eRe4s3r wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 18:50:
Maybe I guess i have to see what i think of this when cloning humans is more than myth. I am aware my opinion on clones is pretty hardcore fundamentalist atm.. but i just think it'd be too dangerous to allow clones to walk the earth.

Ah, so you think one should be able to freely "retire" genetic copies? Or genetically modified copies?

See also: Blade Runner

Th reason that the laws are there is because if a human were ever cloned, it would actually force us into addressing this moral dilemma directly with no way of breaking free. It drives right to the heart of the fundamental question: "what makes us human?" Does the "soul" or "consciousness" if you will come solely from the merging of male and female DNA through reproduction? Certainly it is today, though we sidestep the genetic manipulation question with "test tube babies." But what happens when we can sysnthesize the DNA needed to make life from scratch? They've already been able to create the "primordial ooze" life evolved from in a lab, with carbon, hydrogen, and electricity present in a controlled environment.

It's not a simple argument, and probably not one that the belief systems humanity has now are mature enough to deal with responsibly.

^D^

dheer wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 08:59:
I'd certainly augment myself, if given the option. Especially if it were nano-technology and not complete replacement.

This is the only life I've got, so if I can improve it, lengthen it, etc. I will. Let everyone else argue about it.

A problem I foresee would be hearing something like "The Ileg 3.0 is coming out this fall." Damn it! I just bought my Ileg 2.0 a couple months ago.

Just as long as the Augs don't run Windows 7 Mobile. I don't need my eyes going all BSoD on me when I'm doing elite H+ activities like SCRRAMjet skiing in the Himalayas in 60 seconds or less.

^D^

Overon wrote on Aug 11, 2011, 23:47:
I agree with everything you say except when you said "elitism infected science circles." I wish that this negative attitude about elitism would go away. When you go to war you want to have the most elite soldiers, the most elite equipment, the most elite leaders. When you are sick you want the most elite doctors. When you watch sports, you want to see the most elite athletes. When you are being flown you want the most elite pilots. Expertise is desirable and that's what the elite have, expertise and this is what you want as well.

Wow, that closed in a very different way than I expected from the opening

I think what eRe4s3r was referring to is more "elitists" that have a self-centered attitude of entitlement, not the "creme de la creme" of the various groups in society.

The elitist response would have been "when are all you little people going to realize that we know what is best for you?"

^D^

What if someone was cloned, the deed was done what would you do to that clone? I can understand that you would ban human cloning. I can see your reasons for it, but if it happened, the clone would be afforded the same rights as everyone else. You would simply make it a crime to do the cloning in the first place?

Maybe I guess i have to see what i think of this when cloning humans is more than myth. I am aware my opinion on clones is pretty hardcore fundamentalist atm.. but i just think it'd be too dangerous to allow clones to walk the earth.

But if you have a clone you automatically lose a right *you* have - that is the right to have a unique identity.

I agree that clones are humans, but i don't think that we should allow them to walk society. And if i don't allow that, then how can i call them humans, i'd have to give them all rights then

So my argumentation is this, they are not humans, because we don't allow them to be.

And no Overon, i would not strip their rights when they'd walk around, i'd simply never let them walk around to begin with.

And if you change the dna sequence or add artificial new markers then i would still argue that clones should never have the same rights, or indeed any rights. Cloning an already existing human is a crime, if not by law, then against nature.

No no no. Clone should have the same rights as everyone else. They have the same thoughts and feelings as everyone else. Why would you afford them no rights or less right? Imagine a scenario when someone is a clone and is walking around. You don't know they are a clone and then you suddenly find out they are a clone, all of their rights gets stripped away?

Human cloning is a crime in some places, but it's hardly a crime again nature. Something can hardly be a crime against nature if it is found in nature mostly among single celled organisms.

I don't think it would introduce another age of slavery, not if you afforded clones the same rights as everyone else.

the appleseed manga is based on this concept, and it was very well done.. possibly the best treatment ive seen so far

And if they were, i would argue that one of them would need to be altered in such a way that they are not 100% identically, gene wise.)

Your are right though that physically clones would be human but when you say

a clone ...... the same DNA

then you are basically building my argumentation why a clone can NEVER be considered human.

Ok, but if you were cloned, and it was 100% identical, maybe it'd be you who's no longer human!

Transhumanism is inevitable, and while initially it will be used for restoring a human being to full functionality (like in the mentioned example of someone losing an arm and a leg and having them restored cybernetically,) it won't take any time at all before it starts becoming fashionable to "be metal."

Humanity can never do anything sensibly or with moderation, so we'll quickly have people that replace everything they can. Then Hollywood will get involved and the "stars" will start doing it, and it'll be like a tidal wave, since we're nothing if not absolute followers here in the US.

Btw, Peter F Hamilton writes really awesome sci-fi in which humanity goes in very interesting directions.
Pandora's Star (and its sequel Judas Unchained) is a really cool take on how humanity would work towards immortality.

The Void Trilogy then takes that setup and moves it 1200 years into the future.

Absolutely worth reading if you like sci-fi.

Creston

Of all my years lurking on BN, this thread has got to be the most interesting I have ever read, and it stems from a videogame! The times they are a changing.

I think all its pretty inevitable really. If the technology exists then people will want it, and people will find ways to get it to them. The thought of a black market of cybernetic bodyparts is a pretty grim prospect to behold, buying a new limb with no guarantees and no refunds would be pretty scary.

That is assuming that world governments would ban H+ augmentation. If not then I could see it becoming a new rat race entirely. Someone above mentioned the "iLeg 2.0" and they are dead on the money. The great thing about the "v1.0" human body is that you can upgrade it for free just by working out a lot, whereas if you had prosthetic legs and a new version becomes available, your pretty much screwed. I think it would create a certain elite class of top society that can afford to keep their bodies up to date with the latest gadgets and cybernetics while the less wealthy underclasses cannot.

Kind of scary to think that job applications could start requiring "eyesight of at least a 4.0 standard" and suddenly only the rich or extremely lucky have access to the good jobs in society.

Identical twins are not 100% perfect clones - that only happens once in billion billion billion births (so, only in theory and yes, i googled that) And if they were, i would argue that one of them would need to be altered in such a way that they are not 100% identically, gene wise.)

Your are right though that physically clones would be human but when you say

a clone ...... the same DNA

then you are basically building my argumentation why a clone can NEVER be considered human.

Imagine there'd be a clone of you, and he'd be physically impossible to tell apart from you. You'd have a serious problem if that clone decides to go rape someone, then disappear while leaving a false trail to you. How could ever prove you were not the rapist, in fact, how could you prove you are not the clone? Such situations are the reason i would even argue that human clones should never be allowed to exist in society. And never have ANY rights whatsoever. No matter how cruel that may sound, but the world just wouldn't work with clones and originals walking around. At least, clones that are not distinguishable from the original.

And if you change the dna sequence or add artificial new markers then i would still argue that clones should never have the same rights, or indeed any rights. Cloning an already existing human is a crime, if not by law, then against nature.

And thats coming from someone who'd gladly stick it up to nature with cybernetics.. but clones are something i can not ever agree on. The potential for abuse is so massive that it would essentially create the age of slavery all over again, because if cloning becomes possible, you have to face the reality that illegal cloning will happen. And if it does, then i want to have more rights than my illegal clone.

By the way, a clone would currently have no legal rights either.

I am not saying cloning shouldn't be researched though

This comment was edited on Aug 12, 2011, 10:16.

eRe4s3r wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 02:17:
...in my opinion clones are not humans...

Wait wait wait. A clone is not human? Of course they are human. Identical twins are human and a human clone would be too. Both a clone and an identical twin share the same DNA. What's the difference? I guess the only difference I can think of is that a clone does not share the identical womb environment as identical twins.

I'd certainly augment myself, if given the option. Especially if it were nano-technology and not complete replacement.

This is the only life I've got, so if I can improve it, lengthen it, etc. I will. Let everyone else argue about it.

A problem I foresee would be hearing something like "The Ileg 3.0 is coming out this fall." Damn it! I just bought my Ileg 2.0 a couple months ago.

Dr. D. Schreber wrote on Aug 12, 2011, 03:32:
It's like this thread just got back from a Ghost in the Shell screening.

Well you know the next GiTS series is supposed to come out in the next few years with any luck.

But, I'm a happy member of the H+ belief system. If anything can level the playing field, and ensure that we can surpass the weaknesses of our own coils. I'm all for it.

s: You're just a prototype. A prototype for me!

hehe I wasn't saying you were wrong, however this does not make us transhumans. All of these things just correct the performance of broken things back to their default value. Pacemakers are vastly inferior to the real thing, implanted lenses have a decay rate and do only restore lost vision, not improve it beyond that.

Transhumanism means improving a healthy human BEYOND that. Beyond just healthy and human, more and higher abilities than organically achievable, total immunity against viruses, bullet proof skin, heat vision, faster thinking, more memory, more strength etc.

Surgically implanted lenses, laser eye reshaping, pacemakers, cochlear implants.

One of the discarded storylines for a game I'm making, involved an apocalypse brought on by nanotechnology.

I do believe it may happen. The first nanovirus will do something cute, like give everyone a tattoo of a penis. The second nanovirus will kill or mutate most life on this planet.

You can always take your glasses off, try doing that with a heart or brain implant...

It's like this thread just got back from a Ghost in the Shell screening.