These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

RL Implants coming soon

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nakami Saans
Conclave of Independent Pilots
#41 - 2014-05-09 20:58:40 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Utter nonsense

At least because the majority will never be able to afford it, and the tinfoils will rail against it, and like cloning and organ farming it will be banned for religious and psuedo-moralistic reasons.

It doesn't take tinfoil to see how these technologies open up tremendous possibilities for abuse.
It's also not unreasonable to believe that cybernetic augmentations and other transhumanist technologies will bring about unprecedented and unpredictable changes across all of human society, good or bad.

You may or may not believe in the technological singularity conjecture but technological advancement over human history has followed an exponential curve, and it's reasonable to expect that this trend will continue. The inventions of a fully functional quantum computer and of a post-silicon deterministic computer would be two of the last hurdles before a singularity event.


And quantum computers are relatively around the corner.

People: "You shouldn't burn bridges." Me: "I don't, I bomb them from orbit."
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
#42 - 2014-05-09 21:12:50 UTC
Doreen Kaundur wrote:


1. Hear a conversation from across a room, or in a crowded club.
This one is nothing new, ask any mother.

In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.

New Player FAQ

Feyd's Survival Pack
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#43 - 2014-05-09 21:46:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Honestly, h+ and forced mass distribution of genetically modified organisms are the only things that would justify a use of a nuclear weapon.

I'm pacifist and humanist

Pacifism is mutually exclusive with what you just said.


Technically, it's not. When you embrace h+ or genetic modifications past the use for overcoming disabilities/impairments, the humanity of the subject does not exist any more. It's simply not human any more - it's merchandise.

Pacifism has nothing to do with it. It's like destroying toxic chemicals or any other artificial object that threatens its natural environment.

Humanism and pacifism is about humans, not artificially modified bio-mechanoids created to serve interests of individuals or groups.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#44 - 2014-05-09 22:00:49 UTC
Those are some pretty shaky assumptions on which to justify the use of nuclear weapons.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#45 - 2014-05-09 22:19:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Those are some pretty shaky assumptions on which to justify the use of nuclear weapons.


I could have used a world wide flood and extinction of all but a handful of humans to describe making a fresh start, if you are more comfortable with the religious approach. Maybe I should have. After all, religions have a good property of easily describing abstract concepts in a society - a destruction of previous bad sociological norms and establishment of new ones that are hopefully better (a fresh start, so to speak).
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#46 - 2014-05-09 22:54:05 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Those are some pretty shaky assumptions on which to justify the use of nuclear weapons.


I could have used a world wide flood and extinction of all but a handful of humans to describe making a fresh start, if you are more comfortable with the religious approach. Maybe I should have. After all, religions have a good property of easily describing abstract concepts in a society - a destruction of previous bad sociological norms and establishment of new ones that are hopefully better (a fresh start, so to speak).

There's no easy way to put this, so I'll just go ahead and say it.
You're a blathering idiot.

You're literally advocating the extermination of a form of sentient species (post-humanist cyborgs or GM humans, it doesn't matter) merely because it doesn't agree with your ideals of human racial purity. Unfortunately for you appeal to nature is a logical fallacy - whether something is natural (a term which has issues in of itself) or not has no bearing on its inherent ethical or moral standing. Computers certainly aren't natural (in the sense that their creation requires the presence of an intelligent species or being) but you can't really make the case that this implies that computers are evil.

Even if you still cling to this ridiculous notion that cybernetics and genetic modifications are inherently immoral, where do you draw the line? Are hearing aids offensive to your sensibilities? Cochlear implants? Pacemakers, hip replacements? What about bananas, genetically modified indirectly through centuries of selective breeding? What about strawberries that resist frost? What about engineered bacteria that secrete cancer-killling drugs or that consume harmful waste products in oil spills? At what point does a genetic or technological augmentation of living organisms become so offensive to you?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#47 - 2014-05-09 23:25:47 UTC
Even if you still cling to this ridiculous notion that cybernetics and genetic modifications are inherently immoral, where do you draw the line?
They are not inherently immoral. Mix it with capitalism, our current socio-economic order, and it soon becomes obvious that the reasons behind implementing genetic modifications is purely for profit which is traditionally defended with wars. Another interesting ingredient of capitalism - corruption - does not help the morality argument for manufacturing genetically modified organisms or artificially enhancing humans either.

Bottom line is, it's not immoral by default - our current way of thinking will produce immoral outcomes out of it in a very large majority of cases. We are simply not ready as a society for it.

Are hearing aids offensive to your sensibilities? Cochlear implants? Pacemakers, hip replacements?
Nope. As I said: " When you embrace h+ or genetic modifications past the use for overcoming disabilities/impairments..."

What about bananas, genetically modified indirectly through centuries of selective breeding?
Nope. That's natural selection.

What about strawberries that resist frost?
If engineered artificially in the lab, then yes - it's wrong. It's because no matter how smart people working on the genetic modifications think they are, I can assure you they are not smart enough to even see the consequences of their actions. Here's one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-y_N4u0uRQ . And they did try to cure tuberculosis with cigarettes as well. That was not even a century ago.

What about engineered bacteria that secrete cancer-killling drugs or that consume harmful waste products in oil spills?
Very dangerous when you have new breeds of bacteria increasingly resistant to anti-biotics. Alternative safer solution must be found. Until then, it's a necessary evil - just like using radiation and chemo-therapy to try to cure cancer.

At what point does a genetic or technological augmentation of living organisms become so offensive to you?
At the point of using it to gain advantage over others that are not using it.
At the point where discrimination of natural humans becomes accepted in the h+ society.
At the point where h+ is used purely for profit.
At the point where h+ is used for military, sociological, cultural and economical warfare.
There are many points, in fact, and none of them should be allowed to be crossed.
Jamagh
Grand Violations
#48 - 2014-05-10 00:29:48 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
I think the medical applications would be interesting, especially to restore or rewire some brain functions to those who are missing them due to genetics, circumstance (paralysis), or old age (ie: Alzheimer's). I imagine these implants could work in tandem with prosthetics like a replacement eye or leg.

Anyway, it was a good article. Thanks for posting it.

Edit:
Jamagh wrote:
So... M.O.M. conversions are coming? I would not be surprised to hear about a company named Mindwerks doing this.

I wonder how many people will get this reference.

Is it a Rifts reference? I remember playing a Gunslinger who got chopped in half by a couple Juicers and a deebee five minutes into my first time playing while trying to rob a bar..


Yes it is a Rifts reference. And man... your GM hated you... Or did that as a lesson not to try to hold up a bar.

"Please stop reopening silly rumor threads."  CCP Navigator.
Nakami Saans
Conclave of Independent Pilots
#49 - 2014-05-10 04:02:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Nakami Saans
I wish I had asked this community about this a few months ago. It would have made some great material for my psychology project on this subject. Bear

People: "You shouldn't burn bridges." Me: "I don't, I bomb them from orbit."
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#50 - 2014-05-10 06:08:06 UTC
Hopefully we will one day invent an implants that regains us the ability to transmit interesting information without a top ten list.

You can't even look up a recipe for apple pie any more without having to scroll past a dozen lists of the top ten awkward uses for apple pie.

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#51 - 2014-05-10 23:14:21 UTC
I have to chuckle when I read these sort of anti-GM rants. Genomes are naturally MUCH more plastic than people realise. Do you know how many genomes wheat has? Or canola? Just to name a couple. These are fusions of multiple species and contain multiple genomes. Genetic engineering at its finest - far more ambitious than anything we attempt (so far).

Yes, I am a genetic engineer IRL.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Previous page123