Accelerating Future

A minor personal announcement — I’ve been hired to work half-time for Halcyon Molecular in Redwood City. I’m mostly going to be working on improving their website content. Halcyon was founded by Michael and William Andregg, who I originally met in Tucson at a Center for Responsible Nanotechnology conference in 2007.

Halcyon is developing a technology to sequence genetic material at orders of magnitude faster than anything on the market or in the pipeline. Their technology and approach, which uses electron microscopy, is really unique. I’m happy I finally get to talk about the company and technology a bit in public because I’ve been excited about them in private for a long time.

You can read more about Halcyon at their website or at this TechCrunch article.

Also keep in mind that Halcyon is actively looking for new researchers.

10 Responses »

The UK Telegraph has a nice new article on thorium, the energy source that provides a practical alternative to fossil fuels, unlike pipe dreams of wind or solar scaling up fast enough to save us.

Obama could kill fossil fuels overnight with a nuclear dash for thorium

If Barack Obama were to marshal America’s vast scientific and strategic resources behind a new Manhattan Project, he might reasonably hope to reinvent the global energy landscape and sketch an end to our dependence on fossil fuels within three to five years.

We could then stop arguing about wind mills, deepwater drilling, IPCC hockey sticks, or strategic reliance on the Kremlin. History will move on fast.

Muddling on with the status quo is not a grown-up policy. The International Energy Agency says the world must invest $26 trillion (£16.7 trillion) over the next 20 years to avert an energy shock. The scramble for scarce fuel is already leading to friction between China, India, and the West.

Kirk Sorensen, the former NASA engineer that writes the excellent Energy from Thorium blog, is quoted in the article.

For those who missed it, I did a feature article on thorium back in 2006, titled “A Nuclear Reactor in Every Home”.

3 Responses »

From The Wall Street Journal:

Rapid advances in bioscience are raising alarms among terrorism experts that amateur scientists will soon be able to gin up deadly pathogens for nefarious uses.

Fears of bioterror have been on the rise since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, stoking tens of billions of dollars of government spending on defenses, and the White House and Congress continue to push for new measures.

But the fear of a mass-casualty terrorist attack using bioweapons has always been tempered by a single fact: Of the scores of plots uncovered during the past decade, none have featured biological weapons. Indeed, many experts doubt terrorists even have the technical capability to acquire and weaponize deadly bugs.

The new fear, though, is that scientific advances that enable amateur scientists to carry out once-exotic experiments, such as DNA cloning, could be put to criminal use. Many well-known figures are sounding the alarm over the revolution in biological science, which amounts to a proliferation of know-how—if not the actual pathogens.

Another bit later in the article:

All the government attention comes despite the absence of known terrorist plots involving biological weapons. According to U.S. counterterrorism officials, al Qaeda last actively tried to work with bioweapons—specifically anthrax—before the 2001 invasion of that uprooted its leadership from Afghanistan.

This is great. It’s best to pay attention to obvious risks, like this, nuclear terrorism, the integrity of the power grid under solar storms, major earthquakes, etc., before they happen, not after. Often times, adequate preparation even requires little marginal effort.

2 Responses »

It’s coming to Melbourne this September 7, 11, and 12th. The speaker list, which includes Gregory Benford, Russell Blackford, and Stelarc, is here.

No Responses »

I wish to qualify my statement in the previous post where I wrote, ” I currently think that EMP attack is the second greatest risk we face, right behind a genetically engineered superplague.”

What I should really say is that I think that any electromagnetic event that wrecks havoc on electronics is the second greatest risk, and that includes geomagnetic storms as well as EMP. I don’t want the particularly vivid risk of EMP attack to distract attention from the fundamental point that the most critical nodes in our power grids simply need to be more protected.

EMP attack is controversial. The experts are divided. Scientists can agree, however, that a solar maximum is on the way for 2013, and it could rival the Carrington Event of 1858 in its intensity.

The Space Review has an article that argues that EMP attack is unlikely while geomagnetic storms are the real threat.

8 Responses »

I am concerned about the PR aspects of the EMP attack risk communication over the last couple years. Awareness of the EMP risk has spread much faster among the extreme right than any other portion of the political spectrum. This is already making it highly unfashionable.

Given the year (2010), I currently think that EMP attack is the second greatest risk we face, right behind a genetically engineered superplague. A small EMP-optimized nuke launched from a container ship in the Gulf of Mexico could take out the power grid of the entire continental United States. The same thing could be done anywhere, like Europe or Japan.

The facts are available from the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack. No one cares except the Fox News crowd. It wasn’t like this only a few years ago: EMP attack was primarily a topic limited to analysts and sci-fi TV show writers. Obama seems concerned about nukes in general (which presumably includes the EMP risk that emanates from them), but not many on the left share his concern. People are too busy worrying about global warming. The aging Henry Kissinger is not a good spokesman for the nuclear security movement.

If an EMP attack came, cars and trucks would just stop. Factories, controlled by computers, would stop. Molten steel on the assembly line would cool and solidify in place due to failure of the heating elements. The vast majority of tractors, combines, and other heavy machinery would become useless. Transformers and other electrical elements, large and small, would be fried. The largest transformers have to be ordered from China and are generally ordered with a year of lead time.

An effective EMP attack on the US would cause tens of trillions of dollars of damage. Cities would run out of food in a few days. The US grain stockpile only has about a million bushels of wheat. Wheat is the only common grain with enough nutrients to sustain someone on an all-grain diet. A bushel is only 60 pounds, and someone needs about a pound of wheat a day to avoid hunger pangs. Ideally two pounds if you are doing manual labor. 60 million man-days of food is not a lot. The population of the United States is 300 million. That means our grain stockpiles are enough food for everyone to eat a fifth of a pound and then they’re gone.

The long-term prognosis will depend on how hard it will be to get crucial electronics for trucks and tractors in. If security collapses a few weeks after an EMP attack, foreign companies may be reluctant to do business here.

For a few tens of billions of dollars, we (the US) could shield our most important infrastructure from EMP attack. Our power grid is so naked and unprotected right now, we are practically asking to be nuked.

14 Responses »

Congratulations to Max More, Howard Blume, and Tom McCabe for winning the Humanity+ board elections.

Howard Blume is the newcomer. You may remember him as author of The Lucifer Principle. I don’t know a lot more about him other than that, but I welcome him to transhumanism.

Tom and Max More, of course, have been around for some time. Max More is the father of modern transhumanism. Tom McCabe is a young genius, but I’m biased, because I frequently get to chat with him at the SIAI offices.

Organized transhumanism… can it exist? That is the premise of Humanity+.

No Responses »

I am optimistic because it’s already 2010 and there are very few signs that nanocomputers will be developed in the next 10-15 years.

Moore’s Law does make it easier to develop AI without understanding what you’re doing, but that’s not a good thing. Moore’s Law gradually lowers the difficulty of building AI, but it doesn’t make Friendly AI any easier. Friendly AI has nothing to do with hardware; it is a question of understanding. Once you have just enough computing power that someone can build AI if they know exactly what they’re doing, Moore’s Law is no longer your friend. Moore’s Law is slowly weakening the shield that prevents us from messing around with AI before we really understand intelligence. Eventually that barrier will go down, and if we haven’t mastered the art of Friendly AI by that time, we’re in very serious trouble. Moore’s Law is the countdown and it is ticking away. Moore’s Law is the enemy.

– Eliezer Yudkowsky, “Why We Need Friendly AI”

If we get to superintelligence first, we may avoid this risk from nanotechnology and many others. If, on the other hand, we get nanotechnology first, we will have to face both the risks from nanotechnology and, if these risks are survived, also the risks from superintelligence. The overall risk seems to be minimized by implementing superintelligence, with great care, as soon as possible.

– Nick Bostrom, “Ethics in Advanced Artificial Intelligence”

Does the difficulty of making an AI Friendly decrease with increasing computing power? Not obviously so; if the problem of building AI in the first place is assumed to have been solved, then building a Friendly AI is a problem in architecture and content creation and depth of understanding, not raw computing power. Thus, increasing computing power decreases the difficulty of building AI relative to the difficulty of building Friendly AI. Anyone who can build an AI that runs on a PIII is vastly smarter than I am and hopefully knows far more than I do about Friendly AI. At that our current level of computing power, the genius required for AI exceeds the genius required for Friendliness. The same hopefully holds true at that point where AI first becomes just barely human-feasible.

Even so, increasing computing power will eventually decrease the genius required for AI to significantly below the genius required for Friendliness. If – at this point – smarter researchers still have a speed advantage, then humanity will be safer, though not safe. If researcher intelligence is relatively insignificant compared to funding disparities, then humanity’s safety will rely on how widely a workable theory of Friendliness is disseminated and accepted within the AI community. In either case, the potential will exist to screw up really big-time.

– Eliezer Yudkowsky, “Creating Friendly AI”

Friendly AI first, then nanocomputers. Not nanocomputers first.

18 Responses »

There is a second SENS Foundation LA meeting this Friday, for those in the area. Here’s the beginning of the blurb:

On behalf of SENS Foundation I am excited to write to you to invite you to join us for our second SENS Foundation L.A. Chapter meeting to be held on Friday, August 27th, 2010, at the Westwood Brewing Company (1097 Glendon Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90024-2907) from 6pm until we have had enough fun.

In this second meeting we will be joined by the fabulous Dr Sarah Marr (SENS Foundation Vice President)… and, of course, me! ;-)

Sarah is going to take this opportunity to tell you a little more about SENS Foundation’s mission, and the ways in which it is working to communicate that mission. Our hope is that we’ll be able to empower all the members of the chapter to work with us in promoting the Foundation effectively.

The organizer of the LA chapter of SENS is the beautiful singer and pilot Maria Entraigues. She sings, she flies, she advocates life extension research… what a gal!

No Responses »

As a cryonicist, it feels good to have some kind of hedge against death, even if it’s not perfect. It’s much better than your hedge against death being a big invisible alpha male in the sky who talks to us in our heads.

For me, it’s easy to fantasize that if I happen to be hit and killed by a truck tomorrow, someone will quickly notice my cryonics necklace, call up Alcor, a heroic field technician will give me a heparin injection (to prevent clotting), quickly whisk me away to a hospital, where I am pronounced dead, packed with ice, and shipped to Scottsdale for an effective cryonic suspension.

However, such a suspension would probably be considered seriously suboptimal. My blood would be clotted and my tissue would be swollen. According to the Alcor FAQ:

Standby is the process in which cryonics personnel are deployed and waiting near the bedside of a patient at serious risk of death. The purpose of Standby and a Standby Team is to take prompt action to restore blood circulation, administer protective medications, and start rapid cooling when the heart stops beating. This is critically important to achieve a good cryopreservation. Alcor attempts to provide Standby when needed to all members in the U.S. and Canada through its Comprehensive Member Standby Program.

One of the most important things is ensuring that the whole process begins before blood begins to clot. Why? Because the circulatory system is used to get the vitrifying agent into the patient’s body, which prevents crystal formation during the cooldown phase. If it’s clotted up, the vitrification process is ruined, and you have to go with what is called a “straight freeze”.

Under Alcor’s somewhat recent (five years old) Comprehensive Member Standby policy, monthly fees for Alcor memberships were increased by just $10.00, giving the member “standby coverage worth $35,000 or more that would otherwise have to be paid during a time of need or through pre-funding.” There is also $5,000 worth of coverage available for relocation assistance to Scottsdale, an opportunity worth taking advantage of if you have any serious doubts about your health.

Because of all the difficulties inherent in cryonics, it is definitely worth pursuing room-temperature neuropreservation, though I’m sure that process would necessitate a fresh brain as well.

Anyway, the message of this is, if you are really sick or in any danger of spontaneous death, be sure to get on Standby right away! I know a few stories of people signed up for cryonics who underwent sub-par (perhaps irrecoverable) cryopreservations because they were too lazy or stubborn to leave their houses and go under closer monitoring.

Your neural-encoded memories turning into a nutritious sludge for microbial growth — don’t let it happen to you! Your brain is not a petri dish, and should not be treated as one, even after metabolism ceases.

8 Responses »

Great post by George Dvorsky lamenting how Ray-hatred is turning off people to the rich intellectual tapestry of non-Ray-related Singularity ideas. He provides a short list of non-Ray Singularity thinkers dating back half a century and their contributions to this emerging and confusing field: von Neumann, Good, Minsky, Vinge, Moravec, Hanson, Bostrom, Yudkowsky, and Chalmers.

The post also includes an image of George’s impressive recent painting, “Singularity”.

No Responses »

Over at Singularity Hub, Aaron Saenz is gushing over Michael Vassar’s Google TechTalk.

Aaron said:

Vassar is the president of the Singularity Institute and a prominent advocate for the belief that technologies may develop exponentially in the future.

Not really… my understanding is that the reason that Michael V. talks about the Enlightenment a lot is that he thinks that was the last major boost in human understanding and reason. He tends to focus more on human thinking than on our technologies, and sees the latter as an outgrowth of the former. That’s the primary idea behind the Vingean Singularity as well. (Remember that one?)

One of the apparent purposes of Less Wrong is to start a new Enlightenment. The jury’s still out on that one, but it doesn’t hurt to try.

3 Responses »