NEUROMANCER
A brief meditation on its key technologies.
A brief meditation on its key technologies.
“The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.” [1] As metaphors go, the very first line of the very first cyberpunk novel is a small masterwork. On a purely formal level, the characteristic grey static of a dead TV channel perfectly describes the gloomy overcast sky common to many North Pacific port cities. On a deeper conceptual level, this first line sets the tone for the entire book, as well as for the entire age it would help bring about. It describes a concrete and corporeal world completely immersed in an ever-flickering atmosphere of informational noise. Much like the air we breath, this informational atmosphere becomes ubiquitous. With each inhalation it gradually permeates our every cell, and with each exhalation we gradually contribute to its existence. Cyberspace, the term by which this informational atmosphere came to be known, was itself dreamed up by William Gibson. Written before mass-adoption of the internet and virtual reality, Gibson’s “consensual hallucination experienced daily by billions…” [2] would not be hard to recognize today, but was a prescient vision in 1984.
Neuromancer is brimming with fascinating technologies, some of which closely resemble current ones. There are two technologies in the book that, while not commercially realized yet, may be within the realm of possibilities for the not-too-distant future. The first one is computer-to-brain interfaces, which can create complete worlds for the user by directly stimulating the cerebral cortex. The second one, and the one I will be analyzing, is what Gibson refers to as a construct. In basic terms, a construct is an artificial intelligence that has been programmed to accurately replicate a deceased person’s thinking process. It is important here to differentiate between a person’s knowledge and her thinking patterns, the last of which would include her “skills, obsessions and knee-jerk responses” [3]. New knowledge can always be fed into a construct, but that knowledge will be processed through the uniquely idiosyncratic lens of the person being emulated. A construct is not a gateway to eternity for the deceased, it is a way for the living to continue having access to experts, artists, prodigies, advisors and leaders who have passed on.
It is not difficult to appreciate how this technology could be monetized. A company able to preserve the idiosyncratic thinking processes of individuals could provide a limitless cognitive resource for publishers, corporations and governments. Dead authors, musicians and visual artists could continue to produce work for labels and galleries. Dead industry leaders such as Steve Jobs could continue to be a guiding force for their companies. Dead experts in all fields could be consulted as new research and challenges emerge. Of course, constructs could also be monetized in the black market, as it happens in Neuromancer.
Monetizing a person’s thinking process after their death poses interesting legal and ethical questions. The first question would be whether property rights can be claimed over the emulation of uniquely personal thinking patterns. If, as it is the case in Neuromancer, constructs can be claimed as property, who should own them? Who should benefit from any financial gain they may generate? Should it be the heirs of the person being emulated or the entity commissioning the construct? Should constructs be placed in the public domain for the benefit of society? On the other hand, what are the rights of the deceased, as her thinking patterns could be exploited for purposes she would not have approved of? Considering that last question, how much agency would a construct have? It is telling that, feeling exploited, all that the Dixie Flatline construct wants is for someone to erase if from existence. [4]
The power imbalance that the private ownership of constructs could generate can’t be overstated. Information is potentially powerful, but it is the capacity to efficiently and effectively process information that represents true power. We are already experiencing the social imbalances that can emerge when a few multinationals control much of the information, as well as the processing power to turn that information into capital. For example, Google has already converted the collective written knowledge of humanity into the raw material that will fuel much of its AI efforts. [5] One of the most relevant questions that the concept of constructs poses is: what if intellectual property rights could be expanded from the works produced by the human mind to the human mind itself? While this idea may seem far-fetched today, so did the idea of a cyberspace in 1984.
[1] Gibson, W. (1984) Neuromancer (p.3). London: Penguin Publishing Group.
[2] Gibson, W. (1984) Neuromancer (p.57). London: Penguin Publishing Group.
[3] Gibson, W. (1984) Neuromancer (p.83). London: Penguin Publishing Group.
[4] Gibson, W. (1984) Neuromancer (p.114, 221). London: Penguin Publishing Group.
[5] Lanier, J. Who Owns the Future? (p. 184). New York City: Simon & Schuster.