The Four Seasons
January 15 and 16, 2002


What Will it Mean to be Human?
We are at a point of evolution where the spectrum of species from animals to humans to machines is blurring. The Institute for Genomic Research is identifying a minimum number of genes necessary to create life. Animal activists insist that apes, whales and dolphins, among others, have comparable or superior intelligence to humans. We have more designer children by requesting specific traits in egg or sperm donors. We are evolving to a stage where we will control our evolution by deciding and selecting which genes our children will have. This applies to materials as well: scientists decide what properties they would like in a substance, and design it to do the job. Soon quantum mechanics and molecular dynamics will be able to create a large variety of "smart" materials.

While mainstream computer science is comfortable with the concept of "intelligent computers," an unanswered issue is whether computers are becoming more human-like or humans are becoming more computer-like. Jaron Lanier poses the possibility of computers becoming a successor species to humans. He observes that "medical science, neuroscience, computer science, genetics, biology - separately and together, seem to be on the verge of abandoning the human plane altogether."

Raymond Kurzweil suggests several possibilities emerging from brain mapping. One is the design of neural nets that operate like the human brain. Another is scanning a brain that will be downloaded onto a computer, resulting in recreation of the human brain on a neural computer. He speculates that human knowledge can be stored in a database and that death could disappear. In the future, our identity will be based on our evolving mind file - humans will become more like software than hardware.

The Dissolving Boundaries of Personal and Private Identity Technology
• On-line networks that allow people to pretend to be someone else, or even several people at the same time.
• Avant-garde explorations in quantum theory that challenge the role of a person's mind (interactions between consciousness, matter and energy) in time and space.
• The meanings of "mechanical" and "living" stretched and combined to the point where each complicated system can be seen as a machine, and self-sustaining machines are increasingly viewed as biological in structure.
• The use of implanted microchips to learn an animal's identity, portending eventual applications in humans (i.e., to replace fingerprints, prisons, green cards, Social Security numbers, telephone numbers, etc.)

Brain Research
• Isolation of the neurohormone PEA, an amphetamine-like substance which regulates one's emotional highs and lows.
• Studying sleep disorders caused by impaired neural systems, and their impacts on behavior.
• Studying the mu rhythms of the brain - the electrical pattern that controls sensory and motor functions - to allow minds to control computers.
• Discovering what "smart" brains do, and further analyses of the differences between males and females.
• Consideration of the prominent role of brain functions in "consciousness" and "free will."
• Discovering the brain-related underpinnings of addiction.

Genetic Research
• Finding genetic defects predisposing people to cancer, pointing to lifestyle management (e.g., high fiber, low fat) for persons at higher risk, and possibly eugenics. The notion that one deserves care only if he or she has behaved according to his or her genetic risk table.
• Criminal alterations of computer DNA records that could give new identities to gangsters and their clients.
• Studying linkages between genetics and IQ.
• Pressures for testing for insurance, employment, reproductive and criminal purposes.
• Grafting DNA and/or brain cells onto chips.
• Crossbreeding species - first in plants, then in animals (and, ultimately, combining either or both with humans?)

Implications:
Will advanced cybernetics, or the human/machine interface, lead to machines with emotions? Ben Shneiderman, head of the Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory at the University of Maryland, rejects this idea. He also raises the question of who will be responsible if "intelligent machines" controlling air traffic or medical equipment, for example, make disastrous choices. As companies employ more "intelligent machines," these risk/liability issues obviously need to be examined.

Shouldn't HR professionals begin to address the growing segment of "intelligent" machines in the work force? What "expectations" will they have and what "benefits" will they want and require? Will the government claim its share of payroll and other taxes on human-machines (as the thinking is now applied to robots)?

Will human-machines be compatible with each other and with humans? We already know what it is like when software isn't compatible - or when people aren't compatible. Imagine the iterations when there are "smart" human-machines and ¿dumb humans; "dumb" human-machines and "smart" humans; "smart human-machines interfacing with "dumb" human-machines - and so forth. How do you manage this?

Remember Hal - the human-like computer featured in 2001 A Space Odyssey? He has been a popular culture symbol of this cybernetic potential. Hal's self-destruction was a result of defending himself. If human-machines are programmed to defend themselves, they will protect themselves - at whatever cost, including the cost of humans. At the end of the day, it may be that we need genetic engineering more than ever - as a way to stay ahead of machines. This suggests yet another argument in favor of biotechnology: without its advances, humans may become an endangered species.

In sum, the overwhelming onslaught of technology is already reinterpreting identity, personality and free-will, and will seriously challenge:

• religious teachings
• human resource policy
• health care funding and delivery systems
• market research
• the practice of psychology
• interpersonal relationships
• educational testing and sorting criteria
• training programs
• occupational health and safety standards
• socio-political assumptions of equality and privacy
• legal assumptions of accountability