The Coming Wave

Imagine a world where a single person with a laptop could engineer a new pandemic, where artificial intelligence systems make decisions that no human can understand or control, and where the line between human and machine intelligence becomes increasingly blurred. This isn't science fiction—it's the trajectory we're already on as two revolutionary technologies converge to create what experts call "the coming wave." Artificial intelligence and synthetic biology are advancing at exponential rates, promising to solve humanity's greatest challenges while simultaneously creating risks that could threaten our very existence.

This technological tsunami represents more than just faster computers or better medicines. We're witnessing the emergence of technologies that can replicate and surpass human intelligence while giving us the power to redesign life itself. Throughout this exploration, you'll discover why these technologies are fundamentally different from anything humanity has faced before, how they're already reshaping the balance of power between individuals and institutions, and why the choices we make in the next decade will determine whether these tools become humanity's greatest achievement or its final mistake. The question isn't whether this wave will arrive—it's already here—but whether we can learn to surf it without being swept away.

The coming wave of artificial intelligence and biotechnology is powered by four fundamental characteristics that make it unlike any technological revolution in human history. These forces explain why these technologies spread so rapidly, why they're so difficult to control, and why they represent both unprecedented opportunities and existential risks for humanity.

The first force is asymmetry, which describes how small actors can now wield disproportionately large power. In Ukraine, a handful of drone operators using consumer-grade equipment successfully disrupted massive Russian military convoys, demonstrating how emerging technologies can level playing fields in ways that were previously impossible. A single AI system can generate as much text as thousands of human writers combined. One person with access to synthetic biology tools could theoretically create pathogens more dangerous than anything found in nature. This represents a fundamental shift from traditional power structures, where destructive capabilities were concentrated in the hands of nation-states with enormous resources.

The second characteristic is hyper-evolution, the breakneck pace at which these technologies improve and spread. While Moore's Law described the doubling of computer processing power every two years, we're now seeing capabilities in AI advance at even faster rates. The amount of computation used to train the most powerful AI models has increased by nine orders of magnitude in just a decade. Similarly, the cost of sequencing a human genome plummeted from $3 billion to under $1,000 in two decades, following what scientists call "Carlson's curve." What once required teams of experts and millions of dollars can now be accomplished by graduate students with access to cloud computing services.

Multi-use technology represents the third force, referring to how the same breakthrough can serve both beneficial and harmful purposes. The CRISPR gene-editing system that can cure genetic diseases can also create biological weapons. AI systems designed for cybersecurity can be repurposed for cyberattacks. Unlike nuclear weapons, which have a singular destructive purpose, these technologies blur the line between helpful tools and dangerous weapons, making it nearly impossible to ban harmful applications without also restricting beneficial uses.

The fourth and perhaps most unsettling characteristic is autonomy. These technologies increasingly operate without human oversight, making decisions and taking actions independently. AI systems are already making financial trades, controlling industrial processes, and even modifying their own code. Synthetic organisms can evolve and reproduce beyond their original programming. This autonomy means that once released, these technologies may develop in ways their creators never intended or anticipated, potentially operating beyond human control or understanding.

The development of transformative technologies isn't driven by abstract scientific curiosity alone, but by powerful incentives that operate at multiple levels, creating a momentum that seems virtually impossible to halt. These driving forces range from individual researchers seeking recognition to nations competing for geopolitical supremacy, forming a complex web of motivations that accelerates technological development regardless of potential risks.

Geopolitical competition provides perhaps the strongest driving force behind the technological race. When China's president Xi Jinping declared that artificial intelligence would determine which nation "rules the world," he crystallized what many leaders already understood: technological superiority has become synonymous with national power in the 21st century. The United States responded with massive investments in AI research through initiatives like the National AI Initiative, while China poured resources into quantum computing, surveillance technologies, and biotechnology. This creates a classic security dilemma where no nation can afford to fall behind, regardless of the risks involved, because the costs of technological inferiority could be existential.

The profit motive adds another layer of unstoppable momentum to technological development. Technology companies aren't just competing for market share; they're racing toward potentially trillion-dollar markets that could reshape entire economies. McKinsey estimates that AI alone could add $13 trillion to global economic output by 2030, while the biotechnology market is projected to reach $2.4 trillion by 2028. When the stakes are this high, the pressure to move fast and take risks becomes overwhelming. Companies that pause to consider safety implications risk being overtaken by competitors who prioritize speed over caution, creating a "race to the bottom" in terms of safety standards.

Scientific culture itself contributes to this acceleration through what researchers call the "openness imperative." The tradition of sharing research findings, which has driven scientific progress for centuries, now means that dangerous discoveries spread rapidly across the globe. When researchers publish papers on creating deadly viruses, developing new AI capabilities, or engineering biological weapons, they're simultaneously educating potential bad actors. Yet the scientific community remains reluctant to abandon openness, viewing it as fundamental to progress and innovation. This creates a tension between the benefits of open science and the risks of proliferating dangerous knowledge.

Perhaps most troubling is how these incentives reinforce each other in a self-perpetuating cycle. Geopolitical competition drives government funding, which attracts private investment, which accelerates research, which creates new capabilities that intensify competition. This feedback loop has created what experts describe as an "arms race" mentality, where the perceived costs of falling behind outweigh the risks of moving too fast. Breaking this cycle requires unprecedented international cooperation at precisely the moment when global tensions are rising and trust between nations is declining.

Modern democratic societies, despite their apparent stability and resilience, rest on surprisingly fragile foundations that new technologies are systematically undermining. These "fragility amplifiers" don't destroy institutions overnight but gradually erode the trust, shared reality, and effective governance that democracy requires to function, creating vulnerabilities that could be exploited by malicious actors or lead to systemic collapse.

The most visible threat comes from the weaponization of information through sophisticated manipulation technologies. Deepfake technology now allows anyone with modest technical skills to create convincing videos of political leaders saying or doing things they never did. During India's 2020 election, a political party used deepfake technology to have their candidate "speak" in languages he didn't know, addressing voters in their native tongues. While this particular use was relatively benign, the same technology enables the creation of false evidence that could swing elections, justify military actions, or destroy reputations. When citizens can no longer distinguish between authentic and fabricated content, the shared reality that democratic discourse requires begins to disintegrate.

Cyberattacks represent another critical vulnerability that threatens the infrastructure upon which modern societies depend. The WannaCry ransomware attack in 2017 crippled Britain's National Health Service, forcing hospitals to cancel surgeries and turn away patients. The attack used tools originally developed by the U.S. National Security Agency, highlighting how even defensive cybersecurity research can be turned against the societies it was meant to protect. As our infrastructure becomes increasingly digital and interconnected, these vulnerabilities multiply exponentially, creating potential single points of failure that could bring down entire systems.

Perhaps most insidiously, these technologies are reshaping the nature of power itself in ways that favor authoritarian control over democratic governance. Artificial intelligence enables surveillance capabilities that would make totalitarian regimes of the past envious. China's "Sharp Eyes" program uses AI-powered cameras to monitor its population continuously, while algorithms analyze behavior patterns to predict and prevent dissent before it occurs. Even democratic nations are adopting similar technologies, often with the best intentions of preventing terrorism or crime, but creating infrastructure that could easily be repurposed by authoritarian leaders who gain power through democratic means.

The economic disruption caused by automation adds another layer of instability to democratic societies. As AI systems become capable of performing increasingly complex tasks, they threaten not just factory jobs but white-collar professions that form the backbone of the middle class. Economists estimate that up to 40% of current jobs could be automated within two decades, potentially displacing hundreds of millions of workers. History shows that rapid economic displacement often leads to political upheaval, as displaced workers seek radical solutions to their problems and become susceptible to populist appeals that blame scapegoats rather than addressing underlying technological changes.

The central challenge of our technological age lies in learning to contain revolutionary technologies without stifling their beneficial potential, a problem that is fundamentally different from previous efforts to control dangerous technologies. This "containment problem" is complicated by the fact that AI and biotechnology are both incredibly useful and potentially catastrophic, making simple prohibition impossible while traditional regulatory approaches prove inadequate for technologies that evolve faster than laws can be written.

Historical attempts at technological containment offer both hope and sobering lessons about the difficulty of controlling powerful technologies once they emerge. The international community successfully banned chlorofluorocarbons that were destroying the ozone layer, but only because effective substitutes existed and the economic costs of transition were manageable. Nuclear weapons proliferation has been partially contained through treaties like the Non-Proliferation Treaty and international monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency, yet nine nations now possess these weapons, and the system remains fragile as new technologies make nuclear weapons easier to develop. The challenge with AI and biotechnology is that they're not single-purpose weapons but general-purpose technologies with countless beneficial applications that make blanket bans politically and economically impossible.

The unique characteristics of these technologies make containment extraordinarily difficult using traditional approaches. Their dual-use nature means that the same research that could cure cancer might also enable biological weapons, making it impossible to ban the dangerous applications without also restricting beneficial uses. Their rapid evolution means that regulations become obsolete almost as soon as they're written, as new capabilities emerge monthly or even weekly. Their digital nature allows them to spread instantly across borders through the internet, making national-level controls ineffective in a globally connected world. Most challenging of all, their increasing autonomy means they may eventually operate beyond human oversight entirely, making containment a race against time.

Effective containment requires a fundamentally new approach that operates simultaneously at multiple levels and adapts to the unique properties of these technologies. Technical solutions include building safety measures directly into AI systems, such as "off switches" that allow humans to shut down systems that begin behaving unpredictably, and creating secure laboratories for dangerous biological research that prevent accidental releases. Regulatory approaches involve developing international treaties specifically designed for dual-use technologies and creating licensing systems for the most powerful capabilities, similar to how we regulate nuclear materials or dangerous chemicals.

Cultural changes prove equally important, requiring the scientific and technology communities to embrace a new ethic of responsibility that prioritizes safety alongside innovation. This means moving away from a "move fast and break things" mentality toward one that considers potential consequences before releasing research or deploying systems. Economic incentives must be restructured to align profit motives with responsible development, possibly through new corporate structures that legally require companies to consider social impact alongside shareholder returns. The goal isn't to stop technological progress but to ensure it unfolds in ways that benefit humanity rather than threatening our survival, requiring what experts call "walking the narrow path" between the extremes of reckless innovation and paralyzing precaution.

Creating effective governance for transformative technologies requires a comprehensive approach that addresses technical, economic, political, and cultural dimensions simultaneously. Rather than relying on any single solution, experts have developed a ten-step framework that builds multiple layers of protection and guidance around the development and deployment of powerful technologies, recognizing that no single measure can adequately address the complex challenges these technologies present.

The foundation begins with dramatically expanding technical safety research, which remains severely underfunded relative to the technologies it seeks to govern. While billions of dollars flow into AI development and biotechnology research, only a few hundred researchers worldwide focus specifically on AI safety, and even fewer work on biosafety for emerging biotechnologies. This imbalance must be corrected through what some experts call an "Apollo program" for safety research, requiring companies to dedicate substantial portions of their research budgets to understanding and preventing harmful outcomes. Technical solutions include building "interpretability" tools that help humans understand how AI systems make decisions, developing secure laboratories for dangerous biological research with multiple containment barriers, and creating "circuit breakers" that can halt automated systems when they begin operating outside safe parameters.

Governance mechanisms form the next crucial layer, starting with comprehensive auditing systems that can verify whether technologies are operating safely and as intended. This includes "red teaming" exercises where researchers deliberately try to break systems to discover vulnerabilities, similar to how cybersecurity experts test computer networks. International monitoring bodies, similar to those that oversee nuclear technology, could track the development of the most powerful AI systems and biological research. Choke point controls can slow dangerous developments by restricting access to critical components like advanced computer chips needed for training large AI models or specialized equipment required for DNA synthesis.

The human element proves equally crucial to effective governance. Developers and researchers must embrace a culture of responsibility that prioritizes safety over speed and considers potential consequences before releasing research or deploying systems. This cultural shift requires fundamental changes in how scientists and engineers are trained and rewarded, moving away from a "publish first, ask questions later" mentality toward one that builds in safety considerations from the beginning. Professional organizations could establish codes of ethics similar to those in medicine or engineering, with real consequences for violations.

Political and economic reforms complete the framework by addressing the structural incentives that drive reckless development. Governments need much stronger technical expertise and regulatory capabilities, including agencies staffed by people who understand both the technical details and broader implications of emerging technologies. International cooperation becomes essential for technologies that cross borders instantly, requiring new treaties and agreements that can adapt to rapid technological change. New business models must align profit incentives with safety goals, possibly through benefit corporation structures that legally require companies to consider social impact alongside shareholder returns, and public engagement ensures that these powerful technologies serve society's broader interests rather than just those of their creators.

The convergence of artificial intelligence and biotechnology represents a technological revolution that will reshape human civilization more profoundly than any previous wave of innovation, driven by four fundamental forces that make these technologies both incredibly powerful and extraordinarily difficult to control. Unlike past technological advances that unfolded over generations, this transformation is happening at unprecedented speed, powered by unstoppable incentives ranging from geopolitical competition to scientific curiosity, while simultaneously undermining the democratic institutions and social structures that have maintained stability for centuries.

The path forward requires abandoning the naive belief that technology will automatically benefit humanity or that market forces alone will guide development in positive directions. Instead, we must actively shape these technologies through comprehensive governance frameworks that balance innovation with safety, democracy with security, and global cooperation with national interests. The choices we make in the next decade about how to develop and deploy AI and biotechnology will echo through centuries, determining whether these tools become instruments of human flourishing or sources of unprecedented risk. How will you contribute to ensuring that the most powerful technologies in human history serve humanity's best interests rather than threatening our survival?