No ratings yet.

 

It’s not uncommon to see Elon Musk’s name in the context of a rather ethically controversial topic, and he kicked off 2018 in a similar fashion. Namely, Musk announced his company Neuralink, and the company’s vision to ensure that humans will overcome obsolescence with the exponential advancements of AI. He stressed how AI will soon be able to surpass humans in almost every cognitive front, and that only adopting the lifestyle of a cyborg will ensure we stay in the race. How does he want to do this? Well, he wants to biologically engineer our brains to connect with AI functional computers.

We are already significantly smarter through the use of our phones and computers on a daily basis, by already a significant order of magnitude relative to humans only 100 years ago. We are part cyborg currently, he believes, but we can go above and beyond that to develop our brains to superhuman levels.

Cognitively enhancing ourselves will obviously come with numerous ethical implications, and significant dangers. Creating these “superhumans” would quite rapidly spill-over in a military environment, where soldiers would be able to detect objects we currently aren’t able to identify. Our thoughts would be enhanced in so many different ways, which would beg the question: are we still ourselves with the implanting of such technologies? And if not, are we ourselves with the current access we have to technologies? Where would the line be drawn?

People with disabilities and medical conditions would be able to benefit significantly from such inventions. We already use links between the brain and robotic arms to have amputees be able to use limbs they thought to have permanently lost.

While this would need to be significantly regulated, I believe the opportunities significantly outweigh the possible drawbacks. Our development would exponentially increase, at a rate so rapid, that we would be able to function on superhuman levels and solve many of our current crises. Disparities between different communities would, however, increase. Finding the right balance would thus be the ultimate question, with the technological capabilities already right at our doorstep.

 

Sources:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/01/elon-musk-neurotechnology-human-enhancement-brain-computer-interfaces

https://www.indy100.com/article/elon-musk-products-ideas-superhuman-technology-neuralink-invention-8540021

No ratings yet.

When George Orwell symbolized a dystopian society as a result of omnipresent governmental surveillance in his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, he might have been too optimistic of the technological advancements that would happen over the span of 30 years. Over the past decade, however, we have seen the gap between fiction and reality of this society lessen around the world, as global superpowers have been advancing in their citizen-monitoring capabilities.

While certainly not the first superpower to do so, China has been implementing an incredibly detailed “Social Credit” system in order to monitor and track the status of its 1.4 billion citizens. It keeps an extensive profile on every individual, and monitors their behavior through cameras spread around all of the big cities detecting behavioral patterns through AI algorithms, and through transactions done online and at POS locations. Additionally, it looks at factors such as having a bad credit score, or being late on bills, but even their behavior in traffic, interactions with others on the street, and whether someone visits their parents enough. This mass of generated data is processed to review an individual score of a person, which is used to determine whether a person is eligible for a loan, but even whether he/she is allowed to live in a certain neighborhood, buy plane or train tickets, visit certain locations, have access to specific dating websites with others of a certain score, and many other restrictions in their daily lives. Even playing a video game like Counter Strike Global Offensive will influence a person’s rating, namely, when found cheating in the game, a subject will be punished by having their rating lowered. Social gatherings have even been banned between people of certain scores, to control the civil society and prevent the formation of “illegal governmental organizations.”

Of course, the ethical controversies that stem from this are obvious, but it has been met with surprisingly many supporters in the country. They believe it significantly contributes to a better society, and even state that they themselves have become better people as a result of it.

The United Kingdom, United States, and even The Netherlands have been making use “Predictive Policing” in their own cities, by using algorithms to detect suspicious behavior of people, and keeping profiles on people who have frequently been seen conducting questionable acts. The UK has the most cameras per capita of any country to ensure surveillance is on every corner. While I do believe the benefits outweigh the costs of such an implementation, I can understand why people have trouble accepting the infiltrating feeling such measures have on their daily lives. That does not go for China’s current practice that will be fully implemented in 2020, however, as it goes far beyond the safety of the people zaps the central reason for using such technologies in day to day lives. Where should the line be drawn before we impose a lifestyle where Big Brother is always watching you?

 

Sources:

Lead title

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/china-social-credit

China has started ranking citizens with a creepy ‘social credit’ system — here’s what you can do wrong, and the embarrassing, demeaning ways they can punish you

https://nos.nl/artikel/2250867-misdrijven-oplossen-met-data-geen-filmscenario-maar-realiteit.html