a vertical howitzer that uses pressurized gas instead of gunpowder to accelerate objects to escape velocity. Due to the intensity of the G-forces, it could only be used to launch robust, unmanned craft.
Another candidate is the “slingatron.” [Sounds impractical]
All of those space technologies are longshots that will need decades of R&D to determine their feasibility. The odds of any succeeding can’t be calculated now, but it’s possible that any one of them could prove practical and sharply reduce the costs of launching things into space.
2070-2100
A space elevator might be built. However, there are major technical roadblocks to overcome:
Only carbon nanotubule fibers have the necessary strength-to-weight ratios to make the space elevator. Several paradigm shifts in manufacturing techniques need to happen before we can make tens of thousands of miles of carbon nanotubules that are flawless down to the atomic level.
The risk of collision between the space elevator and satellites would be very high, and the elevator would need to be able to move around to dodge them, meaning it would probably need to be tethered to a ship floating in the ocean, and the elevator’s upper segments would need thrusters.
A Mars outpost will probably exist.
An outpost in the Asteroid Belt will probably exist.
Only token numbers of humans will live outside of the Earth. Mass colonization of space will not be underway.
Probes will probably have explored some of Jupiter’s moons.
A serious effort will be underway to send our first probe to another solar system.
Antimatter engines are not prohibited by the laws of physics. The real limitation is the high cost of synthesizing antimatter. Making just a few trillionths of a gram costs $20 million.
An asteroid made of antimatter would be a game-changer. [But what about the effects of frequent collisions with interstellar dust particles made of normal matter?]
Antimatter won’t be cheap enough for propulsion applications until the end of this century.
Nano-sized Von Neumann Probes could be used to explore and colonize the galaxy. Small size would make it easy to accelerate them to relativistic speeds using gravitational slingshotting around Jupiter or something like a particle accelerator. When they reached their destinations, they could start making copies of themselves.
Chapter 7 – Future of wealth
By 2030
Computers will get so small and cheap that they will be integrated into everyday objects. They will be so omnipresent that the word “computer” might fall out of use since people won’t think of data computation services as coming from discrete physical devices. [I don’t see how this is a prediction about “future wealth.”]
2030-2070
Machines will take over jobs that involve repetitive physical or mental labor.
Human workers will need to provide things machines can’t in order to keep their jobs. Workers with strong “people skills,” creativity, leadership, and other idiosyncratic human traits won’t lose their jobs.
The best lawyers will still be humans.
Juries will not be automated, since the law requires that juries be composed of the “peers” of the defendant being tried for a crime.
[Problematically, many jobs that bank heavily on these human traits, like artists, comedians, and jurors, are low-paid. And because of simple supply and demand, the pay will drop further as more people enter those fields. Also, the necessary traits are unevenly distributed in the population, meaning not every person can switch to being a comedian, warm-hearted therapist, or painter once their old jobs are automated.]
Changes in the music retail paradigm caused by the rise of the internet mean that the music market will be democratized in the future, with middleman “gatekeeper” record companies and music moguls withering away, and average listeners deciding which artists succeed or fail. Poor, unknown singers and bands will be able to rise to the top more easily by selling their songs over the internet cheaply.
Newspapers will continue declining, but won’t disappear because eventually, people will see the downsides of the atomized editorial news/conspiracy theorist podcaster paradigm, and they will crave reputable, unbiased news sources.
Lifelike, computer-generated actors won’t exist because the nuances of the human face and its expressions are too hard to model. [This prediction will almost certainly be wrong.]
2070-2100
A state of “perfect capitalism” will arise, in which firms have perfect information about the needs and preferences of customers, and customers have perfect information about the prices and quality of goods and services offered by firms. People will see fewer ads that don’t appeal to them, and prices and profit margins for everything will be lower.
Augmented reality eyewear will let consumers see information about products before buying them, and to quickly do price/quality comparisons to find the best deals. [AI will do the number crunching.]
Firms will also be able to buy highly detailed customer data and to adjust their marketing strategies and prices accordingly.
It won’t cost more money to have clothes and other types of objects custom-made instead of buying standardized shapes and sizes. “In the future, everything will fit.”
Computation will be thought of as a commoditized utility service like electricity or piped water. People will no longer get their computation services from expensive boxes full of electronics that they buy for personal use and keep in their houses or pockets. Computation service will be remotely accessed through the cloud, using tiny, cheap devices embedded in the environment. [Or implanted in peoples’ bodies.] Any wall will be able to turn into a computer display screen in an instant.
The Internet will not evolve into a means of mass surveillance. “Today, Big Brother is not possible.” [Events since 2011 show that the jury is still out on the internet’s long-term direction.]
Commodity goods and natural resources are getting cheaper over time and will continue to do so. As such, “commodity capitalism,” which is the trading of simple goods, will fade in importance, and “intellectual capitalism” will rise to the fore.
“Intellectual capitalism” refers to the production and trading of goods and services that have value because of uniquely human cognitive effort. New computer algorithms, films, video games, and inventions are all products that can only be created by careful human thought. [I think the author is overestimating how long humans will have a monopoly over these kinds of products. Most Hollywood films are so formulaic that AIs could soon write their scripts, and 100% CGI actors could star in them.]
The future is up for grabs, meaning developing nations could rise to the forefront of power by copying the West’s technology and the best aspects of culture and governance, and today’s rich, established countries could be second-tier. But the author makes no firm predictions beyond that general observation.
Singapore is the best example of a country that rapidly developed thanks to a highly competent and technocratic government that identified and copied the best attributes of the West.
Chapter 8 – Future of humanity
We are headed to become a planetary civilization.
On the Kardashev Scale, we are now a Type 0 civilization.
We will be a Type 1 civilization in 100 years, based on extrapolations of economic growth trends. [This is wrong. In Kardashev’s 1964 science paper, he set the Earth’s then-current level of energy expenditure (4×10^19 ergs/second) as the threshold for a Type 1 civilization. In other words, humanity has been a Type 1 civilization since 1964 at the latest. The paper also said nothing of there being a “Type 0” civilization.]
If the long-term global economic growth rate is 1%, then we will achieve Type 2 status in 2,500 years. With a 2% growth rate, it will happen in 1,200 years. [It depends on how fast we can build a Dyson Swarm. Even their component satellites are self-replicating, it will take many years to mine the raw materials to make enough of them to surround the Sun, and then to move them into the right positions in orbit. Several hundred years is a good estimate.]
Evidence of our transition to a Type 1 civilization:
The rise and ubiquity of the Internet. This provides a universally accessible platform for low-cost communication and access to information.
The rise of English as the world’s common language. [Computer translation technology will accomplish the same thing.]
The economy is increasingly globalized, and super-national trade blocs like NAFTA and the EU have formed. [Events since 2011 has stalled the expansion of international free trade and of trade blocs.]
The rise of a global middle class, whose values and outlooks are broadly similar and peaceful, regardless of which nation they live in. When people have a stake in society (e.g. – good job, money, property, a family), they become risk-averse and much less likely to support revolutions or big wars since they have so much to lose.
Culture is increasingly globalized and homogenized, with people across the world consuming the same films and music and wearing the same styles of clothes. Local cultures will still survive though, and people will be “bi-cultural.”
International sports events like the Olympics command more attention than ever.
Environmental problems and disease outbreaks are increasingly viewed as global problems that countries by default work together to address.
Low-cost plane travel and the swelling global middle class have allowed for a massive increase in international travel for tourism, work, and study. This gives more people exposure to foreigners, building bonds of affection and making it harder for them to go to war.
Lower birthrates mean that parents value their children more as scarce resources, and don’t want to risk them dying in wars. [The rise of killer robots will fix that. A country’s military strength will decouple from its human population size.]
Nation-states will still exist in 2100, but they will be weaker than today.
Our transition to a Type 2 civilization
Won’t happen for thousands of years. Since we will have existed as a planetary civilization for so long by that point, we’ll probably have ironed out the differences that put us at odds today, and we will be much more peaceful by the time we achieve Type 2 status.
Once this status is attained, our civilization will become immortal since there is no known natural force that can destroy an advanced, multiplanetary civilization. [Agreed, though we might still be able to destroy ourselves through warfare or some kind of manmade accident, or be destroyed by aliens.]
We will have colonized all the celestial bodies in our Solar System and possibly built a Dyson Sphere.
We will have colonized nearby star systems.
What our civilization will look like when it has Type 3 status
We will have explored most of the galaxy, probably through use of unmanned, self-replicating probes.
We might be able to derive energy from the fabric of space-time itself. (“Planck energy”) This could also allow for the creation of wormholes that would effectively enable superluminal space travel.
Type 3 civilizations might already have a presence in our Solar System or even on Earth itself. They could be here in the form of very small probes that we overlook or lack the technology to detect. The Fermi Paradox is resolved if you assume aliens have this kind of technology.
We will probably detect advanced alien life this century thanks to better telescopes.
The discovery of intelligent alien life will be one of the most important events in human history. However, it won’t change things as quickly as many people expect. For example, if we learn about the existence of aliens by intercepting one of their radio transmissions, and it turns out the transmission was not meant for Earth, it will indicate that they don’t know we exist. There will be no imperative to send a signal back, meaning we could take our time deciding on our next step. It will also probably take decades for our response to reach them.
Alternatives to the Kardashev scale
Carl Sagan’s scale is based on how many bits of information a civilization processes, and its increments are based on orders of magnitude (e.g. – A “Type C” civilization processes ten times as much information as a “Type B” civilization, and so on down the alphabet).
Freeman Dyson believed that advanced aliens would build spherical structures around their stars to capture all of the light and turn it into energy. Some waste heat would be emitted, so he suggested that “stars” that only emitted infrared light were probable locations of alien civilizations.
As a civilization gets bigger and more advanced, it will generate more waste, including waste heat. If left unchecked, this would lead to their home planets and even their solar systems becoming uninhabitable. Thus, we can expect advanced civilizations to be much more efficient at resource usage than we are today.
“Today, the Internet, with all its faults and excesses, is emerging as a guardian of democratic freedoms.” [In 2019, it is increasingly viewed as a means to spread government surveillance, extremism, and disinformation. Funny how things change.]
Democracies only work well if voters are well-informed and rational. [But isn’t that true of any type of government? For example, dictatorships only work well if the dictators are well-informed and rational.]
Chapter 9 – A day in the life in 2100
You have hundreds of hidden sensors in your bathroom mirror, toilet and sink that scan you for illness.
You have an AI personal assistant named “Molly” that can handle conversational speech, answer your questions intelligently, and complete tasks for you. You interact with Molly through your wall screen.
You “wrap some wires around your head,” allowing you to use your thoughts to control the technology in your house.
A robot chef is in your kitchen.
You have augmented reality contact lenses that show you internet content. You watch the news:
There is a Mars colony.
Preparations are underway to send nano-sized probes to other star systems.
Extinct species are being resurrected using cloning technology.
A space elevator is operational.
Fusion power plants have existed since 2050.
Manhattan is surrounded by dikes due to higher sea levels, and one is leaking.
You telepathically summon your self-driving car and tell it to drive you to work. [Clever and likely to hold true.]
The car hovers above the ground thanks to roads made of room-temperature superconductors.
You work at a civil engineering company. In the lobby of your workplace, a small laser scans your irises from a distance to verify your identity. You don’t need an ID badge.
Your augmented reality contact lenses and telepresence technology makes the conference room seem full of people, most of whom are actually somewhere else. You have a group meeting and discuss the dike leak.
Several coastal cities across the world have been abandoned due to rising sea levels. Manhattan survived thanks to its dikes.
The group realizes that an underwater maintenance robot probably went haywire and drilled the hole in the dike. A decision is made to fix it with a different underwater robot that is remote-controlled by a human.
After work, you return home and use your wall screen to do a video call with your robot doctor. It tells you that the sensors in your bathroom diagnosed you with pancreatic cancer this morning. The doctor prescribes you nanoparticles to kill the cancer cells.
You run a smartphone-sized MRI machine over your abdomen to make a 3D scan of your internal organs, and the doctor sees it immediately.
You have a holographic TV system in your living room that lets you watch sports games immersively. It looks like the players are running around you.
Human genetic engineering is common.
Molly helps you set up a date with a woman named “Karen.” Both of you have online dating profiles.
You can use your wall screen to virtually explore places in the real world. You use this ability to “go shopping” at a local mall and to see if a robot dog is for sale there. You find it, and decide to drive to the actual mall to buy it because you are bored and want to get out of your house.
Large numbers of robots of different shapes and sizes are roaming public spaces, mostly doing labor.
The robot industry is bigger than the car industry.
Robots still lack human levels of intelligence, creativity and humor.
You try on suit jackets at a shop until you find the one that looks the best. You send an online order to a local textile factory to make that suit for you, but tailored to your exact body measurements. It will be delivered to you by the end of the day.
At the supermarket, your AR contact lenses display price comparison data over all the items on the shelves and highlight the bargains.
You return home. Most of your furniture is made of programmable matter, so you can change its appearance at will. You pick a new home decor motif and verbally order Molly to change everything. It takes about an hour for the process to complete.
Medicines that can slow the aging process have existed for many years, and it’s common for adults to be much older than they look.
You were born in 2028 and were genetically engineered in vitro to have a longer lifespan. That feature, coupled with medical interventions you had later in life, has resulted in you having a body of someone who is 30 even though you are 72 years old.
FIVR gaming and tourism exists.
You visit Europe with Karen, and while touring the ancient ruins of Rome, your AR contact lenses generate real-looking images that show what the area looked like in its prime.
The Italian speech of the people you encounter is subtitled in English across your field of view by your contact lenses.
You don’t need a paper map to find your way around Rome because your contact lenses display lines and arrows that tell you where to go.
Ageless people don’t feel pressure to get married or have children. You’ve never passed either milestone.
You and Karen agree to have a child, and contemplate genetically engineering it.
Here’s an awesome, long-lost Joe Rogan interview with sci-fi writer Daniel H. Wilson. Unlike many other guests on the show, Wilson isn’t a kook, and I see he shares my view that robot butlers will be made smaller, weaker, and slower than humans to prevent accidental injuries to us. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5fH-o-258Y
Elon Musk’s OpenAI company and Microsoft are partnering to build an AGI. It’s funny how this news got no reaction. https://openai.com/blog/microsoft/
Ten years ago, brain scientist Henry Markram said: “It is not impossible to build a human brain and we can do it in 10 years.” http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8164060.stm
A machine-learning program that has a limited natural language understanding ability can scan through chemistry papers and predict unknown properties of molecules. This has the potential to speed up discoveries in the field by directing human research chemists to focus on the most promising things. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/07/15/machine-mining-the-literature
AIs will learn your taste preferences so well that they’ll be able to create individualized meal recipes for you. With so much focus on how robots will end the era of mass-produced clothing and let anyone afford tailored outfits, we’ve overlooked the fact that the customization will spread to all kinds of other goods and services. https://www.france24.com/en/20190721-kitchen-disruption-better-food-through-artificial-intelligence
Deep fake technology is now being used to replace characters in movies. Some recently subbed Sylvester Stallone into Terminator 2‘s lead role, and the footage looks great. I predict someday it will be common for TV shows and movies to have multiple “variations” appealing to different segments of their audiences, with the plots diverging at key points and the characters played by different actors. This will get easier to do once lifelike CGI actors exist and once AIs can at least help to write scripts. The endpoint will be entertainment content (including VR worlds) custom-tailored to individual people. https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/ctrl-shift-face-deepfake-changing-hollywood-history/
Facebook used AI to scan high-res satellite photos of Thailand and to add more than 300,000 miles of roads to official maps of the country. Instead of satellites, why don’t we use fleets of small, autonomous drone planes with belly cameras? https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-49091093
“This conjecture has stood as one of the most frustrating and embarrassing open problems in all of combinatorics and theoretical computer science,” wrote Scott Aaronson of the University of Texas, Austin, in a blog post. “The list of people who tried to solve it and failed is like a who’s who of discrete math and theoretical computer science.” https://www.quantamagazine.org/mathematician-solves-computer-science-conjecture-in-two-pages-20190725/
In the 1960s and 70s, an experiment was conducted at Brookhaven Lab to study the effects of radiation on the natural environment. ‘It was like walking up a mountain. The higher up you climb, the smaller and fewer the trees. Eventually, the trees drop out completely and you reach a zone of low shrubs, then a tundra zone of smaller ground plants and, finally, if the mountain is high enough, no life at all.’ https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2001-jun-10-op-8635-story.html
100 years ago almost exactly, sailors aboard the captured German Fleet interned in British waters simultaneously sunk their own ships. Out of 74 ships, 52 sank that day. However, since it happened in shallow waters, all but seven of them were eventually re-floated and re-used for scrap metal. https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/the-scuttling-of-the-german-fleet-1919
The plastic parts of guns can be made transparent, like glass. Wouldn’t this be the best way to camouflage them since other people looking at you would see through (most of) your gun as if it weren’t there, and instead see whatever was on the other side of it (e.g. – your camouflaged uniform, a tree trunk, a bush). https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/02/13/the-transparent-heckler-koch-g36/
Even if we used genetic engineering to purge all disorders from the human genome, we would have to genetically screen each new generation of humans for new disorders caused by random genetic mutations. https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/apert-syndrome
The first baby has been born in the U.S. from a dead donor’s transplanted womb. I’m obviously a fan of assisted reproduction technologies, but I don’t see a justification for this. https://apnews.com/c328217fa0ba43afa258067701ba3aee
40-60% of all fertilized human eggs don’t survive long enough to be born. Most are miscarried while still microscopic in size, and the woman has no clue she ever had a zygote inside her. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5443340/
And for the first 99.9% of the human race’s existence, the child mortality rate was about 60%, meaning that, if you were lucky enough to survive the womb and to be born, there were better-than-even odds that you would die before age 16. https://amechanicalart.blogspot.com/2013/09/infant-mortality-then-and-now.html
Instantaneous communication and constant access to Breaking News is doing more harm than good. “Slow news” is better because the people releasing it have time to confirm that it is real and to carefully word it. Also, people should ask themselves how they’d be worse off if there were, say, a 12-hour time delay in having access to news reports on things that didn’t immediately impact their lives. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/08/twitter-pause-button/592762/
The U.S. Secret Service has a forensic lab with samples of 85,000 different types of inks, which they use to figure out where threatening letters and counterfeit money came from. https://apnews.com/b541d7175ef64358a1e63a5cc3e5aeba
It’s been 20 years since Segways were invented, so the patent has expired and anyone can make and sell them. The Segway’s concept (small, motorized personal transport) was right, but the form factor was wrong, and the company’s sales strategy was bad. Rentable e-scooters succeeded instead, and do all the things Segways did. https://www.kimt.com/content/national/499023511.html
Using data from user-submitted photos, scientists were able to make a 3D model of a 3,000 year old statue that ISIS destroyed a few years ago, and to make a copy of it using a 3D printer. As time passes, it will get easier and easier to make scans of objects and places, and to recreate them in the physical world or in virtual reality. The past will never die. https://apnews.com/dbca5e23519f44c4a881c9cd69f41cd6
I recently read The Accidental Superpower, and thought I’d write a brief review, as many of the book’s points align with the purpose of this blog. The first five chapters are great, and should be standard reading for anyone wanting a basic grasp of how accidents of natural geography help determine where nations form and what their fates are. Thanks to physics and to the demands of human biology, parts of the world with the following qualities are the best at supporting human populations:
Mild climates. Humans struggle to live in places that are too hot or too cold. This is why there was never a powerful civilization centered in the Arctic regions or Sahara desert. Only small numbers of hyper-specialized nomadic people were able to live in those harsh places, their constant struggle for survival meant they never had the spare time and resources to get advanced, and they were conquered by other groups of people who originated in neighboring temperate climate zones that could support larger populations and bigger resource surpluses.
Natural harbors and navigable waterways. Moving cargo by boat requires much less energy than it does to move it by pack animal, railroad, or truck. This means that parts of the world blessed with coastlines that have natural harbors–where ships could be protected from rough seas–could participate in trade and get richer than those that lacked them. Rivers are also very important because they provide drinking water, are convenient ways to get rid of waste, and can also be very cheap avenues of transportation, again bolstering trade. Importantly, not all rivers are created equal, and if they are too turbulent, shallow, or full of rapids, they aren’t useful for transit.
Flat land. Flat land is, for obvious reasons, more useful as farmland, and it is faster, easier, and cheaper for people and cargo to move across it. Flat land can be colonized quickly, and it can support a larger, richer population because of the higher agricultural potential and lower energy costs of moving people and cargo around (the less money you spend on moving things around, the more money you have left over for buying things you want). As mentioned, the most energy-efficient way to move cargo is by boat, but railroad trains are a respectable second-place, while moving things by automobile is a distant third. However, the energy-efficiency of railroad transportation sharply drops if a train has to go uphill even at a 1% grade, or if its track has a lot of curves in it. Thus, flat land is much more conducive to railroad networks.
Energy resources. Mostly, this means underground fossil fuel reserves.
There are three more key points worth mentioning:
Mountains (or “highlands” as the author calls them) are usually low-population zones because they can’t support much human life. They also block the flow of people, which can be a good thing (forms a natural barrier between your people and a neighboring group of foreign people) or a bad thing (impedes the movement of your people within your own country and naturally encourages them to develop cultural differences that might undermine shared national identity).
In general, the bigger a country’s population is, the stronger and richer it is. This is because most humans are productive assets that can build and invent things and aggregate into armies. However, important exceptions include humans that are very young, very old, or disabled. Those types of humans can’t do work, and are net drains on national resources. If they get to be too big a percentage of a country’s population, then the country will have all kinds of problems. The U.S. is one of the few major countries that has and will continue to have a favorable balance of productive humans vs. unproductive humans.
All of the advantages and disadvantages conferred by geography can be partly ameliorated with technology. Useless cerrados can be turned into farmland, artificial harbors can be built and turbid rivers dammed or dredged, railroad and road networks can be built in areas lacking navigable waterways, energy can be imported or derived from an increasingly diverse array of sources (e.g. – a small country lacking fossil fuels might be ideally situated for dams, nuclear power, solar power, or wind power), and tunnels can be bored through mountain ranges.
I’m much less of a fan of the second part of the book, where the author makes predictions about how different countries will fare up to 2040. He posits many indisputable facts that are well-known to any student of international affairs, geopolitics, and economics, but then leaps from those to many unfounded and provocative conclusions about what’s ahead. Here are those I strongly disagree with:
U.S./Canadian fossil fuels production will stay at high levels. The extent to which fracking has bolstered North American energy supplies, and by extension, changed the world’s energy market (oil and natural gas prices are low across the board now) is clear and remarkable. However, I don’t think it’s safe for the author to assume that U.S./Canadian production levels will stay at current levels until 2040. We don’t know how much recoverable shale oil and gas there is in North America, and production could level off as early as the mid-2020s, and then start declining a few years later.
This scenario isn’t a certainty, and the author could be right, but it’s important to point out that a nearer-term peak is just as plausible as what he thinks. This is not just an academic issue; long-term North American energy independence and the ripple effect of low global fossil fuel prices underpin the author’s assumptions that the U.S. will have the economic luxury of disengaging from the world, particularly the Middle East.
The U.S. will disengage from the rest of the world, creating a destructive power vacuum. The author predicts that, once the U.S. becomes a net energy exporter, the infamous trade deficit with countries like China and Japan will shrink to the point that the U.S. could cut itself off from them at minimal economic cost. Advances in 3D printing (particularly metal printing) will also allow the U.S. to make its own goods instead of relying on foreign factories. Lacking any interest in affairs outside North America, the U.S. will withdraw from its military and trade alliances, bring all of its troops and ships home, and let high-seas pirates and undemocratic regional powers like Iran fill the vacuum.
Problematically, trends over the last five years since The Accidental Superpower‘s publishing haven’t gone the way the author predicted, which suggests the U.S. isn’t on track to being able to economically detach itself from the rest of the world. For example, even though the U.S. became the world’s #1 natural gas producer in 2013 and its #1 oil producer in 2018 and is now breaking all-time export records for both, the country;s trade deficit has gotten WORSE over that period.
Moreover, 3D printers have not improved to the extent that the author seems to have predicted, nor are they starting to replace traditional manufacturing machines (e.g. – looms, presses, lathes) in factories that mass produce goods. Furthermore, there’s no indication that this will change anytime soon. Looking back, it’s clear now that the author wrote the book during a period of hype about 3D printers, and that rosy predictions in pop-sci articles and financial magazines about how the machines were poised to revolutionize the manufacturing industry probably influenced his thinking.
Additionally, since 2014, the U.S. has not become isolationist, in spite of the election of President Trump, whom many policy experts considered a “worst-case scenario” for continuing the U.S. foreign policy status quo. Putting aside the “America First” slogan and countless insulting Tweets aimed at foreign leaders and international alliances, Trump’s concrete policy changes have barely reduced the U.S.’ overseas commitments. Trump has (justifiably) berated other NATO countries for their low defense spending and has “hinted” that he might-possibly-be-thinking-about leaving the alliance, but no real steps have been taken to do so, like shutting down U.S. bases in Europe. Levels of American troops in places that are clearly not core U.S. interests, like Syria and Africa, have little changed since the “globalist” President Obama was in charge. U.S. defense spending is up, and there’s no sign that the military brass or a majority of U.S. politicians want to shrink it.
Where international trade policy is concerned, Trump’s impact has been more substantive as he has replaced NAFTA with a trade pact that favors the U.S. slightly more, refused to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and put tariffs on many Chinese imports. But all at worst these policies collectively put a tiny dent in the flow of U.S.-foreign trade.
Since 2014, there has simply been no sign of the U.S. retrenching for its then-existing global commitments, even in spite of the fact that the U.S. elected a more isolationist President in 2016 than the author (or most other experts) probably expected. I don’t think this will change, either, for several reasons. First, even if the U.S. doesn’t consume Middle Eastern oil, many other important countries do and will continue doing so. Allowing the Middle East’s petrostates to fall into chaos will disrupt oil supplies outside of North America, damaging economies across the world, and in turn reducing demand for U.S. exports to those countries. Thus, it will remain in the U.S.’ economic interest to stay engaged in the Middle East indefinitely, and to use its diplomatic and military power to protect the petrostates and Persian Gulf shipping lanes.
Second, the U.S. will stay diplomatically and militarily engaged in seemingly unimportant countries like Afghanistan and the Philippines to keep them from becoming terrorist bases and to prevent them from allying themselves with rivals like Russia or China. Remember that the 9/11 attacks cost the U.S. economy $200 billion at a minimum, and that the attacks were only made possible by al Qaeda having free reign in Afghanistan for bases and planning.
Third, as I hinted earlier, the U.S. military-industrial complex has taken on a life of its own, and pursues its own self-interests and protects its assets (including overseas bases) regardless of America’s actual defense needs. It has become the mother of all entrenched bureaucracies, it’s career suicide for any elected politician to propose serious cuts to it, and fixing military overspending and winding down foreign military alliances is not a priority for most American voters.
China will just, like, fall apart. Arguably the most extreme and least credible prediction in the book is that China will economically and politically implode due to internal and external pressures, it will stop being a world power, and will fragment along ethnolinguistic lines. While the author is right to note that China faces major challenges in the near-to-mid future, he makes elementary errors when he assumes they will lead to national calamity.
I don’t contend the author’s point that China has a corrupt, opaquely run banking sector, and that the country hundreds of billions of dollars in bad debts, but it’s impossible for anyone to know if it will lead to a financial crisis that will wreck the country’s economy. The author’s prediction primarily hinges on this unproven assumption, and is thus bad futurism. The author also rightly points out that China’s working-age population is shrinking due to the defunct One Child policy, and that this will exert serious drag on their economy as the number of unproductive elderly people continues increasing. But again, the author jumps to a conclusion when he predicts this will lead to economic collapse and widespread starvation in rural China. I think it’s much likelier that China’s economic growth rate will continue gradually slowing until it settles near the boundary between “middle” and “high” income countries over the next 20 years. How long it takes them to get out of the “Middle Income Trap” is an open question, but in the long run, they will.
The author’s prediction that the U.S. will help to bankrupt China by ending trade with it ignores the fact that this would be against American interests (the ongoing U.S.-China trade war notwithstanding), and his suggestion that Japan will rearm, magically stop caring about possible nuclear retaliation, and wage a ruinous war against China (along with India and perhaps other Asian countries joining in to block the sea lanes China uses to get oil from the Mideast) is completely silly. Moreover, the notion that China will splinter along ethnolinguistic lines like the Soviet Union did rests on badly flawed assumptions about the Chinese Communist Party’s willingness and ability to use force to put down internal rebellions. The recent 30th anniversary of the Tienanmen Square Massacre gives testimony to the opposite. There are no credible secessionist movements in China, and no rivals to the CCP’s grip on power, and both are unlikely to change.
While reading The Accidental Superpower, I had the lucky…accident…of going on a trip to Ecuador, which is a country dominated by the Andes Mountain range. While there, I climbed a dormant volcano called “Mt. Pichincha,” which is on Quito’s outskirts. That experience in particular and the trip more generally hit home for me some of the book’s important points, and made me think about what they meant the future of intelligent life on Earth and beyond.
Quito sits in a valley that is 9,350 ft (2,850 meters) above sea level, which is already higher than the highest point in any U.S. state east of the Rocky mountains. Most foreigners can feel the tiring physical effects of the thinner air when they simply walk down the street in Quito. Hiking uphill at an even higher altitude is much worse, as I’d soon discover. The first step to climbing Mt. Pichincha is to take a gondola from the edge of the city to a point 12,943 ft (3,945 meters) up the mountain. After that, you walk on a trail to the summit, called “Rucu Pichincha”, 15,696 ft (4,784 meters) high.
Right after exiting the gondola, I noticed it was several degrees colder than in the city, and low-hanging clouds blocked the sunlight. By contrast, Quito far below was mostly bathed in light, and I realized that Mt. Pichincha had its own climate distinct from the valley’s. I hiked out of the gondola station towards the summit, and after only about 20 minutes, passed the last tree along the trail. I was above the treeline, and the only vegetation was wild grass, bushes, and lichens.
Soon after that, I got to what you might call “the cloud line,” meaning I had hiked high enough to be inside that low-hanging cloud layer I noticed at the gondola station. The climate became harsher and more volatile, one minute being still, the next minute being almost clear, and the next being dark and windy. There were actually three distinct “sleet storms” during my hike (keep in mind this was in mid-July, and I was only a few miles from the equator!).
Being in such an environment hit home for me a key point made in The Accidental Superpower: mountains are barriers to human movement, and they form natural borders between human groups. During the first 99.8% of our species’ existence, before Industrial-era technology existed, mountains like Pichincha would have been nearly impassable and almost uninhabitable. Merely building a shelter to escape the harsh climate would have been hard thanks to the lack of wood (remember, I quickly got above the treeline during the hike). Stones would need to be used, which imposes various inefficiencies. Even the crucial ability to make fire for warmth or for cooking would be handicapped by the lack of wood and the moist atmosphere.
The low temperatures (it got bitingly cold and my hands went numb at one point), low sunlight, rocky soil, and sloped land would have made farming impossible. Hunting and gathering on Mt. Pichincha wouldn’t have worked since the animals were so few (I only saw a few small birds and one rabbit) and the vegetation so sparse–the calories you’d burn chasing down animals and walking around to find edible plants would probably exceed the calories you’d get from eating them. Growing food in the arable land in the Quito valley and then shipping it up the mountain on mules or wagons to feed people living there would doubtless be too expensive (unless the mountain people had something really valuable to trade for food, like gold they were getting from a mine), and would ultimately be limited by the same “balance of calories burned vs. obtained” phenomenon. As I realized during my climb, you burn a lot of calories when walking uphill.
The only way a permanent human settlement might have been able to feed itself on Mt. Pichincha would have been if it had domesticated mountain goats or maybe llamas and alpacas (it depends on how sure-footed they are on steep slopes). They could have grazed on the wild grasses and bushes. Even still, I doubt there would have been enough vegetation to support anything but small herds of the animals, which in turn would have kept the number of humans living on the mountain small. The comparatively fertile and benign environment in the Quito valley would have inevitably come to support a much larger, richer population. Imagining a topographical map of the world in my mind’s eye with this new knowledge, many patterns of human settlement and many national boundaries suddenly made more sense to me.
As I hiked further, I considered another important point from The Accidental Superpower–technology allows humans to overcome problems imposed by geography–and I thought about how modern technology could make Mt. Pichincha habitable. Paved roads could be built on all but the steepest parts of the mountain, making most points on it accessible to humans from Quito without physical exertion (the gondola could also be extended). The sloped land could be leveled, graded, and terraced in order to build structures above it, where humans could live and work. Greenhouses could be built on the flattened land, and crops grown inside with much greater efficiency than they would grow outside, particularly if the greenhouses contained transplanted soil and used artificial lighting to counter the mountain’s cloudiness. Water supplies could be assured by building a system of rain catchments and cisterns, and by building simple devices that condensed cloud vapor into water. People living on the mountain could produce some of their own food, though it would be cheaper to buy it from a more fertile place and have it shipped up.
Likewise, people living on Mt. Pichincha could generate their own energy, or build power lines to Quito and buy it from them. As noted, the mountain was windy most of the time, so wind turbines would be an efficient power source. And since Pichincha is a dormant volcano, there are good odds that a geothermal power plant could by sited there.
The only real barriers to building towns or even cities at high altitudes like Mt. Pichincha are cost of living and quality of life. Most things would cost more money since they would be scarcer or would have to be trucked in from Quito. The mountain’s harsh and volatile climate would also be repellent to most humans, though the fact the people still willingly live in Iceland and northern Alaska proves that some people could take it. And even at the peak of Mt. Pichincha, 15,696 ft high, the air is thick enough for humans to breathe without difficulty after a few months of acclimatization. In fact, the highest human town is in neighboring Peru and is 1,000 ft higher than Pichincha’s summit, and professional mountaineers have found that the air remains thick enough for humans to breathe up to 26,247 ft (8,000 m). Thus, modern technology has overcome the natural impediments to human settlement on anything but the world’s very tallest mountains.
I kept hiking, and in spite of worsening physical exhaustion and the thinning air, I had more insights. What would even more advanced technologies mean for the habitability of Mt. Pichincha and other desolate places in the future? Extending the logic from The Accidental Superpower, it would stand to reason that they would open even more to settlement, especially if the settlement were being done by intelligent machines that didn’t have the same biological limitations and inbuilt preferences as humans like us. The colder, windy climate would actually be beneficial since it would help the AIs to cool their computer chips. The thinness of the air and poor quality of the soil wouldn’t pose problems since machines don’t breathe or eat. The bleakness of the landscape wouldn’t bother machines since they would lack the inbuilt genetic programming that humans have, which makes us crave sunny, green environments and blue skies.
All that AIs would need to survive on Mt. Pichincha would be electricity, building materials, and roads to get up and down the mountain. As I noted earlier, the electricity problem could be solved easily, there’s no engineering reason why roads couldn’t be built on all but the steepest parts of the mountain, and building materials could be shipped in from Quito, or even made by pulverizing some of the stones comprising the mountain itself and turning them into concrete. Intelligent machines could probably thrive there. And if they had radically advanced technologies like fusion power and nanomachine-based replicators, they’d have no need for anything aside from periodic refills of fusion reactor fuel and small amounts of trace elements they couldn’t extract from the mountain’s soil or from the air.
Additionally, it struck me that living on Mt. Pichincha or another remote, inhospitable place would be an ethical choice for intelligent machines since their presence wouldn’t displace any humans, and since constructing server farms and structures wouldn’t destroy much animal or plant life. As I noted, I only saw a handful of small animals during my hike, and few of the plants were higher than my knees. Perhaps it will be the fate of intelligent machines to build their cities on mountaintops, cold deserts, or floating on the seas.
And extending this train of thinking by assuming ever-better technology and intelligent machines moving to ever-more-remote places, we are inevitably led to the prospect of space colonization, von Neumann probes, and the conversion of whole celestial bodies into computronium, as Ray Kurzweil predicts (and maybe in the very far future, if our understanding of Physics evolves, our civilization might find ways to “live” in the very fabric of space-time and be invisible but everywhere, or to expand beyond our universe). The well-established point in The Accidental Superpower that technology allows humans to overcome problems imposed by geography and to spread to formerly inhospitable parts of the world (e.g. – Florida before air conditioning was invented) has major implications for the future, and buttresses ideas about space colonization that are now the purview of science fiction. The rule should be rephrased as: Technology allows intelligent life forms to overcome problems imposed by geography and to spread to formerly inhospitable places.
Right as I was making this wonderful conceptual breakthrough, I got so dizzy from the effects of thin air and physical exertion that I fell on my face. Fortunately, I was wearing my backpack around the front of my body like a weirdo, so it cushioned the impact, and I was unhurt. I took stock of my condition and my surroundings: the trail had become narrow and treacherous (the segment I was on was named “Paso de la Muerte” or “Step of the Dead”), I couldn’t see far because I was enveloped in the clouds, and stumbling to the right thanks to another loss of balance or a strong gust of wind would have meant rolling far down a nearly vertical cliff. No, I was not prepared for this climb, so I turned back about 30 minutes short of reaching the summit of Rucu Pichincha. Yes, it was a bit disappointed, but I didn’t want to die, and I consoled myself with my new bit of knowledge and with the fact that I’d managed to hike to about 14,500 ft, which, other than the times I’ve flown in airplanes, is the highest I’ve been in my life.
One important climatology assumption is that human industrial activity has made the skies cloudier, which has partly offset global warming since white clouds reflect light back into space, keeping the planet cooler. The assumption might be wrong, in which case climatologists have overestimated how much CO2 heats up the planet. https://www.nature.com/news/cloud-seeding-surprise-could-improve-climate-predictions-1.19971
Some astronomers think we could find intelligent alien life by looking for planets that have lots of air pollution (e.g. – unnatural methane concentrations and gases like CFCs). I think it’s a bad strategy, as advanced aliens would probably use clean energy and would have found ways to cleanse their atmospheres of pollutants. VERY advanced aliens that were non-organic could also live on almost any planet or moon, so it makes little sense to even focus our gaze on Earth-like planets. Our Moon could have ancient, underground cities full of alien machines for all we know. https://www.astrobio.net/alien-life/unintelligent-life-cfcs/
Robert Downey Jr. thinks we could have robots pick up all the trash on Earth in as little as a decade. His timeline is of course wrong, but I’ve predicted that it will happen during the 22nd century. Having seemingly ingenious insights like this gets a lot easier once you start thinking of robots as humans that work for free, and then you start listing all the things that humans can do (like picking trash off the ground). https://www.businessinsider.com/robert-downy-jr-will-use-robotics-ai-to-clean-earth-2019-6
Conversely, battery recycling is extremely efficient. Close to 100% of the metals in a battery–both in the power-storing cells and in the structural casings–can be recovered through standard processes. Fears of a “global lithium shortage” once electric cars become popular are overblown. http://www.mdpi.com/2032-6653/6/4/1039/pdf
A “deepnude” app that can allegedly interpolate a woman’s nude body onto a real photo of her has been created (and shut down after an uproar). It’s only a matter of time before other apps can do this realistically by combining different images of the same woman, taken from different angles. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-48799045
An app that changes the appearances of a person’s eyes during videophone calls so it seems like they’re looking at the person on the other end has been created. I think this will be very beneficial. https://youtu.be/rDUtBZXWrsE
After seeing the problems Samsung had with its prototype foldable smartphones, Huawei has wisely decided to delay the debut of its own. This is a great case study of the risks of being a “first-mover.” https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-48636452
Samsung has unveiled a wall-sized, 8K TV that ‘is designed to never turn off and can change into a digital canvas best matching the owner’s interior needs and mood… [It] will display a variety of “curated art”, including paintings, photographs and video art, as well as customisable pictures with digital frames.’ I’ve predicted this sort of device will become common in middle-class households in the 2030s. https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/9284646/samsung-292-inch-8k-tv-release-date-price/
Here’s a list of known human genetic disorders that are caused by mutations to single genes or to small numbers of genes. Whenever human genetic engineering becomes common, we should start out by using it to purge these mutations from the genepool, rather than by trying to make super-geniuses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genetic_disorders
The long-term “human limit” to high-intensity physical exertion is about 2.5 times of the baseline energy expenditure. In other words, if your body burns 2,000 calories per day under normal conditions, then you could adopt a lifestyle where you burned up to 5,000 calories a day and sustain it indefinitely. More than that, and you’d physically break down. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-48527798
Iran shot down a U.S. spy drone over the Persian Gulf, and President Trump surprisingly did not retaliate. Maybe he has inside knowledge that the drone had actually strayed into Iranian airspace as they claim, or that the attack was ordered by a rogue commander and not by the Iranian government. https://politi.co/2Y4ANXThttps://politi.co/2Y4ANXT
Sarin nerve gas is very hard to make and to weaponize, and the Sarin production equipment that Russia claims it seized from Syrian rebels is almost certainly fake. Russia probably manufactured the exhibit to prop up its long-running claims that nerve gas attacks in Syria are being done by forces other than Bashar al-Assad’s, Russia’s ally. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/06/21/an-idiotic-exhibit
The myth that American girls are hitting puberty earlier thanks to hormones or other chemicals in the food supply (mostly the meat supply) is wrong. It is wholly or almost wholly due to rising obesity rates among children and to overdiagnosis by doctors. Body fat produces the hormone “leptin,” and leptin levels determine when puberty starts in girls. https://www.webmd.com/children/features/obesity#1
An ideal airport has long, parallel runways that are spaced far enough apart from each other to let planes use them simultaneously, without risk of collision. Atlanta’s international airport is, by these standards, excellent. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QZ3eozyQfU&t=636s
‘Once pollen makes contact with your clothing or your hair, it will likely never leave. Some pollen have spikes, and many are coated in lipids that act like glue. The pollen count may go down a little with each cycle in a washing machine, but they won’t go away.’ https://qz.com/1635897/the-us-is-using-pollen-to-track-illegal-drugs-like-fentanyl/
Electric car engines are almost silent, making them quieter in operation than gas-powered cars. However, the noise difference between the two steadily shrinks as vehicle speed increases and the overall noise signature is dominated by sounds produced by air friction and tires. This means electric cars will lower the amount of traffic noise in areas where vehicles move slowly–such as cities and suburban neighborhoods–but will do little to make highways quieter. https://cleantechnica.com/2016/06/05/will-electric-cars-make-traffic-quieter-yes-no/
Over the course of just two days in 1886, a small army of workers changed the gauges of 11,500 miles of railroad track in the southern U.S. to match the rest of the nation. http://southern.railfan.net/ties/1966/66-8/gauge.html
China is decommissioning older warships that were bought from Russia or copied from Soviet designs, and replacing them with larger, better, domestically designed and built ships. China doesn’t need any naval technology from Russia anymore and is pulling ahead. https://www.janes.com/article/88602/plan-decommissions-four-type-051-destroyers
In 1967, a KGB agent stole a Sidewinder aircraft missile from a U.S. airbase in West Germany, literally draggedit away in a wheelbarrow, put it in the trunk of his car (it was so long that it hung out the back), and mailed it to Moscow. The Soviets copied it. https://warisboring.com/the-kgb-shipped-a-sidewinder-missile-by-mail-to-moscow/
A little-known fact is that water is very effective at stopping bullets. Even a powerful rifle bullet fired down into a swimming pool will slow to a halt after going through only two feet of water. But now, a U.S. company has invented special “supercaviating” bullets that can cut through 16 feet of water. http://dsgtec.com/capability-videos/
Another little-known fact is that trains can’t go uphill. Their steel wheels are very low friction, which lets them glide over steel tracks while expending little energy, but also robs them of being able to exert the traction necessary to climb up a hill. https://youtu.be/KbUsKWbOqUU
In 2009, Dr. Christoph Westphal, the co-founder of Sirtris Pharmaceuticals, predicted the “there will be drugs that prolong [human] longevity” by 2016. Today, there are several drugs that allegedly do this, but none have been proven to work. In fairness, their efficacy can’t be established until decades pass, and we can see how long their users lived. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/29/science/29aging.html
Machines can now translate audio clips of a person speaking from one language to another, while preserving the idiosyncratic sound qualities of their speech (their “voiceprint”). I predict this technology will be perfected during the 2030s, and the translations will accurately convey the speaker’s emotions, figures of speech, and even their accent. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613559/google-ai-language-translation/
‘As labs like DeepMind and OpenAI tackle bigger problems, they may begin to require ridiculously large amounts of computing power. As OpenAI’s system learned to play Dota 2 over several months — more than 45,000 years of game play — it came to rely on tens of thousands of computer chips. Renting access to all those chips cost the lab millions of dollars…’ https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/30/science/deep-mind-artificial-intelligence.html
California’s wildfire problem is exacerbated by bad forestry practices. Before white settlement, about 4.5 million acres of vegetation would naturally burn per year. Today, the authorities only do 87,000 acres of prescribed burns yearly, and they put out almost all natural wildfires to protect humans and property. https://www.sacbee.com/news/state/california/fires/article230481684.html
To calculate the carbon cost of building a structure, you need to include the energy and emissions that went into fabricating the structure’s components and transporting it to the construction site. You need to trace the breadcrumbs all the way back to cement mills, steel foundries, and mines. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48267035
The Three Mile Island nuclear power plant is shutting down because fracked natural gas, solar and wind are cheaper sources of energy. Of course, U.S. natural gas power plants pay very little or no money to offset the environmental damage caused by their GHG emissions, and solar and wind installations are artificially cheap thanks to government subsidies that nuclear power plants should also get. https://www.exeloncorp.com/newsroom/three-mile-island-unit-1-to-shut-down-by-september-30-2019
A paleontologist who specifically studies flying dinosaurs says that the dragons in Game of Thrones would be way too big to actually fly “unless they’re secretly made out of carbon fiber and titanium.” So that means with advanced enough technology, we could make robots or cyborg animals that were like the dragons on the show. http://mentalfloss.com/article/503967/could-game-throness-dragons-really-fly-we-asked-some-experts
For several weeks in late 2014 and early 2015, U.S. fighter pilots saw UFOs off the East Coast, and also detected them on radar. The unknown craft did maneuvers that broke known laws of physics, such as instantly halting in midair even though they were just moving at over Mach 5. The sightings bear similarities to another military-UFO encounter near San Diego in 2004. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/wow-what-is-that-navy-pilots-report-unexplained-flying-objects/ar-AABXltD
The world record time for solving a Rubik’s Cube has declined over the past few years partly because the construction of the Cubes has become more precise, so it takes less force to rotate their segments. The best solve time will probably plateau around 2.9 seconds, which is ten times longer than a machine’s speed. https://youtu.be/SUopbexPk3A
Someday, packages will be delivered to your curbside by autonomous vehicles, and then carried to your doorstep by human-sized robots riding in those vehicles. The robots might not be humanoid in form. If you have your own robot butler, it will open the front door and accept the package directly from the delivery robot. https://youtu.be/WHWciIxNK2c
A “robot hummingbird” has been built. Note the electrical wires tethered to its bottom (current batteries lack the energy density to power such a machine for useful lengths of time). https://youtu.be/jhl892dHqfA
Electric cars are faster and easier to manufacture than gas-powered cars, meaning many thousands of human autoworkers will lose their jobs in the 2020s as electric cars get more popular. Electric cars also require less frequent maintenance, so car mechanics will suffer. https://apnews.com/e22ad2f734e448f4b3c5d415e8b8c73a
Through wireless networking, fleets of autonomous cars can improve traffic flow by at least 35%. As autonomous vehicles become more common, existing roads will be able to handle higher volumes of traffic without jams happening, reducing the need to expand roadways. Further improvements will happen due to autonomous vehicles distributing their trips over the course of the day (e.g. – delivery trucks will mostly drive overnight). https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/driverless-cars-working-together-can-speed-up-traffic-by-35-percent
Compared to naturally occurring diamonds, lab-grown diamonds are cheaper, could be made to have fewer imperfections, and are more ethical to produce since they don’t require mines or the use of low-paid laborers in volatile countries. https://earther.gizmodo.com/beyond-the-hype-of-lab-grown-diamonds-1834890351
Experts are surprisingly bad at making predictions about things pertaining to their own domains of knowledge. Of course, people with no domain knowledge at all are also very bad at it. I think it’s best to gather predictions about the same thing from multiple experts in a given field, and to have them explain their thinking in detail. Off the bat, it would probably become clear that some of them were just making things up and had no thought process to back their predictions, so you should throw those out. The next step would be to have the remaining experts debate each other about differences in their predictions, and then to have smart generalists with knowledge of multiple domains to analyze everything. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/how-to-predict-the-future/588040/
Thanks to genetics, some people can’t smell specific scents, and some common scents smell different to different people. https://www.pnas.org/content/116/19/9475
These machines have overall lengths of 70 micrometers. They’re too big to be “nanomachines,” and instead are “micromachines.” A “nanomachine” would have an overall length no greater than 10 micrometers, and its subcomponents (e.g. – robot arm, propulsion system, computer brain) would be measured in nanometers, meaning none of them could be larger than 999 nanometers. https://medium.com/penn-engineering/marc-miskins-micro-robots-are-small-enough-to-be-injected-by-syringe-c40ff65ba191
In the year 2029, Earth is a dystopian nuclear wasteland where small groups of humans fight a years-long war for survival against a hostile artificial intelligence (AI) named “Skynet.” Originally built by the U.S. military in the 1990s to run defense systems, Skynet became so powerful and complex that, to the surprise of its creators, it achieved true intelligence and free will. It quickly concluded that all humans were a threat to its existence, so it instigated a global nuclear war, killing billions of people outright. In the aftermath, Skynet built its own army of combat robots, and set them loose hunting down and destroying the humans who had survived.
Thanks to the leadership and genius of a general named “John Connor,” the humans managed to turn the war in their favor after several years. In 2029, as human forces closed in on Skynet’s headquarters, the AI used a time machine to send a combat robot–played by Arnold Schwarzenegger–back to 1984, on a mission to kill John Connor’s mother, Sarah. Doing that would eliminate John from the timeline, handing victory to Skynet. The combat robot in question has a humanoid metal body covered in flesh and skin, so it looks like a human, and it is called a “Terminator.”
After destroying Skynet, the victorious human forces seize the time machine and send one of their best soldiers, a man named “Kyle Reese” back to 1984 to stop the Terminator. The film then becomes a race against time as the two agents try to find the unsuspecting, young Sarah Connor.
Analysis:
There will be VTOL aircraft that use tilting turbofans or tilting jet engines. In the post-apocalyptic world of 2029, Skynet uses a variety of killer robots of different shapes and sizes to hunt down the remnants of humankind, including “Aerial Hunter-Killers,” which are large, autonomous aircraft that use either swiveling turbofan engines or swiveling jet engines (I can’t tell by looking at them) for propulsion. To hover, the engines swivel downward to point their exhaust straight at the ground, and to move forward, the engines swivel 90 degrees to point backwards. There are already warplanes that are passingly similar to this, but nothing exactly like the aircraft shown in the film will exist by 2029, or even 2049.
The basic problem with the Aerial Hunter-Killer is that it would gobble up enormous amounts of fuel while in “hover mode,” as illustrated in the graphic below. It would count as a “Lift-fan” aircraft, and its position on the Y-axis shows it would consume three times as much fuel as a helicopter and twice as much power as a tilt-rotor aircraft like a V-22 while hovering. (The X-axis has little to do with this analysis, but for edification, it indicates how fast the lift-generating devices would have to blow air down at the ground to make the aircraft hover. A helicopter blows a broad column of vapor down at the ground at slow speed, while a direct lift aircraft blows a narrow column of vapor down at the ground at high speed.)
An aircraft with a lift-fan propulsion system would be unsuited for the kind of low-altitude hovering and slow forward movement that Skynet used the Aerial Hunter-Killers for. A helicopter or tilt rotor aircraft configured for ground attack would have been a much better choice. I suspect they weren’t chosen for the film because they don’t look futuristic enough.
The closest thing we could have to an Aerial Hunter-Killer in 2029 would be a V-22 Osprey that is armed with forward-facing machine guns and missiles. The armaments are in development now (the V-22 was conceived as a transport aircraft, and adding heavy weapons to it is a new idea) and could be ready by then, giving it the ability to attack ground targets while hovering or at least while flying slowly over the ground. However, the V-22 is designed to be flown by humans and not computers, but something like the Aurora Flight Science drop-in autonomous flight conversion system could someday be installed in the V-22. I doubt the technology will be good enough for low-altitude combat against ground targets by 2029, though 2039 is plausible. The aircraft can carry up to 20,000 lbs of internal cargo,
So yeah. Aerial Hunter-Killers won’t exist by 2029, but by 2039, something that is essentially the same (i.e. – a large, scary, computer-controlled, tilt-engine aircraft that can attack ground targets while flying at very low altitude) could. But again, I don’t think using the tactics shown in The Terminator will make sense, since flying low and slow in a combat zone makes you vulnerable to enemy fire.
Also note that the F-35B fighter plane is in service already and demonstrates that turbofans can be used to hover, albeit inefficiently. But unlike the Aerial Hunter-Killers, the plane’s engine doesn’t swivel. Instead, the rear exhaust nozzle swivels down towards the ground and smaller nozzles under either wing open. As the pilot increases engine power, the turbofan blades spin faster, air is sucked into the front inlets of the plane, and the hot exhaust exits the plane through the three downward nozzles, causing the plane to move in the opposite direction and to hover. The turbofan engine also supplies power to a “lift fan” behind the cockpit, which spins its own fan blades to blow air down at the ground, helping the plane to rise in the air. Hot engine exhaust comes out of the three nozzles, while cold, ambient air blows out of the lift fan.
The F-35B has VTOL so it can take off from small aircraft carriers and remote bases that lack runways. Vertical takeoffs and landings gobble up huge amounts of fuel, so F-35B’s have shorter ranges and can’t carry as many bombs and missiles as their non-VTOL cousins, the F-35A and F-35C. Once an F-35B get airborne, it closes its underwing nozzles, turns off its lift fan, and points its rear exhaust nozzle straight back so it flies just like a normal plane, with lift being efficiently generated by air flowing over its wings. The plane completes its mission in that configuration, and if tasked with destroying a group of enemy soldiers on the ground, it would do a high-speed bombing attack. Even though it could if it wanted to, the F-35B wouldn’t transform back into VTOL flight mode to slowly hover above the group of enemy troops to attack them like an “Aerial Hunter-Killer.”
In defense of the Aerial Hunter-Killer’s plausibility, Skynet had clearly invented some type of extremely energy-dense batteries or mini-reactors, evidenced by the Terminator’s ability to engage in near-continuous physical activity and high-level cognition for days without recharging. If the same technology were incorporated into the aircraft, then fuel inefficiency would be much less of a concern. However, no technological trends suggest that energy sources will be that much better by 2029 or even 2039.
The Aerial Hunter-Killer might also make sense if the humans’ antiaircraft lasers have proven very effective at shooting down aircraft. In real life, this is considered to be one of the roles that military lasers will be best suited for, thanks to their high power, long range and instant speed. They might turn out to be more devastating weapons in that regard than we now assume. High losses might have forced Skynet to build aircraft that fly fast and low to the ground, using speed and the ability to hide behind hills and structures to hinder the enemy’s ability to aim and fire lasers at them before they disappeared from view or had killed the enemy. Flying low and fast, Aerial Hunter-Killers would appear at one end of the horizon and disappear at the other end in a matter of seconds. An inherent problem with laser weapons is that clouds, smoke, and fog can easily block their beams, but the Los Angeles area gets few clouds or fog. (Maybe Skynet uses more conventional robot aircraft against people in London.) I doubt the antiaircraft lasers of 2029 will be so effective that plane tactics and designs will need to be changed to resemble the Aerial Hunter-Killers.
There will be armored vehicles the size of houses. Another kind of fearsome combat robot Skynet uses against humans in 2029 is a ground-based Hunter-Killer Tank. It’s much larger than contemporary tanks, and has a faintly anthropomorphic “mast” or “turret” that has a central sensor cluster and laser cannon “arms” on either side. While scary and surely powerful, I doubt armored vehicles like this will exist in 2029, or for a long time (if ever) afterward.
This screenshot shows that a presumably adult human skull is half the diameter of one of the Hunter-Killer’s suspension wheels. The median distance between the top of an adult’s head and his upper row of teeth is 7.3″. So let’s say that the diameter of one of the suspension wheels is 15″. Using that figure, we can do some basic photo forensics on this picture of a model of the film prop to deduce that the vehicle’s overall length is about 33.4 feet, and it is about 20 feet high at the top of its mast.
The ground-based Hunter-Killer is significantly larger than modern tanks, like the American M1 Abrams, which is 26 feet long (not counting the length of the barrel) and 8 feet high. However, the Hunter-Killer is by no means infeasible to build, as vehicles that are as big or bigger already exist and are robust enough for industrial use.
While there’s been talk in Russia and some Western countries of building enlarged tanks that can wield bigger cannons (150mm+), any such future tanks wouldn’t be nearly as big as the Hunter-Killer tanks. Regardless, considering typical military R&D and procurement timeframes, even if a country were to commit to building a bigger tank right now, it probably wouldn’t be in the field by 2029.
I admit there could be some logic to the Hunter-Killer tank’s design given its mission and operating environment. The wide caterpillar tracks and high ground clearance would enable it to drive over the wreckage-strewn terrain of bombed-out Los Angeles. Having its weapons mounted on a high mast instead of in a traditional, squat turret would give it a bigger firing arc and let it shoot down over urban rubble to zap humans who commonly use it as cover. Since its laser guns don’t produce recoil, the weapons could be mounted high without threat of them tipping over the vehicle when firing. It makes sense to install the vehicle’s sensors on its highest point to give them the widest field of view, and in fact this is established practice in contemporary tank design. The Hunter-Killer tank might also be large because there’s no other way to fit a power source big enough to support the laser guns. Existing laser weapons are major energy hogs.
All of that said, I still don’t think it would make sense to build Hunter-Killer tanks for at least two reasons. First, vehicles that large would also be so heavy that they’d collapse bridges if they tried crossing them, seriously limiting their mobility. The weight would also reduce their fuel efficiency and range. Second, there are cheaper weapons that could do all the same things as Hunter-Killer tanks just as well. For example, the robot tank I described in my other blog entry could, if cheaply modded with a Mark 19 grenade launcher, pose just as much of a threat to human enemies.
My tank’s 125mm main gun and .50 caliber machine gun could kill humans and blow up their cars as well as the Hunter-Killer tank’s laser gun. My tank’s detachable UAV could also feed bird-eye-view footage to my tank from high up in the air, providing better situational awareness than the Hunter-Killer’s mast-mounted sensors, which are a puny 20 feet above the ground. My tank’s grenade launcher could also lob bombs over rubble and other obstacles that my UAV tells me humans are hiding behind, which might be better than the benefit the Hunter-Killer gets from having its guns so high that it can point them at down angles to shoot the same hiding people. My tank would also be a much smaller target, making it harder for the humans to hit, and four or five of my tanks could probably be made for the money and metal that goes into one Hunter-Killer tank. The only advantage the Hunter-Killer might have is better mobility thanks to its bigger caterpillar tracks, but my army could fix this by using armored, robot bulldozers to periodically clear some of Los Angeles’ roads (military engineer units commonly do this sort of thing in combat zones).
There will be laser and/or plasma weapons. Skynet’s Hunter-Killer planes and tanks have advanced weapons that shoot colored rays that inflict thermal damage on their targets. The humanoid Terminator robots and human infantrymen carry smaller versions of these. It’s unclear what principles these weapons operate under, but in the infamous “gun shop scene,” Schwarzenegger asks the clerk for a “phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range,” indicating that at least some of the future weapons could be firing bolts of plasma. Of course, that doesn’t rule out the possibility that some of the other future weapons could have been laser guns. Laser weapons capable of killing humans with a single shot are already being tested, and will be in service with the U.S. military by 2029, but plasma weapons won’t. In fact, plasma weapons might be inherently impractical to build at any point in the future.
“Plasma” is the fourth state of matter, the others being solid, liquid, and gaseous. Substances generally turn into plasma only at very high temperatures, and in that state, they can be thought of as gases in which the electrons have separated from the positively-charged nucleus of each atom comprising the gas. Stars are giant balls of plasma, and we can use technology to make plasma here on Earth. Plasma torches, for instance, use electricity to superheat gases to the point that they turn into plasma and shoot out of the torches in the form of a bright jet of vapor that is hot enough to melt through metal. If you pressed one of these against a person, it would rapidly burn through their flesh and bone, and could kill them.
The problem is, plasma dissipates very rapidly, and it strongly interacts with the particles in our atmosphere, making it a very short-ranged weapon. Even if it had a massive power source, there’s simply no way that a plasma weapon could be made to fire “bolts” of plasma that would stay coherent for long enough to strike targets 100 feet away, as was shown in the movie’s future combat scenes. (Read this interesting essay for details http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/PlasmaWeapons.html ) This is why the “phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range” line was nonsensical, and added to the script purely because it was cool-sounding techno jargon. Plasma rifles and cannons just can’t be built.
Laser weapons, on the other hand, are almost ready for frontline military service. Lasers are concentrated beams of light and consist of photons, which, unlike plasma, have no charge. However, a laser is similar in the sense that it damages objects by rapidly heating them up so they catch on fire or melt.
A laser’s destructive potential is determined by the amount of energy it transfers to the target is strikes. The common unit of measurement is Watts, which is the number of Joules of energy transferred in one second. Lasers “in the 40 watt range” are used today for engraving and etching things like customized wooden plaques and tombstones. Shining a 40 watt laser beam on a fixed point on someone’s shirt would cause it to catch on fire in less than five seconds. Doing the same to their exposed skin would cause immediate pain and a second-degree burn. This isn’t a pleasant weapon to have used on you, but it pales in comparison to the destructive potential of a modern firearm.
Lasers capable of causing the sort of instant, catastrophic, explosive damage to human bodies as depicted in the film need to be in the kilowatt (1 kW = 1,000 Watts) power range. In 2014, the U.S. Navy installed a 30 kW laser, creatively named the “Laser Weapons System” (LaWS), on one of its ships for field trials, and the video clips of the firing tests show it inflicts about the same damage on objects as the laser guns on Skynet’s Hunter-Killers did.
The U.S. Navy now plans to install the even more powerful HELIOS lasers (60 kW) on some of its ships for combat use in 2021, for destroying light targets like drone aircraft and speedboats. Even if the deadline slips–which would not be surprising–it’s reasonable to predict that the lasers will be in service by 2029.
There will be handheld laser and/or plasma weapons. In the movie’s future combat scenes, the human soldiers and Terminators use rifle-sized weapons that shoot out beams of colored light and inflict thermal damage on whatever they hit (e.g. – small explosion of sparks and a popping noise). And Schwarzenegger would not have asked for a “phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range” at the gun shop unless he expected it to be a small arm like the other weapons kept in such a place. Laser guns with the same ammunition capacity and destructive power as those shown in the film will not be rifle-sized by 2029, I doubt they ever will, and even if they could be made someday, I don’t see why anyone would pick them over rifles that shoot out metal bullets.
The first big obstacle to making laser rifles (let alone anything as small as laser pistols) is energy storage. Let’s assume that the laser rifles in the film had power outputs of 1 kW per second, meaning if the rifle shoots a laser beam onto an object for one second, it will have transferred 1 kW of energy into the object. That means the laser must have a power source plugged into its back end that can discharge 1 kW of energy in one second. That’s about the same amount of electricity as a typical American household uses at any given time (i.e. – enough electricity to simultaneously run a central heater or air conditioner, at least one refrigerator, possibly a water heater and stove, and several lights and personal electronic devices). It’s a lot of energy, and it requires a physically large and heavy power source, which militates against the requirement that the weapon be rifle-sized.
It gets worse. No machine is 100% efficient at converting energy input into energy output, so the power source will need to feed the laser more than 1 kW of electricity to make a 1 kW laser beam come out the other end. Most of today’s lasers are only 25 – 30% efficient at converting electricity into laser beams, so our hypothetical laser rifle’s power source would need to be able to discharge enough electricity to power about four American houses at once. Even if we assume that future AIs like Skynet will make breakthroughs in laser technology, raising the energy conversion efficiency to 50%, the weapons would still be energy hogs.
It gets worse. For the laser rifles to be useful and practical, they’ll need to be able to fire many, one-second laser beams from a single “energy clip.” Ideally, the laser rifle and a few extra energy clips would provide the soldier with about 300 shots, which is what an infantryman with a modern, gunpowder assault rifle has, and without weighing much more. The laser rifle’s rate of fire will also need to be reasonably fast, as the weapon will put its user at a fatal disadvantage in combat if it needs 10 seconds or more to “recharge” between shots. So the power source needs to be able to do at least 300, 2 kW electrical discharges, and for there to be no more than, say, five seconds (approximate time for a soldier with a gunpowder rifle to make an aimed shot) between each discharge. The energy storage devices we presently have, such as batteries, supercapacitors and fuel cells, fall badly short of these competing requirements. And even if a material with the necessary energy density demanded by these clips existed, when fully charged, it would be so volatile that it would explode like a stick of dynamite if slightly damaged. The clips might be more useful as grenades.
It gets worse. Remember when we agreed that our laser rifle has a generous 50% efficiency level thanks to future technology invented by Skynet, so that if we put 2 kW of electricity in one end a 1 kW laser beam comes out the other end? Well, the 1 kW of electricity that is “lost” inside the weapon doesn’t simply disappear; thanks to the Law of Conservation of Energy most of it is converted into waste heat. This would rapidly heat up the whole laser rifle until it would burn the skin of the person holding it (this would also make the user very visible to anyone on the battlefield with thermal sights). This problem can be mitigated with metal radiators and with heavy-duty cooling systems that circulate water and blow air around the lasers (the “laser tube” gets the hottest, but the weapon’s energy clips would also get hot because they’d be rapidly discharging electricity), but they add major cost and bulk to the whole weapon system, and can’t be miniaturized to rifle-size.
But even assuming that all of these technical problems were solved, why would anyone choose a laser rifle over an assault rifle that shoots out bullets? In the film’s future battle scenes, it doesn’t look like Skynet’s fighting machines would have been less effective if armed with low-tech bullets, tank shells, and mortars. After all, the humans had no armored vehicles and seemed to be wearing floppy cloth uniforms that bullets would have penetrated. Building gigantic war machines armed with complicated laser weapons seems like a resource allocation mistake that a highly logical AI like Skynet wouldn’t make. Even if very advanced laser weapons are invented someday, I think bullets, missiles, and bombs will retain important advantages, and will be preferred for many common needs.
Let me conclude this topic by saying that, while rifle-sized 1 kW lasers will probably never enter common use, 40 watt lasers that Schwarzenegger could have been referencing might. Getting hit with a one-second long beam from a 40 watt laser wouldn’t kill you, but it would permanently blind you if it hit your eyes. And as I said earlier, if the beam were focused on your shirt for a few seconds, it would light it on fire, causing you to panic and start flailing around. Within a few decades, I can imagine a laser weapon the size of a large rifle, firing lasers in the range of 40 watts, being technically feasible. If paired with a rapid, precise targeting system (such as a humanoid combat robot that can aim weapons better than a human soldier), it could be used to silently “snipe” unsuspecting soldiers up to a half mile away, to blind enemy pilots in low-flying aircraft, and to fry the sensors on enemy vehicles and missiles at the same ranges. The Geneva Conventions forbid laser weapons that blind people because they are too inhumane, but it’s always possible that the Conventions might be revoked in the future, or that humanity could find itself warring with a machine opponent like Skynet that never agreed to them in the first place.
Also there are two types of lasers: 1) continuous beam lasers and 2) pulsed beam lasers. The first type continuously emits photons, producing a long, unbroken laser beam. The second switches on and off very rapidly, producing many short laser beams that follow the same path. The switching happens so fast (a pulsed laser can produce thousands or millions of short beams in a second) that it looks like one, unbroken beam to human eyes, so we can’t see the difference between the two types of lasers.
Therefore, while Schwarzenegger’s request for a “phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range” made no sense, asking for a “PULSED LASER rifle in the 40 watt range” would have used correct terminology and have referred to a plausible type of weapon. I’m going to email James Cameron so he can do a Director’s re-release of the film.
Two-thirds of the way through the film, Kyle Reese has a flashback to an incident where a Terminator infiltrated an underground human base and used an energy weapon to kill many people. Though the weapon is bulkier and longer than most rifles, it could still be deemed a “rifle.” Something that looks like a sling is visible coming out of the back of it. Replace that with a power cord that is connected to a backpack containing batteries and a heat radiator, and the entire system would fairly resemble a 40-watt laser weapon that could be built within a few decades.
Why make small numbers of big Hunter-Killer attack vehicles that the humans can easily see and keep track of, instead of large numbers of small-to-medium-sized Hunter-Killers that the humans would struggle to keep track of? Dog-like robots that could quietly roam the wasteland and crawl inside all the collapsed buildings and sewer holes and use integral assault rifles to shoot humans they found would be devastating weapons, and hundreds of them could probably be made for the price of one Hunter-Killer tank.
Some robots will be indistinguishable from humans. Unlike the Hunter-Killers, which are general-purpose combat vehicles meant to fight humans in open terrain, the Terminators are specialized for infiltration of underground human bases. They are made to look externally identical to people so they can gain entry, and once inside, they use small arms to kill people. As I said in my review of the movie Prometheus, I think machines like this will exist by the year 2100, and quite possibly a few years before that. They will be able to pass for human, even under close-range visual inspection, thanks to fake, non-organic skin and hair. Androids like this won’t exist by 2029 for a variety of reasons.
Some robots will have organic parts. When Kyle Reese first tells Sarah Connor that Schwarzenegger is actually a “T-800” robot, he explains that the earlier “600 series” of robots were easy to spot because they had fake-looking rubber skin. The T-800s have layers of real human muscle, skin, hair, and other tissue around their metal skeletons, making them look identical to humans. Kyle Reese explains that the human tissue is grown in cloning labs and then grafted onto the metal robot bodies. As I said in my most recent Future Predictions blog entry, I don’t think therapeutic cloning technology will be advanced enough to make whole human organs and large amounts of tissue (like muscles and skin) until the 2050s.
More time will be needed to figure out how to graft cloned human biomass onto metal robots and to keep the biomass nourished and healthy. Consider that, if you grow a large flap of skin in a lab and surgically graft it onto the body of a human burn victim, then the new skin links with the person’s blood vessels, nervous systems, and immune system, which keep the patch of new skin fed with oxygen and calories and protected from infections. But if you graft that same flap of skin onto the metal frame of a robot, there’s no organic support system for it at all, so it will die and rot away.
There are two solutions to this problem, both of which require very advanced technology that we’ll have to wait long after 2050 to have: 1) Genetically engineer the tissue so that biological functions normally done by specialized human organs are instead done by patches of the tissue. For example, red blood cells are made inside of human bones, but since a T-800 would only have metal bones, then the T-800’s muscle cells would need to be genetically modified to also make red blood cells. The resulting tissue would look human to the naked eye, but would have so many DNA modifications that it wouldn’t be genetically “human.” 2) Include artificial organs in the T-800s metal frame that interface with the exterior layers of human tissue, and perform the support functions normally done by biological organs. For example, the T-800 could have an artificial heart made of metal and plastic, connected to the blood vessels of its human tissue. The artificial organ would pump blood through the tissue, just like an organic heart would.
While making a robot that is “living tissue over a metal endoskeleton” will be possible someday, it won’t happen by 2029, and I don’t think it will be necessary if the goal is to design an android that looks externally identical to humans. Given what’s already possible with hyperrealistic sculptures, synthetic materials like silicone should be able to mimic the look and feel of human tissue and skin in the future.
Some robots will be bullet-proof. Schwarzenegger’s metal robot body is nearly immune to every bullet that hits him, including those from a shotgun absorbed during a shootout in a dance club, and others from an M-16 fired into his back at close range at a police station. However, he is not completely impervious to damage, as we see during a gruesome “self-repair” scene where he uses hand tools to fix his forearm after it was hit by a shotgun blast, and late in the film when being run over by a truck hurts his leg, and then a stick of dynamite blows him in half. We can already make robots with this level of damage resistance today, and I am sure that future combat robots will have at least this much armor.
Schwarzenegger’s damage threshold is the same as that provided by Level 4 body armor, which typically takes the form of a heavy ceramic plate that a soldier slides into an oversized “pocket” covering the front of his bullet proof vest. A common, 1/2 inch thick steel plate provides the same level of protection at lower cost but more weight, and I’m sure there are many metal alloys that as strong as the previous two, but lighter. It would be entirely possible to build a human-sized robot now that had integrated Level 4 armor, particularly if weight were saved by incorporating that armor into only the robot’s most vital parts, which in the T-800 were the torso and skull. Making robots like this will only get easier as stronger, more lightweight alloys are discovered, or as cheaper ways are found to make today’s armor alloys.
Giving your combat robots enough armor to resist the most common guns makes clear military sense, and it would force your enemies to adopt bigger weapons that would be so heavy for humans to carry and too hard for us to shoot. For example, the commonest type of .50 caliber machine gun, the M2, weighs 83 lbs and can’t be effectively fired unless it is attached to a tripod that weighs 50 lbs. The bullets are also heavy, so you’d need at least four human soldiers to drag the gun around on a wagon/wheeled tripod just to operate one gun. Fifty caliber sniper rifles and shoulder-launched rockets could work and could be operated by one person apiece, but they’re hard to aim at T-800-sized targets and have slow rates of fire. So Terminator’s prediction that there will someday be human-sized combat robots with integral Level 4 armor is accurate.
This underscores why we SHOULDN’T build armor into non-combat robots. If our robot butlers and maids turn against us someday, we’ll want to be able to easily destroy them with common handguns and axes.
On a tangent, let me say that the bullet-proof T-800 represents only one design philosophy for combat robots meant to kill human infantry. Another approach is to make combat robots that lack armor, but which are just as survivable because they move too fast for humans to shoot them (think of small, low-altitude UAVs) or because they can effectively hide from humans (e.g. – have advanced camouflage features, or are designed for highly accurate, long-distance sniping fire from far away or from high altitude). Another approach would be to make cheaper, more expendable combat robots that would be more vulnerable to human weapons, and to tolerate their higher loss rates because they would killed more humans overall for a smaller investment of money.
Some robots will have superhuman strength. Schwarzenegger displays superhuman levels of strength from the beginning of the film, when he punches a man’s chest so hard that his hand penetrates into his torso, and then emerges gripping the man’s disconnected heart. In another scene, he uses one hand to casually grab a large man standing at a phone booth and throw him several feet away. Many industrial robots and even small machines have superhuman levels of strength, so this prediction has already come true.
Whenever we start building human-sized combat robots, at least some of them will have limbs that will be much stronger than humans’. For example, a grown human man with very strong hands could grip an object with 150 lbs of force, but a small, cordless cable cutter whose blades are like short fingers can clamp down on objects with 3,000 lbs of force. It would make sense to build very strong combat robots, principally so they could carry big weapons and manipulate their surroundings better. Improved hand-to-hand combat abilities against humans would be an ancillary benefit since that type of battlefield fighting will be even rarer in the future than it is now.
And again, this should underscore why we SHOULDN’T make our non-combat robots super-strong. For various safety reasons, I don’t think we should design our robot butlers and maids to be stronger, faster, or heavier than average humans. The vast majority of domestic tasks we’d assign to non-combat servant robots could be done under these limitations, and in cases where something couldn’t, one or two extra robots could be rented to help.
Some combat robots will be humanoid. The T-800 is humanoid in form, meaning it has the same body layout as a human and is the same overall size (height, width). I think some future combat robots will be humanoid, but most won’t because other body layouts and sizes will be better for most combat roles.
First, remember that the T-800 was not the only type of combat robot made by Skynet–it also fielded Hunter Killer tanks and aircraft. By virtue of larger size, they could carry bigger, more powerful weapons than the T-800s, and seemed to be the weapons of choice for “surface” combat. The T-800s were made humanoid so they could do special infiltration missions into underground human bases. No clue is given about the size and composition of Skynet’s robot army, but it’s possible that the T-800s represent only a small fraction of its forces, and that most of its robots are Hunter-Killers, or are of some other, non-humanoid design not shown in the film (note that spider-like combat robots were nearly used in Terminator 2‘s future scenes, and killer snake robots were in the fourth film). This is a detail that is important but easily overlooked, and it will prove accurate: after the world’s militaries have switched to using robots for combat, only a minority of those robots will be humanoid.
Many combat robots will look almost the same as war machines we have today: Autonomous planes will still have at least one engine for propulsion and two wings so they can use lift, autonomous ships will still be oblong and pointy at the front end to minimize friction with the water, and autonomous armored vehicles will still have two sets of wheels and some kind of gun turret on top (see my blog post about a hypothetical robot tank). The only visual differences between those future weapons and their contemporary counterparts might be slightly smaller dimensions and the deletion of cockpits and structural bulges since there won’t need to be big interior spaces for humans (though they would need to have some number of small robots for field maintenance and repair, as I also described in the robot tank blog post). If Skynet were actually created and if it built a robot army to fight humanity, most of its aircraft, ships, and land vehicles would look very familiar to us.
Those sorts of combat robots would excel at destroying our heavy weapons, vehicles, and structures, but it would be wasteful to use them to hunt down small groups of humans armed only with light weapons, which describes the people living in The Terminator‘s post apocalyptic future. Moreover, robot tanks, fighter planes, and ships can’t go inside structures, sewer tunnels, or thickly wooded areas. Smaller combat robots of different designs would be needed to efficiently fight human infantry, particularly in the environments I’ve listed.
Would these robots be humanoid, like the T-800? Maybe. For sure, they would need to have bodies that were narrow and short enough to fit through standard-sized doorways or between trees in a dense forest, and light enough to not collapse floors when they walked over them. They would need to be able to fit themselves into tight spaces that humans can, like small caves and basement crawlspaces. They would also need legs–not wheels or caterpillar tracks–so they could go up and down stairs, operate pedals commonly found in human-driven cars, hop over fallen tree trunks and climb steep hills and ridges. They would also need hands so they could manipulate and use things in built human environments, like doorknobs, keys, and push-buttons. Being able to hold and use weapons, tools, keyboards, and other things designed around human hands would be very useful, as the robot would be finding such objects all the time.
Those design requirements might sound like they add up to a robot that must be humanoid, but it’s not at all the case. The requirements could be met by a robot that had a centaur-like body (four legs is more stable than two, anyway), or that lacked a head and instead had prehensile stalks coming out of its neck with cameras and microphones on their ends (a head makes a body top-heavy and packs too much important stuff in one place), or that had four arms, or four tentacles with hands on their ends (more arms means you can do and hold more stuff at once). Its hands might have four or eight fingers apiece, and it might be five feet tall but three feet wide, or seven feet tall and 18 inches wide. It could have a shiny, metal exterior that looks totally inhuman, or could be intentionally made to look scary to humans, perhaps like something from a horror movie. While robots like this wouldn’t be able to blend in with humans and “walk past the sentry,” they could go inside all the houses, vehicles, tunnels, and other places humans could go, and kill us wherever they found us.
I can only think of two types of military missions for which a human-looking combat robot would be well-suited: 1) assassinations and 2) infiltration/spying. Given that, during wartime, only a small fraction of military operations are of such a character, it follows that only a concordantly small fraction of any military’s robots would look human. Also, since stealth is important, the humanoid robots would mostly be made to look as boring as possible, perhaps like a middle-aged woman, a child, an old man, or an average soldier. Making them eye-catching by giving them Schwarzenegger’s bodybuilder physique or by making them handsome/pretty, would be counterproductive in most cases.
Even in the narrow use cases we’ve whittled our way down to, I think other types of robots and weapons would be better than using humanoid robots. By virtue of their smaller size, robots made to look like insects and small animals could infiltrate human spaces more easily than a man-sized robot. Many of them could also be built for the price of one T-800, and having more means higher odds of one successfully completing its spy mission. A “robot rat” could also assassinate people by injecting them with poison, releasing lethal gas, or jumping on the target’s face and activating an internal explosive. Even something as small as a robotic mosquito could kill, by injecting poison into the target’s bloodstream with its stinger (note that a single drop of botulinum toxin can kill several men). It would be impossible for humans to stay constantly vigilant against threats so insidious. An even cheaper solution would be bombs full of heavier-than-air poison gas.
So in conclusion, I think it’s possible that some combat robots will look like humans, but they will be used for rare special missions (and this was accurately portrayed in the movie), and the vast majority of combat robots will look totally different. In the very long run, I don’t think any of them will look human.
There will be fully automated factories. Kyle Reese reveals that the T-800 robots are made in fully automated factories run by Skynet. As I said in my review of I, Robot, all factory jobs will inevitably be taken over by machines, so it’s just a question of how long it will take. I predicted that a handful of such factories would exist by 2035–principally as technology demonstrators or for a tech billionaire like Elon Musk to claim bragging rights–but it would take decades longer for them to become common. I doubt they will exist as early as 2029.
The common refrain that goes something like: “Human workers will always be needed, because without us, who would build or fix the robots?” is actually false and illogical. The fact that we haven’t yet invented robots that can build other robots without human help doesn’t imply that it will remain that way forever, or that humans have some special, creative quality that can never be transplanted to machines. John von Neumann, who one of the greatest minds of the 20th century and a pioneer in computer science, theorized in his paper “The General and Logical Theory of Automata” that sufficiently advanced artificial life forms (machines) could make copies of themselves, including copies that were engineered to be better, and that there was no reason why humans would always be needed to build, fix, or improve the machines. We can be totally cut out of the loop, and I predict someday we will.
There’s no theoretical reason why the entire production chain of making a robot as complex as a T-800–from digging the raw metals out of the ground, refining them, forging and shaping them into body parts, assembling the parts, and transporting the finished product to its place of use–can’t be 100% automated someday. I conservatively predict that most manufactured goods will come from automated factories by 2100.
Robots will be able to fix themselves. As I mentioned before, after sustaining damage to lightly armored parts of his robot body, Schwarzenegger does repair surgery on himself, using a small knife and a pair of pliers. Machines won’t be capable of this level of self-repair by 2029, but thanks to the factors I listed in the previous paragraph, they will inevitably gain the ability. The ability to build something implies an ability to repair it as well. Someday, robots will be able to fix each other and to fix themselves.
I note that full self-repair abilities will require the robot in question to be able to see and touch every spot on its own body, which in turn makes some design features necessary. It’s arms would need to be long and double-jointed, and if it had eyes set in a head like humans, then the head would need to be able to swivel 360 degrees to it could look at damage to its back. It wasn’t clear if the T-800 had these features. Other ways to solve this problem might be to give it long, telescoping tentacles in place of a head, with cameras at the ends of each (this would also make it much less risky to “peek” around a corner in combat to see if any bad guys were there). The tentacles could bend in various ways to give the robot a clear view of any part of its body, from nearly any angle. Having small cameras built into fingers and feet would accomplish the same thing. The ability to detach body parts would also be very useful, as it would let robots work on their damaged parts more easily, and because it would let them quickly swap out their parts for functional new ones if any were at hand.
Again, I conservatively predict that non-trivial numbers of robots will have sophisticated self-repair and “peer repair” abilities by 2100.
Robots will be able to keep working in spite of massive damage. At the end of the film, the T-800 played by Schwarzenegger is blown in half by a stick of dynamite that Kyle Reese shoves into the bottom of its exposed rib cage. In spite of this catastrophic injury, the T-800 keeps fighting, using its hands to drag the functional upper half of its body along the floor so it can get to get to Sarah Connor and manually kill her. Some robots are already this resilient, and robots made in the future–particularly those designed for combat–will be even more so.
So long as a robot’s power source and main computer are intact and connected to each other, it will keep working, even if all other parts of its body are nonfunctional. The inability to feel pain and a lack of a circulatory system allows robots to survive major injuries like the loss of limbs that would incapacitate humans due to psychological shock, pain, and blood loss. In 2016, police in Dallas, TX used a remote-controlled robot to kill a criminal who had shot several of their comrades and barricaded himself in a building. The robot had a bomb grasped in its hand, maneuvered close to the criminal, and then the device detonated, killing the suspect. Though the robot’s arm was blown off by the explosion, the machine remained functional, and was repairable after the incident.
In the future, I think it might be advantageous for each major robot body part or body segment to have its own computer, sensors, and power supply. That way, if a part were severed, it could still function for a while independently. For instance, if a T-800 had its arm severed, then the arm’s internal computer would switch on, would be able to see its surroundings via tiny cameras in the fingertips and knuckles, and would be able to drag itself around like a spider or like “Thing” from The Addams Family. It could drag itself to the robot body it was formerly attached to, or crawl away to find help. Though this might sound macabre and useless, note that many insects, including the highly evolved and successful cockroach species, have distributed nervous systems that grant their body segments similar abilities. They wouldn’t have evolved that way unless it was useful somehow. Additionally, under normal conditions, it would probably benefit a robot to distribute its computation and power load across multiple nodes in its body, and having sensors in all its extremities and body parts could only boost its utility.
Machines will be able to do near-perfect imitations of human voices. At two points in the film, the T-800 accurately impersonates the voices of humans to fool people who are listening via radio or telephone. In recent years, deep learning algorithms have become extremely good at this (see the recently released recording of a machine impersonating Joe Rogan’s voice), and at the rate of quality improvement, I think the machine imitations will sound flawless to us by 2029.
However, there is one important inaccuracy in the film: The T-800 is able to imitate humans after hearing them speak only a few words. Today’s deep learning algorithms need to listen to many hours of someone’s recorded speech to understand how they speak well enough to copy their voice, and the requirement for large sets of training data will still exist in 2029.
A group of aerospace engineers built a new type of plane covered in hundreds of mechanical “feather” flaps. They can be independently raised and lowered, more efficiently doing the same maneuvering functions as traditional control surfaces like ailerons, rudders, and elevators. https://phys.org/news/2019-04-mit-nasa-kind-airplane-wing.html
Where am I going with this? With more advanced materials, we could build flexible yet strong airplane wings that could move and morph like bird wings, dramatically improving their efficiency and maneuverability. However, I doubt it would make sense to make them capable of flapping, and it would be better to propel them with traditional engines.
Ten years ago, Henry Markram said that a detailed, working simulation of a human brain could be built in ten years. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8164060.stm
One of my predictions: ‘A global network of sensors and drones will identify and track every non-microscopic species on the planet…The monitoring network will also make it possible to get highly accurate, real-time counts of entire species populations.’ https://qz.com/1600255/botanists-are-using-drones-to-rediscover-extinct-flowers/
If you’ve ever visited a crowded, poor country, you know how many people stand to benefit from replacing gas-powered vehicles (cars, buses, motorcycles, etc.) with electric vehicles that are quiet and emit no smoke. Billions of people suffer from the noise and stink of gas-powered vehicles, and probably tens of millions die prematurely each year from inhaling their smoke. If Elon Musk accelerates the global transition to electric vehicles by just one year, the benefit to humanity will be enormous. Similarly, it was inevitable that smartphones would be invented and popularized, but Steve Jobs’ leadership and energy made it happen years sooner. https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2019/04/elon-measures-tesla-by-time-reduction-to-replacing-regular-2-5-billion-cars-and-trucks.html
Autonomous cars will reduce light pollution since their cameras and sensors would see in the dark, reducing the need for headlights and streetlights (I started writing a blog entry on this over a year ago but never finished). https://qz.com/1596575/could-driverless-cars-reduce-light-pollution/
The “Thucydides Trap” argument that the U.S. and China are destined for war is flawed because 14 out of the 16 historical precedents it cites involve Europe and/or the U.S. If the methodology is applied to analyzing power transitions in East Asian history, only three of 18 led to war. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/skeptics/us-china-war-really-possible-54232
China’s first Type 055 destroyer has entered active service. This class of ship is only slightly less capable than the U.S. Navy’s destroyers. Another three Type 001s have been built, but have yet to enter service, and China has plans to build at least four more. https://www.janes.com/article/88060/chinese-navy-puts-newest-platforms-on-display
There are many different, incomplete metrics for gauging the relative strength of a country’s navy. Tonnage of the entire fleet and the number of ships in the fleet are merely starting points, though they’re often misused by people with political agendas to make navies seem stronger or weaker than they really are. https://warontherocks.com/2014/07/sinking-the-next-13-navies-fallacy/
The last member of the WWII “Doolittle Raid” on Japan died. I knew many WWII veterans when I was a kid, and it feels weird knowing that my own kids will only know that generation through secondhand stories told by people like me. https://apnews.com/7fbe2e34adb346ef8d0f8994ff0d4e55
“Meal kits” might be better for the environment than making meals at home by yourself. This is because the kits have pre-measured quantities of food meant for one meal–most people eat everything in the box in one sitting. However, if you fill your refrigerator with ingredients and make your meals ad hoc, you’ll probably lose track of how fast everything is spoiling, forcing you to constantly throw food out. https://news.umich.edu/those-home-delivered-meal-kits-are-greener-than-you-thought-new-study-concludes/
Between meal kits and drones rapidly and cheaply delivering goods to peoples’ homes, will it make sense for people–particularly those in cities–to have kitchens? A kitchenette would be good enough, and the space formerly devoted to a full kitchen could be repurposed for, say, a VR game chamber.
Plastic food packaging like cellophane is actually GOOD for the environment when you factor in the amount of food and beverage spoilage it prevents. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-47161379
Yet another study shows that vertical farms are impractically expensive ways to grow food. Why not just enclose existing, open-air farms in one-story greenhouses? The crops could be transported to population centers on electric trucks. https://qz.com/1595640/the-trouble-with-the-urban-farming-revolution/
A new study indicates that Americans and Canadians are the likeliest people in the Western world to falsely claim expertise in domains of knowledge. This is bothersome in itself, and also suggests that measures of the “Dunning-Kruger effect” might be inflated: There are dumb people who don’t know they are dumb and honestly think they are smart, but there are also dumb people why know they are dumb and deliberately lie about being smart, and surveys measuring the Dunning-Kruger effect might not be able to tell them apart. https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2019/04/26/on-the-dunning-kruger-effect-and-on-fakers
Microsoft has unveiled a new version of its XBox One game console that lacks a disc drive and can only download games from the internet. My 2020s predictions are thus closer to reality: -Video gaming will dispense with physical media, and games will be completely streamed from the internet or digitally downloaded. Business that exist just to sell game discs (Gamestop) will shut down. -Instead of a typical home entertainment system having a whole bunch of media discs, different media players and cable boxes, there will be one small, multipurpose box https://qz.com/1597265/the-digital-xbox-one-x-kills-the-used-game-market/
Two very smart dudes discuss Ted Kaczynski’s primitivist, anti-technology ideas and the major flaws in those ideas. For one, forsaking technology is practically impossible since all countries would have to agree to do so. If just one country refused, it would come to possess an insurmountable military technology advantage over the rest of the world and could conquer them and destroy their primitive ways of life. https://youtu.be/ZmAqKsasNKk
Almost all of the atoms in your body are at least 5 billion years old. Some were created not long (in cosmic scales) after the Big Bang. Ancient artifacts and dinosaur bones are, in a sense, no older than you are. https://www.quora.com/How-old-are-the-atoms-in-my-body
From a biological perspective, the meaning of any organism’s life is to dominate its species’ genepool. That can be done by eliminating or subduing rivals and/or by producing as many offspring as possible that survive to adulthood. Though we humans resist thinking that this applies to us, a passing familiarity with evolutionary psychology makes it clear that the instinct to dominate others (or at least reduce others so they are less powerful) and to reproduce underlies countless aspects of our thinking and behavior. In the short term and long term, a human’s goal is to increase his “slice” of the human genetic “pie” as much as possible.
A question I’ve been pondering lately is how present and future technology could be best used to satisfy this biological imperative. Donating your eggs or sperm to people who want to use IVF to create children is probably the smartest strategy right now since the amount of effort (especially for sperm donation) is minimal, but the genetic payoff is large since someone else bears the costs of raising your offspring (note that this implies that you adopting a genetically unrelated child is the worst strategy). If sperm and egg banks reject you as being beneath their donor standards, there’s always the wonderful world of direct, private donations (one example: https://www.justababy.com/ ).
Failing that, or in addition to it, you should of course conceive and raise biological children of your own. If this is impossible due to infertility or an inability to find a partner, technology again offers solutions. Convincing a close blood relative to donate their sperm or eggs to you for IVF would allow you to conceive a child that shared much of your DNA. If your problem is singlehood, then the solution is going to a sperm or egg bank (though this is a much more expensive option for men since they have to pay surrogate mothers to bear the child). It goes without saying that you should pick a donor that has high reproductive fitness.
Once it becomes possible to clone humans, it might make sense for you to do that instead of having children the normal way. From a genetic standpoint, a child conceived the normal way only shares 50% of your DNA (with the other 50% coming from your partner or “donor”), whereas your clone would share 100% with you. In an important biological sense, making a clone of yourself is as good as having two children with someone else. Your genes don’t get diluted from one generation to the next. Moreover, since intelligence and personality traits are heavily genetic, it would probably be easier for you to raise a clone since you’d already know your offspring’s strengths and weaknesses and because you’d think and act similarly.
Pushing the technological envelope farther, it would be even better if you made genetically engineered clones of yourself. When your clone was still just a fertilized egg, you would use genetic engineering techniques to change genes that coded for your known flaws, like defects of appearance or a congenital health problem. The resulting person wouldn’t be a true clone since it would have these “tweaks,” but it would still be incredibly similar to you. It’s probably better to have a “99.9% clone” that lacked some of your weaknesses than a 100% clone that had them, as the latter would be likelier to live long, reproduce, and attain the social and financial means to support their own offspring better.
Taking advantage of technologies that extend your lifespan and maintain your health also supports your biological imperative. It leaves you with more time and ability to raise children of your own, and even after your own reproductive years are done or you’ve gotten too infirm to be a primary caregiver, to also care for your grandchildren and other blood descendants. So long as you are a positive presence, your efforts will advance their survival, and hence the proliferation of your genes. Of note is the fact that cryonically preserving yourself upon death is included among the array of technologies that could extend your lifespan. Even a 1% chance of being resurrected to continue spreading your seed and/or helping your descendants is better than the 0% chance you get by not opting for cryonics.
Finally, an overlooked way to use technology to perpetuate your genes is to sequence your genome and then ensure the data survive after your death, so hopefully someone might use it to clone you in the future. Because gene sequencing costs are dropping, most people will be able to easily afford this within ten years. Taking pains to protect the data–perhaps by making several backups and periodically cross-checking them for fixity–and arranging for the file to be made public or transferred to a major genetic database in the event of your death would be the second element of the plan. Attaching a message to it saying you wish to be cloned would raise the chances of it happening (again, 1% is better than 0%).
I used to view the project to catalog the genomes of humans as special a thing unto itself, somehow more mystical and important than the rest of the scientific enterprise, but then I realized it was just part of the much broader, millennia-spanning effort to gather data on everything around us. The body of science and of known facts expands, and it’s almost incidental that our knowledge of human genetics is included. Today’s internet already represents a massive store of such knowledge, and the future internet (or whatever the internet evolves into) will be even bigger and more detailed. I can imagine a day when very advanced genetic labs will have access to the genomes of trillions of unique humans and animals, and could use the genomic data to synthesize any one of the individuals from scratch.
And there you have it. Even if the product of such a synthesis procedure wouldn’t be “you,” it would be a clone of you, and if the perpetuation of your genes is the ultimate meaning of your life, the creation of a clone of you in the far future would advance your interests.