why the future doesn't need us

Siatta Merchant
Dr. Adams
Seminar in Composition

“Why the future doesn’t need us”

If our society set a limit on all technologies and innovation, we would evolve into a complete dystopia. A dystopia where feelings and unique ideas would be shut out and technology would be unable to impact our lives to its full capabilities, similar to the community in “The Giver” by Lois Lowry; this community would come about if we followed Bill Joy’s solution to our coming problem in over-advanced technology. In Joy’s “Why the future doesn’t need us,” he instills a great fear into our society; the article focuses on our technological advancements and creations dangerous take over of the human race in some twenty-three years. Joy’s solution is then, for all of us, as a unified front, to set goals for our technologies, in order to avoid this fate. He states, “If we could agree as a species, what we wanted, where we were headed, and why, then we would make our future much less dangerous.” Bill Joy’s background in computer science allows us to believe that this theory holds some truth, if not all. Could the human race become a robotic army and a victim of our own natural selection? Simply, it is possible, but with repercussions. Could an attempt to unite as a species prevent this fate, without surrendering the freedom that we have all fought for at some point in our histories? I think not.

Although over creation of GNR technologies could be one of great danger and uncertainty, if our natural intuition propels us into the direction of choosing this fate, then why should we not move forward into new ages and new ways of being? Before the creation of the computer, there were typewriters, and before the telephone, there was no sophisticated way to communicate without being face-to-face. Technology has played a major role in helping generations transition and develop into unique identities. I am not saying that Bill Joy is completely wrong for wanting our society to make a clear cut decision as to where we would like to be in the coming years, I am saying that we should not put a lid on innovative minds and individuality. Joy gives thought to moving forward without goals when he says, “These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they will most certainly not be free.” As I mentioned before, the dystopia society illustrated in “The Giver” featured many individuals that where brainwashed, resembling robots, to think that unknowledgeable persons without feelings would create a great, perfect community. As they were happy to be in this state, they did not know all that they were missing, the pain, sorrow, and what living life would be like. What I am saying is that if we choose not to explore the natural progression of our society and of our innovations, we will be living blind to a whole world we could have explored if we did not set boundaries to our GNR advancements. We should allow our society to branch out and be free to create and bring about a new way of life, instead of cutting that freedom short by placing restraints before they are naturally given.

In another section of Bill Joy’s “Why the future doesn’t need us,” he discusses self-replication. “It is most of all the power of destructive self-replication in genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR) that should give us pause. Self-replication is the modus operandi of genetic engineering, which uses the machinery of the cell to replicate its designs, and the prime danger underlying gray goo in nanotechnology.” Joy goes on to say that this characteristic increases the chance of those with knowledge of this machinery to use it for destructiveness. With restraints set, it is in the power of the creator of these technologies to decide secretly or publicly the uses and exposure of their creation. Joy discusses the possibility of the masses becoming a “burden” to the elite few that can then impose destruction. What I will say now is that laws and rules of oaths and promises have a record of being broken, so instead of letting individuals be free with a plan to impose destruction on human race, and then following up with a plan of opposition, we would instead allow an individual to create such a plan, and then assume that the laws or rules are still being followed, resulting with a more limited time to come up with solution.

Bill Joy’s “Why the future doesn’t need us” was a mind-blowing article about the reality of what our future holds with the same or increased development of newer technologies. The only way to truly see our fate unfold is to proceed with no set boundaries on what we can create to better our lives and the lives of those around us through innovation and creativity.