Transhumanisim

[Ray Jones]

The body is a machine, just made of organic material. I mean "mechanic" doesn't really mean "non-organic". Wood, for instance, is an organic material, and can be (and was) used to build cool machines of any kind. The difference between a wooden machine and a living body is of course that where a body is made of living matter, can produce it's own energy, and can repair/rebuild itself, etc.

 

I think we could somehow come up with something similar, just not organic or anywhere near as elegant as life can.

 

But what's that thing with material anyway, at the end of the day it's all made of the same stuff, like electrons, protons, and neutrons, used to mass produce the elements we know in those things we call stars.

[Quanon]

Thing is how will people abuse this new technology .

 

Think of it , a robotic arm could have 4 times the power of a well trained meaty muscled arm .

 

Giving someone a punch with that would crush their skulls , or tear your car door off .

 

How would you setup a controle system , that doesn't look to tyranic , but doesn't give to much freedom so you can go to the blackmarket and put laserlights in your fingertops to annoy your teacher beyond belief .

 

Though I like the idea to expand my brain , I'm a sucker in Math and so I wouldn't mind a calculator or logics divice added to my head .

 

Then again , if big corporates start to produce the software / hardware we might end up with a Microsoft in Robotic Organs .

 

You would get all the same persons everywhere , cause they HAVE to use all the same products ...

 

Then again were nowhere near such things , so I'll let time to its job .

[Tommycat]

Um I said biological not organic. I said mechanical, not machines.

 

Biological components(as I intended it to mean, perhaps I needed to clarify) are parts specifically grown to do a task. Where as mechanical components are built for the task. Basically, anything that must be assembled by a man or machine tends to fail more often than something that is biologically grown to do that task.

 

I wouldn't worry too much about a Microsoft brain controller with an Intel chip inside it, as there will always be a Mac or Linux with an AMD or other company.

 

Come to think of it I can see machines in the future with biological components as a realistic possibility.

[Ray Jones]

Uh-huh, and when do you render organic to be non-biologic? And machines are non mechanic at what point exactly?

 

Biological components(as I intended it to mean, perhaps I needed to clarify) are parts specifically grown to do a task. Where as mechanical components are built for the task.

Biologically grown is no different to being assembled, it's just done another way. The point is when we build an robotic arm, we have different goals/criteria for it than nature has. Plus, nature had a little bit more time for proper development.

 

 

Basically, anything that must be assembled by a man or machine tends to fail more often than something that is biologically grown to do that task.

Poppycock. How do you want to compare what (for instance) a lift does to that what human legs do, anyways?

[PoiuyWired]

Biological components(as I intended it to mean, perhaps I needed to clarify) are parts specifically grown to do a task. Where as mechanical components are built for the task. Basically, anything that must be assembled by a man or machine tends to fail more o

 

Depends on the mentioned device, its purpose, effectiveness, specificness etc.

 

To say its failing more is kinda weird cause technically the body is repairing itself continuously for the most part. Also when specific function are called to, the artificial toys can be quite superior. I find my chainsaw a bit more effective at cutting wood than my teeth.

[Tommycat]

Uh-huh, and when do you render organic to be non-biologic? And machines are non mechanic at what point exactly?

I answered that in the next line.

 

Biologically grown is no different to being assembled, it's just done another way. The point is when we build an robotic arm, we have different goals/criteria for it than nature has. Plus, nature had a little bit more time for proper development.

I disagree. Assembly of a mechanical device is connecting of two or more pieces to create something. Assembly of a biological device is done through cellular replication.

 

Poppycock. How do you want to compare what (for instance) a lift does to that what human legs do, anyways?

I assume you mean the elevator lift, not a hydraulic lift. You cannot compare them. However you can compare their use with the body itself. The parts of the body are designed in the general idea of all the parts working together to accomplish a task. For example a Cheetah's legs are strong, but its the combination of the legs and remainder of the body that makes it fast. So Unless you are willing to include the whole body, I cannot answer.

[Ray Jones]

I disagree. Assembly of a mechanical device is connecting of two or more pieces to create something. Assembly of a biological device is done through cellular replication.

On atomic level, that "difference" disappears. However, if you take a bunch of cells, or a bunch of small components and stick them together, what's so different about it?

 

 

I assume you mean the elevator lift, not a hydraulic lift. You cannot compare them. However you can compare their use with the body itself. The parts of the body are designed in the general idea of all the parts working together to accomplish a task. For example a Cheetah's legs are strong, but its the combination of the legs and remainder of the body that makes it fast. So Unless you are willing to include the whole body, I cannot answer.

Let's take a human arm and robotic arm then, which are at least able to behave in similar way. How would you compare them regarding "functional failures"?

Hardly, because while that robotic arm is able to lift a hundred kilos non stop in a 24/7/365 manner it needs maintenance several times a year, your human arm can only lift 50 kilos 10 times and then needs a rest but usually no "maintenance" for like 80 years. You simply cannot compare those failure rates, because we have a completely different design with different goals and different presets here.

[Tommycat]

On atomic level, that "difference" disappears.

But we aren't assembling mechanical devices on an atomic level. What's your point in this? I made my distinction, explained what I meant. Now you're trying to say that they are the same. I disagree. They aren't assembled the same way. There is no outside force assembling biological machines.

 

Let's take a human arm and robotic arm then, which are at least able to behave in similar way. How would you compare them regarding "functional failures"?

Hardly, because while that robotic arm is able to lift a hundred kilos non stop in a 24/7/365 manner it needs maintenance several times a year, your human arm can only lift 50 kilos 10 times and then needs a rest but usually no "maintenance" for like 80 years. You simply cannot compare those failure rates, because we have a completely different design with different goals and different presets here.

Fine, lets say catastrophic failure. There are fewer catastrophic failures from biological parts failing in a catastrophic way in the same amount of time as a similar mechanical part with the same job. I mean we could point to a monkey's arm rather than a human arm for something that requires more up time. And having worked with robotic arms, they require cool down time as well. Not to mention that they do not get stronger if they mildly exceed their weight capacity. Quite the opposite.

 

I admitted that there are advantages in my first post in this thread. But in order to lift 250 kilos with your arm you also need the remainder of your frame replaced as well. Your spine would need to be strengthened, back musculature would also need replacing. If you're talking about for physical labor, You are talking about much more replacing. Then there is blood creation, which comes from the marrow in our bones(If I remember my A&P classes right... its been a while). If you replace too much of your skeletal structure, you risk not having enough blood being created.

 

Honestly it would make more sense to do the Shadowrun Rigger method rather than the General Grievous method. Tap into neural functions to control mechanical creations(vehicles).

[Ray Jones]

But we aren't assembling mechanical devices on an atomic level.

That we are not assembling stuff on atomic level is not true. We already have technology that allows us to grab and assemble single atoms together to objects, and yes, even mechanical devices, like a nanoturbine made of not more than 6 molecules, have been constructed already.

 

 

What's your point in this?

That we are in fact, like all things made of matter in this universe, nothing but a bunch of atoms.

 

 

I made my distinction, explained what I meant. Now you're trying to say that they are the same. I disagree. They aren't assembled the same way.

Yes, but..? I said if we take a close enough look, there is no true difference in the assembly of mechanical and biological "devices".

 

 

There is no outside force assembling biological machines.

Not sure if that is true. Organ transplantation could be considered as 'assembling modules of biological machines'.

 

 

Fine, lets say catastrophic failure. There are fewer catastrophic failures from biological parts failing in a catastrophic way in the same amount of time as a similar mechanical part with the same job.

Example please? I mean a plane's turbine or a car's brake does not really have a biological counterpart. My argument stands, comparison is not possible.

 

 

I mean we could point to a monkey's arm rather than a human arm for something that requires more up time. And having worked with robotic arms, they require cool down time as well. Not to mention that they do not get stronger if they mildly exceed their weight capacity. Quite the opposite.

Hence difference in design, goal and presets.

 

 

I admitted that there are advantages in my first post in this thread. But in order to lift 250 kilos with your arm you also need the remainder of your frame replaced as well. Your spine would need to be strengthened, back musculature would also need replacing. If you're talking about for physical labor, You are talking about much more replacing.

But I don't want to lift 250 kilos. I introduced that example to show that you cannot compare human and robotic arms that easily. However, I think robotic arms used as prostheses is a good thing nonetheless. But the aim here is not necessarily lifting of tons, but rather an almost *exact* copy as replacement for a human arm, for instance. When we are able to do what nature can, then we can take one step further and think about enhancements.

 

 

Then there is blood creation, which comes from the marrow in our bones(If I remember my A&P classes right... its been a while). If you replace too much of your skeletal structure, you risk not having enough blood being created.

I am well aware of that. However, no one wanted to replace a complete skeleton, but if, sure that'd be an issue to solve.

 

 

Honestly it would make more sense to do the Shadowrun Rigger method rather than the General Grievous method. Tap into neural functions to control mechanical creations(vehicles).

Depends on what your aim is. I think some vehicle won't necessarily help someone who lost an arm and leg in the same way as an artificial replacement would do. However, neural interfaced controllers for big ass machines or maybe just the average everyday technology like a computer or car is something we will see for sure in the future too.

[PoiuyWired]

Well, the general mundane people just want to live their lives and a reasonable comfortable and convenient way, and a few limbs to replace their lost ones would be of great help. Hack, getting a few limbs in addition to your normal ones would be nice also... Dr. Octopus style... or just some little extra something to please your girlfriend?

 

Hmmm... soon I can have a full sized gundam at by garage. Next time someone piss me off at the bar I can actually yell Gundam Fight!

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Thing is how will people abuse this new technology .

Not more than they abuse existing medicine (doping comes to mind). I fail to see how making yourself better is 'abuse' in the first place.

 

Think of it , a robotic arm could have 4 times the power of a well trained meaty muscled arm .

And our generation has 4 times the lifespan of the Ancient Egyptians.

 

Giving someone a punch with that would crush their skulls , or tear your car door off .

Reality check, please. We don't need robotic arms - we have these

You're making this kind of firepower sound like something new. We're not in the Stone Age anymore, we're in the modern-day world with atomic bombs, machine guns, and rockets. I don't worry the least bit about an arm that could crush my skull. They invented such a weapon in the Stone Age. It's called a club.

 

And even if you're strong enough to rip out a car door or smash skulls, so what? Many people in the world are that strong (watch a sumo-wrestling match or one of those shows where super-strong men compete to push trailers the fastest down a course)? We don't go about restraining them, do we? Do sumo wrestlers and boxing champions need to walk around in handcuffs because they otherwise smash someone's face?

 

How would you setup a control system , that doesn't look to tyrannic , but doesn't give to much freedom so you can go to the black market and put laser lights in your fingertips to annoy your teacher beyond belief.

And that'd be different to simply buying a laser pointer how?

 

Though I like the idea to expand my brain , I'm a sucker in Math and so I wouldn't mind a calculator or logics divice added to my head.

If such things are developed, there'll no doubt be ways to keep students from using them to cheat.

 

You would get all the same persons everywhere , cause they HAVE to use all the same products ...

Why, though? Existing mechanical aids (glasses, artificial legs, contact lenses, hearing aids, etc.) are all different, and, in the case of vital stuff like artificial hearts, kinda need to pass quality control anyway. Pacemakers don't crash and require reboots every other second, nor will they ever unless we descend into a Soviet Russia-style regime when medicine is below sub-standard and saving lives is not considered important.

 

As for 'all being the same people', you're thinking in sci-fi terms, where everyone look like Terminators or something. Have you seen the artificial hands prostheses they're developing? They look pretty much just like human hands, and you can even control them rudimentary through brain signals, pretty much the same way you control your natural hands.

 

Think of it this way: you're going to buy contact lenses. The lenses are all from the same producer. Yet they're all different colours, and even if everyone in the world required contacts, all from the same producer, they'd still have different-colored contacts - unless of course they all got hit by some sort of huge fad or something.

 

Yes, technically this could lead to a dystopia where the ruling elite is much stronger, smarter, and so on than the proletariat. But this is not exactly a new risk. We already have ways to make ourselves much stronger and smarter than everyone else, don't we? If I lift weights seven days a week at the nearest fitness gyms, I would eventually become really strong, right? So technically, we could have a dystopia where fitness studios, weight-lifting and steroids were limited to the ruling elite and the proletariat was a bunch of piss-weak, unfit wretches.

 

Yet we're not the least bit afraid of training studios.

[Web Rider]

Honestly it would make more sense to do the Shadowrun Rigger method rather than the General Grievous method. Tap into neural functions to control mechanical creations(vehicles).

 

The pointed difference between the two is that "peoples" bodies in Shadowrun were not destroyed. Grievous is essentially a major amputee because his body was destroyed.

 

 

You would get all the same persons everywhere , cause they HAVE to use all the same products ...

Except for different appearances, people ARE the same everywhere, and we all do use all the same parts. Sure, they come in a variety of shapes, and two primary designs(male and female), but if you were to compare my arm to the arm of anyone else in the world, the setup would be exactly the same.

 

And as far as that goes, your outsides are purely aesthetics anyway, and that's the simplest part of building a machine, the box it comes in.