Future Long Life, "Immortality" and Family Dynamics

[Umbran]

Though I in turn question that a machine that is sufficiently intelligent that we can't distinguish it from human intelligence will still be "copyable" like that. Sure ,if we can run it on a contempory computer, probably it can, but is that actually feasible? But what if the artificial intellect actually is also dependent on specific hardware? Maybe it requires a quantum computer, or organic tissue, and then copying it would be as hard as copying a human.

Quite true - if true AI is achieved by quantum computing, copying becomes problematic to impossible, as copying *will* change the state of the system. Copying for organic parts may or may not be feasible, depending on the function the organic parts play.

Let us remember, also, that "brain chemistry" is not a blanket, nor a static, thing. Some changes in brain chemistry produce long-term and notable changes in personality, and others don't. We have to consider what we call "the same person".

Let us consider a real world case - a person goes off to war, and comes back with PTSD. Are they "the same person" as when they left? Legally speaking, yes, they are. If their dysfunction is powerful enough, they may be relieved of legal responsibilities, but they are still the same person. So, there's some level of change in the brain we tolerate in calling them "the same". We don't even need them to behave in the same way for all time - which is good, because people do change, even without traumatic events.

 

[Kramodlog]

Do parents share ownership of their children? Since they could argue that they each own half of the genetic material, so...

As I said, I'm pretty sure we won't go down that road, but may of course be wrong about that.

Well, parents do go to court for child custody. In the case of cloning, you only have one parent who paid a lot for it. Plus there is the whole question of ownership of genetic material that isn't really topical today. In a future where capitalism's march hasn't stopped and genetics is omnipresent in our daily lives (more than today), it makes sense that ownership of people's genes be more legislated than it is today. Corporations like Monsento managed to patent the genes of seeds. In others words, life, or the map to it, has been patented already. Why can't my genetic information be protected? Maybe a clone should just pay royalties to the original.

I wouldn't be surprised if we develop the ability to grow individual cloned organs (or at least some key ones) long before we can clone an entire person.

I have a friend who dated a woman who studied biomedical research. Apparently, hearts and other organs can be grown already. Getting them to "work" and not rejected is where research is at now, if I understood correctly. Plus Japanese scientists announced last year that they wanted to grow human organs for transplantation in GMO pigs.

Imagining headless human organ reservoirs is just more fun, dramatic and stimulating. You're ruining my stimulation! *cries*

Our personalities are significantly influenced by chemical factors. This is most obviously seen when under the influence of alcohol or similar, of course, but things like hormonal balance is also key.

So if, for example, a habitual smoker were cloned and the brain scan transferred, the resulting person would then have a mismatch - he'd still have the psychological addiction to smoking in place, while the physiological addiction to nicotine is missing.

(And, of course, despite "The 6th Day", a cloned Arnie wouldn't automatically get his muscle mass, which is of course significantly the result of training over the course of years.)

Assuming a 60-year-old mind could handle the shock of being transferred into a 20-year-old body with the relative storm of hormones that that entails, could we really consider it the same person when their behaviour changes due to those hormones?

I'd be incline to say yes, as we consider people under the influence of drugs and alcohol to be the same person as the sober one. At least legally. You are responsable for your actions even if you were seriously intoxicated. You can't say "I was someone else, arrest me when I'm drunk". People on steroids, which are hormones, are considered to be the same person as their non-steroid using self. Older folks, men and women, are often prescribed hormones. Would hormones from a younger self's body be that legally different when it came to transfer of estate?

 

[delericho]

Well, parents do go to court for child custody.

Custody isn't ownership, and anyway ends when the child reaches maturity. If parents owned their children, they could sell them.

In a future where capitalism's march hasn't stopped and genetics is omnipresent in our daily lives (more than today), it makes sense that ownership of people's genes be more legislated than it is today. Corporations like Monsento managed to patent the genes of seeds. In others words, life, or the map to it, has been patented already. Why can't my genetic information be protected?

Absolutely, and I'm sure it will be... for everything except a clone. Because while you can reasonably claim ownership of your genetic code and even a heart grown from your genetic code, as soon as it becomes a full-blown person a whole other set of rights kick in. Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and all that stuff.

Imagining headless human organ reservoirs is just more fun, dramatic and stimulating. You're ruining my stimulation! *cries*

Oh, if you're just imagining a future world for use in storytelling/RPG use, then absolutely have people owning their clones - there's more story potential there than the really boring "they're legally an identical twin" approach that I think we'll actually adopt.

You might want to consider having adult entertainment stars selling their genetic code to the studios, who then clone them, perform various surgeries on the clones, and then sell them on to customers. Or something like that.

I'd be incline to say yes, as we consider people under the influence of drugs and alcohol to be the same person as the sober one. At least legally. You are responsable for your actions even if you were seriously intoxicated. You can't say "I was someone else, arrest me when I'm drunk". People on steroids, which are hormones, are considered to be the same person as their non-steroid using self. Older folks, men and women, are often prescribed hormones. Would hormones from a younger self's body be that legally different when it came to transfer of estate?

Ah, but a key distinguishing point there is that in all those cases, the person is using the same body. If you have a person who is acting significantly different and is in a different body, is that still the same person?

Bear in mind that if the clone is legally the same person, then if your clone goes bad and murders someone, you're liable to be convicted and punished. After all, you're legally the same person!

 

[Kramodlog]

Ah, but a key distinguishing point there is that in all those cases, the person is using the same body. If you have a person who is acting significantly different and is in a different body, is that still the same person?

But it is the same body, as its they both have the same genetic make up. Even the same brain.

Bear in mind that if the clone is legally the same person, then if your clone goes bad and murders someone, you're liable to be convicted and punished. After all, you're legally the same person!

That is interesting.

-Detective, I never killed 20 hobos and have sex with their cadavers. I was at a party with the president of the United-States.

-One more thing... Your clone is an exact copy of you in everyway, right?

-Yes, but...

-An exact copy of you kills and has sex with 20 dead hobos and you couldn't do it?

-Um...

-Take him away, boys.

 

[delericho]

But it is the same body, as its they both have the same genetic make up. Even the same brain.

It may be an identical body, and indeed an identical mind, but it's not the same body.

That is interesting.

-Detective, I never killed 20 hobos and have sex with their cadavers. I was at a party with the president of the United-States.

-One more thing... Your clone is an exact copy of you in everyway, right?

-Yes, but...

-An exact copy of you kills and has sex with 20 dead hobos and you couldn't do it?

-Um...

-Take him away, boys.

Yep. It gets very messy, very fast.

Edit: Of course, that's the plot of the Stallone "Judge Dredd" film, so maybe that's not such a good thing...

 

[Kramodlog]

It may be an identical body, and indeed an identical mind, but it's not the same body.



Yep. It gets very messy, very fast.

Edit: Of course, that's the plot of the Stallone "Judge Dredd" film, so maybe that's not such a good thing...

Thanks for reminding me.

 

[Umbran]

But it is the same body, as its they both have the same genetic make up.

"Have the same genetic makeup," and, "are in the same body" are actually not equivalent. There is a matter of development, which has significant permanent impact on the body.

Imagine your clone - you've taken the host's genetic material, and force the growth of an adult-sized body in one year. It floats around in a tank for the year during the growth process.

What's its muscle tone and bone density going to be like? Both are extremely dependent on physical use - if you don't use muscles, they atrophy. If you don't put weight on bones, they lose calcium, and become brittle. Meanwhile, the original host has been lifting weights and running 5k races every few weeks. You haul out your clone, and stand it next to the host.. and it will have a problem standing, as it doesn't have muscle tone. It will be a thin, weak, pallid thing next to the host.

And all the attendant chemical changes that come with a healthy body and high metabolism? Your host has them, your clone doesn't.

Now, you can stipulate, "in the cloning process, we cover all that". But, you can't cover *everything* that happened in your hosts, say, 30+ year of life. All the exposure to chemicals in the environment, the differences between the host and the clone's diets - we can expect it to add up.

As for telling the difference between the original and the clone - how many of us have *no* childhood or other injuries that have somehow marked their body in a unique way? Ever broken a bone? Had a dental filling? Got cut so you have a scar anywhere on your body? Gotten a tattoo?