Technology: Triumph or Time-bomb
Over the years, technology has
managed to capture the attention of the masses like few other things have. Our
technological ambitions and visions have inspired images such as flying cars,
time travel, inter-galactic exploration and more, but behind every fantasy is
an equally mesmerizing nightmare. Almost as frequently as we see the great
possibilities that future technology can bring, we also see the other face of
ever evolving technology: the idea that we really have no idea what lies behind
the next corner in our technological progression. Since the spawn of humanity,
man has always feared that which he does not know. Whether it consist of
monsters beneath the bed or the rise of robots to take over the world, the
general concept is the same. Just as the physical mysteries of our own planet
once fueled the wild imaginations of man many centuries ago, technology now
serves that purpose. The future of technology is the next great unknown, and
only time can reveal our true fate.
Technology
has changed us. There is no doubt it. Whether these changes are good, bad, or
just plain neutral, only time will tell, but the fact that we now do things in
a different way, think in a different way than we once did, cannot be denied. As
outlined in Sherry Turkle’s report on society titled “The Flight from
Conversation,” we can see that professionals from around America and around the
world are coming to the same conclusions: we are no longer the same people we
were even 20-30 years ago. In her article, Turkle gives plenty of evidence as
to how we have changed, but the most frightening thing to me about the article
is not how we have changed over the past few decades, but that we have changed
at all. If we have made such dramatic social changes as Turtle suggests in only
a few decades, then who knows how we might change as a species over the course
of a historically significant time period like two or three centuries. Changing
how we go about our day to day business or interact with the world around us
may seem like a minor adjustment, but it brings about the idea that in only a
few centuries’ time, our behaviors and mannerisms may be completely foreign to
the way we live our lives now. In her article, Turkle remarks that in today’s
age, “when people are alone, even for a few moments, they fidget and reach for
a device” [Turkle 5]. This one simple line is of particular significance to me
because it shows me that the technology we have acquired up to this point is
not just the tool we believe it to be. Like a drug, our need for a screen in
front of our faces literally consumes us and effects the actions we make on a
moment to moment basis. The scary part is that this statement is 100 percent
accurate. I notice it in myself and everyone around me: the moment I am placed
in an awkward or down moment, I find my hand instinctually being pulled toward
my pocket and phone as if by some divine intervention. I wouldn’t go far as to
say technology has made us bad people, but it has definitely changed us, and
there is only so much changing we can go through before a the changes stop
being good ones.
The
changes we as people go through in the presence of evolving technology is one
topic, but the very direction of such technological evolution is a different discussion
entirely. In the academic world of technology studies, there are essentially
two competing theories regarding the final outcome of such evolution, and
neither is particularly good. One brand of scholar follows the more
conventional belief that at some point, possibly in the not so distant future,
the vast improvements in computing and artificial intelligence well lead to
what is known as a technological singularity, or a day when robots will be
intelligent enough to write and improve their own software, essentially leaving
the human race at the mercy of a hyper- intelligent robot race. This idea has
essentially been circulating for many decades, but the term itself has gained
significant relevance since the turn of the last century thanks to breakthroughs
in artificial intelligence research and the influence of writer/technology guru
Ray Kurzweil, who controversially predicted such an event in his 2005 book “The
Singularity is Near.”
In
the other corner of the ring there is another branch of academia that believes
our human greed and tendency to develop only what makes our lives easier will
lead us not to a technological singularity, but to a sofalarity. In this
hypothesis, a world much like that seen in Pixar’s Wall-e is the proposed future of mankind; a future “defined not by
an evolution toward superintelligence but by the absence of discomforts” [Wu,
Tim]. This type of world may seem desirable, but once all discomforts in life
have been dissipated, what motivation will mankind have left to push forward?
What individuality will remain when everybody’s needs are catered without them ever
leaving a chair?
The future of mankind and technology may seem as daunting as it does inspiring, but for now, only time will tell what the true future of technology will look like. As Tim Wu wrote in The New Yorker magazine, "nowadays," he says, "it is not the biological chisel but the technological chainsaw that is most quickly redefining what it means to be human" [Tim Wu]. In essence, the natural selection that lead humanity to where we are today is no longer a considerable factor. The impact of ever evolving technology on man is far and away more significant to the future of mankind than any biological process. From this point forward, we are the only ones in charge of our own destiny, and that's a gig responsibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment