Category Archives: fashion

Casual displays

I had a new idea. If I was adventurous or an entrepreneur, I’d develop it, but I’m not, so I won’t. But you can, before Apple patents it. Or maybe they already have.

Many people own various brands of pads, but they are generally expensive, heavy, fragile and need far too much charging. That’s because they try to be high powered computers. Even e-book readers have too much functionality for some display purposes and that creates extra expense. I believe there is a large market for more casual displays that are cheap enough to throw around at all sorts of tasks that don’t need anything other than the ability to change and hold a display.

Several years ago, Texas Instruments invented memory spots, that let people add multimedia to everyday objects. The spots could hold a short video for example, and be stuck on any everyday object.These were a good idea, but one of very many good ideas competing for attention by development engineers. Other companies have also had similar ideas. However, turning the idea around, spots like this could be used to hold data for a  display, and could be programmed by a similar pen-like device or even a finger touch. Up to 2Mb/s can be transmitted through the skin surface.

Cheap displays that have little additional functionality could be made cheaply and use low power. If they are cheap enough, less than ten pounds say, they could be used for many everyday purposes where cards or paper are currently used. And since they are cheap, there could be many of them. With a pad, it has to do many tasks. A casual display would do only one. You could have them all over the place, as recipe cards, photos, pieces of art, maps, books, body adornment, playing cards, messages, birthday cards, instructions, medical advice, or anything. For example:

Friend cards could act as a pin-board reminder of a friend, or sit in a wallet or handbag. You might have one for each of several best friends. A touch of the spot would update the card with the latest photo or status from Facebook or another social site. Or it could be done via a smart phone jack. But since the card only has simple functionality  it would stay cheap. It does nothing that can’t also be done by a smartphone or pad, but the point is that it doesn’t have to. It is always the friend card. The image would stay. It doesn’t need anything to be clicked or charged up. It only needs power momentarily to change the picture.

There are displays that can hold pictures without power that are postcard sized, for less than £10. Adding a simple data storage chip and drivers shouldn’t add significantly to cost. So this idea should be perfectly feasible. We should be able to have lots of casual displays all over our houses and offices if they don’t have to do numerous other things. In the case of displays, less may mean more.

The future of gender

Warning: this is a 10,000 word entry, not my usual page or two

Introduction

Scope Limitation

I lecture occasionally about the future of sex, but I find gender as a whole is a fascinating subject. I don’t want my blog to get x-rated so need to be a bit careful what I cover and how, but I do think the future of gender is a topic worth writing about and I don’t need to get all adulty to make it interesting. If you are adult, you can use your own imagination to colour in any areas left uncoloured. Having said that, I’d still prefer you don’t proceed if you are under 18 or easily upset. I will cover this as far as I can.

I must also apologise at the outset that I haven’t managed to organise my thoughts on this very well. There are a number of dimensions to consider and it doesn’t lend itself well to a one dimensional article. There are probably some huge gaping holes in my coverage, even though this is a 10,000 word article. I think of this as an early stage in my thinking and therefore as a work in progress. I would welcome and thoughts on areas I have missed, and some of you will also have personal and first hand gender change experiences that are quite alien to me, that I would like to learn about. Although Einstein relied on it, and I love to copy his example, you simply cant do everything by thought experiment.

What is gender?

Wikipedia’s entry on gender is disappointing and seems lacking in scope. It is typical of academic treatments all too common in Wikipedia that use formality, obfuscation and unnecessary addition of superficial details in place of completeness of scope, understanding or insight. Nevertheless, it serves as a basic foundation on which to build. Its definition of gender:

“Gender is a range of characteristics of femininity and masculinity.[1] Depending on the context, the term may refer to such concepts as sex (as in the general state of being male or female), social roles (as in gender roles) or gender identity.”

Its gender taxonomy is adequate:

chromosomes may be 46xx, 46xy, 47xxy (Klinefelter’s syndrome), 45xo (Turner’s syndrome), 47xyy, 47xxx, 48xxyy, 46xx/xy mosaic , other mosaic, and others.

gonads may be testiclesovaries, one of each (hermaphrodites), ovotestes, or other gonadal dysgenesis

hormones: androgens including testosterone; estrogens — including estradiol, estriol, estrone; antiandrogens and others

and of course genitals, but also secondary characteristics such as breasts,

there are also differences such as

brain structure -special kinds of secondary characteristics, due to their influence on psychology and behaviour

gender identity – psychological identification with either of the two main sexes

gender role – social conformity with expectations for either of the two main sexes and finally

erotic preference - gynophilia, androphilia, bisexualityasexuality and various paraphilias.

I really hope those keywords don’t cause me any problems.

At least that is all pretty clear, but it is clearly pre-IT thinking and too medically oriented so misses a lot of importance. Humans are advanced animals, and their brains and accumulated culture add a great deal of extra scope beyond what nature bequeaths to most creatures. There is no mention in the article of the huge degree of virtualisation, abstraction, compartmenatilisation, multi-dimensionalism or parallelism of gender common in virtual worlds, dream-space and social media and the associate impacts in real world psychology. It is purely two dimensional, recognising genetic and social gender but still only male or female. I don’t believe for a moment that gender has suddenly changed beyond recognition or that sociologists must all be blind, so I can only infer that the discipline of gender studies is deliberately self-restricting. I can’t imagine why.

I don’t normally bother with definitions anyway, preferring to live in an analog world where common sense rules. I certainly don’t recognise the Wikipedia one as anything other than of historical interest. But let’s start with it as just that, assuming the last 30 years hasn’t happened yet and that everyone is still hiding in a Victorian closet.

Male, female, what else for physical gender?

Male and female isn’t a bad starting point per se. Natural sexuality uses just two sexes. In the 1990s, a few of my BT colleagues did a study on the numbers of sexes that should be used in genetic algorithms (a method of engineering using random mutations on ‘genes’, which are typically options for algorithms, and fitness testing, loosely based on Darwinian evolution). They found that the optimal number of sexes averages between 2 and 3. Two is fine, and nature ran with it. But you could have 3 or 4 or any number. It isn’t optimal from an evolutionary perspective, but it is for purpose and that is all nature needs.

There aren’t any common names for additional genders yet, though I am sure names exist within subcultures. Sure, we have male, female, neuter and hermaphrodite and lots of intersex variants, some of which do have names, but that is just one physical dimension and even so, there is some overlap among the names, and disagreement and confusion as to their precise meaning. When we start to add extra genders, there will be far more possible combinations.

New chromosomes

Initial (birth) physical gender in nature is largely determined by genes. Usually, two X chromosomes make a girl, and an X and Y create a boy. Even then, things can go wrong and some competitive sports issues have been raised in recent years by mismatches between chromosomal state and physical appearance, resulting in arguments over the gender of a winner and their consequential right to compete in that event. It is possible to have X and Y or two Xs and a Y and yet be born with an apparently female body. Before we start on designing new kinds of chromosome, let’s look briefly at what we might be designing them for.

Opportunity for new gender dimensions

Humans treat sex as a recreational and social activity as well as a reproductive one. Some future genders may be involved in reproductive processes and some may not. Some associated activities may generate sexual pleasure, others may not. Some genders could have roles as ‘bridges’ between two or more other genders, not directly providing any of the genes for future offspring, but involved as a necessary link in the reproductive process, as simple carriers, or genetic filters or processors. Regardless or the biological simplicity or complexity of the role, the organs, gender identity, social roles, rituals, and so on are essentially orthogonal dimensions, so could be designed pretty independently. The timelines for different types would not necessarily be similar, and designs could evolve over time. Obviously, making a new gender capable of reproduction is more difficult than just making a few cosmetic features, especially ones that aren’t deeply woven into the sensory or emotional or sexual response systems.

Adding new reproduction-capable genders or sexes will presumably require synthetic biology to create new genes, as well as a great deal of imagination and creativity to decide what gonads, genitals, other organs and sexual features to add. There is little point in speculating yet what they would look like, because it is a completely open space for creativity and experimentation.

Suppose as well as an X or Y, we were to add A, B, C… and Z chromosomes to carry the genes for them. They would need designed to achieve the features desired, but engineers will be able to do that in due course. We don’t yet understand how to design DNA to achieve particular features, but it is only a matter of time before we will. We will also one day be able to make DNA alternatives so won’t be limited by its capabilities. Physics and biology certainly allow it, the market will demand it, and engineers will build it. There are different ways of proceeding. We could end up with 3 or more chromosomes, or we could just modify existing ones to incorporate modified genes. Maybe only one type of cell is affected, or a few, or maybe all. Synthetic biology is a relatively open design space.

However, we choose to do the bio-engineering, by the end of this century, there could be a range of biological sexes  to add to male and female. We will still have neuter, male, female, and hermaphrodite, but also gender A, B, C, …,  multi-gender, hybrid genders, and so on ad infinitum. People may be able to pick any blend of them for their offspring.  Instead of two genders and a few mutations, we will have lots.

Associated practices

Creating new types of sex organs and associated mating practices is one thing, but the whole of sexuality could be redesigned at the same time. These new sexes will often interact in completely new ways. There will be arguments over whether some should be classed as new species since not all will be able to interbreed with traditional humans.

New gender roles, identities and erotic preferences would all have to be designed and engineered. It would be possible to engineer what makes attractiveness to a particular type of person of a particular gender. This isn’t all new, sci-fi writers have included inter-species relationships for decades, though they have generally stuck with traditional male and female in each species. But at least they have got as far as working out some attractive features and rituals, for Klingons at least. Where there is a big gap is in the scope for many genders being involved in an interaction, rather than the traditional one or two. To paraphrase Peter Cochrane, we don’t have six genders in nature because the chances of six people getting together at once without any of them having a headache is minimal. We will one day have gender designers and engineers working with sociologists, neuroscientists and many other disciplines to come up with new genders, roles, practices, rituals and attractiveness design.

Full Transgender

Change of physical gender today requires a lot of pain and mental stress, and isn’t something undertaken lightly. Even after all that, biotechnology still can’t offer a full chromosomal change and cosmetic surgery can only accomplish so much, so the changes are limited to outward appearance, organ reassignment and hormone medication. Results vary considerably in achieving a convincing change. Perhaps one day, if much hyped nano-medicine ever achieves its full potential, a full chromosomal retrofit and body reshaping may be possible so that the person becomes how they would have been had they been born their chosen gender. In that scenario, if the technology can do all that, then it can probably also achieve pretty much any body design desired, so gender change may be be just one option in a long selection of major body redesigns, way behind youth restoration in popularity. In the extreme, an average looking middle aged man may be able to change into an attractive young woman. And it need not be permanent, they could change back, though I wouldn’t expect much of a queue of attractive young women wanting to become middle aged men.

It is unlikely that it will become easy to change gender physically, so however much it may appeal as a concept, frequent recreational gender changing of their physical body is unlikely. It will still be something people do once at most.

Neural linking of external technology

Many people are well used to gadgetry in sex, some leave that kind of play for others. A variety of means are used to create stimulation, but electronic stimulators particularly hint at what the future offers. Stimulation is generated by using cleverly designed toys with electrodes that generate variable voltages and frequencies into relevant parts. In the next decade or two, active skin will use electronics printed directly on to the skin surface, along with some that penetrates deep into the skin to connect to nerve endings, enabling recording and replaying of sensations. It can then be expected that the sophistication, capability and personalisation of sex devices will increase dramatically.

It is possible that in the future, a variety of strap-ons, harnesses, sheaths and plugs will exist that not only create intense sexual stimulation, but do so from a library of recorded experiences, or indeed those downloaded from others. Future porn may well include recorded experiences from or with other people, and of course just like conventional porn, these could be enhanced with the neural equivalents of Photoshop. Further in the future, when we understand the brain better, and can engineer direct links into it, it may be that areas of some people’s brains may be modified or taught to treat the sensations from these devices as if they were truly part of their bodies.

This then reopens the scope for modification of gender. For example, it may be possible for a woman using a strap-on to feel as if it were an actual part of her, getting appropriate sensations from it. This could be sensations appropriate to males, or specially designed new ones for women. This is the most likely starting point for another class of gender modification. Toys could be added to an otherwise conventional body and linked into the nervous system and/or brain so well that they allow true full sensory transgender play. They could also be added alongside other sexual organs and sensations or, by perhaps using TMS-based signal attenuation, it could displace the original sex sensations. By generating another dimension for gender play, it greatly increases the scope for gender fluidity. When mixed with multiple genders, of course the scope increases still further.

The person wearing the device may well experience a convincing change in gender from a purely sensory point of view, but their outward appearance to another person would still be that of someone of original gender wearing a device. Outward appearance matters, but a convincing visual change to match the assumed gender could be done using augmented reality. Augmented reality adds another huge area for gender change and experimentation and deserves its own section later.

Unlike permanent transgender operations, these devices could be attached and detached at will, allowing people to oscillate freely among genders, opening the door to recreational gender change.

Recreational gender change

These future sex toys will allow a high level of sensory immersion in a different gender. Their use and popularity is evidenced by the high level of recreational gender change that  already features heavily in virtual worlds. Virtual worlds have many applications, but highly relevant to gender play, they are often used for computer games and for socialising, often combining both. They are also heavily used for role play, exploration of new places,, cultures and experiences and experimentation.

Gender identity is a bit more fluid than Wikipedia suggests. People role play different genders frequently in computer games and social virtual worlds and the experience can vary across a broad spectrum from totally detached and 3rd party to fully immersive. Sometimes, people may compartmentalise the experience, so they remain fully their normal gender in their real life while playing as another in a game or in a virtual world. Or they might become fully immersed in the role and feel as if they are the other gender for a while. Over prolonged sessions, their gender identity may blur somewhat.

Gaming

In gaming, people generally play as a character, such as a soldier or superhero, a wizard or alien. They explore worlds that range from totally fantasy to those based on real places and real life. Sometimes, games give a choice of character, and often people will play as a character of different gender to themselves. Men often play as female characters even if they don’t have any transgender intent. The standard justification is that they since they are looking at the world through a viewpoint just behind their character, they would rather look for the next 30 hours at an attractive female rear than a male one. Of course, it may also just be fun playing at being female for a while and then the role play can become a superficial gender change experience. Women gamers would find it hard to avoid having to play as a male character occasionally, since many games are designed with only male playable characters. Either way, games are a simple and painless way of exploring another gender superficially.

Virtual worlds and social networking

Such gender changing becomes a step more real once the game allows interaction with other people. It may still be in the context of a game or role play, but there is a wider spectrum of role play with other real humans involved rather than just lines of computer code. In a game, the real person hides behind their online gamer persona, which then hides behind the game character’s avatar. There is still little social risk since the game offers the excuse to play, but the degree of immersion into the other gender is consequently limited too.

When the game is removed and it becomes primarily a social networking world, like World of Warcraft or Second Life for example, the player is a step closer to their avatar and their immersion in the gender of their avatar is more real. The deliberate choice of gender and name for their avatar at the outset creates an extra level of buy-in. They are self-representing in a way that a computer game character isn’t. Choosing a different gender from their normal self is an act of minor but nevertheless deliberate deception. In spite of that, though some people may present in their normal gender, the temptation to try out a different gender at least once is irresistible to most people. About three quarters of people in virtual worlds and chat rooms have tried presenting as a different gender and some do so very often.

When they present as a different gender, the player must then consider not only what they look like to themselves on the screen, but how they present themselves to others and how they are seen. They also have to consider their personality, and the degree to which they modify that to support their virtual gender change. The level of association with the avatar varies from person to person and from time to time, but the result is that virtual gender play varies all the way from frivolous to deeply immersive and self absorbing in way that the person genuinely feels themselves to be the presented gender. It seems reasonable to say that although playing a different gendered character in a computer game isn’t always gender play, doing so in an online social context probably always is, even if it is temporary and far less committing than full gender reassignment. By being forced to interact personally rather than just hitting buttons on a controller, the buy-in crosses the boundary. Before looking at the future of this, we need to mention filters.

Filters

Reality TV is based in large part on the huge gulf that can occur between the image someone thinks they project and what is perceived by the viewer as reality. We see the world, other people and even ourselves through a series of filters. These are at least as important in gender play too.

Since people generally haven’t any actual experience of fully being another gender, they can only experience their virtual trans-gender through context-specific filters. When presenting to other people as a different gender in a virtual world, several of these filters come into play and they add another dimension.

Firstly, the superficial gender that is presented means different things to different people – beyond agreeing on genitalia, we don’t all share exactly the same prejudices about what male or female mean. People build up a picture in real life of how it must feel to be another gender and can play to that image but have no way of benchmarking that with real life feeling.

Secondly, no-one knows exactly how a particular image would be perceived by another. All they can do is to use their interactions with others as feedback on how convincing they may be.

Thirdly, even given an image that someone wants to project, there is another error in the actual presentation of it – there is no perfect feedback system that lets someone see accurately how others perceive what they think they are projecting.

Fourthly, there may be a fetishist bias to project an image that appeals to the tastes and fetishes of the person changing gender themselves. In such cases, the outward superficial appearance is what matters most to the person, and the acting out of a fantasy, rather than the immersion in the other gender.

So there are errors in presentation, interpretation and difference of meaning, and the experience of gender change may be diluted by other accompanying role plays.

Degree of reality

The other person may initially see someone in the gender they present, but anyone familiar with online social networking will learn to suspect a gender mismatch so they won’t necessarily accept it at face value. They may or may not know the person’s real gender, they may only believe it to a point, or they may realise they are presenting an alternative one. But they may not care. The same excuses for presenting a false gender may still  be successfully offered if the player doesn’t want to admit to any transgender feelings, but gender play is so common online that few would really care. It is a lightweight way of experiencing gender play with others. The lower threshold for gender acceptance also means that the reality of the experience is reduced, since people don’t necessarily treat others as they would someone whose gender they are sure of.

Other social sites

In non-play social sites, role play isn’t assumed and the self is more exposed. Some sites such as Google+ enforce the use of real identity, others such as Facebook don’t. Gender play on social networking sites is therefore not as socially acceptable as in virtual worlds where it is considered a routine part of role playing.

Virtual worlds ought to be a place where new genders should emerge. The main barriers preventing this in the real world don’t exist, though there are still barriers of culture and imagination.  So we should expect virtual worlds to be the first places for trying out new genders, with their associated cultural baggage, practices and rituals.

Future virtual worlds will have better graphics, full 3d immersion and eventually sensory recording and replay. The quality of communication with others and the quality of shared experiences in 3d realistic environments and situations will increase proportionately. These will make them a more realistic and immersive exploration of the other gender too, and will increase the overall feeling of reality of the experience.

What does the absence of new genders in virtual worlds teach us?

The lack of new genders on virtual worlds is interesting. People are certainly enthusiastic about experimenting. Changing into robots, drones, monsters, animals, furries, aliens, dolls, even objects is commonplace, and swapping between genders is also commonplace, but apart from male, female, neuter and some shemale variants, there conspicuously aren’t any other genders. Is this just failure of imagination, or does it simple reflect the fact that people are coming from an existing state with its associated sexual preferences, and are therefore only drawn to these options? The latter seems the more likely explanation.

Immersion

Thanks to these filters, the degree of reality of gender changing experiences available in virtual worlds is highly variable, both to the person undergoing the gender change and to other people interacting with them. Adding future technology increases the potential sensory quality, but won’t necessarily change the social assumptions or trust. If the gender changing is just fetishist self-voyeurism or role play, then that may not matter much, but if the intent is to pass as the other gender then it would matter more.

Interaction in virtual worlds today is often just via text chat and animations, but voice changing technology may also be used to pretend in a little more depth. As this improves in quality, it may allow people to pass as an alternative gender much more easily and convincingly. Avatars can be made to look any way, and they will improve in quality over time too. They will become full 3d and some virtual worlds may become fairly convincing replicas of real life.

Artificial intelligence can also play a part, acting as a real time coach and filter, changing the outward presentation of a gender by altering or enhancing mannerisms, gestures and other body language, use of verbal language, such as choice of words, phrases, style, subject matter, the lengths of sentences and other clues to gender.

At that point we will really start to see crossover of the technology into other forms of chat, with webcams able to change video image, conversational style and content and voice in real time to allow people to pass in real life chat situations as another gender. Some may do so only in social interactions, others may use it for work too.

In chat rooms, ever since they started, some people have presented as different genders, so anyone’s friends lists will include some people whose real gender they know for certain, some they know for certain are gender-bending, and some in between, where there are varying levels of suspicion that they may not really be their presented gender. Virtual worlds added even more play potential, and soon webcams will increase it further still. Soon, thanks to the trend of working from home, we may not know the genders of the people with whom we are working. Not knowing the genders of all your friends is not new, but it also isn’t ubiquitous. Many people have never used a chat room or virtual world, so have no first hand experience of gender confusion. No doubt some people would consider it to be a social problem if people frequently present as another gender from time to time, others will feel perfectly comfortable with it.

Augmented reality

Augmented reality is a bit different from this, offering more scope for change and adding still more new dimensions to gender play. AR allows computer generated images and data to be overlaid onto the field of view. This started off in everyday practice with simple text and symbols on smart-phone screens, but the idea space is over 20 years old now, and only the technology is holding back realisation. It will quickly evolve into a fully immersive overlay capability where the uses can selectively overlay or replace real world images with computer generate ones. So, virtual architecture may modify the appearance of buildings or streets, virtual fauna and flora will decorate them, and people can be cosmetically enhanced or simply replaced by avatars. That means a user could make all the ugly people look prettier, replace them with images of their favourite celebrities, or just delete them from the field of view (though some mechanism is needed to prevent collisions when they are physically close).

There are a number of choices that make it interesting.

Firstly, who controls how one person sees another. Is it the viewer, or the person being seen, or some third party such as an application or service provider?

Can someone assert their chosen edited appearance on the viewer, and can they do so differently for each group of potential viewers, or tailor how they appear to the context and specifics of that interaction? All of the above?

Does the viewer get to choose between an avatar and a real life image, even if an edited one, or an alternative avatar, or a cosmetically enhanced appearance, or is that also decided by the person being seen?

If the viewer has control, can they also choose the gender of the other people they see?

Can the person being seen assert their chosen gender, and hide their real one from the image production system?

Should there be a right to see how someone else is visualising you, or even how they are visualising others? If so, under which circumstances? Should the police be able to check that your visualisation of someone else isn’t demeaning or insulting, or a race crime? Should your use of overlays be forced to be recorded in case it needs to be policed in future?

Obviously, these choices give a lot of options for potential gender interactions. As well as gender, images could also show people with different ages, races, even species, or as an object, as someone else, or as a group of people, or show a group as an individual. Someone playing a character in a computer game or virtual world may find it fun to use that same character avatar on the high street. A full AR replacement of people in the street could be a very different world to live in.

There would be some social pressure on application providers to prevent too much abuse of such systems, but also some demands from minority groups to protect their specific interests. It seems reasonable that a transgendered person or a transvestite should have the right to present themselves as their chosen gender. Since someone may be just exploring gender options prior to considering becoming transgendered, that right would also need to extend to casual recreational gender change. But that only requires that their original gender be concealed from the viewer or system. It doesn’t prevent the viewer from replacing or modifying what they see. They could still replace any stranger’s image with a customised one of their own choosing, and it isn’t necessary to know anything about the stranger to do so. So it is possible to protect transgender rights while still allowing viewers to choose how they modify the world they see.

Augmented reality also allows people to select and apply components of how they (or an application provider) believe other genders might feel by changing the appearance of the world to that ideal. Certain parts of images may be enhanced or dulled to reflect the relative importance. A crude example may be feminising it by adding more pinks or flowers or children or female oriented ads. Hopefully, the reality would be a little more sophisticated.

Augmented reality will objectify women

Our treatment of others varies according to how we perceive their gender.

Augmented reality will bring many benefits and improve our lives in many ways, such as enjoying virtual architecture, playing immersive computer games while a partner is shopping, or enjoying artworks transposed onto walls in the high street. But it won’t all be wonderful.

In spite of marketing hype and misrepresentation of basic location based services, AR is only here in very primitive form today, outside the lab anyway. But very soon, we will use visors and contact lenses to enable a fully 3D, hi-res overlay on the real world. So notionally, someone can make everything in the world look how they want, but only to a point. They can transform a dull shop or office into an elaborate palace of spaceship. But even if they change what these look like, you still need to represent real physical structures and obstacles in your fantasy overlay world, or they may bump into them, and that includes all the walls and furniture, lamp posts, bollards, vehicles, and of course other people. Augmented reality allows us to change their appearance thoroughly but they still need to be there somehow.

When it comes to people, there will be some small battles. Each of us may have a wide variety of avatars, and may have invested a great deal of time and money making or buying them. Someone may have a digital aura, hoping to present different avatars to different passers-by according to their profiles. They may want to look younger or thinner or as a character they enjoy playing in a computer game. They may present a selection of options. The avatar they choose to overlay could be any one of the images on offer, that they spent so much time on. Maybe some people get to pick from several on offer, or are restricted to just one that is set for their profile type.

However, other people may choose not to see that avatar, but instead to superimpose one of their own choosing. The question of who decides what the viewer sees is the first and most obvious battle in AR and it will probably be won by the viewer (there may be exceptions, and these may be imposed by regulations). The other person will decide how they want to see you, regardless of your preferences.

Someone could spend a great deal of time making an avatar or tweaking virtual make-up to perfection, but if someone wants to see Lady Gaga walking past instead of them, they will. A stranger’s body becomes no more than an object on which to display any avatar or image someone else chooses. People are quite literally reduced to an object in the AR world. Those with concerns over objectification of women will not like what AR will bring.

Firstly they may just take an actual physical appearance (via a video camera built into their visor for example) and digitally change it,  so it is still definitely still the target person, but now dressed more nicely, or dressed in sexy lingerie, or how they might look naked, body-fitting any images from a porn site. This could easily be done automatically in real time using some app or other. They could even use the actual face as input to image matching search engines to find the most plausible naked lookalikes. So anyone can digitally dress or undress anyone, not just with their eyes, but with a hi-res visor using sophisticated software and image processing software. They could put anyone in any kind of outfit, change their skin colour or make-up, and make them look as pretty and glamorous or as slutty as they want. The victim won’t have any idea what someone looking at them is seeing. They simply won’t know whether they are being treated with respect, flattered, or made to look even prettier, which they might not mind, or perhaps being digitally stripped or degraded which they probably will mind a lot.

Anyone can treat anyone else as just an object on which to superimpose some other avatar, which could be anything or anyone, a zombie, favourite actress or supermodel. They won’t need consent and again the victim won’t have any idea what the viewer are seeing. The avatar may make the same gestures and movements as the real person. In some ways this won’t be so bad. People are still reduced to objects but at least it isn’t that particular individual that they’re looking at naked. Most strangers on the high street were just moving obstacles to avoid bumping into anyway. Most people will cope with that bit. It is when interaction starts that it starts to matter. Many people won’t enjoy it if someone is chatting to them but looking at someone else entirely, especially if they are a friend or partner. Kissing one person while looking at someone else would be a breach of trust. This sort of thing could and probably will damage a lot of relationships.

It’s a fairly safe bet that the software to do some or all of this is already in development. Maybe some of it already exists in primitive forms but it will develop quickly once AR display technology is really with us. The visor hardware required is certainly on its way and primitive versions will be here by the end of 2012.

In the office, in the home, when you’re shopping or at a party, people won’t have any idea what or who someone else is seeing when they look at them. The main casualty will be trust.  It will make us question how much we trust each of our friends and colleagues and acquaintances. It will build walls. People will often become suspicious of others, not just strangers but friends and colleagues. Some people will become fearful. People may dress as primly as they like, but if the viewer sees them in a slutty outfit, perhaps their behaviour and attitudes will be governed by that rather than reality. So there could be an increase in sexual assault or rape. Women especially may more often be objectified, in more circumstances. Many men objectify women already. In the future AR world , they’ll be able to do so far more effectively without everyone knowing.

Augmented reality accessories

It is possible to use virtual accessories as well as real ones. An augmented reality strap-on or vibrator may look similar to a real one, but of course doesn’t have the same physical presence and the same goes for any other imagined accessory for any future gender. If it is to have anything more than a symbolic presence in role play, it needs somehow to connect into the nervous system or at least to be able to create some sort of sensation. Linking a virtual accessory to the peripheral nervous system can be done via active skin, pressure pads, smart gloves or data suits. In the far future it may be possible link directly into the brain. There are lots of options.

The potential to make augmented reality accessories that can be associated with real sensations and take a real part in gender–related practices allows new genders to come into play long before they are possible to make genetically.

However, we must ask just how ‘real’ such genders would be. The people using such virtual appliances may take part in interesting experiences, but their original body and original gender remains intact unless they undertake further action.

It is possible to have original equipment disconnected or removed, and to use the augmented reality devices instead. It may also be possible to block or attenuate the sensations from them at the brain using derivatives of trans-cranial magnetic stimulation or some future signal blocking means. With this associated physical gender reassignment, augmented reality would offer a proper means of gender change with less trauma.

Once we start linking to the peripheral nervous system, we can dissociate the physical acts causing a stimulus from the sensation experienced. Though frivolous and perhaps ridiculous, it is entirely possible to create intense sexual sensation or even orgasm just by typing a capital O on a keyboard, or by any other action.

The existing nervous system is limited in its scope though, and it would be better to be able to map sensations onto new areas of the brain. Thanks to research and development on tools to help disabled people interpret the world around them, we know that the brain is able to accept stimuli and learn to interpret and experience them over time. This again offers scope for new genders before we get to building them genetically.

Compartmentalising and acting

Humans are skilled at presenting filtered or enhanced views of themselves to others. We talk of wearing a shield or a mask. We all do it all the time, at work and socially, presenting edited personas to different groups.

Some people are very good at it and become actors. The acting profession is a good point to look for gender insight. Actors often complain that people treat them as if they were the character they play, which shows that for some people, the line between fiction and reality can sometimes get blurred. Presumably, that would make it easier for them to take people’s presented gender at face value and perhaps not even consider whether it may be faked.

Another clue from acting is that actors sometimes practise for a role by immersing themselves in the character’s situation, so that they can begin to identify with it more closely and play the role more naturally. In essence they are deliberately blurring the lines of their own fiction and reality. Or at least part of it.

From birth, we start registering differences between male and female. Each of us forms a unique view of how it is to be our own gender and how it might feel to be another. If we try to act as if we were another gender, that is the prejudice we have to start from. To improve on that, some people live part or full time in the guise of the other gender, just as actors may live in their character. Gender reassignment surgery usually follows a lengthy period of such living, since it isn’t properly reversible, yet. This ensures that the person feels comfortable in their new gender before the final commitment. They will experience others’ reactions to themselves but may also feel differently while in the other gender. The playing of the new role is important because it changes how someone feels inside, not just how they look outside.

Recreational gender changing is temporary in nature and therefore lends itself more to compartmentalising rather than essentially practising a new life. Again, like acting, someone knows who they ‘really’ are, but allocates a sub-mindset to play their role. Someone presenting themselves as another gender in a chat room or virtual world is likely compartmentalising. They have a normal everyday life as one gender, but play act with a particular mindset in their chat room role.

There isn’t a limit on how many roles someone can act. In everyday life, we all have dozens of slightly different personas to cover all the different social groups we belong to. In chat rooms and virtual worlds, people often have several alternative personas, or alts. Some people use over twenty regularly. That is easy to understand, but what is surprising is that they manage successfully to use several at the same time. They may even have one of their alts apparently chatting to other ones so that they can maintain the pretence. This requires a degree of skill to keep them all separate and prevent others from suspecting. But it is exactly that skill that also allows someone to compartmentalise gender. People may have some alts in one gender and some in another. Some may flip between them. They use the appropriate gender filters to present each one according to circumstance.

Such compartmentalisation skill is common, and shows that some people will be adept at doing so with future genders too. They will have to juggle lots of roles, with all the associated memory and behaviours, and they will do so in games, chat rooms, social networking sites, virtual worlds, and augmented reality overlays, and in a wide variety of everyday business and social interactions, but they will have AI to help them translate body and verbal language between them, handle all their avatars, and even act in their place or alongside when they are not sufficiently present. We can only expect gender to become even more blurred and dynamic as recreational gender play becomes more powerful and immersive.

Blurring of gender identity

That raises the question of degree to which someone’s psychological gender identity can blur as a result of frequent recreational gender play. If someone puts effort into presenting as another gender for significant periods, running the appropriate emulators alongside the normal ones, it is inevitable that they will gradually adopt some of what they consider to be the attitudes of the other gender, and some behaviours will cross over into their other compartments. The various models all have to access some of the same underlying thinking and control processes – they won’t all be duplicated and kept separate – so the appropriate neural circuitry and skills will change accordingly. This must be especially so in areas that don’t get shielded from outsiders, the ones they don’t think of as particularly visible or gender-relevant, because they are less careful to keep them in separate compartments. Over time, their gender identity will inevitably blur. This may well make them more accepting and tolerant of the other gender, but if they are frequent recreational gender changers, that is unlikely to have been an issue in the first place.

Dreams

Dreams are related to games and virtual worlds. They share some of the same mental emulation of a perceived reality, albeit in dreams the emulator is heavily distorted and filtered. Some people sometimes dream of themselves in another gender. It may feature as a central part of the dream storyline, perhaps that somehow they have been transformed, it may be that they just happen to be that gender, or it may be purely incidental, not particularly relevant to the storyline. Or it may be a way of indulging in an aspirational gender change for someone who has transgender thoughts. In lucid dreams, it can even be a form of recreational gender change.

Which brings us nicely to the idea that we will soon be able to choose what we dream of, and link our dreams to those of other people. Gender play in dreams may then become as common as it already is in virtual worlds.

Augmented reality could use a variety of displays, including goggles or active contact lenses. Contact lenses have the advantage of being under the eyelids so the images can be seen even when eyes are closed. During dreams, feedback from brain signals could be used to direct the selection of imagery produced in the lenses, enhancing dreams and allowing them to be linked with those of other people. This is closer than you may imagine.

Even today it is possible to pick up clues as to the images the person is seeing, and this could link into programming in an augmented reality system to generate additional appropriate imagery. We are all familiar with building external sound into dreams, and we should expect that augmented reality images could also be used by our brains. So if programs are designed well, they could use the topic detected from the sleeper as an input to search utilities, then playing appropriate media to enhance or even guide the dreamer. This would allow some element of choice before sleep, where the person could pick dreams from a menu, and have a good chance of experiencing them. Gender could be one of the choices of course.

It will be possible to link people’s dreams together, provided they are both in a dream state at the same time. Detecting signals from each one and feeding in appropriate augmented reality to each, they could be guided along converging paths until their dreams overlap. Then they would be able to interact with each other in the dreams using nerve signals to directly control the dream ‘avatar’ in the other person’s dream. Ongoing development of thought recognition should enable such dreams not only to be gently guided but also recorded.

Dreams feel more immersive and real than computer games so gender play in them may be more significant in some ways. Habitually dreaming as another gender may have long term effects on waking state too.

Voyeuristic gender play

People may choose to swap gender for a variety of reasons. Men often choose a female version of the hero in computer games, so that they can look at an attractive woman for the next 30 hours rather than a man. They are acting female for purely voyeuristic reasons, not as a means of gender experimentation. Similarly in virtual worlds, people may choose an alternative gender for the avatar simply so that they can look at them or watch them act out a role in a fantasy. This is very different from wanting to be that gender. However, someone else may do exactly the same things to try and experience being that gender. Intent is important, not the act. Intent governs the degree of association with that gender. Are they living the character, or just watching the character?

Aspirational gender

In contrast to voyeuristic play, someone may genuinely aspire to be another gender or to adopt some of its characteristics. They may want the full TG package, or may want to pick and mix from their picture of the traits on offer, TG-lite if you will. There are very many variants of this. Physically, there are lots of combinations of surgical and hormonal changes, as well as simple use of cosmetics. There are also many variations of feminised, camp or tomboyish behaviour, which may result from natural, environmental or medical use of hormones, exposure to cultural pressures or from deliberate personal choice. Pick and mix gender is illustrated in typical sissy play, where a basket of cherry-picked feminine attributes and behaviours are assembled while retaining the underlying masculinity. This falls short of the full gender change play that also happens in such worlds. The outlets in virtual worlds allow people to indulge many behaviours they associate with another gender safely, and they can do so openly or hidden as they wish. The result is a rich mixture of variations of the two standard genders.

Some people feel that they are the wrong gender and some badly enough to go through the trauma of surgical reassignment, but there are many more who would change if they could do so easily and painlessly, and probably even more who would choose to be another gender if they were able to live their life again or reincarnate. The social barriers to changing are high, as are the physical ones. But that doesn’t necessarily affect the aspiration to change gender. Technologies that allow this in part or avoiding negative social issues would cater to these latent gender changers and thus be relatively popular since they allow at least some of the frustrated aspirations to be achieved.

Environmental impact on gender - exposure to feminising chemicals

Many studies over the last decade (and even earlier) have shown endocrine disruptors (which mimic the behaviour of estrogens) in the environment causing feminisation in insects, fish, amphibians, birds, reptiles and mammals. Such chemicals come from plastics, packaging, pesticides, cleaning products and even shampoo and the linings of tin cans. In extreme cases, polluted rivers have seen 100% of male fish (Roach) becoming hermaphrodite. Effects are greater in the young. Google it for examples. You’ll find lots.

Humans are animals too of course, and although they may not have enough exposure to human endocrine disruptors in our everyday environment to cause adult men to actually change into women, again there do appear to be significant effects, especially on such things as sperm counts, breast development and testicular cancer rates. Sperm counts have fallen dramatically over the last few decades.

In the womb, effects are potentially far greater. In 2007, the Arctic Measurement and Assessment Program found twice as many girls as boys being born due to levels of chemicals in the blood of pregnant women there that were high enough to cause gender change. In Japan too, fewer boys are being born.

Surprisingly perhaps, the effects on humans have not had much study, but this is perhaps because of the potential reactions of militants in the gay and transgender communities. It is a sensitive area, but we ought to be able to discuss it properly and openly. We are using more and more chemicals in our everyday lives – more hygiene and cleaning products, more processed foods, more packaging, more plastics generally. Exposure to human endocrine disruptors is already high and may become higher if we keep brushing the issues under the carpet.

What is at stake?

If men are becoming feminised, we will gradually lose the contributions of one end of the masculinity spectrum. Gender lines have already blurred and are blurring further, and the impact  on our culture is as important as the impact on health and fertility. These problems will escalate if unborn babies and younger generations with greater vulnerability are exposed to relatively higher exposures.

It does seem that men are showing their feminine sides far more than used to be the norm. Are metrosexuals in increasing abundance because of fashion and cultural exposure, or because of chemicals changing their preferences, or a combination. Why do men cry more now? Why are more men gay and bisexual than before? Why do far more teenage boys want gender changes than before? Any one trend arises from a combination of factors, but if the overall feminisation is due in part to chemical exposure, and it probably is, then perhaps that is a problem that should be fixed. Genders are important and should be a matter of choice human culture and social make-up shouldn’t be dictated by pollution.

Why does it matter?

Male, female, inter-gender and transgender people make diverse contributions to overall society and culture. The different ways men behave and think and react and emote, or not should be valued and preserved as well as other genders and behaviours. The feminised end of the male spectrum is growing, but we should worry about losing ‘straight’, non-metrosexual masculinity. It has value too. In the gender spectrum, one end of the male part is becoming fainter while the other intensifies.

So what to do?

If cultural and chemical effects on men created pressure in opposite directions, they might cancel to some degree, but they don’t. They both create feminising pressure. Men have been under strong social and media pressure to feminise for decades. It simply isn’t fashionable to be a man today. Male behaviour is ridiculed routinely throughout the media, especially in advertising, with men portrayed as cavemen and idiots in a world of highly evolved and intelligent women. Men are encouraged to explore and show their feminine sides. The UK and US education systems have been restructured to favour the ways girls learn. Boys are punished and put down in the playground if they dare to behave as boys. Selection of participants in reality TV shows such as ‘Big Brother’, ‘I’m a Celebrity’ and ‘Come dine with me’ greatly favours feminised men to fill the male half. TV presenting is the same. Women have significantly greater legal rights than men. In the workplace, women and gay men are heavily protected and given positive discrimination at the expense of straight men. While chemical exposure is already creating biological feminising pressure, society is kicking masculinity while it’s down.

We should obviously start to limit exposure to chemicals that cause feminisation. But society should also question its attitudes and consider the long term consequences of anti-masculinity pressure. Do we really want a world with only feminised men? Masculinity deserves to be preserved too.

Symbionts

Science fiction (such as Star Trek) holds the concepts of symbionts, organisms that share bodies, where one acts as a host or carrier for the other in a symbiotic relationship, though of course it could equally be parasitic or commensalistic. This sort of thing could extend to gender too, where two distinct characters interact, share or overlap in such ways that they form a gender together. Separately they may have no gender or hold a different one, but when linked together they generate a new distinct gender.

The question arises as to how far this concept could be taken. In principle, quite far. One group could participate in a number of distinct genders depending how they combine with other groups. Three or more could combine. They could have some physical, some neural, and some virtual links. With many different ways of connecting and sharing sensations, emotions and thoughts, with many combinations of organism and indeed synthetic organisms or AIs, the idea space is huge.

Gender forcing

Some people have fantasies (or nightmares for a few too) of forced gender change. In the real world, this would be a relatively rare event (I assume that some people enslaved in the sex trade may have forced gender change, but have no idea how widespread a problem that is) but in virtual worlds, it apparently happens quite a lot.  Of course, the victim may want it to happen, in which case they would simply be enjoying no-fault recreational gender change while pushing the blame onto someone else. But it could also be genuinely unwanted. As a part of role play or a game forfeit, and temporary, it may still be accepted. If it is permanent that might be very different. In such a case, it could have more severe consequences.

Widely different degrees of reality and immersion are possible, as I have discussed already. If someone is forced into a different gender even in a virtual world and can’t revert for some reason, maybe their identity irrevocably locked to that gender, then they would simply have to get used to it, or leave that virtual world. It wouldn’t necessarily always be possible to create a new identity to escape and the social costs of leaving entirely might make the new gender the lesser of two evils. This could extend to some augmented reality applications, again with varying degrees of immersion and realism.

A closely related problem is that if someone assumes a different gender in a virtual world for a significant time, they may accumulate valued relationships that would be damaged if they were to change to their real gender, so again the costs of reverting would be unacceptable and they are effectively locked in their presented gender. Since there is so much gender play in virtual environments, I suspect this is not likely to be a major issue overall, but it still could be for particular individuals or relationships. Although less likely than in socialising virtual worlds, it is possible that employees in geographically spread virtual companies could present to some or all of their colleagues as an alternative gender than their reality, and reverting could potentially thus come at a career cost. Video and voice changing technologies will make such pretence easier and perhaps more common. Fiction has many examples of people presenting in a different gender to colleagues for professional reasons. The spread of freelancing and virtual companies makes it more likely, and the potential lock-in would follow.

So gender forcing is already here, albeit mainly virtually. The magnitude of the problems would presumably simply scale with the degree and intensity of recreational gender play, since other forcing issues would correlate highly with this too.

Empathetic gender play

Compartmentalising allows people to assume multiple parallel threads of behaviour and present different genders or gender-related traits to different groups even at the same time. The personal psychological costs and difficulty associated with this would vary between individuals but if it is easy for someone, they may do it a lot. Even without any particular desire to change, they may simply find it easier to empathise with another person by assuming their gender during the encounter. It may be such casual gender changing would happen for other reasons too.

Gender as an art form

I’ve always found it fascinating as a technologist and engineer how the first users of new technological breakthroughs are so often artists. As we mess around increasingly with genetics, it can only be a while before we see the first artistic exploration of gender creation. I wouldn’t know where to start predicting what artists will do with it, I’ve already mentioned most of the available dimensions. Part of the fun of art is the surprise when it happens. Let’s wait and see.

How many genders are there?

Most people would initially count male and female, and quickly recall others such as shemales (or ladyboys) and hermaphrodites. But there are already a lot more combinations. Assuming many different degrees of casualness, immersiveness, and commitment, virtualisation, parallelism and multi-threading of gender play, on top of many different states and combinations of physical, hormonal and psychological base, there are already hundreds of possible gender states. This number will grow markedly as we add new dimensions for experimentation. Each extra dimension would include several possible states, so the far future will certainly contain thousands of potential variations.

The future of gender is a very diverse one!

Flat lenses – oozing potential

Lenses used to be curved. Not in the future thanks to Harvard scientists: https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news-events/press-releases/flat-lens-offers-perfect-image and http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/nl302516v.

Ht http://nextbigfuture.com/ for making me aware.

Flat antennas aren’t new per se, phased array radio antennas have been around decades, but this is the first optical flat lens I am aware of. Theirs is pretty damned clever!

They are already looking at applications such as flat microscope objectives, and have probably covered most of the biggest opportunities. But just in case, and researchers do occasionally miss some opportunities, here are a few for free:

Kite telescopes

NASA are currently flying a 747-based telescope, chucking out huge quantities of water vapour into the high atmosphere, contributing to global warming to take over from their space shuttles. Ironic that such a warmist organisation should do that, but there we go. A large flat surface telescope could presumably be made into a high altitude kite, albeit one that needs a little engineering. And it wouldn’t add to stratospheric water vapour, or even add CO2.

High altitude telescopes could be used for ground imaging as well as space of course, and there would be many commercially viable businesses from this root, as well as military surveillance of course.

Smart glasses and contact lenses

I would like a pair of glasses that record everything I look at. Flat surface cameras would allow this. Glasses are much bigger than my pupil, so they could allow much higher resolution, so I’d be able to see at very high magnification without having to use binoculars. I’d also be able to see infrared, microwaves, see where the strongest cellphone signal is, enable a whole new kind of fashion using different spectra, add to augmented reality hugely by using the infrared channel to show real as well as digital auras. Wow, can’t wait for these! I am playing Assassin’s Creed again, and this is Eagle Sense and then some.

Of course, active contact lenses could also use this tech and offer intuitive optional zoom. I would see the world as normal, but by trying to focus on something in the distance, it would zoom in automatically. There have only been a few updates to my original active contact lens idea from 1991, http://www.futurizon.com/inventions/activecontactlensmay91.pdf but this will be another generation for its 21st anniversary.

Credit card cameras

The smartphone is causing the decline of standalone digital cameras. Digital jewellery will cause the decline of smartphones, but one of the things we still needed them for is the camera. Not any more. A simple credit card camera would work fine. Or maybe even a wristband could be used. Flat cameras will hasten the decline of smartphones.

Smart posters

If they can be printed cheaply, cameras could be built into much of the urban environment. Any poster could have video capture and storage built in, powered by solar, with some comms added too. What and who it sees could direct what it displays. Sure, you can do all that and then some with augmented reality, but augmented reality is a whole load of additional functionality that lives happily alongside other stuff, and doesn’t necessarily replace everything. Posters could be the next wave of Big Brother or the next wave of advertising. Or both.

Teletubby T-shirts revisited

When the Teletubbies were still new, I suggested that we’d be able to make clothes with video panels in using polymer screens. Teletubby t-shirts. Flat panel cameras would allow these to be two way. They could display images but also act as a cameras. They could link to cameras in other people’s t-shirts. You could have a camera on your back that links to the video image on your front, making you appear to have a big hole through you.

Thought recognition and smart microwaves

Wired carries another interesting article on brain wave recognition of PINs via the headsets used to play computer games. Old stuff in idea terms perhaps but it’s always nice to see practice catching up. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/08/brainwave-hacking/

It seems obvious that this could work nicely with the flat lens idea. A flat surface could image the electrical activity in the brain from a greater distance instead of having to use a helmet.

It would also be possible to put flat cameras on the inside surfaces of microwave ovens, looking at the food to see where the hot spots and cold spots are, so that the microwave beams could be directed better to the areas needing heated.

I think that’s enough for now.

What do solar panels on your roof say about you?

I mostly work from home and since my office is just a short walk from the bedroom, lounge or kitchen, I have started going on short walks round the neighbourhood to avoid becoming fat. I noticed some of my neighbours have covered their south-facing roofs with solar panels.

What image did they convey? Here is a multiple choice:

a) I had some spare cash and wanted to get a big return on my investment and solar panels offer a fantastic return.

b) I had a guy come round promising me lots of cash if I let him put panels on my roof.

c) I hate paying big greedy companies for energy and paying too much taxes, so am very keen to take full advantage when there is a means to get my own back.

d) I really love technology and am keen to demonstrate it.

e) I want everyone to know what a nice person I am looking after the environment.

f) I want to do my bit for the environment and solar panels are a good way to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and reduce CO2 emissions.

g) I want my kids to live in a sustainable world and that is far more important than the appearance of my house.

I get the impression that each of the above would have some people ticking them. Some would tick several.

Well, I did have a guy come round offering me cash if he would let me stick panels on my roof too. I sent him away, mainly because I am a not an idiot. I had thought it through long before he came. Let me explain what image solar panels on a roof conjure up in my mind when I see them. And bear in mind that my full-time job is as a futurist and I think systemically about how people will behave over the longer term. Using the same tick list, with alternative answers:

a) I wanted a fantastic return on my investment and I don’t care at all that it is other people with less cash to invest who will pay that high return. So I am  greedy and selfish. As the recession lingers on, some people may be tempted to spray nasty messages on my door or run keys down my car doors or shame me on social networking sites, and maybe my family will live in fear or I will be forced to remove them. So I am an idiot too. I am a greedy selfish idiot.

b) I was fully taken in by a door to door salesman and didn’t understand that I could easily commission the panels myself so was happy to give most of the returns to a company who won’t have to suffer the drop in value of my home or the unsightliness, or the maintenance problems they will cause, or the hassle when I move or any other problems. So I am a first class idiot.

c) If energy companies can’t get as much from the energy they sell, they will try to increase the rental and maintenance and billing charges to maintain their revenue. And that means I will get less net profit from any energy I put back into the grid. So I probably won’t save much on what I buy and won’t make much on what I put back. And when I sell my house, even though I will get less for it because the panels make it look awful, I will probably lose heavily again in various admin fees to transfer the solar contracts over to the buyer, who probably won’t get the same deal, so won’t pay me much for it. So I am not as canny as I thought and my returns will be far less, so I am an idiot.

d) As long as I have the latest panels I will look cool and trendy. But they won’t be the latest panels for more than a few months, after which they will quickly start to look obsolete as well as unsightly, so I will have to either reinvest regularly or accept looking like a loser. So I am an idiot.

e) I care for the environment but not enough to do any basic reading and can’t think for myself anyway. I have been fully taken in by the anthropogenic global warming scam and as the global warming panic changes to global cooling panic I will increasingly be labelled as one of the idiots who went along with the AGW panic and just did what the environmentalists told me to do. I am a well-meaning idiot with little or no independent thought. Still an idiot though.

f) Solar panels will one day be an excellent way of reducing CO2 emissions, albeit in sunny countries. However, they are darker and absorb more of the sun’s energy than the roof did previously, so contribute directly to warming the earth, and manufacturing them creates loads of pollutants today, so it isn’t really quite as simple is it? And anyway, maybe we should have waited and put our panels in later, in the Sahara, and got far more energy for far lower costs, while helping poor African economies. And we now know for certain that the impact of CO2 has been greatly exaggerated and is fairly small compared to other impacts on global temperature. On the other hand, as global cooling sets in, we will welcome the extra heat absorption and I’ll be able to get my energy while helping warm the earth. But I didn’t expect it, so am a lucky idiot who landed in poo and came out smelling of roses.

g) I am holier than you are. You obviously don’t care about your kids and their future. I do, aren’t I wonderful? But I can’t think clearly so am happy to do make some ill-informed token gestures instead of things that actually help. So I am a sanctimonious idiot.

At the moment, public opinion hasn’t had time to catch up and many people are still influenced by AGW panic. But it will. Give it a while, and attitudes will migrate from the first list to the second.

I am all in favour of solar energy in the future in some sunny areas. It has an important role to play, but it isn’t as squeaky clean as it initially looks. It doesn’t need subsidised. When the technology is mature, it will be far cheaper than many other forms of energy, but it isn’t there yet. Since global warming has stopped for 15 years or more now, and it looks more and more like we are heading into a prolonged period of cooling, there is no economic or environmental justification for installing subsidised solar. If it indeed helps the environment overall, it will be far better to invest the same amount later, when we can buy more and help more. There is certainly no cause for panic based subsidies. In the short term they move money from the poor to the greedy, and in the longer term, even those people will lose out. Even the companies installing them can’t seem to survive because of the rapid technology evolution, making their investments in stock worthless and changes in subsidies undermining their business models. It really seems that there are no winners from early investment.

One day, in some places and circumstances, it may be a great idea, but for now, across the UK, rooftop solar power is for greedy, selfish, sanctimonious idiots.

Augmented reality will objectify women

The excitement around augmented reality continues to build, and my blog is normally very enthusiastic about its potential. Enjoying virtual architecture, playing immersive computer games while my wife is shopping, or enjoying artworks transposed onto walls in the high street are just a few of the benefits.

But I realized recently that it won’t all be wonderful. I’ve often joked that you could replace all the ugly people in the high street with more attractive ones. But I didn’t really consider the implications of that. And now I have, I think it will actually become a problem.

In spite of marketing hype and misrepresentation of basic location based services, AR is only here in very primitive form today, outside the lab anyway. But very soon, we will use visors and contact lenses to enable a fully 3D, hi-res overlay on the real world. So notionally, you can make everything in the world look how you want, but only to a point. You can transform a dull shop or office into an elaborate palace of spaceship. But even if you change what they look like, you still need to represent real physical structures and obstacles in your fantasy overlay world, or you may bump into them, and that includes all the walls and furniture, lamp posts, bollards, vehicles, and of course other people. Augmented reality allows you to change their appearance thoroughly but they still need to be there somehow.

When it comes to people, there will be some small battles. You may have a wide variety of avatars, and may have invested a great deal of time and money making or buying them. You may have a digital aura, hoping to present different avatars to different passers-by according to their profiles. You may want to look younger or thinner or as a character you enjoy playing in a computer game. You may present a selection of options. The avatar they choose to overlay could be any one of the images you have on offer, that you spent so much time on. Maybe some people get to pick from some you offer, or are restricted to just one that you have set for their profile.

However, other people may choose not to see you avatar, but instead to superimpose one of their own choosing. The question of who decides what the viewer sees is the first and most obvious battle in AR and it will probably be won by the viewer (there may be exceptions, and these may be imposed by regulations). The other person will decide how they want to see you, regardless of your preferences.

You can spend all the time you want making your avatar or tweaking your virtual make-up to perfection, but if someone wants to see Lady Gaga walking past instead of you, they will. You and your body become no more than an object on which to display any avatar or image someone else chooses. You are quite literally reduced to an object in the AR world. If you worry about objectification of women, you will not like what AR will bring.

Firstly they may just take your actual physical appearance (via a video camera built into their visor for example) and digitally change it,  so it is still definitely you, but now dressed more nicely, or dressed in sexy lingerie, or how you might look naked, body-fitting any images from a porn site. This could easily be done automatically in real time using some app or other. They could even use your actual face as input to image matching search engines to find the most plausible naked lookalikes. So anyone can digitally dress or undress you, not just with their eyes, but with a hi-res visor using sophisticated software and image processing software. They could put you in any kind of outfit, change your skin colour or make-up, and make you look as pretty and glamorous or as slutty as they want. And you won’t have any idea what they are seeing. You simply won’t know whether they are celebrating your inherent beauty with respect, flattering you and simply making you look even prettier, which you might not mind, or stripping or degrading you to whatever depths they wish, which you probably will mind a lot.

Or they can treat you as just an object on which to superimpose some other avatar, which could be anything or anyone, a zombie, favourite actress or supermodel. They won’t need your consent and again you won’t have any idea what they are seeing. The avatar may make the same gestures and movements but it won’t be you. In some ways this won’t be so bad. You are still reduced to an object but at least it isn’t you that they’re looking at naked. To most strangers on the high street, you were mostly just a moving obstacle to avoid bumping into before. Most people will cope with that bit. It is when you stop being just a passing stranger and start to interact in some way that it starts to matter. You probably won’t like it if someone is chatting to you but looking at someone else entirely, especially if the viewer is one of your friends or your partner. And if your partner is kissing or cuddling you but seeing someone else, that would be a strong breach of trust, but how would you know? This sort of thing could and probably will damage a lot of relationships.

It’s a fairly safe bet that the software to do some or all of this is already in development. Maybe some of it already exists in primitive forms but it will develop quickly once AR display technology is really with us. The visor hardware required is certainly on its way and will be here by christmas.

In the office, in the home, when you’re shopping or at a party, you won’t have any idea what or who someone else is seeing when they look at you. Imagine how that would clash with rules that are supposed to be protection from sexual harassment  in the office, but how to police it?

The main casualty will be trust.  It will make us question how much we trust each of our friends and colleagues and acquaintances. It will build walls. People will often become suspicious of others, not just strangers but friends and colleagues. Some people will become fearful. You may dress as primly as you like, but if the viewer sees you in a slutty outfit, perhaps their behaviour and attitude towards you will be governed by that rather than reality. So we may see an increase in sexual assault or rape. We may see more people more often objectifying women in more circumstances.

It applies equally to men of course. You could look at me and see a gorilla or a zombie or see me fake-naked. I won’t lose any sleep over that because I don’t really care all that much. Some men will care more than I will, some even less. I think the real victims will be women. Many men objectify women already. In the future AR world , they’ll be able to do so far more effectively.

We can still joke about a world where you use AR to replace all the ugly people with supermodels, but I think the reality may well not be quite so funny.

 

Is greed more sustainable than frugality?

Sustainability is much misunderstood. Certainly government and corporate sustainability policies often point completely the wrong way.

To be sustainable, we must ensure that future generations are able to live decent lives. Not much argument about that usually. But conventional wisdom in the field is that this means we should cut back on consumption.  That leap of logic is flawed. Cutting back reduces environmental impact in the short term but that doesn’t necessarily mean it will reduce it in the long term, or overall over any significant length of time. The full lifetime, full system impact is what counts. Achieving a reduction in overall impact well be best served by increasing consumption in the short term, if this leads to development that reduces the later impacts enough to offset short term damage.

An excellent example is in mobile phone design. Vigorous marketing and encouragement to replace mobiles frequently seems to many people to be wasteful and environmentally unsustainable. However, the rapid obsolescence cycle here has given us 150g mobiles that essentially replace 600kg of previously needed IT equipment. If everyone wants a mobile phone, or to access to the functions they provide, then the lowest environmental impact is achieved by using ultra-high tech phones that do far more with far less. Increased consumption has led to lower environmental impact. If instead, we had held back development and demanded that people use their phones till they fail, we would still be using a lot of heavy and resource intensive kit that needs lots more energy, generates far more waste, and would need far more mining, nasty heavy metals and pollution. And it wouldn’t work half as well, so we’d have less happy lives too.

Greed v frugality? Greed is the more sustainable. Because it leads faster to more advanced technology that is invariably better for the environment.

For a fuller analysis of sustainability and technology, download http://futurizon.com/articles/sustainingtheearth.pdf. It is free.

Futurizon Sustainability Report Part 5: Technology

Caution : this section is long. 5000 words ahead:

Linear Induction Bike Lanes

Electronic bicycle lanes could also be constructed to incentivise cycling. A linear induction motor, laid into or on the cycle lane surface could pull cyclists along if they wanted assistance. Mechanical energy is very cheap, whereas the effort required to cycle long distances or up hills is a strong deterrent to many potential cyclists – they are not all super fit! This linear induction drive would only require a small modification to the bicycle (a simple metal plate affixed to the front forks would probably do), and could easily be switched on and off, could offer variable speeds for individual cyclists. Bikes would be pulled along by the magnetic field. It is quite easy to engineer in various safety precautions to prevent misuse and also to enable charging to make commercial ones viable. With no moving parts, and therefore nothing to clog up, it could be extremely reliable. Tracks could be laid either into the surface, or made as rolls that could be quickly laid out on hills to give extra assistance where it is needed. Of course other technologies such as RFID chips could enable highly personalized control (and payment) systems. Apart from encouraging more bicycle use, it could also be used to increase bicycle speed, which both improves journey time for the cyclist, and reduces the congestion bicycles can cause in other traffic. Making it easier to use bikes, and enabling people to use them to commute without needing a shower as soon as they arrive, would yield system wide benefits through extra bicycle use and increased fitness and because speeds would be higher, they wouldn’t slow down other transport as much or cause so many accidents.

Self-driven Pods

New transport solutions based on electronically driven cars and electronic highways could be developed quickly. The basic technologies are all proven now. Cars in the far future will simply drive themselves. These could dramatically improve personal mobility and social inclusivity, and greatly reduce congestion. People would most likely abandon car ownership if this is done well. If personal driving style is eliminated by electronic overrides, there is far less incentive to personally own a car, and at the same time it will become much easier to implement and manage large fleets of shared cars. Fleets give economy of scale and also far better economy of resource. A car would not spend most of its life idle, but could be in use most of the time. A modest number of cars could cater for a large population, especially since the exact locations of all the cars is known, as well as the destinations and likely arrival times of cars in transit. There are already several instances of car rental systems that allow people to just pick up and drop cars as they wish. This will become much more attractive an option with future technology.

So we may well see large fleets of shared cars, owned by companies, government or social groups. With cars linked electronically into a ‘road train’ for acceleration and braking, they could drive closer together, increasing road occupancy, reducing drag and making road travel more energy efficient. With computers driving the cars, they could be much closer together sideways as well as lengthwise, squeezing more lanes onto the same road area, so it may be possible to increase the number of cars on a stretch of road. Given smaller pods instead of large cars, narrower lanes and closer distancing, it should easily be possible to achieve a factor of 5 in the number on a stretch and since they could all be moving well, overall capacity would improve even more. It also makes it more feasible to run roads with lane direction determined by time of day, with some lanes carrying cars one way in the morning rush, and the other way in the afternoon.

Obviously, lorries need more road space but this can easily be accounted and flow still optimised by a computer driven system. Lorries are already being developed that can work in road trains to save drag and driver fatigue.

Such an electronically controlled system could have a mixture of public and private (large fleet company) ownership. The key feature is that it will have all the flexibility of private transport but be more socially inclusive than current public transport, since older people wouldn’t have to walk to a distant bus stop. All they would do is ask their computer to get them a car.

Car batteries are an obvious storage solution for intermittent energy supplies such as wind or solar energy. However, if direct power pickup from road surfaces is implements, and it is likely, then batteries would not need to be very high capacity, since they would only need relatively short local reach. Using smaller batteries would greatly reduce the need for lithium and other materials, making cars cheaper, lighter and safer.

Buses would be a big spoiler for such a system. Since they have to stop frequently to let people on and off, it would be far better to replace them with individual pods. Each person would get personal service door to door and the reduced size makes it far easier for computers to organise flow around them as they stop. In fact, they may even be small enough to simply use pavement. Few people would miss slow and dirty buses or the risk of having a drunk sit next to you, when faced with the option for comfortable end to end service at probably lower cost.

A public transport system like this would require far less resource than today’s, because far fewer vehicles would be needed, and they would be lighter so need less raw material, and drag would be much lower, so they would use less energy. It would also be safer, cheaper and more socially inclusive by far than what we have today.

Rail use – pod trains

There is really no reason why these self-driven pods or road train technology could not be implemented on the railways too. Rail occupancy can be as low as 0.4% on regional railways. Performance analysis shows that packet switched networks can be safely loaded to 80% occupancy before statistics cause significant performance degradation. So there is clearly a huge opportunity for improving the capacity of railways, perhaps 100-fold, if packet switching based solutions were to be implemented instead of the current system, which allocates a very long stretch of track exclusively to each train because of the safety limits required by the obsolete signalling and control technologies that current railways use. Suppose that electronically driven cars and buses could be taken onto the railways, and interleaved with vans and small rail carriages that spend all their time on railways. For example, cars could be made with dual wheels, as some buses are today. Once on rail, no steering is needed and with the vehicles talking electronically to each other to coordinate braking and acceleration, the driver could do other things while the car drives itself to the destination station, whereupon it would leave the track and use its other wheels to get to its final destination. The cars could be driven very closely, and of course the drag and friction costs would be very low. Furthermore, since most of the journey could be on rail with electric energy easily provided, the car could use an electric motor. Instead of using petrol or diesel, or even fuel cells, it could make very long journeys just on batteries, since the batteries could be recharged during the rail journey. Since railways are simple one-dimensional systems, this would be far less demanding in terms of control systems than the equivalent on the roads. So whereas electronic highways will take some more years to become feasible, rail based systems could be implemented much more quickly, given the will.

Nuclear energy – Thorium

Many environmentalists are in favour of nuclear power compared to a few years ago. Nuclear power has always been a scary option to many people because of the waste disposal problem, and the potential use of some kinds of nuclear power stations to generate material for bombs. Nevertheless, if it does turn out that CO2 emissions are a problem, then it offers an obvious way of reducing them while providing much more stable power than that available from wind, wave or solar.

Today’s nuclear stations mainly use uranium, a few use plutonium, but tomorrow we will probably have many that use thorium, a relatively common element that is cheaper and more readily available than uranium, and produces much less dangerous by products as it decays. The Chinese are currently trying to develop thorium reactors and are likely to succeed. If so, this will provide a great deal of help in achieving a sustainable world that still has enough energy for us all to lead comfortable lives.

In the longer term, fusion based energy is inevitable too, but no-one knows when this is really likely to become reality. The very far future has a glut of potential energy supplies, so it is only the short and medium terms that are threatened with shortages. Long term sustainability is not a problem as far as energy goes.

Nuclear waste disposal

Uranium comes from mines. It is extracted, concentrated, used until it isn’t radioactive enough any more and then we lock it in secure dumps until we figure out what to do with it. One option seems obvious when you remember that it came from a mine originally. If the nuclear waste it replaces were to be extremely diluted by mixing with the refuse from the uranium mine, (or indeed with any other rubbish if it is being used for landfill), then it could all be dumped back in the hole it originally came from, and that would result is a slightly less radioactive mine than the original.

A longer term option lies in the space elevator. Nuclear waste could be flung into the sun, which of course is just a nuclear reactor anyway. It could be an expensive solution compared to burying it or using it up in a thorium reactor, but who knows?

Wind energy

If there is one perfect example of the triumph of green dogma over scientific sense, it would be wind farms. Wind farms can harness superficially free energy but are an eyesore, cause noise and stress, disrupt breeding cycles and kill birds, and may even sap enough of the wind to disturb natural weather patterns. They are ludicrously expensive to build, with little scope for cost reduction requiring heavy subsidies. Because wind doesn’t always blow, they still need other power generation capacity to be provided alongside, and this also needs to be subsidised if the generator companies can’t sell their power all the time. Overall, wind farms as they currently stand are anything but green and should really be a last resort.

There are a few developments that will make wind energy slightly less awful though. One is the use of different kinds of turbines according to the deployment circumstances. Vertical axis turbines may be better in turbulent environments such as housing areas, whereas conventional fans cannot harvest efficiently when the wind direction changes frequently.

Super-capacitors made of novel materials such as graphene offer the prospect of being able to store energy more easily, solving one of the big problems with intermittent energy use.

Plastic capacitor sails

Also on the capacitor side, plastic capacitors change their capacitance as they deform. Wind energy harvesters can be made using large sails covered in millions of tiny plastic capacitors that spin in the wind, deforming and springing back every time they make a rotation. The sails would lie on the surface of the sea, and only become visible when the wind fills the sail. There would be no visible movement from any distance away because of the small size of the capacitors, so this would doubly help visual disturbance. Since the energy would be converted more directly into electricity, there would be no need for a large central generator, no need for heavy engineering. The costs of plastic capacitors today make sail solutions even more expensive than conventional turbines, but materials science often follows Moore’s law cost reductions, whereas mechanical systems don’t. This means that in a few years it may be cheaper to use sails, and the cost benefits would continue to improve thereafter.

Whether such advances will ever make wind energy a good solution is uncertain, but it could be less bad.

Solar farms

Solar farms in equatorial regions are likely to spread, contributing enormously to energy supply, but affecting wealth distribution and already associated with crime and forced people movement. Short term costs are very high but inevitably will fall. They also increase absorption of sun’s energy relative to bare ground. So solar farms would produce a great deal of energy and could be cheap as Moore’s law brings down the costs and increases efficiency of photovoltaics, but it isn’t the clean solution sometimes imagined.

Graphene

Graphene is the new wonder material. Like carbon nanotubes, it is just another form of carbon, the atoms just laid out differently. Having said that, it is far stronger and lighter than steel, is a superb conductor, it can be used as a substrate for electronic circuits, and it is made of carbon, an extremely common element. Its importance in sustainability will come from many angles. To list just a few, it will enable substitution for other materials that are in short supply, expensive or dangerous or resource-consuming to make. It will allow super-capacitors that can replace batteries and store power from intermittent energy supplies. It will make ultrafast computers, better sensors, and many other things we haven’t even imagined yet. Engineers are very excited about its potential and it is impossible to know just how much impact it will eventually have, but it is likely to be huge. As a key pillar in future sustainability, graphene is certainly in there.

AI (artificial intelligence)

If we could produce intelligence synthetically, and therefore provide extra thinking capability to solve problems, this could have a profound effect on technology development rate, in every field. Since it is likely that this will be achieved in the next few decades, AI is a very important sustainability tool, with its enormous potential to invent solutions, increase understanding of the environment, and accelerate research development, but it is rarely mentioned in environment debates. Clearly, smart machines might be used to design smarter machines, which will design smarter ones still, leading exponentially quickly to vastly superhuman intelligence that may well solve many of the problems for us, with new energy technology, and new environmental clean-up and management technology.

We should not rely on AI to save us, but we may reasonably expect that it will, even if some man-made solutions fail. It gives us hope, but not enough certainty to avoid us using other approaches in parallel.

Active contact lens

My own invention in 1991, the active contact lens is a tiny display device that is worn as a contact lens, and contains circuits to project images directly onto the retina. It has already been prototyped in primitive form but in the far future it will offer ultra-high resolution fully immersive 3d images, and will make all other display devices unnecessary (though we may still have some anyway). Any kind of other display could be mimicked as a portion of the active contact lens display area. It is possible therefore to save all the resources and pollution involved in all the others. Given the number of TVs, mobiles, PCs, tablets and so on that could be replaced, the active contact lens can be a significant contributor directly to sustainable resource use.

In addition to replacing other displays, it can also be used for new services such as augmented reality. This allows even a basic environment to be enhanced virtually, and if the display quality is sufficient, it would be indistinguishable from the real thing.

Digital Jewellery

A person wearing a few grammes of digital jewellery in the 2020s will have far more IT capability than someone today with a laptop, phone, PDA, MP3 player, digital camera, GPS navigation system, security alarm, identity card, electronic cash cards, credit cards, voice recorder, video camera, memory sticks, radio, portable TV, a book, magazine, games console and many other gadgets that haven’t even been invented yet. Furthermore, by 2020, billions more people will be able to afford these sorts of things. These can also be the basis for a distributed cloud platform, requiring far less server farm provision and requiring far less power than today’s server farms. It is important that we get greater miniaturisation and lower energy use if everyone in the world is to have access to all the benefits of IT sustainably. Digital jewellery will be key.

Biomimetics

Biomimetics is simply using nature as stimulation in engineering design. Three billion years of natural evolution has come up with some great ideas, still being discovered. Engineers draw inspiration from these. Sometimes natural techniques and designs can be mimicked almost exactly, sometimes a bit of human tweaking is a good idea, but nature-inspired design is often lighter, stronger, faster, or better in some other way than alternatives. Biomimetics is another great sustainability tool. There are some purists in the field who like to stay true to nature, but as far as sustainability goes, it is great to get ideas wherever they come from, and nature is a big source. Even if the end product looks nothing like nature, its initial inspiration can be important.

Biomimetic architecture has been around quite a while, enabling low power air conditioning systems for example, or skyscrapers that can be lighter weight, or use lower drag materials to reduce wind pressure. There are very many opportunities here.

Synthetic Biology

Synthetic biology can be seen as a major derivative or biomimetics. Engineers and scientists have been discovering how nature works at microcellular and even molecular levels, and are now copying and using even genetic tools. At first, the major headlines are in modifying DNA slightly or assembling genomes from off-the-shelf chemicals to create synthetic bacteria, but it will undoubtedly progress to designing whole new classes of proteins, genes, and different types of synthetic organisms. It will also allow us to modify and enhance existing ones. Proteins are nature’s machines, and by understanding how to design and build them for our own purposes, this will be a rich seam for future development.

However, it is not without risk. Messing with nature will allow us to fix a lot of environmental problems. But as it becomes better and eventually commoditised, it is also a tool that lends itself well to the military, terrorists and mad scientists. I would say synthetic biology is in the top three tools when it comes to achieving sustainability, but I’d also put it in the top three risk to life on earth. If we can harness its potential while protecting against its threats, we will have a much better world for sure, but that is no easy task.

Bacterial mining

One example already under way is bacterial mining, designing bacteria to break transform a fixed resource (coal in this case) into a gaseous one (methane) so that it can be extracted more easily. Methane also produces less CO2 than coal for a given amount of energy. This clearly would help sustainability, as would many other custom bacteria. Other roles may be mining rubbish tips to recover useful elements from them, extracting resources without digging big holes and ruining ecosystems; processing waste; fixing carbon; making algae fuels; changing the earth’s albedo and many others. Again, the dangers are possible harmful but unexpected interactions with the environment (and it certainly wouldn’t be the first time we have had unexpected reactions), or commoditised advanced uses being perverted for destruction.

Restoration of the environment to health via genetic technology, desert greening programs, weather control technology and so on, are all highly likely to be developed over the next several decades. Synthetic biology could also yield tools to rescue life on earth after environmental catastrophe, by eventually enabling wholesale redesigning of the ecosystem from the ground up.

Carbon Reefs

Most UK householders are already encouraged to separate plastic waste for recycling, and when it reaches the recycling centres, it is usually compressed into blocks for easier handling, which sadly is often done in China. If these blocks were instead to be dumped in the sea and suitably contained, just off the Norfolk coast for example, transport and processing would produce far less CO2, carbon would be locked up, coastal erosion would be reduced, land would be reclaimed, and landfill would fill up more slowly. The plastic would effectively become a plastic reef and later, reclaimed land. This approach would be carbon negative, while recycling is at best carbon neutral. One of the obstacles to this solution is the move towards biodegradable plastic, which of course returns carbon to the atmosphere, and ironically, was developed to help the environment. Another is EU law which prohibits dumping plastic in the sea. Another obstacle is environmental groups who argue that we shouldn’t try to resist erosion because it will then happen elsewhere, but that is a rather defeatist attitude. Put some of the blocks there too.

The much levied criticism of conventional plastics, that they will stay around in the environment for thousands of years, actually makes them ideal for a carbon sink. Bio-degradable plastic, and current laws that prevent plastics from being dumped in the sea could turn out to be environmentally damaging, by preventing such solutions.

Some other waste could be mixed in too. For example, glass is borderline recyclable, yielding a environmental benefit when recycling it rather than producing it from scratch, but since this full-life benefit is actually quite small, perhaps it could also be included with the plastic, giving extra density to the waste.

Even organic waste could be processed by heating with reduced oxygen so that it carbonises, giving off natural gas in the process that could be used as fuel. The carbon could be added to the plastic reef to help absorb toxins from the seawater, cleaning it up a bit too.

Fabric Technology

New fabrics that don’t need to be washed are making their way onto markets already. It is the norm for clothes to be washed of course, and not everyone will be happy wearing clothes without ever washing them, but gradually acceptance is likely to grow. Washing machines that require far less water and detergent, and wash at lower temperatures are of course already here, and we will see their penetration increase too. All of these are useful tools in the battle for sustainability.

One of the first fabrics to be released is treated cotton. This is quite ironic, since cotton production is extremely water intensive and polluting. But it is still a start.

We can expect more and better synthetic fabrics in the future of course as well as treatments for natural fibres. Some of these will reduce environmental footprints by keeping us warm and dry and clean while reducing consumption of raw materials, water and energy use. Genetic engineering is likely to improve natural fibres too or make them easier to produce without so much water.

Carbon sequestration

Solutions for carbon sequestration can be developed quickly if we need them. As yet, we don’t really know if we do and this could be money wasted.

Farming

Organic farming generally produces less food per hectare of land, which decreases global food production capacity, which increases prices and makes it harder for poor people to survive, forcing them to have more children, which creates a greater population, greater need for aid and so on. It is a Western luxury that is paid for elsewhere.

Organic farming products are often delivered by a different distribution system, which has different impacts and these also need to be accounted. Additionally, marketing for organic produce tends to reinforce other aspects of lifestyle and attitudes that affect the system in many more subtle ways. For example, as well as consuming ‘organic’ food, the same people are likely to prefer natural fibres instead of synthetic substitutes. This increases demand for cotton. Cotton is becoming a hot environmental topic in itself, producing pollution and water stress among many other socioeconomic problems. Again, the transport, CO2, energy demand and social impact is very different across the whole system and whole lifecycle from synthetic clothing.

Planes and alternatives

Cheap air travel is a strong focal point for environmental hostility, but it is generally better to solve the actual problem than just tackling a few of the symptoms. The real issue isn’t travel, it is the environmental impact of the travel. Future technology can even provide alternatives to planes if need be. And ultimately, there is no law of physics that says that travel has to use any energy. The whole planet travels 1.5 million miles every day without using any energy at all!

The airline industry is currently researching the potential for both battery powered and hydrogen powered planes. If the hydrogen is produced in an environmentally friendly way, then that would certainly be one solution that would keep air travel going without creating major environmental problems. More interestingly, taking futurology back 100 years, we find ideas that may just have been ahead of their time. At the turn of the 20th century, futurologists were suggesting long tubes through which people could be propelled in vehicles by compressed air. That idea is now making a comeback, with long tubes that use vacuums and magnetic propulsion instead of compressed air. De-pressurising the tubes reduces air resistance. Superconductivity will make these far better than is possible today. We do not yet posses the tunnelling technology to make such solutions viable on a widespread basis, but they may become viable for high speed city links in the not too far future. For overseas journeys, large plastic tubes might even work, suspended not too far below the surface. Again, once an object is moving, in the absence of friction, it will continue doing so with no power consumption. This could be a very low energy transport solution one day, or perhaps it will be still a curiosity in another 100 years.

Yet another novelty is the idea of using super-cavitation to allow supersonic submarines. It has apparently been demonstrated that high speed travel through water can be done with less resistance than through air. This effect has already been used for torpedo technology.

Virtual existence

Estimates of future population generally only include humans, but we won’t be the only intelligent beings on the planet much longer. Advances in AI promise to make sentient AIs in a decade or two and by the end of this century there will be millions or even billions of them, with a  wide range of intelligence levels and characteristics. They will not only exist to serve people. Some will have a purposeful existence of their own, just as we do. They will have their own culture, and we will interwork with them. AI’s are potentially very diverse in nature, just as organic life is. We shouldn’t assume that they will all sit in rooms looking like computers, or even walk around as robots. Some will, some won’t. Some AIs will stay in the same place. But that ‘place’ could be the entire global network and any associated computer. They may roam electronically. They may also consume resources just like we do, for entertainment, research, building, arts, even growing gardens. We should not preclude AIs necessarily from sharing at least some human interests, as well as many we don’t have. But we can reasonable assume that many or even most AIs are produced to serve human interests. They may help a great deal with science and technology development, so may be extremely valuable in the fight to achieve sustainability. But there are some other lines of thought worth listing before moving on.

Science fiction generally presents robots as having their ‘brain’ on board. With cloud working today, this already looks dated. It is highly likely that robots will have a mixture of on-board and remote capability for processing, sensing, storage and communication. Some robots will essentially be empty husks waiting for occupation by any AI that is capable of occupying them. Or human mind for that matter, once our technology is up to the job. Direct links to the brain are extremely embryonic today, but by 2050, remotely occupying a robot and feeling senses as if you were present in it should be feasible, and if not by then, certainly not long after. This is an important factor for sustainability. It opens the possibility that people could carry on in machine form after their biological bodies die, or even have multiple parallel existences in different forms. It also allows an alternative for of travel, where you simply hire a robot at the destination and use remote presence to be there. There is little point in detail here since these technologies are too far away and will happen in a very different world from ours. It is enough just to mention them and move on, as I will now.

The full report is completely free and can be found at http://futurizon.com/articles/sustainingtheearth.pdf

Cellular automata, social jewellery, and the X Factor

I confess that I was among many who watched the x factor final last night. I know it’s not high culture, but it was fun. During one of the performances (Coldplay in this instance) the lights were dimmed and the cameras showed the effect of many people in the audience wearing glowing electronic bracelets. These were clearly centrally controlled and were either red or green (or was it yellow, can’t remember). There are lots of ways this might have been orchestrated. You can signal using the lights, or by radio, ultrasound, the web, or many other mechanisms. It doesn’t matter which they used, it was a nice touch and worked well. But it did make me realise how little people use electronic jewellery. I predicted LED jewellery particularly would take off many years ago and have been very disappointed how little it has. Apart from novelty Christmas accessories, you hardly ever see LEDs in jewellery. I don’t know why that is, but you can’t argue with the market. Maybe everyone just has less tacky taste than me.

Anyway, to the point.

It isn’t necessary to have central signalling to get nice pretty effects. If each person’s bracelet were to interact only with the nearest ones, you would still get interesting effects, with much more elaborate patterns than you would expect. In the early days of study of evolution in electronic systems, there was much talk of cellular automata. Stephen Wolfram showed that some seemingly complex natural shapes and behaviours could be explained if each cell made its development ‘decisions’ based simply on the properties of its nearest neighbours. If you aren’t familiar with cellular automata, it is worth checking it out on Google, you’ll find it very stimulating and it can easily suck up a day of your time. I loved that theory and greatly enjoyed exploring the patterns on my computer. It worked well. With my own background in finite element analysis it seemed obvious in hindsight, as many great insights do. But he had that insight, not me. I went on to apply it to hardware and network evolution based on digital hormone gradients, but that’s a different story and ancient history now. Since then, a lot of work has been done on the wider class of emergent behaviours, linking strongly to complexity and chaos theory.

I didn’t track down who makes the X Factor bracelets,so I don’t know their full functionality but let’s hope that they will bring out future versions that can talk direct to each other, assuming that these can’t yet. And obviously they could be hats, headbands, bracelets, rings, t-shirts or pretty much anything you can wear. As long as they are easily visible they could work well. It doesn’t even have to be a new piece of jewellery. It would work just as easily with a smartphone app, though I can’t be bothered to write one.

Emergent behaviours will produce interesting effects, many of which can’t be predicted. They could be programmed to behave out of the box with some basic cellular automata algorithms , e.g what is the state of the other devices I can hear best? That would already produce nice patterns to someone watching at a distance, with waves of colour change oscillating wildly around a community as people move around. Many of these would be biomimetic, precisely nature apparently uses similar algorithms. Or they could take manual inputs from their wearers. That would also be fascinating. Users might pick a particular emotional state they want to  project. Then the patterns and colours would evolve according to the social mood in the area. People could play games with the patterns, or use them as an elaborate form of tribal signalling and communication. In today’s age that could be in anything from parties and rock concerts to urban riots. Marketers are unlikely to ignore their potential too.

The X Factor may make debatably good TV, but social jewellery can certainly be good fun, and you can prove mathematically that its effects can’t all be predicted, so we’d get some surprises too. It might not take off, but I really hope it will. In times of economic gloom, we can do with some extra fun.

 

 

Time for the 13″ pad

800M people now have e-book readers, iPads or various other tablets. Most are around 7″ or 10″ screen size. The next obvious step upwards is magazine tablets.  There are a few very large format magazines out there, but Time magazine comes in at 13″ and I’d place my money on this being the next size for popular tablets. People can read books, papers and magazines on pads already, or even iphones for that matter, but with middle-aged eyes, I am not alone in wanting a bigger display and even the ipad feels cramped.

Smart-phones fit in your pocket, current pads are designed for taking out and about, but the 13″ pad will live mostly on the desk, coffee table or kitchen table. It is a better substitute for the laptop, and this is an important niche of course, but enabling new services in the home will be the big market for it. People who are used to reading paper magazines are more likely to buy a large format pad if the price is right. Games will look better on a bigger display, and so will videos. Even books can feel cramped on a 7″ pad, and in the home some will prefer to read them on large formats with bigger text instead of having to squint or juggle different pairs of glasses.

The 13″ format is more likely to be a shared device then the smaller formats. It is the natural home of home messaging, calendars, magazines, books, general web access and information services. Some of these are personal and will live on individually owned smaller pads, but the shared ones will move up.

I am expecting the phone to ring any minute as newspapers start producing their “what will happen next year then?” articles. Well, the 13″ pad will be top of my prediction list for 2012.

 

New book on the future of everyday life: You Tomorrow

My brand new book is called You Tomorrow, and now is available at http://t.co/yPcRwdY . It is all about the future. I started by collecting a lot of the ideas from my blogs and papers over the last few years, but found loads of gaps and filled them in, updated and rewrote a lot of stuff, sorted it, and finally was happy with a contents list for 2 books. Then I started writing them. The one that I just released is about everyday life and for ordinary people in ordinary language and is called You Tomorrow. My next one is for business and will be a full PEEST analysis – politics, economy, environment, society and technology, and is a bit like a long overdue update of Business 2010. If it gets too big, I may split off the technology and environment bits into a third book. It will be much more jargonny, if that’s an acceptable word, but still aimed at intelligent people from pretty much any discipline so will explain terms where I think they need it.

Meanwhile, buy this book about your own normal everyday life. I made it cheap enough to be a casual purchase and easy enough reading for bedtime or the beach. It is £5.74 inc tax and delivery in the UK. It is approximately 86,500 words.

It looks at how technology will change the ways we make kids, the life stages they will go through, from pre-design to electronic immortality. Then it looks at just about every aspect of everyday life, then the ways careers will change, then the sort of stuff we own, and finally the nature of our surroundings, real and virtual. Although aimed at pretty much anyone, it is I think still a useful guide for anyone in strategy or planning.

It is only available so far as an e-book, and a few comments here and there are UK-specific. But USA and German versions will come soon, and if it sells well, I will also issue it on paper, though at a higher price.

I hope you enjoy reading it, while I get on with the next one.