Post-Human Trilogy

POST-HUMAN

TRILOGY
BY

DAVID SIMPSON

A message for you from the author:

Hi! Thank you so much for reading my book! I hope you enjoy it. It is always an honor when someone takes the time to read one of my novels and I feel humbled and thankful. I owe you one! If you do enjoy the book, please remember to tell a friend or two (or two thousand) about it. Best of all is a positive review on Amazon.com. At this stage in my writing career, word of mouth is better than gold and is the best way for me to reach a large audience and achieve my dream of writing full time one day soon.

I want to be available and interactive with my readers, so you can actually
friend me on Facebook
, “like” the
Facebook page
for
Post-Human
, read my blog,
follow me on Twitter
, or check out my
website
. I’m also on
goodreads.com
and love to hear from readers and correspond with them about their experiences with my books.

So, thanks again, and hopefully, this will be the beginning of a long, rewarding, and beautiful relationship between reader and author.

Yours,

David Simpson

SUB-HUMAN

Sub-Human

Copyright (c) 2012 David Simpson

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

This is a work of fiction. All of the characters, names, incidents, organizations, and dialogue in this novel are either the products of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any Web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author.

Acknowledgements

Thank you to my editor, Autumn J. Conley, for being so thorough, creative, and awesome.

Thanks also to my beta readers, Curtis Hox (the awesome pro), Patrick Weddell (my technical advisor), Matthew Drummey (my gracious reader), and Jeremiah Wood (my military expert).

Thank you also to Sandra and Brian Degrechie, Melanie Klein, Aria Cheng, Sanha Cho, Daniel Lee, and Lisa Kelly-Wilson for allowing me the use of their names.

Thank you to the hundreds of supportive readers who have taken time out of their busy lives to leave positive reviews on Amazon. I owe so much to you. Thank you also to the tens of thousands of people who have downloaded copies of this series in the last few months. I’m blown away.  

And lastly, thank you to my wife, Jennifer, who makes these books possible. I can’t believe how much work you put into them and how incredible your support is. You’re the coolest woman in the universe, and all other universes too!

Prologue

Interviewer:
With us is presumptive Presidential nominee, Senator Morgan, for his first major interview since sweeping the Super Tuesday primary contests less than twenty-four hours ago. Congratulations on your victories, Senator and for locking down the nomination so quickly.

Morgan:
Thank you very much, Anderson.

Interviewer:
Now that your opponents have suspended their campaigns, are you surprised at all with how quickly you’ve managed to dispatch your competition? You were, after all, facing two candidates that were far better funded than yourself throughout most of the early primary season. Yet here we are in the middle of March, and you’re already uncontested and headed for the general election.

Morgan
: I’m not surprised at all, actually, given that the stakes were so high. The choice was crystal clear for voters, and they resoundingly chose to cherish and protect human life. No amount of funding would have been enough to confuse the issue for the American people in the primaries, and no amount of funding will be enough to confuse it for them in the general election either.

Interviewer
: By ‘protecting human life,’ you are, of course, referring to your signature issue—that being that you want to outlaw what is known as
strong artificial intelligence
.

Morgan
: It’s not just
my
signature issue—it’s
the
most important issue in the history of our species. It’s about species dominance—

Interviewer
: And the ‘history of our species’ is 6,000 years? Since Adam and Eve?

Morgan
: Listen, Anderson, I’m not going to play that game. This is too important—

Interviewer
: I’m just trying to clarify—

Morgan
: No, you’re not. You’re doing a hit job on me, as I knew you would.

Interviewer
: I’m just clarifying—

Morgan
: You’re doing a hit job for the incumbent—the President of the United States—as I expected.

Interviewer
: Senator, you said during the primaries that you believed in Adam and Eve—

Morgan
: I’m not going to be debating theology or my personal religious beliefs with you, Anderson. I am not taking that bait. What I am going to do is voice the concerns of the majority of Americans, whether your friend the President likes it or not.

Interviewer
: I cannot deny, Senator Morgan, that you have voiced the concerns of about half the American electorate. Stats have shown that 47 percent of Americans say they strongly oppose the development of strong A.I., which is part of why you were able to use your unofficial status as the head of the
Purist
movement in the United States to beat back your better-funded opponents.

Morgan
: The Purist movement is bigger than any one man.

Interviewer
: Well, it may be bigger than you, sir, but you must admit that it was your wedge issue.

Morgan
: You think you’re so clever, don’t you?

Interviewer
: Excuse me?

Morgan
: You do. Admit it. You ask me questions and smirk away, but you have no idea what’s coming. You and your pseudo-intellectual establishment. The people of this country know what’s coming. They know the choice that they have in this election. That’s why I accepted the invitation to be here today. No amount of personal character assassination against me is going to confuse this issue in the minds of the American public.

Interviewer
: Okay, so let’s discuss the issue at hand, then.

Morgan
: All right.

Interviewer
: It’s your position that the United States should use its power within the new Democratic Union to push for a ban on artificial intelligence worldwide, correct?

Morgan:
Let’s be crystal clear, because this is a crucial point.

Interviewer:
Okay.

Morgan:
It’s
not
my position that we should use our power to
push
for a ban—it’s my position that we should use our power to
insist
on a ban. And I am not personally against the development of artificial intelligence. A.I. is all around us—

Interviewer:
Yes, I was going to ask you about your own personal use—

Morgan:
I’m not against artificial intelligence. What I’m against is
strong
A.I. I am against artificial intelligence that is capable of passing the
Turing test
and that has the potential to become infinitely more intelligent than human beings.

Interviewer:
But, Senator, A.I. is already stronger than us at most types of thinking—

Morgan:
Most types of thinking? I don’t know where you’re getting your information, Anderson, but that’s simply not true.

Interviewer:
Okay—many types of thinking—is that a fair statement?

Morgan:
It’s faster, sure.

Interviewer:
So, if computers have already surpassed us in many respects, isn’t the Turing test an anthropocentric and, therefore, irrelevant way of evaluating—

Morgan:
No, it’s not. The Turing test determines whether or not a computer is conscious. That’s the whole point of it.

Interviewer:
Don’t you think that might be debatable?

Morgan:
We don’t have time for that type of academic debate.

Interviewer:
No time for debate, Senator?

Morgan:
The Turing test is the only agreed-upon—

Interviewer:
No time for debate in a democracy?

Morgan:
Let me finish. The Turing test is the only agreed-upon test in which all parties agree that, when a computer passes it, that computer will have reached human levels in all respects. We won’t have any cognitive advantages over a machine like that—we’ll be demoted to the second-smartest species on the planet. Like the dolphins. Ask them how that worked out for them.

Interviewer:
So your position is that the United States will unilaterally decide to ban artificial intelligence if you’re elected president?

Morgan:
I never said that.

Interviewer:
You said the United States should insist on a ban.

Morgan:
We should.

Interviewer:
The rest of the Democratic Union doesn’t agree with that position.

Morgan:
That’s not true.

Interviewer:
It is true, Senator—

Morgan:
No, it’s not. Sure, there are countries within the D.U. that disagree, and we’ll negotiate with those countries—

Interviewer:
You said “insist.”

Morgan:
The United States has the most influence of any D.U. nation. If we take a moral stand, I have full confidence that the D.U. will follow our lead.

Interviewer:
Even if that’s true, China will never agree to abandon—

Morgan:
I don’t know about that.

Interviewer:
They have openly stated their position that they will continue developing strong A.I., regardless of the D.U. position on the matter.

Morgan:
As President, I will not let China threaten us—

Interviewer:
They’ve issued no threat, Senator.

Morgan:
Yes they have. If they develop strong A.I., not only will that threaten international security, but it will also threaten our species.

Interviewer:
How have they threatened international security?

Morgan:
A strong A.I. would quickly be able to find a way around our defenses. That’s why they want to develop it in the first place—to threaten us.

Interviewer:
With all due respect, Senator, aren’t you the one who’s issuing threats?

Morgan:
Absolutely not, Anderson. I’m simply doing what the American people expect me to do—defending humanity from an existential threat.

Interviewer:
Isn’t this—

Morgan:
I’m glad you find this amusing.

Interviewer:
I’m sorry, but aren’t you being a little dramatic?

Morgan
: I don’t find the security of the American people and the security of the people of the Democratic Union funny, Anderson. I take it very seriously. If your friend, the President, were to take it seriously, he’d back me up and insist on a comprehensive, strong A.I. ban.

Interviewer:
Let’s talk about that proposed ban. The election is almost eight months away, Senator, and even if you win, you won’t take office until January of next year. Meanwhile, IBM already has a working simulation of the human brain. Some experts are saying now that this simulated brain might be able to pass the Turing test before the end of the next President’s first term. How do you intend to implement measures draconian enough to stop multinational companies from following through on the development of these technologies?

Morgan:
By any means necessary.

Interviewer:
Excuse me, Senator, but I am a bit taken aback. Isn’t that the kind of talk that has caused some people to label you as an extremist?

Morgan:
Your network has labeled me as an extremist. The American people haven’t.

Interviewer:
Senator, I resent that. We’ve always been fair—

Morgan:
Fair? The man who owns your network has donated to the President’s campaign already, has he not?

Interviewer:
He has. Full disclosure for our viewers. That’s true.

Morgan:
He’s got his toes dipped in every major technology company there is.

Interviewer:
That’s an unfair generalization—

Morgan:
It’s worse than selling his soul. If he just sold his soul, so be it. He’d burn in Hell. Serves him right. But this is worse than that. He’s selling out his species. He’d end humanity. He’d see a world that is
post-human
, as long as he lived to see it inside a computer—

Interviewer:
Senator Morgan—

Morgan:
He’s not just a traitor to America—

Interviewer:
This is really—

Morgan:
He’s a traitor to the species—to his own species!

Interviewer:
Senator Morgan? Please—okay. Senator Morgan has walked out on the interview. He’s certainly started the general election campaign with a bang, that’s for sure. We’ll see how voters respond. A fiery outburst of a self-proclaimed Purist, or the extremism of a fanatic? The American voters will decide in November.