josh@cs.rutgers.edu (08/09/90)
[I got the Update in a different format this time so it seems easier to send it as separate messages. Also, I'll be out of town for a week so read slowly! (I'll be at the ISIL conference in San Francisco if anyone else is going and would like to meet...) --JoSH] Feinberg Anxious for Policy Discussions by Dan Shafer Saying that, for some of the technologies involved "it may already be getting to be too late," Prof. Gerald (Gary) Feinberg urges that the Foresight Institute move forward as quickly as possible with the "broadest possible public debate" on the ethical issues involved in the ultimate implementation of nanotechnology. "We've already lost more time than we can afford," Feinberg, a member of the FI Advisory Board, said in an interview recently. Planning and assessing the social implications of new technologies is practically a life-long interest for Feinberg, a theoretical physicist and former Chairman of the Physics Department at New York's Columbia University. In 1969, he published a book called The Prometheus Project. "Prometheus," he points out, "is a Greek word meaning foresight." Feinberg recalls predicting in the book that "In the next 50 years, there would be a number of important technological developments that could fundamentally alter the way the human race lives. The thrust of the book was that we needed foresight into what the human race and human life should be like in the future, which of these potential technologies we should foster and which we should wish to avoid." Not surprisingly, it is the public policy formation aspect of FI that most interests Feinberg. "I have an underlying feeling," the respected researcher says, "that these questions are far too important to be left to scientists alone. Almost unavoidably, scientists' decisions are colored by their very nature as scientists. Their intent is to benefit science per se. But what might be viewed as the 'public interest' might or might not be the same thing as what is in the best interests of science." Personal Decision Feinberg goes so far as to say that, if he were to discover some fundamental scientific method of, for example, controlling the aging process, "I'd want to see a consensus on the underlying issues before proceeding. If I simply publish it, it is almost certain that some people would try to make use of it. It isn't possible to prevent the idea from being implemented once it's known. As an individual, I'd be inclined not to publish until I had a better sense of what should be done with the discovery." He cautions, however, that this view is "purely personal. I'm not prepared to urge this position on others." Although he recognizes that many, if not most, of these decisions in the broader arena will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, he thinks "we should be able to work toward a situation where individual scientists aren't faced with the issue. The fundamental decisions about the future of society need to provide the framework within which scientific decisions about implementation, encouragement, and so forth, are made intelligently." Asked if government should play some role in this process, Feinberg points out that there is a flaw in the question. "The problem is, the question assumes we already know what we want to do as a species. The thrust of my book The Prometheus Project was that we have no general agreement on where we as a species want to go. The government might play some role in the implementation of these policies, ultimately, but not in the larger planning arena." Seeing the need for a "broad range of viewpoints" much like the discussion groups FI has proposed from its inception, Feinberg suggests that such groups as organized religion need a place in the process. "As a matter of strategy," he believes, "organized religion must play a role in this discussion. Any group that even feels it has a stake in the outcome should be part of the process." Interest in Technology Feinberg's interest in molecular engineering and molecular computing dates back to the early 1960s when he read about a talk by Richard Feynman called "There's Plenty of Room at the Bottom." He thought the concepts were intriguing but soon moved on to other interests. Then about six years ago he was working on his book, Solid Clues, on the subject of the future of science, he decided he should include a chapter on technology while devoting most of the book to pure science. "In the process of reading stuff for that chapter," he recalls, "I ran across Eric Drexler's paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences." Drexler and Feinberg had met much earlier when Drexler, then an undergrad, had attended the first conference on space colonies and Feinberg had also appeared there. "I was impressed that he'd gone on to a second really important idea," Feinberg recalls. As a result of reading Drexler's paper, he purchased Engines of Creation, read it, and found it intriguing. "At some point later, Eric called and asked me to serve on the Foresight Institute's Board of Advisors. I was delighted to say yes." What's Hot Now? Feinberg thinks that one of the most interesting and significant areas of research that could have great importance for nanotechnologists is the research in x-ray holography going on at a number of places including Los Alamos National Laboratories. "Ordinary holography," he points out, "uses visible light in the form of optical lasers. The image they produce is similar in size to the original object. X-ray holography, however, promises the ability eventually to create holograms that we can then use visible light to see and blow up. We should be able to examine the hologram of a virus, blown up to dog size, and really see what is going on inside the structures of these tiny objects....The first x-ray holograms have already been produced. Within five years, we'll have x-ray holography with large magnifications. This will give us a way of seeing what we are doing on a nano level." Ultimately, Feinberg thinks that this and other technologies will emerge into the area of nanotechnology applications he feels is the most interesting: the production of ultra-intelligent beings. "The combination of ultra-intelligent molecular computers and medical applications," he says, "converges at a point where I think the most difference can be made in the lives of the most people." He just hopes we're ready to grapple with the ethical and public-policy issues that such a development will pose before it is too late to deal with them rationally. Dan Shafer is an author and consultant in computation and emerging technologies.