We live in an age of miracles when compared with the nasty, brutish, and short existence of our millennia of progenitors, and today's heady pace of scientific and technological advance make almost anything seem plausible. Yet, if we are to make good use of our limited resources -- including the most precious commodities of all: time and attention -- we must learn to draw careful distinctions between the probable, the possible, and the fantastic. Some things will simply never be achieved, like perpetual motion machines or true immortality. That doesn't mean, however, that amazing developments won't occur that would have stunned our grandparents and will leave many in our own time astonished.
It's useful, then, to think about emerging technologies on two axes: feasibility, and impact. "Feasibility" means how likely something is to be achieved, including whether there are major scientific or technological hurdles to be overcome and whether enough effort will made to accomplish whatever is envisioned. "Impact" describes how much a particular emerging technology (or result of a technology) is likely to change the world. Note that this does not necessarily imply for better or for worse, just different.
These are subjective assumptions, of course, but we have to start somewhere. Your opinion about a particular development might differ from mine, and that's fine. The main point is that we try to determine where our collective efforts can best be applied. If something has high potential impact but almost no chance of being achieved, it should be assigned a lower priority than other work of possibly lesser impact but greater likelihood of success.
With that as an introduction, take a look at this initial assessment:
Moving roughly in order from most feasible to least, and from least impact to most, let's briefly consider each one:
Robotics already is making inroads in manufacturing and also now on the battlefield, so its feasibility is basically unquestioned. Its impact, however, seems incremental to me; significant but probably not revolutionary. (Marshall Brain, an IEET Fellow, might disagree.)
Genetic engineering includes modifying not only the human genome but other animals, insects, plants, and even bacteria and viruses. Again, work in this area is well underway, so even if some of the possibilities sound exotic, it's likely only a matter of time in most cases. Impacts will be large, but since they will occur somewhat gradually and not all at once, I've placed this just past the middle point on the vertical axis.
Geoengineering is the deliberate application of technical knowledge to manipulate Earth's climate on a large scale. Many of the techniques being considered today are certainly practical, although their advisability is hotly contested. If they are attempted, which seems more and more likely, and especially if various interest groups -- both public and private -- end up competing with each other, the results could be catastrophic, one of those cases where the cure is worse than the disease.
Space colonization is a romantic idea from the golden age of science fiction: the 1940s and 50s. Writers then knew a lot less than we do now about the hazards of space, and they also made assumptions that far too often minimized the financial and political challenges involved. Still, it seems probable that we'll eventually do this, although since it's taking so much longer than once imagined, the impacts will be comparatively small.
AGI, or artificial general intelligence, has long been predicted but appears almost as far out of reach now as it did several decades ago. We know surprisingly little about how consciousness actually works. Someday someone probably will crack the nut, but it's a hugely complex problem. Because it's so difficult to determine when -- or even if -- AGI can be developed, it's also hard to gauge the potential impacts.
Desktop nanofactories are the most significant near-term goal for advanced nanotechnology (also known as molecular manufacturing). It doesn't appears that there is any major technical obstacle to prevent their development, although the task certainly will not be easy. Assuming that atomically-precise general-purpose exponential manufacturing can be achieved, the affect on society could be enormous, especially if it comes sooner rather than later.
Post-senescence refers to the defeat of aging, a time when death would be limited to accidents, homicide, and suicide. Transhumanists are sometimes accused of minimizing the incredible challenges involved, but on the other hand, skeptics can be criticized for failing to take seriously the possible impacts. Given how difficult it seems to overcome all the hurdles and how little is actually being spent on the effort, I've pushed this out past the midpoint for feasibility. And even if it is achieved someday, the impacts would appear to be minimal, at least during the next century or so.
Cyborgs -- let's call this the projected merging of humans and machines. Of course it's already happening to a small degree, with artificial limbs and cochlear implants, but the ultimate vision of a half man half robot seems distant, partly because of the technical challenges and also due to the slowdown effects of religious resistance, economics, and politics. So, although it may happen and the effects could be large, it's not around the corner.
Post-scarcity is the dream of many a futurist: a time when superabundance, unlimited energy, and enlightened (if not obsolete) governance bring an end to poverty and launch an unending era of peace and prosperity. Suffice it to say that although I admire the sentiment, the potential for its ever coming to pass seems marginal at best.
A technological singularity might not be the most probable of events, but by definition it would have greater impact than anything else on this list. I don't fault anyone for thinking about it or for working in some small way to try to influence a beneficial outcome, but I do have a serious problem with those who talk and act as if it is a foregone conclusion.
Uploading of human consciousness or personality into the substrate of a supercomputer is another popular science fictional concept. We can't rule out the possibility altogether that this might be achieved someday -- and its impact if it ever comes to pass could be significant -- but the whole idea is still entirely in the realm of the imaginary.
And now to my second point. Beyond assessing the feasibility and the effects of emerging technologies, it's imperative that we also stay firmly footed in the real world if we hope to play a role in bringing about positive change.
In the real world, people are dying. Right now, today, children are wasting away from starvation and suffering horribly from preventable diseases. Women and girls (and some men and boys too) are in slavery at this very minute, being used for the profit or pleasure of others. Species are disappearing all around the world, blinking out of existence before we know a thing about them as biological diversity decreases and the potential for severe ecological collapse looms larger. Glaciers are melting, methane is bubbling up out of the permafrost, and coal-fired power plants keep belching more and more CO2 into the atmosphere. The struggle for energy, for water, for arable soil, and for political advantage brings the devastation of major wars closer every day.
We need to have an overlay on our thinking, a recognition that while it can be fun and valuable to spend time thinking about or working on futuristic possibilities, in the real world life goes on. Or not, because it stops, it ends, for many thousands of people every day. That is a certainty, and its impact is unquestionable.
Technoprogressives are in a unique position to bridge the gap between understanding the potential power of emerging technologies -- modulated by a sober and realistic assessment of feasibility -- and finding workable solutions to the real problems we face today and will face tomorrow.