# Presentation: 098153

## Frontiers of the Future 

**Frontiers of the Future **
***Methods, Madmen and Massive Change ***

- A Presentation for the National Intelligence Council

*by*
*Theodore Gordon*
*November 6, 2003*

**The views expressed in this and other papers associated with the NIC 2020 project are those of individual participants.  They are posted for discussion purposes only and do not represent the views of the US Government. **

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## The Millennium Project

- Established in 1996, after a 3 year feasibility study
- Accumulative study of change, identification of global issues, therapies, methodologies
- 19 Nodes, 1500 participants from 50 countries
- Used by and funded by a broad range of institutions for new insights into global challenges

***The Millennium Project***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

**Notes:**
Beijing; Buenos Aires, Cairo; Calgary; Caracas, Helsinki, London; Madurai & New Delhi,; Maui,; Moscow ; Paris, Prague, Rome, Sao Paulo, Tehran, Silicon Valley, Columbia, Berlin, Kuwait, and Tokyo. 

## The Evolution of Future Studies

**   ****Necromancy**
**Entrails**

**Fortune Telling**

**Genius Forecasting; Malthus,, Wells, Freud,  Kahn**

**Expert Studies: RAND and Delphi**

** ****Newton: The Clockwork Universe**

**Complexity: Chaos, Adaptive Models**

**Astrology**

**Model Building: Econometrics, Systems**

**Scenarios; Look Out Panels**

**Normative Visions**

**National Foresight Studies**

**Games**

**Utopias**

**State of the Future Index**

**Agent Models**

- Revelation           Inspiration            Determinism             Reductionism        Permutation

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## The S&T Management Study 

- Method: Attaché meetings and 2 round questionnaires
***Year 2: Implications of the first year's results for S&T management.***
- Method: Policy-maker interviews
***Year 3: Create scenarios to make the policy consequences explicit.***
- Method: Scenarios; 2 round questionnaires

***The S&T Management Study ***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

**Notes:**
Demographics of S&T Participants in the two rounds of the third year
Total: 125 participants

NA 11%
ME and N Africa 3%
LA 8%
Asia 27%
Europe 50%

Govmt 25% 
Academics 22%
IO 4%
Private 22%
NGO 26%

## Some Key S&T Questions

- What research has the greatest potential risks?
- What are some seminal scientific developments?
- What catastrophes can science help avoid?
- How can science become a more important part of decision process?
- How can interdisciplinary research be strengthened?
- How can ethical consequences be more thoroughly considered in S&T management?

***Some Key S&T Questions***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## How can S&T help improve the human condition? 

- 4.38

- 2.98

- Simple, inexpensive, effective medicines and delivery systems

- 4.27

- 3.48

- Improving the efficiency of water use in agriculture by 75%.

- 4.21

- 3.44

- Climate change - understanding and solutions.

- 4.18

- 3.12

- Improvements in early detection and tracking of pandemics.

- 4.07

- 3.78

- Cheap, efficient, means for providing potable water from salt water

- 4.01

- 3.31

- Techniques for improving waste water treatment, village sanitation.

- 3.91

- 3.54

- Preserving biological and cultural diversity.

- 3.90

- 2.86

- Techniques for improving agriculture, foods, forestry, and livestock

- 3.84

- 3.58

- Providing inexpensive medical treatment for poor people.

- 3.81

- 2.97

- Advanced computation and artificial intelligence.

- 3.62

- 3.93

***How can S&T help improve the human condition? ***

- Importance   Likelihood

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## What research has the greatest potential risks? 

- 4.28

- 3.31

- Use of biotechnology to build new kinds of biological WMD

- 4.16

- 3.61

- Nanotechnology weapons for killing large numbers of people.

- 3.88

- 3.04

- Loss of biodiversity from marketing strategies that encourage genetically altered varieties.

- 3.83

- 3.51

- Intelligent nanotechnology evolving beyond human control.

- 3.74

- 2.36

- Release of substances with long-term hormonal or genetic effects.

- 3.74

- 3.38

- More sophisticated military weaponry.

- 3.70

- 3.84

- Internet dissemination of potentially dangerous technologies.

- 3.70

- 4.16

- Commercial use of human genome information in preconception modification of somatic cells to achieve certain physical or behavioral characteristics of the child and adult.

- 3.63

- 3.41

- Super intelligent and potent computer viruses/ Cyber terrorism.

- 3.59

- 3.70

***What research has the greatest potential risks? ***

- Importance   Likelihood

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Below Some Radars

- Improving collective intelligence and reducing anti-social behavior.
- Psychological /sociobiological research on violent behavior
- Developing a science and technology of governance.
- Tailored psychotropes.
- Increased private sector control of research and development.
- Radically better understanding of quantum phenomena.
- Human appendage regeneration.
- The "final theory" linking quantum physics and relativity.
- Human-computer symbiosis, brain boosters.
- Microprobes that can be deployed in extreme environments.
- Increased use of non-rocket means of low cost space propulsion.
- Altering genomes to create new or revive old species.

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Sources of Acceleration

***Building on prior work***
***Communications***
***Synergy***
***Instrumentation***
***Globalization***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Synergy

*Cosmetics*

*Food*

- Tiny computers
- Smart chips everywhere
- Eyes and ears everywhere
- Implantable monitors

- Understanding mind, brain
- Brain prosthesis
- True AI
- Improved decisionmaking

- Smart machines
- Tiny robots
- Swarm machine

*Cognitive Science*

*Nanotech*

*Computers*

- Future:
- Computers as small as synapses
- An atomic scale general purpose assembly machine could copy itself in a week; a billion in a year
- So, our "mind children" will think and reproduce, and evolve themselves. (Minsky)

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Controlling S&T Risks: 

*** ******Two Schools of Thought***
*Regulations drives research underground or other countries. *
*Regulators cannot keep up with advances. *
*Educate and train scientists in ethics and self-manage risks. *
*Scale of impacts requires global systems to assess risks *
*Design regulations and enforce agreements*
*Dangers are global; control must be global. *
*Some threats should be banned, others, controlled*

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

**Notes:**
International S&T Organization was created in this study:
OTA revisited
Evolves from an information system
De facto regulator
Aspects of ISTO:
Form international guidelines with eminent experts
Provide access to information about risk and opportunity
Create a global S&T fund
Produce annual Davos-like S&T forums
Engage media and politicians to improve S&T discussion
Create international treaties as consensus evolves

## Four Scenarios

- High

- Low

- Pro

- Anti

- Works

- Fails

- Accel

- As now

- 1. S&T Develops a Mind of Its Own

- X

- X

- X

- X

- 2. The World Wakes Up

- X

- X

- X

- X

- 3  Please Turn off the Spigot.

- X

- X

- X

- X

- 4. Backlash

- X

- X

- X

- X

***Four Scenarios***

-               Centralization   Public Support      Functioning
- 	   Of Regulation     Of Science         of Regulation       S&T Speed

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

**Notes:**
The rate of progress of S&T 
The severity of the risks of S&T
The nature of public science education 
The level of public concern over the risks
The locus of regulation 
The nature of S&T regulation 
The degree to which the risks of S&T materialize 
The effect of regulation on science globalization
The responses and attitudes of media 
The degree to which regulations can be circumvented 
The penalties for violation of regulations 
The emergence of science "stars" 

## Scenario 1: 

***Scenario 1: ***
***S&T Develops a Mind of its Own:***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Scenario 2 

***Scenario 2 ***
***The World Wakes Up***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Scenario 3 

***Scenario 3 ***
***Please Turn off the Spigot***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Scenario 4

***Scenario 4***
***Backlash***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Novel Scenario Concepts

- "Unplug-and-Relax" movement
- Connecting education with security
- Corruption in S&T regulatory agency
- Early detection of intolerance
- Electronic psychotropes: escape but entrapping
- Entertainment/ education systems including "You Were There"
- International focus: human security
- Global projects for energy, water, and diseases
- Memes (influential contagious ideas) for tolerance and to stamp out stupidity

- Rise of neo- McCarthyism in science
- Scientist's Oath
- Nanotech viruses
- "Off switches": nano and genome
- Policies for control of publication of dangerous research findings
- Principles of Inviolability of Science autonomy
- Telomerase dispersal as a weapon
- Public participation in S&T debates
- UN Security Council intervenes in S&T
- Uneasy relationship between SIMAD prevention and transnational organized crime.
- Utilizing artificial intelligence programs to minimize corruption in organizations

***Novel Scenario Concepts***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Key Scenario Questions

**Are increases in collective human-machine intelligence plausible?**

**Will regulatory organizations fail to keep pace with advances?**

**Is it plausible that WMD will be available to single individuals?**

**Is it plausible that advances in cognitive science, information technology, and new educational systems will improve tolerance?**

**Is it plausible that international systems will be established to monitor and regulate, with enforcement powers?**

**Is it plausible that international S&T treaties and regulations will have provisions for police enforcement or military intervention?**

**Can S&T regulators and commissions be virtually corruption free?**

**Is it plausible that an anti-science movement will be as or more powerful than the environmental movement?**

**When extreme consequences are involved, can cost-benefit tradeoffs be logically made?**

**Might scientists in the future unite into a global labor organization?**

**Can science disciplines effectively self-regulate?**

***Key Scenario Questions***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

## Good Bet Science Policies

- Consider SIMAD
- Make unintended consequences explicit
- Develop mitigation strategies in parallel
- Each level of management should take responsibility
- High level organizations should engage in risk analysis
- Include public participation in priority setting
- Explore alternative institutional forms to  minimize the chances of impeding innovation, promote sharing the benefits globally, minimize risks, operate without corruption and with wisdom
- Teach science ethics

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government

**Notes:**
Many S&T management levels
Global organizations with power to proscribe and encourage particular research directions, set standards, inspect, monitor, and initiate legal proceeding against people or organizations that do not follow the rules such as  the International Atomic Energy 
National advisory commissions that establish or advise on issues of acceptable and non acceptable research. Current example: The National Academy of Sciences (and its research arm, The National Research Council) which often reports on risks and opportunities of new science targets and the scientific commissions such as The President's Council on Bioethics, created in the United States in late 2001
National agencies of government such as the Office for Human Research Protection which exists with the Department of Health and Human 
The disciplines themselves, through self regulation, control research directions. Perhaps the most well known example is the agreement reached among early researchers in the field of recombinant DNA met at Asilomar California in 1975. 

·	The individual researcher has more or less power to choose the course of his or her research. "More or less" because the freedom of choice is to a degree a function of the field, the setting or laboratory in which the scientist operates, his or her seniority and reputation, and his or her ability to raise research funding.  

Participants were divided about the need for regulation
Forecasting and risk assessment is needed
Funding of S&T should look toward needs of humanity
SIMAD is plausible
Globalization of science without global ethics could lead to disasters

## Methods Frontiers

- Questioning Reductionism
- Social Epidemiology
- Computaria
- Analysis of Systems Near Chaos
- Decisionmaking in Uncertainty
- Probing the Depths of the Unknown

***Methods Frontiers***

- Discussion paper -- does not represent the views of the US Government