Future of Crisis Management

At the CMU-hosted Silicon Valley Crisis Camp, March 26-28, 2010, there was a lively brainstorming session about the longer-term future of disaster management. In the much farther future, crisis response could disappear since disasters might be prevented through weather management, sensor-equipped smartbuildings, and floating movable cities. When disasters do occur, they could be regarded as an annoyance rather than a catastrophic loss of human lives and property through the 3-D printing of physical bodies imprinted with recent mindfile backups, and robot-aided damage clearing and structure rebuilding.

In the medium term, advanced technology could transform crisis response in several ways:

• Robotic first responders: Autonomous or remote-piloted robots could be used as a substitute to humans for assessing damage, scouting terrain, finding victims, and providing aid.
• Super-smartphone: Super-smartphones could be messaged or would automatically sense disaster occurrence and switch into crisis mode, making disaster applications easily accessible, for example mapping software layers indicating relief shelters, and automatic status updates from personal social networks. Smartphones could track health status, vital signs, psychological state, and be used for telediagnosis and even possibly DIY surgery or other medical treatment. The user could run a virtual world app on the smartphone integrated with augmented reality to send their avatar out to inspect the local environment for self-rescue and peer-rescue.
• Building codes 3.0: smart sensors could capture a variety of data about a building’s status and its occupants, for example knowing who or at least how many people are inside a building at any time (with regular data purges to protect privacy).
• Gaming: An augmented reality (AR) game immediately begins when a crisis occurs. Participants earn points for crowdsourcing/reporting information, uploading video footage documenting damage, and accepting challenges (disaster management-related tasks). There could be many layers to the AR interface, heatmaps showing the injured and dead, building damage, resource availability, shelters and health clinic locations. Gaming could be used to pass time, distract, improve psychological state, and connect those in physical proximity.
• Market principals: Technology tools could be used to create markets, to facilitate the discovery and exchange of different types of supply and demand: information, labor, time, relief resource availability, and distribution.
• 3-D printing of relief materials: blankets, food, shelter, medical supplies, and clinics could be printed with 3-D printers and online sharable CAD designs in urgent disaster response. Over time, smart infrastructure printing could be used to reconstruct buildings. Rubble could be recycled into building materials.
• RFID-tagged resources: all aid resources and donations could be RFID-tagged for inventory management and delivery, including real-time updates of what is still available and functional from local stores; markets could develop to allocate resources.
• Personal biosensors and bioactuators: personal biosensors are seamlessly incorporated into clothing to provide a personal data climate including both biophysical and environmental data. Biosensors can identify an approaching bioplague, download antibody plans from the internet, manufacture, and administer them. Similarly, radiation-resistant genes found in extremophiles could be downloaded and applied in the case of nuclear incidents.

Human microbiome and personalized medicine

In genomics, the eleventh annual meeting of Advances in Genome Biology and Technology (AGBT) was held February 24-27, 2010, and featured an eclectic mix of new research and bioinformatics tools. Genomic research was presented in a diversity of areas including human, animal, plant, and bacteria. Many research advances are coming from partnerships between one or more academic research teams together with commercial entities. The biggest buzz was around Pacific Biosciences, the 3rd generation sequencing darling, with their single-molecule real-time (SMRT) platform which is still on track for an estimated launch later this year. The platform could deliver a 30,000-fold improvement over current methods, and ultimately achieve sub-$100 whole human genome sequencing. Attendees were also wowed by 454 Roche’s bench top GS Junior System (initially announced in late 2009), making sequencing much quicker and easier, and priced at only $98,000 (a milestone for sequencing equipment which usually runs in the several hundreds of thousand dollars).

Sequencing data storage and transfer costs continue to increase with the computing industry still not cognizant of the whole new era of data processing and communications transfer that is necessary for Very Large Datasets. The NIH 1000 Genomes project, for example, is transferring many terabyte-sized files per day.

From a research standpoint, some of the most activity is in cancer genomics. A recent NIH study generated 100TB data sequencing a melanoma sample and a normal blood sample and has been refining the Most Probable Variant (MPV) Bayesian analysis method used to identify genetic mutations. Perhaps the most innovative new research activity is in RNA sequencing. Other specific findings of note are in the areas of the microbiome and genetic variation:

Human microbiome
The complex interactions between individual humans and their microbiomes could have a substantial impact on personalized medicine. In some cases of infectious disease in humans, the pathogenesis may be unknown 40-60% of the time (e.g.; respiratory disease, skin disease). Even rudimentary issues remain unsolved, for example, it may be undetectable from a simple blood draw showing staph infection whether the bacteria was on the skin surface or in the blood. Microbiome sequencing is allowing the identification of novel pathogens, and could also be useful at the human population level to assess the spread and mutation trajectory of pathogens.

Genetic variation: human and otherwise
The populations analyzed in human genome wide association studies are being expanded, with important findings for both ancestry reconstruction and medical genomics. Research was presented on African-American, Mexican-American, Bushmen, and Bantu genome studies. A deeper understanding of genetic variation is also being used to facilitate the selection of desirable qualities in agriculture and animal livestock. For example, a chicken sequencing project found 7 million unique SNPs, 5 million of which were novel, and several of which were useful in translational application.

Ultimate possibilities for life and technology

Thinking really long term, what would it be like if all matter, including life, could be designed and built to specification with nanotechnology and synthetic biology? Form factor could become ephemeral and purpose-driven. An intelligence could embody as a human, as a fleet of starships, as a crane, as a school of nanoparticles, or remain digital.

Some interesting issues could come up, say from having multiple persistent copies of one intelligence. What would the social, legal, economic etiquette and governing laws be? Or would these words even make sense anymore? The notion of the distinct individual may become obsolete.

Transhumanism will be an interesting and certainly divisive step, when groups or all humans have radically enhanced capabilities as compared with today. Posthumanism, the moment of speciation, may be quite a shock.

What about utility functions? In a digital format, traditional biological functions make a lot less sense. And what about emotion? Is there a relevant adaptation for the digital substrate or is emotion just another biology-based information system?

What is intelligence and is it reflected differently in a digital medium without the sensory input context of the physical world? Maybe intelligence is nothing more than manipulating patterns of information.

Finally, what are the ultimate possibilities for life and technology once joined? What if any would the activity be? Would the focus be on aesthetics? Analytics?

Integration of life and technology

Life and technology are thought of as discrete but they are starting to converge (a detailed explanation is here) and could continue to become increasingly integrated, unified as is sought with the physical laws. Life sciences have evolved from being an art to a science to now an engineering problem. Life is complex but finite and it is quite possible that all biological processes, human and otherwise, will be understood and managed, including disease and death. All matter, including life, could be designed to spec in the future; the aims of synthetic biology, building genetically-precise organisms from the bottom up, programmable matter and molecular nanotechnology are early examples. In the future, form factor and embodiment could be temporary and determined by purpose.



The above graphic represents the evolution of human and machine intelligence. Given the faster pace of technology advancement, a crossover point, sometimes called the technological singularity is inevitable. Futurist Ray Kurzweil expects this point of machine intelligence surpassing [current] human intelligence in 2029. The two curves could merge (the Human’ line above), with humans reengineering themselves into technology that can learn and evolve as fast as information technology. In actuality, there may be many forms of biological life integrating with technology and more ‘human’ diversity than has ever existed.

Future of intelligence
It is not clear that there is anything special or inherently undesignable or unreplicable about intelligence. Intelligence may be nothing more than the manipulation of patterns of information, and presumably could be substrate agnostic and executor agnostic.

Fallacies when thinking about the economics of future technology

Future technologies seem so impactful and fabulous that it is easy to jump to incorrect conclusions about what things would be like with their advent.


Fallacy #1: Molecular assemblers will have a worldwide overnight rollout
The conventional assumption is that once humans are able to make one molecular assembler, it will be able to self-replicate, and therefore within twenty-four hours everyone worldwide will have one. It is far more likely that a molecular assembler would follow the usual s-curve adoption pattern of any other newtech; early versions are expensive and clunky with minimal functionality, continued improvement iterations make the newtech more relevant and usable.

The first molecular assemblers may be like a next generation 3d printer, printing the T-shirt a friend sent as an email attachment. Only early adopters will have the utility (read: money and interest) to purchase the first molecular assemblers. Also, the first molecular assemblers will not be able to self-replicate as the intricate molecular manufacturing processes will need to be conducted at special facilities.

Finally, the full newtech ecosystem needs to be considered, while carbon and other basic elements could be obtained easily from dirt piles delivered to suburban driveways, industrial utility solutions are need for the 50% of the urbanized world. Cartridge supply for specialty elements (think Gillette) will be required. Matter decompiling will need to be a feature of the molecular assembler or there will need to be some other means of recycling. More here, here and here.


Fallacy #2: Don’t develop newtech if it’s not cheap enough for universal access
This is the view that we should not develop any beneficial newtech unless it can be immediately accessible worldwide at a low price. “Folks, lets not make the Eniac since not everyone can have one.” However noble this view may be, it again ignores the historical precedent of technology development, rollout and penetration. A fundamental property of technology is that it may be expensive at the outset but then price drops, functionality improvements and re-purposing to new markets occur over time. For example, those currently paying $100,000 a year for life extension treatments are hopefully helping to rationalize, standardize and develop a broader market for these services.

Work can still be done on open-source and universal accessibility models, and diligence applied to clearing public goods to non-IP protected regimes (e.g.; the human genome), but with the understanding that traditional technology development models (cost drops over time) will continue to drive progress.

In fact, there can be benefits in not adopting newtech immediately; costs are higher, unintended consequences are unknown, early adopters can work out the kinks (e.g; the first generation iPhone cost $600, the second generation iPhone 3G with expanded functionality emerged a year later at $199) and older technology generations like landline telephony can be skipped. World-is-flat cycle time speed-ups and new business models (e.g.; OneWorldHealth as a non-profit pharmaceutical company directed at developing world disease) illustrate market efficiency in applying traditional technology development in today’s world.

The article with all nine fallacies is available here

Virtual world killer apps

Virtual worlds seem to be distinct from the Internet but are really the natural evolution of the web as a communications, commerce, information and computation medium; a move to real-time 3D interaction from 2D text.

Virtual worlds are no longer exclusively recreational, they are becoming increasingly routine for a wide range of professional activities. Will Sun Microsystems be the first to announce their corporate earnings simultaneously in-world as they do now on CEO Jonathan Schwartz's blog?

There are about 50 virtual worlds in various stages of funding, launch and adoption. Linden Lab’s Second Life is the largest and most complex with an economy in excess of $1.5m USD per day. With the surge in activity, killer apps are starting to emerge.

Consumer Killer App: 3D Immersive Shopping
Shopping could be the killer app of virtual worlds for consumers, just like email drew people to the Internet. Shopping, not in the sense of avatar couture, coiffeur and custom animation, although this is an important sector of the virtual world economy, but in the sense of physical-world retailers having virtual showrooms for customers to review and potentially purchase their products in a 3D visual immersive way, everything from cars to furniture to electronics to tax services to books and music.

Steelcase furniture showroom
Click here to teleport

EOLUS/SAP experimental shop
Click here to teleport

Business Killer App: the Interface
For businesses, it is not about the application but the interface, the interface is the application. Virtual worlds are the modern functionality-extending overlay for any existing application, a 3D real-time information-rich collaboration environment. Some examples include IBM's virtual NOC business, constructing VNOCs for their own and client operations, Intel's in-world Dev Zone developer network meetings and Coke's "Virtual Thirst," Cisco's "Connected Life" and Osram Lighting's "One Million Dollar Idea" virtual world creativity campaigns.

IBM Watson's VNOC (Virtual Network Operations Center)
Click here to teleport

Pervasiveness
Due to resource consumption, virtual worlds are not yet used pervasively by most people; they are an application to log into intermittently, just like the Internet was before broadband. It could be in five years that computer processing power and broadband speeds, including on the mobile platform, make virtual world pervasiveness possible. Even before then, it will probably be as natural to book an airline ticket in-world via a travel sim as it would be to go to Orbitz.

How could progress not be underway in an evolution from users to residents?

Are today's technologies life-transforming?

Technologies people have experienced in the last 20 years like the PC, the Internet, cell phones, iPods, and personal video recorders have been life changing but have they been truly transformative? Despite the current rapid pace of technology change and innovation, it can be argued that some inventions in the late 1800s/early 1900s period had a more dramatic impact on people's lives - the advent of electricity, indoor plumbing, cars replacing horses, hospitals and more.

Examining the changes in the 100 years ago era and the present era suggests that the changes are of different types. While they are both the implementation of better tools to ease human labor, the 100 years ago changes were more about basic hardcore real world problems of comfort, health, sanitation and efficiency, building linearly to a more modern baseline. Our recent changes, and the ones coming, are more profound in a different way - they are about opening up non-linear possibilities in human thought space and creativity. There is an assumption that we are at baseline and improving exponentially from there. Today we have the privilege of thinking about what it is like to extend humanness, to travel off the Earth, to change and create new organisms from the DNA up and a myriad of other formerly almost unimaginable phenomenon.