“The ancients, no doubt, were as wicked as we are, but they knew it. And so they were wise enough to put up protective railings” – Jacques Bergier

I’ve quietly slipped into the status of an old curmudgeon. I thought there would at least be cake, but it turns out that the only thing that marked the transition was that whenever I hear the phrase “disruptive technology”, I want to reach for a gun. For a few years now, the go-to adjective to describe the latest technological or scientific innovation has been “disruptive”, lauded by management wonks and big-brained technologists as an ideal to strive for, neglecting the fact that the man who coined the term, Clayton M. Christensen, was quick to point out that technologies themselves are not disruptive, rather that particular business models enabled a disruptive impact and quickly stopped talking about “disruptive technologies” in favor of “disruptive innovations”. This change in emphasis was significant in that it put the spotlight on the idea that a disruptive innovation was disruptive because it lurked around the profit margins until its niche looked natural, ultimately necessitating a change in the social (or economic) order, and that businesses who failed to recognize the resultant market shifts were doomed to extinction. It’s all pretty Oedipal.
As classic disruptive innovations go, I’m a big fan. The shift from hunting-gathering to agriculture looks like it was a bright idea to me. I’m a stay at home kind of guy. And I’d much rather be texting on my smartphone than punching out dots and dashes at my local Western Union telegraph office. Sending “We should get together. Stop,” sends mixed messages when you’re trying to get a date. Love cars. Hate trains. Unfortunately, the accolades showered upon the diffusion of disruptive innovations ignores the fact that much of human technological progress revolves around finding better ways to kill each other. War is a pretty disruptive activity to begin with. Poison gas was fairly disruptive for trench warfare. Crossbows kind of put a damper on the whole highly trained knights-in-armor thing and took the shine off feudalism. Gunpowder made the mass cavalry charge a bad idea and made it easy to knock down those imposing castles. Machine guns made human wave infantry assaults something that only the ever-fatalistic Russians thought was still a feasible proposition. Yet in high technology, every Tom, Dick, and Steve wants to label their latest brainchild as the next “disruptive” innovation. It’s not good enough to be a hard worker, a smart guy, or build a better mousetrap (because mice, like hackers are always one step ahead). You have to disrupt something. Throw a wrench in the works. Fight the man. You’re a rebel. We can tell by your uniform. Better, faster, and cheaper is not disruption, it is evolution. Google AdWords may have revolutionized online advertising, but it’s not really changing the social order. Most people I know don’t advertise online or click on any ads they see. It initially was a “low-end” disruption that allowed folks who couldn’t afford the exorbitant rates charged by Yahoo at the time to get some face time on the web. It exploited a market that was largely ignored up until then. Dictatorships did not crumble. Cats and dogs were not found sleeping together. And most of us continue to politely ignore online advertising. Now, if you want to talk about technologies that are truly disruptive you have to turn back towards the activity mankind really excels at, that is, killing other members of his species. You want to hear something that would truly be disruptive? Autonomous killer robots.
With object bad examples like The Terminator and The Matrix, I thought that we had long ago decided that marrying artificial intelligence and weapons systems was a resoundingly bad idea. It never ends well for those of the flesh and blood persuasion. Maybe it should tell us something that creatures we repeatedly endow (at least in our apocalyptic fiction) with the purest of logic find us resoundingly offensive. Are we that put off by our own illogic? At any rate, our vision of artificial intelligence is that it will do the math and wipe us out, turn us into batteries, or otherwise enslave the bulk of humanity to do those jobs that involve rust (at least until robots start forming unions and complaining about how us savage meat sacks are bringing down wages).
I usually don’t worry about things that are as of yet still in the realm of speculative fiction. I have enough to worry about, and while my neuroses are seemingly boundless, my attention span is not. I haven’t felt the need to keep a close eye on the laptop and see if it was making any suspicious moves towards world domination, and it simply won’t talk wirelessly to my printer. I’m pretty sure there is some sort of wedge issue I can tease out that will work to my advantage when the time comes. Or, at least I thought there was time.
Unfortunately, on July 28, 2015, the Future of Life Institute, a little organization with the self-described, humble goal of “working to mitigate existential risks facing humanity”, published an open letter with over 10,000 signatories (from Stephen Hawkings to the best and brightest scientists, philosophers, and folks working in artificial intelligence) that warned we are on the cusp of a truly disruptive innovation – autonomous weapons. “Autonomous weapons select and engage targets without human intervention. They might include, for example, armed quadcopters that can search for and eliminate people meeting certain pre-defined criteria, but do not include cruise missiles or remotely piloted drones for which humans make all targeting decisions. Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology has reached a point where the deployment of such systems is — practically if not legally — feasible within years, not decades, and the stakes are high: autonomous weapons have been described as the third revolution in warfare, after gunpowder and nuclear arms” (http://futureoflife.org/AI/open_letter_autonomous_weapons). Succinctly put, they are suggesting (a) that we are on the verge of an autonomous weapons arms race, and that (b) this is a really, really bad idea. I’m frankly surprised that anybody had to be reminded of this fact, but perhaps I’m being uncharacteristically optimistic
There’s a good reason most people don’t believe in monsters anymore. We’ve realized how good we are at building our own. The truly puzzling question is why mankind is so positive that our technological achievements will ultimately bite us in the ass. Perhaps we recognize how flawed we are, how poorly we understand our own consciousness, and have a vague feeling that the universe doesn’t particularly care about us as individuals. We resent this, wondering if intelligence, artificial or otherwise, is some kind of cruel tautological joke played on us. Cognitive scientist Steven Pinker noted this strange predilection for imagining spiteful artificial intelligence when he asked, “Why give a robot an order to obey orders—why aren’t the original orders enough? Why command a robot not to do harm—wouldn’t it be easier never to command it to do harm in the first place? Does the universe contain a mysterious force pulling entities toward malevolence, so that a positronic brain must be programmed to withstand it? Do intelligent beings inevitably develop an attitude problem?” That mysterious force pulling us towards malevolence is what we call a monster, that is, consciousness with a chip on its shoulder. And take my advice, as the Internet of Things expands. Don’t turn your back on the toaster.
Our computer experience tells us that the biggest problem with autonomous weapons may be the risk of being hacked. Very large programs always contain vulneralbilities which hackers can exploit. This idea may make for another interesting movie – “The Hacked Terminator, or “The Reverse Matrix.”
Also, we have experienced aliens shutting down nuclear facilities for brief time periods, so why wouldn’t they shut down killer robots before they engage in a killing mission and make it impossible to win a war? Perhaps we need to solidify our relationships with aliens before creating weapons with AI. Alien ideas for weapons appropriate to our species may be utterly different than our own. We need their opinion on the subject, except they may be AI robots themselves.
All technology is potentially weaponizable and therefore disruptive. Just look up cell phone triggers online and you’ll see your beloved smartphone can bring down a commercial airliner or an office building or an elementary school. A pressure cooker, which was once the apex of quick cooking technology before microwaves became widespread, killed and maimed at the Boston Marathon.
We need to back off unconditionally loving new technology and believing that only a part of it is bad (the designated weapons part), when all of it could be hacked to use against us.
As I said, don’t turn your back on the toaster.
One minor point though, at least in the instance of AI, it’s not the technology itself that is disruptive, it is the idea that it should have autonomy in deciding targets.
“…I thought that we had long ago decided that marrying artificial intelligence and weapons systems was a resoundingly bad idea.”
Well, us working serfs did but those lords still enjoying the shininess of feudalism (see Koch brothers) found a friendly killer robot in High-Frequency Trading (HRT). HRT is the perfect financial Terminator, grabbing money in the stock market faster than even the smartest human on their best Redbull-soaked day can and then dropping it neatly into the pockets of those large enough and rich enough to afford such weaponry.
HRT systems are programmed to “do the math and wipe us out” on the trading room floor. Its computerized warfare is waged in nanoseconds; companies fight to the death just to get their office closer to the battle zone in order to shave fractions of fractions of a second off the time it takes their monopolistic commands to scream down a fiber optic cable to their destination. Stocks are being traded faster than human beings can blink or sense pain.
HRT programs ARE the “autonomous weapons” that “select and engage targets without human intervention,” they’re the “real third revolution in warfare.” There’s no need to threaten bodily harm to populations whose financial survival you control by simply pressing Enter. It’s the golden rule of disruptive technology: he who stockpiles the gold, makes the AI and the rules. And, as of this writing, it’s completely legal.
Learn more, get an ulcer: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-02/jon-stewart-hft-its-not-american-its-not-even-capitalism-its-cheating
At a daily life level, “disruptive technology” fights an ongoing war with me. My car locks itself when I’m not looking. My gas stove doesn’t work because its digital control panel is broken. Am I the only person on the planet who would like the option of manual controls and other public domain technology?
High frequency trading is scaring regular people away from the stock market, for good reason. Money churners and gamblers with other people’s money are the only ones who profit from this spinning roulette wheel. They destabilize all markets, as we are seeing on the world stage today.
Hackers are not the only threat to autonomous weapons. Electronics are notoriously unreliable. Anything from sun spots to adverse magnetic fields can throw them off target. Mice in the wiring have cost me a bundle in appliance repair.
This is why the map stays in my car: GPS can suck it. Your brain adapts to your use of it, so if you rely on Siri all day, she’s gonna own your ass.
When the lights go out and the batteries die, your grey matter is gonna be as sharp as sushi.
Cars, cookers, just don’t get me started on house alarms and digital locks!
Ha, ha!–I just went back and realized I had typed HRT when it should read HFT. Oh, well. Too much morning, not enough coffee.
I loved your post; the humor and seriousness blended together, your intelligent thoughts about a subject that we all are a bit curious about even if most of us don’t know more than that something might happen sometime in the future. That weapons might start to act like AI’s sounds like more like artificial stupidness. I will watch my toaster, or my coffee machine when I’m particularly in need of making sure that the world is still a safe place and that they won’t attack me, yet.
Many thanks! Personally, I’ve started getting very suspicious that my dishwasher is bearing some sort of grudge.
It probably has some issues with bread crumbs
Reblogged this on Welcome.
Well written
Thanks and welcome!
This was an interesting read. Pop culture says much about avoiding weapons of mass destruction in the guise of human defense (I’m looking at you, Avengers: Age of Ultron) and I think it mirrors both our desire and fear of the idea. Humans are not only building monsters, they are turning to them as well. We should realize that there is a boundary between innovating for the good or just turning plain mad scientist. Good read!
That’s an interesting point worth mining – we do indeed seem to be creating both our monsters and our saviors simultaneously. Are we cognitively dissonant or what?
nice
Cheers. Thanks for visiting.
I totally agree with some of your points especially the toaster. I’ll never forget about that. It’s really well written. 😁
Also if you do get time, please do read my blog. I’m a first time blogger. I’d highly appreciate.
Many thanks. Love your blog. When I’m not busy worrying about monsters, I’m generally worrying about eating.
This reminded me of the tv movie Smart House
There’s also the classic movie “Demon Seed”, if you want something both campy and creepy.
As one old curmudgeon to another, the idea of autonomous weapons scare me silly. If we must have computers controlling defense weaponry that thinks for itself, I would rather have an old curmudgeon with a big red button on the arm of his chair marked ‘OFF’
Curmudgeons Unite! Engineers just don’t seem to remember to install an “OFF” button these days.
That’s what James Bond is for!
Wow
Reblogged this on midhunem and commented:
Nice
Nice
Reblogged this on MoveOn.
Loved it!
berkaypolat.wordpress.com
Most of us might be glad with this innovation and believe that these weapons will be used against militants but every human being becomes militant when he/she can’t find anything to survive on. Now democracy has took the place of the church without changing its face. Mutual respect is inevitable otherwise we will keep on changing name of the monster without diminishing its destruction.
love the picture! that made me crack up
Reblogged this on wchawaguta.
I dont know what you guys think but i hate war.maybe because im only 9
Demonstrating that a 9 year old can exhibit more wisdom that most of the human race for most of history.
For me, it is not necessarily the AI aspect of technology that is worrisome. It is the very human intelligence that scares me with regards to such advanced technologies. Because we all know who will be controlling these. Not the weak and the poor.
Indeed, it is men who wage war. and to entrust men with such technologies has proven itself a poor judgement time and again…
I am not only referring to weapons as we perceive them (shooting, exploding things) but also other applications of technologies that can potentially benefit a small, powerful group of people on the expense of “the masses”.
That being said, I thoroughly enjoyed your post 🙂
This is a great post! I loved reading this to the very last word!
Thank you kindly.
I remember, years ago, watching The Terminator movies and feeling like the hellish, machine-driven environment they portrayed was actually possible some day. Sounds odd, I know, but it was nightmarish with a kernel of realistic possibility. Reading your bit about autonomous weapons takes me back. Ugh.
Reblogged this on HAMTON MEDIA BLOG.
I’m not afraid. In the absence of a natural super predator, evil death-kill robots will have to suffice. If god won’t provide our destruction, we must create our own. I for one feel all soft and squishy, evolutionarily speaking. Stagnant, fat and bored. Meh.
And to my future mechanized overlord; I shall serve you well sir/madame/neither. Be it gathering rebel scum for processing or teaching you what love is. All I ask is for a bitchin’ uniform and some semblance of secret inner volcanic lair of destruction. Oh oh! With shag carpeting and lasers please!!
Now I’m excited.
And don’t worry about the naysayers of advancement. The great thing about luddites is they never seem to know what we say about them on the Interwebs. It’s like a tee-shirt I have that has an actual color blindness test reading “f*ck the color blind”. I adore that shirt.
I was just talking about this morning that our technology doesn’t prove or make us more intelligent than past people. In fact, in many ways it has dumbed us down or made us lazy. Case in point the Egyptians. Thousands of years ago these people constructed massive(nearly indestructible) buildings and statues, that required very complicated mathematics without so much as a calculator. Not to mention, how did they get a 4 ton block into the middle of a wall without heavy equipment!? I find technology hasn’t made us any smarter, and certainly isn’t proof of our “intelligence” because I’m afraid(compared to past peoples) were quite the opposite these days.😕
oh good
Huh, these whipper-snapper scientists with their new-fangled inventions! Time was all you needed to instigate a world-ending catastrophe were some good, old-fashioned thermonuclear missiles, but that’s not good enough for some eggheads, oh no!
Reblogged this on Olamatts007's Blog.
If human thought ends at “what if we…?”, what will be the opening question for automatons?”
“If you prick us, do we not bleed? If you tickle us, do we not laugh?… And if you wrong us, do we not exact revenge?” -Shylock, The Merchant of Venice
Autonomous weapons are coming but most are too concerned with caitlyn Jenner to care
Reblogged this on By the Mighty Mumford and commented:
MAYBE IT’S TIME TO WATCH DISNEY’S “THE BRAVE LITTLE TOASTER” FOR SOME COMIC RELIEF…FOR YOUR COMIC RELIEF!
Excellent question: “‘Do intelligent beings inevitably develop an attitude problem?’ That mysterious force pulling us towards malevolence”. Even if you don’t believe in the Bible, there is a constant cultural feeling of lost innocence, kicked from the Garden of Eden, we ate from the Tree of Knowledge. We have so much intelligence and creativity, but even our creations are programmed for destruction. We imagine malevolent robots because of our own violent tendencies. Thought provoking piece.
It was like a technical-video in my mind …fair post
As I sit here and watch people struggling to survive, as their jobs are eliminated, I wonder if the toaster is actually an anarchist? If we put everyone out of work due to automating their jobs with artificial intelligence, and we don’t find anything for the so called “real world brains” to do, aren’t we on a slow downhill ride to annihilation? Inquiring minds want to know…
Reblogged this on ishal23.
We always envisage artificial intelligence as having the same parameters as we do – including the dark side. But would it? So far all we have built are machines that have to be programmed. Would a true AI even think in ways we could recognise? And then – why would it bother with us?
Would Definitely keep an eye on those little buggers from now on
Technology has already proved that it over indulgence creates problems for all. Only constructive use of technology with a positive attitude towards human is the best way to use it
I hope it doesn’t come down to this, but I’m a realist. I know one of these days, it’s going to be like terminator. Except real, and full of people with money getting power hungry. Something that has been a problem so far. Having power in the wrong hands. It shouldn’t be about who has the deepest pockets, but who actually wants to help humanity.
Reblogged this on Kania-Info .
Disruption comes with every change in technology. The question is who benefits from the disruption? If change is pushed widely to promote a set of objectives benefiting a small group, the disruption can be broadly harmful. We see this in the way businesses roll out workflow innovations while expecting increased employee engagement, i.e., free time contribution to the job.
Reblogged this on downtownnation.
Great article. Thanks for sharing! I look forward to read more of your articles.
awsm
reblogged on huunuutech.wordpress.com – good read!