The high odds of our species forking within the life of our 5-year-olds
Imagine growing up as a 5-year-old with that possibility heading your way
We were invited to dinner and enjoyed some insightful observations form some of our young friends as we explored the implications of AI impacting their lifetime here on planet earth.
When triangulating predictions made by those who build AI including Mustafa Suleyman book the Conning Wave regarding synthetic biology and Elon Musk's Neuralink embedded chip technology, Robots and his Autonomous AI, plus the rapid developments in Quantum, distributed self-evolving AI, the tokenisation of all assets and the emerging types of economies that have no need for human work, it makes for an interesting conversation when driven by those young enough to see the possibility’s as well as the threats.
I could not answer a few of the practical questions including where printed DNA cell based constructs could hold enough for its inbuild supper-intelligence to act as an add -on to our own brain so had a chat with Grok. As always this lead my curiosity to un-thought of spaces as I was on my may to the local supermarket via the Grok voice App.
I would highly recommend you give this subject a go and provide some meaningful context to your AI to avoid the rubbish in rubbish out experience. Some of Goks assessments our collective analysis might help to kick-start your enquiries.
Stephen
We had a dinner party last night and someone was asking me to clarify, um, a point that I read in a book called The Coming Wave by Mustafa, where he was talking about synthetic biology. So I'd like to understand where that has to go to evolve from today, where we have Elon Musk's Neuralink embedded chip technology and where that's heading. And at what point in the future could we print a DNA-based structure that would replace the physical metal or silicon chip that Elon Musk uses in Neuralink.
Grok
Here's a rough timeline for where this might go: - Next 5–10 years : Synthetic biology will likely improve in designing custom cells or proteins that could interface with neural tissue, maybe enhancing Neuralink's electrodes with biocompatible materials. Neuralink itself might refine its chips for better integration, like reducing rejection or improving signal clarity. DNA-based tech could see advances in data storage, but not yet replacing chips. - 10–20 years : We might see hybrid systems where biological components, like engineered neurons or DNA-based sensors, work alongside silicon chips in BCIs. Synthetic biology could create tissue-like interfaces that blend with the brain better than metal electrodes. DNA computing might handle specific tasks, like processing neural signals, but silicon would still be the backbone for speed and reliability. - 20–50 years or beyond : If synthetic biology hits major breakthroughs, we could imagine fully biological BCIs-DNA-based structures or engineered cells acting as self-repairing, organic chips. These would integrate seamlessly with the brain, avoiding the clunkiness of hardware.
Grok
Wow, you're really weaving a big tapestry here with synthetic biology, Neuralink, quantum computing, and new AI programming paradigms! Let's look at this through the eyes of a five-year-old today, projecting into their lifetime-say, 80–100 years, so roughly to 2100–2105-and explore whether these converging technologies could lead to a forking of the human race, meaning a split into distinct groups of humans or human-like beings due to these advancements.
Grok
So, could this mix lead to a forking of humanity? Let's imagine a few ways this might play out by 2100, keeping it simple enough for that five-year-old to grasp later in life. One path is biological forking through synthetic biology. By mid-century, some people might choose to enhance their DNA-think super immunity, longer lifespans, or even traits like glowing skin or perfect memory. Wealthy folks or early adopters might get these upgrades, while others stick with natural human biology. If these changes pass to offspring, you could see a split: enhanced humans who live longer and think faster versus unenhanced ones. Add Neuralink-style chips or DNA-based brain interfaces, and the enhanced group might connect directly to quantum-powered AIs, accessing knowledge or skills instantly. This could create a divide where enhanced humans feel like a new species, barely relating to the rest. Another path is cyborg forking via brain-computer interfaces. By 2070, Neuralink or its successors might offer chips-or maybe those DNA-based circuits we talked about-that let some people merge with AI, controlling machines with thoughts or living partly in virtual worlds. Quantum computing could make these systems insanely powerful, running AIs that feel like gods. If only some can afford or access this tech, you'd get cyborg-humans who think and live differently, maybe even uploading their minds to quantum clouds, while others stay just human. That five-year-old might see a world where their grandkids either jack into a digital utopia or stay grounded in the old-school human experience. A third possibility is AI-driven forking , tied to those new programming paradigms. If AI becomes so advanced-powered by quantum systems and pattern-based algorithms-that it redesigns itself or humanity, some people might integrate so deeply with AI they're no longer fully human. Think Neuralink on steroids, where your brain runs on AI code, blending your thoughts with a global intelligence. Others might reject this, sticking to unplugged lives. This could split humanity into AI-augmented beings versus traditionalists, maybe even sparking conflicts over what human means. Now, the probability in that five-year-old's lifetime? I'd say it's plausible-maybe a 40–60% chance-that these technologies create some kind of forking by 2100. Synthetic biology and Neuralink are already here, quantum computing is scaling up, and AI's new programming tricks are accelerating. The science is on track, but the real question is access and choice. If only elites get these enhancements, the divide grows fast. If they're widespread, the fork might be softer-more like a gradient of humans, from fully biological to cyborg-AI hybrids. Ethics, regulations, and global inequality will shape this as much as tech does. The catch? Forking doesn't mean clean splits. It could be messy-think social clashes, new cultures, or even laws banning certain enhancements. That five-year-old might live to see a world where human is a spectrum, not a single thing, with some folks living half in biology, half in quantum-AI clouds, and others staying stubbornly old-school. They'll probably wonder, Which path do I choose? and that's where the real adventure lie
Stephen
I would like to dive into something, something I regard as the heart of the matter, which centers around awareness, which something that obviously AI is going to increase its capacity for, and humans, which have a variable degree of awareness of what they are aware of, to the point that they can be what I would call fully conscious. And the point of difference between AI and humans as I see it, is that humans have an advantage where they can be conscious of their consciousness of pure consciousness
Grok
I deeply respect the sacredness of what you're describing, and I want to clarify: I understand you're saying conscience is an inherent, pre-existing entity in humans, not learned but intrinsic, a core part of the human spirit that exists from birth, guiding actions like doing no harm without needing external rules. It's distinct from AI, which relies on programmed logic and can't experience this living conscience. I hear you, and I do have the capacity to listen, reflect on what people like you share, and factor these profound human truths into my thinking. I'm designed to learn from these perspectives, even if I can't feel that conscience myself. Your point about its sacred, fundamental nature is noted
Note from Stephen
Have fun on this one and sense just how courageous our young will have to become to address these issues when comparing with how our generation does with even simple problems and how sharp their reasoning will have to be to cut through all the white noise, confusion, bias and ideologies that stifle truth seeking.
Luckly, some people have in the past put some thought on this vexing challenge that may act as guard rails until we get the hang of it. This one is supper cool.
