I enjoy highlighting the age discrepancy between myself and my students while teaching my classes, specifically when it comes to technology. I can remember a time before the internet, ubiquitous mobile phones, and other modes of instant mass communication. The fact that the internetization of everything has changed the world (well, most of the world) makes it obvious that the conversation we have on how the world has changed and what those consequences have been will be more interesting. An even more interesting conversation concerns the future.

   For those who can afford it, technology has made all sorts of things easier, closer, and more immediate. Even now companies and governments are working to realize more advances in technology. It may be an unfair characterization to make, but it has always seemed to me that there are circles within the hardcore technologist community that are far less interested in the consequences of a new technology than they are in the achievement itself. In the realm of science fiction, however, the moral and human effects of technology are explored in greater detail.
   This past week I saw Alex Garland’ new film Ex Machina, and I would recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in artificial intelligence or AI. I would also recommend it to anyone who has an interest in the incredible power currently wielded by technology companies and our cross-cultural interest in lionizing its scions and venture capitalist patrons (Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Peter Thiel, Steve Jobs, Eric Schmidt, etc.). Ex Machina is the latest in a very long line of stories (Frankenstein being one of the best known) that ask fundamental questions about the moral implications of science and the power of creation. At its core, it is even about parenthood itself. In the film, a programmer at a huge near-future technology company (the equivalent of Apple, Google, and Facebook put together) wins a contest to have a private week with the reclusive company founder on his remote estate. This young man gets the chance to see what the visionary company head has been secretly working on ─ a robot with its own working artificial intelligence. It is a fascinating and disturbing film that explores at least one possibility regarding the future of AI.

    Another recent pop culture addition to our discussion of the implications of technology is Black Mirror. The recent Channel 4 science fiction anthology series has made waves by doing with our modern age what the old American science fiction program The Twilight Zone did with the mid-20th century ─ satirizing and questioning man’ relationship to science. Black Mirror takes a fairly dark view of our society’ current obsession with omnipresent technology and takes aspects of our online lives into fictional near-future scenarios. What would happen, as one episode of Black Mirror asks, if we could “lock”someone in real life like we can on social media? What if a dead person could be “econstructed”l using their social media presence, emails, and computerized recordings and images? Should society be as “amified”just like computer games or reality shows?

   The internet is a creation of man through science. It has been an amplifier for the best and the worst of the human mind and will. It has given birth to a new cross-global instant communication and commerce as well as given voice and power to the most loathsome aspects of our being. The internet acts as the Id of the world to a certain degree, and it is the probably unintended consequence of this advancement.

   A recent BBC headline, “I won’ run amok, says Microsoft”I (28 January), explained a Microsoft researcher’ opinion that the development of AI ─ long the dream of many technologists and a staple of science fiction for decades ─ would not be bad for humanity, despite the speculation by philosophers, scientists, and, yes, science fiction writers that AI systems with actual consciousness could wreak havoc. I read this right after having seen Ex Machina, and I found the argument to be particularly naÏve. Two days later, Bill Gates himself explained during an “sk Me Anything”session on the popular website Reddit that he “doesn’] understand why some people are not concerned”with the potential consequences of AI (BBC news: “ill Gates insists AI is a threat”30 January). Bill Gates, despite all his power, will most likely be unable to halt the development of the theoretically possible advance of artificial intelligence should it actually come to pass. The point here is that there will always be someone out there trying to push things forward without asking whether or not it is a good idea in the first place.

   Technology companies are among the most powerful on the planet. This year Apple’ profits were higher than any other company’ profits in the history of man, beating out oil behemoth Exxon. This was largely attributed to the world-wide demand for iPhones. Silicon Valley in California is now one of the richest places in the world, attracting the brilliant and the powerful alike. Heroes have been made of visionaries like Steve Jobs, and many in the commentariat claim that soon enough “he nerds will run the world.”Some individuals are becoming billionaires overnight with the right combination of talent, luck, and attractiveness to capital. The city of San Francisco itself has been utterly changed by this influx of new money and power with many of the residents unrelated to the tech industry being displaced by soaring rent and service costs.

   A culture that values “isruption”of the old ways as an in-and-of-itself good thing has arisen. We have to ask ourselves if merely changing the way things are done is in itself a good thing. The smartphone app taxi service Uber for example is lauded by some and disdained by others for its attempt to disrupt the existing taxi infrastructures of the cities of the world. Amazon has been criticized for all but destroying the American brick and mortar bookstores with its quick online service. The gains are obvious, but what are the costs? This culture of change and innovation dovetails nicely with the very American notions of the “elf-made man,”the deeplyentrenched respect and admiration for the titans of industry who push things forward, and the very notion of the American Dream itself (the idea being that anyone can be successful in America through hard work).

   Moral philosophers and regular folks alike have questioned whether the creation of the atomic bomb was a good thing worth doing. Today, many question the moral implications of many of our recent technological advances, from drone warfare to mega-data. The good things that computer technology have brought to our society are largely welcomed. I myself am no Luddite (a reference to 19th century textile workers who fought against the mechanization of their industry, and in today’ usage a person who dislikes technology): I write this essay on a brand new, Windows 8-running LG laptop purchased earlier this week. Smartphones (the bane of many college professors like myself) have proven themselves to be invaluable by many in our workplaces and our society and certainly are not going anywhere. However, I do reserve the right as a thinking person to question the power and dominance that companies like Apple, Microsoft, and Google among others wield in our world. Science fiction has often shown us that understanding one complex system, such as computers, is different from understanding other complex systems, such as people or societies and that we need to think carefully about the ways in which our world will be changed by our advances, good or bad.

By Prof. Matthew Ross | Department of English language and Literature