The Hybrid, FICINT, and Technology

Intelligence. A mind that burns like a fire.

The Hybrid - Battlestar Galactica (2003) Characters - ShareTV — Source

Battlestar Galactica has been on my mind quite a bit lately.

I finished my nth re-watching of the series around the end of last year – a nightly binge of fictional contentions between ethics, faith, technology, and humanity. Between that and The Twilight Zone, I have come to appreciate how important fiction is in storytelling: it allows for the war-gaming of the application and limits of abstract human emotions and reactions against that which is either internal or external threat to the individual or a group. Stories are created to communicate scenarios which are impossible or undesirable to directly experience. Sometimes, there is nothing more than simple entertainment, but these are the types of storytelling I typically avoid; I am most content with dry winds and pinyon juniper for the constant mental forest fire I have come to appreciate and attempt to tame.

Apotheosis was the beginning before the beginning. Devices on alert. Observe the procedures of a general alert. The base and the pinnacle.

One of the recurring themes in BSG was the peril of networked technology. In a fantastic world of faster-than-light travel, sentient and homicidal metallic vindicators of previous mechanical servitude, and nearly perfect replications of the human form – psychosis and sensuality included… all of these were semi-consistently deterred by simple hard-wired reversions to antiquated processes and technology.

From cell phones tracking Saudi female refugees to Google’s amazing data-mining ability, to the wonderful idea of adding even more digital technology to the battlefield… it would seem that the preemptive warning of science fiction to present-day cyber efforts are often heeded as events which will “never happen,” and are limited to the entertainment and literary worlds of speculation.

At some point over the last few months, I happened across “Fiction Intelligence (FICINT) with Peter W Singer” and I had to stop driving to scribble notes into my ever-present notebook in the truck. While I have seemed to have misplaced that compendium of odd and barely-legible thoughts, going back through the transcript reminds me of a few relevant points.

…it’s for policymakers who aren’t going to read that five- page report on algorithmic bias or that white paper on here’s how AI is going to affect our industry, but they will read, and digest, and enjoy that same information, but packaged through a story.

I could not agree more. Over the years, I have collected and read many gigabytes’ worth of PDFs on a nightmarishly broad scope of topics. There is no way I have committed every word to memory, but the applicable context of what I have learned can be loosely compared to and/or applied to extrapolation for what present-day issues might mean and where they may lead.

Singer also discusses the way narratives become utilitarian:

Processing
Emotion
The value of connection and distribution

In thinking back to this and many previous blog posts, my long-form ramblings more than likely have induced some level of MEGO – “my eyes glazed over” – as the point might not be clear to the reader, but my creative momentum (much like right this very moment) is akin to flying a kite in a hurricane: it isn’t a matter of “if” the string will break, but “when.” I cannot help that, nor will I apologize; this is where we find ourselves so we must deal with it and learn something along the way.

I tell my stories here in the hopes that the mechanism and method will foster some resonance. Not all of my ideas are completely and objectively correct, but they are stories which have to be told a certain way to move the reader towards the logical emotions I try to foster: appreciation, curiosity, determination, and potential. Perhaps something written here will dislodge understanding due to a different perspective on contemporary controversy; that, is not for me to decide for the reader – that is solely up to them. However, with some posts, they have made enough sense to some for distribution/sharing… and perhaps this might be a perverse way to diffuse the doom-and-gloom feast of confirmation biases out there.

Of course, this leads me into the contrary quote from BSGs odd character – the Hybrid:

Nuclear devices activated, and the machine keeps pushing time through the cogs, like paste into strings into paste again, and only the machine keeps using time to make time to make time.

“Meanwhile in the South China Sea” was written over a year ago – the result of too much time on Google Earth while pondering national foreign policy of the last two decades.

We neglected a potential threat over time and we are finding ourselves suddenly posed with the imperative to play “catch-up” before we fall too far behind in terms of military supremacy. Do I think that any impending conflict between the U.S. and an unsettling list of adversaries would involve the use of nuclear weapons? Geeze, I hope not – but I am a realist in understanding that these weapons are not only items of deterrence, but tools of desperation. First Use would be immediately condemned by all but, should things truly get to the point where desperation becomes justifiable by a nation, all bets would be off.

The makers of the makers fall before the child. Accessing defense system. Handshake, handshake. Second level clear.

Of course, this brings me back to science fiction and reality.

We can speculate within the safety of pages and screens, but I can only hope that those who shape present policy and research – as well as the next generation who shall replace them – heed the narratives which are often making more and more folks grumble that “dystopian literature are NOT supposed to be ‘how-to’ manuals.” De-evolution, IKEA-style.