Summary of Bill Joy’s, “Why the future doesn’t need us,”

Bill Joy at World Economic Forum (Davos), 2003-01 (cropped).jpg

Bill Joy (1954 – ) is an American computer scientist who co-founded Sun Microsystems in 1982 and served as chief scientist at the company until 2003. His now famous Wired magazine essay, “Why the future doesn’t need us,” (2000) sets forth his deep concerns over the development of modern technologies.[i] 

Joy traces his worries to a discussion he had with Ray Kurzweil at a conference in 1998. He had read an early draft of Kurzweil’s The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence and found it deeply disturbing. Subsequently, he encountered arguments by the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski. Kaczynski argued that if machines do all of society’s work, as they inevitably will, then we can: a) let the machines make all the decisions; or b) maintain human control over the machines.

If we choose “a” then we are at the mercy of our machines. It is not that we would give them control or that they would take control, rather, we might become so dependent on them that we would have to accept their commands. If we choose “b” then control would be in the hands of an elite, and the masses would be unnecessary. In that case, the tiny elite: 1) would exterminate the masses; 2) reduce their birthrate so they slowly became extinct; or 3) become benevolent shepherds to the masses. The first two scenarios entail our extinction, but even the third option is bad. In this last scenario, the elite would fulfill all physical and psychological needs of the masses, while at the same time engineering the masses to sublimate their desire for power. In this case, the masses might be happy, but they wouldn’t be free. Joy finds Kaczynski’s arguments both convincing and troubling.

About this time Joy read Hans Moravec’s book Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind where he found predictions similar to Kurzweil’s. Joy was especially concerned by Moravec’s claim that technological superiors always defeat technological inferiors, as well as his claim that humans will become extinct as they merge with the robots. Disturbed, Joy consulted other computer scientists who, for the most part, agreed with these predictions.

Joy’s worries focus on the transforming technologies of the 21st century—genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics (GNR). What is particularly problematic about them is their potential to self-replicate. This makes them inherently more dangerous than 20th-century technologies—nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons—which are expensive to build and require rare raw materials. By contrast, 21st-century technologies allow for small groups or individuals to bring about massive destruction. Joy also argues that, while we will soon achieve the computing power necessary to implement some of the scenarios envisioned by Kurzweil and Moravec, we overestimate our design abilities. Such hubris may lead to disaster.

For example, robotics is primarily motivated by the desire to be immortal—by downloading ourselves into robotic bodies. But Joy doesn’t believe that we will be human after the download or that the robots would be our children. As for genetic engineering, it will create new crops, plants, and eventually new species including many variations of human species, but Joy fears that we don’t know enough to safely conduct such experiments. And nanotechnology confronts the so-called “gray goo” problem—self-replicating nanobots out of control. In short, we may be on the verge of killing ourselves. Is it not arrogant, he wonders, to design a robot replacement species when we so often make design mistakes?

Joy concludes that we ought to relinquish these technologies before it’s too late. Yes, GNR may bring happiness and immortality, but should we risk the survival or the species for such goals? Joy thinks not.

Summary – Genetics, nanotechnology, and robotics are too dangerous to pursue; we should abandon them. (I think Joy’s call for relinquishment is unrealistic. For more see my peer-reviewed essay “Critique of Bill Joy’s ‘Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us.’“)


[i] Bill Joy, “Why The Future Doesn’t Need Us,” Wired Magazine, April 2000.

Liked it? Take a second to support Dr John Messerly on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

9 thoughts on “Summary of Bill Joy’s, “Why the future doesn’t need us,”

  1. If the West doesn’t develop these technologies, the Chinese will.
    Should we care whether the philosophical seeds of the new world order are capitalist or statist?

  2. You are correct; someone will develop these technologies. And when the genie is out of the bottle it is very hard to put it back. Better to figure out how to utilize and control them.

  3. it may be arrogant, but its not the end of the design line. we are just creating first generation a.i. – machines as smart as people. those machines will be the ones making the new robot overlords.

  4. probably won’t be us vs. them; rather we’ll incorporate new technology into our bodies and become cyborgs. JGM

  5. I believe Mr. Joy is correct in his pessimism. Our society is rushing to embrace technologies of which we have little understanding concerning their ultimate impact. Information and technology are developing at an exponential pace. Our wisdom regarding them is not. Disasters like Chernobyl are inevitable. When they happen with GNR the results could be disastrous to the point of unprecedented destruction. Combine them with the already mature technologies of nuclear weapons, chemical and biological warfare and intercontinental ballistic missiles and we are way over our heads.

  6. I don’t think robots are necessary. Robots don’t have any feelings they are not like us humans who can think. We know what is right and wrong. Robots cannot stop doing mistakes. But humans once they make mistakes they can stop.

  7. I remember reading this in Wired Magazine and meeting him at Comdex in Las Vegas the same year discussing this topic.. AI is what he wrote about all those years ago. Here we are.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.