The Age of Living Machines: How Biology Will Build the Next Technology Revolution

by Susan Hockfield, Andrea Gallo (Narrator)

A century ago, discoveries in physics came together with engineering to produce an array of astonishing new technologies: radios, telephones, televisions, aircraft, radar, nuclear power, computers, the Internet, and a host of still-evolving digital tools. These technologies so radically reshaped our world that we can no longer conceive of life without them.

Today, the world’s population is projected to rise to well over 9.5 billion by 2050, and we are currently faced with the consequences of producing the energy that fuels, heats, and cools us. With temperatures and sea levels rising, and large portions of the globe plagued with drought, famine, and drug-resistant diseases, we need new technologies to tackle these problems.

But we are on the cusp of a new convergence, argues world-renowned neuroscientist Susan Hockfield, with discoveries in biology coming together with engineering to produce another array of almost inconceivable technologies—next-generation products that have the potential to be every bit as paradigm shifting as the twentieth century’s digital wonders.


The Age of Living Machines describes some of the most exciting new developments and the scientists and engineers who helped create them. Virus-built batteries. Protein-based water filters. Cancer-detecting nanoparticles. Mind-reading bionic limbs. Computer-engineered crops. Together they highlight the promise of the technology revolution of the twenty-first century to overcome some of the greatest humanitarian, medical, and environmental challenges of our time.

Genres: Science, Nonfiction, Biology, Technology, Audiobook, Medical, Artificial Intelligence

7 pages, Audible Audio

First published May 7, 2019

Reviews

[Joe Kraus · Rating 2 out of 5]

I’ll say this for this book: it would have made an interesting magazine article in an alumni magazine. As a book, well, its core idea is spread awfully thin, and it’s all the more troubling that Susan Hockfield doesn’t do more to interrogate the risks and costs of the technological promise she explores.

Hockfield begins with a thrilling claim: just as the different fields of physics, chemistry, engineering, and math converged to create the rise of electronics and the technologies that have transformed our world, we are on the brink of another convergence with the way the biological sciences are marrying those earlier ones. We are, she claims, close to knowing how to use viruses to build more efficient and less environmentally taxing batteries, close to new devices that can purify water at little cost and with portability, and close to fashioning medicines that can treat us in targeted and personalized fashion.

It’s an exciting notion, and it does make me perk up my ears and imagine the possibilities. At the same time, she repeats her thesis over and over in this fairly short book. We get the idea quickly, but we get told it far more often than we need.

What’s worse, as far as I’m concerned, is that the whole tone of this book is of a college president trying to sell her faculty’s accomplishments to a group of donors. We get some of the science, but never its intricacies. We do get the names of individual researchers, but I always hear a small “and we’d be happy to assign this young scientist a professorial chair with your name on it” in the background. And, even more loudly, I hear a “and these people are creating start-up companies that, with an angel investor or two, could make someone an awful lot of money.”

In other words, there’s more sizzle than steak in support of that core thesis, and it gets old.

Worse than such condescension, as far as I’m concerned, is that we never hear about the risks of such technologies. There’s a brief acknowledgement that we want to be careful before we release genetically modified crops into the world, but I’d like to hear more. There’s no consideration of the risks behind wanton distribution of vaccines. You don’t have to be an anti-vaxxer to know that the HPV vaccine – whatever benefits it might legitimately have – has harmed a great many who’ve had it. We may still want to go ahead with that sort of aggressive mass-vaccination, but we ought to recognize the need to monitor its effectiveness and its hurts. There are potential health benefits, but there are profit certainties as well.

I’ve recently read Kurt Vonnegut’s Player Piano, his first novel in which he characterizes a nostalgia for an American “can-do” attitude as somehow missing the very point of human existence. Here, I see Hockfield making the very claim that Vonnegut mocked more than half a century ago.

I do like optimism, and this book is filled with it, but I think it’s crucial to temper our sense of what technology can do with the toll it exacts on the world and on us. Hockfield is selling us something, but she’s not quite letting us see the price tag.

[Peter Tillman]

Review at Science magazine: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/books/20...
Excerpt:
"In her entertaining and prescient The Age of Living Machines, Susan Hockfield argues that the resulting “parts list” of the physical world facilitated the development of electronic tools, including the telegraph, television, computers, satellites, and the internet. Catalyzed by the interdisciplinary efforts of the Second World War, the technologies forged in this convergence of physics and engineering fueled a period of unprecedented industrial and economic growth that placed the United States in a global leadership position."

I stalled our early, and then the book came due. Mixed reviews here (q.v.), so I may not be back. It's a compelling topic, but not a compelling book (sigh).

[Joy D · Rating 3 out of 5]

Combination memoir of how Hockfield became president of MIT and report on cutting edge molecular biology innovations. I like the positive tone of this book. It gives us hope for the future in making progress toward solving global problems.

Hockfield addresses such topics as using viruses to produce more efficient (and ecologically sound) batteries, producing lower cost water purification, developing earlier detection methods for cancer, connecting prosthetics directly to the brain, and genetically engineering improvements in food production.

I was previously unaware of some of these topics and found it fascinating. At times the author employs rather technical terminology. This is not an exhaustive analysis of risks and benefits – it is more for raising awareness of areas where microbiology is currently being pursued to improve our world.

[Gendou · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is by the former president of MIT. It's about the cutting edge research going on there. It reads like an advertisement. It's non-stop buzzwords. Do yourself a favor and just read the original research. Links below.

Biologically enhanced cathode design for improved capacity and cycle life for lithium-oxygen batteries

The Aquaporin Water Channels

A Combination RNAi-Chemotherapy Layer-by-Layer Nanoparticle...

... Human Implementation of the Agonist-Antagonist Myoneural Interface

[Katie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Summary: This book could be more details but did give an understandable introduction to some fascinating research.

As our understanding of the biological world increases, outstanding scientists working with interdisciplinary groups are turning to the natural world for solutions to critical engineering problems. Whether working to provide enough food, water, and energy for a growing population or to fight disease and create prosthetic limbs, the natural world provides many ideas we can draw on. This book covers some amazing inventions, from batteries assembled by viruses to cancer-detecting, protein-based nano-particles. These are projects that people are still working on, so this is the perfect book for learning about the latest efforts in bioengineering.

Personally, I found this book a bit simplistic. I was completely in awe of what these scientists have accomplished, but I wanted so much more detail about how they got there! I'm not sure if this a complaint other readers will share. This book matches my professional interests and I was excited to read about a scientist I've actually worked with (Becky Bart at the Danforth Plant Science Center). I think, though, that any reader who already understands some basics about how DNA, RNA, and proteins work will find this book on the light side. That said, I think this would be a fantastic read for anyone interested in engineering challenges and with little or no biology knowledge. The author did an incredible job of distilling the biology you need to understand into easily digestible, core concepts. She did this without introducing any inaccuracies that I noticed, despite avoiding many domain specific terms. Even though I didn't feel like I was the audience for this book, I was impressed!

The scientists and the inventions covered in this book blew me away. I don't think I've heard of much that's cooler than a battery assembled by viruses. What a brilliant idea! The author also does a great job showing the people doing science. The reader gets to see the curiosity and drive to improve the world that motivates these scientists. We also get a slight glimpse of daily work in a lab, but there is a stronger focus on the way innovation happens, through a mix of choosing the right 'out-there' ideas to explore and some serendipity. The book is a little MIT-centric (the author is a president emeritus of MIT), but she does a good job mentioning other researchers working on similar problems and does visit several other institutions. So, while this book wasn't a perfect fit for me, it does provide a helpful introduction to some fascinating research.This review was originally posted on Doing Dewey

[George Kaslov · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is more of a puff piece and request for funding for MIT than anything else. There is some new info on the current state of bio tech, but not enough to justify this book.

[Roger March · Rating 2 out of 5]

It is hard to express my distaste for the book. The "Oh my gosh" uberman view of the science being popularized is misleading and grating. It was almost like reading a comic book with the "bang" and "pows" on every insight or obstacle overcome. There are better books to spend your time on.

[Doug · Rating 3 out of 5]

A readable (for the most part - gets a bit dogged down at times with techo-jargon) and informative book about upcoming possibilities with the blending of biology and technology. Batteries, water purification, artificial limbs, agricultural efficiencies are all addressed.

I would give this a much higher rating if Hockfield addressed the possible hazards of this kind of research. The book ignores the warnings regarding nano technologies and genetically modified food. The book becomes a sales pitch for more federal funding to research universities rather than an unbiased look at where science is heading.

[Grace Crandall · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really fascinating, optimistic look into emerging technologies!! Each chapter told the story of researchers working to realize a new scientific concept, with decently easy-to-follow explanations of the ideas and principles behind the new tech. My brain is frazzled, but in a good way.

[Michael Dean Edwards · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first several chapters in Susan Hockfield’s “The Age of Living Machines” demonstrate outstanding attention to essential details to convey a sense of wonder and possibility to the reader. Chapter Two, with its virus-grown batteries, followed by the revelations about how water moves through a membrane, definitely give one pause. The wonder of it all is inspiring along with a sense of betrayal because trusted sources and organizations loose credibility now that their standard and forceful narratives have been unveiled, revealing corporate emporers who wear no clothes.

Then Susan Hockfield moves into agriculture…and oh my goodness! She moves out of the expertise nested within the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. As a journalist and writer, I have monitored the “standard narratives” of big agriculture for a decade. During this time, I was fortunate to be mentored by Dr. Ramesh Thakare and by his mentor Prof MS Swaminathan. I also wrote and published an article about developments in agriculture in India. My contribution focused on how journalists should cover the field with strong emphasis on specific categories that require careful and comprehensive investigation.

Unfortunately, basing my conclusions on the work, and my interviews with, one of the foremost agronomists in the world and work by his MS Swaminathan Research Foundation, I was taken by surprise when I read the standard narratives regarding agricultural practices concerning genetically engineered, GE, or genetically modified, GMO, crops. I was also disappointed at the failure to discuss essential requirements to sustain soils to prevent loss of topsoil, as well as essential developments on water use and distribution. Instead, we are treated to a carefully edited advertisement for large agriculture as holding our best interests for us, much like the mercantile elites during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

Also missing are the stories I hear whispered by agronomists about how massive funding and force are used by large agricultural concerns to prevent research from investigating their standard narratives at major agricultural institutions. Oh, yes, my political science degree was from the University of California at Davis. Enough said…

The stories otherwise deserve a strong four stars, however, questions raised by cautious filtering about developments in agriculture in the chapter about feeding the world hit credibility hard

Therefore, I can recommend these visions into scientific futures and interdisciplinary ventures to readers, providing they skip the chapter on agriculture entirely. Instead of deciding on four or five, I am reduced to awarding three stars to The Age of Living Machines: How Biology Will Build the Next Technology Revolution.

[Thomas · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a pretty decent and very positive look at future technology, though I do think the “Age of Living Machines” actually began when the first life forms appeared on earth. Still, I get where the author is coming from. I’m an optimistic person myself, so I hope she succeeds in inspiring a new generation of scientists and investors to continue to work on the technology of tomorrow.

I personally think that humanity has gone too far down the road it's on to turn back now. We're committed. There is no way to walk things back without catastrophic results. Still, a little time could have been spent on discussing some of the hazards of these new technologies and how we might avoid them.

There’s some cool stuff here, employing viruses to build better batteries, using a protein found in living cells to create a membrane for purifying water, using nanoparticles to fight cancer, developing sophisticated prosthetics that can connect directly to the brain, and using advanced technology to genetically engineer better crops. (That last one doesn’t strike me as a very new idea.) Still, how you could discuss these subjects and never once mention CRISPR is beyond me.

Sometimes it gets a little too technical for my liking, but I don’t think I wasted my time reading this.

[Dmitry Khvatov · Rating 2 out of 5]

Favorite quote: “neural networks and other machine learning techniques”. Or was it “machine learning and other neural network techniques”? Doesn’t matter.

[Steven · Rating 3 out of 5]

I love books about technology, especially when written by knowledgeable advocates. Dr. Hockfield is such an author, and I mostly enjoyed her explanation of several up-and-coming revolutionary technologies intended to solve present real-world problems.

From the biological construction of battery components, to water filters made from proteins, to the use of nano-particles to fight cancer, to thought-controlled prosthetics, to genetically engineered food, she presents an in-depth tour of ways in which disparate scientific domains can converge to produce products that uplift humanity.

One of her prescriptions for the future, however, struck me as self-serving and unnecessary. Dr. Hockfield made a case for the need for basic scientific research, that is, research into basic principles freed from concern over applications. She looked back fondly to a time when the U.S. government invested heavily into basic research, and claimed those investments led to many of the country's greatest advances and inventions. She lamented the meager spending the federal government furnishes on that today, less than one percent of GDP.

I believe U.S. inventors were churning out inventions and getting patents even before the federal government spent anything on basic research. Secondly, our government is presently over 22 trillion dollars in debt, so it should be cutting spending, not adding more. Third, government spending comes from taxes and debt; Dr. Hockfield has not made a sufficient case why either taxpayers or future generations must pay more now for basic research. Fourth, as a member of the MIT Corporation, Dr. Hockfield's organization would be a major beneficiary if the government followed her advice.

This prescription detracts in a large way from an otherwise fascinating and uplifting book, so I can't give it more than three stars.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The convergence of biology and engineering provides a very good reason to hope that we can once again avoid the gloomy future that in 1798 Thomas Malthus described to be our fate: a future of inevitable war, famine, and pestilence.

In The Age of Living Machines, Susan Hockfield, former president of MIT, presents examples of technology which merge biology and engineering. She presents brief overviews of breakthroughs in creating virus-made batteries, protein-based water filters, cancer fighting nanoparticles, brain-powered protheses, and computer-mediated rapid crop selection. There is an optimism and openness in her approach which underlines her main argument: Our government should support and fund collaborative and cross-disciplinary research on the same magnitude which existed during World War II (where physics and engineering converged to provide the foundations of the digital age). According to Hockfield, the rudiments of genetics is critical in helping our wounded yet growing world.

The problem is Hockfield avoids the real gray areas involved in implementing this vision of biology and engineering. People fear "genetic mutation," they fear that tinkering with DNA could result in unprecedented peril for life on our planet. While much of the fear is based on ignorance, we should not--as Hockfield does here--gloss over this fear and ignorance and concentrate only on the "good things." She complains federal bureaucracy slows biological progress, but she never delves into the cultural and even psychological reasons why we are reluctant. When she states RoundUp has never been shown to be detrimental to the environment "when properly used," she is disingenuous, like Rachel Carson's warnings in Silent Spring which spurred a majority of limiting legislation is not worth acknowledging.

I agree with many of her arguments, but I do not like her glib dismissals of potential or perceived dangers. This is a fascinating book, but I wish it would have been written by someone who has visited Wal-Mart at least once and has spent quality time with people not in academia. There's a naïve "science can solve all our ills" foundation to this work which weakens it. When it comes to employing technology to battle the challenges of the present and future, let's consider the entire forest and not just a few specific trees.

The possibilities are thrilling. As Aquaporin A/S's founder and CEO, Peter Holme Jensen, told me, we may soon solve many of our problems by "just using nature's genius." We may soon be able to enlist viruses no only to cleanly and efficiently produce batteries, as Angela Belcher is doing, but also take on jobs that I have not addressed, among them turning methane into ethylene (the key component of plastic bags, bottles, and boxes) or catalyzing the fixation of nitrogen (an energy-intensive step necessary to produce the mass quantities of fertilizer necessary to feed Earth's growing population).

[Midwest Geek · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an excellent presentation of how a blend of fundamental knowledge and innovative applications is bringing about a new technological revolution. It differs from most applications of biology which focus on medical advances, the potential for pluripotent stem cells, and genetic engineering. I think she does a very good job presenting introductory principles of molecular biology as well as describing the work of a number of multi-talented, creative scientists/engineers.

Even though I am quite familiar with the basic biological facts and DNA and RNA, which are reviewed here, I was amazed by some of the pioneering work being conducted. It is a short book, actually only 170 pages long. I wish it were longer. There are 44 pages of documentation for many of the claims made during the course of the book. The author is a distinguished neuroscientist and former President of MIT and former Provost at Yale.

I think it is a very good presentation so far as it goes. As she said, it is her first attempt to write something for general consumption, and I think she does a very good job of explaining and maintaining this reader's interest.

This book is underrated for a number of reasons which I shall risk addressing: first of all, she does not discuss what many people fear about GMO (generically modified organisms) applied to agriculture. Nonscientists seem far more worried about such crops than scientists, yet we all have benefitted enormously from the development of disease resistent strains and the increased productivity that farming has achieved. With proper, rigorous testing and screening before gaining approval for general distribution, humans can continue to benefit from such developments. This does not mean that old-fashioned natural selection has no role--she describes the very high-tech research program at Danforth Plant Science Center to identify helpful mutations.

Secondly, she does not seem to fear that engineering developments not only solve problems but cause future problems, such as our dependence upon fossil fuel consumption and the increases of atmospheric carbon dioxide that is causing a modest but definite increase in average temperatures of land and sea. There is no mention of such issues.

The political, economic, and social challenges of technological progress are enormous; humans seem to be ill-equipped to take adequate account of long-term issues associated with the degradation of the environment. The tragedy of the commons has been a problem for a very long time. These are not addressed here, and that is not the purpose of this book. I think she would have done well to mention them in her conclusions, instead of beating the drum for more government funding of basic research. I am sympathetic with her cause, but she comes across as a bit short-sighted, placing her self-interest above those of the broader society.

Third, some readers fault her for lauding the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT, of which she remains a member. The Koch brothers (David and Charles) are regarded as evil doers by many progessive and left-leaning people. Nevertheless, their philanthropy has been significant and not anti-science. Both Koch brothers are MIT alumni and have provided substantial funding to MIT as well as to various medical centers, such as the Sloan-Kettering Medical Center. They also provided substantial funding for the arts, including the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts. (David Koch died last August; I'm not sure what the disposition of his estate is.) I do not agree with their anti-government, extreme Libertarian views, but that doesn't mean that everything they touch is tainted, or that Susan Hockfield should be ashamed to be associated with the Koch Institute.

[William Schram · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology or MIT is considered to be one of the best colleges in the world. They have been at the forefront of technology for a long time, ever since World War II when they improved their curriculum for Physics and other fields of study. I have never been there, and I never considered studying there; I was never a good enough student for that. Susan Hockfield is a former President of MIT and the author of this book.

With The Age of Living Machines Hockfield discusses how the new forefront of technology is paired with Biology. From water filtration to targeted cancer diagnoses this field has a lot of promise. Hockfield describes these new technologies by talking about the underlying mechanisms behind them. She never goes into too much jargon and the illustrations serve the book well.

The first portion of the book focuses on five inventions that utilize our understanding of molecular biology. So the first one is making a Virus that builds batteries. It goes into how it was done in a friendly conversational style that is easy to understand. The next breakthrough is using Aquaporin to filter water without using so much energy. The third breakthrough is using nanoparticles to aid in cancer diagnosis. The fourth breakthrough goes through prosthetics and robotic limbs. The fifth breakthrough talks about improving crop yields to feed our increasing population. The last chapter of the book talks about what would aid in our quest to stay at the forefront of what Hockfield calls Convergence 2.0.

The book is pretty good. As I said, it doesn’t use too much jargon and does explain the technology behind each breakthrough. It is also short, weighing in at only 167 pages of content.

[Sophie Webster · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed reading about Hockfield's optimistic take on the future of biology-inspired engineering, which she dubbed "Convergence 2.0" (on the heels of the first convergence, a wartime marriage of engineering and physics). She takes us on a tour of the impressive people bringing these two fields together, which gave a sense of the breadth of application areas. Occasionally, though, it did feel like she was trotting out some of the most-decorated show ponies from her time as president of MIT. I agree with some other reviews that she could have raised the potential dangers & causes for concerns in this arena, but I did feel like the science was well-explained for a general audience.

[Erin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Dr. Hockfield has written a fascinating behind-the-scenes look at some of today's big research at the intersection of biology and engineering. From the discovery of proteins that transfer water molecules across cell membranes to coming-soon technologies like cancer detection tests akin to pregnancy tests, it covers an incredibly wide range of subjects with clarity and insight.

It's a humanizing look at the history, stories, and people behind cutting edge research, and I highly recommend it for both scientists and science-interested folks!

[Mirek Jasinski · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book is written in a boring style but the subject matter is mind-blowing & fascinating. Has to be endured. :)

[Leah · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good overview of interesting research being done and good introduction science for first years. However, this book is tone deaf. Hockfield's careless writing, which includes praise of WWII weapons (the atomic bomb), her usage of the phrase "from the lab to the marketplace" about a half dozen times, her enthusiasm for the Bayh-Dole Act, and silence regarding issues with GMO strains (think Monsanto), lacks insightful consideration for the ramifications surrounding the aforementioned topics.
I would recommend this on a reading list accompanied with books, essays and newspaper articles delving into some of these topics.

[Adam Lowy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Clear descriptions of fascinating advances in biological engineering. However, I was shocked by minimal thought on the some of the profound ethical and political issues at play . One scientist is quoted as saying, “ I see myself as a Henry Ford,” without appearing to consider the irony that cars contributed to many of the challenges these approaches are to solve. The dissolution of corporate- academic boundaries are advocated; much of the work cited was from a Koch brothers funded institute at MIT. Their role in advancing anti- science policies to serve their political agenda was not noted. I don’t mean to sound like a Luddite but these issues are critical.

[Dan Downing · Rating 4 out of 5]

Many surrounding aspects of this effort disappoint. Start with the title. Dr. Hockfield does do a nifty job in explaining and forecasting several applications of life forms being utilized by hard technology toward the end of making a new world. The field is hardly dented by the few examples, although they are illustrative. Telling how a new world will come about is an awful lot to ask of 167 pages.
The most important chapter was the last, wherein she calls for more research and more integration among disciplines. The age where chemists don't talk to physicists and no one talks to biologists is well behind us, praise be. In entering these waters, one must recall C.P. Snow's "The Two Cultures". His classic 1959 lecture called for commerce between the sciences and the humanities, a call not often heeded and one which if reiterated here would have strengthened Hockfield's argument. Certainly, most essential steps forward come from people with hyphenated areas of expertise, a trend which will grow. I think it telling that many of the scientists mentioned live or work or were trained abroad. If the whiff of jingoism coming off these pages is to be satisfied---without warfare, as stated--- we'll need trained brains.
The core argument here is that by 2050 our population Earth will be 9.5 billion+. People who need food and energy and shelter and medicine: all true. But sometime there must come a limit. No matter how we scrimp and innovate, do we really think we can sustain 20 billion souls? Or 50 billion? Isn't the question of limits one which both humanists and scientists need to address?
While none of the examples discussed in this volume are astoundingly new, the depth and the personal profiles make for fascinating reading. "The Age of Living Machines" could set some minds free to imagine brave new worlds.
Recommended.

[Benjamin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Full of good stories, almost cooked into a full-fledged book. Each chapter is quite good, though the book hangs together only somewhat well.

Still, Hockfield's personal and professional experience is so extraordinary that it fills out to a terrific book. Worth reading for sure.

I listened to the audio book, read by Andrea Gallo, who did a terrific job of the underrated difficult task of narrating the thoughts of a scientist about science.

[Avolyn Fisher · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book deserves a much higher average rating than it currently has. When looking over the low ratings it appears the main issues people have had with this book are (1) it's overly scientific - which I did not feel to be the case despite being someone without a background in science beyond high school level science curriculum. (2) That the book largely ignores the negatives and downsides that exist in pursuing science, specifically nuclear (war) and genetically modified crops. To me, the second argument feels reactionary and lazy.

GMOs have been plagued by public fear and a smear campaign to cause the public to lose trust in them, however multiple studies have since concluded that they are absolutely safe for us to eat. Nuclear war, while something every human on earth hopes to avoid, does not negate the promise of Nuclear energy as being explored by The Gates Foundation and others, that could unlock the secret to clean energy and ways of harnessing Nuclear that could very well save our planet. Arguing that the development of science is some perverse manipulation of nature that should be avoided just because their are good and bad outcomes and stories of breakthroughs that have proven deadly (think of Marie Curie whose work was groundbreaking for science but had a devastating outcome for her) doesn't mean that these breakthroughs are not worthwhile or don't contain the solutions we so desperately seek and look for. We know the powerful destructive force of fire yet we use fire to cook our meals, heat our homes, and forge the metals we have built our societal infrastructure upon. For if the answers to our biggest challenges and scariest threats doesn't exist in science and nature, where else could it possibly exist?

I thoroughly enjoyed this book, honestly my only gripe was that it wasn't longer! I highly recommend this for anyone curious about the next wave of science and what solutions are currently being explored.

P.S. One final note about those crops though, perhaps Hockfield should look into the conversion of land from raising animals to growing crops. Right now the following animals consume calories and produce calories in the following ratios:

Chicken 4:1
Beef/Cattle 54:1
Turkey 13:1
Eggs 26:1
Milk Protein 14:1
Pork 17:1
Source: https://news.cornell.edu/stories/1997...

Perhaps the shortage of land for available crops to meet the growing food demand of the world population could be better met by reducing the land used for animals and convert to more grain. (I'm not a crazy animal rights hippie, just an interesting fact that I was surprised wasn't mentioned in this section of the book, maybe because it doesn't require a sexy MIT solution but is an obvious idea once you realize the current numbers.)

[Aaron Dy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Love the idea of highlighting cutting edge bioengineering work and the people behind the research, but was not a fan of the execution. Lots of it is written at the level of a general reader but it has the unmistakable tone of being written by an academic. More concerningly, it takes an overly techno-optimist view of the world which is troubling when the book is largely framed around climate change which is unlikely to be solved by technology alone. This overly cheery view of the role of technology becomes especially noticeable when the atomic bomb is mentioned only in passing when discussing applications of physics in war or later when the atomic bomb is listed among other technology successes.

In terms of the writing, some of the descriptions read more like Wikipedia pages for the summary rather than taking advantage of the deep expertise that Dr. Hockfield possesses. When discussing each example of a new tech, it was presented as if each will actually work on a large scale. I would rather get her expert opinion on problems and challenges in the fields rather than the sanitized version that reads like a press release.

Overall, I think Dr. Hockfield is right to highlight the importance of the integration of biology and engineering research that she calls "Convergence 2.0." I wish we got more of her critical thinking on the subject though and less straightforward championing of the buzzword.

[Robert · Rating 3 out of 5]

The technology covered is really interesting, especially because this is not the "tech" that is currently getting the most attention, but I found the writing a bit hard to follow.

I would have liked to get a bit more explanation of some of the science, it seemed things were glossed over to such an extent it was hard to get a clear picture of what exactly was going on.

But I did find myself very intrigued by the "virus battery." It would be really cool if this ever gets a practical application, it might end up being as revolutionary as the discovery of Lithium-Ion batteries themselves.

Another one that stood out to me was the aquaporin water filtration. Again, the potential social impact is so vast if they can ever make it practical.

In general what this book made me realize is that "biological engineering" really does have the potential to produce a major game changer at any moment, something that will change society as much as the transistor did in the 50 years after its discovery.

Almost all these ideas will fail, but it only take 1 of them to work to potentially really change the world.

I'm very excited to see what will happen.

[Myles · Rating 2 out of 5]

Every once a while I like to read a feel-good story about technology.

Susan Hockfield is an outstanding scientist and by the accounts I’ve read highly respected as a higher-learning administrator, having led MIT and been Provost of Yale University.

This book is fuelled by her passion for collaborative learning across disciplines, belief in the scientists behind bioengineering, and a cry for optimism about the future.

This book catalogues the genius of scientists finding ways to turn technology to our favour, and the stories are amazing.

On many levels though technology has helped push humankind to the edge of self-extinction.

We have not treated our planet well.

Hockfield thinks we can pull ourselves back from the brink, but the “ifs” include getting the political will to cooperate with one another across nations.

These days I see little evidence this is about to happen during my lifetime.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a broad introduction to how new technology is changing the world. It is well written at a level accessible to the general public. I am an engineer, and I'm familiar with most of the methods described in this book. The book ends with a call to action that covers several important points, but left me feeling uninspired. The author says that the US will lose technology dominance unless we extend government funding for basic research. I think that the main issue I have with this book is that the author seems to think that innovation started in the 1950s with Convergence 1.0. But the truth is that human history is a long string of technology convergence. It spans from the invention of fire, to cultivation, to iron, to renaissance, to industrial, to digital, to future. That future could be clearly stated as the age of living machines as scientists, engineers, business leaders, and politicians work together to create the future.

[Adrian Senftleben · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting book about the convergence of biological research and engineering. Gives 5 or so concrete examples and explains where they are right now, gives enough background to understand how they work, and what the potential impact would be.

+ Exciting near-ish future tech
+ Good detail about the relevant science and engineering background for a lay audience

~ The focus on the individuals is humbling, and brings attention to scientists and researchers, which is good, but slows down the pace of the book

- The ending feels like an awareness/fundraising pitch
- The ending seems overly focused on helping the US maintain a technological lead, I would have preferred more on the benefits to the world the tech could bring
- The prose was adequate, but it didn't pull me in like other books that touch on near-future themes like Deus Ex and Origin Story

[Porter · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book does not live up at all to what I expected based on its title. The author spends a large amount of time in the book talking about herself and the personal characteristics of people featured in the book who are really not notable people at all. She also fawns over colleagues and how superb they are, maybe to sell copies and get reviews I guess. The little amount she explains about each and the few technological inventions that she does discuss involve a discussion so superficial and unknowledgeable that more could be gleaned by reading current science magazines headlines in a couple of minutes. The book is extremely repetitive. Her platitudes about how she hopes war will not occur and that we will overcome disease are as trite as the ideas themselves are so scantily elaborated on.