|
Preprints & Reprints Carbon-Silicon Convergence For most people IT convergence conjures up a world of radio, TV, hi-fi, PCs, PDAs, telephones, cameras and more, coming together in singular integrated and multiple units, on one global network. They are right of course, but I think convergence will go much further. For me, convergence is about a future symbiosis between humans and machines. It is about the creation of networked things and intelligence to help us fit into a world changing faster than our wet ware (brains) have evolved to accommodate. It implies a subsumption of technology itself into our carbon form. Just think of the millions with pacemakers, cochlea implants, pain relief modules, and other forms of electronics imbedded in their bodies. We don't just use IT to communicate, entertain, sell and trade, we depend on it to sustain life. Only a fraction of those reading these words would be alive today without the intervention of technology. Imagine what would happen if we suddenly switched off all the computers and networks. In one fell swoop, a large fraction of humanity would die. We would be unable to create and distribute the food, clothing, water and energy required by the near 6Bn on the planet. Will our dependence on technology grow? Without doubt it will be difficult to refuse the future life enhancement and repair abilities on offer. At the frontier of today's research there are paraplegics with brain implants controlling computers by thinking, and as a result realising a communications channel for the first time. A handful of experiments with silicon retinal implants have been encouraging, as have direct interfaces to the human nervous system for the control of prosthetics. Work on the use of silicon tracks to by-pass spinal and other gross nervous system damage is in its infancy but producing encouraging results. More close to reality is the artificial pancreas, and the internal pharmacy. Imagine travelling the world in the sure knowledge you carry an internal drug store ready to electronically dispense the right antibiotic on demand. On the far horizon of course there is the possibility of silicon brain implants to enhance our memory and computational skills, and even direct interfaces with machines. But such a notion is as about as wild as a Crystal Set Radio of 1914 evolving to become a Mobile Phone by 1984. I remember suggesting that chip implants would eradicate the need for keys, passports, driving licences, identity cards, money, bank accounts and central medical records. Two years later Professor Kevin Warwick at Reading University had a chip implant in his arm to automatically open doors, allow him access to secure buildings, and be tracked by his secretary. I now hear on the grapevine that some diplomats are having similar electronic implants to counteract abduction. Obvious extensions would of course include the tagging prisoners and criminals. But probably the greatest benefit would be the potential to rid ourselves of the inconvenient documentation and security paraphernalia of modern life. Of course, nothing is certain or without competition. Genetically engineered solutions to our biological problems are also making great advances with the help of IT. Being able to model and fabricate piece parts, and repair elements, for our own bodies and systems is a worthy cause and a potentially huge market. The question is - who is going to get there first, and which technology will dominate? In the area of artificial hearts it looks as though the early efforts of the mechanical engineers will be eclipsed by carbon solutions using animals, and perhaps, genetic engineering. Biological, optical, electronic and quantum computing are also promising avenues for the future, and probably on convergent courses. Many development areas are migrating toward the biological in their topology and operation to realise greater and more powerful levels of machine intelligence. Why do we need this? Because we increasingly face problems far too complex for the human mind and intellect to contemplate or solve. We need a third intelligence to help us cope with a world of growing complexity that has far outstripped our biological evolution. The future is not about hunting and throwing spears, with our minds modelling in three, and at most four dimensions. Nor is it about communicating with modest numbers of people and machines across a limited tract of knowledge and understanding. We will have to find the means off assimilating more information and making decisions faster. In the previous century a doctor could have read every published discourse on every aspect of medicine, and the same was true for chemists, physicists and engineers. Today as a communications engineer I know a little about optical fibre, radio and software, and the doctor could spend every waking hour reading the research papers on just urology and still not be fully up to date. What chance for managers and politicians? Not a lot! Relatively speaking we increasingly know nothing, and live in a world that demands more. There are no longer any polymaths among us, and yet we have to think in a far more holistic manner if we are to cope and prosper in the future. How are we going to keep up with technological advances? How are we going to cope with increasingly complex drug interactions, pollution processes, or information flow, control and decision systems that ask us to think in ten or more dimensions? Do we have to understand everything in minute detail? Probably not! Do we have to understand things sufficiently well to be able to make wise decision? Definitely! Just contemplate the cost of very recent decisions made on the basis of a poor understanding. Mad cow disease, nuclear power, the contraceptive pill and thrombosis, growth hormone in meat, genetically modified foods, and a vast list from the pharmaceutical industry that is far too long to print. What was missing and critical in each case - a lack of human ability to model and understand what was happening, and what was about to happen. The consequences of ignorance are very often tragedy. If our wet ware is insufficient and not up to the task - then we have to create a third intelligence to help. And this has to be more than a pocket calculator or PC - it will require a degree of cognition about us and our world. My lap top computer has more computational power than any ant, but it does not have anything like the intelligence. The reason? Firstly, it is hard wired and runs software that is unable to adapt to environmental change. Secondly, and more importantly, it suffers from total sensory deprivation. Two fingers can only give it 100 bit/s input, where as eyes could give it 1Gbit/s. Until our machines are given a range of sensory capabilities, and have adaptable internal wiring and software, they are unlikely to become truly intelligent. For the present it looks like we have to stay in the loop to fulfil a large proportion of that task, but once the chips become a part of us, and we a part of the machine, it will, in some sense become automatic. All of this prompts people to as; will machines be able to read our minds? Will we be able to tap into the vast resources of a giant machine minds? Will we be able to communicate between ourselves and with the machines by just thinking? I think the answer has to be a guarded yes. In each of these dimensions we already have either rudimentary or strong evidence that some of this is at least possible. But the question is - will machines understand and think as we do? Personally, I hope not. We really do need to increase the diversity, as well as the depth, of thinking and not constrain it by the limited domain of biology. Some find it comforting to think we are in control of our destiny. But I am not so sure we are, or indeed, if it would even be a viable or desirable proposition. The natural mode of our world is for chaos (in the mathematical sense) and evolution to go hand in hand. In such a world everything increasingly comes in bursts - as is now visible with stocks, Internet activity, and Ecommerce. As a very simple example, consider simple elements like a cup of coffee or a ladder bringing down mobile networks. At large conference no one is using a mobile until 10.15 when coffee arrives. Two thousand people stream into the foyer and 100 mobile phones come out and overload the cell site in 2 minutes. On a freeway a ladder falls off a contractor's truck and brings down the 911 service. The mechanism? Every car that swerves to miss that ladder hits 911 and locks up the service until the ladder is removed. In the future we won't think 'Intel Inside', but UMTS (3rd generation mobile) inside. Buy a microwave meal, and instead of a bar code, there is a printed chip. The same will be true of products in the stores. All stock control and purchases will be automated without a checkout - each item will communicate with the chips in you. And back home that meal will be recognised by the microwave and cooked to perfection without your intervention. Historically we have always used technology to create more prime time for those things that we really want to do. But technological evolution won't provide any relief if we cannot understand the mechanisms and apply some control and steer. Most of our lives have made a subtle change from being dominated by atoms to being dominated by bits. Well, it looks like part of our natural evolution as we converge with our technology. |