NationStates Jolt Archive

Lets say, in the near future, cybernetic implants became available on the open market, and where sophisticated enough to enhance, or at least replace fully, what they're replacing. (IE a pair of cybernetic eyes would be equal to, or greater then, biological human eyes.) Would you augment yourself?

And, as a follow up question, do you think it will ever happen?

Replace defective organs, sure. Approximate normal human functionality in the deformed or disabled? Sure. But to augment normal, healthy humans past their limits? Hell no, that's asking for trouble.

I won't even wear contact lenses; I'm not about to have my eyes replaced.
Besides, do I really need to make myself vulnerable to being hacked?

I won't even wear contact lenses; I'm not about to have my eyes replaced.
Besides, do I really need to make myself vulnerable to being hacked?

A cybernetic eye can't be hacked, unless you bothered to get an Eye-Pod or an Eye-Phone.

I won't even wear contact lenses; I'm not about to have my eyes replaced.
Besides, do I really need to make myself vulnerable to being hacked?

Assuming that the engineers didn't do something daft like install a radio receiver on the cybernetic implants and played it safe with shielded hardwire linkages, anyone capable of remotely hacking into the electrical systems of a cybernetic system is about equally as capable of remotely hacking into a flesh and blood body, and no, I don't mean the kind of hacking that involves axes or machetes.

How much would it cost?

The thought of Grandpa dancing the Watusi when the neighbors wanted in their garage comes to mind, but it's far enough in the future such considerations may yet come into play. I think it's acceptable for those as want it, but it's not for me, personally.

Yeah, probably.

I want a bionic penis. :D

Lets say, in the near future, cybernetic implants became available on the open market, and where sophisticated enough to enhance, or at least replace fully, what they're replacing. (IE a pair of cybernetic eyes would be equal to, or greater then, biological human eyes.) Would you augment yourself?

And, as a follow up question, do you think it will ever happen?

Damn right I would.

Absolutely, no reason to stay connected to this pile of flesh more than absolutely required.

I'd replace my eyes and left knee in a heartbeat, but they're defective anyway. But I'd also go for heart and lung replacements to extend my life, and many of the other internal organs to stave off organ failure.


Stuff like legs and arms can wait until they start to fail due to aging. I don't want to be superman; I just want to live forever!

Dr.Studd's rules.

No way, we throw people like that out the airlock. :P

Technology is the way to immortality!

Or at least what passes for immortality at a glance.
It still beats dying just because your body cells have finished their "cloning" cycle.

Mechanical bodies are less messy.

Technology is the way to immortality!

Or at least what passes for immortality at a glance.
It still beats dying just because your body cells have finished their "cloning" cycle.Mortality is an unfortunate, but necessary aspect of humanity. The human brain is self destructive and thus new generations are constantly needed.

As for cybernetic implants... I'm not sure I'd bother -- that is with physical implants I mean. Mental implants probably. Quicker access to my memories, the ability to memorise something on demand, being more able to cope with concepts like left and right. Stuff like that.

Internal bodily replacements? Nah, I'll just stick with my trusty Iron Monger suit. :gas:

well id do the direct interface with stuff ones or anti disease ones but im not replacing perfectly working body parts unless the cybernetic parts work in harmony with the flesh and blood

Lets say, in the near future, cybernetic implants became available on the open market, and where sophisticated enough to enhance, or at least replace fully, what they're replacing. (IE a pair of cybernetic eyes would be equal to, or greater then, biological human eyes.) Would you augment yourself?

And, as a follow up question, do you think it will ever happen?

In a (prosthetic) heartbeat.

And I definitely think it's going to happen. Cybernetic implants that improve normal sensory function (giving rudimentary sight to the blind) already exist in the R&D phase. I think the best we can do at the moment is 16 pixel resolution.

Yes, absolutely.

http://www.blatruc.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/bill-gates-borg.gif

Fuck no.

I wouldn't under any circumstances get cybernetic implants. Better to die on your own than become a cybernetic freak.

I would get Neural Interface, integrate a mini processor that could contain additional space for my personal library (such as geography knowledge, biology, and other scientology), of course I wouldnt refuse bionic eyes to enhance my perception and I would install cybernetic kidney that would be able to filter out all toxic materials in my blood, as well as cancer vessels. ;)

The question is - Why not?

I would get Neural Interface, integrate a mini processor that could contain additional space for my personal library (such as geography knowledge, biology, and other scientology), of course I wouldnt refuse bionic eyes to enhance my perception and I would install cybernetic kidney that would be able to filter out all toxic materials in my blood, as well as cancer vessels. ;)

The question is - Why not?

The question is why you would want Scientology stuff in your head. You've obviously lost your mind and need a cybernetic one.

Hell yeah I'd get cybernetic implants! Just one more step closes to the technological Singularity! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity)

Fuck no.

I wouldn't under any circumstances get cybernetic implants. Better to die on your own than become a cybernetic freak.

Because clearly hopping around on one leg is better than getting a prosthetic :rolleyes:

Machines are crude. Cells are too complex to be matched by mechanics. Tools like jackhammers, computers, and cars excel at certain functions have very few abilities compared to the many of tissues. Eye-replacements may be made that're like camera placements into your brain but will they heal? Feel the air? Clean themselves and show expression w/tears? Where would the power source be? How often would they need lubricated, repowered, or repaired? It's fun to imagine cyborgs, robots, and androids but a creator can only make things lesser than himself.

Machines are crude. Cells are too complex to be matched by mechanics. Tools like jackhammers, computers, and cars excel at certain functions have very few abilities compared to the many of tissues. Eye-replacements may be made that're like camera placements into your brain but will they heal? Feel the air? Clean themselves and show expression w/tears? Where would the power source be? How often would they need lubricated, repowered, or repaired? It's fun to imagine cyborgs, robots, and androids but a creator can only make things lesser than himself.

The word Never ought not be used. It's unscientific. Avoid words like Always and Never.

Additional parts that expanded human functions.
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/esp.html
These have the same nature as other appliances but are useful add-ons b/c they'd give men senses we don't biologically have. Imagine such a belt synced w/a GPS so it'd have a secondary vibration for chosen destinations. Picture a whole culture where no one asks for directions. I anticipate that were such input-patches to become standard amongst a people they would somehow become both different and superior to regular humans as their new senses mixed w/other observations to create a fuller understanding of reality.

The question is why you would want Scientology stuff in your head. You've obviously lost your mind and need a cybernetic one.

What I meant by Scientology is all science disciplines, such as chemistry, physics, biology, psychology and etc. Why would I want to have this knowledge? Why not? If you don't have desire to broaden your perspective and understand the world around you better than religion based explanation that God has created stuff and thats how it is - you don't need to understand anything more, go back to your farm and pray for forgiveness - then you are the one that needs cybernetic brains to fix your short mindedness.

What I meant by Scientology is all science disciplines, such as chemistry, physics, biology, psychology and etc. Why would I want to have this knowledge? Why not? If you don't have desire to broaden your perspective and understand the world around you better than religion based explanation that God has created stuff and thats how it is - you don't need to understand anything more, go back to your farm and pray for forgiveness - then you are the one that needs cybernetic brains to fix your short mindedness.

What you said. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology)

What you meant. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science)

Oh, I'm so sorry that your American eyes have been offended by non-native English speaker. I beg your pardon and I hope your biological eyes didn't suffer from major nervous shock.

Oh, I'm so sorry that your American eyes have been offended by non-native speaker of English. I beg your pardon and I hope your biological eyes didn't suffer from major nervous shock.

I'm not offended. Mostly I'm just lost at the moment.

But, for future reference, Scientology is a religion. Science is a field. Scientology also happens to be a very funny religion (in my opinion), and you should read the link I left you.

I've read it and yes its a funny one. Here is what I would also put into my cybernetic brain - wikipedia. ;)

I wouldn't mind my eyes having night vision built-in, as well as IR, UV and anti-gettingblindedbyasuddenflash stuff as a bonus. However, I can't stand the idea of having my biological eyes plucked out for it. But as the general idea, cybernetic augmentation is fun. Maybe implanting subdermal armour plates won't necessitate having anything cut out?

Replace defective organs, sure. Approximate normal human functionality in the deformed or disabled? Sure. But to augment normal, healthy humans past their limits? Hell no, that's asking for trouble.

No it isn't. It's asking for trouble when we assume that movies that act as if anyone who's augmented would automatically be some sort of super-evil "fuck everyone" kind of guy.

When really odds are they'd be more compassionate and understanding than anyone else, because they'd be more capable of being so.

No it isn't. It's asking for trouble when we assume that movies that act as if anyone who's augmented would automatically be some sort of super-evil "fuck everyone" kind of guy.

When really odds are they'd be more compassionate and understanding than anyone else, because they'd be more capable of being so.

I doubt that.

I'd bet they'd be more likely to super-evil than super-compassionate.

They'd become a major threat to real humans, a threat that would eventually have to faced.

I doubt that.

I'd bet they'd be more likely to super-evil than super-compassionate.

They'd become a major threat to real humans, a threat that would eventually have to faced.

http://www.mckellen.com/images/3298.jpg

I doubt that.

I'd bet they'd be more likely to super-evil than super-compassionate.

They'd become a major threat to real humans, a threat that would eventually have to faced.

Because clearly someone with a prosthetic arm capable of grasping with enough force to crush a human skull is going to start killing people willy nilly. Because, you know, people with prosthetic legs these days are snatching purses on the street and running away on their enhanced legs.
Oh wait, that's utter bullshit.

http://www.mckellen.com/images/3298.jpg

http://www.freewebs.com/xfreak0310/home%20page.jpg

Also, thanks. I wasn't aware Ian McKellen had his own site.

Because clearly someone with a prosthetic arm capable of grasping with enough force to crush a human skull is going to start killing people willy nilly. Because, you know, people with prosthetic legs these days are snatching purses on the street and running away on their enhanced legs.
Oh wait, that's utter bullshit.

I don't think anyone has prostetic arms capable of crushing skulls. And I'm sure there is at least one thief with a prosthetic leg.

Just wait until the augmentations start becoming greater (if they do). If certain people start to have access to greater power, they are likely going to abuse it.

I don't think anyone has prostetic arms capable of crushing skulls. And I'm sure there is at least one thief with a prosthetic leg.

Just wait until the augmentations start becoming greater (if they do). If certain people start to have access to greater power, they are likely going to abuse it.

Yes, Chicken Little. I bet the sky really is going to fall down any minute. :rolleyes:

Your inability to understand basic differences in verb tenses and phrasing notwithstanding, the fact that you're sure there's at least one thief with a prosthetic leg is pretty thoroughly irrelevant. Now, if you could show a correlation between having a prosthetic and committing a crime (for instance, are those with prosthetic legs more or less likely to commit a crime compared to the average, non-prosthetic individual), your argument might hold some (perhaps a little) water.
I won't hold my breath for that analysis. Even if I had cybernetically enhanced lungs.

http://www.freewebs.com/xfreak0310/home%20page.jpg

Also, thanks. I wasn't aware Ian McKellen had his own site.


No problem.

Also:

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g220/moonstone_icons/Personal%20Icons/My%20LJ%20Graphics/XMenStillsHeaderPhoenix.png

Psst... Jean Grey is HOT!

Yes, Chicken Little. I bet the sky really is going to fall down any minute. :rolleyes:

Well when you put it that way...

An asteroid could hit the earth...in what...2030 or something?
A missle could be launched and destroy whatever it hits
a plane could fall from the sky, accidentily or on purpose...
bombs could be dropped from planes..

so the sky could fall...

Edit: you added more after I quoted you...
"Your inability to understand basic differences in verb tenses and phrasing notwithstanding, the fact that you're sure there's at least one thief with a prosthetic leg is pretty thoroughly irrelevant. Now, if you could show a correlation between having a prosthetic and committing a crime (for instance, are those with prosthetic legs more or less likely to commit a crime compared to the average, non-prosthetic individual), your argument might hold some (perhaps a little) water.
I won't hold my breath for that analysis. Even if I had cybernetically enhanced lungs."

First of all, please forgive me for not giving a shit about 100% grammar and all that jazz. I wasn't aware I was being graded, Jack.

And also, haven't you heard...correlation does not equal casuation! All you people love to throw that phrase around so much, so there you go.

But, as I am not in law enforcement, I haven't the slightest clue as where to find statistics on criminals with prosthetics.

My argument comes from the phrase "power corrups, absolute power corrups absolutely". As augmentations become greater and greater, those with the augmentations will have more power to do what they please to others, and some will certainly try enforce their will on others.

No problem.

Also:

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g220/moonstone_icons/Personal%20Icons/My%20LJ%20Graphics/XMenStillsHeaderPhoenix.png

Psst... Jean Grey is HOT!

Hawt. *nod*

Well when you put it that way...

An asteroid could hit the earth...in what...2030 or something?
A missle could be launched and destroy whatever it hits
a plane could fall from the sky, accidentily or on purpose...
bombs could be dropped from planes..

so the sky could fall...

Hardly, given that none of those are "the sky."

Hawt. *nod*

There's something about a woman who can deatomize you...

There's something about a woman who can deatomize you...

There sure is.

I don't see why not. Though if I can get a peg-anything instead I'd go for that. Because peg-anythings are awesome. Peg legs, peg arms, pegs faces, peg lungs.

I doubt that.

I'd bet they'd be more likely to super-evil than super-compassionate.

They'd become a major threat to real humans, a threat that would eventually have to faced.

Oh, bull marlarky.

To be specific, I'm talking about people with increased intelligence. Take a look at intelligence and consciousness in the various species on Earth. The more intelligent the species, the more kind and compassionate they are capable of being, with the culmination--so far--in humans. I personally think this has to do with the correlation between emotion, consciousness, and intelligence.

Someone with enhanced intelligence would have enhanced emotions as well as enhanced consciousness. They'd be more capable of understanding their own minds. Personally, I think that would lead to enhanced capability for compassion. It has so far as we can see, anyway.

No it isn't. It's asking for trouble when we assume that movies that act as if anyone who's augmented would automatically be some sort of super-evil "fuck everyone" kind of guy.

When really odds are they'd be more compassionate and understanding than anyone else, because they'd be more capable of being so.

Cartoon villainy hardly has anything to do with my concerns for augmenting healthy undamaged humans. If anything, you'd have to be a complete crack-smoking Pollyanna to think that the military of any sufficiently developed nation will have the moral dilemma to avoid exploiting technological breakthroughs given the chance. Ever since they turned Einstein's Theory of Relativity into the atom bomb, it's pretty much a given.

Cartoon villainy hardly has anything to do with my concerns for augmenting healthy undamaged humans. If anything, you'd have to be a complete crack-smoking Pollyanna to think that the military of any sufficiently developed nation will have the moral dilemma to avoid exploiting technological breakthroughs given the chance. Ever since they turned Einstein's Theory of Relativity into the atom bomb, it's pretty much a given.

Please note, again, I was talking specifically about enhanced intelligence, and said "more likely" and "capable" not "guaranteed." Of course the potential for abuse exists. I'm not denying that and I'd be a fool to deny that.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't avail ourselves of technology. Computers, for example, can be used to completely ruin a person's life, steal their identity, and make them wholly miserable. On the other hand, computers have enormous benefits for research, business, and lots of other applications.

This is no different. We'll have problems at first, but you're basically talking about the sky falling. It's not going to fall.

(Oh, and as for nuclear explosives? Nuclear explosives, among other things, were enough to keep countries so used to always gearing up for war against each other from fighting long enough to realize that cooperation actually does work better. In other words, the most destructive weapon we've got is the most powerful arbiter of peace we've got. )

Oh, bull marlarky.

To be specific, I'm talking about people with increased intelligence. Take a look at intelligence and consciousness in the various species on Earth. The more intelligent the species, the more kind and compassionate they are capable of being, with the culmination--so far--in humans. I personally think this has to do with the correlation between emotion, consciousness, and intelligence.

Someone with enhanced intelligence would have enhanced emotions as well as enhanced consciousness. They'd be more capable of understanding their own minds. Personally, I think that would lead to enhanced capability for compassion. It has so far as we can see, anyway.

Sure people are capable of being compassionate, and people are also capable of great evil. You seem to be gladly ignoring the other side of human nature, and thinking that enhancements will only affect the lighter side of human nature.

My argument comes from the phrase "power corrups, absolute power corrups absolutely". As augmentations become greater and greater, those with the augmentations will have more power to do what they please to others, and some will certainly try enforce their will on others.

You mean just like some people do now? I suppose you would be in favour of banning all attempts at becoming exceptionally physically fit, as this would give people more power in the same way that cybernetic augmentations would.

You mean just like some people do now? I suppose you would be in favour of banning all attempts at becoming exceptionally physically fit, as this would give people more power in the same way that cybernetic augmentations would.

Not at all. People have been physically fit since the dawn of the species.

And most people have the ability to become physically fit. Not everyone would be able to have these cybernetic augmentations, as I'm sure they'd be insanely expensive, and would only create an entrenched elite that would be very, very difficult to overcome.

Sure people are capable of being compassionate, and people are also capable of great evil. You seem to be gladly ignoring the other side of human nature, and thinking that enhancements will only affect the lighter side of human nature.

Evil is in the eye of the beholder.

But pithy phrases aside, let me explain further. As humans, while we're sentient, we're not fully conscious of our own minds. We have consciousness to a degree, but not full consciousness. We're still greatly affected by our instincts and by impulses we can't fully control. Take, for example, phobias. Phobias wouldn't occur in individuals who are fully conscious because phobias require a disconnect between emotions, instinct, and thought.

Or for that matter look at how often we fail to grasp our own emotions or often fail to be fully compassionate towards others.

Compassion itself is all about being conscious and recognizing that others are like you, that they have hopes, dreams, emotions, all the jazzy human stuff. With the limits to human consciousness we can only feel so much compassion towards others. We have to make a real effort to feel more than basic compassion towards our closest family members or friends, and many people don't even bother doing that.

With higher consciousness comes a much better ease for understanding about other people, and as such, more compassion. It's a positive cycle.

Now, again, I did not say at all that it would be guaranteed. Of course there would be abuses and arrogance and the like. But it would not be total and complete the way you seem to be depicting it. Far from it.

I have a bionic username!

Not at all. People have been physically fit since the dawn of the species.
Irrelevant. They still have more power to impose their will on others than the average person.

And most people have the ability to become physically fit. Not everyone would be able to have these cybernetic augmentations, as I'm sure they'd be insanely expensive, and would only create an entrenched elite that would be very, very difficult to overcome.

They would only become cheaper as time goes on. The technology and the methods of manufacturing it would improve. And not everyone can become fit to the same degree. There will always be those who are blessed by genetics that are stronger and faster. But this too is irrelevant. Becoming physically fit makes you more able to impose your will on others in the same way that getting a cybernetic arm that could punch through walls would, though not to the same degree.

Irrelevant. They still have more power to impose their will on others than the average person.



They would only become cheaper as time goes on. The technology and the methods of manufacturing it would improve. And not everyone can become fit to the same degree. There will always be those who are blessed by genetics that are stronger and faster. But this too is irrelevant. Becoming physically fit makes you more able to impose your will on others in the same way that getting a cybernetic arm that could punch through walls would, though not to the same degree.

Doesn't matter. Your point is irrelevant to mine. Being physically fit helps the species evolve.

Having augmentations ruins evolution.

People have been, and have had to be, physically fit. We already know th risks of fit people.

We don't know the risks of augmented people. I'd rather not have world wide holocaust caused by some arrogant son of a bitch who thinks he's a god because he had the money to pay for augmentation.

Also, why would the first people to get enhancements allow others to receive it when by taking control with their enhanced mind, bodies, whatever, they can entrench themselves and their power forever?

Evil is in the eye of the beholder.

But pithy phrases aside, let me explain further. As humans, while we're sentient, we're not fully conscious of our own minds. We have consciousness to a degree, but not full consciousness. We're still greatly affected by our instincts and by impulses we can't fully control. Take, for example, phobias. Phobias wouldn't occur in individuals who are fully conscious because phobias require a disconnect between emotions, instinct, and thought.

Or for that matter look at how often we fail to grasp our own emotions or often fail to be fully compassionate towards others.

Compassion itself is all about being conscious and recognizing that others are like you, that they have hopes, dreams, emotions, all the jazzy human stuff. With the limits to human consciousness we can only feel so much compassion towards others. We have to make a real effort to feel more than basic compassion towards our closest family members or friends, and many people don't even bother doing that.

With higher consciousness comes a much better ease for understanding about other people, and as such, more compassion. It's a positive cycle.

Now, again, I did not say at all that it would be guaranteed. Of course there would be abuses and arrogance and the like. But it would not be total and complete the way you seem to be depicting it. Far from it.

Crap, missed your post when I responded to Ifreann!

Anyways, here it goes!

First off, insticts are there for a reason, and shouldn't be discarded. People shouldn't live soley of instict, though rather live soley of instinct and emotion than soley of reason.

Some people do not deserve compassion. And quite frankly, compassion outside of friends and family (our modern day tribe, so to speak), isn't necessary, though it is worthy of praise.

I don't see how more intelligence equals more compassion. It could be the exact opposite. More intelligence could lead to more arragance and disdain, not compassion. Or maybe both, depending on the person.

Doesn't matter. Your point is irrelevant to mine. Being physically fit helps the species evolve.

Having augmentations ruins evolution.

People have been, and have had to be, physically fit. We already know th risks of fit people.

Buuuulllllshit. Being physically fit helps the species survive in conditions where physical fitness are useful. Hunter gatherer societies, for one. However, with the advent of things like agriculture and industry, they become increasingly irrelevant.
Human ingenuity, intelligence, and inventiveness have been the sole determinants of our social progress for the last several thousand years. It doesn't matter how fast and how far you can run, and how strong you are, when a single spear or a single arrow, tipped with steel, can kill you. It matters even less when you get into the realm of the guns you seem to love so much. Guns that wouldn't exist if "physical fitness" had anything to do with human progress.
This mystical vision you have of a perfect world of hunter gatherer societies is nothing more than a pretty little fantasy you tell yourself. No one else is at all fooled by it, at all taken in.


We don't know the risks of augmented people. I'd rather not have world wide holocaust caused by some arrogant son of a bitch who thinks he's a god because he had the money to pay for augmentation.

Also, why would the first people to get enhancements allow others to receive it when by taking control with their enhanced mind, bodies, whatever, they can entrench themselves and their power forever?

I see. Why indeed. After all, the first gunsmiths hoarded their technology, and no one but the descendents of gunsmiths and those they trusted ever owned guns. The Wright brothers never made heavier-than-air flight technology available to people they didn't like. No one but those who are already in power own iPods, or access the internet, or the stock market.

...oh wait, BUUULLLLSHIIIIIIT.

Doesn't matter. Your point is irrelevant to mine. Being physically fit helps the species evolve.
Lots of successful breeding helps a species evolve.

Having augmentations ruins evolution.
Who gives a shit?

People have been, and have had to be, physically fit. We already know th risks of fit people.
This changes nothing.

We don't know the risks of augmented people. I'd rather not have world wide holocaust caused by some arrogant son of a bitch who thinks he's a god because he had the money to pay for augmentation.
And of course, there will be nobody who would attempt to stop such a person. The police forces of the world would sit back and scratch their asses. Other people who had been similarly augmented would be too busy ruining evolution to help. After all, that's what happens when weightlifters get pissed and beat people up.

OH WAIT! No it isn't.

Also, why would the first people to get enhancements allow others to receive it when by taking control with their enhanced mind, bodies, whatever, they can entrench themselves and their power forever?

Capitalism. It is in the interests of the people who provide these enhancements to allow as many people as possible to receive them.

Buuuulllllshit. Being physically fit helps the species survive in conditions where physical fitness are useful. Hunter gatherer societies, for one. However, with the advent of things like agriculture and industry, they become increasingly irrelevant.
Human ingenuity, intelligence, and inventiveness have been the sole determinants of our social progress for the last several thousand years. It doesn't matter how fast and how far you can run, and how strong you are, when a single spear or a single arrow, tipped with steel, can kill you. It matters even less when you get into the realm of the guns you seem to love so much. Guns that wouldn't exist if "physical fitness" had anything to do with human progress.
This mystical vision you have of a perfect world of hunter gatherer societies is nothing more than a pretty little fantasy you tell yourself. No one else is at all fooled by it, at all taken in.




I see. Why indeed. After all, the first gunsmiths hoarded their technology, and no one but the descendents of gunsmiths and those they trusted ever owned guns. The Wright brothers never made heavier-than-air flight technology available to people they didn't like. No one but those who are already in power own iPods, or access the internet, or the stock market.

...oh wait, BUUULLLLSHIIIIIIT.

Phyical fitness does play a role human progress. Sexual selection, for one.

To your second part.

Augmentation are a bit different from guns and works of art, as they'd be inside the person, not on the outside. The first group of augmented people would have an unprecedented advantage over most people, and would the perfect opportunity to take power for themselves. Will that happen? Who knows? Its very possible, however.

It could be just as possible that they won't try an take power, and will go on living pretty normal, peaceful lives.

Phyical fitness does play a role human progress. Sexual selection, for one.

Right, which is why fat people never breed. Or why during the Middle Ages a woman who was a rail thin stick was considered a better candidate for a wife than a woman who was comfortably plump.

(Here's a hint, both are wrong)

To your second part.

Augmentation are a bit different from guns and works of art, as they'd be inside the person, not on the outside. The first group of augmented people would have an unprecedented advantage over most people, and would the perfect opportunity to take power for themselves. Will that happen? Who knows? Its very possible, however.

It could be just as possible that they won't try an take power, and will go on living pretty normal, peaceful lives.

How exactly does an augmentation being inside a person differentiate it from an enhancement that is purely external? How is a bionic arm any more empowering or dangerous than a semi-automatic or access to a Cray? What idiocy is this you're spouting.

Right, which is why fat people never breed. Or why during the Middle Ages a woman who was a rail thin stick was considered a better candidate for a wife than a woman who was comfortably plump.

(Here's a hint, both are wrong)



How exactly does an augmentation being inside a person differentiate it from an enhancement that is purely external? How is a bionic arm any more empowering or dangerous than a semi-automatic or access to a Cray? What idiocy is this you're spouting.


Alright, jack, you can cut it out.

Early guns first weren't that effective. It took a while for them to dominate the field. Also, as guns were weapons used by people, they could be captured and copied by the enemies of people with guns.

Internal augmentations, such as robotic arms, enhanced brians, whatever, are on the inside, and would be much more difficult to simply copy.

The first batch of augmented people would actually be pretty stupid- or pretty decent people, depending, to not try and take power for themselves.

I want replacement eyes with an IR vision mode and telescopic sight. A cybernetic arm might be fun, too. I want that designed so the tools can be swapped. Today an air wrench, tomorrow a submachine gun.... all designed so they pop out from behind the hand replacement, so I always have that amazing multi-tool of four fingers and the thumb enhanced to super-strength

Crap, missed your post when I responded to Ifreann!

Anyways, here it goes!

First off, insticts are there for a reason, and shouldn't be discarded. People shouldn't live soley of instict, though rather live soley of instinct and emotion than soley of reason.
Instincts are there for a reason. They were very useful when we lacked intelligence and reasoning.

They're not that useful anymore, since practically everything they give us can be done better with intelligence, and they hold us back in significant ways by continuing to encourage things like xenophobia.

Some people do not deserve compassion. And quite frankly, compassion outside of friends and family (our modern day tribe, so to speak), isn't necessary, though it is worthy of praise.

Debatable, not to mention irrelevent to my point.

I don't see how more intelligence equals more compassion. It could be the exact opposite. More intelligence could lead to more arragance and disdain, not compassion. Or maybe both, depending on the person.

It could be. Can you provide anything to show that it would be? There's plenty of evidence to support my assertion. Do you have any to counter it?

@ Kyronea an everyone else:

I've got to go to work now, so I'll respond to the rest of your points later on tonight or tomorrow.

I've got some things to think about while at work now!

Alright, jack, you can cut it out.

Early guns first weren't that effective. It took a while for them to dominate the field. Also, as guns were weapons used by people, they could be captured and copied by the enemies of people with guns.

Internal augmentations, such as robotic arms, enhanced brians, whatever, are on the inside, and would be much more difficult to simply copy.

The first batch of augmented people would actually be pretty stupid- or pretty decent people, depending, to not try and take power for themselves.

But they'd be pretty easy to remove with the right equipment, and more importantly pretty easy to disable. Whether you can think like a normal human or at twice the speed, your brain's still going to fry when a current's passed through it. A taser will still knock you on your ass and cause your muscles to spasm, and probably short out whatever it is you've got in you already.

Not to mention that it's foolish to assume that anyone with an augmentation is instantly going to become a megalomaniac, for the same reason it's foolish to assume anyone who acquires a firearm is going to instantly become a lunatic who rants about the evils of modern technology ON THE INTERNET.

Though it does happen.

Alright, jack, you can cut it out.

Early guns first weren't that effective. It took a while for them to dominate the field. Also, as guns were weapons used by people, they could be captured and copied by the enemies of people with guns.

Internal augmentations, such as robotic arms, enhanced brians, whatever, are on the inside, and would be much more difficult to simply copy.

The first batch of augmented people would actually be pretty stupid- or pretty decent people, depending, to not try and take power for themselves.

You both over- and underestimate the abilities of scientists and engineers. You assume that the first version of these implants would allow people to take over the world and you assume that nobody would be able to figure out how they worked.

I'd only get them if i have to, like if i was in an accident and lost my sight/arm/leg. I've always wondered what it would be like to have a bionic hand or lower arm.
As for internal organs, depends on how old I am when it was needed. right now, yes i would, when im 75, i couldnt care less.

This also has social ramifications. If augmentation was allowed for healthy people, think of how this would affect sports. You think Barry Bonds can hit an asterisk with steroids? Wait until he gets a set of cybernetic 12-inch Pythons.

This also has social ramifications. If augmentation was allowed for healthy people, think of how this would affect sports. You think Barry Bonds can hit an asterisk with steroids? Wait until he gets a set of cybernetic 12-inch Pythons.

Given that a double amputee was already disqualified from participating in the Olympics this year because of the enhancement to his running speed, these social ramifications are already starting to be addressed. It's likely to eventually result, as prosthetics become more and more advanced, in the formation of a new league to accommodate enhanced athletes.

Yes, if only to do whatever unhealthy and dangerous activities I want with absolutely no consequences.

I'll get an implant out of principle, if we ever get them. :D

dont forget a radar implant that would detect dangerous cybernetic modifications and alert the user of potential dangers :]