Hello World.

Screen shot 2014-01-24 at 3.04.43 PM

“Hello” from Macintosh, a slightly more friendly version of the classic “Hello World” programs which are traditionally used to show beginning coders basic syntax of a programming language or to verify that a computer system is working properly.

Historians are all about periodization. Part of our job entails breaking down the rivers of history into bite-sized chunks for the sake of crafting a narrative, teaching a comprehensible class (c.f. “Western Civilization, 1000-1500” etc.), or framing a doable research project. It’s one of the ways we make sense of time yet we recognize its artificiality. A cousin of periodization is commemoration – noting the nth anniversary of something, revisiting it, and rethinking it. A big one this year is the 100th anniversary of the start of World War One. But this past week, we saw another commemoration – a flurry of retrospectives and stories about the 30th anniversary of the original Macintosh PC.

Screen shot 2014-01-24 at 3.08.35 PM

Scene from Ridley Scott’s “1984” advert for Apple

Millions of Americans met the Macintosh on 22 January 1984 during the third quarter of Superbowl XVIII (which featured the Los Angeles Raiders (huh??) playing the Washington Redskins) via Apple’s famous “1984” commercial. Set in some dystopian tech-future, liberation came in the form of athletic blonde hurling a giant hammer to smash a grey, imposing “Big Brother” (i.e. IBM) visage. The commercial was directed by Ridley Scott; two years, his (first) version of Blade Runner came out so he was already well-versed in dystopian imagery. The allusions to Orwell’s 1984 continued – the commercial concluded with the line “…you’ll see why 1984 won’t be like “1984.” A few days later, the first Macintoshs appeared in stores.

Screen Shot 2014-01-25 at 11.41.55 AM

Apples rolling off the assembly line, March 1984

At the computer’s launch – preserved in this video – a confident Steve Jobs lifted the machine out of its carrying bag and put the new computer through its paces. This included a demonstration of Mac’s speech capabilities, made all the more memorable when it took a swipe at IBM’s mainframes and cautioned that one should “never trust a computer you can’t lift.” The response? Ecstatic, prolonged applause.

Screen Shot 2014-01-25 at 12.10.30 PM

My point in recounting this is not to add to the Apple homage-fest. There are plenty of tech writers who filed excellent retrospective pieces (here and here and here, for example). Instead, what caught my interest was at a slightly more meta-level. I was intrigued by how original Apple advertisement – now hailed as a classic – played with the larger social fears and anxieties that accompanied the start of the 1984 calendar year. It got me thinking about other predictions for the technological future from 1984 and the overall nature of commemorating this or that technology.

Thirty years ago, George Orwell, certainly, and his dystopian imaginings received a great deal of attention. A quick search of the New York Times data base shows more than 150 articles coming out around late 1983/early1984 that, in one way or another, juxtapose Orwell’s futuristic novel – published in 1949 – with predictions of various futures to come.

Screen shot 2014-01-24 at 4.01.10 PM

One of the scores of “Orwell/1984-themed” articles from the period; this is from 8 January 1984

In Washington, DC they even held a big academic conference to discuss the Orwellian implications of future technologies. Ominously titled “The Road of 1984: High Technology and Human Freedom“, the four-day symposium brought together slew of experts at the Smithsonian to discuss “various aspects of society in light of…Orwell’s novel 1984.” At the meeting a pollster revealed the results of a phone survey – it found that almost half of Americans were “very concerned” about threats to their personal privacy. 80% of respondents believed that “it would be easy for someone to assemble a master file on their lives that would violate their privacy.” Look at this headline…prescient, no? As they say, ripped from today’s headlines. Except it was 30 years ago.

Screen shot 2014-01-24 at 4.48.31 PM

Times headline…2014? No…8 December 1983.

Apple’s “1984” commercial hacked into this broader cultural dialogue, reframed it, and broadcast it back to millions of football fans. Apple’s advertisement worked so well precisely because it contrasted a shiny, colorful, and playful utopian future with such a grey, grim, and humorless alternative.

1984 saw many other notable “technology events”. For instance: At the first Hackers Conference, Stewart Brand remarked (to Apple co-founder and newly minted millionaire Steve Wozniak, no less) that “Information wants to be free.” Now often cited as a founding principle for cyber-libertarians, most people have forgotten the other half of Brand’s statement which was “information wants to be expensive, because it’s so valuable.” Juxtapose Brand’s statement with the fears of average Americans about what might happen to their privacy if information did in fact become “free” and start circulating more widely. Now jump ahead 30 years and into the quagmire of Anonymous, Edward Snowden, the NSA…how should we think of Brand’s off-hand comment now? “Expensive” takes on a set of meanings far beyond financial ones.

1984 also saw the emergence of the “tech intellectual”. The very first Technology, Entertainment, and Design (i.e. TED) conference was held that year. Attendees included MIT’s Nicolas Negroponte (the Media Lab was just about to open its over-hyped doors) and – no surprise – Stewart Brand, the Zelig of just about every tech scene in the late 20th century. But it was, perhaps, a dubious achievement. The first TED lost money and it took six more years before, with the riches of cyberspace beckoning, the organizers tried the format again. Of course, TED has now become something to parody, perhaps even to lament.

Finally – for a really dystopian view of the future, made all the more real via 1984-era computer graphics, theaters in October premiered The Terminator. Set in Los Angeles of 1984/2029, the film featured just about every technology-induced nightmare one could imagine – artificial intelligence run amok; killer robots; nuclear apocalypse; and, of course, California’s future governor on a cinematic murder spree.

Screen Shot 2014-01-25 at 12.44.47 PM

I Robot…yes, you too can become governor of California.

Ultimately, there’s nothing inherently special about these (or any other) “technological commemorations.” 1984 – like all years – saw a whole host of technological debuts. We remember the introduction of the Macintosh largely because Apple has navigated treacherous corporate waters to become one of the highest valued and successful tech companies. If the Macintosh had failed and taken Apple down with it, I doubt we would have such a plethora of laudatory looks back. To be sure, a decade later, it was far from a foregone conclusion that we would be celebrating, much less remembering, the Macintosh today.1

Historians recognize the flaws inherent in any sort of periodization. The 30th anniversary of the Macintosh is certainly something to think about. But not only for what happened during a Superbowl commercial or on a stage in Cupertino. Commemorations matter for what they tells us about ourselves today, how we fantasize about or fear our technology now. So – what new technologies will say “Hello World” this year? How will we remember them in thirty years? Will we still care? Will they have made the world a better place? Will they have hurt us?

  1. When the ten-year anniversary of the Macintosh happened, Apple was on the ropes. I was hard pressed to find any commemorations for the Macintosh in 1994…other than the ominous “Apple’s Earnings Plunge as Revenues Rise.” []

Worlds Set Free

Screen Shot 2014-01-11 at 1.31.51 PM

2011 cover of Time…2045 is just about the time in which Ramez Naam’s novel Nexus unfolds.

When NPR made its Best Books of 2013 list, I was happily surprised to find Ramez Naam’s debut novel Nexus on it. Subtitled, Mankind Gets an Upgrade, the book’s back matter describes its author as a “professional technologist,” a former CEO of “Apex Nanotechnologies” who “holds a seat on the advisory board of the Institute for Accelerating Change” and other Silicon Valley-based tech affiliations.

Screen Shot 2014-01-11 at 1.27.47 PM

Naam giving a public talk, 2012.

Given my experience in writing about visioneers, Ramez Naam seemed like my kind of person. Moreover, Naam was born in Cairo before coming to the U.S. when he was three. The visioneers I’ve written about fit a standard (and too restricted) demographic – white males who attended elite American schools – so Naam’s background was all the more intriguing. So – I bought the book and took the wild ride.

The world that Naam constructs in Nexus sits on the verge of a dystopian future. But it never quite falls into the abyss. At its heart is the question of whether humans should be allowed to augment themselves with chemical, nanomachines, computer implants, and so forth. Those who choose to do so will emerge from the crucible as a posthuman. As Naam defines it, via a fictional entry from the 2036 edition of the OED, a posthuman is a “being which has been so radically transformed by technology that it…can no longer be considered human at all.”

Screen Shot 2014-01-11 at 1.28.00 PM

Cover of Naam’s 2013 book

From this stems much of the novel’s tension. On one hand, there those people who wish to hack their own biology (and perhaps that of others around them) so as to transcend their humanity. A few of these characters are unsavory, venal people who only seek profit and power. The majority are well-meaning, good-looking people in their mid-20s with superior intellects who see the passage to posthumanism as a form of evolution, augmented and accelerated to be sure.

Not surprisingly, those opposing them – to the extent of stripping posthumans of legal and human rights – are shadowy government agencies who see people augmented with emerging technologies as an emerging threat. Naam’s exposition reflects current oppositional views toward trans/posthumanism which is, as I’ve remarked, one of the relatively few areas in contemporary science where the left and the right-wing agree.

The basic plot: It’s 2040 and new technologies for human augmentation include cloning, mind control software, nanotechnologies, and drugs that allow the creation of a hive mind. (Naam’s scenes fell somewhere between a vigorous tantric yoga system and a molly-fueled rave at Burning Man). Central to this is the drug Nexus which, thanks to the efforts of Kaden Lane, a smart but naive doctoral student (is there any other kind?), has been upgraded into a form of mind-linking technology. Lane imagines the new Nexus will make a path to enlightenment, societal understanding, human enhancement (and perhaps an enhanced ability to bed sexy nerds)…but the duplicitous Emerging Risks Directorate sees only an unacceptable threat. Add to the mix some omnipresent surveillance, biologically improved martial arts fighters, and a cloned army of elite Chinese soldiers.1 

Nexus isn’t a bad book. Some of the dialogue is quite anodyne and readers might be put off by the level of tech speak that permeates the book. (Others might find this gives an even thicker veneer of verisimilitude.) The plot chugs right along though, enough to entertain me for a flight between JFK and LAX.

At the book’s end, however, what made Nexus worth reading wasn’t so much Naam’s prose but his plumbing of prevailing ideas about technology today. Good sci-fi offers a window into the time in which it’s written and Naam succeeds at this. His exploration of the implications that the technologies undergirding posthumanism might bring were provocative without veering off (at least not too often) into waters that were over-churned with philosophical musings. The plot and characters serve more as vehicles for Naam to put forth his own ideas about the risks and benefits of human enhancement technologies. Not surprisingly, given his profession of technologist and futurist, he is enthusiastic. But it’s an excitement tempered with some severe reservations.

Screen Shot 2014-01-11 at 1.29.44 PM

What Nexus reminded me most of all was H.G. Wells’ classic 1914 book The World Set FreeLike Naam’s book, Wells’ was inspired by rapid advances in technoscience – in Wells’ case, these were the recent discoveries in physics. Wells dedicated his book to British chemist Frederick Soddy who, along with Ernest Rutherford, had discovered atomic transmutation. Soddy popularized his musings on what the new sciences of radioactivity and nuclear physics might be able to do in his 1909 book The Interpretation of Radium. 

Wells’ book was especially prescient for its prediction of the first nuclear weapons. Fueled by something Wells called “Carolinium” these “atomic bombs which science burst upon the world that night,” Wells wrote, “were strange even to the men who used them.” Carnage ensues.2

Like Wells’ The World Set Free, Nexus is a cautionary tale. But what is it cautioning us about? Yes, Naam presents the dangers of rampant human enhancement via chemical, computer, and nanotechnologies are there. Their most damning capacity is not their ability to destroy but to coerce and Naam conjures some chilling scenes to depict this. Naam’s thriller clearly extrapolates existing techno-trends and his depiction of a pervasive and intrusive surveillance state is all the more relevant given the near-daily revelations about years of National Security Agency abuses, on-going debates about autonomous vehicles et al.. One doesn’t have to be some wild-eyed futurist to see some merit in the warnings Nexus sounds. Five years ago, my colleague Michael Bess, a historian at Vanderbilt University, published an excellent article that detailed the challenges that human enhancement technologies pose, not in 2040, but now.3

Naam wrote Nexus a century after Wells’ composed The World Set Free. But what and who is being set free? Wells’ ended his book by having the world spared through the actions of enlightened scientists who form a one-world government. A new social order, an all-encompassing but benevolent one based on technocratic rationalism would free the world from conflict.

At the end of Nexus, however, the techno-geeks – loosely connected members of an atomized society who espouse a pretty standard sort of techno-libertarian-utopianism – appear triumphant. Unfettered to evolve onward and upward, the Nexus-eaters have been set free from themselves. But – more revealing – they have freed themselves from government. They have improved themselves…but did society as a whole benefit?4

  1. Much of the book unfolds in Thailand, an unconventional move in terms of setting that was perhaps inspired by Paolo Bacigalupi’s excellent The Windup Girl. []
  2. Wells’ book is also famous for helping, in 1932, inspire the Hungarian émigré physicist Leo Szilard conceptualize the possibilities and dangers of nuclear energy. []
  3. Michael D. Bess, “Icarus 2.0: A Historian’s Perspective on Human Biological Enhancement,” Technology and Culture, 2008, 49, 1: 114-26. Bess has a new book soon to appear entitled Superhuman Civilization: Justice and Identity in a Bioengineered Society. According to his web site, it “explores the ethical and social implications of new technologies for human biological enhancement. These technologies, which reconfigure or boost our physical and mental capabilities, are developing rapidly in three distinct but interconnected domains: pharmaceuticals, bioelectronics, and genetics.” []
  4. For curious readers, Naam has a sequel. Crux picks up the story roughly where Nexus left us and follows the characters and the implications of their actions. []