Yeah, it reads a lot like 'recreation of life', true. To me it's another of these boy's toys. Like the military and space craft industry. Instead of taking care of the existing by-products of their shagging for God's world dominion they escape to regions where they still hold the reins.
On 22 Mai, 17:48, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: > It seems that it should be possible to use something like DNA to seed > nanomachines, and cybernetic interfaces. Not the hollywood version but > versatile, scalable micro-controllable organisms. Beginning with the > requirements to reverse diseases like Parkinsons, Alzheimers, and cancer > would give us one hell of a blueprint to lay out an augmentation roadmap. > > It could remove many of the barriers of quality control and production, > for instance we might be able to produce something very useful today but > in a shabbly fashioned kludge and it still could cost an arbitrarily > huge sum. Take that thing or idea and remove those barriers. Perhaps > then our consumption/reproduction mania would be a little more obvious, > but I would also be wary of human error, ignorance, and megalomania. > > On 5/21/2010 9:37 PM, archytas wrote: > > > The news of computer created DNA and thus the human creation of life > > is a bit late. The chemistry has been with us for some time. So far, > > all I've seen in the media has the same old form - religious idiots > > and paranoid ethicists who don't give a damn about the world really, > > but want to spout anti-erudition as though this is clever. My feeling > > is that this stuff is as significant as the agricultural revolution > > and probably more so. > > The eventual stuff that interests me is the potential to change > > perception through biological means and build something worthier than > > humanity rather than just a life of hanging about until Rapture (my > > bet is the velocoraptors will get the Xtians) or evolution's next > > catastrophe appreciating art or erotica.
