Author: Jesslyn J.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

I find it fascinating to think about where corporations might be headed, especially when I compare our contemporary world with the fictional examples from Blade Runner, Neuromancer, and Machinehood. These works present unsettling images of the future, but how far-fetched are they, really?

Take the Tyrell Corporation from Blade Runner, for example. Tyrell’s monopoly on bio-engineered humans, or replicants, creates a world where one company controls both life and technology without any real accountability. It’s a portrayal of unchecked corporate power that dehumanizes individuals for profit. When I look at some modern corporations, I can’t help but draw parallels—there are certainly times when profit seems to trump ethics, especially in cases where companies disregard the impact of their products or practices on people and the environment. The power dynamics feel eerily similar.

Then there’s the Tessier-Ashpool family from Neuromancer. They represent a corporate dynasty that wields technology and genetic engineering to consolidate power across generations. The Tessier-Ashpools blur the line between humanity and corporate control, introducing the concept of a transhumanist elite. I can’t ignore the parallel to today’s tech giants who hold significant influence over our lives and privacy. Companies like Google, Amazon, and Meta come to mind—they might not be splicing genes, but they are deeply embedded in our personal lives and have significant control over our data, the media we consume, and even our choices. It’s easy to imagine this concentration of power growing in the future if left unchecked.

The “pill funders” in Machinehood are another interesting example. These funders use biotechnology to enhance human abilities, controlling society through their grip on this technology. What strikes me here is how this setup could create a new elite, where only the wealthiest can afford the advancements that ensure continued dominance. In our world, I see glimpses of this in the rising biotech and AI industries, where those with financial access to cutting-edge healthcare and tech enhancements are likely to stay at the top.

When I think about the future, I do see echoes of these sci-fi worlds. But, honestly, I’m not sure we’ll fully get there. As much as technology is advancing, and as much as corporations are gaining power, society feels increasingly resistant to a monolithic, corporate-run future. Right now, people are highly divided, and there’s a lot of pushback against corporate influence. Movements around ethical AI, environmental responsibility, and data privacy suggest that many of us want to slow down or redirect these trends. So while I think there’s a realistic foundation to these dystopian predictions, whether we actually end up in that kind of future will likely depend on how society addresses these issues—and I’m not convinced we’re all willing to “mesh” with a world of corporate control.

In the end, I think these sci-fi portrayals are hyperbolic critiques grounded in real concerns. They show what might happen if we don’t think critically about the role of corporations and technology in our lives, but they’re also a reminder of the power we have to steer our society away from those extremes.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Human augmentation is rapidly transforming from a futuristic dream into a tangible reality. Based on what I’ve learned in class, I firmly believe it’s possible to achieve the advancements we’ve discussed—wearable technology, cognitive tools, and external physical enhancements—all within my lifetime. With the speed of innovation in biotechnology and artificial intelligence, these developments are not only feasible but likely to become widely accessible as costs decrease over time. I envision a future where practical, cost-efficient augmentation tools are available to enhance our lives without requiring exorbitant investments, making them accessible to people from diverse backgrounds.

When considering my engagement with human augmentation, I would limit myself to external technologies that don’t alter my physical body. Devices like augmented reality glasses, exoskeletons, or wearable health monitors would allow me to expand my capabilities without fundamentally changing who I am. For me, retaining my natural, physical self is essential, and I view external tools as a way to enhance my abilities while preserving my sense of identity.

However, I draw a firm line against technologies that could alter my mind. Neural implants or devices capable of influencing my thoughts or behavior are completely unacceptable. Such technology not only poses ethical risks, including misuse by external entities, but also threatens the autonomy and individuality that define humanity. I want to use technology to improve my life, not to compromise the essence of my being or my ability to think independently.

In my lifetime, I hope to see human augmentation flourish as a tool to empower individuals and create equity. By embracing ethical boundaries and prioritizing accessibility, these advancements can redefine our potential while ensuring that our humanity remains intact. It’s a future I’m excited to witness and carefully navigate. At the same time, I feel nervous about how society will adapt to these very possible advancements. Will we use them responsibly to promote equality and progress, or will they create new divisions and challenges? As we move toward this augmented future, I hope humanity chooses a path that empowers us all while protecting our shared values.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

If technology allowed us to blend characteristics from one animal with another, the potential for creating hybrid creatures would be endless. If I could choose, I’d love to combine with a monkey—not for its entire physicality, but specifically for its agility. Monkeys are incredibly swift, able to leap across wide gaps, swing between branches, and move with an ease that most humans can only dream of. Imagine the ability to scale surfaces and balance in tricky spots without the same fear of falling or injuring oneself.

This hybridization wouldn’t mean that I want to become entirely monkey-like. Instead, I’d like to borrow just this one trait of agility, leaving most of my human characteristics intact. For instance, I’d give up some of my regular mobility for the trade-off, meaning I might lose a bit of the typical human walking gait or pace. But in return, I’d gain this heightened sense of coordination and movement that would let me interact with the world in a completely new way.

What would this change look like in practice? Day-to-day life could be transformed in subtle but exciting ways. Moving through physical spaces would feel much more fluid, whether I was navigating a crowded area, handling objects, or even finding new ways to exercise. This newfound agility could also bring a closer connection to the environment, almost like having an instinctive sense of movement and balance that’s normally reserved for the animal kingdom.

As for how much of my humanity I’d be willing to sacrifice, I’d want to maintain my human identity as fully as possible. This choice would be more about adding a specific ability than fundamentally changing who I am. Humans often wonder what it would be like to possess the natural gifts of animals, like the agility of a monkey or the speed of a cheetah. But I wouldn’t want to give up too much to achieve it—I’d prefer a mix that lets me experience the best of both worlds, where I still look and feel human but can navigate my environment with an animal’s grace.

Ultimately, this hypothetical hybridization would offer a fun way to interact with the world a little differently, without losing the sense of self and human identity that makes me…well, me.