Who would not say that, the world has known the names of pioneers, implantable chip itself and the test subject. Scientists, politicians, the Ministry of Justice and the medical establishment has a dozen years of review and implement in their structure chipovaniya system. What will we implement this controversial technology?
Myth or reality?
Chipovanie or Tagging, as they call the procedure in other states, not the theory of the future or a plot for fiction. This is a problem that we face is literally day by day. The development of biotechnology — one of the most popular theories of global catastrophes. That is why around this topic all the time are inflamed debate.
The first person to reap the fruits of chipovaniya considered scientist Kevin Warwick. Professor of Cybernetics at the University of Reading (UK), and can actually be considered the first cyborg planet Earth. In August 1998, Warwick decided on a fairly desperate move: implanted in the nervous system of a tiny capsule containing a microchip. The project was called "Cyborg 1.0". The main goal of this project is the introduction of high technology into everyday life. Just a couple of days mastering control technology, the scientist has become the first "updated" is not only a resident of the UK, but the entire planet. Glass capsule, outstanding 64-bit code to the demand, was part of an extensive program of Intelligent Home System and allows scientists from one point to control all electronics at home.
Warwick's delight knew no bounds, and he continued to explore the possibility of equipping and improvement of the human body. In 2002, Professor implanted a chip and another began the research project "Cyborg 2.0". The aim of the project is the sequel was to prove the possibility of the transmission of nerve impulses computer for further playback. Despite the possibility of paralysis of the limbs, the scientist has embodied his desire in life and forced to move a mechanical arm, passing it commands over the internet.
In 1999, in his book "The offensive machines" Warwick argued that the period between 2010 and 2015 the human race will come to the fact that the possibility of robots will be much greater than the ability of people.
No scientist in any case did not claim that the robots will be able to fully replace the human presence on the various types of production. However, he noted that, where possible, the robots will be much more precise and orderly.
Does not follow from this that the scientific community is digging the grave of all mankind?
Answer to this question can only mean depressed mood train of thought, because even such a scientist original, like Craig Venter, in an interview with The Independent said: "Science — a tool for the study of life and the world around us. And this knowledge is used for the benefit of mankind. " After that, however, the scientist added that he would like to tighten the regulatory measures in science, because, in his view, the current is not enough.
On the other hand, chipovanie is a seven-mile steps to create AI (artificial intelligence). In my personal opinion, the involvement of human existence is the AI any good initially can not lead. However, according to an expert in the field of global risks Alexey Turchin, scripts and scientific works dealing with AI as the cause of the apocalypse, there is much less than, for example, theories, considering as a base nuclear weapons.
Artificial Intelligence — Friend or Foe
Analysts are considering several options for the development of artificial intelligence. According to experts, in the next decade will be made more than one attempt to create a full-fledged AI. To operate this software algorithm requires not so powerful computer, as previously, the technical ability to create AI in the next decade may appear in a sufficiently large range of citizens. Therefore necessary to pose a threat of such technologies now. If you follow the news at all sorts of creating artificial intelligence, we can trace it increases every year the number of applications of various global giants (in the software and computer technology, of course) on the establishment of such systems. And despite the fact that the creation of AI — a very difficult and expensive process, a strong and well harmonious AI will be able to solve and analyze problems that a person can not do. However, the eminent physicist Roger Penrose is confident that these machines surpass human intelligence can never and will solve applied problems.
But the problem is they do not work or is not working correctly, or, even worse, a car, initially working against humanity, will be able to capture and destroy the information structure of the world for a few months, and in the worst scenarios — for a few hours. As the disaster in Japan, the people, in spite of all the achievements of technical civilization, remains highly vulnerable biological being.
It should also not rule out the possibility that sufficiently strong AI will be created in several laboratories. Such an alignment is also not favorable for the development of society. In this case, the laboratory is likely to simply "incited" the AI against each other, which quickly lead to bloodshed of people.
Now the scientific community is considering two options for ischemic stroke: a system operating on the program, given the man (and the man, unfortunately, often becomes a slave of desires and irrational impulses), and as a system with the possibility of their own logical calculations and analysis tool with the function to change the rules of the computing. In the first case, the world will sooner or later face the human thirst for power, program the machine. And in this scenario, humanity still remains, albeit meager, the chance of rescue. In the second case can be realized one of the many alarmist scenarios of Hollywood films about our tragic future where robots are taking over the planet and other cybernetic undead.
How do we relate to these prospects? I think that it is necessary to begin to recognize that we can not stop progress, but to destroy the whole scientific system to the ground. But we have the strength to fight for the direction of the vector of development of civilization. And if the benefits for the majority of the citizens and inhabitants of the planet of technology, such chipovaniyu not obvious, you need to resist attempts to make information about our transparent and accessible to virtually unidentifiable organizations.