The Singularity Is Near_ When Humans Transcend Biology Part 16

GEORGE 2048: Okay, but consider that you can be with your favorite entertainment star. Okay, but consider that you can be with your favorite entertainment star.

MOLLY 2004: I can do that in my imagination any time I want. I can do that in my imagination any time I want.

RAY: Imagination is nice, but the real thing-or, rather, the virtual thing-is so much more, well, real. Imagination is nice, but the real thing-or, rather, the virtual thing-is so much more, well, real.

MOLLY 2004: Yeah, but what if my "favorite" celebrity is busy? Yeah, but what if my "favorite" celebrity is busy?

RAY: That's another benefit of virtual reality circa 2029; you have your choice of millions of artificial people. That's another benefit of virtual reality circa 2029; you have your choice of millions of artificial people.

MOLLY 2104: I understand that you're back in 2004, but we kind of got rid of that terminology back when the Nonbiological Persons Act was pa.s.sed in 2052. I mean, we're a lot more real than ... umm, let me rephrase that. I understand that you're back in 2004, but we kind of got rid of that terminology back when the Nonbiological Persons Act was pa.s.sed in 2052. I mean, we're a lot more real than ... umm, let me rephrase that.

MOLLY 2004: Yes, maybe you should. Yes, maybe you should.

MOLLY 2104: Let's just say that you don't have to have explicit biological structures to be- Let's just say that you don't have to have explicit biological structures to be- GEORGE 2048: -pa.s.sionate? -pa.s.sionate?

MOLLY 2104: I guess you should know. I guess you should know.

TIMOTHY LEARY: What if you have a bad trip? What if you have a bad trip?

RAY: You mean, something goes awry with a virtual-reality experience? You mean, something goes awry with a virtual-reality experience?

TIMOTHY: Exactly. Exactly.

RAY: Well, you can leave. It's like hanging up on a phone call. Well, you can leave. It's like hanging up on a phone call.

MOLLY 2004: a.s.suming you still have control over the software. a.s.suming you still have control over the software.

RAY: Yes, we do need to be concerned with that. Yes, we do need to be concerned with that.

SIGMUND: I can see some real therapeutic potential here. I can see some real therapeutic potential here.

RAY: Yes, you can be whomever you want to be in virtual reality. Yes, you can be whomever you want to be in virtual reality.

SIGMUND: Excellent, the opportunity to express suppressed longings ... Excellent, the opportunity to express suppressed longings ...

RAY: And not only to be with the person you want to be with, but to become that person. And not only to be with the person you want to be with, but to become that person.

SIGMUND: Exactly. We create the objects of our libido in our subconscious anyway. Just think, a couple could both change their genders. They could each become the other. Exactly. We create the objects of our libido in our subconscious anyway. Just think, a couple could both change their genders. They could each become the other.

MOLLY 2004: Just as a therapeutic interlude, I presume? Just as a therapeutic interlude, I presume?

SIGMUND: Of course. I would only suggest this under my careful supervision. Of course. I would only suggest this under my careful supervision.

MOLLY 2004: Naturally. Naturally.

MOLLY 2104: Hey, George, remember when we each became all of the opposite gender characters in the Allen Kurzweil novels at the same time it? Hey, George, remember when we each became all of the opposite gender characters in the Allen Kurzweil novels at the same time it?

GEORGE 2048: Ha, I liked you best as that eighteenth-century French inventor, the one who made erotic pocket watches! Ha, I liked you best as that eighteenth-century French inventor, the one who made erotic pocket watches!

MOLLY 2004: Okay, now run this virtual s.e.x by me again. How does it work exactly? Okay, now run this virtual s.e.x by me again. How does it work exactly?

RAY: You're using your virtual body, which is simulated. Nan.o.bots in and around your nervous system generate the appropriate encoded signals for all of your senses: visual, auditory, tactile of course, even olfactory. From the perspective of your brain, it's real because the signals are just as real as if your senses were producing them from real experiences. The simulation in virtual reality would generally follow the laws of physics, although that would depend on the environment you selected. If you go there with another person or persons, then these other intelligences, whether of people with biological bodies or otherwise, would also have bodies in this virtual environment. Your body in virtual reality does not need to match your body in real reality. In fact, the body you choose for yourself in the virtual environment may be different from the body that your partner chooses for you at the same time. The computers generating the virtual environment, virtual bodies, and a.s.sociated nerve signals would cooperate so that your actions affect the virtual experience of the others and vice versa. You're using your virtual body, which is simulated. Nan.o.bots in and around your nervous system generate the appropriate encoded signals for all of your senses: visual, auditory, tactile of course, even olfactory. From the perspective of your brain, it's real because the signals are just as real as if your senses were producing them from real experiences. The simulation in virtual reality would generally follow the laws of physics, although that would depend on the environment you selected. If you go there with another person or persons, then these other intelligences, whether of people with biological bodies or otherwise, would also have bodies in this virtual environment. Your body in virtual reality does not need to match your body in real reality. In fact, the body you choose for yourself in the virtual environment may be different from the body that your partner chooses for you at the same time. The computers generating the virtual environment, virtual bodies, and a.s.sociated nerve signals would cooperate so that your actions affect the virtual experience of the others and vice versa.

MOLLY 2004: So I would experience s.e.xual pleasure even though I'm not actually, you know, with someone? So I would experience s.e.xual pleasure even though I'm not actually, you know, with someone?

RAY: Well, you would be with someone, just not in real reality, and, of course, the someone may not even exist in real reality. s.e.xual pleasure is not a direct sensory experience, it's akin to an emotion. It's a sensation generated in your brain, which is reflecting on what you're doing and thinking, just like the sensation of humor or anger. Well, you would be with someone, just not in real reality, and, of course, the someone may not even exist in real reality. s.e.xual pleasure is not a direct sensory experience, it's akin to an emotion. It's a sensation generated in your brain, which is reflecting on what you're doing and thinking, just like the sensation of humor or anger.

MOLLY 2004: Like the girl you mentioned who found everything hilarious when the surgeons stimulated a particular spot in her brain? Like the girl you mentioned who found everything hilarious when the surgeons stimulated a particular spot in her brain?

RAY: Exactly. There are neurological correlates of all of our experiences, sensations, and emotions. Some are localized whereas some reflect a pattern of activity. In either case we'll be able to shape and enhance our emotional reactions as part of our virtual-reality experiences. Exactly. There are neurological correlates of all of our experiences, sensations, and emotions. Some are localized whereas some reflect a pattern of activity. In either case we'll be able to shape and enhance our emotional reactions as part of our virtual-reality experiences.

MOLLY 2004: That could work out quite well. I think I'll enhance my funniness reaction in my romantic interludes. That will fit just about right. Or maybe my absurdity response-I kind of like that one, too. That could work out quite well. I think I'll enhance my funniness reaction in my romantic interludes. That will fit just about right. Or maybe my absurdity response-I kind of like that one, too.

NED LUDD: I can see this getting out of hand. People are going to start spending most of their time in virtual reality. I can see this getting out of hand. People are going to start spending most of their time in virtual reality.

MOLLY 2004: Oh, I think my ten-year-old nephew is already there, with his video games. Oh, I think my ten-year-old nephew is already there, with his video games.

RAY: They're not full immersion yet. They're not full immersion yet.

MOLLY 2004: That's true. We can see him, but I'm not sure he notices us. But when we get to the point when his games are full immersion, we'll never see him. That's true. We can see him, but I'm not sure he notices us. But when we get to the point when his games are full immersion, we'll never see him.

GEORGE 2048: I can see your concern if you're thinking in terms of the thin virtual worlds of 2004, but it's not a problem with our 2048 virtual worlds. They're so much more compelling than the real world. I can see your concern if you're thinking in terms of the thin virtual worlds of 2004, but it's not a problem with our 2048 virtual worlds. They're so much more compelling than the real world.

MOLLY 2004: Yeah, how would you know since you've never been in real reality? Yeah, how would you know since you've never been in real reality?

GEORGE 2048: I hear about it quite a bit. Anyway, we can simulate it. I hear about it quite a bit. Anyway, we can simulate it.

MOLLY 2104: Well, I can have a real body any time I want, really not a big deal. I have to say it's rather liberating to not be dependent on a particular body, let alone a biological one. Can you imagine, being all tied up with its endless limitations and burdens? Well, I can have a real body any time I want, really not a big deal. I have to say it's rather liberating to not be dependent on a particular body, let alone a biological one. Can you imagine, being all tied up with its endless limitations and burdens?

MOLLY 2004: Yes, I can see where you're coming from. Yes, I can see where you're coming from.

. . . on Human Longevity

It is one of the most remarkable things that in all of the biological sciences there is no clue as to the necessity of death. If you say we want to make perpetual motion, we have discovered enough laws as we studied physics to see that it is either absolutely impossible or else the laws are wrong. But there is nothing in biology yet found that indicates the inevitability of death. This suggests to me that it is not at all inevitable and that it is only a matter of time before the biologists discover what it is that is causing us the trouble and that this terrible universal disease or temporariness of the human's body will be cured.-RICHARD FEYNMAN Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never-in nothing, great or small, large or petty-never give in.-WINSTON CHURCHILL Immortality first! Everything else can wait.-CORWYN PRATER Involuntary death is a cornerstone of biological evolution, but that fact does not make it a good thing.-MICHAEL ANISSIMOV Suppose you're a scientist 200 years ago who has figured out how to drastically lower infant mortality with better hygiene. You give a talk on this, and someone stands up in back and says, "hang on, if we do that we're going to have a population explosion!" If you reply, "No, everything will be fine because we'll all wear these absurd rubber things when we have s.e.x," n.o.body would have taken you seriously. Yet that's just what happened-barrier contraception was widely adopted [around the time that infant mortality dropped].-AUBREY DE GREY, GERONTOLOGIST We have a duty to die.-d.i.c.k LAMM, FORMER GOVERNOR OF COLORADO Some of us think this is rather a pity.-BERTRAND RUSSEL, 1955, COMMENTING ON THE STATISTIC THAT ABOUT ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE DIE OF AGE-RELATED CAUSES EVERY DAY38 Evolution, the process that produced humanity, possesses only one goal: create gene machines maximally capable of producing copies of themselves. In retrospect, this is the only way complex structures such as life could possibly arise in an unintelligent universe. But this goal often comes into conflict with human interests, causing death, suffering, and short life spans. The past progress of humanity has been a history of shattering evolutionary constraints.-MICHAEL ANISSIMOV Most of the readers of this book are likely to be around to experience the Singularity. As we reviewed in the previous chapter, accelerating progress in biotechnology will enable us to reprogram our genes and metabolic processes to turn off disease and aging processes. This progress will include rapid advances in genomics (influencing genes), proteomics (understanding and influencing the role of proteins), gene therapy (suppressing gene expression with such technologies as RNA interference and inserting new genes into the nucleus), rational drug design (formulating drugs that target precise changes in disease and aging processes), and therapeutic cloning of rejuvenated (telomere-extended and DNA-corrected) versions of our own cells, tissues, and organs, and related developments.

Biotechnology will extend biology and correct its obvious flaws. The overlapping revolution of nanotechnology will enable us to expand beyond the severe limitations of biology. As Terry Grossman and I articulated in Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever, we are rapidly gaining the knowledge and the tools to indefinitely maintain and extend the "house" each of us calls his body and brain. Unfortunately the vast majority of our baby-boomer peers are unaware of the fact that they do not have to suffer and die in the "normal" course of life, as prior generations have done-if they take aggressive action, action that goes beyond the usual notion of a basically healthy lifestyle (see "Resources and Contact Information," p. 489).

Historically, the only means for humans to outlive a limited biological life span has been to pa.s.s on values, beliefs, and knowledge to future generations. We are now approaching a paradigm s.h.i.+ft in the means we will have available to preserve the patterns underlying our existence. Human life expectancy is itself growing steadily and will accelerate rapidly, now that we are in the early stages of reverse engineering the information processes underlying life and disease. Robert Freitas estimates that eliminating a specific list comprising 50 percent of medically preventable conditions would extend human life expectancy to over 150 years.39 By preventing 90 percent of medical problems, life expectancy grows to over five hundred years. At 99 percent, we'd be over one thousand years. We can expect that the full realization of the biotechnology and nanotechnology revolutions will enable us to eliminate virtually all medical causes of death. As we move toward a nonbiological existence, we will gain the means of "backing ourselves up" (storing the key patterns underlying our knowledge, skills, and personality), thereby eliminating most causes of death as we know it. By preventing 90 percent of medical problems, life expectancy grows to over five hundred years. At 99 percent, we'd be over one thousand years. We can expect that the full realization of the biotechnology and nanotechnology revolutions will enable us to eliminate virtually all medical causes of death. As we move toward a nonbiological existence, we will gain the means of "backing ourselves up" (storing the key patterns underlying our knowledge, skills, and personality), thereby eliminating most causes of death as we know it.

The Transformation to Nonbiological Experience

A mind that stays at the same capacity cannot live forever; after a few thousand years it would look more like a repeating tape loop than a person. To live indefinitely long, the mind itself must grow, ... and when it becomes great enough, and looks back ... what fellow feeling can it have with the soul that it was originally? The later being would be everything the original was, but vastly more.-VERNOR VINGE The empires of the future are the empires of the mind.-WINSTON CHURCHILL

I reported on brain uploading in chapter 4. The straightforward brain-porting scenario involves scanning a human brain (most likely from within), capturing all of the salient details, and reinstantiating the brain's state in a different-most likely much more powerful-computational substrate. This will be a feasible procedure and will happen most likely around the late 2030s. But this is not the primary way that I envision the transition to nonbiological experience taking place. It will happen, rather, in the same way that all other paradigm s.h.i.+fts happen: gradually (but at an accelerating pace).

As I pointed out above, the s.h.i.+ft to nonbiological thinking will be a slippery slope, but one on which we have already started. We will continue to have human bodies, but they will become morphable projections of our intelligence. In other words, once we have incorporated MNT fabrication into ourselves, we will be able to create and re-create different bodies at will.

However achieved, will such fundamental s.h.i.+fts enable us to live forever? The answer depends on what we mean by "living" and "dying." Consider what we do today with our personal computer files. When we change from an older computer to a newer one, we don't throw all our files away. Rather, we copy them and reinstall them on the new hardware. Although our software does not necessarily continue its existence forever, its longevity is in essence independent of and disconnected from the hardware that it runs on.

Currently, when our human hardware crashes, the software of our lives-our personal "mind file"-dies with it. However, this will not continue to be the case when we have the means to store and restore the thousands of trillions of bytes of information represented in the pattern that we call our brains (together with the rest of our nervous system, endocrine system, and other structures that our mind file comprises).

At that point the longevity of one's mind file will not depend on the continued viability of any particular hardware medium (for example, the survival of a biological body and brain). Ultimately software-based humans will be vastly extended beyond the severe limitations of humans as we know them today. They will live out on the Web, projecting bodies whenever they need or want them, including virtual bodies in diverse realms of virtual reality, holographically projected bodies, foglet-projected bodies, and physical bodies comprising nan.o.bot swarms and other forms of nanotechnology.

By the middle of the twenty-first century humans will be able to expand their thinking without limit. This is a form of immortality, although it is important to point out that data and information do not necessarily last forever: the longevity of information depends on its relevance, utility, and accessibility. If you've ever tried to retrieve information from an obsolete form of data storage in an old, obscure format (for example, a reel of magnetic tape from a 1970 minicomputer), you understand the challenges in keeping software viable. However, if we are diligent in maintaining our mind file, making frequent backups, and porting to current formats and mediums, a form of immortality can be attained, at least for software-based humans. Later in this century it will seem remarkable to people that humans in an earlier era lived their lives without a backup of their most precious information: that contained in their brains and bodies.

Is this form of immortality the same concept as a physical human, as we know it today, living forever? In one sense it is, because today one's self is not a constant collection of matter, either. Recent research shows that even our neurons, thought to be relatively long lasting, change all of their const.i.tuent subsystems, such as the tubules, in a matter of weeks. Only our pattern of matter and energy persists, and even that gradually changes. Similarly, it will be the pattern of a software human that persists and develops and slowly alters.

But is that person based on my mind file, who migrates across many computational substrates and who outlives any particular thinking medium, really me? This consideration takes us back to the same questions of consciousness and ident.i.ty that have been debated since Plato's dialogues (which we examine in the next chapter). During the course of the twenty-first century these will not remain topics for polite philosophical debates but will have to be confronted as vital, practical, political, and legal issues.

A related question: Is death desirable? The "inevitability" of death is deeply ingrained in human thinking. If death seems unavoidable, we have little choice but to rationalize it as necessary, even enn.o.bling. The technology of the Singularity will provide practical and accessible means for humans to evolve into something greater, so we will no longer need to rationalize death as a primary means of giving meaning to life.

The Longevity of Information

"The horror of that moment," the King went on, "I shall never, never forget it!" "You will, though," the Queen said, "if you don't make a memorandum of it."-LEWIS CARROLL, THROUGH THE LOOKING-GLa.s.s THROUGH THE LOOKING-GLa.s.s The only things you can be sure of, so the saying goes, are death and taxes-but don't be too sure about death.-JOSEPH STROUT, NEUROSCIENTIST I do not know sire, but whatever they will turn out to be I am sure you will tax them.-MICHAEL FARADAY, RESPONDING TO A QUESTION FROM THE BRITISH EXCHEQUER AS TO WHAT PRACTICAL USE COULD BE MADE OF HIS DEMONSTRATION OF ELECTROMAGNETISM Do not go gentle into that good night, ...Rage, rage against the dying of the light.-DYLAN THOMAS

The opportunity to translate our lives, our history, our thoughts, and our skills into information raises the issue of how long information lasts. I've always revered knowledge and gathered information of all kinds as a child, an inclination I shared with my father.

By way of background, my father was one of those people who liked to store all the images and sounds that doc.u.mented his life. Upon his untimely death at the age of fifty-eight in 1970, I inherited his archives, which I treasure to this day. I have my father's 1938 doctoral dissertation from the University of Vienna, which contains his unique insights into the contributions of Brahms to our musical vocabulary. There are alb.u.ms of neatly arranged newspaper clippings of his acclaimed musical concerts as a teenager in the hills of Austria. There are urgent letters to and from the American music patron who sponsored his flight from Hitler, just before Kristallnacht and related historical developments in Europe in the late 1930s made such escape impossible. These items are among dozens of aging boxes containing a myriad of remembrances, including photographs, musical recordings on vinyl and magnetic tape, personal letters, and even old bills.

I also inherited his penchant for preserving the records of one's life, so along with my father's boxes I have several hundred boxes of my own papers and files. My father's productivity, a.s.sisted only by the technology of his manual typewriter and carbon paper, cannot compare with my own prolificacy, aided and abetted by computers and high-speed printers that can reproduce my thoughts in all kinds of permutations.

Tucked away in my own boxes are also various forms of digital media: punch cards, paper-tape reels, and digital magnetic tapes and disks of various sizes and formats. I often wonder just how accessible this information remains. Ironically the ease of approaching this information is inversely proportional to the level of advancement of the technology used to create it. Most straightforward are the paper doc.u.ments, which although showing signs of age are eminently readable. Only slightly more challenging are the vinyl records and a.n.a.log tape recordings. Although some basic equipment is required, it is not difficult to find or use. The punch cards are somewhat more challenging, but it's still possible to find punch-card readers, and the formats are uncomplicated.

By far the most demanding information to retrieve is that contained on the digital disks and tapes. Consider the challenges involved. For each medium I have to figure out exactly which disk or tape drive was used, whether an IBM 1620 circa 1960 or a Data General Nova I circa 1973.Then, once I've a.s.sembled the requisite equipment, there are layers of software to deal with: the appropriate operating system, disk information drivers, and application programs. And, when I run into the inevitable scores of problems inherent in each layer of hardware and software, just whom am I going to call for a.s.sistance? It's hard enough getting contemporary systems to work, let alone systems for which the help desks were disbanded decades ago (if they ever existed). Even at the Computer History Museum most of the devices on display stopped functioning many years ago.41 a.s.suming I do prevail against all of these obstacles, I have to account for the fact that the actual magnetic data on the disks has probably decayed and that the old computers would still generate mostly error messages.42 But is the information gone? The answer is, Not entirely. Even though the magnetic spots may no longer be readable by the original equipment, the faded regions could be enhanced by suitably sensitive equipment, via methods that are a.n.a.logous to the image enhancement often applied to the pages of old books when they are scanned. The information is still there, although very difficult to get at. With enough devotion and historical research, one might actually retrieve it. If we had reason to believe that one of these disks contained secrets of enormous value, we would probably succeed in recovering the information. But is the information gone? The answer is, Not entirely. Even though the magnetic spots may no longer be readable by the original equipment, the faded regions could be enhanced by suitably sensitive equipment, via methods that are a.n.a.logous to the image enhancement often applied to the pages of old books when they are scanned. The information is still there, although very difficult to get at. With enough devotion and historical research, one might actually retrieve it. If we had reason to believe that one of these disks contained secrets of enormous value, we would probably succeed in recovering the information.

But mere nostalgia is unlikely to be sufficient to motivate anyone to undertake this formidable task. I will say that because I did largely antic.i.p.ate this dilemma, I did make paper printouts of most of these old files. But keeping all our information on paper is not the answer, as hard-copy archives present their own set of problems. Although I can readily read even a century-old paper ma.n.u.script if I'm holding it in my hand, finding a desired doc.u.ment from among thousands of only modestly organized file folders can be a frustrating and time-consuming task. It can take an entire afternoon to locate the right folder, not to mention the risk of straining one's back from moving dozens of heavy file boxes. Using microfilm or microfiche may alleviate some of the difficulty, but the matter of locating the right doc.u.ment remains.

I have dreamed of taking these hundreds of thousands of records and scanning them into a ma.s.sive personal database, which would allow me to utilize powerful contemporary search-and-retrieve methods on them. I even have a name for this venture-DAISI (Doc.u.ment and Image Storage Invention)-and have been acc.u.mulating ideas for it for many years. Computer pioneer Gordon Bell (former chief engineer of Digital Equipment Corporation), DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), and the Long Now Foundation are also working on systems to address this challenge.43 DAISI will involve the rather daunting task of scanning and patiently cataloging all these doc.u.ments. But the real challenge to my dream of DAISI is surprisingly deep: how can I possibly select appropriate hardware and software layers that will give me the a.s.surance that my archives will be viable and accessible decades from now?

Of course my own archival needs are only a microcosm of the exponentially expanding knowledge base that human civilization is acc.u.mulating. It is this shared species-wide knowledge base that distinguishes us from other animals. Other animals communicate, but they don't acc.u.mulate an evolving and growing base of knowledge to pa.s.s down to the next generation. Since we are writing our precious heritage in what medical informatics expert Bryan Bergeron calls "disappearing ink," our civilization's legacy would appear to be at great risk.44 The danger appears to be growing exponentially along with the growth of our knowledge bases. The problem is further exacerbated by the accelerating speed with which we adopt new standards in the many layers of hardware and software we employ to store information. The danger appears to be growing exponentially along with the growth of our knowledge bases. The problem is further exacerbated by the accelerating speed with which we adopt new standards in the many layers of hardware and software we employ to store information.

There is another valuable repository of information stored in our brains. Our memories and skills, although they may appear to be fleeting, do represent information, coded in vast patterns of neurotransmitter concentrations, interneuronal connections, and other relevant neural details. This information is the most precious of all, which is one reason death is so tragic. As we have discussed, we will ultimately be able to access, permanently archive, as well as understand the thousands of trillions of bytes of information we have tucked away in each of our brains.

Copying our minds to other mediums raises a number of philosophical issues, which I will discuss in the next chapter-for example, "Is that really me or rather someone else who just happens to have mastered all my thoughts and knowledge?" Regardless of how we resolve these issues, the idea of capturing the information and information processes in our brains seems to imply that we (or at least ent.i.ties that act very much like we do) could "live forever." But is that really the implication?

For eons the longevity of our mental software has been inexorably linked to the survival of our biological hardware. Being able to capture and reinstantiate all the details of our information processes would indeed separate these two aspects of our mortality. But as we have seen, software itself does not necessarily survive forever, and there are formidable obstacles to its enduring very long at all.

So whether information represents one man's sentimental archive, the acc.u.mulating knowledge base of the human-machine civilization, or the mind files stored in our brains, what can we conclude about the ultimate longevity of software? The answer is simply this: Information lasts only so long as someone cares about it Information lasts only so long as someone cares about it. The conclusion that I've come to with regard to my DAISI project, after several decades of careful consideration, is that there is no set of hardware and software standards existing today, nor any likely to come along, that will provide any reasonable level of confidence that the stored information will still be accessible (without unreasonable levels of effort) decades from now.45 The only way that my archive (or any other information base) can remain viable is if it is continually upgraded and ported to the latest hardware and software standards. If an archive remains ignored, it will ultimately become as inaccessible as my old eight-inch PDP-8 floppy disks. The only way that my archive (or any other information base) can remain viable is if it is continually upgraded and ported to the latest hardware and software standards. If an archive remains ignored, it will ultimately become as inaccessible as my old eight-inch PDP-8 floppy disks.

Information will continue to require constant maintenance and support to remain "alive." Whether data or wisdom, information will survive only if we want it to. By extension, we can only live for as long as we care about ourselves. Already our knowledge to control disease and aging is advanced to the point that your att.i.tude toward your own longevity is now the most important influence on your long-range health.

Our civilization's trove of knowledge does not simply survive by itself. We must continually rediscover, reinterpret, and reformat the legacy of culture and technology that our forebears have bestowed on us. All of this information will be fleeting if no one cares about it. Translating our currently hardwired thoughts into software will not necessarily provide us with immortality. It will simply place the means to determine how long we want our lives and thoughts to last in our own figurative hands.

MOLLY 2004: So what you're saying is that I'm just a file? So what you're saying is that I'm just a file?

MOLLY 2104: Well, not a static file, but a dynamic file. But what do you mean "just"? What could be more important? Well, not a static file, but a dynamic file. But what do you mean "just"? What could be more important?

MOLLY 2004: Well, I throw files away all the time, even dynamic ones. Well, I throw files away all the time, even dynamic ones.

MOLLY 2104: Not all files are created equal. Not all files are created equal.

MOLLY 2004: I suppose that's true. I was devastated when I lost my only copy of my senior thesis. I lost six months of work and had to start over. I suppose that's true. I was devastated when I lost my only copy of my senior thesis. I lost six months of work and had to start over.

MOLLY 2104: Ah, yes, that was awful. I remember it well, even though it was over a century ago. It was devastating because it was a small part of myself. I had invested my thoughts and creativity in that file of information. So think how precious all of your-my-acc.u.mulated thoughts, experience, skills, and history are. Ah, yes, that was awful. I remember it well, even though it was over a century ago. It was devastating because it was a small part of myself. I had invested my thoughts and creativity in that file of information. So think how precious all of your-my-acc.u.mulated thoughts, experience, skills, and history are.

. . . on Warfare: The Remote, Robotic, Robust, Size-Reduced, Virtual-Reality Paradigm

As weapons have become more intelligent, there has been a dramatic trend toward more precise missions with fewer casualties. It may not seem that way when viewed alongside the tendency toward more detailed, realistic television-news coverage. The great battles of World Wars I and II and the Korean War, in which tens of thousands of lives were lost over the course of a few days, were visually recorded only by occasional grainy newsreels. Today, we have a front-row seat for almost every engagement. Each war has its complexities, but the overall movement toward precision intelligent warfare is clear by examining the number of casualties. This trend is similar to what we are beginning to see in medicine, where smart weapons against disease are able to perform specific missions with far fewer side effects. The trend is similar for collateral casualties, although it may not seem that way from contemporary media coverage (recall that about fifty million civilians died in World War II).

I am one of five members of the Army Science Advisory Group (ASAG), which advises the U.S. Army on priorities for its science research. Although our briefings, deliberations, and recommendations are confidential, I can share some overall technological directions that are being pursued by the army and all of the U.S. armed forces.

Dr. John A. Parmentola, director for research and laboratory management for the U.S. Army and liaison to the ASAG, describes the Department of Defense's "transformation" process as a move toward an armed force that is "highly responsive, network-centric, capable of swift decision, superior in all echelons, and [able to provide] overwhelming ma.s.sed effects across any battle s.p.a.ce."46 He describes the Future Combat System (FCS), now under development and scheduled to roll out during the second decade of this century, as "smaller, lighter, faster, more lethal, and smarter." He describes the Future Combat System (FCS), now under development and scheduled to roll out during the second decade of this century, as "smaller, lighter, faster, more lethal, and smarter."

Dramatic changes are planned for future war-fighting deployments and technology. Although details are likely to change, the army envisions deploying Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) of about 2,500 soldiers, unmanned robotic systems, and FCS equipment. A single BCT would represent about 3,300 "platforms," each with its own intelligent computational capabilities. The BCT would have a common operating picture (COP) of the battlefield, which would be appropriately translated for it, with each soldier receiving information through a variety of means, including retinal (and other forms of "heads up") displays and, in the future, direct neural connection.

The army's goal is to be capable of deploying a BCT in 96 hours and a full division in 120 hours. The load for each soldier, which is now about one hundred pounds of equipment, will initially be reduced through new materials and devices to forty pounds, while dramatically improving effectiveness. Some of the equipment would be offloaded to "robotic mules."

A new uniform material has been developed using a novel form of Kevlar with silica nanoparticles suspended in polyethylene glycol. The material is flexible in normal use, but when stressed it instantly forms a nearly impenetrable ma.s.s that is stab resistant. The army's Inst.i.tute for Soldier Nanotechnologies at MIT is developing a nanotechnology-based material called "exomuscle" to enable combatants to greatly increase their physical strength when manipulating heavy equipment.47 The Abrams tank has a remarkable survival record, with only three combat casualties in its twenty years of combat use. This is the result of both advanced armor materials and of intelligent systems designed to defeat incoming weapons, such as missiles. However, the tank weighs more than seventy tons, a figure that will need to be significantly reduced to meet FCS goals for smaller systems.