Being human in the Digital Age.

As a life-long dilettante interested in how we connect the dots (which runs the gambit from how we exercise power to why we like pets), I have been convinced for some time now that we are entering a new world: a world where most of the rules have been changed and technology is running ahead of our ability to cope.

I come home from a recent conference entitled "Being Human in the Digital Age" with most of my concerns validated.

It is like predicting the Maple Leafs will lose in the Stanley Cup final. There is no joy in Mudville.

For those of us in the hinterland looking get in, the Digital Age means getting on the map, getting in the game, finding out where the jobs are and trying to get a seat at the table.

There is not a lot of concern about biotechnology, genetic engineering, or the ability of robots-to replicate themselves.

Our thought is merely how do we create a tax policy that is so attractive these people and companies will come live with us.

For those on the bleeding edge, where the innovations come hourly, where some countries get it (India) and others do not (Germany), where Moore's Law is the speed limit and Napster challenges the concept of copyright, there is growing awareness that our society is out of control.

We are capable, mostly as a result of the incredible power of computers, to figure out almost anything we choose to know.

What is new is that we are creating robotic, digital, and genetic organisms that replicate themselves.

The concept is no different than the Lovebug virus, which most of you have met.

It has caused problems worth hundreds of millions of dollars around the world.

This one little problem was caused by a couple of kids in Manila who 25 years ago would have been stealing hubcaps, not disabling computers around the world.

In our homes we eat food that is genetically engineered. There is no law demanding such foods be labeled, and certainly no prerequisite to actually tell us what has been done and what the consequences might be.

What exactly is going on in our bodies with a piece of corn that is now manufactured to be bug-resistant?

Is it better or worse than yesterday's pesticides?.

It is of course outrageous, but so far few people are concerned the emperor has no clothes.

The public either does not get it or they just trust whoever is in charge to look out for them.

We are creating antibiotics which have the unintended consequences of creating stronger, larger, more dangerous viruses.

We have massive military complexes, ready to launch nuclear bombs, dependent on computers that can be hacked by la-year-old kids. More interesting, as we become more adept at replacing original body parts, we haven't discerned at what point are we no longer human, or at least not the person we started out to be.

We are moving from a terrestrial to a virtual world.

If we are prepared to hand over the landing of an Airbus 300 to computers running the autopilot, what are the implications as this blind faith is transferred to other sectors?

At what point have we delegated decisions to computers to such a degree we are no longer really in charge?

Just 20 years ago 70 per cent of research and development in the United States was sponsored by government.

Now it is less than 5% It means that all this stunning growth in knowledge is resident in the privates sector, controlled by companies who exist to make money.

If the companies that produce genetic foods can get us to opt out of knowing what we eat and the collateral damage that may ensue, are we going to care when private companies offer tailor-made DNA construction for parents who would like DNA from Wayne Gretzky or Placido Domingo to round out their hopes and dreams for their offspring?

Our problem is that we are unable to move beyond legislating the rules of competition.

Our concept of total freedom precludes us from saying we are not going to go there, whether it is private or public funds. In other words, reason an outcome rather than leave it to Darwinian principles.

We are unwilling to grapple with the reality we-are imperfect, and some of us are mad and others evil.

The consequence of life-changing technologies in the wrong hands is the end of civilization.

As Amory B. Lovins says, "Isolating genes while disregarding the interactive totality of ecosystems is replacing nature's wisdom with people's cleverness."

Scientists are reluctant to take responsibility for their handiwork. They just want absolute freedom to do whatever-occurs to them, and today that means doing it for profit.

Some are beginning to dissent. Bill Joy, the chief scientist for Sun Microsystems, wrote an article a few months ago in Wired Magazine entitled "Why the future doesn't need us".

It is a reasoned description of what we might expect if we do not find a way to negotiate and control the power of robotics, genetic engineering and nanotechnology.