IVIV (12): 195-197

[John Carvill]

> But you do agree that technology only has the agency that we ascribe it.

I hope we can all agree on this, at least in literal terms. But even
recognising that there is no 'IT' to technology - that it isn't some
conscious force which is out to destroy us - that recognition doesn't
necessarily preclude an occasional shiver of dread that our logical,
rational view of technology as not having agency might be horribly
wrong. A bit like being 'afraid of the dark', even though 'the dark'
is, in itself, neutral.

That aside, there is also the much less superstitious fear that
technologies may some day emerge which will have, or equate to, an
independent intelligence. Once strictly the preserve of sci-fi, that
sort of thing is looking increasingly likely now. It still seems, even
to the most pessimistic technophobe, to be a very long way off, and
other man-made malignities may intrude - global warming being a prime
candidate - so that we may never see what Pynchon called the moment
"when the curves of research and development in artificial
intelligence, molecular biology and robotics all converge". Should we
make it that far, then, as the man said, "Oboy."