This piece appears in this month’s issues of Erudition. You can find it here: http://www.eruditiononline.co.uk/article.php?id=909
When I was invited to write a piece about the future of technology, I assumed that I was being asked to predict which gadgetry we would have next year, how medical science will progress, and the new and terrifying surveillance methods our governments will employ. So, here are those predictions:
You will have more and smaller (and sometimes bigger) gadgets. They will thrill and delight you. Then you will tire of them and throw them away and buy different gadgets. Apple® will love you. Your smartphone will begin—if it already hasn’t begun—to be a little creepy. It will, of its own (programmed) volition, gather data about your friends and contacts in such a way that every time you pull someone up in your contacts list, you will be presented with more information than the last time you looked them up.* Medical science will find increasingly bizarre ways to not cure cancer, but to look at cancer. Cattle and chickens will be replaced by grasshoppers and ants as sources of protein as the human population outgrows its ability to produce food supply. Your government will place tiny microchips in your toilet paper to monitor your bowel movements.
Now, with that boring, run-of-the-mill assessment out of the way, let us actually have a look at what the future of technology will be for us as people.
Firstly, you will not notice the proliferation of technology in the world around you. It will just be there. Everywhere. You will not see it. It is this type of technology which I will address presently. Secondly, due to proliferation, there will be two kinds of people in the world: those who know what they are looking at and how it works and those who do not. The latter group will comprise the majority of people.
This is, of course, already happening. Ask anyone with an iPhone to describe the manner in which it connects to other such devices and you will get a range of bizarre answers of varying levels of complexity and detail. An example: a friend explained to me his theory that the reason that he had to turn off his iPod on take-off and landing was because it was communicating with satellites. He believed that the device was communicating with satellites because it would magically change its time when he went from the United States to Egypt or Egypt to Thailand. He had overlooked the fact that the time had only changed once the device had been plugged into a laptop.
Explanations like this abound when your average end user picks up a device or opens a web browser and then tries to contemplate how and why these things work the way that they do. This is not really a problem most of the time. Users of technology do not need to understand how something works or in some cases even how to use it. Some things just work without ever requiring human intervention. When they stop working, however, this is a problem.
What do you do when your mobile phone, iPod, computer, router, or other devices stop working? You call someone and then they tell you to either take or send it somewhere to have it looked at by a technician. We are becoming increasingly reliant upon technicians and technology experts. There will come a time, very soon indeed, that there will be no user-serviceable devices in the market at all. Apple has done a good job of doing away with external artifacts that betray that your device can be opened up and looked inside. This is the way of the future.
Personal computing could already be considered esoteric, but this is only the beginning. As mentioned above, we are going to see—or, more importantly, not see—tiny computing devices embedded in all manner of objects and products. Everything will become “smart”. Users, on the other hand, will become less smart about how these things work. Those who do know and who can repair and change the manner in which the devices function will become tantamount to clergymen or magicians. They will be the keepers of the esoteric knowledge of the future.
Think of it like this: if you told someone in the fifteenth century that you could look into a device and see someone looking into a similar device on the other side of the world, they would either turn away in utter disbelief or they would call you a witch and burn you at the stake. Yet we do this all the time with Skype and other internet video phone and video chat appliances and applications. Magicians, astrologers, priests, and mystics in antiquity were revered—or reviled—for their knowledge of the unseen world and familiarity with the methods used in manipulating it.
Magic, science, and religion have never really been all that different, if even at all separable. Each comprise on one hand a set of theoretical models which are required for understanding and explaining the world. On the other hand, they each have a set of protocols for interacting with that which is not directly visible or tangible. The practitioners of each have deep knowledge about both the theory and protocol associated with their chosen discipline. This knowledge allows them to interact with the world in a manner very different from those around them.
Place technological advancements in computing in this context. There is already a clergy associated with computing. System administrators (sysadmins) require a huge amount of knowledge in order to do their jobs and to make systems and networks function properly. Dabblers often miss things and with disastrous consequences. End users neither need nor want to have the kind of knowledge that sysadmins have , but they know that they are different. Every office has a set of people who are considered “technological wizards.” These are often the same people who are employed to keep the servers and networks in good operating condition.
There are also those who will use their vast knowledge for evil. The recent Stuxnet infection of computers in Iranian nuclear power plants comes to mind. Black-hat hackers and virus engineers will hold dominion over the black magic of the future and we will have reason to fear them. The less end users know about the devices that they use, there will be a greater chance that those devices can be used against them. This may manifest in actual life-threatening situations—think “smart” cars, onboard navigation systems, autopilot—or they will be used to monitor their users surreptitiously—tracking the whereabouts of users using the GPS devices in their mobile phones, monitoring email and text messages, tapping calls.
This is not a warning, this is a prediction. The path has already been set. End users have neither the desire nor the the need at present to know how or why their devices function. This trend will continue to the point that they will barely even know how to use them. They will simply know that they are there. Those who possess the esoteric knowledge will be increasingly considered to be wizards and magicians to the point that they will come under scrutiny if not members of the orthodox clergy. This already happens to some extent. In governmental background checks, technological knowledge of those being investigated is of great concern to weed out any potential “hackers” who might be or have been involved in any illegal activities.
The average lay person will both marvel at and fear the knowledge of the sorcerer. The clergy will work to maintain their position of dominance as the keepers of the knowledge, though they will mostly be charlatans, possessing only partial or partially-falsified knowledge; the real knowledge being locked away in vaults somewhere; the keys held by few, if any.
——————
*This has already happened. My phone freaks me out all the time with things like this. It should learn to mind its own damned business