NationStates Jolt Archive

The other day a friend of mine showed me this link: www.humanupgrages.com.

At first, before realising its a joke, I found it quite interesting. It poses to be a site offering DNA surgery, theoretically meaning you could alter your body in any way, from merely changing eye colour or hair colour, to some of the more extravagant ideas, like giving yourself wings. Rather reminiscent of Brave New World.

However, DNA surgery is not that far off, and one day it should be possible. RNAi therapy is already on track, even if still nowhere near being ready for use. So what should the limits if DNA surgery be? I mean, should it be limited to simple things like improving one's beauty, changing one's hair/eye colour and so on, or should we go to the more extreme? What could be extreme? Genetically selecting the traits of one's offspring (meaning richer children will be naturally better off). Breeding armies of individuals with superior traits. Suppressing emotions. Creating individuals which are all the same and all equal (wouldn't communists love this). The list goes on.

Now, I am in favour of DNA surgery within limits, both as a means of eradicating disease and enhancing physical beauty. In this regard, I disagree with the view expressed in BNW that its necessarily "evil" so to speak. Yet, how far should it go? Should we go as far as the aforementioned situations? Or even further than that? Ethically, morally or even logically, is there anything that really necessitates the limitation of such technology? Discuss.

I don't think messing with your own DNA will do much to change your appearance. It will help against many genetic diseases though.
Genetically modifying your offspring is another case altogether. Trends and fashion might pose some serious trouble, one year everyones wants kids with bunny ears, and the next year kitty ears are in. And you can't just throw out the old kids and get new ones either (not as replacement anyway). And you can't easily 'fix' it afterwards either.

I don't think messing with your own DNA will do much to change your appearance. It will help against many genetic diseases though.
Genetically modifying your offspring is another case altogether. Trends and fashion might pose some serious trouble, one year everyones wants kids with bunny ears, and the next year kitty ears are in. And you can't just throw out the old kids and get new ones either (not as replacement anyway). And you can't easily 'fix' it afterwards either.
That, and it will be inherently superior to most other children. Possibly, more intelligent, more beautiful, stronger, healthier...Money will buy better traits.

It should be able to change your appearance, so far as your hair/eye colours are concerned at least.

I'd prefer not to live in Brave New World. DNA surgery should be strictly limited.

I'd prefer not to live in Brave New World. DNA surgery should be strictly limited.
But can we still have soma?

If it comes to fruition, I am sure as hell not taking the first wave of it...to expensive, most likely, and too likely to be full of bugs. I will wait for them to get it right and reasonably priced before I turn myself into a disease-resistant, hyper-intelligent, Greek-speaking, half-man, half-computer. It's a cool upgrade, but it may not be worth a steep price.

I'd prefer not to live in Brave New World. DNA surgery should be strictly limited.

Then again, Brave New World is human GM done by the government. The private sector wouldn't be able to create the same sort of strict caste system. For one thing, who'd buy an epsilon?

Then again, Brave New World is human GM done by the government. The private sector wouldn't be able to create the same sort of strict caste system. For one thing, who'd buy an epsilon?
Yeah, but if we have a world full of Alphas who'd clean the toilet?

Then again, Brave New World is human GM done by the government. The private sector wouldn't be able to create the same sort of strict caste system. For one thing, who'd buy an epsilon?
Well, if the private sector were to develop the technology, and gain the right to sell it, then what would be the situation? This is my point really. DNA surgery available both from the public and private sectors.

Limitless use damn it!

The god damn government has no right to tell anybody what they can and can’t do with their body.

As to the issue of whether or not a child’s DNA should be changeable in the whom, I really don’t see the problem with it. All reasonable people recognize that a fetus has no rights, and the law of most modern nations accepts that. A rare acknowledgement of our rights, really.

Yeah, but if we have a world full of Alphas who'd clean the toilet?

Robots.

Robots.Not robots. Droids.

Not robots. Droids.
Neither. Women

*runs away*

It should be able to change your appearance, so far as your hair/eye colours are concerned at least.I think hair dye and contacts would remain more popular. More direct effect, and cheaper.

Not robots. Droids.

Um... I don't think cleaning a toilet requires human traits (assuming by droid you mean android, i.e. humanlike robot). An arm that comes out of the wall with a cleaning attachment would surely be more efficient?

I think hair dye and contacts would remain more popular. More direct effect, and cheaper.
And damage your hair with them? Nah. I'd go for DNA surgery. However, it has one disadvantage...risk...you're playing with very sensitive technology really. So unless it had a high success rate, I would steer away from it.

Keep it to health, curing cancer and stuff like that...

Um... I don't think cleaning a toilet requires human traits (assuming by droid you mean android, i.e. humanlike robot). An arm that comes out of the wall with a cleaning attachment would surely be more efficient?
Droids come in all shapes and sizes!
Anyway, what if that arm breaks, huh? You have to fix it. Meanwhile the toilet either gets fucked up or goes without being used. Thus, uneven toilet ware. Even if a cleaning droid breaks, you can always have a spare around to go clean it up, while the usual droid is repaired.

Ethically, morally or even logically, is there anything that really necessitates the limitation of such technology? Discuss.

as with anything humans come into contact with, there will always be some individuals or groups who push the envelope.. ending in some type of disaster due to thinking they're little gods with flawless mentalities (polio vaccine and AIDS, for example). anything like this can be used for good and also bad purposes. i think it's inevitable that something tragic will eventually result, it being related to humans, ..that perhaps at this time is not obvious to our limited senses and disconnected grasp of the interconnectedness of everything.

have you ever read _Steel Beach_ by John Varley? check it out sometime. they can do whatever they want with their bodies.. there's no disease.. they live for many hundreds of years.. and there are resultant problems. needless to say it won't probably get to that point in our lifetimes. then again.. ? :)

i support the cause. however, how will drug monopolies handle it?

And damage your hair with them? Nah. I'd go for DNA surgery. However, it has one disadvantage...risk...you're playing with very sensitive technology really. So unless it had a high success rate, I would steer away from it.I don't think I'd want to wait 1 years for my hair to change color (that's for +- 12 cm of hair), and I doubt most would.
You'd be better off manipulating your hair to better withstand hair dyes :p

Vegetarianistica']i support the cause. however, how will drug monopolies handle it?
They’ll get in on the ground floor and their business will subtlety change over time.

Vegetarianistica']
have you ever read _Steel Beach_ by John Varley? check it out sometime. they can do whatever they want with their bodies.. there's no disease.. they live for many hundreds of years.. and there are resultant problems. needless to say it won't probably get to that point in our lifetimes. then again.. ? :)

i support the cause. however, how will drug monopolies handle it?
I'll check the book out :) The subject interests me.

I don't think I'd want to wait 1 years for my hair to change color (that's for +- 12 cm of hair), and I doubt most would.
You'd be better off manipulating your hair to better withstand hair dyes :p
1 year for permanent results? Not bad. :)

Well, if the private sector were to develop the technology, and gain the right to sell it, then what would be the situation? This is my point really. DNA surgery available both from the public and private sectors.

My point was mostly that if the private sector was the group starting out with it, they'd be less likely to establish a set caste system. As for the worries that with the private sector having a hold on it only the rich would get its advantages, the fact is that DNA treatments might not necessarily be as expensive as people think. Companies will want to lower costs and prices to reach a large consumer base. While the more complex techniques might be left to the rich, they wouldn't really give them many more advantages than they already have. Instead of paying their way into Harvard they would get in the normal way. They would still go to Harvard.

Droids come in all shapes and sizes!
Anyway, what if that arm breaks, huh? You have to fix it. Meanwhile the toilet either gets fucked up or goes without being used. Thus, uneven toilet ware. Even if a cleaning droid breaks, you can always have a spare around to go clean it up, while the usual droid is repaired.

Well, of course, you would use a repair robot where necessary, but you're not expecting things to be breaking all the time. Just hire one when necessary. Jobs that require movement would have them. When I said human traits, I was thinking personality, but still "android" does come from "andros", meaning man, and thus means human-like robots.

1 year for permanent results? Not bad. :)Well, not if you only want to change it once. But some people like variation.
I suppose I know one cartoonists that might be happy if this modification comes in bright blue :p

It's frivolous use of technology though and I don't see the point myself. I suppose you could change skin color as well.
But there's more potential for unseen changes. Internal production of ritalin, or other drugs (nicotine, caffeine, alcohol) ;)

That humanupgrades.com website must be a joke, right?

Simplenose, simplear, simpletooth, simplecunts, palmclits, multinipples?

Webfooted, 6th finger?

I bet this is a promotion for a new movie!

Well, not if you only want to change it once. But some people like variation.
I suppose I know one cartoonists that might be happy if this modification comes in bright blue :p

It's frivolous use of technology though and I don't see the point myself. I suppose you could change skin color as well.

Frivolous or not, I think its cool. Getting any hair/eye colour you want and getting it permanently would be great. If you want variation, you can still dye your hair or use contacts, but at least your permanent colour would be the one you wanted.

That humanupgrades.com website must be a joke, right?

Simplenose, simplear, simpletooth, simplecunts, palmclits, multinipples?

Webfooted, 6th finger?

I bet this is a promotion for a new movie!
Its a joke :p

Now, I am in favour of DNA surgery within limits, both as a means of eradicating disease and enhancing physical beauty. In this regard, I disagree with the view expressed in BNW that its necessarily "evil" so to speak. Yet, how far should it go? Should we go as far as the aforementioned situations? Or even further than that?
What's all this about how far we should go? I will go as far as I want.
Ethically, morally or even logically, is there anything that really necessitates the limitation of such technology? Discuss.
Not that I know of.

It would be the end of humanity, certainly, though one could make an argument that the result would be worth it. I wouldn't, myself. I for one think transhumanism is really just a way to replace God with technology. People desperately want immortality and transcendence, and don't like reality, so if they can't get it through religion, they try transhumanism.

It would be the end of humanity, certainly, though one could make an argument that the result would be worth it. I wouldn't, myself. I for one think transhumanism is really just a way to replace God with technology. People desperately want immortality and transcendence, and don't like reality, so if they can't get it through religion, they try transhumanism.
I'm not sure I understand what would be wrong with this 'immortality and transcendence' if people could actually have it.

DNA surgery for anything other than health treatment is wrong, its eugenics...it must be stopped.
Indeed.

I'm not sure I understand what would be wrong with this 'immortality and transcendence' if people could actually have it.
Agreed.

It would be the end of humanity, certainly,
How do you figure?

Go genetics!

I'm not sure I understand what would be wrong with this 'immortality and transcendence' if people could actually have it.

The issue is that for the most part they couldn't, and it would end up as an empty promise. GM might help health, but it isn't going to lead to transcendence.

The issue is that for the most part they couldn't, and it would end up as an empty promise. GM might help health, but it isn't going to lead to transcendence.
You never know where technology might lead us :)

How do you figure?

Go genetics!

Well, If we change ourselves into something not human, no more humanity...technically speaking anyways...

You never know where technology might lead us :)

Preferably other planets with more advanced life....assuming we weren't going to start some kind of planetary war once we got there.

DNA surgery would certainly be interesting, though I'm not quite sure of what my stance on its usage would be...

However, I will stand by the opinion that all problems will eventually be solved with nanobots. Or pie. Nanobot-pie.

DNA surgery would certainly be interesting, though I'm not quite sure of what my stance on its usage would be...

However, I will stand by the opinion that all problems will eventually be solved with nanobots. Or pie. Nanobot-pie.
For the time being anyway. I am awaiting the time at which genetics becomes the centrepiece of scientific progress.

Preferably other planets with more advanced life....assuming we weren't going to start some kind of planetary war once we got there.

Why does everyone assume that aliens will be more advanced than us? There wasn't any substantial barrier that would make us develop late, why couldn't we be one of the older races? Why do no sci-fi writers ever think of this?

Needed to get that out there.

For the time being anyway. I am awaiting the time at which genetics becomes the centrepiece of scientific progress.

This makes me think of a book I read, 'The Changeling Plague' by Syne Mitchell (I think...). Very interesting. Part of it dealt with the ability of people to change their genomes to fit what they wanted.

This makes me think of a book I read, 'The Changeling Plague' by Syne Mitchell (I think...). Very interesting. Part of it dealt with the ability of people to change their genomes to fit what they wanted.
Hmm I'll check it out :)

Why does everyone assume that aliens will be more advanced than us? There wasn't any substantial barrier that would make us develop late, why couldn't we be one of the older races? Why do no sci-fi writers ever think of this?

Needed to get that out there.
Finally someone who sees the light :)

Why does everyone assume that aliens will be more advanced than us? There wasn't any substantial barrier that would make us develop late, why couldn't we be one of the older races? Why do no sci-fi writers ever think of this?
In Star Wars, humans were one of the first races to start traveling the stars. That’s why they are so spread out.

Well, If we change ourselves into something not human, no more humanity...technically speaking anyways...

No more anything if you follow it through far enough. If humans alter their own DNA at will, they would eventually alter it far enough that they would be a different species. Thus, unable to reproduce with other humans, or I think at least...

It's possible that they would be able to reproduce, but produce sterile offspring. Like Ligers. Or (I think) mules.

This entire issue is deeply disturbing to me. DNA, altered or not, gets into the eco-system. Read any of the stories over the past few years of how biologists have found NDA in the fossils of dinosaurs? Altering DNA without total comprehension of its ultimate impact within the ecosphere is inherently foolish.

Why does everyone assume that aliens will be more advanced than us? There wasn't any substantial barrier that would make us develop late, why couldn't we be one of the older races? Why do no sci-fi writers ever think of this?

Needed to get that out there.

hey, I didn't say every other planet with life wold be more advanced, I just said if we got to one that was more advanced. Were it was less advanced, we'd just take it regardless. Of course, our planet's been around for about, 4.5 billion years, and the universe is about 10-15 billion years old, there could be much older life-supporting planets, and it wouldn't have to be that long, think how much we advanced in a few centuries, if we found a planet where they'd been around a few extra millenia....