218
PARTISAN REVIEW
Then people say, "Okay, today non-biological intelligence for the
human race is growing exponentially and biological intelligence is
stuck at 10
26
calculations per second . It'll be 10
26
in fifty years, while
the non-biological is growing exponentially, so ultimately it will domi–
nate ." However, that non-biological intelligence is emerging from the
human civilization. What I am pointing out is that there will be many
scenarios-copies of the human brain modified, extended; designs
made by human brains that then evolve-but, it will all be coming out
of the human machine civilization and will be deeply influenced by, and
derivative of, human ideas and the design of human thinking itself. It
will have many human characteristics, and in my view, it is the next
stage of evolution. But whether it will have a malevolent outcome or
will further our shared human values (not that we have an absolute
consensus on what those are) remains to be seen.
Rita Kramer:
Since these very brainy machines can be used for ill as well
as for good, are there precautions against their abilities?
Ray Kurzweil :
Yes, absolutely. There are already discussions about
guidelines. We have, for example, very detailed guidelines for bioengi–
neering designed to avoid the kinds of dangers I talked about. They
don't absolutely rule them out; I mean, some malevolent mind might get
this expertise and wouldn't necessarily follow all the guidelines. But we
do have lots of rules, although obviously there is controversy as
to
whether they're sufficient. I was at a conference organized by the Fore–
sight Institute, which is a leading nanotechnology think tank, about
devising similar rules for nanotechnology and artificial intelligence (par–
ticularly when you get to self-replicating entities) to avoid the kind of
dangers I've talked about. I think we will have a lot of discussion about
how to guide the technology towards constructive ends.
David Sidorsky:
In many discussions of the positive benefits that often
follow exciting developments in technology, there is a tendency
to
assume that these must lead to a general improvement in the human
condition. I'm reminded of the response to the first science fiction novel
written around the turn of the century by H.G. Wells. Although Wells
had been able to describe in imaginatively detailed terms the function of
the new machines, whether of invisibility or of time travel and space
exploration, he was challenged for being unimaginative and deficient in
his invention of his characters. Thus, the motivation for the characters
