About robots, the internet and digital me. Interview with futurist Brian Johnson

Interested in the future of digital technology? Read science fiction and communicate more with teens - advises Intel staff (and only) futurist Brian David Johnson (BDJ). On duty, predicting how people will interact with computers and devices in 10-15 years, Johnson already sees a world in which data lives its own secret life, and computer intelligence is dissolved in everyday things.
We bring to your attention a shortened translation of the interview Johnson gave to the information project Intel Software Adrenaline (ISA) .

ISA: Computers are getting smaller and smaller, until they disappear completely. How far will this process go in the next ten years?
BDJ: By 2020, the physical size of computers will be close to zero. Intel has just announced a 14nm process, and my architectural friends are talking about a 5nm process, which is only 12 atom sizes. This means that we can turn anything into a computer.
However, from a practical point of view, everything looks completely different. The world in which we are surrounded by computer intelligence, does not look like the world with new data transfer protocols or security. To be in this, we must find a place for computers where they have never been: in our bodies, in the soil, everywhere.

ISA: Returning to the previous question: where is the boundary between man and technology? Will technology become a part of us — or vice versa — in the near future?
BDJ: We are currently seeing the process of "screening" computers; that is, if you see the display, it means that it is a computer. Looking ahead for several years, we can say that we will live in the world of displays. How will we interact with them? Sometimes with the help of a set of words (it won't go away right away), sometimes with touches or voice. And sometimes just involving the device in your life. This is the most interesting - when life itself becomes a way of interaction.
In the future, input and output will become headless. Perhaps you have already heard about wearable devices - these are the first members of this class.

ISA: You have already said that data will live its life without human intervention. What are the potential dangers of this scenario, what actions do we need to take so that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?
BDJ: Last year we had the opportunity to make sure that the data really live their own secret life. People are beginning to understand that they have a second essence - the digital information associated with them. The pitfalls here are the same as in the real world. We have to ask ourselves what actions are permissible with our second self, how much information can I share with others and what can I get from them?
Our second digital entity should be studied from the point of view of social sciences - this is how we will understand the complexity and subtlety of this data.
')
ISA: Almost everyone in this world is experiencing information overload. How can technology help to cope with them and increase the value of information?
BDJ: It is very important that the technologies around you are familiar with you personally - what is interesting and what is not. Know your schedule of the day - when you are very busy and subject to information overload, and when you are bored and would not mind to learn something new and interesting.
Take, for example, a smartphone. An ordinary smartphone now has more computing power than the computer that brought the Americans to the moon and back. But if he is so smart, why doesn't he know anything about me? Why does not understand that I represent as a person? When we have it, it will be possible to filter and prioritize information.



ISA: Privacy and security are often at odds with each other, although both are certainly very important. How can technology balance them?
BDJ: People often talk about security and privacy as something physical. In fact, these are not things, but legal, cultural and social constructions. Therefore, their understanding is very different in different countries of the world. In the United States it is considered so, in the European Union in a different way, in China - somehow. If we realize how much everything is mixed here, this will allow us to more fully understand what is permissible and what is not.

ISA: You said you were a big fan of science fiction in the past. How is the practical role of fiction for a futurist?
BDJ: Yes, I am not only the author of science fiction works, but also a big fan of them. As a futurist, I use fiction as a product creation tool at Intel. Good science fiction makes it possible to evaluate both the positive and negative aspects of what is happening, so from all the options for the future we can determine those that are suitable for us and those that we would like to avoid.
Still, in my opinion, fiction is a very powerful tool for spreading technological ideas. Let's say that I am not an expert in artificial biology, but if I read a good fantastic thing based on scientific facts, I can maintain a meaningful conversation on this topic.
Here is a great example. Gene Roddenberry created Star Trek not just to show cool devices and interplanetary travel. He created it because he saw the future in a completely different way, and for this he invented technology. He wanted to show a completely different society, and, perhaps, with his help, we will not only build such a society, but also create the technologies we have seen.

ISA: Many science fiction works paint the future in black: technology has gotten out of control, humanity is in danger. Such scenarios can not be called impracticable. Do you think tomorrow will be or maybe more positive?
BDJ: I consider myself an optimist. This is probably a very radical statement for a futurist - people used to think of us as pessimists. But I disagree with that. The future is created by the everyday work of people, why should we make it bad? Another thing is that you can not be obscured by all the bad that we can do. Dark predictions are more important than optimistic because they provide us with terminology for discussions about the future and what we should avoid.

ISA: Regardless of gloomy forecasts, cars are increasingly replacing people in many areas of activity, including intellectual ones. Should we be afraid of this?
BDJ: Let's say definitely: cars will not replace a person. Machines perfectly expand our capabilities. When we create machines, we in some way instill in them the features of human nature: morality, ethics, faith in the future. If we do them right, we ourselves will become more humane.

ISA: One can argue whether the technologies change us as humans. Are we becoming more like machines or, on the contrary, are we creating cars in our image?
BDJ: Humanity is well able to adapt and interact with technology and devices. For example, studies by Columbia University have shown that we are now increasingly transferring our memory to the Internet. That is, we keep less in our heads and need to connect to the Internet in order to remember the rest. Just as before, we transferred oral stories to books. It's great and something like a Renaissance.

ISA: They say that people use the Internet, and young people live in it. Is the future really theirs?
BDJ: I am often asked how to prepare for the future? I recommend to take in advisors a 13-year-old child. Of course, the future belongs to youth. And my job is to prepare these young minds for creating the future.
For me, it's great that an entire generation has grown up, which does not know that once we did not have the Internet. I remember those times it was cold, dark and boring. The internet is awesome. And not only the Internet, but also robots, microcomputers, cell phones. Now is the right time to live.
Our task is to work with young people. I spend most of my time communicating with young people, but I already relate to old people. We must give her the means to build the future, of course, before asking how they see it.