The Future: Ephemeralities running on Quantum Smartnetworks

The future could be one of pluralistic digital societies running on consensus-confirmed smartnetworks. There could be many kinds of entities, those with human-roots, technology entities, and any variety of hybrids. Blockchains could be the coordination mechanism between these entities, based on attestation variables like capacity and reputation. Further, eventually the digital societies of the future could be post-entity ‘entities’ or ‘whats’ – ephemeralities, presences, capacities, reservoirs, resources, like capacity in reserve: processing, memory, consciousness, ideas, associative processing, analysis, feedback, support, and critique. Perhaps all in the future is just capacity.

The ontological unit of intelligibility could be resident capacities in reserve, not resident entities already instantiated but available capacities, energy fields, potentialties. This is not even already-intentioned propensities (as contemplated by Popper ), but the uncollapsed waves and particles of quantum mechanics catalyzed into reality through intention, need, interaction, and imagination. Ephemeralities could automatically coalesce into actuality from virtuality to respond to a purpose, and continually meta-self-evaluate to monitor for ongoingness and finality of purpose.

Like photons, electrons, and maybe gravitons exist as wave packets at more than one place and time, only manifesting into reality when an observation is made, and the concept could be extended so that capacities too might coalesce into reality when an observation, conscious choice, or other motivator to action is made about the need for the capacity.

Quantum Smartnetworks
The notion of Quantum Smartnetworks is twofold. First, there is conceiving of some model, like blockchains, as a universal mechanism for measuring, administering, exchanging, tracking, monitoring, recording, finding, and interacting with all manner of granular quanta of anything; any entity that is dividable into essential quantized constituent building blocks. Second, there is the application of quantum principles to smartnetwork instances, in the sense of quantum smartnetworks as the orchestration of post-entity capacities or energies existing in potentiality (Deleuze’s virtuality) into reality.

Science fiction examples can lead the way, for example Accelerando features distributed trust networks and reputation markets, where one use of blockchain models could be digital copies “watching over their originals from the consensus cyberspace of the [smart] city [2].”

References 
[1] Popper, K.R. (1959). "The Propensity Interpretation of Probability" The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10, 37, 25-42.
[2] Stross, C. (2006). Accelerando. London: Ace.

Post-entity Society of Instances

In digital smartnetwork societies, entities wanting to conduct smartnetwork operations will likely need to be independently confirmed and validated through mechanisms like consensus trust. Consensus trust and reputation structures have been conceived as grounded in a fixed and persistent entity.

However, there is the possibility of progressing to a post-entity society. Humans are currently constrained to an embodied form, but this may not be the situation in the future, and there is no such requirement for technology entities in the realm of digital identity. Digital identity might become so distributed, portable, copiable, open-sourceable, sharable, malleable, and shardable, that it no longer makes sense to think in terms of entities.

The question would then be how to enable smartnetwork operations in a post-entity society, perhaps one in which ‘ephemeral instances of capability and creativity’ have replaced identity-bounded entities. The answer is that reputation could still matter. Even if not a full-fledged identity-entity, any instance, any measurable quantum, any participation no matter how ephemeral could still have a reputation.

Reputations could become a lot more complicated, measuring different levels like actor, action, and intention, and also line-item credit for contributions and new ideas; and calculate composite team reputations for sharded cloudmind group participations. All this is could be possible because blockchains give us much more granularity in record-keeping.

Personhood Beyond the Human: the Subjectivation Scale of Future Persons

Philosophical concepts are useful for considering a potentially diverse landscape of future persons.

One important question is subjectivation – how individuals form and what constitutes an individual. The less helpful approach is focusing on classification and definition which is discriminatory and doomed to death by detail. A more fruitful approach is Simondon’s theory of individuation.

For Simondon, the current and future world is an environment of dynamic processes like individuation. Individuals participate in but do not cause individuation. Most importantly, individuals exist on a spectrum of capacity for action with other living beings including animals, human persons, and possibly a variety of future persons.

‘Capacity for action’ (a Spinoza-inspired concept) is crucial because it focuses on degrees of capability (related to a particular quality or skill) as opposed to underlying nature. Capacity for action has all of the possibility and mobility of a future-looking frame, and none of the fixity and discrimination of classification.

The Post-Human Biocitizen

We find ourselves in a world with a frenetic pace of life sciences bio-innovation emanating from institutional science, startups, and community biolabs. New possibilities abound in a wide range of areas including  personal genomics, regenerative medicine, cellular therapies, anti-aging, microfluidic chips, quantified self tracking devices and apps, Google Glass, Google diabetes monitoring contacts, brain fitness training, wearable computing, IoT, and cognitive enhancement techniques.

At a higher level, two main themes emerging from this bio-innovation are:
1) what is happening with ourselves as human subjects
2) what is happening regarding data

The human subject is in the process of evolving into a biocitzen, being at the center of health optimization action-taking with a layer of quantified self-tracking gadgetry as a first line of defense, then a layer of preventive medicine health intermediaries (like genomic counselors) and peer collaborators in health social networks and community biolabs, and finally traditional public health services as final line of defense. 

Data's role is transforming even more quickly than the emerging biocitizen where the possibility of collecting, integrating, and sharing huge volumes of health data streams is now possible and required for the destigmatization of health issues and realization of preventive medicine. There are four main data streams to integrate: all of the omics (e.g.; genomics, metaboliomics, etc.), traditional health, quantified self-tracking gadgetry (wearables), and personal internet-of-things (e.g.; smart car, smart home). There is an important need to extend the concept of privacy and rethink the attendant rights and responsibilities of data regimes, quick likely with the advent of protective data intermediary services.

YouTube Video: The Post-Human Biocitizen

Presentation (en français): The Post-Human Biocitizen
Video (en français): Les personnes futures comme biocitoyens

Principia Posthuman: an assertion-free posthuman philosophy

Although a definition of philosophy is hard to come by, and practitioners may be either loth to define it (sacrilegious to the field’s pervasive intentional obscurantism) or fill tomes with its consideration (Deleuze’s What is Philosophy? is one of the more recent examples), one purpose of philosophy would certainly seem to be serving as a tool for structuring thinking about almost any topic. In particular, the future is a welcome venue for more standardized tools for structuring thinking. Just because the future has not yet occurred, and linear and probabilistic forecasting is limited, does not mean that there could not be rigorous means of thinking about it.

In fact, whilst thinking about the future from a philosophical view, points arise which suggest that the current nature of philosophy may be limited and inapplicable to many future conditions, and will need to be extended and re-thought. For example, much of philosophy is built upon concepts like language, the self, and subject-object differences while it is not at all radical to envision a post-lingual, post-self, and post-subject object future. There are already starting to be more profound communication structures such as body language readers and holographic thought maps that could supplement and replace language as the only (and hopelessly narrowband and mediated) communication mechanism. The self can be seen as merely the current meatsphere holding tank for an individual brain in a future which might include a variety of biological and electronic copies, with different portions permissioned out to groupmind projects. Subject-object differences fade too with the controlled manipulations of nanotechnology and perspective-extending sensors.

Humbly proposed by a pseudonymous Mary Posthumanis then, is the need for a Principia Posthuman, a new thought paradigm that realizes just as ancient philosophy and theology were not enough and gave way to existentialism, that modern, post-modern, post-post-modern, neo-post-structuralism, post-subjectivity, etc. thinking is currently insufficient as a guidepost to the different possible flavors of posthuman future, and that a radical Posthuman Principia will be needed which apprehends post-Marxist economics, post-existential metaphysics, and a model-free, assertion-free, wholistic, noSQL philosophy.