Two great movies - "War of the Worlds" and "I, Robot" - born of even greater books by yet even greater writers (H.G. Wells and Isaac Asimov) pondered on the destruction of human life - but from different angles.
Asimov pondered the possibility of Robots created that decide that they don't need humans and attempt to destroy humans. Asimov proposed that each Robot created should be created with three inherent "laws" from which they could not deviate:
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
He starts the book "I, Robot" with the three basic laws, then goes ahead and smashes to pieces these rules with interesting fiction on how the rules can be broken, or simply would not suffice their intended protection. The book leaves us with a refreshed respect for humanity, and even for robots. The basic "aftertaste" still remains - robots can one day decide to destroy us, and may succeed.
The other book - War of the Worlds - has the primary theme of an alien invader destroying humanity, but also a secondary theme of destruction by microbes (the fate of the aliens, thankfully). Aliens are destroyed by the simple influenza virus because they dont have the resistance we (neanderthal-like) humans have adapted over millenia. This "death by microbe" I propose is a fate that not only for the fictitious aliens, but one that does still lurk around the corner for us humans - moreso again through the recent work of "artificial life" or "synthetic cells" or whatever you want to call it.
In recent news, a tenacious scientist named Craig Ventner has been lauded (and criticized) for creating "synthetic life".
His supporters have called him "ambitious", "genius", and have even credited him with potentially "saving the environment" with his algae-based research. His detractors have called him a "monster", "dangerous", and probably most painful to him among all monikers "insignificant and unoriginal". I believe what he has done can either save the planet or destroy humanity - sound familiar ?
Bottom line: looks like we have something else to worry about - Ventners first "artificial cell" is actually borrowed from a microbe/virus that can be harmful to goats, but his institute states that they've "removed numerous markers" which makes it harmless to goats even "if it were accidentally released" into the environment.
I bet goats don't want to find out for sure.
But why be cynical - let science move forward and hope that those with access to technology like Mr Ventner's are pursuing greater good, and not goat-killing vengeance.
So what do we worry about now ? Nuclear Weapons ? Robots taking over ? The "Ventnerenza" virus ?
And to put the icing on the "what's important in life" cake, Lady Gaga is on Larry King this week. "Life" goes on. For now.
No comments:
Post a Comment