Among my various photo-albums and pictures of parties,
weddings and holidays, there is one photograph that I never
get tired of looking at. I took it a few years ago while
on holiday and though, to the uneducated eye, it appears
to be nothing more than a lump of white plastic upon a
table, it is in fact a perfect summary of how I feel about
the future.
How so, you ask? How can this simple, slightly blurred
photograph mean so much?
Well, it’s like this. The picture was actually taken
in the Sony Headquarters in Tokyo. This is a rather large
and impressive building which, for someone who ‘works
with computers’, is a place I felt I should visit
as something of a pilgrimage. I wandered around the first
few floors and took in the various hi-resolution screens
and televisions that were so flat they started to make
the wall look a little uneven, before reaching floor four:
robotics.  This was more like it- this was the future as
only the Japanese could do it. With camera clutched in
my sweaty palm, I headed into the main display area. And
there it was: Teckno One, in all its glory. Except
it wasn’t. Teckno wasn’t looking too
bright today. In fact, Teckno –whose design
roughly resembled a dog– was splayed out, motionless,
on all fours with a small, blinking LED light that happily
boiled the whole thing down into one very accurate word: ‘ERROR’. A
wide grin spread across my face as I quickly took a few
snaps. Every ten seconds or so Teckno’s four
legs would burst into life and attempt to raise the mechanical
marvel, only to be interrupted by a sharp, piercing whistle
and a slow return to its former position. It was one of
the most satisfying things I have ever seen. Here I was,
in the very heart of the technological dream and what did
I find? A broken piece of rubbish. I almost started looking
for the curtain and the Wizard.
Now, the reason I find this to be so significant is that
this demonstration of failure is a welcome relief from
the very serious affect of the onslaught of technology.
I mean it. Think these are the ramblings of some back-to-the-trees
old hippy? Well, you’re partly correct, but allow
me to at least attempt to present my case.
Exhibit A: Chess. Oh yes, we can get nerdy all right.
I’m not proud but it is a fact that yes, I used to
enjoy chess. Used to sleep with a board next to my bed
as a matter of fact but caring doctors and strong medication
have solved that little issue. Now the thing with chess
is that when I was young I used to enjoy playing against
various friends and family members however they did not
all share my enthusiasm for the game and, as shocking as
it may seem, would often avoid the opportunity to play
me. Solution: chess computer. Small plastic set with a
few buttons and two double ‘A’ batteries,
and I was happy as Larry. This was fine for a few months
but eventually I worked out how to beat my microchipped
opponent. A simple bishop sacrifice on move six left my
adversary reeling such that victory was always assured.
It’s a rather sad footnote that despite this invincibility
I still continued to play with the thing for several weeks – you’d
think I’d get bored but hey, a success is a success
and when you’ve been sleeping with a chess board
for a while you don’t have an awful lot else to hang
your achievement hat on.
 Now then, all this is relevant because a few years ago
the world chess champion, Gary Kasparov, was beaten by
IBM’s Deep Blue supercomputer (I’m not sure
what the difference between a normal computer and a supercomputer
actually is but I’m guessing that capes are, sadly,
not part of the picture). This was historic. Kasparov was
arguably the greatest person ever to have played the game.
He wasn’t just another good player, he was probably
the greatest we, the human race, have ever had to offer.
And the supercomputer beat him. A large lump of metal and
plastic was able to outwit and outmanoeuvre this god of
strategy. And while the world’s press duly reported
it and the event did make the cover of a few daily newspapers
there wasn’t really much of a hullabaloo.
But hang on a second here: if the computer is now smart
enough to beat us at chess, then what is the point in us
playing the game anymore? I mean, that’s it; it’s
been solved. Yes, we can organise playoffs between IBM’s
Deep Blue III and Sun Microsystems’ Goliath IV, or
whatever names they give these beasts, but it’s still
going to be a computer that wins. And isn’t that
sad? No more of us puny humans battling it out over such
an innocent pastime? In the 1978 world final between Karpov
and Korchnoi they had to place a wooden barrier under the
table between the two players to stop them kicking each
other. Isn’t that great? That two Grandmasters who
had worked so hard and achieved so much were nonetheless
reduced to taking swipes at each other under a desk! But
that’s all gone now. Now we’re just going to
have a cold printout of the moves between two machines
and there is a good chance the game itself will be forgotten
to history.
Ok, maybe I am being too melodramatic here. Maybe people
will continue to enjoy chess and it is not the rise of
the machines that I’m suggesting. But what about
films, eh? What about the whole Hollywood situation? No?
Not with me? Well try this on for size – computer
actors. What about that? According to the experts, the
enormous processors that are used to create these computer
animated films are soon going to be so powerful that they
will be able to accurately depict a human form so precisely
that the average Joe in the street will not be able to
tell the difference. Now that’s amazing. No more
James Deans or Marilyn Monroes? No more cute little Tom
Cruise smiles or Darryl Hannah’s body? Just a load
of bits and bytes flying around creating images of people
we will probably end up worshipping just like today’s
stars. From the studio’s point of view this is great
news. No more enormous wages to have to hand out. No more
profit cuts eating into their budgets. Now actors will
be on time and available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
They will do exactly what is required and it will be the
writers and programmers who will give them a personality.
So that’s it. No more chess and no more human actors.
Now do you see my cause for concern?
 I’ll take this one stage further as I see you are
becoming alert to the danger. What about music? What if
-and you need to follow me closely on this one- what if
they solve music, just like they did with chess? Let me
explain. The human mind is essentially a lot of synapses
and nerve endings that interact via electrical signals.
Though it’s still early days on us working out how
the brain works, we can now detect and map what some of
the connections actually do. For example, when we’re
under a lot of stress, or feeling euphoric or any heightened
emotional state, the activity of various areas of the brain
lights up. In a similar vein, when we listen to certain
types of music our brain responds accordingly. A blast
of Mozart’s Jupiter symphony will cause the mind
to become alert and excited whilst anything by Sadé makes
us want to kill ourselves. Well, just kidding, but you
get my point. Our mood is altered at a very basic level
by music. Therefore, what happens if some bright spark
looks into this and starts working out how notes, rhythms
and chord progressions affect our mood? What if they start
to work out that a simple pentatonic scale in the key of
C sharp with a 4/4 beat will cause our relaxation synapses
to respond? Then they add melodies and timbres and all
the other aspects of what we think of as music to the mix
until eventually you are left with a machine that will
simply be a ‘mood alterer’. The true meaning
and life that exists within music as we know it today would
be gone. Instead we would be left with a simple ‘tune-fix’ that
would affect our emotions in whatever way we wished. So
there it is – music would be ‘solved’.
Frightening, isn’t it? How plausible these babblings
become when you don’t get a chance to think about
the subject logically for a second? The thing is, what
has really got me quite concerned, is that though the little
episode at the Sony building took place about three years
ago, I recently saw a programme about state of the art
robotics and I have to tell you, they’re not nearly
as wobbly and crap as they used to be. Now they look like
us. They’re walking upright and able to carry things.
In one demonstration they were even doing a basic dance
step. I’m serious: dancing robots. It’s here.
And I’m not laughing any more. After all, they can
only get better. Soon, the scientists confidently predicted,
they will be able to respond to voice instructions and
have their own basic vocabulary. Staircases are fast being
overcome and running is seen as the next evolutionary step.
Quite frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Foxtrot
does not follow soon after.
Sorry? Over reacting? Do you think so? You could be right.
Part of me likes to think that for all this hi-tech future
the only real impact we will actually come into contact
with will be something like the self-monitoring fridge.
You know the kind of thing- as soon as you run out of a
certain provision a text message will be sent to your mobile
informing you that you need to go shopping. We’ll
spend hours of our lives muttering back at our household
appliances, “Why don’t you get the
milk if you think we need more” and “I know,
I know– ‘seatbelt not fastened, seatbelt not
fastened’ ”. This is a more likely future,
I agree. And I would certainly welcome it when compared
to its opposite number. I would hate a future in which
people no longer play games, one where there are no actors
whining about their ‘issues’ and where the
beauty of music is replaced by some cold, heartless, brainwave
device. Put simply, I’d rather be going into space
with Chewbacca than Spock. Steady now, I’ve thought
about this.
 You see, things have to break and it has to be messy some
of the time. It’s human, yet for some reason we are
continually accepting of the suggestion that the future
will somehow always be some standardised homogeny. I like
to term this ‘the Star Trek and the Star
Wars ideals’ (told you it would get nerdy).
Simply put, the Star Trek world is very organised.
Everyone wears the same clothes and eats from a machine.
The ships are incredibly clean and tidy and all humans
are part of an omni present ‘Federation’. Fine,
but does that sound just a little National Socialist to
anyone else? In the Star Wars future, things break.
Machines are not reliable and the ships are not well maintained
and they do indeed have oversized buttons and levers. As
a result it looks like a fun place to be. Things need to
break, to go wrong and let us down, otherwise there is
no humour or irony in the world. It would be a little like
the west coast of America.
Not so long ago we were told that the future was bright,
the future was Orange. That’s fine, but can there
be a smudge on that future, please?
Professionally, M. Whyte does something with computers
but does not really understanding how they work. For
more information please visit www.xs4all.nl/~whytem
|
