The thin end of the wedge Where is our appetite for technology taking us?
Andrew P Binnie
Cover Image: Htp
FEATURES
002 In tech we trust
014 Social proof
A glimpse through the looking glass of Human Augmentation
The surprising truth about new ideas
004 Under my skin
017 Ascent
Advances in Medical Augmentation
Our Adoption Acceleration
006 The real bionic man
018 The only way is up
Eugene; entirely lab made, but more than a sum of his parts
Moore’s law and Desire
009 Build me up
020 Unnatural selection
Replacement Organs & Consumer Genomics
Social Darwinism & Survival of the Fittest
010 Ahead of the curve
022 Being human
Kevin Warwick and the Bio-hacker revolution
Change is inevitable, progress is not
012 You look familiar Learning from our history
In tech we trust A glimpse through the looking glass of Human Augmentation
I
n the twenty first century, our environment is saturated with visions of the future, from advertisements of the most current phones and tablets, to the latest Sci-fi blockbuster; selling the future is big business. It seems we have an insatiable appetite for keeping up to date with tomorrow’s tech trend or to get a glimpse of the next big thing on the horizon. In fact to most it will come as no surprise that we are embarking upon a future of longer life and drastically increased capabilities, but just how far away is that future? And to what extent do we have a choice in how it turns out?
002
So ok, it’s hard to imagine that we are existing at the tipping point in time of a techno, bio enhancement revolution as we hang out of our window franticly waving our phones at the gods of Wi-Fi. But when you consider, four out of five of the most powerful brands on the planet today are technology brands (Forbes 2014) it becomes hard to argue what direction we are headed in. In fact, if we take a look back over the last year alone at some of the phenomenal results that advances in science and technology have produced it becomes quite obvious the things that once only Hollywood could give us will soon be right in the palm of our hands, quite literally. But as our pursuit of enhancing the quality of our lives has progressed, so ultimately has its focus.
Where once attention was directed on the external; from fire, tools, machines, we are now beginning to shift our attention inward, on ourselves, our bodies and our minds.
And whilst buying the latest new car or mobile phone hardly produces any moral dilemmas, it becomes a much more interesting question when we have the choice of upgrading to the latest cognitive enhancing chip, or bionic augmentations. In this report we take a look at what can be learnt from incidences in the past, and attempt to identify a pattern that can provide an insight into what role augmentation may play in shaping our future. We will also ask to what extent do we as individuals have a choice in our collective trajectory, and what social and environmental factors may influence our decisions.
Cg Wallpaper
003
Under my skin Advances in Medical Augmentation In February 2013 a landmark decision was made in the United States. FDA regulators announced their approval for the first ever bionic eye to be implanted into patients suffering from retinitis pigmentosa; a progressive form of blindness. (Jones 2013)The Argus 2, produced by visual medical tech developers Second Sight, is the first commercially available implantable visual prosthetic that helps restore 004
sight in affected patients. The device works by bypassing the damaged cells that process light. Visual data collected from small cameras on the glasses is transmitted directly to an implant that projects individual pixels of light directly to the back of the retina. (Jong 2012)
TREATING EPILEPSY WITH
NeuroPace RNS
Deus Ex
In the same month the FDA voted unanimously in favour of another bio implant, stating that the NeuroPace RNS system produced by Neuropace Inc. provides clinical benefits that far outweigh any risks of its use. Designed for the treatment of medically refractory partial epilepsy, the RNS system consists of a device implanted into the brain that can be directly programmed and configured via laptop. The implant, about the size of a USB stick, detects abnormal electrical activity in the brain and responds by delivering electrical stimulation in order to normalise brain function. Clinical trials are now being held across the U.S with the intent to finalise the commercialisation of the technology by 2015. (Business Wire 2014)
NeuroPace
005
The real bionic man Eugene; entirely lab made, but more than a sum of his parts
006
But it’s not all about opening ourselves up and dropping microchips in. On the other side of the spectrum, advances in technology are allowing for a far more organic form of augmentation, which may not only allow us to repair damaged or malfunctioning biological parts but to swap them for new parts entirely. Or even prevent dis-function from occurring in the first place. Early in 2013 the BBC aired a
programme in which a group of scientists, roboticists and engineers revealed they had been working together to explore how much of a human being they could create from bionic parts and laboratory grown organs. The Bionic man project produced, a 70% finished, entirely lab made ‘man’ named Eugene. Eugene has synthetic organs, including lungs, a pancreas, kidneys, spleen, and trachea. He even has bionic limbs, a metal skeleton and synthetic blood pumped through an artificial heart. (Design News 2014) Rich Walker, managing director of Shadow Robot Company, and the manager of the project stated that:
“The goal was to build something that would show what these parts did and how much of a human is within the capacity of medicine to replicate and replace. I was surprised by how much of a person we were able to build”. (Macleans.ca 2014)
(Image: Independent)
007
Sara Asnaghi
008
Build me up
Replacement Organs & Consumer Genomics Lab grown organs and tissues offer huge potential for the treatment and eventual irradiation of many serious diseases and could lead to a future where each of us has access to a ‘stockpile’ of organs, each grown from own genetic make-up ready and waiting should the need arise. But what if we could prevent the need altogether, and if we could, would we? One recent news story has drawn a lot of attention to that very question, and the whole idea of genetically modifying embryos to alter their DNA.
23andMe In October 2013 California based genomics company 23andMe was granted a patent for a new service offering a DNA screening process whereby customers could provide a saliva sample and in return find out the likelihood that their offspring would receive particular genetic traits from serious disease to athletic ability. (FPO 2014) Further to this however the patent granted 23andMe exclusive rights to genetic and computer technologies that would enable prospective parents to handpick a sperm or egg donor with whom they would be likely to produce a child born with the characteristics that they desire. This of course sparked
a huge amount of moral debate, and in some cases outrage. (PatentDocs 2014) Later, under the weight of rising ethical concerns and government scrutiny the FDA administered an official warning to 23andMe, stating that it should cease production of its DNA testing kits in an apparent bid to avoid the public health consequences of inaccurate results. (FDA 2014) But despite the controversy this case is a prominent example of the type of questions being raised by the advent of new technologies. One harrowing question in particular is; In a world where governments are unable to effectively control other illegal practices, such as the trafficking of drugs, arms and people, how easy will it be to prohibit the spread of new technologies? And as a society, are going to want such policies?
Yeedor
009
Ahead of the curve Kevin Warwick and the Bio-hacker revolution
One outspoken advocate of this future believes the answer is No, and has already began to alter his own biology. Pioneering Professor Kevin Warwick; Futurist and doctor of cybernetics at Reading University is a veteran of selfaugmentation and is well known for his outspoken opinions of the subject of augmentation. (Warwick 2002) The professor belongs to a group of technologists known as the ‘Transhumanists’, whom actively promote and encourage human enhancement through the application of science and technology. (Mehlman 2012) The Transhumanists are a part of the growing international cultural and intellectual movement of Transhumanism, or ‘H+’ and are defined by their doctrine of developing and making widely available technologies that evolve the intellectual, physical, and psychological boundaries of the human condition. (Al-Rodhan 2011)
But this is far from just a passive ideology, for its followers it’s a way of life, the Transhumanist movement has given birth to a new generation of ‘bio-hackers’ eager to experiment with body modification and enhancement (Dvorsky 2008).
Warwick
“Those who remain as humans are likely to become a sub-species. They will, effectively, be the chimpanzees of the future.” K.Warwick 010
Macklemore
Bio Beech Club In the Netherlands futurist clubbers at the Baja Beech Club are already adopting microchips under the skin. The chips, about the size of grain of rice are embedded in the arms of the clubbers and require no power supply. Wearing one guarantees the clubbers entry at the door, access to a VIP area, and enables them to access their bank accounts wirelessly to pay for drinks. (The Guardian 2014)
011
Mainline
You look familiar Learning from our history So you might say that this is just medical technology that serves a need, and that it is only fringe scientists and eccentrics that advocate its wider use. You may think there is no real evidence to suggest it will ever find its way into the public arena. You may even say given the choice, you wouldn’t want to make use of any technology that may affect your natural evolution. But it wouldn’t be the first commercial augmentation 012
to have crept into our lives from the peripherals without us really realising. This all seems reminiscent of something else that today is seen as common place. Consider cosmetic surgery, and its transcendence from therapy to enhancement. As with many inventions, cosmetic surgery was born out of a need to make life better for the injured and disadvantaged. First finding its application treating the awful injuries inflicted on victims of the First World War and before. (ASPS 2013) However, today it would hardly come as a surprise to hear that a friend or relative has had some form of cosmetic surgery; breast enhancement, alterations to facial features or laser hair removal.
Origin
Adoption
Origin
Exposure
Refinement
The answer is complex, and there are of course many factors that contribute to the process, but in its simplest terms it can be separated into 5 key stages;
Acceptance
So how exactly did cosmetic surgery change from a necessity to a commodity?
Like cosmetic surgery, body augmentation’s origins lay in therapy; a medical need arises and technology answers. From limbs to organs, implants to microchips. But then how does a technology born out of a medical need make the migration to a commercial desire? Put quite simply; Pioneers. Enthusiasts like Kevin Warwick, who take the idea out of the confines of its origin and introduce it to their networks. These pioneers initiate the ‘Adoption’ stage, acting like a trigger, effectively putting the idea into the minds of the public.
013
Social Proof
There are many examples of this type of behavioural pattern occurring, from social ideologies to consumer The surprising truth about new ideas buying patterns, where people look to conform to the movement of the group. Everett Rogers, professor and chair of Solomon Asch, a renowned social the Department of Communication & psychologist is known for conducting Journalism at the University of New many experiments investigating this Mexico highlights the importance of phenomenon. In one example, twelve people like Warwick in the process questions were given to test subjects, of spreading new ideas. In his book; some individually and some in groups. ‘Diffusions of Innovations’ Rogers Test subjects in groups, upon seeing explains how new ideas spread via all others in the group were answering communication channels over time, incorrectly, would in over one third and although initially perceived as of cases change their own answer, uncertain and even risky, innovations against their own senses, are initially adopted by a few key allowing the actions of the individuals who then spread the word to group to directly change others in their social networks. their own. Arch (Rogers, E.M 2003) believed that this phenomenon could We can see the same thing in cosmetic generate even the surgery. Take Pamela Anderson, what most unthinkable is the first thing you think of? What of actions, and that about Michael Jackson? It was the Social Proof could ‘celebrity’ that first brought the idea of have been partly cosmetic augmentation into the public responsible for the domain, acting like walking, talking advent Nazism. endorsements. And of course the stigma (Rozin 2001) followed, but just like Rogers identifies, these initially uncertain innovations quickly spread. It’s through these pioneers that an idea can infiltrate the collective consciousness, helping to trigger one of the most powerful drivers of any trend; Social Proof. Social Proof, sometimes referred to as the ‘herd mentality’ is a psychological phenomenon where by people assume the actions of others in an attempt to reflect the correct behaviour for a given situation. (Thaler and Sunstein 2008)
014
Adoption In fact, the concept of celebrity may likely be the most powerful vehicle for the spread of augmentative technology in the future.
TAG Heuer
015
Exposure
S
o now an idea is out in the public, and the wheels of social proof are beginning to turn, in many respects this in itself may be powerful enough to spread the innovation. But it would be naive to think that is all there is to it. We have barely considered a whole host of other sticking points such as generational perception to religious beliefs, where firm ideas and notions of right and wrong are embedded into the phyche. Indeed when considering something as 016
morally controversial as augmentation some close held beliefs such as religion may not ever be surpassed. But the biggest challenge to these systems is time. Belief systems have to be taught, passed on, and learned, otherwise they are lost. But as the environment around them changes and evolves these systems remain static and become subject increased pressure and further scrutiny. Consider today, a child will be born whose mother or father may have undergone cosmetic surgery of
Ascent A matter of time some kind to enhance their outward appearance. They may well have long contemplated the moral implications of the procedure beforehand, but the very fact that a role model has actively advocated the procedure will undoubtedly effect the child’s own future stance on its morality. So as generations are born into a world where their environment is saturated with these types of realities, the concept of social normality evolves alongside. Not only that, but in parallel it soon takes
a higher amount of stimuli to produce a reaction among the new generation, for what shocked one will not shock the next. This can be referred to as the ‘exposure wedge’. This graph shows how quickly new technology is reaching wide scale adoption compared to how long it took as little as a decade ago. (Asymco 2014)
017
The only way is up Moore’s law and Desire Moore’s Law states that over the history of computing hardware, the number of transistors on integrated circuits doubles approximately every two years. (Hargrave 2000)The product of this exponential growth curve is the vastly enhanced capabilities of the technology that we are surrounded by and continue to be immersed in today. But what does this mean in the context of augmentation?
Refinement Whilst the intangible aspects of adoption are being slowly changed, the tangible are becoming more capable, smaller, smarter, cheaper, better looking, and ultimately more desirable. This will be no different when it comes to augmentation, and the continued refinement of these technologies will only help contribute to an already altering moral balance.
Choice
018
Acceptance The final stage of the process is acceptance, and again we can look at the journey of cosmetic surgery as an example. Whilst it can be argued that cosmetic surgery is yet to gain full scale social acceptance, the data is however irrefutable. On March 12, 2013, the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery released its 16th annual Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank procedural statistics. The data showed that cosmetic surgical procedures had risen by 80% in the past 16 years, and the numbers continue to rise. The total number of cosmetic surgery procedures were up 3% from 2012 to 2013 whilst population growth was less than 1% (WDB 2014). Even more evident however were the changing attitudes amongst men. Since 1997 the amount of men undergoing cosmetic surgery had risen by a staggering 106%. The top five of these procedures included; liposuction, rhinoplasty, eyelid surgery, breast reduction and ear shaping. (Kenkel 2013) Surgery has also become an increasingly accepted option to alter physical appearance amongst Adolescents. In a study conducted by Carolina Lunde, for the institute of psychology at the University of Gothenburg Sweden, data was collected from 110 high school students between the ages of 16 to 18 in order to gauge the overall attitudes towards Cosmetic surgery. Test subjects were questioned on the acceptability of cosmetic surgery in the pursuit of altering physical appearance. “These findings The study revealed younger reflect that adolescents to be far more adolescents have accepting of the idea than embraced the notion previous generations, with of cosmetic surgery over 70% of subjects in favour of cosmetic surgery for social as a viable method motives, this was especially the to reduce individual case for boys.
suffering associated with body dissatisfaction� (Lunde 2013)
019
Unnatural selection
So throughout these stages, there has been one crucial factor that seems to have been overlooked, and that’s ‘choice’. There will always be a choice, and as we have already stated, a belief system such as religion is a strong motivator when it comes to choice. But choice is so very often circumstantial, and what we have done so far is defined the environment the choice of an individual will be made in, and Social Darwinism & some of the factors that will effect it. Survival of the Fittest But there is something more, one particular factor inherent in all human beings, and arguably perpetuated the most in the west, and that’s competition. The theory of Darwinism is defined as a biological evolution, but it’s what’s at the route of the theory that we see all around us today. The instinct to survive, compete, outperform and stand out. Far from just a biological race, it’s these instincts that advocates of Social Darwinism believe are the key drivers behind the western economies of today. (Hofstadter, R. 1992) Social Darwinism is a socio political theory that carries the idea of Darwinism into modern social and political constructs, suggesting that the ‘survival of the fittest’ principles, that applied to the biological theory are prevalent in the social and political systems of today. And with growing concerns over the wealth divide in several western economies it is hard to argue, that getting whatever edge on the competition you can is becoming more important to financial stability.
DNA
020
Examples of social Darwinism are abundant in western society, and are arguably at the foundation of many of the fundamental capitalist institutions, such as the right to private ownership and competitive markets. (Crook 1996). But how does this apply to augmentation? The answer is survival; it can be seen in everything from sport to business, if something is developed by one contender, soon, in order to continue to compete the other side has to develop a version of their own. In the same way, if team A develop a physical edge, team B will need the same in order to stay in the running. So as technology becomes more and more capable of providing that edge, be it biological or intellectual, once the augmentative cycle has started it may be perpetuated in the very same way. And be it in nature, business, or simply making a living, when survival is at steak, fair play can take a back seat.
Imagine Imagine the scenario, augmentation has made its way into the wider public. However, a child is prohibited by their parents from any augmentation. What effect might it have on the child if he/ she cannot now play for the school team
because they aren’t fast enough? Or when they graduate, they may find it harder to find work because their test score was much lower than their augmented peers. Would this change the context of the choices being made? 021
Being human
Change is inevitable, progress is not
“It is not the strongest species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but rather the one most adaptable to change�
022
Re Cap In this report we have taken a brief look at the unique position we find ourselves in at this moment in time, and at some of the new advances in science and technology that in time may force us to reconsider what it means to be truly human. We also looked at what we can learn from history and how as a collective we have reacted to the advent of similar technologies in the past, in order to form a picture of how we may react in the future. Together with these insights we’ve applied theories of social and cultural phenomena to help develop a model of adoption that may be used to speculate how the role of augmentative technology could evolve from therapy to enhancement, and also to what extent the role of a few may play in deciding the fate of the many.
Insight In the beginning we asked the question of what sort of choice we might have in this future, and discovered that whilst choice is an important aspect, we may be far less in control than we think. Whilst our intentions are conceived in innocence, factors outside of our individual control may alter our motives with time. The implications of which could have historical significance.
As we embark into an ever more technical future it is vital that we define what it is that truly makes us human and be sure that we retain it. Faith in law and policy may not be enough in itself, the responsibility essentially lies with the collective, and we must remember; to augment, is to enhance, and not to replace.
Limitations Whilst this report is at best a theory, and does not consider many of the cultural, social and political factors that may play a role in the future of the human condition. It does however present a logical argument as to the possible sequence of events we may navigate, and draws attention to the need for us to consider the implications of such a future, and how me may influence it.
When considering exposure to technology as a whole it is easy forget how quickly our world is changing, and small incremental changes before long have far reaching implications. The underlying theme here is both perception and responsibility, and it is hoped that through understanding the drivers, desires, and factors that influence us as a society, we may make more informed decisions about our future direction. 023
Further Reading Preparing for Life in Humanity 2.0. Fuller. S. Philosopher, Sociologist and Professor of Politics and Social Theory at Warwick University The Singularity is Near Ray Kurzweil. Director of Engineering of Google Inc. I Cyborg Dr. Kevin Warwick, Professor of Cybernetics at Reading University
References Al-Rodhan, N. R. F. (2011). The politics of emerging strategic technologies. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. ASPS (2013) ‘History of Plastic Surgery: How a pioneering specialty took shape.’ [Online] Available at: http://www.plasticsurgery.org (Accessed 05 January, 2014) Asymco (2014) Adoption Rates of Consumer Technologies [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.asymco.com/. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Business Wire. (2014). FDA Advisory Panel Recommends Approval of the NeuroPace RNS® System for Medically Refractory Epilepsy | Business Wire. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.businesswire.com/news/ home/20130226005782/en/FDA-Advisory-Panel-Recommends-ApprovalNeuroPace-RNS%C2%AE#.Uu_0RvRdXE0. [Accessed 03 February 2014] Design News (2014). Design News - Features - Bionic Man Shows What’s Humanly Possible With Artificial Medical Technology. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.designnews.com/ document.asp?doc_id=270180&dfpPParams=ht_13,industry_ medical,aid_270180&dfpLayout=article. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. FDA (2014). 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.fda.gov/ iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/2013/ucm376296.htm. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. FPO (2014). Gamete donor selection based on genetic calculations. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.freepatentsonline.com/8543339.pdf. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Forbes. (2014). The World’s Most Valuable Brands List - Forbes. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.forbes.com/powerful-brands/list/. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Hargrave, F. (2000). Hargrave’s communications dictionary. New York: IEEE Press. Hofstadter, R. (1992). Social Darwinism in American thought. Boston: Beacon Press. Jones, K. (2013). ‘FDA Approves Bionic Eye for First Time in U.S.’ Wall Street Journal [Online] Available at: http://search.proquest.com.v-ezproxy.brunel. References
ac.uk:2048/docview/1287755630?accountid=14494 (Accessed 05 January, 2014) Jong Min. O,. da Cruz, L. (2012). ‘The Bionic Eye; a review’ Clinical & Experimental Ophthalmology, 40 (1), pp. 6-11 [Online] doi: 10.1111/j.14429071.2011.02590.x (Accessed 05 January, 2014) Kenkel (2013) A Lot to Learn From ASAPS 2012 Statistics. Aesthetic Surgery Journal July 2013 vol. 33 no. 5 733-734. doi: 10.1177/1090820X13488136. Lunde, C. (2013) ‘Acceptance of cosmetic surgery, body appreciation, body ideal internalisation, and fashion blog reading among late adolescents in Sweden’ Body Image. 10 (4) [Online] doi: 10.1016/j.bodyim.2013.06.007 (Accessed 15 January 2014) Macleans.ca. (2014).Building a better human - Health, Rethink, Science Macleans.ca. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/10/15/ building-a-better-human/. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Mehlman, M. J. (2012). Transhumanist dreams and dystopian nightmares. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. PatentDocs (2014). Patent Docs: 23andMe Patent Creates Controversy. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.patentdocs.org/2013/10/23andme-patent-createscontroversy.html. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Rogers, E. M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press. Rozin, P. (2001). Social psychology and science: Some lessons from Solomon Asch. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5 (1), pp. 2--14. Thaler, R. H. Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. The Guardian. (2014). RFID: I’ve got you under my skin | Technology | The Guardian. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/ technology/2004/jun/10/onlinesupplement1. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Wakehealth (2014). An International Leader in Regenerative Medicine. [Online] Available at: http://www.wakehealth.edu/Research/ [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Warwick, K. (2002). I, cyborg. London: Century. WDB (2014) Population growth (annual %) | Data | Table. [ONLINE] Available at:http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW. [Accessed 03 February 2014].
Bibliography BCS. The Chartered Institute for IT. (2013) I, Cyborg: An interview with Prof Kevin Warwick. Available at: http://www.bcs.org/content/ConWebDoc/51124 (Accessed 05 January/2014) Dov Fox. (2014) 23andMe’s Designer Baby Patent | Dov Fox. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dov-fox/23andmes-designer-babypa_b_4042165.html. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Dvorsky, G .(2008). Better Living through Transhumanism. Journal of Evolution and Technology - Vol. 19 Issue 1 pg 62-66 Fuller. S. (2011) Humanity 2.0, What it Means to be Human, Past, Present and Future. Palgrave Macmillan. Genomes Unzipped. (2014). 23andme « Genomes Unzipped. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.genomesunzipped.org/tag/23andme. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Scientific American. (2014). After 23andMe, Another Personal Genetics Firm Is Charged with False Advertising - Scientific American. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/after-23andme-another/. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. The Verge. (2014). 23andMe receives patent to create designer babies, but denies plans to do so | The Verge. [ONLINE] Available at:http://www.theverge. com/2013/10/2/4795586/23andme-designer-baby-patent. [Accessed 03 February 2014]. Warwick, K., Gasson, M., Hutt, B., Goodhew, I., Kyberd, P., Schulzrinne H, and Wu. X. (2004) “Thought Communication and Control: A First Step using Radiotelegraphy”, IEE Proceedings on Communications, 151(3), pp.185–189.
Images Asymco. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.asymco.com/2013/11/18/ seeing-whats-next-2/ [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Cg wallpaper. (2014) [online] Available at: http://hdw.eweb4.com/out/882212. html [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Choice. (2014) (2014) [online] Available at: http://ntureferendum.wordpress. com/2011/04/15/but-will-they-vote-young-people-and-the-referendum-onvoting-reform-by-professor-matt-henn-and-dr-nick-foard/ [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014] Deus Ex. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/09/24/ fallout-new-vegas-tv-ad-proclaims-superiority-of-pc-version/ [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. DNA. (2014) [online] Available at: http://wallpaperswide.com/dna_2-wallpapers. html [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Htp. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cris-rowan/ technology-children-negative-impact_b_3343245.html [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Sara Asnaghi. [online] Available at: https://www.behance.net/SaraAsnaghi [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Independant. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ science/meet-rex-the-1m-bionic-man-with-working-heart-set-of-lungs-andhuman-face-8481943.html?action=gallery&ino=5 [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Macklemore. (2014) [online] Available at: http://rapgenius.com/Macklemoreand-we-danced-lyrics#note-1136758 [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Main Line. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.mainlineplasticsurgery. com/ [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. NeuroPace. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.neuropace.com/product/ overview.html [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. TAG Heuer. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.tagheuer.com/int-en/ leonardo-dicaprio [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Warwick. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/knowledge/ themes/virtualfutures/kevinwarwick/ [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014]. Yeedor™. (2014) [online] Available at: http://www.yeedor.com/opinions/thedesigner-baby-and-consumer-genomics/ [Accessed: 5 Feb 2014].