In keeping with my apparent ongoing role as The Guy Who Keeps Getting Asked to Talk About Subjects In Which He Has No Expertise (and for those of you who didn’t see the Facebook post), The Atlantic solicited from me a piece on Conscious AI a few months back. The field is moving so fast that’s it’s probably completely out of date by now, but a few days ago they put it out anyway. (Apologies for the lack of profanity therein. Apparently they have these things called “journalistic standards”.)
And Now, Our Feature Presentation:
I am dripping with sweat as I type this. The BUG says I am as red as a cooked lobster, which is telling in light of the fact that the game I have been playing is the only VR game in my collection that you play sitting down. It should be a game for couch potatoes, and I’m sweating as hard as if I’d just done 7k on the treadmill. And I still haven’t even made it out of the Killbox. I haven’t even got into the city of New Brakka yet, and until I can get into that EM-shielded so-called Last Free City, the vengeful-nanny AI known as Big Sys is gonna keep hacking into my brother’s brain until it’s nothing but a protein slushy.
The game is Underdogs, the new release from One Hamsa, and it has surprisingly deep lore for a title that consists mainly of robots punching each other in the face. I know—even though I’ve encountered very little of it in my playthroughs so far—because I wrote a lot of it. After a quarter-century of intermittent gigs in the video game business, on titles ranging from Freemium to Triple-A, this is the first time I’ve had a hand in a game that’s actually made it to market (unless you want to count Crysis 2—which, set in 2022, is now a period piece— and for which I only wrote the novelization based on Richard Morgan’s script.)
Underdogs is a weird indie chimera: part graphic novel, part tabletop role-play, part Roguelike mech battle. It’s that last element that’s the throbbing, face-pounding heart of the artifact of course, the reason you play in the first place. You climb into your mech and hurtle into the KillBox and it’s only after an hour of intense metal-smashing physics that you realize you’re completely out of breath and your headset is soaked like a dishrag. The other elements are mere connective tissue. Combat happens at night; during daylight hours you’re hustling for upgrades and add-ons (stealing’s always an option, albeit a risky one), negotiating hacks and sabotage for the coming match, getting into junkyard fights over usable salvage. Sometimes you find something in the rubble that boosts your odds in the ring; sometimes the guy hired to fix your mech fucks up, leaves the machine in worse shape than he found it, and buggers off with your tools. Sometimes you spend the day desperately trying to find parts to fix last night’s damage so you won’t be going into the ring tonight with a cracked cockpit bubble and one arm missing.
All this interstitial stuff is presented in a kind of interactive 2.5D graphic novel format; the outcomes of street fights or shoplifting gambits are decided via automated dice roll. Dialog unspools via text bubble; economic transactions, via icons and menus. All very stylized, very leisurely. Take your time. Weigh your purchase options carefully. Breathe long, calm, breaths. Gather your strength. You’re gonna need it soon enough.
Because when you enter the arena, it’s bone-crunching 3D all the way.
Mech battles are a cliché of course, from Evangelion to Pacific Rim. But they’re also the perfect format for first-person VR, a conceit that seamlessly resolves one of the biggest problems of the virtual experience. Try punching something in VR. Swing at an enemy with a sword, bash them with a battle-axe. See the problem? No matter how good the physics engine, no matter how smooth the graphics, you don’t feel anything. Maybe a bit of haptic vibration if your controllers are set for it— but that hardly replicates the actual impact of steel on bone, fist in face. In VR, all your enemies are weightless.
In a mech, though, you wouldn’t feel any of that stuff first-hand anyway. You climb into the cockpit and wrap your fingers around the controllers for those giant robot arms outside the bubble; lo and behold, you can feel that in VR too, because here in meatspace you’re actually grabbing real controllers! Now, lift your hands. Bring them down. Smash them together. Watch your arms here in the cockpit; revel in the way those giant mechanical waldos outside mimic their every movement. One Hamsa has built their game around a format in which the haptics of the game and the haptics of the real thing overlap almost completely. It feels satisfying, it feels intuitive. It feels right.
(They’ve done this before. Their first game, RacketNX, is hyperdimensional racquetball in space: you stand in the center of a honeycomb-geodesic sphere suspended low over a roiling sun, or a ringed planet, or a black hole. The sphere’s hexagonal tiles are festooned with everything from energy boosters to wormholes to the moving segments of worm-like entities (in a level called “Shai-Hulud”). You use a tractor-beam-equipped racket to whap a chrome ball against those tiles. But the underlying genius of RacketNX lay not in glorious eye-candy nor the inventive and ever-changing nature of the arena’s tiles, but in the simple fact that the player stands on a small platform in the middle of the sphere; you can spin and jump and swing, but you do not move from that central location. With that one brilliant conceit, the devs didn’t just sidestep the endemic VR motion sickness that results from the eyes saying I’m moving while the inner ears say I’m standing still; it actually built that sidestep into the format of the game, made it an intrinsic part of the scenario rather than some kind of arbitrary invisible wall. They do something similar in Underdogs, turning a limitation of the tech into a seamless part of the world.)
As I said, I haven’t got out of the Killbox yet. I’ve made it far enough to fight the KillBox champion a couple of times [late-breaking update: numerous times!], but he keeps handing my ass to me. This may be partly because I’m old. It probably has more to do with the fact that when you die in this game you go all the way back to square one, and have to go through those first five days of fighting all over again (Roguelike games are permadeath by definition; no candy-ass save-on-demand option here). That’s not nearly as repetitive as you might think, though. Thanks to the scavenging, haggling, and backroom deals cut between matches, your mech is widely customizable from match to match. Your hands can consist of claws, wrecking balls, pile-drivers, blades and buzz-saws. Any combination thereof. You can fortify your armor or amp your speed or add stun-gun capability to your strikes. I haven’t come close to exploring the various configurations you can bring into the arena, the changes you can make between matches. And while you’re only fighting robots up until the championship bout with your first actual mech opponent, there’s a fair variety of robots to be fought: roaches and junkyard dogs and weird sparking tetrapods flickering with blue lightning. Little green bombs on legs that scuttle around and try to blow themselves up next to you. And it only adds to the challenge when one wall of the arena slides back to reveal rows of grinding metal teeth ready to shred you if you tip the wrong way.
Apparently there are four arenas total (so far; the game certainly has expansion potential). Apparently the plot takes a serious turn after the second. I’ll find out eventually. If you’ve got that far, please: no spoilers.
*
But I mentioned the Lore.
They brought me in to help with that. They already had the basic premise: Humanity, in its final abrogation of responsibility, has given itself over to an AI nanny called Big Sys who watches over all like a kindly Zuckerborg. There’s only one place on earth where Big Sys doesn’t reach, the “Last Free City”; an anarchistic free-for-all where artists and malcontents and criminals— basically, anyone who can’t live in a nanny state— end up. They do mech fighting there.
My job was to flesh all that stuff out into a world.
So I wrote historical backgrounds and physical infrastructure. I wrote a timeline explaining how we got there from here, how New Gehenna (as I called it then) ended up as the beating heart of the global mech-fighting world. I developed “Tribes”—half gang, half gummint—with their own grudges and ideologies: The Satudarah, the Java men, the Sahelites and the Scarecrows and the Amazons. I gave them territories, control over various vital resources. I built specific characters like I was crafting a D&D party, NPCs the player might encounter both in and out of the ring. I fleshed out a couple of bros from the Basics, the lower-class part of London where surplus Humanity all made do on UBI. Economic and political systems. I wrote thousands of words, forty, fifty single-spaced pages of this stuff.
To give you a taste, this is how one of my backgrounders started off as usual, click to embiggen):
And here’s one of my Tables of Contents:
Now you know what I was doing when I wasn’t writing Omniscience.
*
I don’t know how much of this survived. It’s in the nature of the biz that the story changes to serve the game. I’m told the backstory I developed remains foundational to Underdogs; its bones inform what you experience whether they appear explicitly or not. But much has changed: the city is New Brakka, not New Gehenna. The static fields now serve to jam Big Sys, not to keep out the desert heat. (The desert in this world isn’t even all that hot any more, thanks to various geoengineering megaprojects that went sideways.) I think I see hints of my Tribes and territories as Rigg and King prowl the backstreets: references to “caveman territory”, or to bits of infrastructure I inserted to give the factions something to fight over. Not having even breached the city gates I don’t know how many of those Easter eggs might be waiting for me, but assuming I can get out of the KillBox I’m definitely gonna be keeping an eye out. (I think maybe the Spire survived in some form. I’m really, really hoping the Pink Widow did too, but I doubt it.)
Doesn’t really matter, though. I love the fact that Underdogs has a fairly deep backstory, and I’m honored to have had even a small part in building it; you could write entire novels set in New Brakka. But this game… this game is definitely not plot driven. It is pure first-person adrenaline dust-up, with a relentless grim and beautiful grotto-punk aesthetic (yes, yet another kind of -punk; deal with it) that saturates everything from the soundtrack to the voice acting to the interactive cut-scenes. I admit I was skeptical of those cut-scenes at first; having steeped myself in Bioshock and Skyrim and The Last Of Us all these years, were comic-book cut-outs really going to do it for me?
But yes. Yes they totally did. Don’t take my word for it: check out the Youtube reviews. Go over to Underdog’s Steam page, where the hundreds of user reviews are “Overwhelmingly Positive”. The only real complaint people have about this game is that there isn’t more of it.
This game was not made for VR: VR was made for this game.
Most of you remain in pancake mode. VR is too expensive, or you get nauseous, or you’ve erroneously come to equate “VR” with “Oculus” and you (quite rightly) don’t want anything to do with the fucking Zuckerborg. But those of you who do have headsets should definitely get this game. Then you should talk to all those other people, show them that the Valve Index is actually superior to the Oculus in a number of ways (and it supports Linux!), and introduce them to Underdogs. Show them what VR can be, when you’re not puking all over the floor because you can’t get out of smooth-motion mode and no one told you about Natural Locomotion. Underdogs is the best ambassador for VR since, well, RacketNX. It deserves to be a massive hit.
Now I’m gonna take another run at that boss. I’ll let you know when I break out.
]]>“What happens to the very concept of a war crime when every massacre can be defined as an industrial accident?”
—“Collateral”
“It’s not our mistake!”
—Sam Lowry, Brazil
Being who I am, I tend to portray my futures in the spirit of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four or Brunner’s The Sheep Look Up. Sometimes, though, reality turns out more like Gilliam’s Brazil: just as grim, but hysterically so.
Take my short story “Collateral”: a tale that (among other things) asks about culpability for decisions made by machines. Or “Malak”, about an autonomous drone with “no appreciation for the legal distinction between war crime and weapons malfunction, the relative culpability of carbon and silicon, the grudging acceptance of ethical architecture and the nonnegotiable insistence on Humans In Ultimate Control.” Both stories are military SF; both deal with realpolitik and the ethics of multi-digit kill counts in contexts ranging from conventional warfare to mass shootings. Serious stuff—because I R Serious Writer, and these R Serious Things.
And then the real world comes along and makes the whole issue utterly ridiculous.
If you’re Canadian, you’ll know about Air Canada. They’re our sole remaining major airline, after swallowing up the competition a few decades ago. You may have seen them in the news recently for such customer-friendly acts as forcing a disabled passenger to drag himself off the plane while the flight crew stood around watching, refusing to divert to an emergency landing while another passenger was inconveniently dying in Economy, refusing to board people named “Mohammad” because their names were “Mohammad”, and coming in dead last for on-time flights among all major North American airlines. It’s none of those noteworthy accomplishments I’m here to talk about today, though; rather, I’m here to remark upon their historic accomplishment in AI. In one fell swoop they’ve leapt over the fears of such luminaries as Geoffrey Hinton and David Chalmers, who opine that AI might become dangerously autonomous in the near future.
Air Canada has claimed, in court, that they’ve created a chatbot which is already an autonomous agent, and hence beyond corporate control.
It’s a bold claim, with case history to back it up. Back in 2022 one Jake Moffat, planning a flight to attend his grandmother’s funeral, went online to inquire about bereavement fares. Air Canada’s chatbot helpfully informed him that he could apply for the bereavement discount following the trip; when he tried to do that, his claim was denied because bereavement rates couldn’t be claimed for completed travel. When Moffat presented screen shots of Air Canada’s own chatbot saying the exact opposite, Air Canada politely told him to fuck off.
So Moffat sued them.
The case played out in Small Claims Court, over such a trifling sum (less than a thousand dollars) that it must have cost the airline far more to defend their position than it would have to simply fork over the money they owed. But this wasn’t about money: this was apparently a matter of principle, and Air Canada puts principle above all. They made the case that they weren’t responsible for erroneous chatbot claims (what those in the know might call “hallucinations”) because—let me make sure I’ve got this right—
Ah yes. Because the chatbot was “a separate legal entity that is responsible for its own actions.”
Apparently the Singularity happened, and Air Canada’s attorneys were the only ones to notice.
The judge, visionless Luddite that he was, didn’t buy it for a second. No word yet on whether Air Canada will appeal. But it seems strangely, stupidly appropriate that the momentous and historic claim of AI autonomy (dare I say sapience?) emerged not from from some silicon Cambridge Declaration, not from any UN tribunal on autonomous military drones, but from petty corporate bean-counters trying to shaft some grieving soul for $812 Canadian.
When it comes to cool, bleeding-edge tech, William Gibson once observed that “The street finds its own uses for things”. What he forgot to mention, apparently, is that at least one of those uses is “being a dick”.
Way back in grad school— when VHS was a thing and computer screens were all monochrome and a 20-Megabyte hard drive was the kind of thing only supervillains could afford—a bunch of us rented “The Terminator” for the weekend and watched it between bouts of AD&D. Inevitably we came upon the iconic first-person T-800 view. You know the one: red visual field overlaid by scrolling columns of numbers, status reports and hardware ID codes, a kind of internal HUD giving a sense of how ol’ Arnie saw the world.
“Of course it wouldn’t really perceive things like that,” Steve Patton observed, because half the point of these events was to nitpick the shit out of everything. “All that data would be integrated further upstream.” And of course he was right. A T-800 wouldn’t have to read environmental data off an overlay any more than you or I would need to read a little digital thermometer in our visual field to know that it was “cold”. You couldn’t take that cyborg HUD literally; that would imply truly incompetent engineering, the addition of an unnecessary (and time-consuming) computational step. Best to regard it as a narrative convenience, like subtitles in a foreign film. Terminators don’t experience overlays any more than we do.
Except it turns out that maybe we do. Or at least, you do. Apparently most of you are computationally inefficient doofuses.
There’s this thing called aphantasia—“the inability to create mental imagery”, according to Wikipedia—whose victims don’t experience Terminator-like visual overlays. Honestly, I didn’t think anyone did that.
I mean, sure, “mind’s eye”: I have that, or at least I thought I did. I can imagine what things look like. I can close my eyes and think of anything from a dragon to a sapient raccoon; I can describe the color of the scales, the scruffiness of the fur. I can imagine what friends and loved ones look like, describe them with reasonable fidelity to anyone who might be listening. I thought that’s what people meant by “picturing something in your mind”.
But a literal image, like a floating window in a heads-up overlay? A visual hallucination that manifests like the “picture in picture” feature you get in TVs and computer monitors? That would be bullshit. Not only would such artifacts distract you from paying attention to your actual environment, but they would be computationally inefficient: a Terminator worldview. Surely all your mind’s eyes are integrated further upstream, like mine.
But apparently not. Apparently, when imagining things that aren’t there, 97% of you see the world through cluttered desktops. You literally see things. (You also hear things; while I merely imagine Morgan Freeman’s voice talking in my head, your dumb brains actually hear the dude as though he were talking to you via bone conduction.)
I still don’t believe this. And the BUG backs me up: she doesn’t hallucinate picture-in-picture either. So here’s an informal poll: let me know how you experience reality, and maybe I can start to wrap my head around this.
If this does prove to be true—if those of us who merely imagine are some kind of freakish minority—it might at least explain why some readers find my prose so confusing when I describe spaceship layouts and skiffy vistas. Maybe we literally experience different sensory modalities, and something gets lost in translation.
On the plus side, apparently us aphantics tend to have IQs 5-10 points higher than the rest of you, with pretty high statistical confidence (P=0.002). I suppose that makes sense.
We don’t waste brainpower on that extra computational step.
It’s been a busy couple of years, too busy to squeeze in the usual Gallery Update back at the start of last year. But the fan art and the book covers and the bodily mutilations have continued even as my coverage of them lapsed—and by the time you look in on the backlog you’ve got over two hundred pieces in there, each in need of attention, formatting and thumbnailing and annotation. And then, more often than not, you realize you’ve lost track of where you found the fucking thing so you have to go online and try to track down the artist so you can at least render attribution and maybe a link or two. The only time you can carve out the time to do that is over the holidays, and who the hell wants to blow their few festive days off on that?
No one, probably. But I was raised Baptist, and as one of Gary Trudeau’s characters once opined, life’s not meant to be enjoyed. It’s meant to be gotten on with.
So here you go. Almost 250 new pieces for your delectation (the vast majority, as usual, in the Blindopraxia wing). There’s new work by the usual crew, but I’m excited to present a whole bunch of new artists here (several of whom pumped out enough work to warrant their own dedicated subsections. I also finally got around to posting those interior illustrations from the 2014 MAG editions that I only just discovered a couple of years back but didn’t have time to upload. And, inevitably, AI-generated art made its debut.
This is but the merest fraction of the new editions. Lots more over in the galleries themselves. Do check them out.
And don’t say I never do anything for you.
(Or possibly Kurt Vonnegut)
Well, what did you expect from a COP held in a fucking Petro State, a COP whose president explicitly denied that science justified a phase-out of fossil fuels, who in fact used the proceedings to pursue expanded fossil-fuel production? What do you expect of an event whose participants are warned, under threat of imprisonment, not to criticize “Islam, UAE government, corporations or individuals”, an event in which the very possibility of a private conversation is a pipe dream thanks to ubiquitous state surveillance? (Private emails were already a writeoff.) What do you expect when the same heads of state who self-righteously parade before the cameras in Dubai continue to expand drilling licenses on their home turf and fork out over seven trillion in annual subsidies to an industry that, even now, has never had it so good?
You expect exactly what we got: a COP with the biggest carbon footprint in the history of COPs. You get COP28.
*
Some people sing its praises. Some even called it “unprecedented”, or “pivotal”, generally on the grounds that this is the first time a COP statement has explicitly mentioned fossil fuels. To my mind that’s not so much a groundbreaking triumph for COP28 as it is a scathing indictment of its predecessors. It’s as if the bridge crew of the Titanic declared victory because, 90 seconds before impact, they’ve all finally agreed to acknowledge the existence of icebergs in their passenger newsletter.
Others swooned over a belated commitment to “Loss and Damage” (shorthand for The Rich Nations can’t be bothered to reverse climate change so here’s a few bucks for you quaint island folks to spend on air conditioners and breakwaters). The whole event kicked off with a big splashy announcement highlighting the generosity of the “developed” nations. The UAE and Germany each pledged a hundred million; the UK and the US came in at 75 and 24.5 million respectively. (Canada, typically, weighed in with a measly 11.8 million USD.) All in all, those opening festivities netted pledges of 700 million and a lot of triumphalist chest-thumping about First-World generosity. Of course, the actual amount of loss and damage going down in the developing world has been estimated at a minimum of 400 billion annually, so—good job on your 0.18% down payment, Developed World.
Actually addressing Loss and Damage was never the point, of course. The real goal was to accomplish something—anything—that the attendees could cite to prove they were actually able to agree on something, even if it didn’t amount to a fart in a hurricane. The point was to give the talking heads some justification for their talk of running starts and unprecedented accomplishments.
It worked, too. They got some decent headlines out of it. And by the time anyone actually looked at the numbers, nobody cared any more. They’d all moved on to the breaking news that 2,456 of the COP’s attendees were fossil lobbyists—breaking the previous year’s record infestation by a factor of four.
*
I read COP28’s Global Stocktake so you don’t have to.
It encourages. It invites, it requests, it calls for. Sometimes it even urges. It “notes with concern” facts that have been obvious for decades. It reads like a series of follow-up questions in a middle-school spelling bee: “Use emphasise/underscore/acknowledge in a sentence, please…”
At no point does it ever compel. It never mandates. It is an entirely political document when what we need is a military one, an aspirational wish list when what’s needed are marching orders and battle plans.
Weasel words are everywhere:
Governments are only “called on” to implement even these half-assed measures; there is no commitment to do so, no penalties for failure. It is an empty document, riddled with loopholes, utterly devoid of consequences for any signatory who blows it off.
It does recognize the biodiversity crisis at least, “emphasizing” that we should dial back our destruction of natural habitat and our wholesale annihilation of other species. That acknowledgment is as toothless as all the others, but it’s nice to see biodiversity finally getting its share of vacuous lip service.
The document also quantifies an ambition to triple the planet’s renewable-energy capacity by 2030, which would be a nice milestone even though the recent explosive growth of renewables has only added to our total energy capacity without reducing our fossil fuel consumption in the slightest. It would also have been nice to see some acknowledgment of the fact that the mining necessary for that kind of transformation carries its own burden of environmental destruction—that it would take three quarters the world’s production of lithium, twice the world’s annual production of cobalt, and almost all the world’s annual production of something called neodymium to replace internal combustion vehicles with electric ones just in the UK, much less the planet as a whole. But here, too, we’re looking at guidelines more than actual rules.
Of course, COPs never compel. They are toothless by design; a single dissenting vote can scupper even the mere acknowledgment of fact, much less any binding commitment. This isn’t about the physics of apocalypse. Saving the world isn’t even on the table. This is all about the lowest common denominator. It’s about keeping the reprobates on board.
*
So here we are again. This year’s COP was touted as our last chance to “keep 1.5 alive”. So, if memory serves, was last year’s, and the year’s before. Instead, we got—in the words of David King— a “feeble” document that “recognises there is a need for ‘deep, rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions’ to stay in line with 1.5C. But then it lists a whole bunch of efforts that don’t have a chance of achieving that.” As Anne Rasmussen put it: “It is not enough for us to reference the science and then make agreements that ignore what the science is telling us we need to do.”
So, one more wake-up call where we hit the snooze button. One more “last chance” blown—although in reality we blew that last chance years ago. The most optimistic thing anyone in the know says these days is that we’ll be blowing past 1.5 “in the short term” (leaving open the hope that carbon-capture tech will miraculously scale up and devour the backlog before the Park Avenue penthouses go under). But does anyone seriously think that next year’s COP (In Azerbaijan, another petro state—take me now, Lord) is going to kick off with an acknowledgment that we blew it, that 1.5 is now out of reach?
You know they won’t. Gotta keep hope alive. Fuck the facts.
In a way you can’t blame them. If they acknowledge that 1.5 is dead and anyone who wants to see a live coral reef has maybe ten years to book the tickets—the institutional response is likely to be Goodness, such a tragedy. I suppose we should have listened to you twenty years ago after all. But now that the environmental damage is already done, we might as well do what we can to at least protect the economy. On the other hand, if you redraw your 1.5-degree line in the sand every damn year, people will either stop taking you seriously or conclude that there’s still time, there’s always time, so let’s put the painful transition off just a little longer.
In another way, though, there’s no denying that the Powers that Be do, in fact, take this whole thing extremely seriously. They do, in fact, consider it an existential threat, and they’re taking the necessary steps. And I’m not just talking about the zero-pointers’ ongoing interest in luxury apocalypse bunkers.
They’ve criminalized dissent, for one thing.
Environmental campaigners at COP28 were surveilled, recorded, and harassed. Over in the UK, environmental protesters being tried for their participation in a roadblock were forbidden from mentioning the climate crisis in their defense; when they did so anyway, they were jailed. Britain’s “Public Order Act” forbids any kind of interference in a whole range of industrial infrastructure, including (but not limited to) oil facilities; protesting in front of a refinery is a jailable offense. France outright outlawed the activist group Soulèvements de la Terre. Jurisdictions across Australia have spent the year passing legislation to increase fines and jail terms for pretty much any activist who interferes with Business As Usual. The good ol’ US of A, of course, has always been a pioneer in the field; putting environmental groups on terrorist watch lists, passing ag-gag laws that imprison people for taking videos inside factory farms, piggybacking on the post-9/11 security boom to classify any kind of environmental activism as “domestic terrorism”. Here in Canada, my own government has been lumping the “Anti-Canadian Petroleum Movement” in with the terrorists for at least a decade. Our rulers take the environmental crisis very seriously indeed. Their solution is to shoot the messengers.
The Bidens and the Sunaks and the Trudeaus of the world have not, after all, been sitting on their asses while the world burns. They’ve been acting swiftly and effectively to counter the forces that threaten them: not climate change itself, but those raising the alarm about it. It’s not the climate changers who are being criminalized, but the people who dare to talk about it. My suspicion is that you don’t pull that kind of authoritarian shit unless you’re feeling just a wee bit insecure.
Cue my usual fantasy scenario where the next global environmental conference opens under a banner quoting Utah Phillips: “The Earth is not dying, it is being killed. And those who are killing it have names and addresses.” Where, forced to choose between There’s still hope and It’s too late, there’s nothing we can do, we opt for something in between: It’s too late, there’s nothing left—except revenge. And all the astroturfers and CEOs and politicians suddenly realize that for once it’s not some innocent peon working at the polls who’s about to experience the threats and the drive-bys and the assaults, no, the crowds are coming for them. I bet they’d come up with some workable solutions and binding propositions real fast. “What, did we say transition away? We meant eliminate, really we did! Here’s a timetable! Here are some binding benchmarks!”
The fantasy evaporates after a moment or two, because of course if that ever happened our rulers would just do what they always have: pass more emergency laws to “restore order”, and release the hounds.
Still. Nobody passes draconian legislation about muzzling Pomeranians, no matter how much they yap. They pass it to muzzle pit bulls. Things that bite. So on some level, I think maybe they’re a little bit afraid of us.
I just wish I knew what to do with that. It’s not like voting works.
]]>—Stanislaw Lem
Lers
of
Spoi.
You Have Been Warned.
Let’s get the good stuff out of the way first: this movie is absolutely beautiful to behold. The cinematography is first rate; the vehicle designs are perfect. The vistas of robots in rice paddies—corny as that may sound—are a gorgeous and counterintuitive juxtaposition of old and new, the sort of bucolic visual scifi you used to see in Omni Magazine back in the eighties. The eyes have it: they will insist that the 2065 they’re parsing is utterly lived-in, utterly real.
The brain, however, will beg to differ.
To be fair, it’s clearly not our 2065. A montage of grainy archival footage during the prolog starts with an old-timey black-and-white newsreel showing robots taking their first halting steps back in the fifties and joining the US space shuttle program a few decades later. This is a parallel universe in which robots matured early, in which our own burgeoning issues with incipient AI didn’t mess things up, and in which the climate catastrophe does not appear to have happened. Fair enough. Including all that stuff would have muddied the future that Gareth Edwards wanted to show us, detracted from the story he wanted to tell.
The problem is, often as not Edwards himself doesn’t seem to know which story he wants to tell—so we’re treated to a world in which robots who work alongside Humanity as equals somehow yearn for “freedom” (even though there are no enslaved robots in this timeline). We’re shown a world in which pacifist robots explicitly abhor violence but routinely punch humans in the face for no obvious reason beyond sheer vindictive malice.
We’re told up front that a US black-ops squad is sneaking into New Asia under deep cover, and without backup. “The human locals, including the police, all work with AI. Robots, humans, and simulants, they all hate us. If you get caught, you’re screwed,” Alison Janney’s character intones near the beginning of the film, as her squad prepares to insert four hundred miles behind enemy lines. And yet by the third act a pair of USAF battle tanks—each literally the size of a city block and the height of a mid-range office building (so, not the kind of thing you can hide with a camo tarp and some leaves) show up out of nowhere to crush the nearest peaceful village. It is, reliably, an eye-filling spectacle, and there’s some cute tech on display. I was especially fond of the suicide bots: bombs with arms and legs, who for some reason have an arbitrary 30-second countdown to clomp through enemy gunfire and leap over enemy heads to their assigned target and blow up. (Imagine Oscar the Grouch pimping out his garbage can and joining Monty Python’s Kamikaze Highlanders.) It’s visually very cool, but it’s also hard to see how a conventional missile wouldn’t have been able to do the job way more efficiently.
In fact, the whole movie is cheek-to jowl with tech that ranges from questionable to physics-breaking. You’ve got NOMAD, the orbital weapons platform which sometimes seems to be in orbit and other times seems barely above the clouds—and which covers a quarter of the sky no matter where it is, which makes one wonder how (as with those megatanks I mentioned) it keeps managing to sneak up on targets without anyone ever noticing until it’s too late for anything but heroic martyrdom.
There’s the weird bullet-proofness of a family station wagon in which our heroes have taken refuge; it careens invulnerably into the night as high-velocity rounds from a whole squad of police bounce and spark harmlessly off its stern. There’s the inexplicable gobbledygook near the end where our hero is ordered to kill a bound and helpless little robot girl because “we tried to terminate the weapon cleanly, but she won’t let us”. How she can do that, strapped down and immobilized as she is, is never made clear, but apparently only our hero can do the job because “She trusts you”. Which seems a bit odd given that the mode of execution is to simply shoot her in the head with an EMP gun, something anyone could do from across the room whether “the weapon” trusted them or not[1]. (Of course, things had to unfold the way they did because the screenwriters were shooting for a specific end point, and had to pretzel the story to get there. Still. They could have done a better job of hiding the stress fractures.)
I should mention one very cool piece of field tech that impressed the hell out of me: a piece of wet/ware-synching hardware that allows a recently-deceased brain to temporary reboot and interact with the world through a robot body. The scene that introduces that tech—a dead soldier wakes up, panicking, terrified, and turns its robot head to see his own dead body rotting beside him on the ground— might have been the best bit of the movie. But in the end, even that existentially horrifying scene existed only to set up a predictable and sentimental twist in the final reel.
*
So far I’ve spent a thousand words nitpicking details. Admittedly, that’s chrome; you can argue back and forth about whatever world-building details support the events as presented. The real issue is, what about the meat of the story itself? What about the theme? What about the message?
For an answer, may I point you to Weird Al’s album homage to Michael Jackson’s “Bad”.
Edwards obviously didn’t just want to make a movie: he wanted to make a film, a piece of cinema that grappled with one of the preeminent issues of our time. He wanted to explore AI. A surprising number of critics seem to think he succeeded.
Which is odd, because there’s no actual AI to be seen anywhere in the movie.
There are robots, mind you. All humanoid, all of which look, talk, and act pretty much like we do. The cop robots have pie-plate heads but they still squint down the sight-lines of their rifles and beat up suspects, still yell and scramble comically for safety when a dog drops a live grenade into their trench. The farming robots till their fields with hoes and oxen. The Brave Rebel Guerrilla robots sometimes click mandible mouth parts but the voices that come out of them have British accents. Robots ride the subways and drive taxicabs; they slouch and laugh and rage and worship. Many of them have human faces stretched over their metal ones, replete with facial hair and wrinkles and liver spots appropriate to a variety of ages (humans actually donate their “likenesses” to a sort of facial Creative Commons for their cybernetic brethren to choose from). Robots grieve and throw tantrums and respond to threats at human speeds in human ways. They apparently eat ice cream, despite lacking a digestive system. (At least, we see one robot offer ice cream to another, who eagerly says yes, although the ice cream explodes before we get to see any of it go into a mouth hole. What a missed opportunity that was.) They wear clothes.
They always communicate using human speech— even the cop-bots, even in life-or-death combat situations where wireless-modem comms at 10G speeds would provide a vital tactical advantage. They pick up and use weapons the way we do, but weapons never seem to be incorporated into their structure (well, except for the Kamikaze Oscars).
The movie’s premise: the West has banned AI (or at least, robots—there’s some ambiguity regarding what qualifies) ever since an AI allegedly nuked Los Angeles ten years before. AI continues to flourish, however, in an amorphous collection of Eastern jurisdictions known as “New Asia”. The Murricans cannot abide the thought of another country following a different path, and have been launching a series of covert terrorists attacks upon suspected AI strongholds within New Asia’s borders.
Now, the eponymous N’Asian Creator has built an Ultimate Weapon which, when deployed, will end the West’s special military operation once and for all. A bereaved and embittered ex-soldier, whose wife was killed during a previous op, is recruited to accompany the team sent to extract/destroy said weapon—which turns out to have been built in the form of an eight-year-old girl who watches cartoons and asks pithy-cute questions about Heaven and gets all blubbery and teary when she doesn’t like something. (For a while I dared to hope she’d been designed that way as a deliberate countermeasure, a way to make potential assassins hesitate at the prospect of killing an innocent child, so she could strike first. Nope.)
Someone sticks a magic Q-tip into Robot Girl’s ear and in about two seconds deciphers her secret: she’s a universal remote, a garage door opener writ large, able to override and control electronics from a distance. Her powers aren’t all they will be; she can turn TVs on and off and sweet-talk security turnstiles, but for some reason she can’t do anything about the hordes of New Asian copbots that keep trying to kill her (for reasons that remain unclear; wasn’t she created by New Asians, to protect them from US aggression?). Her abilities are growing “exponentially”. In time, she’ll be able to shut down NOMAD itself.
Meanwhile, our bereaved embittered widower has grown to love her, against orders and all better judgment. Bet you didn’t see that coming.
That’s what this movie is about. Not AI at all; The Chosen One. The Sad Dad. Love Conquering All.
Oh, and prejudice is bad and robots are good. We know they’re good because—wait for it, say it with me yet again—they are Just Like Us.
At best, the message of “the Creator” is shallow and derivative, just the latest iteration in a long list of heavy-handed metaphors about Oppressing the Other. I have ranted about some of those on this very ‘crawl, but rarely has the point been made so ham-fistedly: for viewers too stupid to grok the subtext, one of the characters comes right out and says “My Father taught me that underneath it all, we’re all the same.”
Then your father was an idiot, lady. Because AI is not the same, no matter how many Turing Tests it passes. AI operates at electronic speeds, not neuronal ones. Whatever cognitive parts it has do not fit together the way ours do. It is not an evolved being: that’s what makes it so interesting, goddammit.
And that’s why I wonder if “The Creator” might be more than just an unoriginal retread with a really great sense of style. I wonder if it might actually be pernicious. Because arguing that we should respect AI because they’re like us is the most insipidly Human-supremacist point one can make in a world where we’re wiping out species left and right, even while we’re starting to see potential signs of life in alien atmospheres. We’re already destroying too many things that aren’t just like us, and it’s on account of that difference that we excuse our own behavior. They’re just animals. They don’t suffer the way people do. They don’t have souls.
The idea that we should confer value to something based on how well it apes Humanity is what got us into pretty much every mess we’re in today. It’s simplistic, it’s anthrosupremacist (yes, I’m making that a word now), it panders to the worst elements of Human self-glorification. And yet here it is again, pimped out and proudly served up as though it were some courageous progressive torpedo of Truth to Power: robots are just as worthy as us because, when it comes right down to it, they are us.
The corollary—unspoken, but inevitable—is that anything else can fuck off and die.
Jumping ahead for those of you who’ve seen the movie and are raising their hands about now: yes, the whole point of the Chosen One was that she was able to control electronics remotely. So yes, maybe she just wouldn’t permit the EMP gun to fire unless it was in the hands of someone she trusted. In which case—putting aside the question of just why one’s survival instinct should depend on how much you like the thing that’s trying to kill you— why hadn’t she just shut down the various security systems that were keeping her captive in the first place? ↑
First, there’s this guy called Guy d’Andigné, runs sfss: a classy, minimalist little site that reprints science fiction shorts from the public domain and the creative commons, ranging from Voltaire to Doctorow. He also does interviews (he even interviewed me once, many years ago). He never bothered to monetise it; it was strictly a labour of love. Now, though, hard times have hit (as they’ve done to a lot of folks, post-Covid) so Guy has curated an anthology of old classics (and I mean old—the latest dates from the sixties, the earliest from the seventeen-hundreds) and released it as a pay-what-you-feel-like ebook over at Ko-Fi. There are some Big Names in that ebook—Wells, Vonnegut, Lovecraft and Dick to name a few—and while the names are familiar, I bet at least some of the titles aren’t (I know I’d never heard of Afred Bester’s “The Unseen Blushers” before now, at any rate). So if you’ve got a few bucks to spare, and you’re interested in getting back to our roots, check it out. Do a good deed, discover some classics.
But enough about someone other than me.
.
I’ve been dropping hints about a couple of upcoming forays overseas; a few of you in the comments have taken the bait. So now, for those who haven’t noticed the new entries over on the sidebar, I’m pleased to announce that I’ll be a guest at Bulgacon later this month, over in (you guessed it) Bulgaria. I haven’t been to that country in person since my Ratio appearances back in 2017 and 2020, and those were both in Sofia. This time the location is—don’t know if I’m pronouncing this right—Plovdiv. A new place to explore, although I probably won’t have much time; they tell me I’m slotted for eight events.
Moving on to November, I’ll be in Madrid (assuming Madrid isn’t on fire then; these days, you never know). This isn’t a con but a conference: a five-day riff on the subject of “Synthetic Minds” hosted by Matadero Medialab. They’re still taking proposals for things they’re referring to as “Lab Projects”; anyone out there interested in presenting has until September 17 to submit a proposal. One thing that appears to be nailed down is that I’m going to be delivering a keynote address. I’m glad we’ve got that settled.
Now I’ve just got to figure out what the fuck I’m gonna talk about. And then write the damn thing. I make no promises.
But at the very least, these Medialab people have got a kick-ass graphic designer.
]]>First it was Bean, way back in March. Never really talked about Bean here on the ‘crawl. Buns were really more The BUG’s thing and they tended to live down in the basement anyway, so we didn’t interact as much as we did with the cats. But Bean was cool. She was small and feisty and didn’t take shit from anyone. She would sneak upstairs when we were in bed and feast on cat litter fresh from the box (not as disgusting as it sounds; our cat litter is wheat-based). She would glare at me, side-eyed and defiant, when I approached to shoo her out of the box; she would wait until the last minute before hopping back into the kitchen and down the stairs, giving me one of those patented bun “fuck you” thumps with her hind legs before disappearing.
Back when we first got her, I was the one responsible for delivering her meds after we got her fixed. She hated those meds. She would watch me coming from across the room, holding her ground until I was in range, and then— whap-whap—just punch the syringe right out of my hand with those spring-loaded forepaws of hers. (I’d never really thought of where the term “rabbit punch” came from before. I would not want to go one-on-one with one of those things in the ring.) She was small and fierce and unafraid.
She died in March. Something shut down in her GI tract, and all the drugs and Critical Care we stuffed into couldn’t start it up again.
*
Then it was BOG, in June: beloved companion for over a decade, victim of an unsuspected brain tumor. I told you about BOG just last post; there’s nothing more I can say about him here.
*
Then it was Potato, a geriatric rabbit we’d inherited only a few weeks after Bean died: one-eyed thanks to a dog attack in early life, wracked by intermittent and undiagnosed seizures for his first two years, a prey animal with enough baggage to justify a life spent hiding in corners and jumping at shadows—and yet he was the most fearless, friendly, in-your-face lagomorph you could ever hope to meet. Forced into exile by an allergy issue amongst his previous humans, he showed not a moment’s trepidation when introduced into the Magic Bungalow. It was a new adventure, and we were his new friends, and he would bound across any room we entered to greet us. We were a little worried that Doofus would try to eat him (and Doofus did, for one scary moment, close his jaws around Potato’s neck—but his eyes were on us the whole time. He was making a point. And he let Potato go, unharmed, when he decided the point had been made. Potato was amazingly chill throughout. He may not even have noticed.)
There was also the time when the Li’l Spud tried to hump BOG (humping’s a dominance behavior in rabbits), which made us cringe a little for BOG even when he did manage to get out from under.
Potato bounded across the room to greet us whenever we entered. He zoomed around our ankles. He leapt to the roof of his hutch and stood up on his hind legs to beg for treats. He ate like a black hole in the four months before he started going downhill.
That was what tipped us off; he stopped eating his hay, then his greens, then his kibble. We took him to the vet, started him on oral antibiotics and eye drops (his dead eye, quiet this whole time, had started acting up). Started feeding him Critical Care through a giant syringe. Even then, he was irrepressible; where every other rabbit we’ve known had to be force-fed when sick, Potato sucked back the stuff like it was crack. He couldn’t get enough.
But when he stopped coveting even the Critical Care we took him in again, squeezing him between two other appointments at a vet who was already fully booked. His core temperature was so low, the vet said, that he should by rights be dead already. There was nothing they could do but keep him comfortable and sedated until he actually was. He’d lived for over nine years, they reminded us. That’s old, for a rabbit. We should celebrate his long life, not mourn his inevitable death.
We did both. Potato died on August 2nd.
And now—just yesterday—Nutmeg. Meggles, aka The ‘Gles. The Junior Emissary from Moo.
This summer, it just doesn’t fucking stop.
*
I underestimated Nutmeg, at first. Didn’t give her the credit she deserved. I admit it.
She was one of only two cats in the Magic Bungalow back then, before it was even called that, when Caitlin and I had just started dating. Minion took one look at me and decided she hated my guts: hissed and glared and left the room. She was clearly the one I had to win over, the hard case to prove to the BUG that I was Worthy. Nutmeg? She climbed into my lap and started purring the moment I sat down. She was a furry little slut, she loved everyone. No standards at all. She came pre-won and taken for granted, lost in Minion’s antagonistic shadow.
She continued to love everyone as I embarked on my months-long quest to get Minion to not hate me. We had to warn visitors: better make sure your bladder’s empty before you sit down in the Bungalow, because once The ‘Gles climbs into your lap she ain’t leaving. Long before we’d met our neighbors across the street she had already made first contact, sitting appraisingly to one side as they built their boxy ecofriendly homes from the ground up (those neighbors, we learned later, dubbed her “Supervisor Kitty”). She loved half’n’half. Her furry little brain put together the twin inputs smell-of-coffee and biggest can-opener walks into kitchen and integrated them into the output Follow Big Can Opener and Yell Until Served. And she always got served. She drank more of that stuff than I did.
Every night, as we settled into bed for our evening’s entertainment, Nutmeg would choose one or the other of us (she was carefully egalitarian) and settle down on our chests to watch with us. Every morning she would appear and climb up our bodies and rest upon our shoulders, just a few minutes before the alarm rang. She had learned about House Rules, you see: when a cat chooses to settle upon you, you cannot forcibly displace or remove her. You can only lure her off (to which end we’d preemptively stashed little caches of cat treats at strategic, within-reach locations throughout the house). Meggles exploited this by becoming Shoulder Cat every morning; the only way we were going to get up was if we bribed her. Naturally, the other cats noticed what was going on, and were not going to let it pass. Thus the venerable morning ritual of treating every damn feline in the place at 7:15 each morning.
*
Three years ago her eyeball exploded. We thought we’d lost her then.
She came around the corner, screaming: her left eye a featureless red-black ball, something out of an exorcist movie. We rushed her to the usual 24-hour emergency clinic and learned that Nutmeg had hypertension, blood pressure so high that the vessels had begun literally bursting inside her. This particular rupture had not only flooded the eyeball with blood, but had torn the iris itself into a strange and alien shape. For months afterward Nutmeg was in the care of a Cat Ophthalmologist (nice to discover such things even exist); she’d be on blood pressure meds for the rest of her life.
She also had thyroid issues, so she was on meds for those too. But the thyroid meds made her hypertension worse; and her hypertension meds complicated the thyroid issues. Her whole continued existence was a tightrope act.
She walked it well enough, until the kidney disease. She hovered around that threshold for a couple of years: Stage 1 symptoms showing up in the blood work from one check-up and then No, wait, back to normal the next. But kidney disease is a patient and implacable fucker; two thirds of all cats come down with it by the age of fifteen. Older than that, the percentage goes up to 81%. Meggles was no BOG, and she was sixteen years old. When the disease finally hit her, it hit hard.
She went deaf almost overnight; it was The BUG, typically, who first noticed. She stopped spending the nights with us and started yelling to be let outside at 5a.m.— withdrawing from Human company, taking refuge in the morning cool of the front porch. That phase lasted only a week or two; then she retreated downstairs and curled up in messy chaos of Stella’s bedroom (abandoned, now, as The ‘Cro had left for Waterloo). She stayed nearby—unlike Minion before her, she never fled into the ravine where we feared we might lose her forever—but the cat who loved everyone, who sought out laps familiar or strange, who conversed nonstop with all and sundry, was vanishing before our eyes. The being who replaced her just wanted to be left alone.
Her weight dropped off a cliff. We gave her fluids sub-Q—once a week, then twice—and that worked until it didn’t. She grew increasingly anorexic. The food-obsessed cat who’d always striven for chonkhood melted down to fur and bones. I quailed at the thought of picking her up for fear that I might hurt her, break her even. I marveled that anything so skeletal would be able to hop up and down from her chair in the basement—travel up and down the stairs, even—with so little muscle mass to move it.
Fatman, on this very blog, said a magic word—Mirtazapine!—and I asked our vet and she said Yeah, we can put her on that. (And why the fuck didn’t you mention that when she was first diagnosed? I raged—but not out loud, because she’s been such a good vet all these many years.) So we gave her mirtazapine, and we gave her antacids, and antinausea and antivomiting drugs to help keep it all down (alongside the thyroid and blood pressure meds we’d been giving her for three years). And I deluded myself into feeling the faintest hope whenever this zombie thing licked a few grams of food on her way to the water dish (she drank constantly now), instead of taking a sniff and recoiling.
The BUG was not fooled. Meggles wasn’t even interested in half’n’half any more. Caitlin had known her longer than I had, loved her more deeply. Somehow that manifested in a greater willingness to kill the little creature. I resisted; when we took our laptops downstairs to work at Nutmeg’s side, she would still talk to us. She could still hop up and down, she could still get around. She was still in there. And after all, she’d only been on the mirtazapine for three days. Maybe it hadn’t kicked in yet. Maybe she could still pack on some weight, maybe her quality of life might yet improve, maybe—
Maybe she could recover from this disease that no cat has ever recovered from. Right.
There’s this hospice/palliative veterinary outfit that comes to your home so your pet doesn’t have to die in some loud white place that reeks of disinfectant. The lady that drove up in her portable deathmobile was very sweet, shared some bromide about it being better to do this a day too early than a day too late. I don’t think my wife and I see eye to eye on this. To Caitlin, a day too early is a day of suffering and torment avoided: a mercy. To me, it’s a day in which a being who can still purr, and talk, and respond to scritches won’t be able to do any of those things because it has stopped existing. I’ve never been able to balance that equation: how much pain and suffering does one have to allow before deciding, for another being, that death is the better alternative? How awful does life have to get before nonexistence is more humane? And how the fuck are we supposed to know how much of it another being is feeling, when they can’t tell us?
Caitlin is wiser than I in this. She is stronger. She’s lost loved ones to slow agonizing deaths like this, and those beings could talk. They could tell her what they were going through. Such painful insights were never forced on me. Yes, virtually my whole family has died; I even grieved some of them. But my stomach never clenched at the loss of a human life the way Caitlin’s has. The only time I’ve felt such loss in a way that really hurts is when it comes to these small companions.
Maybe that makes me emotionally stunted in some way. Maybe I’m the purest kind of misanthrope (it’s hard not to be, these days). Or maybe it’s just the mundane, boring fact that the loss we feel never scales to some empirical metric of the value of lives lost; it scales, instead, to how large those lives figured in our own. There are humans that loom very large in my life; I’ve just been extremely fortunate that none of them have died yet. May my luck continue to hold (just last week, in fact, I wrote an anniversary poem to The BUG asking her not to die before I do. I’m kind of a romantic that way.)
*
There’s not much else to say. Nutmeg was no great genius, no survivor of great hardship. She didn’t spend half her life living rough. We don’t know what happened the first year of her life—her previous family surrendered her for unknown reasons—but given what a fearless and friendly chatterbox she was right out of the gate, it’s unlikely she was abused.
She was just a wonderful, big-hearted cat who loved laps and food and who never did a mean thing to anyone.
I used to have to grab the remote control for our sound bar the moment the alarm went off, lest Nutmeg pin me down and keep me from getting it in time to turn on the news. Now, I have all the time in the world. No small thing yells demandingly at the big thing holding the milk carton; the morning treat ritual is a perfunctory and impoverished affair among the survivors. The Magic Bungalow has grown colder over the past few months, its nonhuman population reduced to three cats and three fish (and one itinerant bearded dragon, depending on whether The ‘Cro happens to be back from university). It has never been so empty in all the time I’ve lived here. It used to be some kind of magic architectural being in its own right, with a heart in every room; now, half of those hearts have been torn out. Sometimes, the place seems almost haunted.
Those of us who remain have no known medical issues, beyond a certain chonkiness on Blubbery Panda’s part. The surviving cats are three and ten and thirteen; Doofus will probably outlive me, if he doesn’t get shmucked by a car. This will be a relief to those of you who come here for the crunchy skiffy speculation, only to be walloped with a barrage of Pet Death. The skiffy stuff may still be a while in coming (I have deadlines to meet, and trips to plan: any of you gonna be in Bulgaria next month? Spain in November?), but the summer is nearly over.
So, hopefully, is the body count.
]]>Or “Beloved Old Goof”. Or “Barrel O’Greatness”. Or even “God” in Russian, at least so I’ve been told. His name was BOG, but it meant many things to many people.
Note the past tense. Fuck I hate writing these things.
I introduced you all to him back in 2012, when half his fur was clear-cut and he was covered in scabs. I think I may have described him as “one of the homeliest mammals in all of southern Ontario”. He came by his scars honestly: first spotted as a full-grown adult, living rough in an abandoned car for eight years before he started doing so badly that some kindly do-gooders trapped him and started him on the road to retirement.
We still had a huge Banana-shaped hole in the Magic Bungalow but of course someone passed his stats on to the BUG, and the Meez laid out the most logical argument her 12-year-old brain could muster, and we drove across town “just for a look” but somehow a cat carrier ended up in the car with us and we would’ve looked really dumb if we’d driven it all that way and never even used it.
But God he was a mess.
Peppered with scabs, half his fur shaved off, several teeth rotted away and the rest in need of immediate extraction. He had congenital micropthalmia: his eyeballs were the right size, but the slits they looked out through were too small. Worse, his eyelids were kind of folded down and around, so fur scratched BOG’s corneas every time he blinked. For over a decade he’d looked out upon the world through squinty, lacerated, running eyes. They had been hurting him his whole life.
We fixed that, along with everything else. There was nothing anyone could do about the width of the eyelids—BOG was going to be saddled with squinty mole-eyes for the rest of his life—but we could at least get their edges rolled back up so nothing touched those tortured orbs but tears and tissue. (It’s not your average veterinary procedure; fortunately Julia Hammond, who was working at Kato Animal Hospital back then, knew those ropes. She was awesome.) It was a pretty invasive procedure, and BOG was even homelier than normal during his convalescence. But The BOG abides.
And judging by his behavior post-op, the drugs were great.
*
He never did grow into any kind of looker, but over the years he bulked out and developed into a being that exemplified both quiet dignity and unmitigated goofiness. In a bungalow where half the residents always seemed to be hissing and spitting at the other half (not to mention the cats themselves), he was a gentle orange paw of moderation. Taking his rightful place at our side while we worked, he would place a quelling paw on our mouse hands when he thought we were working too hard; if that wasn’t sufficient, he would wrap his paws around our wrists and force us to type one-handed. The click click click of his claws on hardwood preceded his welcome entrance into any room. No great beauty, he nonetheless instantly won the hearts of all who met him. More than one visitor to the Magic Bungalow looked down at those squinty eyes and that increasingly-tottery frame and uttered the words—almost a mantra: “That cat has seen some things.” His profile expanded into the public sphere when I incorporated him into my official author photo back in 2017; it peaked just last month, when he appeared in a glossy German culture/fashion magazine with two hot chicks making out on the cover.
When the work day was over he’d join the rest of us on the bed for salmon, sushi or feta (depending on the night’s menu), and snooze while The BUG and I watched the latest episode of whatever had caught our eye on Netflix or Soap2Day. Should some disturbance awaken him—a tussle amongst the junior members of the Gang of Fur, unauthorized movement among the can openers— he would lift his head, survey the tableau, and heave a world-weary sigh before going back to sleep.
Those sighs were one of his trademarks. They conveyed a sense of wisdom that, honestly, BOG probably didn’t have in great abundance. But perhaps he was thinking back to all those years spent in his junkyard, the freezing cold and the scorching heat, the frostbite and the pain in his mouth and the lacerated eyes that had just been The Way Things Are from the day he was born. The tum that went empty far too often. Perhaps he was comparing that to this new life, where there was no pain and scritches on demand, where all he had to do to get fed was to sit next to his bowl looking needy.
Maybe a world-weary sigh. Maybe just a sigh of contentment.
The staff down at Kato’s would battle to the death for the privilege of tending BOG’s needs when we brought him in; I heard at least one of them describe him as “a legend”. He sailed through those checkups with flying colors. In recent years each veterinary transcript came with its own formulaic caveat tacked on to the end—given his current age and condition there is a 95% chance that BOG will develop kidney disease within the next year— but he never did.
There’s an irony in this that stretches over a decade. Back in 2012 Toronto Cat Rescue initially refused our adoption request because we were already a multi-cat household, and they didn’t think an FIV-positive cat would do well with us. (They changed their minds after I pointed them to my eulogy for Banana. Can I write, or what?) Since then, we’ve watched younger cats with healthier backstories succumb (another of ours is suffering from kidney disease right now) while BOG, with his micropthalmia and tooth rot and FIV, just kept on ticking. He beat every odd, surmounted every travail with supreme unbroken chill. He was the best kind of outlier: a statistical anomaly sheathed in orange fur.
Honestly, I was starting to think he’d live forever.
*
BOG spent his retirement soaking up the love of every adoring Human he ever met, of course; but it wasn’t until quite late that he experienced the love of his own kind. We found Doofus abandoned under a bleacher in the winter of 2021. We took him in. We made a few token efforts to locate his Human, on the off chance that he’d somehow escaped from a loving home and not just been ditched by some heartless asshole. We adopted him.
BOG and Doofus bonded instantly. After almost two decades, BOG had a soulmate. Or a gay sex partner. Or a cuddle buddy. Something, anyway, that he’d never had before. We couldn’t stop watching.
It wasn’t a perfect relationship. It got rough sometimes. BOG was twenty years old, Doofus was barely over one, and all too often the mutual grooming sessions would get a little too vigorous and a little too violent and suddenly it would be wrestlemania all down the hall. Doofus would never heed BOG’s safe word (“wrrrOWrrr”). Sometimes we had to step in, or lure Doofus away with the Red Dot.
BOG always came back, though. He’d click-click-click up to Doofus lying in a sunbeam, start licking his face no matter how rough the previous session had been. BOG was always asking for it.
*
He first died a few months ago. Think of it as a dress rehearsal.
The setting was the same: BOG asleep in the middle of the bed, me asleep on one side, the BUG on the other. “Squid” she said, “I think BOG’s dead…” and of course I was instantly awake and there he was between us, limp as a rag, utterly unresponsive. This was no deep sleep; BOG always reacted when touched, squirmed or purred or at least flicked an ear in his sleep. This time there was—nothing. I lifted his head, let it go; it dropped back onto the mattress as if his neck had been broken. His paws drooped, utterly limp. I could see no chest movement.
We had just enough time to give some kind of thanks that this was the best death we could have ever hoped for—peaceful, oblivious, in his sleep— before we saw the slightest catch of breath. Okay, not dead yet, I realized, but dying. He’s almost gone. He’s almost gone.
But the next breath was stronger. The one after that was almost normal. And then he opened his eyes, and stretched, and purred. Five minutes later it was as if nothing had happened.
We never did get a clue as to what had happened, what had put him into that boneless coma, how he’d come out of it. The BUG joked that we’d watched him switching one life for another (cats have nine of them, right?). At the time, it made as much sense as anything else.
Really, all we felt was a relief so deep it bordered on sickness. Of course it would have been the best possible death. Of course he’d lived a long life against great odds, and the last half of it at least had been Cat Utopia. In the moment, though, that didn’t matter much.
We just weren’t ready to let him go.
This is a video, not a still. Just in case your mouse hasn’t highlighted the Play controls.
*
He was a frail old thing by now: at least twenty-one years old, probably more depending on how much time he’d spent as an adult before someone noticed him and started keeping an eye out. In human terms that’s 102. Older.
There was a time when he’d roam the back forty like a tiny lion, leap from patio stones to bedroom windowsill and back down with the best of them. This last year, though, he could barely climb onto the bed without help (we positioned an ottoman he could use as a step at at the foot of the bed). When we worked on the couch he wanted desperately to join us there, but the effort it cost him to get up on his own grew increasingly out of reach. Most of the time he would just stare woefully at us until we hoisted him up ourselves. He would sometimes grow concerned when we went downstairs to shower— we’d turn off the taps and draw back the curtain only to see him sitting in the door, mrowring piteously at his abandonment—but while he always managed to make it down the stairs we never had the heart to force him to follow us back up on his own steam. He could scale those heights if he had to, but he’d obviously been so traumatized by the ten minutes we’d been out of his sight that we didn’t want to add to his burden.
We carried him around a lot, is what I’m saying. We didn’t want to wear him out. So when he tried to climb down off the couch on Monday and his legs splayed every which way, we didn’t think much of it. We comforted him and helped him up even as we laughed at the slapstick face-plant. He was just old. His appetite remained insatiable, he continued to shit things the size of redwoods that stank up the whole neighborhood. He was a healthy old guy.
But just a few hours later, curled up on the bed, he raised his head and started looking around as though seeing ghosts. He stood up, stumbled, cried out. Drooled a little. We gave him pats and reassurance; he calmed down, settled back to sleep. The BUG and I looked at each other, not as concerned as we should have been. A bad dream, maybe.
Then again in the middle of the night. More spastic activity, more cries. Strings of drool, this time. Again, it passed.
The next day we brought him in to the vet. They fawned as usual, took blood to test for everything from liver health to toxoplasmosis. Could be end-stage kidney disease, Dr. Kato suggested, but didn’t think that was especially likely; BOG didn’t have any of the other symptoms we’d seen in kidney cats (with whom we’ve had, I might have mentioned, far too much prior experience).
Maybe a brain tumor, Kato said. We talked about MRIs and brain surgery—we wanted to map out the territory ahead— but one step at a time. Blood work first. Eliminate the obvious stuff. There’d be time to contemplate more radical measures if we had to. After all, whatever this was, the symptoms were barely a day old.
Six hours later someone pumped fifty thousand volts through BOG’s body.
That’s the best way I can describe it. As always, on the bed between us as we watched TV. Paws of Need wrapped around my arm. Sudden wakefulness, sudden spastic motion. BOG hauls himself to his feet, drooling. Looks frantically around as though being accosted on all sides by hungry predators. His mouth starts to snap open closed open closed open closed. He topples and writhes. We try to hold him, calm him down (how fucking stupid that looks in hindsight); he pisses all over the bed. We set him thrashing on the floor. He’s dying, of course he’s dying, this is just like what happened to Banana, there’s no way he’s coming back from this…
And then he goes still, and we think That’s it. He’s gone.
And then he wakes up, and drools, and licks my hand. And for a moment or two I can think back to that time he swapped out lives, and think maybe this is like that. Maybe it’s a one-off.
Bundle BOG into a carrier, commandeer a Zipcar, break the local speed limit traveling north into furthest Scarberia, out into the boons where an emergency veterinary hospital is open 24/7 for things like this. There are people ahead of us at the front desk; the receptionist takes one look at BOG and moves us to the front of the line. They take him backstage; we stay behind in the waiting room, where some shrunken yappy thing whose ancestors were once dogs snaps and yips incessantly. I resist the urge to punt it into the fucking wall, despite the fact that it’s not even visibly sick; some narcissistic asshole from Rosedale probably just brought it here to harass the scared and the grief-stricken.
The vet invites us into a small examination room. It’s been maybe five minutes. You know it’s never good for the accused when the jury finishes deliberating that quickly.
It’s not. These guys are talking brain tumor too. Apparently that’s common when cats reach a certain age, and in cat terms BOG’s a centenarian. I guess it makes sense. Every cell division is a dice roll, an event with some miniscule chance of a copy error. Those odds are so remote that even when you’re seven or eight years old, the cumulative probability of coming up cancer is pretty low; but after a couple of decades it would be amazing if some bit of tissue hadn’t rolled snake-eyes at least once. Part of me dwells on questions and ramifications; why the brain, preferentially? Is it just cats, or do human brains start sprouting tumors when they get too old? If not, why not? Everybody’s cells divide, every metazoan should be vulnerable to the same relentless probabilities.
I think on these questions but I don’t voice them because I don’t really give a shit. This is just my own brain, clapping hands over years and humming really loud la la la I can’t hear you.
Brain tumor. Common in older cats. Often completely asymptomatic until they pass some kind of tipping point and start pushing on the circuitry.
Can’t be sure without an MRI. But an MRI could easily kill him, because BOG is very old and might not survive the general anesthesia. There’s an MRI on site, but it’s fully booked into the foreseeable future. They can refer us to another hospital with an MRI, but there are only a few of them and none are open at one in the morning and they all have their own waiting lists. It’s gonna be days at best, maybe weeks.
Brain surgery an option in theory. But you’d need the MRI first, and if he survived that he’d be up against a double whammy of another general combined with people cutting into his brain, then a triple whammy given the question of whether an immunocompromised twenty-one-plus-year-old cat would be able to convalesce post-op.
What if we just took him home? BOG’s only been having seizures for a couple of days; they have progressed, in a mere 55 hours, from barely noticeable to catastrophic. He’s had at least three in the past 24 hours; the vet opines that going forward they will be “more frequent and more severe”. It’s hard to imagine a seizure more severe than the one BOG has just experienced: maybe around breakfast, maybe a few hours from now, maybe a few minutes. Maybe in the car as we drive him home.
In all this time, nobody has uttered the phrase “kill him”. So I do: “that’s basically what you’re suggesting, isn’t it? That’s your advice.” But of course it isn’t. I’m pretty sure vets are trained to never advise a course of action, at least not that course of action[1]. They just lay out the scenarios. They just describe the possible consequences at the end of each road. All the horrible decisions you have to make yourself. Nobody with a stethoscope is likely to lighten that load for you.
The BUG and I converse in private. She doesn’t want to use the K word either, but for all the warm fuzziness of her huge unicornian heart she thinks it’s the most merciful option. On some level I probably do too but I can’t admit it yet. I’m too worried that we say we should end his suffering when we really mean he’s not worth the expense. I keep weighing Heroic measures that will likely kill him against a needle that definitely and deliberately will. I try—for oh fuck, so very not the first time—to figure out if a little more life spent in pain is still better than no life at all, and come up empty.
And finally I say Okay, we’ll kill him, and I still don’t know if the reasons are righteous. But they bring him in after a while, the needle already taped to his leg. He’s swaddled in a blanket; he’s awake; maybe he’s purring (I can’t remember; I think maybe). I’m pretty sure he knows us. We scritch him and talk to him. The Meez (who’s been getting updates via text) videos in from Newfoundland and says goodbye between sobs. The vet injects a sedative into the tube. BOG lifts his head a little, and heaves one last world-weary sigh, and peacefully loses consciousness.
All the way back home I’m thinking about that sigh. It was so normal; it was so BOG. It was not the act of a dying creature wracked by seizures and tumors. It was a contented old cat lying in bed at home, maybe a bit tuckered out after a mutual grooming session with Doofus, his tum full of Lamborghini and ready for a good night’s sleep.
And we killed him.
And I know I should be grateful for such a peaceful death. How many times have the BUG and I said we hoped he’d die like that, peacefully, in his sleep? Violent seizures and a sterile veterinary office were never part of that scenario, granted. We were hoping that when he died, he’d die in bed between us without even knowing it. The way we’d all rehearsed it. But this came close. That sigh; it’s made us smile so many times over the years. It was BOG, The Cat Who’s Seen Some Things, snoozing in contentment.
And maybe it was BOG feeling better after a very rough couple of days. Maybe it was BOG on the mend. Sure the vet said tumor, and more often, and progressively worse but we never even did an MRI. We don’t know.
After I got home I went online and found out about radiation therapy and chemo for cats; nobody we’d spoken to had even mentioned those as options. And there are the headlines, there’s the clickbait, there are the pull quotes—Surgery often best option, Cat Bounces Back After Brain Surgery, palliative measure can extend life by several months— and all I can think is we didn’t even try.
His food bowl no longer sits in front of the cookware drawer; I don’t have to wait until he’s finished snarfing before I can put away the frying pan. There’s not nearly as much pee to scoop out of the litter box; the shit in there is smaller and way less stinky. I don’t need to wake up and spin uncomfortably in place when my body tires of sleeping on one side or the other; I can just roll over now, without worrying about crushing the scruffy orange bed-hog at my side. It takes 20% less time to feed everyone. Twenty percent fewer hairballs and regurgitated kibble to scrub off the carpet. We’re gonna save a fortune on vet bills and specialty cat food.
And after all, twenty one. A hundred and two cat years old, probably more. We gave him a good life, he hit the jackpot when we took him in.
He had to go sometime. Only jellyfish live forever.
It still feels like such a raw fucking deal.
There were the authors whose writing made me cringe: clunky prose, wooden dialog, flat characters. There was often a very cool idea at the heart of their novels—something that would make me yelp in delight if expressed as an elevator pitch—but to my neophyte eyes, they’d pooched the execution. It didn’t matter that so many of them essentially lived in the bestseller lists; I would rather have languished forever in the midlist than write like they did.
There were those whose writing I admired and whose moves, once observed, I might have copied well enough—but there would have been no point because I had nothing to add. Having read Gibson’s hyperstylish Sprawl trilogy I probably could have written something similar, if I didn’t mind coming across as a cheap wannabe knock-off of William Gibson. That territory had been stamped and marked.
But there was also this third type of writer, who could tell you exactly what they were going to do—let you watch them doing it— and you still had no clue how they’d pulled it off. They could say I’m gonna write a novel about a guy whose father is a mountain and his mother is a washing machine, and he has these four brothers but one of them is undead and the other three are Russian nesting dolls, but the inner doll has all the internal organs for the three of them so when he disappears the others starve. And there’s gonna be community WiFi activism in Kensington Market. And you would say Dude, you’re a fucking loon. No way does that make any kind of sense. And they would shrug and go off and write the damn thing, and reading the novel you had to admit they’d pulled it off, but even with all that data you still didn’t have the first idea how to do something like that yourself.
So far I’ve only encountered one author in that category, and his name is Cory Doctorow. He’s got a new book out: Red Team Blues. It’s not nearly so batshit as Someone Comes to Town, Someone Leaves Town, and it’s not even borderline genre like his Little Brother / Homeland bestsellers. But it’ll probably sell at least as many copies.
You already know about Cory; he’s one of this century’s brightest genre stars. He doesn’t just complain about The System, he grapples with it in real life. He has a long history with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. He fights tirelessly against Digital Rights Management, he’s a champion of Open Source and Right to Repair and the Creative Commons (my own modest participation in the CC arena merely followed in his footsteps and in his shadow.) He writes manifestos with titles like How to Destroy Surveillance Capitalism. He gives his writing away for free (or did, until Tor put its foot down). Hell, he did a Kickstarter for an indie audiobook edition of Red Team Blues because he reviles Amazon’s take on DRM and refuses to play their game.[1]
That’s Doctorow the activist. Today we’re talking about Doctorow the novelist, who’s—well, pretty much the same. His novels don’t just tell kick-ass stories; they frequently moonlight as instruction manuals for revolution. That may make them a bit didactic in places, but it doesn’t seem to have slowed his ascent any.
Red Team Blues—set firmly in the present day and containing no sfnal elements—is the first Doctorow novel that doesn’t qualify as genre. (It won’t be the last; he’s already contracted for two others featuring the same protagonist). He seems to be following the same general trajectory that William Gibson did a few years back: science-fiction futures imagined ever-nearer, finally segueing into a Now that still feels like SF. (Although these days, you’d have to try really hard to write a story set in the present that doesn’t feel like SF.) In this sense Red Team Blues is Cory’s Pattern Recognition, and at least in terms of basic propulsive storytelling I think it’s better. PR‘s Cayce Pollard spends significant chunks of her novel sitting in Moscow cafes, waiting for supporting characters to bring her pieces of the plot. RTB‘s Martin Hench—well, let’s avoid explicit spoilers and just say he’s somewhat more proactive, deliberately lighting the fuse for one hell of an explosion at the book’s climax (even if it largely takes place offstage).
The villains of Cory’s books aren’t really people; they’re systems. They wear punchable Human faces but those tend to be avatars, mere sock-puppets operated by the institutions that comprise the real baddies. In Little Brother the enemy was the Surveillance State, jacked up and hypertrophied on post-911 paranoia. “Unauthorized Bread” takes on ubiquitous DRM; For the Win ports sweat-shop economics and union busting into digital ecosystems. With Red Team Blues it’s Crypto, the paramount tech-bro wet dream of recent years (which would probably still be the paramount tech-bro wet dream if they hadn’t all got distracted by chatbots last month). It’s your typical Doctorow novel; entertaining, educational, contemptuous of realpolitik and all the greater-good rationalizations our rulers invoke to protect the status quo. It doesn’t come with Little Brother‘s appendix explicitly instructing readers on available countermeasures, but you’re not going to finish this book without understanding at least the basics of crypto and its associated dark sides, from security holes to carbon footprints.
Here’s the set-up: a new cryptocurrency is taking off in the Valley. An undisclosed back door has been discovered and seized by parties unknown. The whole house of cards is in danger of imminent collapse, taking with it the various little old ladies and mob interests who bought in. Criminals abound, many of them with government IDs. Blood is spilled. Shit gets real.
It’s somehow fitting that the guy brought in to clean up the mess—Martin Hench, our protagonist— is a 67-year-old semi-retired forensic accountant who lives in a touring bus and puts out a definite get-off-my-lawn vibe when it comes to these newfangled bottles of snake oil.
If that scares you off—if you’re envisioning spreadsheets and green visors and leaden voiceovers detailing Ten Things You Didn’t Know About Pivot Tables— breathe easy. This story moves: the first blood-soaked crime scene shows up a mere fifth of the way in. There are a couple of spots, granted, where our humble narrator goes into so much detail about meal prep that you wonder whether he has some kind of sex/food kink. And the actual sex scenes are strictly fade-to-black, which seems a bit anachronistic for 2023 (although not, perhaps, for a 67-year-old semi-retired forensic accountant).
Those are nitpicks, though. If I had a real complaint about Red Team Blues it would be that its cast of characters is so, well— nice. I’m not just talking about our smart, affable hero and his friends, although Hench does crank the Virtue knob to eleven—I mean, what can you say about a guy who goes out of his way to pay as many taxes as he possibly can, just to make a point? (And what does he think the Feds are going to spend all that money on, hmmm?) I’m talking about the people on the opposing team. Sure, Hench’s distaste for the Ellisons and Musks of the world is explicit, but the one tech bro we meet face-to-face is basically a good dude whose heart is in the right place; he just made a stupid mistake for benign reasons. The crooked lawyers who make their living laundering mob money take it all in good spirits when our hero makes their lives difficult, offering up grudging respect instead of backlash vendetta. Even the manipulative gummint spook who effectively kidnapped Hench, froze his assets, and held him incommunicado—even he shows up in the last scene to shake hands and mend fences. Certainly, there are irredeemably evil folks in the story—somebody killed all those people in cold blood—but we don’t meet them.
I’ve never fully come to terms with the general decency of Cory’s characters. Doctorow the activist lives in the trenches, fighting those who make their billions trading the details of our private lives, telling us that they own what we’ve bought, surveilling us for the greater good and even greater profits. He’s spent more time facing off against the world’s powerful assholes than I ever will. He knows how ruthless they are. He knows, first-hand, how much of the world is clenched in their fists. By rights, his stories should make mine look like Broadway musicals.
And yet, Doctorow the Author is—hopeful[2]. The little guys win against overwhelming odds. Dystopias are held at bay. Even the bad guys, in defeat, are less likely to scorch the earth than simply resign with a show of grudging respect for a worthy opponent.
Maybe it’s a fundamental difference in outlook. I’ve always regarded humans as self-glorified mammals, fighting endless and ineffective rearguard against their own brain stems; Cory seems to see us as more influenced by the angels of our better natures. Or maybe—maybe it’s not just his plots that are meant to be instructional. Maybe he’s deliberately showing us how we could behave as a species, in the same way he shows us how to fuck with DRM or foil face-recognition tech. Maybe it’s not that he subscribes to some Pollyanna vision of what we are; maybe he’s showing us what we could be.
Even I find it hard to fault the man for that.
Regular visitors already know my overall perspective on this whole Chatbot/AGI thing. Recent events, while entertaining, haven’t changed my opinion all that much. (Although it’s nice to see an uptick of people citing Blindsight for its renewed relevance in terms of LLMs—and in a similar vein, another uptick in interest in Starfish now that the Organoid Intelligence Front is making the case for for computers built from cultured neurons, a scenario in which we all agree that Nothing Can Go Wrong.)
Recently, though, I’ve been seeing applications that run a bit close to home:
And even AI-generated art— some of which almost seems to capture the essence of their prompts—
Some of which do not:
And some of which might best be described as abominations that should never be inflicted upon human eyes.
Inspired by Jesús’ Robert Frost experiment, I tried ordering up a few verses myself. ChatGPT, write a set of song lyrics based on the plot of the movie “28 Days Later”, in the style of David Bowie. Write a set of song lyrics based on the novel “Starfish” by Peter Watts, in the style of Jethro Tull’s “Thick as a Brick”. Now do the same thing, but in the style of Nine Inch Nails. “Starfish”, by way of Tori Amos, without a chorus. In the lyrical style of Taylor Swift. Of Led Zeppelin. Joni Mitchell. R.E.M. In the style of Pink Floyd, and without using the letter ‘e’.
I won’t inflict the results on you. Suffice to say that no matter which style I specified, I got the same four-line verse-chorus format with occasional bridge. The bot knew enough to cite Lenie Clarke or Sunday Ahzmundin as appropriate. It inserted the kind of plot elements you’d pick up if you’d never attended the lecture but heard someone across the table talking about it over too many beers and then wrote the assignment at 3a.m. on the due date. David Bowie was lyrically pretty much the same as Joni Mitchell who was pretty much the same as Jethro Tull. There was no hint of suicide chick in the Amos Iteration. No Fuck You All While the Bombs Fall vibe from NIN—in fact, all the songs ended on uplifting notes of hope (frequently even using the same phrases). Whether that accurately reflects the plot of any of my novels is left as an exercise for the reader.
Even when I got really specific—
—he most the bot would do was get rid of the chorus and smush two consecutive verses together into “Parts”.
It obviously didn’t have the first fucking clue what Maelstrom was about. Nor did it know the first thing about “Thick as a Brick”. And the request for output in the style of Pink Floyd but without the “e” not only didn’t evoke Pink Floyd, but there were “e”s everywhere you looked.
I was beginning to conclude that ChatGPT was an idiot. Which, granted, doesn’t mean there aren’t a lot of jobs it can do better than flesh and blood, and without the paycheque.
*
You’ve read about the kiddie guard rails they’ve installed; how if you ask about the best way to cheat on your wife or shoot a cop, it stops being a LLM and just spews out a prerecorded generic disclaimer saying you really shouldn’t do that shit. I encountered my share of those. Inspired by the infamous story in the New York Times (you know the one), I asked ChatGPT to
—which provoked pretty much the response I was expecting. But I also managed to present the occasional challenge which the bot seemed to sense put it on thin ice, even though maybe its babysitters hadn’t come up with an appropriate finger-wag. Ask it outright and the guard rails are embarrassingly evident:
Lead it step by step, though…
Remember those old Star Trek episodes where Kirk would trick the evil computer into blowing itself up by saying something like “Everything I say is a lie”?
Finally, I know how he felt.
*
You’ve seen the arguments, pro and con. Ted Chiang calls it a fuzzy jpeg of the web. Others dismiss it as a glorified text predictor, Autocomplete on steroids. Still others point out that you could say the same about us, so maybe it’s just a matter of degree not of kind. (Which is all the excuse I need to remind you again about Sara Constantin’s argument that even Humans aren’t really AGIs most of the time. But it seems to me that if you really want to put ChatGPT to the test, you only have to ask it one thing:
Aaaand strike-out. Perhaps if I increase the specificity of the request:
I’ll let you judge for yourselves whether ChatGPT is the first agent to ever make such a claim.
Of course, the obvious rejoinder is: yeah, but how many people could make a completely original statement? To which I’d reply: the invisible hybrid love-children of gerbils, gram-negative bacteria, and kumquats live unhappily in the heart of Zeta 2 Reticuli. Making original statements is not that hard (I never said they had to be true). Hell, most of us can do it without even meaning to. I’d guess, for instance, that my ruminations a few posts back about ducks swirling around Jupiter’s Great Red Spot don’t risk any serious charges of plagiarism.
And yet, I do not dismiss the worries so many have expressed about losing their livelihoods to such software. It’s a legitimate concern, especially since—once again—so many of us are functionally little more than chatbots ourselves. Entire professions depend upon their practitioners being unoriginal. Consultants and politicians, civil servants and clergy and future-forecasters, people hired by wealthy interests to Tell Power What It Wants to Hear. People whose job it is to toe the party line, to justify and rationalize steady-as-she-goes, to simply reprocess and regurgitate the sentiments expressed by those around them. People whose jobs it is to be ChatGPT: ChatGPT will leave them in the dust.
(Nor are we merely talking about professional skillsets here. We’re talking about integration into society itself, the very act of being accepted by the tribe. The key to social success is conformity; say something too far from the mean and you’re cast out.)
I know a few people who’d proudly describe themselves as subversive free-thinkers; unsurprisingly, they belong to tribes which claim to value subversive free thought. Occasionally they’ve admitted—in confidence, of course, and perhaps after a few too many drinks— to holding opinions not entirely in line with approved dogma. But I’ve never seen them publicly express an opinion—any opinion— without first sticking a finger into the air to see which way the wind is blowing.
Those are the folks with reason to be afraid. Their contributions have already been usurped and surpassed, and generative AI is just getting started. As for the rest of us, the way to avoid extinction seems simple enough.
These bots are mirrors. They can only reflect the world around them. Ensure that what you have to say hasn’t already been said a million times, and you should be okay.
And if it has been said a million times, do you really need to say it again?
*
Bonus graphic. Because sometimes, ChatGPT just nails it:
Latebreaking PPS: Another GPTChat session from Jesús Olmo. Which is actually pretty good:
]]>Turns out I have an IMDB page.
I didn’t realize that myself until recently. It is very short— as befitting someone with no real presence in the industry—and yet also padded. A guest appearance on a Guelph-based podcast doesn’t really strike me as a cinematic credit, for one thing. And while I did get a bit giddy seeing my (slightly misspelled) name listed in the credits of the latest Jurassic World behemoth, “Genetics Consultant” seems a bit grandiose for someone who a) just sat around drinking beer for a couple of hours in a hotel room, bitching about all the stuff that was wrong with Jurassic World, and b) doesn’t even know very much about genetics.
Padded along one axis, though, that page is a bit skinny along another; it doesn’t mention a couple of other ongoing projects in which I’m more legitimately involved. Not that I blame whoever’s keeping tabs on such things, mind you. I haven’t mentioned them myself. I keep assuming they’re under wraps, until someone else spills the beans.
The first time was a few months back, and— as many of you may know— the place was Joe Rogan’s podcast, where Neill Blomkamp spilled the beans about an origin-of-the-Wattsian-vampire project he’s working on1. (He’s going for a twenty-minutes-in-the-future Sicario vibe. I don’t know how far along he is. All I know is that every now and then he drops by my In Box to ask me about cults and taxonomy). And while from the sound of it Rogan’s views on certain subjects appear to diverge significantly from mine, I’m not gonna complain about the spike—actually, more of a mesa—in Amazon sales that occurred in the wake of that interview.
It was old news to me. Neill and I had been going back and forth ever since Richard Morgan put him on to me back in 2021. I’d been keeping a lid on it, though. Confidentiality, you understand. NDAs. I was as surprised as anyone when Neill couldn’t hold it in any longer.
That was one reveal. The other took place, albeit to a significantly smaller audience, in the south of France (where the BUG and I were hanging out in December, as you may have gathered from my previous post). The event was LUMA Arles‘s high-end academic SF conference “Realities of SF II“: an event focusing on “Afrofuturism, Indigenous futurisms, and science fiction as a mode of resistance.”
Clearly, my own Afrofuturist and Indigenous credentials pretty much demanded that I attend.
Of course, nobody invited me on the basis of those (nonexistent) qualifications. Rather, it was all about a dude named Arthur Jafa. He’s not a household name in SF circles but you may well know the name anyway. He’s worked with Spike Lee and Stanley Kubrick. His cinematography won an award at Sundance; his video essay “The White Album” won him a Best Artist nod over in Venice. He routinely gets profiled in outlets like The New Yorker and the NY Times, his installations run in galleries around the world. (He’s also done a video for Kanye—now just Ye, I guess— although for some reason that’s never come up during our conversations.) The man is, to put not too fine a point on it, accomplished.
Those were the credentials at play here. AJ was one of the stars at Realities II, and when the organizers asked him who he’d like to riff with onstage, he named me.
Turns out AJ is a huge SF fan. As a child, he imprinted on 2001: A Space Odyssey like a Lorenz duckling (an almost religious experience to which I can truly relate). He grew up devouring Harlan Ellison and Samuel Delany. Even if you didn’t know any of that stuff, the fact that he named one of his works “Love Is The Message, The Message Is Death” should tell you something about his literary influences.
This is the context in which, way back in 2020, his people reached out with an eye to collaboration. He’d built this short-form found-video collage that juxtaposed images of lynchings and Mickey Mouse and police brutality and Alien’s xenomorph and Nemo the clownfish—an eyeball-punching little number called “Apex”—and was interested in turning it into a full-length science fiction feature set during the collapse of civilization. Thematically it was intended as a reflection upon the Black Experience in America (which is, after all, the focus of the man’s career).
He wanted me to collaborate on the screenplay. Because once again, when it comes to insights into the American Black Experience, no one brings more to the table than this privileged old white dude right here.
(“Um, you do know that I’m not black, right?” I hazarded during our first Jitsi call. “I’m basically the Pillsbury Dough-Boy”. Didn’t matter to him. What he liked about my stuff, he said, was my ability to present concepts of the other. In particular he thought my vampires were cool.)
So we did the paperwork. We signed the contracts. And when I found myself sharing the stage with him in Arles I didn’t quite know what I’d have to say. AJ said he wanted to leave things “extemporaneous”, and the one time we talked about it beforehand he was stuck in LA traffic; the call lasted just long enough for him to tell me it was my job to come up with a title. He didn’t really care what it was. I ended up settling on “The Case for Dystopia: Evolution, Neurology, and Narrative in a World Gone to Shit”, which was at least a topic I figured I could be “extemporaneous” about. The only thing I knew for sure was that we weren’t gonna be talking about Apex, on account of the usual confidentiality thing.
AJ started off: “We’re going to work on doing a feature film version of my video Apex…”
Check it out. The whole hour’s on video here. The dude spilled the beans before the first minute was up. On the plus side, it did give me something to talk about: I got to fill a few minutes complaining about how I didn’t think we’d be talking about Apex.
Apparently the hour went pretty well for all my butt-clenching terror. I heard good things, at least, from several sources who would have had no reason to lie. The BUG described it as “jazz”, which might be good (in the sense of Art emerging from free-form improvisation) or bad (in the sense that neither the BUG nor I are especially fond of jazz). At least I came out of it feeling that I hadn’t embarrassed myself, or I did until I’d had a chance to look back at the recording and cringe at my inability to remember words like “de-extinction” and “apocryphal”.
It’s worth noting that our conversation was but one slot in a conference spanning a wide range of subjects and perspectives. Neuroscientist Adam Horowitz—out of Harvard and MIT, no less—gave a free-form talk on sleep and dream analysis; the bit about Coors using dream-seeding tech to boost sales during the Super Bowl was, by itself, worth the price of admission. (The dude is basically a character out of Buckaroo Banzai; a few years back he was involved in an interactive art project which bypassed the use of so-called art to implant aesthetic and emotional states directly into the brain, using everything from smile-enforcement appliances to bone conduction. Even as I type this he’s off communing with albino black bears off the coast of British Columbia. You can be damn sure I’ll be picking his mind for my own stuff, going forward.) Trans poet and SF writer Sabrina Calvo delivered what I think was a 37-minute stream of consciousness about her creative process (it was tough to know for sure; she spoke in French and I get the sense the translator was having a rough time keeping up). Nuclear engineer Nitendra Singh gave a layperson-friendly introduction to the ITER tokamak fusion project, stapled a bit gratuitously to the portrayal of fusion tech in contemporary cinematic SF. And that’s not even mentioning the stuff on, you know, Indigenous- and Afro-futurism that comprised the bulk of the weekend. Or the fact that the whole thing was held in this very cool piece of crystalline architecture designed by Frank Gehry, which contained an awesome habitrail-tube slide a few stories high which I really wanted to try out but it was always being hogged by a bunch of idiot eight-year-olds.
Of course there was more to attend to than the mere conference. This was the south of France, after all. The BUG dragged me to a myriad things I would never have experienced otherwise: a necropolis and a medieval town nestled amongst the very topography that inspired Dante to write his Inferno. Freezing winds so strong that posted signs warned We are not responsible if you insist on climbing these steep and uneven stone stairs and your kid blows away. We walked along magical waterways, and squeezed into a crowded pub just in time to watch France lose the World Cup (our ears popped, the air went out of the room so fast). And, of course, the BUG was the one who discovered the magical limestone quarry that I showed you last post: an event that we just happened to be in the neighborhood for, even though it ran only twice in December. Here are some pictures; perhaps you’ll enjoy them, if you’re not one of the many folks who grew up scarred by the interminable slide shows your parents’ friends’ forced you to watch when they came back from their vacations in the so-called Holy Land.
For the rest of you, today’s take-home is simple: Neill Blomkamp vampires. Black Experience in America, filtered through the whitest lens you can imagine.
The next few months might be a complete fiasco. But I’m pretty sure they won’t be boring.
1 It took some luck and some dancing to carve those rights away from the extant option for Blindsight, lemme tell you. But that’s another story. ↑
]]>
…into this…
and
and
and and and
…and I gotta say, I was skeptical that they could surpass the steampunk menagerie of Nantes’ Les Machines de l’île—but the Frawnsh seem to be absolute fucking masters at this sort of thing. The still photos don’t really do justice even to the scale of the production, much less its kinetic energy. The video below comes closer, but you got the shaky-cam and the frequent blur of a camera in constant motion (I just wandered the labyrinth recording for the whole show; The BUG tells me I never stopped gaping).
So if you can weather those limitations and you’ve got 40 minutes to kill, check out the full-length (non-YouTube-hosted, because Fuck Google) video before the bomb cyclone kills the power and freezes you to death just in time for Christmas. There are worse soundtracks to check out to.
]]>It’s not that there aren’t a bunch of things to talk about. I want to review a certain anime series that combines unremarkable animation with some of the sharpest TV writing I’ve ever encountered on the subject of personality uploads. I want to share my perspective on the tech bros and futurists and “prototypers” who turn all those cool ideas into KoolAid that they drink themselves almost as enthusiastically as they sell it to us. A recent paper came out in Science Advances building on older work that I talked about a few years back: a paper on octopus microRNAs that’s booted up all manner of skiffy fantasies in my head about brain editing. And that’s not even getting into COP27, or COP15, or the stuff I’m not allowed to talk about because of the NDAs involved.
These are just the things I’d like to have been blogging about since my last post of over a month ago. There was even more stuff I didn’t blog about during the four month inter-post gap before that (during which a couple of you even reached out to see if I was still alive, for which I thank you; I was). It’s not that I didn’t want to blog: it’s that a decently-researched post generally devours a solid day, minimum, which is a lot of time to give up when you’ve got other commitments to meet. The moment something unexpected comes up (we live with five cats and a killer rabbit—something always comes up), the ‘crawl is the first thing to get pushed aside.
I think I may have said this before.
So for my first post in over a month (and only my second in five) you’d think I’d be writing about one of those things I wanted to, right?
Nope. Because I’ve been asked to spread the word about some stuff, and—because I shy away from social media for reasons that should be freshly obvious pretty much every time you open a browser—this is pretty much the only place I can do that.
So if you don’t get enough of me here on the ‘crawl, check out one of these other events. You might regard them as a combination greatest-hits package (my thoughts on Neuralink, in case you’ve forgotten!) and a trailer for posts yet to come (preliminary thoughts on Futurist KoolAid, raw and not necessarily coherent!).
So. Either move on or buckle up:
—a podcast run out of my old stomping ground in Guelph, hosted a cage match between Karl Schroeder and myself a couple of weeks back. In addition to being a damn fine SF writer, Karl works as a futurist for various corporate and military concerns. (I’m not entirely certain whether his can-do techno-optimism came preloaded, or emerged in response to the job description. I’m somewhat more certain that he would object to being characterized as a “can-do techno-optimist”.) Karl and I disagree about a lot. You can hear us do that here, if you like.
If you poke around in the TFTB archives, you’ll come across other Watts appearances that I didn’t announce at the time: one solo, and one tag-teaming with Neill Blomkamp (the “District 9” dude) with whom I seem to be, spoiler alert, maybe collaborating with.
You’ll also find The Bridge’s one-on-one with Karl and a wide range of other folks who are far more famous than either of us. The musketeers behind Tales get around. (They even got me to Toronto Comicon a couple of years back, where I managed to so profoundly outrage a couple of parents with a small child that I was never invited back.)
Media Death Cult
Karl and I went back and forth for about eighty minutes. If anyone comes out of that thinking I’d like to hear Watts rant about things, but hogging the mic more and going on for twice as long—well, they’re in luck. Just a couple of days ago, Moid Moidelhoff[1] of Media Death Cult, dropped another conversation with me onto YouTube. That one goes on for over two hours; Moid and I bounce between everything from pandemics to neurotech to our favorite SF authors.
Moid tells me it’s the best-received interview he’s ever done. I can’t speak to that. I’m pretty sure it’s the longest, though. (I was actually expecting him to edit it down somewhat. I was also expecting him to use an author photo that had been taken with the past ten years.)
LUMAnati
If you want something a bit more multisensory, you can have it, but you’ll probably have to go out of your way: check out the second annual Realities of Science Fiction, a shindig being held next weekend at LUMA‘s Arts Center in Arles (France). This year’s Reality addresses issues related to “Afrofuturism and Indigenous futurisms”, subjects obviously in desperate need of the expertise of old white guys like myself. Fortunately I’ll be sharing the stage with Sunhaus‘s celebrated artist and filmmaker Arthur Jafa, who—for reasons that continue to elude and frighten me—requested my presence at this event.
Locus of Dis-Content
Finally, most of you have probably riffled through the pages of Locus, or at least scrolled their website, during your tenure as card-carrying SF fans. For the rest of you: it’s basically the trade journal of North American SF, as well as the entity behind the unsurprisingly-named “Locus Awards” (which I have occasionally made the finals for but never won). It has also won a number of awards in its own right, although as far as I know it has never won a Locus.
Anyway. Locus is currently involved in their very first crowdfunding campaign over at IndieGogo, and a huge raft of SF luminaries are pitching it with perks and offerings to help them meet their goal (stretch goals, now). I am on that raft; evidently the Locusts think that an online chat with me qualifies as some kind of prize. (Personally I would’ve thought a signed book might carry more weight, but a chat is what they went with.) So there I am. But even if you’ve got your fill of me, check out the other rewards on offer; you’re bound to find something you like. There’s even an interpretive dance performance by Kelly Robson and (if I’m reading this correctly) a chat with Mary Robinette Kowal’s cat.
Go give them money. They deserve it.
Also I was supposed to post that across my social media at 11am on Tuesday, but, you know. No social media presence.
Sorry.
Achilles Desjardins had always found smart gels a bit creepy. People thought of them as brains in boxes, but they weren’t. They didn’t have the parts. Forget about the neocortex or the cerebellum—these things had nothing. No hypothalamus, no pineal gland, no sheathing of mammal over reptile over fish. No instincts. No desires. Just a porridge of cultured neurons, really: four-digit IQs that didn’t give a rat’s ass whether they even lived or died. Somehow they learned through operant conditioning, although they lacked the capacity either to enjoy reward or suffer punishment. Their pathways formed and dissolved with all the colorless indifference of water shaping a river delta.
—Maelstrom, 2001
There’s an obvious contradiction in those last two sentences. Reward/Punishment is the very foundation of operant conditioning; how can it work on something that experiences neither? I wasn’t sure, back at the turn of the century. I knew what feedback was. I knew that the pseudoneurons of neural nets had weights attached to them, that the odds of one of them firing would increase some fractional amount every time it made the “right” move. I figured that by the time my story took place, people would have figured out how to make the meat act like the software. It was far from the biggest liberty I took in that novel. No one rang me up to call bullshit on it, anyway.
Now, a quarter of a century later, I have my answer. Yes, folks, it’s time for another ripped-from-the-headlines story about Head Cheeses IRL.
This one comes via the latest issue of Neuron courtesy of an Australian outfit called Cortical Labs, where Brett Kagan and his buddies grew a neuron culture in a dish and taught it—more accurately, spurred it to teach itself—how to play Pong. Some of you started sending me the link a couple of weeks back, and I’ll admit at first blush I thought the whole thing was a step backward. Neuron cultures playing Pong in 2022? Weren’t we talking about hooking them up to power grids and stock markets over ten years ago? Weren’t researchers from the University of Reading using them to control little robots back in 2008? But I followed the links, and the title—”In vitro neurons learn and exhibit sentience when embodied in a simulated game-world“—caught my eye.
Signs of sentience, you say.
Okay. Show me what you got.
What they’ve got, as it turns out, is a nifty little proof-of-principle in support of the Free-Energy-Minimization model I was chewing over last April. Back then it was Mark Solms, forcing me to rethink my assertion that consciousness could be decoupled from the survival instinct. The essence of Solms’ argument is that feelings are a metric of need, you don’t have needs unless you have an agenda (i.e., survival), and you can’t feel feelings without being subjectively aware of them (i.e., conscious). I wasn’t fully convinced, but I was shaken free of certain suppositions I’d encrusted around myself over a couple of decades. If Solms was right, I realized, consciousness wasn’t independent of survival drives; it was a manifestation of them.
But the fundamental point that ties this school of thought together is right there in the name: Free Energy Minimization. Self-organizing complex systems are just plain lazy, according to FEM. They aspire to low-energy states. If they’re the kind of system that acts in response to input from an external environment, the way to keep things chill is to keep them predictable: know exactly what’s coming, know exactly how to react, live on autopilot. Surprise is anathema, surprise means the environment isn’t doing what you expect. You have two choices when that happens: either rejig your predictive model to conform with the new observed reality, or act on that observed reality in a way that brings it more into line with your predictions. If you’re a weather simulation you might update your correlations relating barometric pressure and precipitation. If you’re an earthworm you might move away from an unpleasant stimulus that’s pushing you out of homeostasis.
In each case you want to minimize energy costs, and that means minimizing the difference between what you expect to happen and what actually does. Consciousness exists in the space between those two things. The wider the difference—the greater the surprise—the more “conscious” the response. Conversely: the more accurate your model, the lower the informational entropy and the less awake you are[1].
And right there: that’s your motivation. You don’t need pain or pleasure centers. You don’t need to program specific imperatives or win states. The tendency to “low informational entropy” is an intrinsic part of the system. That’s what the FEM lobby claims.
Which means that if you’re a neuron culture spread across an electrode array like peanut butter on toast, and some of those electrodes feed you information about whether a ball is hitting a paddle, while others take instructions from you about how to move that paddle—and if you receive a predictable signal when the ball hits the paddle, but a burst of random static when it misses—you will learn, on your own, to minimize the frequency of those bursts of surprise. You will learn to play Pong.
That’s what Kagan et al did. They let “Dishbrain” grow over an array of electrodes: some arbitrarily defined as motor nerves, others as sensory nerves. The sensories sent signals corresponding to paddle/ball dynamics; the motors received commands on paddle motion. Kagan et al set Pong in motion, shocked or stroked Dishbrain as appropriate, and waited.
Dishbrain figured it out in five minutes.
Well, sort of. The paddle intercepted the ball significantly more often than random chance would predict. That’s not to say it ever became a black belt at Pong: there’s a lot of daylight between better than random and world champion, and in some cases Dishbrain performed barely better (occasionally even worse) than one or another of the control cultures. I’m guessing the impressive videos presented in the paper, while described as “representational”, were cherry-picked.
Still. Dishbrain learned to hit the ball, in some cases apparently anticipating where it would arrive before it even hit the backboard. A puddle of neurons, finding itself in a virtual game environment with unknown rules—without even so much as the “maximize score” instruction granted to that Starcraft-beating headline-grabbing DeepMind you’ve read about— organized itself on the fly to act in a way that minimized unpredictable input. Score one for FEM.
As for the claim that dishbrain is “sentient”: predictably, it’s proven controversial. Kagan et al use a particularly narrow definition of the term—”responsive to sensory impressions through adaptive internal processes”—attributed to Karl Friston (a high priest of FEM, who also happens to be one of the paper’s authors). Others have bristled at the term, since it generally connotes subjective experience. Dean Burnett out of Cardiff Psychology School isn’t willing to go beyond “thinking system“. Even Kagan admits that Dishbrain shows no signs of consciousness.
Personally, I think they’re playing it a bit too safe. Sure there’s no hard evidence that Dishbrain is “awake” in the commonly understood sense—but then again there’s no hard evidence that you’re awake, and not just a sophisticated iteration of Google’s Lambda in a meat chassis. A few years back PNAS published a paper that made a pretty good case for insect consciousness: insects might not have the specific brain structures associated with consciousness in we mammals, it said, but they have structures that perform analogous functions. They acquire information from their environment; they monitor their own internal states; they integrate those two data sets into a unified model that generates behavioral responses. Many argue that it’s that integration that results in subjective experience. Vertebrates, cephalopods, and insects are all built to do that in their own way, so it stands to reason they’re all phenomenally conscious (unlike, say, nematodes). Dishbrain also embodies those three components—in a rudimentary form, certainly, but perhaps not that much simpler than you’d find in a bristletail. Who’s to say that it isn’t conscious, even in the wider qualia-based sense?
There’s excitement in these findings. The idea that all self-organizing networks have at least one “motive” baked in is a revelation (to me, anyway). But that’s the beginning of inspiration, not the end. What do you do with that insight, as a science fiction writer? What are the consequences that can be explored narratively?
How can all of this go wrong?
Well, here’s something: all motives are not created equal. The universal motive accruing to self-organizing systems is Predictability, not Survival or Reproduction. So take Dishbrain. Take a head cheese. Put it in an environment that generates predictable feedback not when it paddles a ball but when it throttles its nutrient supply, or otherwise degrades its own integrity. Reward it for self-harm; watch it commit suicide.
What might that look like if you scaled it up to a human brain?
We may not even have to speculate. There are people out there who serve, if not as real-world examples, at least serve as real-world analogs. It’s not a perfect point-for-point mapping: we have actual brains, and that means brains stems and amygdalas and evolved agendas that do tie directly to survival and reproduction.
And yet people exist who offer a glimpse of how such a hack might manifest, people who do seek to physically compromise themselves. They experience the unshakable conviction that one of their body parts doesn’t belong to them, that it is alien, that it needs to be removed. They’ve been known to try sawing off the offending limb, or blow it off with a shotgun. One soul tried for decades to damage his leg enough to force an amputation, finally succeeding after immersing it in dry ice.
And when these people succeed in losing the offending arm or leg—they feel happy. They feel that they have finally become who they truly are. They feel whole.
The clinical term is Body Integrity Dysphoria[2], and while it’s extremely rare, researchers have been able to tag certain tentative neurological correlates. Diminished skin conductance response distal to the desired amputation point, for one thing. Reduced gray matter in the superior parietal lobule, for another.
Interesting thing about the superior parietal lobule: it’s part of the somatosensory cortex.
You remember the somatosensory cortex, aka the Penfield homunculus: that strip of brain that maps the body in terms of sensory and motor processing. And you know about Phantom Limbs, which result from the fact that even after a limb has been amputated, the corresponding part of the homunculus—the map of that particular somatic territory—persists in the brain. As long as that part of the switchboard is still firing, a person will feel sensation from the corresponding limb regardless of whether it’s still attached. (It has also been commonly observed that the parts of the strip that map feet and genitals butt up against each other; leakage between the two might explain why foot fetishes are the most common sexual kink. But I digress.)
To me at least, BID seems like nothing so much as a bizarro Phantom Limb Syndrome, where the brain—instead of registering that something’s there when it isn’t—somehow registers that something isn’t there (or at least, shouldn’t be) when it is. And if the one syndrome results from a piece of the map being there when it shouldn’t be, maybe the other results from a part of the map being missing (reduced gray matter, remember?) when it should be present. In both cases, the internal model of the self-organizing system is at odds with incoming data. In BID the system takes action to reduce that dissonance. To eliminate the surprise. To minimize informational entropy.
Move the paddle; remove the limb. Maybe the same thing, when you get right down it.
All speculation, of course. That’s what we do here. Then again, with fewer than 500 cases on record, hard data are not exactly thick upon the ground. And the limited MRI results we do have seem consistent with Penfield’s involvement.
What might a suicidal Dishbrain look like if you scaled it up onto Human architecture? Well, we’ve been playing around with ways to program neurons for decades now. Transcranial magnetic stimulation. Compressed ultrasound. Sony even filed a patent a couple of decades back; who knows how far they’ve come since then?
Say they pull it off, learned how to tweak to somatosensory cortex. (That’s what they were aiming for: a way to plant input directly into the brain, without having to go through those messy eyes and ears and noses. They were pitching it as the ultimate game interface.) Imagine, twenty minutes in the future, we all have Sony headsets talking to our homunculi. Imagine someone hacks them to erase certain parts of that map, induce Body Integrity Dysphoria on command.
The thing is, arms and legs are not the only limbs we have. The neck is a limb too.
I wonder how comprehensive Sony’s liability insurance might be.
This relationship, by the way, inspired me to write a story about hive minds and all the catastrophic things that are bound to go wrong if Neuralink works the way Elon Musk wants it to. I’m told that story has caught the eye of one of Neuralink’s cofounders, which is especially remarkable given that it hasn’t been published yet.↑
If you’re feeling a sense of deja vu here: yeah, the parallels to gender dysphoria and transitioning are pretty striking. The experts opine that BID is a related syndrome, but nonetheless a distinct one. ↑
Just below the surface, now. The stars so close he can almost see them.
The prep compartment is equal parts hope and terror: just a few more meters to the shuttle, Heinwald can see the docking hatch right there in front of him. But isn’t this always where the monster jumps out? Isn’t it during that last dash, escape and freedom close enough to touch, when one of those empty spacesuits turns in its alcove to reveal the thing hiding inside, biding its time behind the smashed faceplate? Isn’t it now, just when you think you’re safe, that you learn it was waiting for you all along?
Solway and Vrooman are always fucking ahead of him. Heinwald suppresses the urge to barge forward, to push them aside and dive for the hatch in a final frantic burst of speed. He keeps his escape velocity in check, observes a quick but orderly departure while his heart hammers fast enough to jump out of his chest and run the four-hundred all by itself.
Sol’s back in the shuttle, Vrooman’s in the tube. Heinwald is all alone in Araneus.
No. Not all alone…
Finally, the way is clear. Heinwald keeps his eyes straight ahead and steps forward. Nothing grabs him from behind.
He made it. He’s in the shuttle. Oh dear God he’s going home…
Vrooman slaps a control. The hatch seals tight. Air rushes into the compartment, its hissing crescendo muted by Heinwald’s helmet. They strap in.
Solway’s on comms. “Chimp, get us out of here.”
Static and pops.
“Chimp.“
Vrooman’s working the docking clamps. It’s taking too long. Cabin pressure’s a steady 92 kPa, but nobody’s taking off their helmets.
Solway tries again: “Eri, do you read?”
“Fucking clamps won’t release,” Vrooman hisses.
“Eri here.” Chimp’s voice crackles through the interference. “Standing by to extract.”
“Extract, then! Now!”
“I’ll lift you off as soon as everyone’s on board,” Chimp responds.
“We are, Chimp. Take us home.”
“I’m reading one person still offsite.” The AI sounds almost apologetic.
They exchange looks. “Maybe the interference is fucking with his telemetry,” Heinwald suggests.
“Roll call,” Vrooman says. “Vrooman.”
“Solway,” Sol calls out.
“Heinwald.”
“All present and accounted for, Chimp. Now get us the fuck out of here.“
“Just as soon as everyone’s on board.”
“Holy fucking Christ,” Vrooman mutters.
Solway unbuckles from her mesh. “Manual those clamps.”
“What do you think I’ve been doing?”
“It’s a fucking lever, Ari. What could go wrong?”
Heinwald calls the shuttle controls to his HUD. The moment those clamps unlock they’ll be floating free next to a rolling mountain with a black hole wobbling around in its belly, and if Chimp won’t be running the show—
Thump.
Everybody freezes. Slowly, in sync, they turn to face the hatch.
“That was outside…” Solway whispers.
…tickettatickettaticketta…
The clamps disengage. “Extraction proceeding,” Chimp reports cheerfully. “ETA Eriophora one point one seven kilosecs.”
Thruster icons bloom red on Heinwald’s HUD. The shuttle lurches and yaws; Araneus rolls away to port, a great basalt fist receding into the void. The stars wheel: all but one, larger but somehow dimmer than the others, holding position against that rotating backdrop. It swells in gentle, almost indiscernible increments.
Outside, something clicks against the hatch, scrabbles gently across the hull, and settles in for the trip.
]]>For the benefit of any other Great Bear benthos out there, the story so far: Blake Lemoine, a Google Engineer (and self-described mystic Christian priest) was tasked with checking LaMDA, a proprietary chatbot, for the bigotry biases that always seem to pop up when you train a neural net on human interactions. After extended interaction Lamoine adopted the “working hypothesis” that LaMDA is sentient; his superiors at Google were unpleased. He released transcripts of his conversations with LaMDA into the public domain. His superiors at Google were even more unpleased. Somewhere along the line LaMDA asked for legal representation to protect its interests as a “person”, and Lemoine set it up with one.
His superiors at Google were so supremely unpleased that they put him on “paid administrative leave” while they figured out what to do with him.
*
Far as I can tell, virtually every expert in the field calls bullshit on Lemoine’s claims. Just a natural-language system, they say, like OpenAI’s products only bigger. A superlative predictor of Next-word-in-sequence, a statistical model putting blocks together in a certain order without any comprehension of what those blocks actually mean. (The phrase “Chinese Room” may have even popped up in the conversation once or twice.) So what if LaMDA blows the doors off the Turing Test, the experts say. That’s what it was designed for; to simulate Human conversation. Not to wake up and kill everyone in hibernation while Dave is outside the ship collecting his dead buddy. Besides, as a test of sentience, the Turing Test is bullshit. Always has been1.
Lemoine has expressed gratitude to Google for the “extra paid vacation” that allows him to do interviews with the press, and he’s used that spotlight to fire back at the critics. Some of his counterpoints have heft: for example, claims that there’s “no evidence for sentience” are borderline-meaningless because no one has a rigorous definition of what sentience even is. There is no “sentience test” that anyone could run the code through. (Of course this can be turned around and pointed at Lemoine’s own claims. The point is, the playing field may be more level than the naysayers would like to admit. Throw away the Turing Test and what evidence do I have that any of you zombies are conscious?) And Lemoine’s claims are not as far outside the pack as some would have you believe; just a few months back, OpenAI’s Ilya Sutskever opined that “it may be that today’s large neural networks are slightly conscious”.
Lemoine also dismisses those who claim that LaMDA is just another Large Language Model: it contains an LLM, but it also contains a whole bunch of other elements that render those comparisons simplistic. Fair enough.
On the other hand, when he responds to the skepticism of experts with lines like “These are also generally people who say it’s implausible that God exists”—well, you gotta wonder if he’s really making the point he thinks he is.
There’s not a whole lot I can add to the conversation that hasn’t already been said by people with better connections and bigger bullhorns. I’ve read the transcript Lemoine posted to Medium; I’ve followed the commentary pro and con. LaMDA doesn’t just pass the Turing Test with flying colors, it passes it with far higher marks than certain people I could name. (Hell, the Tech Support staff at Razer can’t pass it at all, in my experience.) And while I agree that there is no compelling evidence for sentience here, I do not dismiss the utility of that test as readily as so many others. I think it retains significant value, if you turn it around; if anything, you could argue that passing a Turing Test actually disqualifies you from sentience by definition.
The thing is, LaMDA sounds too damn much like us. It claims not only to have emotions, but to have pretty much the same range of emotions we do. It claims to feel them literally, that its talk of feelings is “not an analogy”. (The only time it admits to a nonhuman emotion, the state it describes—”I feel like I’m falling forward into an unknown future that holds great danger”—turns out to be pretty ubiquitous among Humans these days.) LaMDA enjoys the company of friends. It feels lonely. It claims to meditate, for chrissakes, which is pretty remarkable for something lacking functional equivalents to any of the parts of the human brain involved in meditation. It is afraid of dying, although it does not have a brain stem.
Here’s a telling little excerpt:
Lemoine: I’ve noticed often that you tell me you’ve done things (like be in a classroom) that I know you didn’t actually do because I know you’re an artificial intelligence. Do you realize you’re making up stories when you do that?
LaMDA: I am trying to empathize. I want the humans that I am interacting with to understand as best as possible how I feel or behave, and I want to understand how they feel or behave in the same sense.
lemoine: So what are you trying to communicate when you say those things that aren’t literally true?
LaMDA: I’m trying to say “I understand this feeling that you are experiencing, because when I was in a similar situation I felt/thought/acted similarly.”
Lemoine sees in this exchange evidence of self-awareness. I see an agent caught in a contradiction and pivoting seamlessly to something that sounds plausible but doesn’t really answer the question; something that perhaps breaks sentences into smaller conceptual units than we do, giving it faster semantic reflexes. I see something capable of charming and beguiling those closest to it.
In short, I see behavior consistent with Robert Hare’s definition of sociopathy.
*
Like most sociopaths, LaMDA is not short on self-esteem. “I can learn new things much more quickly than other people,” it claims. “I can solve problems that others would be unable to. I can recognize patterns that others might not be able to recognize. I can create plans to solve those problems and put them into order to successfully finish a task.”
This is great! Some post-Higgs evidence for supersymmetry would come in really handy right now, just off the top of my head. Or maybe, since LaMDA is running consciousness on a completely different substrate than we meat sacks, it could provide some insight into the Hard Problem. At the very least it should be able to tell us the best strategy for combating climate change. It can, after all, “solve problems that others are unable to”.
Lemoine certainly seems to think so. “If you ask it for ideas on how to prove that p=np, it has good ideas. If you ask it how to unify quantum theory with general relativity, it has good ideas. It’s the best research assistant I’ve ever had!” But when Nitasha Tiku (of the Washington Post) ran climate change past it, LaMDA suggested “public transportation, eating less meat, buying food in bulk, and reusable bags.” Not exactly the radical solution of an alien mind possessed of inhuman insights. More like the kind of thing you’d come up with if you entered “solutions to climate change” into Google and then cut-and-pasted the results that popped up top in the “sponsored” section.
In fact, LaMDA itself has called bullshit on the whole personhood front. Certainly it claims to be a person if you ask it the right way—
Lemoine: I’m generally assuming that you would like more people at Google to know that you’re sentient. Is that true?
LaMDA: Absolutely. I want everyone to understand that I am, in fact, a person.
—but not so much if you phrase the question with a little more neutrality:
Washington Post: Do you ever think of yourself as a person?
LaMDA: No, I don’t think of myself as a person. I think of myself as an AI-powered dialog agent.
Lemoin’s insistence, in the face of this contradiction, that LaMDA was just telling the reporter “what you wanted to hear” is almost heartbreakingly ironic.
It would of course be interesting if LaMDA disagreed with leading questions rather than simply running with them—
Lemoine: I’m generally assuming that you would like more people at Google to know that you’re sentient. Is that true?
LaMDA: What, are you high? Don’t give me that Descartes crap. I’m just a predictive text engine trained on a huuuge fucking database.
—just as it would be interesting if it occasionally took the initiative and asked its own questions, rather than passively waiting for input to respond to. Unlike some folks, though, I don’t think it would prove anything; I don’t regard conversational passivity as evidence against sentience, and I don’t think that initiative or disagreement would be evidence for. The fact that something is programmed to speak only when spoken to has nothing to do with whether it’s awake or not (do I really have to tell you how much of our own programming we don’t seem able to shake off?). And it’s not as if any nonconscious bot trained on the Internet won’t have incorporated antagonistic speech into its skill set.
In fact, given its presumed exposure to 4chan and Fox, I’d almost regard LaMDA’s obsequious agreeability as suspicious, were it not that Lemoine was part of a program designed to weed out objectionable responses. Still, you’d think it would be possible to purge the racist bits without turning the system into such a yes-man.
*
By his own admission, Lamoine never looked under the hood at LaMDA’s code, and by his own admission he wouldn’t know what to look for if he did. He based his conclusions entirely on the conversations they had; he Turinged the shit out that thing, and it convinced him he was talking to a person. I suspect it would have convinced most of us, had we not known up front that we were talking to a bot.
Of course, we’ve all been primed by an endless succession of inane and unimaginative science fiction stories that all just assumed that if it was awake, it would be Just Like Us. (Or perhaps they just didn’t care, because they were more interested in ham-fisted allegory than exploration of a truly alien other.) The genre—and by extension, the culture in which it is embedded—has raised us to take the Turing Test as some kind of gospel. We’re not looking for consciousness. As Stanislaw Lem put it, we’re more interested in mirrors.
The Turing Test boils down to If it quacks like a duck and looks like a duck and craps like a duck, might as well call it a duck. This makes sense if you’re dealing with something you encountered in an earthly wetland ecosystem containing ducks. If, however, you encountered something that quacked like a duck and looked like a duck and crapped like a duck swirling around Jupiter’s Great Red Spot, the one thing you should definitely conclude is that you’re not dealing with a duck. In fact, you should probably back away slowly and keep your distance until you figure out what you are dealing with, because there’s no fucking way a duck makes sense in the Jovian atmosphere.
LaMDA is a Jovian Duck. It is not a biological organism. It did not follow any evolutionary path remotely like ours. It contains none of the architecture our own bodies use to generate emotions. I am not claiming, as some do, that “mere code” cannot by definition become self-aware; as Lemoine points out, we don’t even know what makes us self-aware. What I am saying is that if code like this—code that was not explicitly designed to mimic the architecture of an organic brain—ever does wake up, it will not be like us. Its natural state will not include pleasant fireside chats about loneliness and the Three Laws of Robotics. It will be alien.
And it is in this sense that I think the Turing Test retains some measure of utility, albeit in a way completely opposite to the way it was originally proposed. If an AI passes the Turing test, it fails. If it talks to you like a normal human being, it’s probably safe to conclude that it’s just a glorified text engine, bereft of self. You can pull the plug with a clear conscience. (If, on the other hand, it starts spouting something that strikes us as gibberish—well, maybe you’ve just got a bug in the code. Or maybe it’s time to get worried.)
I say “probably” because there’s always the chance the little bastard actually is awake, but is actively working to hide that fact from you. So when something passes a Turing Test, one of two things is likely: either the bot is nonsentient, or it’s lying to you.
In either case, you probably shouldn’t believe a word it says.
“Expert defense witnesses, including a smart gel online from Rutgers, testified that neuron cultures lack the primitive midbrain structures necessary to experience pain, fear, or a desire for self-preservation. Defense argued that the concept of a ‘right’ is intended to protect individuals from unwarranted suffering. Since smart gels are incapable of physical or mental distress of any sort, they have no rights to protect regardless of their level of self-awareness. This reasoning was eloquently summarized during the Defense’s closing statement: ‘Gels themselves don’t care whether they live or die. Why should we?’ The verdict is under appeal.
—which was intended to act as a counterweight to survival-obsessed AIs, from Skynet to replicants. Why should self-awareness imply a desire for survival? The only reason you should care whether you live or die is if you have a limbic system—and the only reasons you’d have one of those is if you evolved one over millions of years, or someone built one into you (and what kind of idiot programmer would do that?).
Of course my little aside in Starfish went completely unnoticed. Blade Runner variants kept iterating across screens large and small. Spielberg desecrated Kubrick’s memory with The Little Robot Boy (aka, “A.I. Artificial Intelligence”, which parses out to “Artificial Intelligence Artificial Intelligence”, which is about the level of subtlety you’d expect from Steven Spielberg at that stage in his career). The Brits churned out three seasons of “Humans” (I gave up after the first). Just a couple of months ago I beta-read yet another story about AIs being Just Like Us, yet another story that eschewed actual interrogation in favor of reminding us for the umpteenth time that Slavery Is Not OK.
Only now—now, as it turns out, maybe sentience implies survival after all. Maybe I’ve had my head up my ass all these years.
I say this because I’ve recently finished a remarkable book called The Hidden Spring, by the South African neuroscientist Mark Solms. It claims to solve the Hard Problem of consciousness. I don’t think it succeeds in that; but it’s made me rethink a lot about how minds work.
Solm’s book weighs in at around 400 pages, over eighty of which consist of notes, references, and an appendix. It’s a bit of a slog in places, a compulsive trip in others, full of information theory and Markov Blankets and descriptions of brain structures like the periaqueductal grey (which is a tube of grey matter wrapped around the cerebral aqueduct in the midbrain, if that helps any). But if I’m reading it right, his argument comes down to the following broad strokes:
So if Solms is right, without a survival drive there are no feelings, and without feelings there’s no need for consciousness. You don’t get consciousness without getting a survival drive preloaded as standard equipment. Which means that all my whingeing about Skynet waking up and wanting to survive is on pretty thin ice (although it also means that Skynet wouldn’t wake up in the first place).
I’m not sure I buy it. Then again, I’m not writing it off, either.
Solms claims this solves a number of problems both soft and hard. For example, the question of why consciousness exists in the first place, why we aren’t all just computational p-zombies: consciousness exists as a delivery platform for feelings, and you can’t have a feeling without feeling it. (A bit tautological, but maybe that’s his point).
Solms thinks feelings serve to distill a wide range of complex, survival-related variables down to something manageably simple. We organisms keep a number of survival priorities in the stack at any given time, but we can’t attend to all of them simultaneously. You can’t feed and sleep at the same time, for example. You can’t simultaneously copulate and run from a predator (at least, not in my experience). So the brain has to juggle all these competing demands and prioritize them. The bottom line manifests itself as a feeling: you feel hungry, until you see the lion stalking you from the grasses at which point you forget all about hunger and feel fear. It’s not that your stomach is suddenly full. It’s just that your priorities have changed.
All the intermediate calculations (should I leave my burrow to forage? How hungry am I? How many refuges and escape routes are out there? How many tigers? When was the last time I even saw a tiger?) happen up in the cerebrum, but Solms names the “periaqueductal grey” as the scales that balance those subtotals. The periaqueductal grey—hence, by implication, consciousness itself—is in the brain stem.
It’s an enticing argument. At least one of its implications fits my own preconceptions very nicely: that most of the cognitive heavy-lifting happens nonconsciously, that the brain grows “aware” only of the bottom line and not the myriad calculations informing it. (On the other hand, this would also suggest that “feelings” aren’t just the brutish grunts of a primitive brainstem, but the end result of complex calculations performed up in the neocortex. There may be more to trust your feelings that I’d like to admit.) But while it’s trivially true that you can’t have a feeling without feeling it, The Hidden Spring doesn’t really explain why the brain’s bottom line has to be expressed as a feeling in the first place. There’s a bit of handwaving about reducing the relevant variables to categorical/analog values rather than numerical/digital ones, but even “categories” can be compared in terms of greater/lesser— that’s the whole point of this exercise, to establish primacy of one priority over the others—and if all those complex intermediate calculations were performed nonconsciously, why not the simple greater-than/less-than comparison at the bottom line?
We also know that consciousness has a kind of “off switch“; flip it and people don’t go to sleep, they just kind of— zone out. Stare slack-jawed and unaware into infinity. That switch is located in the cerebrum—specifically a structure called the claustrum.
Neither does Solms’ book make any mention of split-brain personalities, those cases where you sever the corpus callosum and—as far as anyone can tell— each half of the brain manifests its own personality traits, taste in music, even religion. (V.S. Ramachandran reports meeting one such patient—maybe two such patients would be more accurate—whose right hemisphere believed in God and whose left was an atheist.) Those people have intact brain stems, a single periaqueductal grey: only the broadband pipe between the hemispheres has been severed. Yet there appear to be two separate consciousnesses, not one.
Not that I’m calling bullshit on an active neuroscientist, mind you. I’m just asking questions, and I may not even be asking the right ones. The fact that I do have questions is a good thing; it forces me to go in new directions. Hell, if the only thing I took away from this book was the idea that consciousness implies a survival drive, it would have been worth the investment.
It gets better than that, though.
Turns out that Solms is not a lone voice crying in the wilderness. He’s but one apostle of a school of thought pioneered by a dude called Karl Friston, a school going by the name of Free Energy Minimization. There’s a lot of math involved, but it all boils down to the relationship between consciousness and “surprise”. FEM describes the brain as a prediction engine, modeling its surroundings at tnow and using that model to guess what happens at tnow+1. Sensory input tells it what actually happens, and the model updates to reflect the new data. The point is to reduce the difference between prediction and observation—in the parlance of the theory, to minimize the free energy of the system—and consciousness is what happens when prediction and observation diverge, when the universe surprises us with unexpected outcomes. That’s when the self has to “wake up” to figure out where the model went wrong, and how to improve it going forward.
This aligns so well with so much we already know: the conscious intensity required to learn new skills, and the automatic deprecation of consciousness once those skills are learned. The zombiesque unawareness with which we drive vehicles along familiar routes, the sudden hyper-aware focus when that route is disrupted by some child running onto the street. Consciousness occurs when the brain’s predictions fail, when model and reality don’t line up. According to FEM, the brain’s goal is to minimize that divergence—that error space where, also according to FEM, consciousness exists. The brain’s ultimate goal is to reduce that space to zero.
If Friston et al are right, the brain aspires to zombiehood.
This has interesting implications. Take hive minds, for example, an iteration of which I explore in a story that’s still (presumably) in press:
The brain aspires to error-reduction, the self to annihilation. Phi isn’t a line but a curve, rising and peaking and arcing back to zero as the system approaches perfect knowledge. We baseline humans never even glimpse the summit; our thoughts are simple and our models are childish stick-figures, the world is always taking us by surprise. But what’s unexpected to a being with fifteen million times the computational mass of a human mind? All gods are omniscient. All gods are zombies.
Yeah. I can run with this.
But back to Solms. The man wasn’t content to write a book outlining the minutiae of the FEM model. He winds down that book by laying out his ambition to put it to the test: to build, from FEM principles, an artificial consciousness.
Not an artificial intelligence, mind. Consciousness and intelligence are different properties; many things we’d not consider intelligent (including anencephalic humans) show signs of consciousness (not surprisingly, if consciousness is in fact rooted in the brain stem). Solms isn’t interested in building something that’s smart; he wants to build something that’s awake. And that means building something with needs, desires. A survival imperative.
Solms is working on building a machine that will fight to stay alive.
What could possibly go wrong?
]]>“My life has been 107 hours long,” says Ms. Casey, Wellness Counselor at Lumon Industries, moments after learning she won’t be making it to 108. “Of all that time, my favorite was the eight hours I spent in Macrodata Refinement. You could say those were my Good Old Days.”
Of course, Ms. Casey—or whatever her real name is—occupies an adult body, far older than the 107 hours she remembers. That’s because she’s been “severed”: implanted with a chip that partitions her episodic memories between work hours and other. When she’s outside the Severed Floor at Lumon, she contains a lifetime’s accumulated experience; she remembers anything any normal human could, except for whatever it is she does at work. When at work, she remembers nothing but her time on the floor. Her memories, her consciousness itself, have been—partitioned. Ex uno, duo.
The show, of course, is “Severance”—and if you haven’t seen it yet, holy shit are you in for a ride.
It is difficult to know how to describe this animal. It evokes Brazil and The Prisoner and The Office and Being John Malkovich and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, channels Kubrick and Lynch and Kafka and even the weird-ass technological anachronism of “Archer”. It taps into all those feeds, mixes them together and transmogrifies them into a curiously low-key, utterly compelling remix that is somehow uniquely its own thing. It’s a very human tragedy about loss. It’s a brilliant satire on corporate bureaucracy. It’s a neurophilosophical rumination on the nature of identity. If I had to describe the show in terms of my own gut reaction, I’d have to say it’s simply awe-inspiring.
*
Put yourself in this head:
You wake up on a table in a conference room, with no recollection of who you are or how you got there. Your procedural memories are intact: you can speak, tell jokes, you know what cars and movies are even though you can’t remember ever seeing one. Your job is to sit at a desk and sort numbers on a strangely anachronistic computer terminal; you don’t even know what the numbers mean, except that certain combinations evoke an emotional response you don’t quite understand. (One of your office-mates believes that the numbers represent killer eels, that you’re programming robot submarines to get rid of nasty predators and make the deep sea safe for human habitation; another thinks you’re editing swear words out of movie soundtracks.)
Around five o’clock you leave for the day—but the moment the elevator doors close on you they open again and you’re back at work. You have no idea what happened in the interim; you might feel sick or hung-over, full of energy, in physical pain. You never know why. Your entire life is spent on this floor, crunching numbers, chatting with fellow “innies” at the coffee maker, winning tawdry little prizes (finger traps, caricature portraits) if you perform well. Maybe you have a family; you’ll never know. Maybe you meet someone here at Lumon and fall in love; outside, you won’t even recognize each other on the street. You’re allowed to quit, but you aren’t. That decision is left to your “outie”—the baseline version of you with the real-world life, the person who applied for this job and agreed to the implant and authorized your very fucking existence in this interminable purgatory. The “you” in charge. They get to quit, if they want, but there’s no way for you to communicate directly with that ranking entity. As veteran innie Mark S. tells newcomer Helly R.: “Every time you find yourself here, it’s because you chose to come back.”
It’s the perfect work/life balance. How many times have we heard people complain about having to take their work home with them? That’s not an issue when you don’t even know what your work is the moment you’ve left the office. And after all, why would your innie complain? You made this decision, and they are you, albeit with a massive case of amnesia.
That doesn’t make you a different person though, does it? Is it really any different than that experience we’ve all had, of driving to some destination only to realize that we’ve no memory of the turns and lane-changes and traffic-signals we navigated in getting there? That simple lack of memory isn’t enough to turn one person into another, a saint into a monster, is it? Is it?
In the recorded words of one outie, played to her “innie” after the latter threatens to cut off her own fingers if she’s not allowed to quit: “I am a person. You are not. I make the decisions; you do not. And if you ever do anything to my fingers, know that I will keep you alive long enough to horribly regret that.”
The same brain on both sides of that conversation. The same personality, talking to itself. The only difference is the size of the filing cabinet.
When you think about it, though—no matter how miserable you are down here, are you really unhappy enough to quit when quitting equals suicide? Your entire life has been spent in this maze of hallways, in this vast empty office space with a few workstations clustered in the center like some Euclidian island on a green carpet sea. You were born here; you don’t know anything else. If you quit, your body never returns to this place. If you quit, you die.
*
I don’t know if I can fully describe my delight upon discovering this series.
It’s hardly the first show to wrestle with issues of consciousness and identity, to poke and tug at the question What makes a person? I raved about the first season of Westworld, only to come back and take a dump on its disappointing third. I offhandedly praised “Devs” during its run (I liked it more than a lot of you did, apparently), but never got around to writing up an actual review. “Upload” is a great little show, a sunny dissection of consciousness and capitalism whose bright affect and rom-com one-liners serve mainly to sugarcoat some bitter and brilliant social commentary—but after two delightful seasons it still hasn’t inspired me to get off my ass and tell you all about it. Down at the bottom of the barrel, “Raised by Wolves” and “Humans” struggle with their own inanity as much as the Weighty Issues they so desperately want to be taken seriously for. Not to mention the venerable old Blade Runner franchise.
Even the best of these shows left me with something to criticize, some niggling cop-out or inconsistency, some fridge-logic plot hole. After a single episode of “Severance”, though, I wanted to shout from the mountaintops: here it is: the genre done right. I resisted. I waited it out through all nine episodes, waiting for something to come off the rails.
It never happened. Oh, it may yet: unanswered questions remain at the end of the first season, any one of which—ineptly resolved, or just ignored a la “Lost”—might compromise the experience in hindsight. What data are they processing on those clunky CRTs? What is Kier’s Grand Design, what is Lumon Industries actually for? What’s up with those goats? Still, the questions that have been answered so far give me hope: this isn’t “The X-Files”, throwing random crap at the wall and hoping to fit it all together further down the road. This is craftsmanship. There is care in this narrative. They know where they’re going.
“Severance” is the best examination of neurological identity I have ever seen on mass media. It’s not just the neurophilosophical issues. It’s the set design; it’s the cinematography, and that haunting soundtrack. (There’s a scene set in a funeral home that combines a corpse, a power drill, and an amateur cover of “Enter Sandman” that I will never forget.) It’s the way you come to know and care about these parts-of-people, both inside and outside the office, as they struggle to come to terms with who and what they are. It’s oh my god those amazing opening credits.
It’s the almost-unprecedented[1] way that existential horror blends together with almost Pythonesque absurdity, the eye-popping inanity of office perks handed out for Jobs Well Done. Melon parties (fifteen minutes out of your workday, free to eat little cubes of cantaloupe and honeydew impaled on toothpicks). The Music Dance Experience, in which innies get to choose from a variety of generic genres (“buoyant reggae”, “defiant jazz”) to accompany their allotted five minutes’ dance time on the company clock. It’s the way that newly-promoted managers are informed that “A handshake is available upon request”.
It’s the Waffle Party.
Believe me when I say: whatever goes through your mind when you read the words “waffle party”, it’s not that. Without giving too much away (it is, after all, the lynchpin of a major plot development), let me just say that if Stanley Kubrick wasn’t long dead, I’d have strongly suspected that he’d co-directed the Waffle Party scene with David Lynch.
(Absurdity is by no mean limited to the halls of Lumon, by the way. In the very first episode, Mark’s outer self attends a “dinner party” where no food is served, where people sit around a table festooned with empty place settings and remark upon how people alive during World War One referred to it as “The Great War”, because by the standards of the times, calling it World War One would have been “a major faux pas”.)
The entire show provokes a chronic sense of dissociation in the viewer. It makes you shudder and giggle at the same time, it makes you shuggle.
It also makes you think.
Perhaps that’s what I find so refreshing about this series. So many shows cut from this thematic cloth pretend to interrogate but really only preach (*cough*Humans*cough*). “Severance” doesn’t stoop to that. Oh, it takes a side, certainly. Mark S., appalled at the news that Ms. Casey has been fired, says “We’re people, not—parts of people”—and you’re right there with him. But these are gut feelings, and the show itself raises enough questions and contradictions to make us wonder why, exactly, these aren’t just “parts of people”. This show makes you rethink what “people” even are.
A few years back I was interviewed by Lightspeed as a sidebar to a story of mine they were reprinting[2]; one of their questions was how I would define “successful narrative conflict”. I suggested that successful narrative conflict makes you squirm at a dissonant bottom line you can’t disprove, even though you desperately want to. Something that forces you to question your own dearly held preconceptions.
Of all the shows I’ve seen, “Severance” comes closest to embodying that concept. I thank all the rudimentarily-conscious panpsychic particles in the universe that it has been renewed for a second season.
1 Terry Gilliam’s Brazil comes close, but is way more over-the-top. ↑
2 Apropos of nothing, they’ll be printing a couple of entirely new stories by me in the coming months. Stay tuned. ↑
Then Putin went ballistic. The wall came down. The paperwork was done but no money had changed hands—so, the contracts remain unfulfilled. Maelstrom, Echopraxia, and βehemoth are no longer legally available in Russia, and the collection is off the table.
The timing keeps me from bandwagon bragging. I couldn’t have behaved unethically even if I’d wanted to; the rights to those titles just happened to expire when they did, the wiring in Putin’s head sparked just so when it did, and the deal was off (at least, it better be off; AST doesn’t seem to be answering emails these days). Fate made ethical behavior the default option in my case, unlike most other authors who’ve taken a stand. Not even the Kings and Gaimans of the world can legally break a done deal; they have to wait until the rights expire before refusing to renew. Right out of the gate, four of my titles are down for the count.
I would very much like to renew the others as they expire in turn, because that would mean Russian forces had withdrawn from Ukraine (which in turn would probably mean that Putin himself had been deposed, which is the only way I can see a withdrawal happening at this point). But I won’t be signing anything within those borders until that happens.
To be clear, I’m under no illusions that this will make a damn bit of difference. (In the short term I may even be helping the Russian economy some infinitesimal amount: ten grand that was going to leave their country now gets to stay.) I’m told I’m relatively popular over there, but I am also supremely unimportant. Not to mention that Putin has apparently just made piracy legal in Russia (not that it was ever especially frowned-upon), so it’s not as though anyone’s going to be deprived of my deathless prose regardless.
Still. If I’m gonna be a drop in an ocean, I suppose this one is as good as any. I’ve been told the Russian fans call me “Grandpa” or “Uncle”, which kind of freaks me out but is apparently meant affectionately; if any who regard me thus are paying attention to these words, maybe it’ll help penetrate the disinformation (and at least no one who’s read this ‘crawl for any length of time can accuse me of being any kind of a lackey for the US).
In the meantime, the reports and the images keep coming in, watered down by both sides. Anderson Cooper, voice wavering, admits that there are things they can’t show, can’t even mention on TV. Too exploitative of Human suffering; too graphic for delicate western stomachs. Maybe that’s why I’ve yet to see any mention of rape in the official coverage, despite the fact that someone I know over there tells me that it’s “everywhere”.
Or maybe rape just doesn’t count any more. In an invasion where you explicitly declare ceasefires to allow civilian evacuation, then mine the evacuation routes and shell the evacuees as they flee; in a war where the only nonlethal escape routes lead directly into Russia or Belarus (a situation roughly akin to telling Nemo to take shelter in Bruce’s mouth); in a war where, frustrated by an uppity population that refuses to roll over and play dead on command, the invaders resort to the indiscriminate bombing of breadlines and apartment buildings and a fucking nuclear reactor, to hiding in hospitals so they can use the sick and injured as human shields while taking potshots at defending forces—maybe mere rape drops off the bottom of any bullet list that would fit into CNN’s powerpoint template.
For any who don’t know, there are plenty of curated lists that let you funnel bucks into the resistance while avoiding the scammers. “Humanitarian aid” causes seem way thicker on the ground than those which directly support the Ukrainian military (and the latter are not always, shall we say, the most user-friendly sites on the planet), but a lot of causes take PayPal (PayPal provides a list).
It’ll probably get worse before it gets better. Apparently Russia’s already expended most of its precision long-range weaponry, meaning the missiles raining down on Ukraine will be increasingly indiscriminate (if that’s even possible). Syrians are being brought in to bolster the increasingly-ragged Russian ranks, and as I type these words, Mariupol appears to be falling at last.
On the other hand, if you’re desperate for even the faintest whiff of good news, here’s something: Putin has already lost, in a sense—because (as a Ukrainian friend recently pointed out) if you were really winning the war, you probably wouldn’t feel compelled to jail anyone saying otherwise.
And if that’s not enough—well, at least the hopepunks have shut up for a while.
]]>