If it breeds, mutates and consumes resources, then it's a threat. Tim Dean thinks your Aibo may be more sinister than it looks.
For all its potency and significance in determining the way we are, natural selection is a gloriously simple concept. All it needs to work are a few straightforward prerequisites - that of reproduction, heredity of traits, the capacity for change of traits, limited environmental resources, and the concept of 'fitness' or suitability of an entity to the environment.
Notice I haven't mentioned biology or organisms so far. This is because the principle of natural selection is not restricted to flesh and blood evolution that it's normally applied to -- it can be applied with equal suitability to anything else that meets these prerequisites. In fact, natural selection operates on a vast range of features of our world, both physical and mental. From determining the colouration of the peppered moth's wings, to the success in the market of a particular product, to the alacrity of a meme making its way through our cultural consciousness, to a baby's ability to learn how to pick up an object - all these things are guided by the forces of natural selection.
Interestingly, one area where natural selection has regressed in its powers is the evolution of the human species -- well, at least in the last several thousand years. Through the inherent plasticity and flexibility of our minds, as well as our capacity to communicate and share cultural traits that improve an individual's fitness, we are not as bound to the harsh dictates of natural selection. That's not to say we're not still evolving - in fact there are some interesting studies that indicate the new breed (no pun intended) of cosmopolitan westerners who mate at a late age, and only have one offspring, may slowly work their genetic traits out of the common gene pool - and this is significant if there are any unique hereditary genetic traits they might take with them.
In any case, while it's a fallacy to say humans are the most evolved organisms on Earth, it's clear humans are one of the most successful. We're at the top of the tree, so to speak - even though it took us to descend out of the tree to get there.
One reason we're still at the top of the food chain is that we're essentially unchallenged by any other organism for that position - except, of course, other humans.
However, we may find ourselves in a very different situation before we know it - we may find we're suddenly confronted with competition, and we may have to face the prospect of not being the winners in that particular battle. The thing is, if this particular vision I have in mind comes to pass, it will be entirely our fault.
I'm talking about that theme that has been relentlessly exploited by hyperbolic movie producers for decades - the threat of artificial intelligence. Interestingly, it may be this very proliferation of man vs machine stories that has weakened our appreciation of the real dangers of AI - a classic case of the boy who cried wolf, combined with our dismissal of science fiction as typically being flights of fancy concocted by crazy geeks with wild hair, thick glasses and poor hygiene.
In fact, the dangers of AI are very real - although things are not at DEFCON 1 quite yet. There are a few key pieces of the puzzle that need to be put in place (by us, that is) before we get Terminators blundering around looking for Sarah Conner. These pieces are the ones that would fit AI into the providence of natural selection. If we do manage to create an AI that can self replicate, can vary its progeny, and that competes with us for resources, then it's all on for young and old.
Even if we manage to somehow enforce Asimov's laws of robotics, there's no guarantee these features won't just get rejected in a subsequent generation of the self replicating machines.
This all might sound a bit far fetched, but there are some notable individuals speaking out now in the hope of increasing awareness of this issue, so that we might have the opportunity to head off the danger before it happens. In 2001 Steven Hawking, talking about the power of computers, said 'the danger is real that they could develop intelligence and take over the world.'
Sun's famous chief scientist, Bill Joy, has also spoken out against the potential dangers of technology in general, due to its pace of development, and the question of whether we humans are able to keep up and make sure it doesn't steer off into the wrong direction.
So, I would encourage you to take the possibility of the threat seriously, although you don't need to go digging your bunker and learning kung fu quite yet. And you can also refrain from destroying computer labs in the middle of the night. As long as we don't develop a machine that fits into the natural selection picture as stated above, we should be safe. At least, until some crazy scientist creates an unholy army of super-cybernaughts - but I'll leave that for another column.