I think he’s right that there will be space in politics for a movement that addresses our relationship with technology explicitly. I’m not sure how accurate his timeline is (scientists I’ve spoken to are more sceptical), but it’s certainly true that there are mind-boggling things under way. At Chalmers University of Technology in Sweden, scientists are already connecting robotic limbs to the human nervous system of amputees: the first arm surgeries are scheduled to occur in less than 12 months. Then there’s the "Iron Man" armour suit being created for American soldiers. Panasonic will be releasing an exoskeleton suit shortly. Injectable oxygen shots are already here. Some video games are already being played via mind-reading helmets. Enhanced contact lenses will soon allow people to have infrared night vision. It does all throw up important ethical and philosophical challenges. Is an uploaded mind still human? Should we give "human rights" to an artificial intelligence with a superior intellect to a human? Then there’s the social problems. Presumably, human enhancement technologies would be disproportionately available to those with greater financial resources, creating a genetic divide. And if you lived forever, are you taking up the place of another generation? What about the more mundane things: what would be a fair prison sentence for murder if we could all live for 200 years? Or the right retirement age. I’m guessing it won’t be 70 if we can all make thirty score and ten. Above all: are we happy about all of this, and can we stop it?