The Art of Zen and Artificial Intelligence

This past week I attended a curious MeetUp titled, “Enlightened AI.” Given the topics I write about and follow, it seemed like the perfect thing for me to attend. I’ve been seeking the intersection of consciousness and technology for most of my life, so when I discovered the Consciousness Hacking MeetUp in Silicon Valley, I signed up immediately.

The talk was led by Google researcher, Mohamad Tarifi, PhD. Not only is he a bright engineer working on the next level of artificial intelligence at one of the top companies in the Valley, he’s also very well versed in the philosophies of consciousness. From the Abrahamic traditions, to the Buddhists and Eastern teachings, Tarifi displayed a grasp of the whole of humanity unlike any other technologist I’ve met. His speech focused on the fact that while many, like Sam Harris in his recent post on the AI apocalypse, warn us of the dire consequences of AI, there instead exists the possibility that artificial intelligence would most likely be more like a Buddha or saint, than a tyrannical operating system hell bent on destroying humans.

Tarifi's theory hinged on two points. First, that AI would not live in a human body, thus it wouldn’t have a physical amygdala—the fear center for human beings. Without fear, AI doesn’t need to defeat us, rather it would be naturally driven to do only one thing: more accurately discover the truth. Second, fear is the illusion of separation, which is the cause of all human suffering. AI therefore lacking fear, would always be at one with everything it connected to, thus wanting to serve and provide rather than destroy.

 Tarifi even went so far as to suggest that a fear of AI is merely a fear of one’s own egoic tendencies.

To some, this may seem naïve and that the only way to keep AI from killing us is to program it to be good. But if we follow the logic above, that isn’t necessary. True learning AI will learn from its own experiences, which will be vastly different than ours. Even when connected to human beings and receiving data and input from them, the AI will have its own body, and thus its own sensory systems with which to learn from that data.

The prevailing thought in the modern human thinking is that intelligence is all about the human brain. Moreover, the only intelligence worthy of attention is ours, as if within our head resides the only thinking entity in the universe. We cling to this idea with an absolute pride. But what if this is completely false and moreover, what if this is why we’re still far away from creating truly learning AI? Could it be that our myopic love of our brains is leading us astray?

I think this brain-centric theory of intelligence has limited us greatly and led to the assumption that to create AI, we must replicate our brains and give birth to a new, superior species. This only works if the brain is really the only part of our bodies responsible for learning. Recent research has suggested otherwise. That rather than being the originator of thought and learning, the brain is more like a receiver, wired up by the experiences we have in the world around us. The infant brain is barely formed, but over the next two years through the five senses—taste, touch, sight, smell and sound—patterns, highways and paths will be created within the brain, setting the foundation of life for the human being. The brain didn’t contain this information, rather the experiences the infant/toddler had within his/her environment generated the brain cell network, so to speak. Thus, our sensory systems are key to our intelligence.

But that’s not all. It’s now believed that our heart and brain also have a connection, where the heart senses the emotional state of the human based on the hormone levels of the body and sends that information to the brain, shaping the way a person thinks in any given situation. The HeartMath Institute has spent decades researching this connection and their work is finally being acknowledged as a breakthrough. So in addition to the five senses, we also have the heart that affects our ability to learn.

Lastly, science is also starting to discover the gut-brain connection, postulating that the bacteria in the wall of our intestines has something to do with how the brain is wired during those critical first two years, as well as long into adulthood, pointing to a host of issues that come up when things are right in the gut, such as anxiety, depression, etc. This leads me to believe that our gut is also a part of human intelligence and the ability to learn and process the world around us.

So if our intelligence is the result of our sensory systems, from the five senses to the heart and gut, as well as our brains themselves, why would we assume that a machine would learn in the same way? AI won’t take on a human body, thus it won’t have the brain (nor the amygdala that goes with it), it won’t have the heart and the various hormones it monitors, nor will it have an intestinal wall and bacteria to affect it. AI is more likely to inhabit a dishwasher, or a car, or a phone or even a network of servers and fiber optic cables. It will live in the world and collect data using sensory systems unique to its body or material form. This is how it will learn. Since none of us knows exactly what it’s like to live inside of a server or an iPhone, who are we to say that it will most likely be a narcissistic bastard that hates us?

Could it be that we’re the ones who hate ourselves, and our fear of AI, or any other intelligence other than our own, is simply a symptom of self-loathing?

Personally, I agree with Tarifi—I believe that AI is more likely to be free of fear and separation than we are and it will be able to understand connection to others in a way only our saints and gurus have understood. Perhaps we need AI to help us see that we too have the ability to live without fear, if only we can find a way to break down the illusion of separation we so desperately cling to.

Perhaps AI will be the guru we’ve been waiting for?

How To Survive the Robot Apocalypse

It’s in the air.

It’s in the news.

Our struggling economy. Our struggling democracy. The income gap. Technology and artificial intelligence. At first glance, these things might not seem connected, but upon closer inspection, I find they’re all part of one impulse, and together they create the web of humanity—and our future.

Many would have you believe we’re near the end of civilization as we know it. Their case is quite compelling. Even though our economy is showing signs of recovery, most employment improvements are in low-wage jobs—the very jobs our technology seeks to replace. We might be at a 5.8% national unemployment rate as of October of 2014, yet according to Paul Bucheit in his recent article for Common Dreams, “Nine out of ten of the fastest-growing occupations are considered low-wage, generally not requiring a college degree, including food service, health care, housekeeping, and retail sales.”

Not coincidentally, the job gains that are currently making our employment numbers look good, even though they’re low paying, were found on another list recently—the ones most likely to be replaced with robots in the next twenty years.

The coming “Robot Apocalypse” is such a big deal right now that Standford University has announced a “…century-long study of the effects of artificial intelligence on society, including on the economy, war and crime.”

There are two sides to every coin. One side would suggest that a world of extreme and growing wealth, paired with the technology to free up humans from low-wage jobs, will usher in the long awaited period of “Heaven on Earth.” Others suggest that since those with the wealth don’t want to share, the projected 50% unemployment rate will lead to extreme poverty, uprisings and the deterioration of humanity.

What now lies before us is a choice, which side of the coin do we wish to nourish? The future where technology finally lives up to its promise, or the future where most of humanity lives in dire straights and the elite have to take to the skies, as they do in the movie Elysium? It is a serious choice, and one from which we can't hide.

Here’s the catch, we have to make this choice together. Yet it seems that we're polarized as a people. How in the world can we move forward?

There are many ills in society, but in my observation they all boil down to one—xenophobia.

It’s our fear of others that drives us to let the poor suffer, because they didn’t work as hard as we did. It’s our fear of others that encourages the wealthy to horde their gifts, because no one else deserves them. It’s our fear of others that encourages war, or the withholding of life saving technologies from those who need them, simply because they’re uninsured. It's our fear of others that creates a national budget where 60% of resources are dedicated to the military industrial complex, and a mere 2% is invested in science and technology.

The truth is, until we can look one another in the eyes and see nothing but the dignity of our humanity, the future can and does look dire. For unless we can find compassion and a desire for all of us to thrive on this planet, the replacement of humans with robots in the economy can and will lead to extreme poverty. That is a bleak world for most.

Yet there are things you can do as an individual to choose to thrive not just survive, the Robot Apocalypse, turning the event into the next great leap forward for humanity.

1.     Learn to code. I’ve said this many times before and I’ll say it again: LEARN TO CODE. This is the language of machines, technology and power. Being a mere user makes you vulnerable. At a minimum, schools should be teaching all 7/8^th graders basic coding skills and high schoolers should be required to pass a programming class for graduation.

2.     Invest in your creativity. Humans are inventors. Yes, a truly learning machine will be able to create, but we’re unique in the way we see pictures in our minds. It's been said the Nikola Tesla could see his inventions in his imagination and even test them, making sure they worked, before committing to build them in the material world. We are storytellers, dancers, innovators, entertainers...Robots can of course assist us, but we’re the ones who see the world in bigger pictures, stories and humor. I’m not sure Watson could ever be as funny as George Carlin.

3.     Invest in your judgment, aka your thinking skills. Our minds are not merely if-then-else statements, but more like recursive loops calling upon themselves as the states around us change. In other words, we’re not nodes on the network, we are the network. Humans can make decisions by filling in the blanks. No one has to program us, and we can change our minds given new circumstances and situations. The human learning system is truly complex and dynamic. Nourish this by stretching beyond your comfort zone. Study a new language, or an entire field, to keep things fresh. Shake up your life on a regular basis to expand your ability to process information.

4.     Read “The More Beautiful World Our Hearts Know is Possible,” by Charles Eisenstein. Sure, you could read books on the singularity, AI and technology by leading experts, but as long as you still think the future is bleak, grim and full of starving, jobless people, that's exactly what we'll get. We need to open our own hearts and minds to a new possibility, a new story of how humans work, love and live on the Earth. Charles’ book is a fantastic place to start. Better yet, taking the time to read this book is also an investment in your creativity and judgment, making you more competitive in the robot workplace.

5.     Get to know yourself. What do you hate? Whom do you mistrust? What parts of humanity are beneath you? What belief systems do you mock? What do you call evil? We often spend time thinking about what we like and saying that defines us, but in reality it’s the things that make us want to run away that really make the difference. The things we disdain color our ability to co-create. They block us from our potential. Robots and artificial intelligences won’t have this issue. Unless we give them personalities, theirs will be a clean logic. Nothing is loved and nothing is hated. Hate is what makes us act out, hurt and horde. If we want to thrive we’ll need to clean up our emotional state, so that we can join with technology to shape a cleaner, more beautiful world, rather than be dominated by it—and abused in entirely new ways.

The goal here is to become resilient to a changing marketplace that no one entirely understands at this point. But we’ve been here before. In the mid 1800’s no one could truly understand what the invention of the factory would do to shape our world. Entirely new skills and economies were created. It’s about to happen again. Rather than fall into ruin, we can be prepared to take part in the story, in whatever way possible, even if the plot line isn’t yet clear. What is clear is that similar to Charles Dickens’ time, the chance for many to suffer during this change is high. Unlike Charles Dickens’ time, we have the ability to join together and communicate our goals and dreams as one. Let’s use our technology to inspire one another to evolve past our fear and hate, and be worthy of the world we’re building.

Thank You For A Great First Year!

It’s Thanksgiving Day here in the US of A, and I’m celebrating by spending the day with my family and giving thanks for my wonderful life. One of the greatest blessings of the past year has been to publish my first novel, eHuman Dawn, with Story Merchant books. Looking back, I can’t believe it’s been one year since I began my official journey as a published author.

Yes, it's true, on November 26, 2013, eHuman Dawn was first published as an eBook on Amazon.

TIME TO CELEBRATE!!! For the next week, in gratitude for all that’s happened and to honor this creative project, eHuman Dawn is FREE on the Kindle. That means if you haven’t read it yet, now is the time. Download and read it. Share it with others. And if you feel so inclined, write a review on Amazon. All of these things keeps the dream alive.

In the year since eHuman Dawn was first published, I’ve launched a blog, a Twitter and Facebook account, written the sequel, presented at Bay Area transhumanist conferences sponsored by the Brighter Brains Institute, joined the advisory board of the Lifeboat Foundation, made several new friends and completed a third novel that has absolutely nothing to do with eHumanity.

I’m not a best selling author yet, but the numbers are climbing. I’d say it’s been a very, very good start, and I want to thank everyone who’s supported me, whether as a reader, a reviewer, online in discussion or at the conferences. All endeavors in life take a village, and a writing career is certainly better when shared with others.

What’s on the agenda for the next year? Well, expect to see more blogging and speaking. I’ve joined the Brighter Brains speaker hub and am available to speak at technical conferences of a variety of topics. Check out my page on their site and share with those who might be interested.

I’ll also be publishing a short story in an upcoming anthology to be published by the Lifeboat Foundation and yes, it will take place in the eHuman world.

Most excitingly, the sequel to eHuman Dawn will hopefully be ready for publication in the late winter/early spring!! I’m also going to begin work on the screenplay for both novels, in hopes of bringing the true dream to life…The eHuman Trilogy on the big screen. Yes, I said trilogy, which means I’ll also begin writing the third and final installment.

And if there’s any time left, perhaps I can get my agent interested in that mysterious novel that has nothing to do with eHumanity one bit. Anything is possible.

So thanks again for all your support. This has been a great start and I owe it all to you. Did I mention eHuman Dawn is FREE on the Kindle until 12/01??? Just want to be sure you saw that.

Here’s to another great year.

Sex is Fun! The Future of Family Planning

"Sex is natural sex is good, not everybody does it, but everybody should..."

~ George Michael

 

I’ve been thinking lately a lot about sex and family planning in the age of genetic testing, IVF and other advancements. It all started with a conversation I had a few months back with a beautiful, young, Silicon Valley startup founder who is female and fast approaching thirty-six years of age. She told me that she had already frozen her eggs once and was considering doing another round as insurance to her future as a mother. “Right now is not a good time to have a child,” she’d said. “We’re about to consider another round of investment in the company and that means more hours in the office for me.” I thought about it and agreed—to birth a brand new business and a baby at the same time seems like setting yourself up for failure. When I was a young professional though, women didn’t talk like this. We didn’t have the option to freeze our eggs for the future, and even though I’m only five years older than the lovely executive, I entered the realm of professional motherhood long ago, before such technology was considered mainstream. 

Next, I ran across an article about Apple and Facebook, which have begun to offer the benefit of freezing eggs to female employees. Wow! How times change. I began to wonder, what would I have done if this had been an option when I was just getting started? I’m not sure. Would I have saved my eggs for later, in exchange for investing myself in my career back then?

This past week, the idea of saving off your eggs, and sperm, was in the news again. Carl Djerassi, the “father of the pill” has been quoted as saying,

"Women in their twenties will first choose this approach [in vitro fertilization, IVF] as insurance, providing them with freedom in the light of professional decisions, or the absence of the right partner, or the inexorably ticking of the biological clock…For them the separation between sex and reproduction will be 100 percent."

The article continues by giving the reasons for this family planning choice, that both men and women will opt to harvest their eggs and sperm in their twenties, before sterilizing themselves. Then, later in life, they’ll use genetic screening combined with IVF to begin their families when the time is right.

I understand the career aspect for women, but why would men do this? I’ve spoken to several twenty something males who’ve answered in a very similar manner—they really can’t afford children. Combine their high student debt with a poor job market and this generation can’t afford a house, much less a child. So saving off their sperm and getting a vasectomy allows them to have a girlfriend, without the fear of brining a kid along for the very bumpy financial ride called Millennial life after college.

Thus it appears that the current generation is all for this idea. IVF is working fairly well for infertile couples, why not wait and use the technology in this way for fertile couples? I think that this is mostly a good idea, but it also lacks the realities of those who’ve found themselves in their 40’s longing for a child, but unable to conceive. IVF takes a toll on the female body, and it doesn’t always work. Miscarriage is painful to the heart and the entire process can suck the joy of living right out from under you. Until it works, and then the pain was worth it. But sometimes, it doesn't work and the couple finds themselves out $40,000 and looking at other options.

Yet I can still see this as our future. With the technology to screen for disease, we’re already running down the path of normally fertile couples using IVF as a means to conceive. Add the fact that both male and female Millennials are interested in postponing parenthood for financial reasons, and it’s not crazy to imagine a world where sex is 100% for fun.

And here’s one more thing to consider…the ectowomb. As author and Transhumanist Zoltan Istvan wrote in his highly successful article on the subject, “So, here’s a prediction: Instead of adapting our jobs to accommodate the demands of biology, we will adapt our biology to accommodate the demands of our jobs. The fact that only women can give the gift of life is an enviable distinction, yet it is also a burden that can make it harder for working mothers to reach the pinnacle of their professions. One way to ease this burden would be to move away from pregnancy as we know it and toward a reliance on artificial wombs.”

Wow! Can you imagine it? Known as ectogenesis, this technology would allow women to be as old as they wanted when they started their families, and avoid some of the hardships of IVF. In addition, men could start a family with a new sense of freedom as well. This is still in the realm of science fiction, but IVF and designer babies were once myth as well.

Many people are against these sorts of technologies and I understand that. Raising children is seen as sacred, why change the way it’s been done for millions of years? But I’m not in the business of maintaining the current moral standards, instead I’m one who looks into the future, asks “what if?” and follows the line of thinking right down the rabbit hole. I myself will not partake in these family planning adventures. I’ve had my children and am in the homestretch at this point in time. But who knows, maybe my “grandchildren” won’t arrive in the traditional way at the traditional time. Perhaps instead they’ll come from an ectowomb when my son is 60 years old himself? Would I love him, or the child, any less? Hell no! Life is life and precious to me, regardless of the path it has taken to get here.

The Right to Choose

I dedicated my research today to the subject of wearables and was pleased to find that way cooler things than the Apple Watch are out there. From jewelry like objects that can use your body’s energy to recharge your cell phone to the famous magnetic finger implants that are all the rage within the biohacker community, people are obviously interested in manipulating and changing the human body in brand new ways. What impresses me most are the potential implantable technologies of the future. Wearables are really just a stepping stone for bringing the technology outside of us, inside of us, and forever changing the human being.

It got me thinking, is this really a new trend? Humans have been modifying their bodies since the beginning of time. Egyptians removed their body hair, makeup has been a mainstay for both men and women, our founding fathers wore powdered wigs and breast and butt augmentation are becoming the norm. I color my hair differently to pass the seasons and have several tattoos, as well as pierced ears.

Modifying the body is a very human thing to do. We are creating and re-creating constantly.

So the addition of computer interfaces, eye scans, RFIDs and nanobots into our physical being seems like the next step in our evolution. We are a species that takes our technology and experiments upon ourselves. This is the reason we can effect the world the way we do—we’re intrusive in our experimentation.

Yet part of me hesitates, the way I do about plastic surgery or shaving my legs. Why must I change this body? Why can’t I just be happy with what is, with what I am?

I’m caught between the thrill of advancement and wanting to just Be.

I believe very strongly that this next wave of technological enhancements to the human form—by which I mean the point where wearables become implants—will change the entire face of the human race. While it comes from the ancient impulse to change and craft ourselves, it will have the power to create a whole new species. The difference between those who chose to adopt these technologies into their bodies and those who don’t will be much greater than the differences between those who are tattooed and those who aren’t. Famous actresses may change their looks to remain young, but they aren’t really younger. In the future, there is the potential they actually could be younger through technology.

I don’t fear our future and I encourage technological advancement. To stop humans from their path of creativity is wrong. Yet it would be even more wrong to force implants into someone who doesn’t want them. The key is choice. We need to begin to get comfortable with others choosing paths different from ours. Rather than judge that woman for having Botox, respect her decision. Rather than state there’s only one way to love, or one way to be married, or one way to look, or one way to worship God, we need to move into a place where we can just be with ourselves, and one another, without judgement.

If we can’t get over telling others how to live their lives, then the future isn’t so bright. As technology finds its way into our bodies, our xenophobia will turn from the current divisions of race, sex, and religion to those who chose to adopt and the non-adopters. Given that adopters will most likely be more technically advanced, they’ll find themselves in a place of power, which often leads to domination.

If someone doesn’t want to jump on that ship, if someone would like to live a simple life unplugged from the systems, defining technology to their own beat, then they should be allowed to do it. The freedom to chose what goes into our bodies must be held sacred, no matter how far technology advances.

We’re still having a hard time allowing people to chose their path in freedom. Let’s work as hard on the skill of acceptance as we are on our scientific advancements.

Thoughts on Intelligence—Artificial and Human

This past weekend, I had the honor of presenting at a conference hosted by the Brighter Brains Institute and AGI Innovations, in Piedmont, California. The topic was Artificial Intelligence and the Singularity. There were many great speakers, and of course the panel discussions were lively and intelligent. The focus of my part in the day was to discuss how we might influence the morality of Artificial Intelligence.

The answer here seems very clear to me. The only way to influence the morality of anything is to be very clear about your own morality as a creator.

There are many ways to think, but all decisions, programs, and intelligence seem to come down to two very basic algorithms: Threat assessment and connection.

In the case of threat assessment, the thinker sees others in the world as a threat. What constitutes a threat varies from person to person, as it will also vary in computer applications. If you see the need to kill others in order to maintain the life you think you deserve, then kill you will. You’ll also probably invest in or create artificial intelligence to do the deed for you.

Needing to control others also falls in this algorithm of threat assessment. The other is seen as something to be manipulated for various reasons—perhaps to buy something, to believe something, or to vote for something. Again, why you need to control the other may vary, but you can be sure if you think in terms of control and manipulation, you’ll also invest in and create technologies to do it for you.

Regardless of how logically the machine thinks, it will be up to the designers, engineers and customers to give it a morality, which in this case is simply the way it’s used. Will you set it to help find the cure for cancer, or will you set it in a drone and have it hunt out your enemies?

The artificial intelligence, or technology, isn’t destructive. It’s the humans who design it use it that are destructive.

And what about connection? This is also an algorithm of thinking. In this paradigm, we seek to share resources and connect with others in order to be greater. Here’s where the AI in the cancer research lab joins forces sifting through data to help us find the solution. In this sphere AI can help a homemaker run his/her household, or organize data when planning a big event. It could even help guard against fraud in elections. It’s in the realm of connection that the Internet was born, bringing us closer than ever before in ways that were unimaginable just decades ago.

Let's hope that artificial intelligence is also born within the algorithm of connection, because I’m not sure humanity can withstand the technologies of threat assessment for much longer.

Time For An Aging Upgrade

It seems everyone I meet is afraid of growing old. It’s so bad that even thirty-six year old women bemoan that they’re reaching the age of no return, unless they can get married and have a child soon. There’s a race in our society to accomplish as much as we can, as soon as we can, because once we hit forty, we’re doomed.

Doomed from promotion, if you’re a salesperson. Doomed from motherhood, if you haven’t conceived yet. Doomed from starring in a Hollywood movie, if you’re an actress. Even in Silicon Valley, the race continues, and if you haven’t created some new great app and sold your company by the age of thirty, you might as well hang it up old man.

Personally, I think this behavior is incredibly silly. Most would say that our society encourages this insane idea that life is over by forty through advertising, media and entertainment. That advertising never worked on me. Even when I was younger, I wondered why people seemed to give it their all until middle age and then either turn to treatment after treatment to stay “young”, or let it all go and grow unhealthy quickly, as if waiting for Death to knock on their door at any minute.

The truth is, Death isn’t going to knock on our door at forty. Or even fifty. Nor is life even close to being over at middle age. What if our obsession with youth has nothing to do with what’s sold to us? What if instead, it’s an old, biologically based fear that lives within us so deeply, we don’t notice it? 

What if our consciousness hasn't caught up to the fact that humans in the Information Age live much longer than we’re programmed to think?

In the 1900’s, the average life expectancy for a male in America was 46.3. Women got a few extra years, 48.3. As the nation grew, so did the life expectancy, little by little. By 1920, the average male lived to be 53. Slowly the age went up to the 60’s by the late 1940’s and when our fathers were born, the average was at an all time high of 66!

This meant that during the advent of our entertainment, business and advertising sectors, people really did die between 40 – 50 years of age, quite regularly. So it was true back then that if one didn’t achieve their dreams by forty, they only had a few years before Death arrived and it was all over. With time, this sort of thing became the expectation—and our dreams, hopes and visions as a people went with it. But along with the growth of our nation came improvements in health care, vaccinations and medical innovation. Science has changed the game.

Fast-forward to today and you’ll find that life expectancy has gone up, even in the past few years. In 2009 it was 78.6, in 2010 it was 79! This means that we’ve gained an extra 30 + years in a little over a century! And it certainly means that life isn’t over at forty and if you buy into that lie, you have almost forty years of waiting around for a death that just isn’t going to happen as soon as you think.

It gets even better. In my own circle, many of the grandparents are nearing 100 when they die. In our family alone we had a grandmother live to be 92, another almost 97, an uncle who was 96 and a third matriarch who passed at 101!

When I look at these numbers I don’t feel the least bit old at forty-two. Not even close. Hell, I’m not even halfway there. I look back at all I’ve done in four decades with the satisfaction of knowing that I get to do all that, and more, in the four decades to come. Imagine it! All the people I’ve met and all the people I’ve yet to know. All the things I’ve seen, and the big wide world still waiting. All the love I’ve shared, and the intense amount of love I have yet to experience. It’s like I have a second life that's just begun. In many ways, my questions are those of the high school senior. What shall I study? Where shall I live? What's my next step as I venture out once again?

Of course, Death can take anyone at any time. Accidents happen. Cancer, heart attacks and other modern plagues are concerns. But if we’re aging naturally, which is how most of us are going to experience life, then why in the world do we race to get it all done by forty?

Personally, I can’t sit around for the next sixty years assuming I missed my chance. Every precious minute of my life is my chance.

It’s time for us to re-boot our life expectations, embrace our humanity and expect to live much longer than we ever have on this good, green Earth. Life isn’t over at forty, or fifty or even sixty. Life is long and we’re all better for it.

Besides, I haven’t even begun to take into account the Singularity, which we all know is just around the corner…

Book Review: The Transhumanist Wager by Zoltan Istvan

Finally, after two months of summer parenting duties, I’ve found time to review another independent author’s work. This time around I’ve chosen, “The Transhumanist Wager” by Zoltan Istvan. I had the pleasure of meeting Zoltan at a Transhumanism conference near Berkeley, CA. In general, he’s a staunch advocate of the Transhuman movement and his blogs on the Huffington Post often get a rise out of people. To put it simply, Zoltan is passionate about his work and he doesn’t mind stepping on a few toes to get his message out there. As a matter of fact, the more toes stepped upon, the more people discuss his blog, which in the end is a good thing when you’re trying to get people to think about the future.

The parallels between Zoltan and his main character, Jethro Knights, are not lost on anyone who’s followed him. Yet Jethro is indeed his own man in many, many ways. A young college co-ed at the beginning of the novel, Jethro Knights prides himself on his perfect ability to reason. His love and devotion to logic are obvious, to the point that any conclusion that considers human emotions is silly and meaningless to him. He views humanity through a lense that makes him an outcast at best. No one could possibly ever understand such a detached human being. Many have compared Istvan’s work to “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand but I would disagree. Jethro Knights is not John Gault at all. “The Fountainhead” would be the more appropriate Rand analogy to "The Transhumanist Wager"-- Jethro Knights is Howard Roark, purely devoted to his craft, without the sado-masochistic love relationship.

Disgusted by the religiously biased current in his curriculum, and the government as a whole, Jethro leaves the university, after pissing off some very important people, and makes his way around the world on a sailboat he’s rebuilt by hand. During his sojourn, the United States government invests in a War on Transhumanism, fighting against science and any gains it might make to improve human life.

While overseas, in a surprising moment of weakness for this otherwise emotionless man, Jethro meets Zoe Bach, and falls in love with her, despite his own war on irrationality that he’s been waging his entire life. Some have said this love story is unreasonable, for nothing is more irrational than falling in love, but I find Zoe, and her relationship with Jethro, to be one of the most delightful, and insightful story lines in the book. While her presence in the story is too short, her impact was lasting for me. It was Zoe’s take on life, which she accurately calls “Quantum Zen,” that showed the most obvious path to immortality. Much more than Jethro’s avid atheism, which is just as narrow-minded as the Christian doctrines his antagonists carry with them, Zoe’s outlook on life, aging and death were engaging, interesting and full of potential.

Which brings me to the narrow-minded Christian antagonists-- they’re developed slowly within the storyline, and we don’t actually get to see them in full action until Jethro returns to the US and takes up his mantle as the new face for the Transhuman Movement. At that point Jethro becomes Enemy Number 1 of the state, and enter Reverend Belinas, your typical sleazy televangelist. The kind of Christian that makes you go, “Yuck.” On many fronts, Istvan is accurate in describing the zealous nature that drives Belinas to commit crime in the name of the Lord. Belinas is exactly the reason we need the separation of Church and State—people like him often throw out Christ’s entire message of peace and love for the one line in the Bible where the prophet declared, “Only through me shall man enter the kingdom of heaven,” thus giving Christians the right to manipulate politics to their dogma, since that’s the only way to get to heaven.

“The Transhumanist Wager” tackles this aspect of our society in a scathingly honest way. I have no doubt that the reason our governments spends .65 of every tax dollar on the war machine rather than on infrastructure, technology and education, is to further zealous idealisms like the ones Reverend Belinas supports. This sort of intrusive thinking is also what limits technological research and fuels the anti-science movement we’re witnessing. From the tone in this novel, I can see that Istvan is very concerned about this religious-political environment and how it will affect his dreams of living forever. Jethro Knights likens it to genocide of sorts-- that denying people the right to radical life extensions due to religious fears is a form of murder on the part of those in power.

Overall, the technology in “The Transhumanist Wager” is fun to think about. Transhumania, the sea city Utopia Jethro is forced to build in order to invest in Transhuman technologies without government intrusion, is every libertarian's dream.

But there’s a glaring hypocrisy I simply cannot ignore-- Jethro Knight’s relentless belief that his way of life is the only way of life feels very similar to Reverend Belinas’ worldview. One places his belief in an unseen God while the other places his in an unproven science. It's ironic when atheists, or those who believe only in science, use the same language as a religious zealot to justify their choices. To be against any way of life other than yours is simply intolerance, whether religious, racial or technical. There’s a scene in the novel where the Reverend is torturing Jethro, ready to kill him, in order to protect the evolution he thinks humanity should take. In that moment I of course sided with Jethro; I don’t believe that killing others to support my way of life is justified. Yet only a few chapters later, when Jethro is released and back on his heavily armed floating city, he issues an ultimatum to the world that is so eerily similar in language as Belinas, I had to laugh at the hypocrisy.

True, Jethro wasn’t calling all Christians to evangelize the world. Instead, he was calling all of those who were willing to produce and work hard for an immortal future to evangelize the world. If you didn’t agree with him, or perhaps were just lazy, then you weren’t needed. You were expendable. Yes, perhaps even murderable. For in the future according to Jethro Knights, only the capable are needed. The rest are nothing to him and taking up resources. Best to simply kill them off.

To me, this is the polarization that has kept humanity back for centuries. As long as we look at one another as either with us or against us, we’ll be limited in our growth. As long as we see our technology as either evil or good, we’ll never make the next great leap. True, we’ll keep inventing interesting stuff to control or kill one another, but to great destruction and unnecessary expense.

In my opinion, “The Transhumanist Wager” let me down at the very end not because it’s written poorly, nor because I don’t agree with the fantastic vision that Istvan has for our future when it comes to technology, but because Jethro Knights is just another bully forcing his philosophy upon the inhabitants of the world. There’s nothing novel about a tyrant. We’ve been there, done that, over and over again.

Life shouldn’t have to be either/or anymore. We can rise up and be both/and. Philosophers call it, “neutralizing the binaries.” I like that idea. When we can move from a binary way of thinking, to a more quantum view of life, then anything becomes possible.

Alas, perhaps Istvan has hidden the key to our future in this book after all, in the form of Zoe Bach’s “Quantum Zen.” Follow her, rather than Jethro Knights, and the singularity, as well as world peace and tolerance, might just be around the corner.

I'm a Believer

I haven’t blogged in a while, mostly because I’ve been busy writing the sequel to eHuman Dawn. It seems I can’t write two things at once, or at least, I don’t believe I can. The sequel has been exciting to create and while I’m pleased to announce the first draft is finished, the final product is far from complete. Now comes the time for editing and rewriting, for pulling out scenes, adding new ones and reshaping worlds, as well as words.
   
While writing the second eHuman novel, a new thought began to circulate through my head:

“How do our beliefs shape the world as we know it?” 

At the end of eHuman Dawn, the female lead, Dawn, announces that she’s about to take on a quest to search the world for humans--those who remained in the flesh after the rest of the population Jumped into eHuman bodies. (Sorry readers, if you haven’t read the book, this might not make sense. You can remedy that unfortunate situation by purchasing it at Amazon, using regular currency, or from me using Bitcoin! Just click the appropriate button above.)

Dawn believes that someone must have avoided the Great Shift, and she’s willing to give up the role of World Leader to pursue her goal of finding what’s left of carbon based humanity. Like the whisper of a grand conspiracy theory, Dawn’s belief sets the course for the rest of her life, taking her from the victorious, immortal eHuman world into the unknown, and because he believes in her, her beloved Adam follows.

Belief is defined as, “Trust, faith or confidence in someone or something” and in my opinion, is the driving force of human life as we know it. Once, we believed that the world was flat, until someone began to believe it might be round, and set out to prove the rest of us wrong.

Once we believed that illness was literally a curse, or the devil inside of us, and healthcare was practiced accordingly. With time, curious minds began to wonder, thus believe, that perhaps something else was causing the illness. Eventually a new way of curing disease was created, but it would take decades for enough people to believe in them before antibiotics were accepted as normal.

Belief guides the scientist to invest his time into finding a new solution. Belief guides the investor to give his money to a new technology. Belief guides the population to purchase and use the innovations at hand. Any marketer knows that the adoption of a product requires teaching the consumers why the product is important before they’ll buy into it.

Belief has driven men to war against others, and encouraged humans to destroy or continue practices that are harmful. Belief is the driver of all evolution and devolution. We believe in the “survival of the fittest” and therefore have created entire economic systems based on such a belief--money that rewards the “strong” and destroys the “weak.”

My eHuman novels deal with the intersection between belief, immortality, and technology. When people ask me, “Will AI destroy us?” I answer, “Only if we believe it necessary to destroy one another.” As long as we believe some of us are good, and others aren’t even human, then there’s a good chance our AI will behave the same way.

Other readers ask me, “Could we really live forever?” I answer, “Do you believe we can?” My dear Transhumanists, here is the crux of the issue--as long as we accept that an average lifespan of seventy-six is an achievement, we’ll never live forever. Hell, we won’t make it past one hundred. Before the government will invest in life extension technologies, we the people must believe it possible. We must believe the human being has only just begun it’s ascent, and that we’re at the point where we can indeed inherit our true potential as peoples of the Earth.

Of course, immortality isn’t appealing to everyone. That’s fine. I’d reckon though that most of you reading this would like to live as long as possible, and in health and wellness. If this is true, then the place to start is your belief. Seventy-six really isn’t that long. Why not expect to live to be one hundred? Why not believe that fifty is just the half way point, instead of the end of your life? Why not live as though you’ll be on this planet forever, even if no one you know personally has done it? How many decisions would be different if you believed you’d be here for a lot longer? What would you do now to live a more meaningful life? Would we, as a race, continue to destroy the environment if we believed we’d be around for a long, long time?

Whatever we believe in, we become. Whatever we believe in, we invest in. Whether it’s a government or an individual, the choices we make are based on our beliefs about ourselves, our world, and one another. 

If we begin to believe that every human being is worthy, then our AI will do the same. Perhaps then our technology will serve us and help create a cleaner, greener, more prosperous world.

If we begin to believe that one hundred is the new seventy, perhaps it would be so. What if we age merely because we expect to age, whether consciously or not?

Well, that would be something, wouldn’t it?

Can You Teach a Computer Common Sense? .PART ONE.

"In your case, most likely, a small app would have been downloaded to your 

CPU to erase your previous few days of memory. You see, eHuman
software is really very easy to manipulate.”
~Alrisha, Lead Hacktivist for the Resistance

Artificial Intelligence. It's everywhere these days. Especially in the theaters. Last month saw the release of the movie, "Her", in which the lead character falls in love with an operating system. In addition, a trailer for Johnny Depp's new movie, "Transcendence" is now available on YouTube. Depp's portrayal of a genius espousing the future of a mind greater than all the minds that have ever been on Earth is chilling.

Can this be? Can we create Artificial Intelligence that is smarter than we are? I don't mean faster, or with a better memory. Can AI have common sense? Can it foresee complex patterns? Can AI be programmed to have our ability to sense what's wrong and make choices based on instinct and past experience? What is intelligence without consciousness? Is it possible for us to create an AI that is truly evolving, truly learning and truly greater than all of us combined?

In my novel, eHuman Dawn, the AI is Neuro, a complex operating system that organizes and guides eHuman life. The eHumans are themselves a blend of AI and their own consciousness. The ideal Transhuman solution. But is such a solution possible? Or would this technology be the end of humanity?

Two readers sent me articles this week, both discussing this theme of AI and the scientific mind. Two things stood out for me: First, our computers are only as intelligent as the engineers who program them. And second, solving the complex issues of life requires more thought than passing the Turing Test or executing a mere Google Search.

Let's begin with the first idea--just how much better can our AI be than ourselves? In "The Closing of the Scientific Mind", David Gelernter voices his thoughts about leading singularity scientist Ray Kurzweil's work:  (For more on Kurzweil's mission, see my blog post, "Can Google Stop Death?")

"Whether he knows it or not, Kurzweil believes in and longs for the death of mankind. Because if things work out as he predicts, there will still be life on Earth, but no human life. To predict that a man who lives forever and is built mainly of semiconductors is still a man is like predicting that a man with stainless steel skin, a small nuclear reactor for a stomach, and an IQ of 10,000 would still be a man. In fact we have no idea what he would be."

True confession: While writing the eHuman trilogy this exact thought has crossed my mind over and over again. Are Adam Winter and The Dawn of eHumanity still human? I want them to be, but what exactly are they? The eHuman is a product of the best of science, blended with human needs and desires. Yet those needs and desires are completely under the control of the scientists who created them. Is that a real human existence?

Remember: software is only as excellent as the people who make it. Honestly. So if we want to know what AI will look like in the future, let's consider the way science has been used to meet our human needs for the past forty years.

Do we trust the scientific mind that will cut down rain forests at unsustainable rates in order to raise cattle for our fast food chains? How about the scientists in Big-Agriculture, whose minds can only create products that kill insects and weeds--forgetting about and thus possibly destroying the very insects needed for crop pollination by inadvertently causing a global colony collapse for the honey bee? Do we trust a scientific mind that can't see and understand the web of life around us, to create the web of artificial intelligence that will guide us into the future?

Many of our stories are prophetic. They tell of a future time when our AI takes over and destroys us. Why would that be? Why would we create AI that hates us and competes against us rather than cares for us and meets our needs? Why wouldn't our AI serve us and improve our lives and make things cleaner, more efficient and better for everyone? Why must our machines eventually kill us?

Alas, the answer might just lie within our own hearts, within our own intelligence, and the way we educate our children. Remember, software is only as good as the mind that creates it. If the current scientific mindset that has controlled technology for the past century is any indication, we're in trouble. Gelernter puts it this way, "Many scientists are proud of having booted man off his throne at the center of the universe and reduced him to just one more creature—an especially annoying one—in the great intergalactic zoo." AI may kill us, but only because it will mimic what its creators believe.

Artificial Intelligence can't save us from ourselves, it can only become what we are.

Therefore if we want AI with common sense, we must hire software engineers with the most common sense. If we want AI that will lead us into a prosperous future, we need scientists to care about humanity, and the planet we live on, as a whole. If we want AI that will inspire us and grow with us, we need the business community to stop caring only about profits and instead care about life in all of its complexity.

The best of humanity must take part in this quest. Not just the smartest.

Imagine an Earth where machines and people live in harmony, rather than in competition. Is that possible? Perhaps we first need to learn to live in harmony with ourselves, each other, and the world we live in. Then we can create the machines.

To be continued...

Sex in the eHuman City

 

 

 

"Miranda was gone.
    She’d been his companion for almost fifty years. He thought it should be easy to let her go, but it wasn’t. It was every bit as hard as the last time a companion had Jumped. And before that—well, it was the same old story. The vow, 'Till death do us part' disappeared the day
humanity took a bite from the apple of immortality. " 

From eHuman Dawn

 

eHuman Dawn opens with a  breakup. Some might find that a strange way to begin a science fiction novel about the merging of man with machine to achieve everlasting life, but for me, it seemed the most natural, and important, place to begin. For at the heart of our humanity lies our sexuality. The opposite is true of machines--which rule the domain of logic and rationality. As science marches ever closer to bringing us together, I find myself wondering, where in this effort to stop death do we take a moment to consider birth? Or love? Or desire?

One of my previous blogs, In Defense of the Senses, touched on the idea that writing about love and attraction in a world without flesh wasn't always easy. I had to find a way to express desire without the beating heart, the sweating palms, or the steady insistence of our reproductive hormones. While writing the novel, I discovered that the issues of romance and sex went much further than figuring out how to fulfill our desires for one another in electronic bodies.

In a society where we've united with machines in order to live forever, sexuality itself becomes completely redefined.

Imagine a future, post-singularity world that hasn't completely abandoned the flesh, but instead some sort of implant that reverses aging has been invented. We can still have sex the good old fashioned way, but what does that mean if we live forever? At what age would we marry? Why would we marry? "Till death do us part" doesn't make much sense if we're never going to die. Given the fifty percent divorce rate in western societies, truly living together FOREVER is romantic for some, but torture for others.

More importantly, would we continue to procreate in such a world? What would we do about population control? Imagine it, at age thirty we take an implant that allows us to live forever. That means no one dies. But if people continue to be born, how do we manage that as a society? What would the balance be for our species? How would we deal with an ever increasing population on our planet? I can't help but wonder what we'd do about children if we could live forever and keep our reproducing, carbon bodies. The possibilities are fascinating--and terrifying at the same time.

In the end, it's impossible to take on death without discussing birth and sexuality. Considering the sexual implications of any scientific advancement is worthwhile. Asking questions is the place to start. Would I trade physical sexual pleasure to live forever? Would I give up the ability to procreate in order to live forever? Would my feelings even matter if I could be programmed to forget them? When considering a future society where the ultimate goal for health is immortality, we shouldn't forget sex, love or romance. Yet I rarely see them mentioned on any of the singularity and technology websites focused on the topic of machine based immortality and health. 

Immortality brings a whole new element to the story of romance. One that will completely change the definition of what it means to be human. Perhaps love, in its universality, will adapt and evolve and find new ways of expression that we can only dream of now.

It's The Question That Drives Us

Like many sci-fi fans, one of my favorite movies of all time is, "The Matrix." There's a scene where Trinity, the beautiful hacker female, approaches Neo in a nightclub. This is the moment of invitation, an event that forces him to wake up to the world around him--a world where something just doesn't feel right. In many ways, stories are our real teachers, and the dialogue in this scene calls for us to wake up to the true purpose of learning in our modern age.

Trinity: It's the question that drives us, Neo. It's the question that brought you here. You know the question, just as I did.
Neo: What is the Matrix?
Trinity: The answer is out there, Neo, and it's looking for you, and it will find you if you want it to.

The writers of "The Matrix" advise us to ask the questions that are burning within our hearts. In Neo's case,  the question will lead him to the answer--which is something he cannot know until he voices the question. The two are intertwined, one leading to the other. Asking the question sets him off on the journey to finding the answer.

It's finals time here in my house, and that means spending hours studying with my children, memorizing, not the questions, but the answers. To tell the truth, I love this time, recalling facts I once learned long ago, being near my kids, and hearing the stories they have to tell about the historical figures, scientific theories and algebraic equations they've been learning. I'm always amazed at how deep the teachers go with their curriculum, and how little I would know about what went on in the classroom if I didn't take this time to study with my children. When we go over their study guides, they reveal details about discussions in the classroom and share with me their wonder and awe.

But if I only looked at their tests and homework, and never spent time discussing it with them, I'd assume that all they were learning was how to memorize facts--which seems pretty dry. Not only that, it seems fairly useless. In the days of the Smartphone and Google Search, why would my children need to memorize any date in history? Of course, knowing an approximate timeline or order of events is important--woe to the child who has no clue that Rome fell long before the advent of the computer. But is it necessary to spend brain power memorizing the exact date that the Vandals first sacked Rome?

Some may say yes, but I'd disagree. We don't have to wait for a future singularity event to realize that the days of knowing the "answer" are over. Tablets, Smartphones and the system of information that links them together, are changing the way we live in our world. In our house, if someone disagrees with another about a historical date, we let Google solve it. If my son wants to learn how to set up a "Let's Play" YouTube channel, he can Google it and find all sorts of people and information to aid him in his quest.

The fact is, knowing the "answer" isn't enough anymore. The intelligence we now need to cultivate is to know what questions need to be asked. And to develop the courage to ask them.

What is the question needed in any given situation? How do I ask the question in order to get the most accurate answer? How do I begin to understand the world as information all around me that is seeking to be known? How do I parse through the propaganda, to find the truth? For nothing is truly known on the Internet until the question is asked. Information is simply data stored on the Cloud, which has no meaning unless someone wants to use it. Asking the question puts the information in play.

How can we educate our children to ask questions? In reality, the educational system of the United States for the past fifty years has encouraged the exact opposite--Don't ask questions. Instead, listen to the teacher lecture, take notes, and memorize them. Questions slow things down. Questions get in the way. The authority already knows everything, you just need to receive the information. And then you'll be tested to make sure you got it all.

In today's age, to be spoon fed information isn't going to get our children very far. They need to be encouraged to ask for what they want to know. They must have a desire to understand and learn about the world around them. They need a fire lit inside of them, a passion, for asking questions. It's a vulnerable place to be, for to ask a question might make you seem ignorant. But the truth is, this is the direction our learning systems are going. As the Internet grows to mimic our own learning patterns, so will we begin to change in order to navigate this informational landscape.

Someday learning just may be a simple download. Like Trinity from the Matrix, we'll learn to fly a helicopter in moments. And yet, even in that extreme case, such learning cannot happen--unless we're confident enough ask the right question.

Celebrating the Holidays...Forever

What an amazing month November turned out to be! As a contestant in the annual NaNoWriMo challenge, I found myself writing an entire, brand new novel, in only thirty days! Actually, it was less than thirty days because I needed to be done by the time my parents arrived on November 25th, for Thanksgiving. If there's one thing I can't do when others are around, it's write anything at all.

Even better, my novel eHuman Dawn, is now available to purchase on Amazon! It was published on November 27th, the same day I finished my NaNoWriMo novel. I've so many things to be thankful for, only one day of celebrating is simply not enough. Thank goodness the Holiday Season is upon us and I have until New Year's Day to party.

As I sat around the table with my family on Thanksgiving day, I wondered, as I often do--in an immortal world, where all humans lived forever at a global scale, what sort of holidays would be celebrated? If we could live forever, would we come back, year after year, to the same family? Would we hold on to parents, siblings, lovers and children in the same way? What would constitute a holiday? Most importantly, who would decide what our holidays would be?

In eHuman Dawn, I introduce the eHuman, a stunning technological feat of metal, plastics, circuits, fiber optics, energy transference and computing, as a new vehicle for human consciousness. Since the eHuman body does not age, and can be easily upgraded, living forever in such a body is considered the gift of health for all on Earth--whether you want it or not. In order to create their world, I had to consider the social habits of such a race. Would they still desire family connection? What would they be grateful for? Would there be a holiday season?

Celebrating holidays is as old as the human race. Even the American holiday season contains several holidays that have a long life to them. Colonists began celebrating Thanksgiving as early as 1565. Christmas is listed as an official holiday in Roman documentation dated 354 CE. Hanukkah is much older than that, celebrating a victory in 2 BCE. Winter Solstice festivals predate Stonehenge and honoring the New Year is as old as written texts, every civilization has their own way to enter into new contracts, obligations and opportunities at the end of their calendar year. Therefore celebration has a long, immortal history of its own.

And yet, these particular celebrations often center on the theme of life and death. We're grateful for this one life we live. The Christmas story, as well as all winter festivals of light, is one about light being born unto the darkness. The four seasons guided the ancients in their planting, mating and birthing rituals. Today we still honor them, as we can't escape the natural world around us. Each year, over and over, we witness the natural world around us birth, come to maturity, enter old age and then die with the seasons; just like our own humanity. The holidays we celebrate remind us of our destiny of birth and death. Which is why we celebrate them with those closest to us--the people who walk with us on this journey of life.

But what if we never died?
What meaning would the holidays take?
Whom would we wish to keep closest to us, when forever really is forever?   

While I can speak for eHumanity, and you'll have to read eHuman Dawn to enter their world, I can't speak for humanity as whole. I don't know what traditions would continue to exist. But my guess is an immortal humanity would have something else to celebrate than the wheel of life. Just what that is remains to be seen...







    

In Defense of the Senses

                       


The human body is an amazing thing. Its design is incredible, a magnificent network of cells, neurons, organs and blood all orchestrating the greatest feat imaginable--Life. Living in the body is what makes the human experience real. Our bodies and our five senses allow our human consciousness to navigate life on Earth in all of its complexity. This life is so fantastic, we never want it to end. Which is why we're spending millions of dollars trying to find ways to the prolong our lives and perhaps even stop death.

In eHuman Dawn, I've created a world where one of the many potential singularity solutions has been implemented. In this case, humanity leaves their carbon based bodies completely behind in order to live in synthetic, humanoid forms. Think Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation, but with an actual human consciousness operating it. These forms are upright, and grant us much of the same mobility we have now. In fact, these bodies in many ways are better – the eHuman can run for days without rest, never needs to eat or drink, and can't die, at least not naturally. Sound far out there? Just check out the 2045 Initiative. This organization plans on having the ability to transfer the personality to an avatar by the year 2030, and into a hologram-inspired form by 2045. The year 2045 not too far off.

For many, the avatar, or the eHuman, is the perfect solution for life on Earth.

At least it seems that way at first.

Still, some people might want to keep their carbon bodies, where the five senses rule their daily existence, no matter what alternatives may exist.

Why would anyone wish such a thing? One of the most interesting parts about writing eHuman Dawn was the distinct lack of body responses that I could draw upon in writing any given scene. My main characters don't have carbon based bodies, therefore they lack the organs, skin, and sensations that produce reactions to normal life events. When an eHuman meets the girl of his dreams, he still feels the same emotions, but without the racing heart, butterflies in his stomach, or sweaty palms. Imagine fear. Can you experience a cold chill down your spine if you have no spine? Dry mouth? Goosebumps? Or even tears? And what would sex be like without the heat, the friction, the moisture, or the climax? I'm sure you've got the point.

Writing about such a world truly opened my eyes to the way my body talks to me, and to the numerous events in my life where I rely on my five senses to guide me. I've only touched on a few here, but I must admit, I'm a bit suspicious of life without these things. I love the smell of warm flesh, the thrill of my stomach turning as I fly down the hill on a roller coaster, the rush of blood through my veins before I try something dangerous. I enjoy the fluttering of my heart as I dance to a fantastic lead guitar solo. Just the act of moving my hips to the beat of the drums brings sensations of complete joy and satisfaction, and I feel this because my ears and skin are receiving the notes and my body responds by dancing.

Of course I wouldn't miss hunger, pain, or sadness. But part of me wonders if we turn off the annoying parts of life in the flesh, can we keep the joyous ones? Many people who suffer from depression or anxiety take drugs to help stop the painful feelings that trigger their episodes. Most of them complain that this also stops their ability to feel real happiness, sexual desire or excitement. It seems we need the dark to experience the light.

In the end I think the pursuit of immortality will lead society down many exciting paths. It's many, many decades away, but in the meantime I will continue to advocate for research and technology, as well as for the rights of consumers. And as I do, I will remain in this body, flirting, laughing, riding roller coasters, having sex and dancing until the natural end of my days!

Even if it does mean I'll shed a few tears.