The future of humanity will no longer be determined by humans – that much is already clear. Technology has taken charge of our destiny. The question is: can anything be done?

No form of technology, whatever its benefits, comes without a penalty. The convenience of coal and oil, multiplied by human numbers and demand, has created the climate crisis, for which there remains no solution. The blessings of modern agriculture have ravaged half the planet, destroying three quarters of the world’s wild animals, and now face internal failure.

Every time humans come up with a brilliant new idea, it seems, we rarely calculate the downsides. We plough on regardless until the harms and deaths become undeniable. We worship ourselves as ‘_Homo sapiens_’ – wise man but our use of technology is seldom wise and quite frequently, catastrophic.

This is not to be read as a Luddite rant against technology. Rather it is a supportive warning that even the best technology has downsides, and its neglect or misuse can result in evil consequences, if not disaster. So, it must be controlled – and by society, not by its originators.

The global technology engine has ignited the afterburners, showering society with blazing marvels we eagerly seize, not understanding their inbuilt flaws, in a way that is far beyond the control of communities, nations or civilisation as a whole. Attempting to regulate this flood of new stuff, one technology and one country at a time, is futile – as the following (fast-growing) list of major risks highlights:

Techno-risks

New plagues: “Gain of function” engineering of deadly new lifeforms capable of infecting humans (as is suspected in the case of COVID) is proceeding worldwide, despite some efforts to contain it. Leading scientists argue it holds high risks and few benefits. More than 7000 research papers have been published on GOF since 2020.

Geoengineering: Geoengineering of the planet and its weather systems not only fails to address basic causes of the climate crisis but threatens to cause global food insecurity, ecosystem collapse and faster extinction rates. Essentially, it is trying to fix global warming by repeating the mistake.

AI: Adverse effects from AI, whether intended or not, on societies and ecosystems, can potentially wipe out humanity, scientists have warned. Short of that they can destroy political, economic and social systems, increase inequality, bias and conflict and saturate society in misinformation.

Global surveillance: Control of entire populations and every individual is advancing rapidly through 24/7 electronic surveillance, facial recognition, data mining, “smart” cities, AI and quantum computing. People will be told what to buy, which leaders to support and will be easily imprisoned or worse for their views.

Security failure: Widespread and systemic failures in safeguarding digital systems, infrastructure, networks, and data from unauthorised access, attacks, malicious use and exploitation by criminals, hostile nations and malignant corporates are now a universal reality. They could make the internet unworkable.

‘ Broligarchy’: Increased centralisation and control over consumers, voters and legislatures by technology billionaires (“tech bros”), is concentrating the power of private technology corporations and their bosses over government and society worldwide. Cheap AI and other digital baubles are used as bait to ensnare naïve citizens in their web. The industry is notably sexist and authoritarian, seen by some as a new form of tyranny.

**Killer robots** : Automation of offensive weapons, including nuclear and biological, so they can “think” for themselves, presents a growing risk that wars may be directed by machines rather than humans. Some experts fear machines may decide humans are surplus to their needs.

Nanopollution: The world is already inundated with plastic microparticles, entering human blood and brains, unborn children and all wildlife from 450mt/yr of plastic waste. A boom in nanoproducts is unleashing a new flood of pollution — of chemicals which never go away — without serious regulation or control.

Megacity collapse: This would be due to technological failure to develop renewable food, recycle water and waste and end chemical pollution. This is more a failure by technology to anticipate trouble.

It is not technology, per se, that is at fault. It is its widespread overuse or misuse, magnified by the power of global markets, the greed of developers, the burgeoning human population and its unrequited thirst for novelty and demand for material goods and comforts, no matter how deadly these may turn out to be.

National governments, beholden to international chemical and technology corporates, are often loath to protect their consumers by regulating. It generally happens very slowly, over decades, and seldom solves the problem – as the corporates simply migrate to more corrupt countries. With 196 countries all doing their own thing, it is arguable than, on its own, national regulation will never be effective in protecting citizens worldwide against the technology swarm now being unleashed.

Experience shows that people who develop technologies are inclined to exaggerate the benefits and play down the harms – and cannot be trusted to tell the whole truth about them. Such is the scale of the risk to all humanity which powerful new technologies present that a mechanism for societal oversight is now essential. A global agreement and an independent agency for reviewing novel technology, akin to the IPCC, is the only way we can avoid repeating the catastrophic mistakes of the past or creating fresh disasters in future.

Seeking answers

1. Recognising that human numbers and demands are now so vast that almost any technology created to satisfy them will have a negative impact on the Earth and its ability to sustain life, we could establish a Global Technology Convention requiring that all technologies — especially those that are comparatively recent and unknown — be independently and expertly assessed for both their benefits and harms and the findings made known worldwide for regulators to act on. (This is essentially how the global air safety authorities operate.)

2. All scientific disciplines should adopt a “first do no harm” code of ethics for their practitioners, as medical doctors do, to limit the likelihood of their technology being used for evil or dangerous purposes. All universities and scientific agencies should observe this voluntary code and be publicly scrutinised. If not, it can imposed by civil and international law.

3. New human rights can be established in the areas most affected by new technology to alert the world to potentials risks. For example:

4. A human right prohibiting the poisoning of humans, their water, food and environment with untested chemicals and nanoparticles;

5. A human right outlawing the creation of novel disease-causing organisms dangerous to humanity;

6. A human right prohibiting the use of killer robots against civilian populations; and

7. A human right prohibiting the mass surveillance of populations.

While human rights in themselves do not prevent the evils they define, they represent a conspicuous standard for the whole of world society and create pressure on governments, corporations and individuals to comply with them as well as legal avenues for redress.

Compared with nuclear war or global heating, the tech explosion is a sleeping giant. But it is fast awakening and may prove even harder to control.

If we fail, it will control us.

The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.