Lamprey Cells Drive Robot 166
xmatt writes: "Eurekalert has a story posted from New Scientist about connecting neural material from a lamprey to light sensors and a cybernetic "body" made of two wheels and circuit board. Steve Grand, a expert in artificial life with Cyberlife Research in Somerset, describes the work as "laudably perverse" and likely to bring the world of cyborgs one step closer."
old news (Score:1)
This is old news! It was up on GeekPress [geekpress.com] yesterday afternoon! Still, it is pretty cool, even if horribly outdated by about 36 hours.
-- Diana Hsieh
Something I found a bit peculiar.... (Score:2)
This insect had been programmed with basic functions - and in reaction to certain stimuli, it would act in a particular way.
One thing it was programmed to do was to run away from light, and to hide in dark places. Without re-programming, it would ALWAYS run away from a light source...
Why does this new robot have 2 different reactions to light? In one instance, it runs away from the light, in another it follows it - to me, that's peculiar - and sounds more like programming than simple basic reactions to a stimuli....
Interesting... (Score:4)
I suppose the true reason for doing something like this is to augment the natural abilities of a naturally occuring animal. Are there any special abilities a Lamprey has that would be useful if augmented?
-Chuck
--
Quantum Linux Laboratories - Accelerating Business with Linux
* Education
* Integration
* Support
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
And what do lamprey-based cyborgs need to accept into their hearts to be truly happy? The Bubbles of Jaques Costeau's Aqualung?
--
Laugh while you can monkey-boy (Score:1)
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
not really I think.. The lamprey is one of the most primitive species of fish, they're older than sharks if I remember correctly. they don't do much, except squiggle around, eating dead stuff. Still this probably worked because the things are so primitive. unfortunately the story itself seems slashdotted at the moment..
//rdj
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
How can these so-called "scientists" live with themselves after creating something that is this much of a blasphemy against God and nature?
Never mind that.
How about a Beowulf cluster of these?
(Dodges shower of debris.)
Lamprey with wheels (Score:1)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Your mocking tone is understandable, you, like many others have been brainwashed by the atheistic cult that controls education, and their empty lies have been fed to you for many years. However, surely even you can see the truth of what I am saying?
---
Jon E. Erikson
But... (Score:3)
For all we know, the lamprey's Müller cells are firing frantically for no reason, and the scientists are studying nothing but behavior brought about by random, non-systematic firings of detached brain cells.
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Sounds like a great idea there cheif.
Now really, by using a computer you are just a hypocryt. A computer is a device made from this same technology and science advancements as what you are saying is wrong with the world.
We need not people to tell everyone else that they are wrong, we need people to do what they want to do and shut up about it. If that's what people really want then they will join you. If not, don't waste your time trying to get people to see your point when they already had the chance and didn't want it.
The lord, so some say, gave us the freedom of choice. A gift, if you will, to make choices and decisions on our own. Some say that if you are given a gift from the lord that you should use it to it's fullest extent. For if you don't, you will be, for lack of a better term, in deep shit.
Well the idea that we wish to improve ourselves and research and design things, is in and of itself a way of useing this "gift" the lord has, supposedly, given to us.
So... you are not actually saying anything. Your words mean nothing.
Fishbots (Score:5)
Sign me up! (Score:1)
I'll pay good money to rid myself of a body
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:2)
Actually, I went through a school system that was rife with prayers and other attempts to brainwash us toward an irrational system of beliefs.
> However, surely even you can see the truth of what I am saying?
Frankly, I think the truth is that you're trolling. (Yes, I've read the Trolls Guide to Slashdot, and your post follows the advice to a 't'.) But I'm always more than happy to go along with a troll for the sake of a joke.
--
This Could Be Bad.. (Score:2)
Re:Sign me up! (Score:1)
One thing though. I can't sell it to you. You have to lease it. And my organisation is allowed to repossess it at any time.
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
This isn't a disgrace (Score:1)
Look at all those people biting!
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Moral implications (Score:3)
Oh go on then, flame away. But there are millions of us "trolls" who care about animal cruelty, and if you want to maintain a freindly climate toward scientists, you'll need to respect us.
Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:4)
Not to be too evangelical about this; I don't for a moment believe that this is a Good Thing (tm). Just interesting to note that once again, A.C.C. manages to semi-predict the future.
As horrid as the thought is (to me anyway), I believe that it is a matter of time before we discard these bodies of flesh for "shining new homes of metal and plastic".
I, for one, am not religious, and quite frankly would rather not get caught up in any religious debates... so don't confuse me as being a religious zealot. Would you trust a machine with your brain? Not me.
This is a good topic for a discussion on ethics. Sure, a body better than the one I have would be nice for some things - but we're playing $DEITY in a big way here; I think that we have to be very careful what we do. Science, I feel, is becoming too advanced for it's own good.
My $0.02...
Re:Sign me up! (Score:2)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
URL? (Score:1)
Ok, ok. Does somebody have a URL yet? My Visa card isn't holding up to the pressure.
Re:But... (Score:1)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Well, my sources indicate that certain individuals are planning on using cyborg lampreys to take over the world.
I think that's ample reason to be afraid.
HTH
First step toward cell phones wired to the brain? (Score:2)
But I don't think I'd like to see this through the current phone companies. "Your bill is 2 months overdue. Pain centers in brain are being activated now."
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
This message was brought to you by Cyberpreach 2.0
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Never fear. I am creating a super loyal race of genetically engineered guppies.
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Re:Moral implications (Score:3)
And as for torture, the lamprey was under full anesthesia.
When it comes to preventing death or pain, you could focus on all the human tragedies going on in third world countries (Sierra Leon(sp?) for an example.) Worrying about one fish is, quite frankly, overreacting.
Re:Something I found a bit peculiar.... (Score:2)
Another thing is that with a neural net, it can constantly "improve itself" if you wish. Or unlearn things once your program discovers that feature was not wanted anyway. All this can be automated, but it's not easy to work with classical neural nets. And it's expensive CPU-wise if you're not relying on AI-hardware.
- Steeltoe
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:2)
I think any artificial body for which sex is not its primary function is doomed to be a marketing failure.
Heh...now here's a touchy subject... (Score:2)
I'm quite honestly at a loss of how to think of this one.
On the one hand you have to potentialy stagering possability for advances in the fields of artificial limbs, etc. that has a great potential to benifit humanity as a whole. The successes in creation of arificial replacment limbs has for all intents and purposes been stagnent for the last 100 years. The average artificial leg is little better then the wooden pegs used a century ago and even the state of the art is nothing more then a couple if hinges and springs. As for arms/hands there little better then a hook with the general high tech version having a closable "thumb" controlled be a cable running to a single muscle or tenden.
On the other hand you have the huge potential for abuse of a viable technology that could be derived from this research. How long until we have people getting "jacked up" in the style of Shadowrun or Johnny Mnomonic. Can you say "Super Soldier"?
--
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
Actually, lampreys attach themselves to live fish and suck on them until they're dead.
"Free your mind and your ass will follow"
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:1)
I can barely trust myself with my brain. And I'd love not to suffer all the pain and misfortune that flesh is heir to. Especially menstruation - what a bore that is.
Science, I feel, is becoming too advanced for it's own good
There has never been a time in human civilisation when someone hasn't been saying that science is (a) going too fast or (b) is too advanced for its own good. At what point would you like it to have been stopped? And if we stop it now, what implications does that have for me when I have trouble conceiving because I spent too long messing about with computers, and not enough time making myself pretty and learning how to cook? I'm all for IVF, but that too was considered "playing God" and "too advanced" before it became mainstream.
We spend a huge amount of time/effort/money just coping with our inefficient bodies. And wouldn't it be great to, say, turn up the amplification on pleasure, and consign pain to the trash can?
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
They suck really good.
I suppose there is a market for ahem that kind of robot.
You set me up, you bitch.
"Free your mind and your ass will follow"
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:1)
Seriously though, I don't see anything wrong in replacing bodyparts with mechanical ones, if we're truly aware of its implications. Especially for medical reasons. However, it should be a natural evolution to plastic, not just means for escaping our flesh. We've got enough complexes about our body, I'm sure we can't escape it that easily. (Got small breasts? Get a breast-job! All your problems are over! Yeehaw!)
Also, we should be aware that we'd lose our humanity. We litteraly become machines. That may sound fascinating to many geeks out there, but it's ain't that much glory to it. (Picture a nuke from outer space EMPing us to virtual hell if you like, or.. corrodation)
- Steeltoe
Re:old news (Score:1)
Re:Interesting... (Score:1)
Re:Moral implications (Score:1)
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:5)
While it might amuse you to know that I suspect the watchers while fire was first harnessed were thinking the same thing, I'd counter that, if anything, such a Luddite attitude is actually pretty insulting to at least some of us out here working to try and make human existance better, healthier, and more whole. Perhaps science is moving too fast for your ability (or even the masses' ability) to readily forcast new developments' impacts. Perhaps the act of research is creating new methods and approaches, entire suites of understanding, that require humanity to develop new social structures and mores. Perhaps, just perhaps, the flaw is not in science moving too swiftly, but in individuals being too foolish and reactionary to follow suit.
One of the primary motivations and goals of science is the pressure it places on society to grow, adapt, and change to accomodate eternally new situations and events. Without that, you might as well live in Imperial China, where scientific innovation could have gotten you beheaded (though society was 'protected' for thousands of years at a stretch). Perhaps you are willing to exchange a little safety for the liberty afforded by new ideas, new ways of thinking, new perceptions which we are granted by the strenuous efforts of thousands of scientists. The Internet, for example, is not an inherently safe thing, but a medium of facilitation unmatched in human history (save by the telegraph, or before that, speech).
Given the opportunity, I'd more than happily upload my personality and move into an immortal world of silver and silicon, leaving behind my useless arms, my insufficient sight, and the slowness of meat-memory. Give me a single opportunity and I'll happily exchange my left eye for an implant, my right arm for cybernetics, and my blood for nanotech-enhanced immunity to disease and wounds.
Bring to me the future!
In the end, it comes down to a simple axiom: Those who do not partake of the new fruits of the vine will suffer, wither, and die, while those who do, who move, who evolve, transmutate, transcend, will not. In the end, its that simple.
I choose life.
Re:Moral implications (Score:1)
a rather risque side of mother nature
We ARE mother nature, nature made us and we must do what we are impelled to do, just as lions kill gazelles and ants exploit aphids. That's the way that mother nature (or God, take your pick of higher authorities to blame) made us.
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
//rdj
My Lord is bigger than your Lord! (Score:1)
Just too bad there's always some truth in every post, even yours.. Think about that.
I hardly think you can call computers deterministic though. Just install Micros~1 software, and your problems with determinism is over.
- Steeltoe
Re:Heh...now here's a touchy subject... (Score:1)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:3)
This is much preferrable to running from said zealot as he tries to strap you to a poll and light you on fire, or throws rocks at you.
If you are a troll - Good job! If not
Now, what about about those RMS clones...?
:>
(feeling myself being moderated to oblivian, which is okay - one must have fun you know)
- Jeff A. Campbell
- VelociNews (http://www.velocinews.com [velocinews.com])
Re:Moral implications (Score:2)
As a defence of scientific research, this suffers from the fairly serious flaw that it also works as a defence of banning scientific research if that's what we feel "impelled to do"
Brainphone (Score:1)
I sure hope they get down the radiation from cellulars before then, and put up a heavy firewall so some script kiddie won't hack into my brain!
An even better commercial use is to put advertisement into our brain _unconsciously_! Then we wouldn't have to watch all those lengthy commercials anymore. We could live happily doing everything we want to do for free, sponsored by unconscious advertising!
Liff sure will be great in a few years! Can hardly wait..
- Steeltoe
Re:Moral implications (Score:2)
--
"The crux of the biscuit is the Apostrophe(*)" - FZ
Re:Moral implications (Score:1)
What I was trying to say was that it is ridiculous to try to separate us from "Mother Nature", when we too are part of nature, good or bad. However we do seem to have a moral imperative wired in, which is what this whole discussion has begun to be about. So I'd rather hear arguments that appeal to our intrinsic morality rather than some obeisance necessary to a spurious "other" such as Mother Nature or God. It's time we took responsibilities for ourselves and not look to Mummy or Daddy for approval.
Artificial Life (Score:1)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
I believe that my existence is nothing but a random but inevitable event (the universe being so huge, the existence of life is pretty much inevitable, I'd have thought). I believe that when I die I will just die. Simple as that. Once you come to terms with these two rational premises, religion and god (irrational) are redundant.
IMHO, religion has no place in solving the world's problems (it certainly has something to do with creating them though), and certainly no place in government or education. The only true way forward is science. This research is the perfect example of the way we are trying to understand life and our existence by emulating it in technology. This is how we should rationalise our existence and make it worthwhile, by expanding our knowledge of ourselves and the universe in which we live. Not by simply inventing various deities and putting it down to themn. That's just a cop out.
--
Re:Moral implications (Score:2)
My post is anecdotal because I don't know how it got into my mind or where it came from and i can't give a reference, I'd appreciate it if anyone knows more.
It seems that operations to cure a squint in children used to be done several months or years after birth, until someone did an experiment on some kittens (shudder). Point is, they proved that it really was essential to fix the squint almost straight after birth and many children benefit.
I'm agreeing with you btw, just thought I'd lob this story in as an example of where the border between good and evil lies - for me. If I've unwittingly perpetuated a myth, I'm sorry.
Mobile phones? (Score:3)
For god's sake lads... enough with the mobile phones! Playstations, Toasters, Fridges, watches. I have a mobile phone, but only because I am running from the phone company (long story) and it was the only phone I could get without an ID (hooray, that should generate some flames). And while it is handy, yes... It is also the bane of my existence. I have a friend who is obsessed with her phone who will actually talk to her boyfriend long distance on the way to the movie theater, totally ignoring anyone she is with, and almost getting hit by cars/other pedestrians in her little phone trance.
This is a bit of a ramble, yeah.. but does anyone else think the whole connectivity thing is going a bit far? I mean, would anyone actually want a frickin mobile phone in their head? Like I don't have enough distractions in my brain without suddenly sensing 'neural rhythms inspired by the uk's top dj's'
IMHO, a mobile phone should be just that... a mobile phone that I can ignore/turn off/leave home/smash into a million pieces if I want to. If someone called you and you didn't want to talk to them and it was like wired into your brain, you couldn't exactly tell them 'oh sorry.. didn't get your call, my phone was dead'
Whoa, relax (Score:1)
I believe that my existence is nothing but a random but inevitable event (the universe being so huge, the existence of life is pretty much inevitable, I'd have thought). I believe that when I die I will just die. Simple as that. Once you come to terms with these two rational premises, religion and god (irrational) are redundant.
Aah, so you believe that the ethics that comes from being a decent Christian are "redundant"? Indeed, by the tone of your post it seems that you believe that humanity has "evolved" past such abstract and obviously useless concepts.
Now your attitude is typical of the atheistic zealot, someone who for some reason cannot abide the thought of their being any kind of religious truth. Instead of accepting that other viewpoints may be just as valid as your scientific paradigm, you instantly flame away at someone who expresses the fact that they believe in a higher power, something your precious "scientists" cannot rule out.
Please, next time think before you post such flamebait. Unless you are the one trying to troll?
---
Jon E. Erikson
Incredible (Score:1)
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:1)
Re:Whoa, relax (Score:1)
To prove my point I will make some examples: In religions based in Persia (Iraq, Israel, the middle east) it is very important that a person gets buried in a hurry when he dies. This is of course of practical reasons, because in the warm climate a body will deteriorate and fester with bacteria quickly, which means you need to get it into the ground fast.
These religions also dictate that eating pig-meat is forbidden. They say it is because the pig is a "filthy" animal. In fact, it is because the meat tends to become spoilt very quickly in the warm climate wich makes storing it a big problem.
To make people follow the rules and to explain the unexplainable (of course they didn't know about bacteria in those days) they just decreed that these things where said to be so "by God".
Throught time we have also had a lot of "prophets" who have come to the people with the "word of God". Most of these people originated in times of need, when people where being prosecuted by another religion or ethnic group. Often their teachings make huge sense and really set up a reasonable ethic base for life. "Thou shalt not kill" for example. Jesus and Mohammed are among my favourites because their general message was tolerance and moderation and the end result was intolerance and extremism.
I am, as you might have guessed, an atheist. I was an agnostic before I started studying physics. The math and theories behind the physics I've studied through the years is advanced enough that I can conclude quite decisively that God does not exist. It is also quite reasonable if you take a look at society where notions of "God" comes from. Just the simple fact that there are a multitude of different religions should be a pointer to any reasonable person. Why is YOUR God the right one?
Good ethics are in my opinion the basis of civilisation. Religion is just one way of enforcing good ethings (a way that has a lot of undesirable sideffects). Today we have a strong social structure in most countries to take care of people with bad ethics (criminals) which renders scare tactics such as "you're going to hell!" unneccesary.
In short (for all you who could not read all of this): Religion has been and will always be just a vehicle for ethics. I as an atheist have strong ethics without religion, which renders it (religion) unneccesary. As for explaining the universe or the world around us, I think that is best to discover on your own. Don't accept anyone's story about this! Go make your own inquiries!
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Doing such experiments on a life form as high as a lamprey is unjustifiable
They should use much lower life forms for such early experiments.
A Microsoft Lawyer would be appropriate.
Re:Brainphone (Score:1)
I sure hope they get down the radiation from cellulars before then, and put up a heavy firewall so some script kiddie won't hack into my brain!
And on that note, read/watch "Ghost in the Shell" [manga.com]. It talks quite eloquently about the philosophy of moving your brain into cyborg bodies.
---
Damn... (Score:1)
Re:But... (Score:2)
I think I'm a little bit disturbed by this (Score:2)
Mind you, I'm not some PETA fanatic who only wears Naugahide for leather (who cares about a few Naugas?), and I'm not inherently opposed to animal experimentation, but I think I wouldn't perform an experiment like this, regardless of how useful the information is. I wouldn't test cosmetics on animals, either - though there are definitely appropriate uses for testing drugs and other things.
Then again, I'm just not completely sure - am I way off base in being disturbed by this?
- -Josh Turiel
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Bream me up, Soctty!
Laws to stop this from going too far? (Score:1)
However, if this eventually leads to the creation of human cyborgs or other cyborgs - then I would regard that as a threat to the human race.
I know this is going to sound REAL lame - but you've seen the movies - we might eventually have something like the "Terminator" situation occur. Laugh all you want, but the more dependance that we place on computers, and the more we attempt to make them like us or fuse them into us, the weaker we become. What are we going to do once we've created machines that can think like us, but have superior physical abilities? If our curiousity goes so far as to see if we can create something that can think faster than us - then whoa! Don't like it at all. We're endangering ourselves. Are we as a human race going to still be able to have control over the cyborgs?
Maybe I'm getting a little ahead of myself here. But I think that it would be worthwhile to make a pact with other nations that the creation of cyborgs for is strictly prohibited.
Just my opinion.
-Chris
It's a Dalek!!! (Score:1)
Hooray, looks like my dream of living in an episode of Dr. Who will soon come true.
Re:Something I found a bit peculiar.... (Score:1)
This insect had been programmed with basic functions - and in reaction to certain stimuli, it would act in a particular way.
So, the Kevin Warwick emulator is clearly proceeding well.
NewSci article on cyborgia ? - Run straight towards it!
Transponder activated catflap ? - In you go !
HAMSTERS BEWARE !!!!!!!!!! (Score:1)
hamster pull such an immense load"?!?!?
"With whips!"
[No hamsters were injured in the creation
of this post]
Whereas the ph of the tanks used for
electrical eels have to be adjusted every
few hours it is clear that the real targets
are our beloved hamsters & their treadmills.
Their boxes only need tending once every
other day, an obvious advantage.
The thought of an army of chipmunks
straped into their titanium energy frams
in an effort to re animate Walt Disney,
fills me with the most mixed of emotions.
Certainly a cause worthy of
consideration but at what cost to our
humanity.
Alternatively I'm sure the same equiptment
would work on a cheap pair of plastic sandals
& a deep pile carpet.
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:1)
Re:Mobile phones? (Score:2)
Who wants a fscking phone in their head? I don't even answer the phones I have now unless someone tells me they're going to call at a certain time. If a call is unexpected, I let the voice mail get it. I hate telephone calls. They are annoying intruders into an already chaotic life. You want to communicate with me, try email.
I don't think that I'd want to have my body "enhanced," though I am not opposed to getting cybernetic replacements for failing, damaged or destroyed body parts. Frankly, I'd prefer having organic replacements grown (cloned?) from my own cells. There have been some interesting strides made in that area recently. (Sorry, no references handy.)
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:1)
What is life? (Score:1)
What is life?
Is it being able to think? breath? touch? When you move your personality into silver and silicon will you loose the ability to smell? Will a digital nose be as good as the real thing? Will you be able to experience the beating of your heart when you fall in love? No, because you won't have a heart, you'll have a small motor circulating your oxygen rich nano enhanced fluid.
Life is much more than a feeling, more than a personality. It is everything we experience and without our bodies how will we experience anything?
I love feeling my pulse race as I close the visor to my helmet and look out the door at 3 miles of air. Ready-Set-Go!, the rush of 120mph wind and the opening shock of my canopy, the taste of adreneline. That is life, experience the world you live in with the senses you were born with.
I want to experience the world before I die. I don't want to live forever. I'll enjoy the 70 or so years I have and not look back with regret. I won't be searching for a way I can live longer just because I failed to live when I had the chance.
Step back from your computer, open your window, listen to the wind, feel the rain, smell the air. Life is not silicon, it *is* flesh and blood.
"Now, I hope and pray that I will, but, today I am still just a bill"
The best feature of my mobile phone is ... (Score:1)
Stop living in a phone trance, connected to everything and everybody except the people you can reach out and touch. Don't worry about wether you can ICQ your friend on the other side of the world when you ignore the people standing right next to you. look out the window and watch the trees move and the kids play. Work isn't that important that you can't take a couple minutes on your drive home to just RELAX.
People work too damn hard, miss out on living and regret it when they are on their death beds. Throw your cell phone in the toilet and go walk in the grass with your shoes off. Tell your boss to pound sand and take a long lunch. The work will still be there when you get back. It doesn't really matter if it gets done anyway.
No, I'm not the unibomber.
"Now, I hope and pray that I will, but, today I am still just a bill"
Egads, Cyborgs! We're really in it now! (Score:1)
Re:Brainphone (Score:1)
Re:Mobile phones? (Score:2)
Cell phones are actually a new form of technological natural selection. Let's say people who talk on a cellphone while crossing the street run a higher risk of dieing. Now, as call phones are becoming more and more popular, they are being used by younger portions of the population. People in their 20's, College students, even high school students are using cellphones. Since they run the risk of having an accident before they actually breed, we now have a natural selection scenario. End result: we're (very slowly) breeding ourselves into a society of beings that can talk on the phone while dodging cars! Who wants to make a bet that this ends up being an olympic event by the end of the century!
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:2)
That is an interesting statement. It seems to me that pressure on society is a *consequence*, not a *motivation* of science. Scientists don't sit around thinking "How can I put pressure on society?". Science is basically problem solving. Some people solve problems for specific applications (applied science). Some people solve problems out of curiosity (pure science). But I don't think anybody solves problems just *because* the solution will exert pressure on society. Pressure is a side-effect and consequence.
Transhumanist? I was once allured by that philosophy, but after a while found it arrogant and sterile. I am a human, not a borg. Thank you, but I think I'll remain human...for whatever meat-based flaws that means I'll have to endure (oh the humanity).
...and they also used to sell cocaine tinctures as magic panacea elixers. Technology != progress. The two might be correlated but they are not the same. The same technology that keeps us warm and cozy, keeps us in a tense state of nuclear stalemate. The same technology that cures diseases, can wipe out just as many people.
I choose life, but my definition of "life" is not just "living".
Re:Lamprey with wheels (Score:3)
Why hasn't anyone thought of doing this before? (Score:2)
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:2)
Well, I think technology might be moving a bit fast. We are generating solutions for problems we don't even HAVE. I mean, REALLY, *who* needs to be a cyborg? Huh? Besides the *gee-whiz* factor, who really needs to be a cyborg? Sure, I can see perhaps giving sight to the blind, or creating better prosthetics, but is there any real reason we NEED to be wiring hardware to ourselves? So technology is moving fast, and the market is convincing us we need all this crap we really don't. How the hell many people REALLY need a pager, a cell phone, and a palm pilot? What the hell are you doing with all your time, except for *organizing* it! I mean, come on...
I think the people creating this stuff (us) have to be careful that there is a reason to. You know, I like the computer industry. You know why? Because it is entirely self-sufficient! We create our own problems (bugs, imaginary needs) and then solve them for the pure joy of it! It's wonderful.
Well, I have to go now because I have to debug an Apache and JServ build on AIX - so that we can write servlets - so that the HR department can write custom jsp pages - so that people can look up their employee information online (instead of, say, picking up a phone and calling a human. woohoo!).
The example of evolution proves my point (Score:2)
Yes, absolutely. In Kansas, the locally elected representatives quite correctly decided to stop having evolution as a compulsory part of the syllabus, and allowed parents the choice. Meanwhile, a group of unelected self-styled "defenders of truth" demanded that every single pupil in Kansas be indoctrinated in their belief system. What part of "we the people" do you have a problem with?
Example (Score:2)
Hello, McFly, anybody in there? Why the hell do we need to connect cell phones directly to our brains. Is the cancer NOT enough? Man. Oh well, I guess whenever they do it I'll be the first to make some picoJava WAP application...
Re:Moral implications (Score:2)
Oh go on then, flame away. But there are millions of us "trolls" who care about animal cruelty, and if you want to maintain a freindly climate toward scientists, you'll need to respect us.
Well, guess what, I don't really care if they do try it out on humans. Once they get it working reliably on a Lamprey they SHOULD move up to something more complex, ideally they should replicate the natural body of the creature as best as possible. And once they've figured it out to a sufficiently advanced level they can try it on me. I've always wanted an Immortal Robot Body to hang out in....
Animal Cruelty takes a back seat to pretty much everything in my mind. If it serves a purpose then go for it. Animal cruelty for personal amusement I disapprove of. This isn't a flame, it's a different point of view, and you aren't a troll, you just happen to have a view that is counter to a lot of other slashdotters.
Kintanon
Re:I think I'm a little bit disturbed by this (Score:2)
I think, upon some reflection, that my dividing line falls somewhere in the "awareness + feeling" category. If a creature has the ability to feel pain or discomfort, then the guidelines for experimentation should be strict as hell (I would count on a code of ethics rather than regulation in a perfect world, which this most certainly is not). I would only perform experiments that have a direct relationship to saving lives, either of humans or more animals on animals that meet this criterion.
I would not restrict things done with cell samples or "cultured" tissue - so long as the sample is obtained without harming the animal (or human) involved.
I will still wear leather and eat meat. That, to me, gets directly into the traditional food chain, and humans were designed to be omnivorous - with (as far as I can tell), a diet of grains, fruits, and vegetables supplemented by occasional meat. Given that belief/assumption, leather is a byproduct of the process. If animals were not killed for food, I think I'd see the leather question somewhat differently.
- -Josh Turiel
Yeah... (Score:2)
And unless you live a life of total luddism, I might point out that the science you detest has made it possible to live to a ripe old age without having to fear a death by smallpox or the black death or any of a number of diseases that plagued humanity up until just recently.
But by all means, lets stop the science now. Never mind the potential to eventually cure paralysis, AIDS and potentially even grasp immortality. The lampreys are too important for that.
Paid for by the committee to save the endangered malaria mosquito.
Who wants to live forever (Score:3)
Let's take a for instance. I have a young friend who is all tore up over his on-again/off-again relationship with a girlfriend. There is a lot of turmoil and excitement in his life over this relationship. My view on it is that he is being foolish and should just move on. I don't have any hope of the relationship working (she's too stupid). From my experience, I can see that all he's doing is riding a roller coaster. There's a lot of ups and downs, but no real chance of being seriously injured. The worst that will happen is that he'll feel a little nauseated at the end.
The thing that keeps life interesting is the idea that it will someday end. For me, it adds urgency. I've got to do what I've got to do, NOW.
Living a cyborg existence in a tin bucket for a million year would just have to suck. Besides, what would you do once Alzheimer's set in?
Re:Interesting... (Score:2)
-B
Artificial limbs vs. cybernetic sugmentation (Score:2)
In my early 20's (ca 1982), I did a lot of private work on improved artifical limbs - until a worried friend (a lawyer) did a search of the case law to show me what a liability minefield it was. [1]
However, if cybernetic augmentaion really rocks your boat, you need to keep up on the DARPA and other government RFPs.
First up on the sci-fi drooler's hit parade is: "Exoskeletons for Human Performance Augmentation" [darpa.mil]-- a current active DARPA RFP, but if you miss the deadline, don't worry, there's similar RFPs every funding cycle.
I only wish they hadn't said ``DARPA is soliciting devices and machines that accomplish one or more of the following:
In other words... faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...
------------------------
[1] In her somewhat irreverent words: "People who lost limbs as adults (due to the nature of the interface I used) and can afford to pay for an experimental limb? Er - sounds like someone who just won multimillion dollar lawsuit, to me. Don't mess with them, they already have a legal team!"
The case law seemed to bear her out.
Re:This is a disgrace (Score:4)
Yes, the ability to read is SUCH a curse...
Genesis 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. {moveth: the Heb. is more like 'creepeth'}
There are roughly half a dozen similar passages in the OT and NT, and don't even get me started on the Koran and the various Talmuds -- they make the Christian Bible seem positively Luddite.
Re:Adaptation of normal behavior EXP BRIEF (Score:2)
Lampreys have a very simple system for keeping themselves vertical in the water, consisting of of a pair of sensors, a pair of neurons and a pair of muscles. In the beast, you can stimulate one of the sensors and activate the muscle on the other side. The lamprey uses the differential signal between sensors on left&right side to control activation of the muscles on the left & right side. Mussa-Ivaldi's group have plucked out the spinal cord, replaced the biological sensors with photodiodes and the biological muscles with motors, so this is a physical demonstration of totally normal neural control.
Re:Moral implications (Score:2)
And as for torture, the lamprey was under full anesthesia.
I'm just trying to picture them putting a little mask on a lamprey while it's squirming around. "Don't take my brain! Don't take my brain!"
When it comes to preventing death or pain, you could focus on all the human tragedies going on in third world countries (Sierra Leon(sp?) for an example.) Worrying about one fish is, quite frankly, overreacting.
Well, remember, to some people, all life is sacred, unless it's a plant, in which case since it has no brain, it's okay to eat it.
And as we descended cries of impending doom rose from the soil.
One thousand NAY, a million voices full of fear, and terror possessed me then.
And I begged, angel of the lord, what are these tortured screams
And the angel said unto me, THESE ARE THE CRIES OF THE CARROTS.
You SEE Reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day, and to them IT IS THE HOLOCAUST
In any case, I didn't come here to start a fight. My point was that to some people, anything living that isn't a plant is sacred. Mind you, if someone actually eats animals, I don't want to hear anything out of them about the cruelty of using animals as test subjects. Is it more wrong to kill an animal and consume its dead flesh, or to kill an animal in the process of making the world safer for humanity? You could go either way on that one, but I think they're basically at the same level -- both of them are animals dying for human welfare.
Of course, you CAN get all necessary nutrition out of plant matter, provided you eat the right stuff, and take supplments (or eat your weight in veggies every day, bleah. Vegetarian is an ancient word for "Lousy Hunter".) So actually, eating animal flesh is just animals dying for our pleasure.
I think I'll go to outback for dinner and have a 20oz. porterhouse.
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:2)
Well, if the ppl who are trying to come up with ways of "growing" artificial intelligence progress as fast as the cyborgians (apologies to English majors), then it will become necessary to use cyborg technology just so we can be evolutionarily competitive with our artificial intelligence creations.
And for those people who don't adapt themselves to the new technology? Well, they probably won't be around in a couple of generations, except maybe as "pets", or as examples of "primitive" humans.
I would like to point out that adopting cyborg technology does NOT require that society become like the dark visions of the Borg, or any of the other common science fiction themes that everyone will become like machines - cold & emotionless - as long as our brain structures still provide support for emotion, then we'll still experience it.
Re:Mobile phones? (Score:2)
*aside* what was that? No, I don't think they'd like that.
:)
Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:2)
Re:[OT]Re:Arthur C. Clarke, you were right... (Score:2)
Thanks for sparing me - I suppose I can guess a broad outline, but the details will still be fun I hope.
Re:Who wants to live forever (Score:2)
I'm only 33, and I can already tell you that I wouldn't want to live forever. As you get older, you begin to lose the highs and lows. It's not that I hate life, it's just that there isn't as much excitement when you have enough experience to know the outcome of a set of action.
Personally, I've found that the highs and lows just take different forms, and the excitement becomes more intellectual in nature.
Living a cyborg existence in a tin bucket for a million year would just have to suck.
It would open up a lot of very non-boring possabilities though. You could travel to other stars weather or not FTL travel ever becomes possable. What would 10,000 years mean anyway?
Besides, what would you do once Alzheimer's set in?
Technology that could allow a person to live a million years would probably include an artificial brain rather than preserving the one you're born with.
Re:Moral implications (Score:2)
dogs, and later, people.</i>
<p>
Bullshit, you're making this up. I used to pull the legs off of bugs when I was a toddler. But except for two occasions when I've had to kill a mortally injured cat to end its suffering, I've never hurt an animal. And I don't torture people either. I think this is rather more typical than the scenario you suggest.
Consciousness is not what it thinks it is
Thought exists only as an abstraction