Category Archives: Nanoweapons

A city is burning down and people are walking.

Assuring the Survival of Humanity In The Post Singularity Era

How do we assure that we do not fall victim to our own invention, artificial intelligence? What strategies should we employ? What actions should we take?

What is required is a worldwide recognition of the danger that strong AI poses and a worldwide coalition to address it. This is not a U.S. problem. It is a worldwide problem. It would be no different from any threat that could result in the extinction of humanity.

Let us consider the example President Regan provided during his speech before the United Nations in 1987. He stated, “Perhaps we need some outside universal threat to make us recognize this common bond. I occasionally think how quickly our differences worldwide would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world.”

I offer the above example to illustrate that we need humanity, all nations of the world, to recognize the real and present danger that strong AI poses. We need world leaders to take a proactive stance. That could, for example, require assembling the best scientists, military and civilian leaders to determine the type of legislation needed to govern the development of advanced artificially intelligent computers and weapon systems. It could involve multinational oversight to assure compliance with the legislation. Is the task monumental? Yes, but do we really have another alternative? If we allow the singularity to occur without control, our extinction is inevitable. In time, the Earth will become home to only machines. The existence of humanity will be digital bits of information in some electronic memory depository.

I harbor hope that humanity, as a species, can unite to prevent our extinction. There are historical precedents. Let me provide two examples.

Example 1. The Limited Test Ban Treaty (LTBT) – The treaty banned nuclear weapon tests in the atmosphere, in outer space, and underwater. It was signed and ratified by the former Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States in 1963. It had two objectives:

    1. Slow the expensive arms race between the Soviet Union and the United States
    2. Stop the excessive release of nuclear fallout into Earth’s atmosphere

Currently, most countries have signed the treaty. However, China, France, and North Korea are countries known to have tested nuclear weapons below ground and have not signed the treaty.

In general, the LTBT has held well, even by countries that have not signed the treaty. There have been several violations by both the former Soviet Union and the United States. However, for almost the last fifty years, no nuclear tests have violated the treaty. This means that the fallout from the nuclear tests did not exceed the borders of the countries performing the tests.

Why has the LTBT been so successful? Nations widely recognized atmospheric nuclear tests as dangerous to humanity due to the uncontrollable nature of the radioactive fallout.

Example 2. The Biological Weapons Convention – In a 1969 press conference, President Richard M. Nixon stated, “Biological weapons have massive, unpredictable, and potentially uncontrollable consequences.” He added, “They may produce global epidemics and impair the health of future generations.” In 1972, President Nixon submitted the Biological Weapons Convention to the U.S. Senate.

The “Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction” proceeded to become an international treaty.

    • Signed in Washington, London, and Moscow on April 10, 1972
    • Ratification advised by the US Senate on December 16, 1974
    • Ratified by the US president January 22, 1975
    • US ratification deposited in Washington, London, and Moscow on March 26, 1975
    • Proclaimed by the US president March 26, 1975
    • Entered into force March 26, 1975

The above two examples prove one thing to my mind. If humanity recognizes a possible existential threat, it will act to mitigate it.

Unfortunately, while several highly-regarded scientists and notable public figures have added their voice to mine regarding the existential threat artificial intelligence poses, it has failed to become widely recognized.

I am written several books to delineate this threat, including The Artificial Intelligence Revolution, Genius Weapons, Nanoweapons, and War At The Speed Of Light. My goal is to reach the largest audience possible and raise awareness regarding the existential threat to humanity that artificial intelligence poses.

In the simplest terms, I advocate that the path toward a solution is educating the lay public and those in leadership positions. Once the existential threat that artificial intelligence poses becomes widely recognized, I harbor hope that humanity will seek solutions to mitigate the threat.

In the next post, I delineate a four-fold approach to mitigate the threat that artificial intelligence poses to humanity. There may be other solutions. I do not claim that this is the only way to address the problem. However, I’m afraid I have to disagree with those that suggest we do not have a problem. In fact, I claim that we not only have a potentially serious problem, but also we need to address it post-haste. If I am coming across with a sense of urgency, it is intentional. At best, we have one or two decades after the singularity to assure we do not fall victim to our own invention, artificial intelligence.

 

 

human extinction

Will Humanity Survive the 21st Century?

In my last post, I stated, “In making the above predictions [about the singularity], I made one critical assumption. I assumed that humankind would continue the “status quo.” I am ruling out world-altering events, such as large asteroids striking Earth, leading to human extinction, or a nuclear exchange that renders civilization impossible. Is assuming the “status quo” reasonable? We’ll discuss that in the next post.

Let’s now discuss if humanity will survive the 21st century.

The typical events that most people consider as causing humanity’s extinction, such as a large asteroid impact or a volcanic eruption of sufficient magnitude to cause catastrophic climate change, actually have a relatively low probability of occurring, in the order of 1 in 50,000 or less, according to numerous estimates found via a simple Google search. In 2008, experts surveyed at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford suggested a 19% chance of human extinction over the next century, citing the top five most probable to cause human extinction by 2100 as:

  1. Molecular nanotechnology weapons – 5% probability
  2. Super-intelligent AI – 5% probability
  3. Wars – 4% probability
  4. Engineered pandemic – 2% probability
  5. Nuclear war – 1% probability

All other existential events were below 1%. Again, doing a simple Google search may provide different results by different “experts.” If we take the above survey at face value, it would suggest that the risk of an existential event increases with time. This has led me to the conclusion that human survival over the next 30 years is highly probable.

It is interesting to note in the 2008 Global Catastrophic Risk Conference survey, super-intelligent AI equates with molecular nanotechnology weapons for number one. In my view, molecular nanotechnology weapons and super-intelligent AI are two sides of the same coin. In fact, I judge that super-intelligent AI will be instrumental in developing molecular nanotechnology weapons. I also predict that humanity, in some form, will survive until the year 2100. However, I predict that will include both humans with strong artificially intelligent brain implants and organic humans (i.e., no brain implants to enhance their intelligence). However, each may have some artificially intelligent body parts.

Let me summarize. Based on the above information, it is reasonable to judge humanity will survive through the 21st century.

human extinction

Will Humanity Survive The 21st Century?

Examples of typical events that most people think could cause humanity’s extinction are a large asteroid impact or a volcanic eruption of sufficient magnitude to cause catastrophic climate change. Although possible, these events actually have a relatively low probability of occurring, in the order of one in fifty thousand or less, according to numerous estimates found via a simple Google search.

However, there are other events with higher probabilities that may cause human extinction. In 2008, experts surveyed at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford suggested a 19 percent chance of human extinction over this century, citing the top five most probable to cause human extinction by 2100 as:

  1. Molecular nanotechnology weapons (i.e., nanoweapons): 5 percent probability
  2. Superintelligent AI: 5 percent probability
  3. Wars: 4 percent probability
  4. Engineered pandemic: 2 percent probability
  5. Nuclear war: 1 percent probability

All other existential events were below 1 percent. There is a subtle point the survey does not explicitly express, namely, the risk of human extinction increases with time. You may wonder, Why? To answer this question, consider these examples:

  • Nanoweapons and superintelligence become more capable with the development of each successive generation. In the 2008 Global Catastrophic Risk Conference survey, superintelligent AI equates with molecular nanotechnology weapons as the number one potential cause of human extinction. In my view, molecular nanotechnology weapons and superintelligent AI are two sides of the same coin. In fact, I judge that superintelligent AI will be instrumental in developing molecular nanotechnology weapons.
  • In my new book, War At The Speed Of Light, I devoted a chapter on autonomous directed energy weapons. These are weapons that act on their own to take hostile action, resulting in unintended conflicts. Unfortunately, current autonomous weapons don’t embody human judgment. This being the case, wars, including nuclear wars, become more probable as more autonomous weapons are deployed.
  • Lastly, the world is currently facing a coronavirus pandemic. Although most researchers believe this is a naturally occurring pandemic, it still infected 121,382,067 people and caused 2,683,209 deaths to date on a worldwide basis. This suggests the death rate is a little over 2 percent. However, if the virus was more infectious and more deadly, it could render the Earth a barren wasteland. Unfortunately, that is what an engineered pandemic might do.

To my eye, the top five potential causes surfaced by the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference at the University of Oxford in 2008 are all possible, and the probabilities associated with them appear realistic. This means that humanity has a 19 percent chance of not surviving the 21st century on our current course.

In the next post, I will suggest measures humanity can take to increase the probability they will survive into the 22nd century.

A close-up of a rope tied in a detailed knot next to a knife on a brown surface.

Will the United States Use Nanoweapons to Topple the Kim Regime?

Nanoweapons are the next and most deadly generation of military weapons the world has ever encountered. In fact, they promise to be even more deadly than nuclear weapons. A cloud of secrecy has kept most people from even knowing they exist. Given this fact, let’s define nanoweapons. Nanoweapons are any military technology that exploits the power of nanotechnology. This begs a question, What is nanotechnology? According to the United States National Nanotechnology Initiative’s website, nano.gov, “Nanotechnology is science, engineering, and technology conducted at the nanoscale, which is about 1 to 100 nanometers.” In simple terms, the diameter of a typical human hair equals about 100,000 nanometers. Therefore, the largest nanotechnology is over a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a human hair. This means nanotechnology is invisible to the naked eye or even under an optical microscope.

North Korea’s leader, Kim Jung um, has already accused the United States of attempting to assassinate him using nanoweapons. In a 1,800 report issued on May 5, 2017, the North Korean state news agency KCNA said a “terrorist group” conspired with the CIA and South Korea’s Intelligence Service (IS) to assassinate its leader Kim Jong un using a “biochemical substances including radioactive substance and nano poisonous substance.” This report marks the second time the United States finds itself accused of using nanoweapons. Pravda, Russia’s state-run newspaper ran this headline on June 6, 2016: “US nano weapon killed Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, scientists say.” While both Russia and North Korea are widely known to issue fake news to support their political agendas, it is striking that they both mention the United States’ use of nanoweapons, specifically nano poisons.

 Is it true? It could be. The United States leads in the development of nanoweapons. Using nano poison to assassinate someone would be virtually untraceable. Unlike a conventional poison, it is nearly impossible to detect its use. What are nano poisons? A nano poison consists of toxic nanoparticles. Because of the size, less than a 100 nanometers in diameter, toxic nanoparticles are absorbed more readily than other known toxins. Nanoparticles are able to cross biological membranes and access cells, tissues, and organs that their larger counterparts cannot. Therefore, nano poisons are more deadly than their bulk counterparts are. Cancer-causing radioactive nanoparticles are particularly deadly and almost impossible to detect. Once a person ingests radioactive nanoparticles, they may die months or even years later, as was claimed regarding the death of Venezuela’s former president, Hugo Chavez.

Currently, the United States, China, and Russia are secretly spending billions of dollars to gain an asymmetrical advantage in nanoweapons. In 2000, the United States government launched the National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), a research and development initiative involving the nanotechnology-related activities of 25 Federal agencies with a range of research and regulatory roles and responsibilities. To date, the US has invested over $20 billion in NNI programs. NNI dedicates at least 20% of its budget to DOD programs. In addition, each branch of the US military has its own nanotechnology R&D facility. Nanoweapons are real. As I fully describe in my latest book, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity, the United States already secretly deploys them.

Nanoweapons are particularly attractive as military weapons since:

1. Unlike nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, no international treaties limit the development and deployment of nanoweapons or their use in warfare

2. Nanoweapons, for example toxic nanoparticles, have the potential to be weapons of mass destruction

3. Developing nanoweapons is less costly than developing nuclear weapons

4. Detecting nanoweapons manufacturing facilities is difficult

5. Detecting the source of a nanoweapons attack is difficult

Ironically, the next big thing in military weapons will be small and almost invisible, nanoweapons. The United States is the world nanoweapons leader. Therefore, it’s logical that they would use this capability to defend the homeland. If we learn that Kim Jung un is dying from cancer, similar to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, it may be the result of a nanoweapons attack. Science fiction? No! Science Fact.

Book cover titled 'Nanoweapons: Growing Threat to Humanity' by Louis A. Del Monte, featuring a small insect image.

AUSA Book Review of Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat To Humanity

The Association of the United States Army (AUSA) published this book review (for inclusion in the print version of their magazine). The full review is below and a link to the review is on the AUSA website at this URL: https://www.ausa.org/articles/august-2017-book-reviews

Here is the full review:

Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to HumanityLouis A. Del Monte. Potomac Books. 244 pages. $29.95

By Scott R. Gourley
Contributing Writer

There are times when a book best serves as the starting point for new discussions or to broaden existing discussions on military technology. Ominous title aside, Nanoweapons: A Growing Threat to Humanity fulfills the role of starting the discussion.

Drawing on three decades of experience as a physicist and business executive leading the development of microelectronics and sensors key to the integrated circuit industry, author Louis A. Del Monte presents a broad look at the emergence of nanotechnology—the science of manipulating materials on an atomic or molecular scale—and the potential implications of “nanoweapons” in future warfare.

In defining the technology, Del Monte offers the criteria used by the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative, which calls for only one dimension of the macroscale product to be in the nanoscale of 1 to 100 nanometers.

“This interpretation opens the door for numerous scientific fields to engage in nanotechnology research and application, including the fields of surface science, organic chemistry, molecular biology, semiconductor physics and microfabrication,” he says, noting that the multidisciplinary research category brings with it “unprecedented optimism and serious concerns.”

The concerns in this book are focused on what he asserts to be the weaponization of the technology and specifically the risk of losing control of those weapons.

After combing through the available open-source literature, the author makes projections about the research, the leading countries involved and what some of those research directions might be. Because of the limited amount of information on nanoweapons research he could uncover, the author asserts it is ongoing classified work and then relies on a level of supposition and conjecture to spotlight hypothetical nanoweapon threats like self-replicating smart nanobots, able to build copies of themselves from raw materials and operating in ways similar to biological viruses.

The rough time frame of 2050 is presented as a possibility for when two “technological singularities” may occur—first, a point when artificially intelligent machines exist that exceed the combined cognitive intelligence of humanity, and then a point when the self-replicating smart nanobots will “have completely changed every aspect of human existence” and “have the potential to render humanity extinct.”

While some readers might dismiss the resulting vignettes as a cross between Terminator and Star Trek, the presentations are based on intriguing open-source threads that the author weaves into an interesting fabric based on his experience with the rapid evolution of integrated circuits. Common supporting caveats include: “My insight suggests,” “speculation on my part,” and “based on publicly available information.”

Those looking for hard data on weapons will not find it in this book. In fact, the author’s commercial background results in occasionally confusing statements that overlook current military realities, such as: “Nanoelectronics and nanosensors have the capability to make artillery projectiles ‘smart,’ meaning that they will have properties that resemble guided missiles.”

However, the author’s insight is founded on a broad technology background and does include many thoughtful suggestions on how categories of nanoweapons could be regulated as extensions of existing arms agreements.

The strength of the book is in establishing awareness and either starting or expanding discussions on some of the issues surrounding the potential of nanoweapons. If the author’s 2050 timeline is correct, this issue is not far in the future. That time frame is more than a decade prior to the planned U.S. retirement of its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and likely a time when the Army will still employ upgraded models of many current combat systems.

Clearly, it’s not too soon to expand some of the discussion on the warfighting implications resulting from nanotechnology.