Transhuman Space: Beyond Good and Evil

[Nifft]

Who says they are dumb? They have been given human or near-human intelligence to their designers in most cases...

Because even things with the potential to be very smart (like us) do not become smart if they are not educated. The process takes quite a long time (at least 7 years) and requires a lot of attention -- and that's before you can start training the critter to be an adult.

These expenses are much, much lower in the Transhuman Space era. If you are creating biological androids ("bioroids"), you can create the body relatively quickly. After that, it takes about three years (or less, for less detailed programming) in a full virtual reality environment to teach the bioroid the skills an adult human might conceivably have learned.

That's from the setting, I guess? I'm not sure a full virtual reality environment can be considered an unconscious entity -- full VR is hard, and "good enough" (e.g. fovial) VR may require consciousness to mediate expected perception.

In the beginning, the bioroids generally will enjoy their enslavement, since that's all they have been trained to do and their bodies are hardwired for it. But as they grow older, they can learn to understand their situation.

Again, there are humans in the world right now who are "hardwired" to enjoy certain kinds of sex. They usually have to pay for it.

Slavery of sentient beings will be very hard -- especially if those sentient beings are artificial and therefore can be made smarter than us.

Seriously, I don't expect anything recognizable as a human to be in control of anything important within ten years of our actually creating something both artificial and sentient. So I don't think the horrors imagined here will be problems. (Very seriously -- I don't think that the things which will qualify as problems will be comprehensible by things which qualify as humans. )

Actually looking forward to it, -- N

 

[Vargo]

For an interesting take on the singularity, which explores some of the same themes, check out http://www.kuro5hin.org/prime-intellect/

Here's my take on it - in any technological revolution, it's always been the first to get their hands on the truly revolutionary technology that end up dominating for a bit, usually at great cost to everybody else around them. The more powerful the technology, the more easily used, the smaller the number of people that benefit from it, and the more people that suffer.

Imagine if someone invents sequestration technology, for example - a technological tool that overrides the conscious mind, and turns you into a walking robot. We've already got a simple version of this for cockroaches and other insects. The first unethical person to get their hands on an easily spreadable variant of this tool will at least end up with a small army of slaves to do his bidding. If they are lucky, the tool destroys their minds in the process. If not...

In addition, look to the growing use of combat drones, slaved to a master control. The current F-35 JSF will probably be the last "manned" fighter aircraft built - future fighters will probably be drones along the lines of the UAVs we're seeing on the battlefield. Not only can they sustain much higher G forces than our puny meatsacks, but they will follow orders unconditionally, without any moral thought entering the equation. Ground combat drones are in the works, too - how long until the armed forces become strongly reliant on robotic combatants? (No, I'm not talking about mecha, which are highly useless in real combat - I'm talking about tanks and the like, and eventually we'll probably have highly mobile human-sized robotic combatants as well)

All the tools will be in place within the next 100 years for the powerful to place themselves beyond the reach of the common man, to place themselves beyond the reach of what has been the only option we have had when tyranny and oppression becomes too great - revolution. The common man has always been able to strike back at the powerful, because the powerful have needed to rely on the common man for their resources and luxuries. But the invention of robotic servitors will eliminate this need, especially once fully-automated universal factories become possible - the powerful will be those that fully control the means of production, and all others will fall by the wayside, dross in the gears of history

Wow, that's pretty bleak.

 

[BlackMoria]

I can make a case that the future as described probably isn't possible. If you want to be a utopian society, then one needs to control or eradicate the root causes of violent and aberrant personalities.

Changes to the genome of fetuses that show generic predisposition to sociopathy or pychopathy could be corrected in the womb. No violent offenders. No serial killers. No psychopaths. No mental deficiences or aberrations. No addictive personality disorders so no substance abusers. No sexual perversions. Etc.

If a theorized future can have mankind doing genetic manipulation to make artifical sentience, then that same technology can 'optimize' people and eradicate the genetic causes of many of problems today.

There would be no more Ted Bundy, David Berkowitz, Adolf Hitler, Pol Pot, etc. type of people - all the aberrant genetic markers are altered at birth.

And if some slip few, after their first infraction and genetic screening, I can see enforced teatment altering personalilty and conciousness to remove the problem traits.

And before someone points it out, yes - the very real possiblity of genetic alteration being used for selfish and illegal purposes is possible. The point I am making it the worst traits of mankind have grounds in genetics and if you can fully control genetics, then you dealt with that issue.

Doesn't make a interesting campaign setting but it makes a more 'likely' future than what Transhuman Space postulates - that genetic manipulation will bring all wonders to mankind but we will not deal the root causes of aberrant and dysfunctional personalty.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Haven't dark futures been done to death? I thought it was one of the strengths of Transhuman Space that it presents a morally neutral universe. Neither taking the easy cynical path of dystopia, nor the no longer credible one of utopia.

The future's not better or worse, but it's always more complex.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I can make a case that the future as described probably isn't possible. If you want to be a utopian society, then one needs to control or eradicate the root causes of violent and aberrant personalities.

Oh, that can and has been done in the setting - to even greater degrees. There are religious sects who make their children unagressive, with little interest in even sex...

 

[prosfilaes]

Doesn't make a interesting campaign setting but it makes a more 'likely' future than what Transhuman Space postulates - that genetic manipulation will bring all wonders to mankind but we will not deal the root causes of aberrant and dysfunctional personalty.

I find Transhuman Space much more likely. Your version reminds me of Serenity; the lack of trust that they'll get it right, and the lack of trust that we really want to be a part of the Alliance at all. You propose that the government should genetically modify everyone's children to be friendly and cooperative around here, I suspect many people would start reaching for their shotguns. I can believe a lot of people genetically modifying their children for what they want, and in most cases getting rid of head cases, like in TS, but not the government forcing this.

TS does believe that in most cases, mental illness can be prevented by genetic modification; most templates have Taboo Traits: Mental Illness on them. (Frankly, I believe that's optimistic. Very few mental illnesses are completely genetic; a schizophrenic twin is only 50% likely to be schizophrenic, and schizophrenia is blatant malfunction of the brain, unlike most mental illness.) But Adolf Hitler was a charismatic nationalist racist, and none of those have simple genetic causes, and do you really want to delete charisma? Too much against violent offenders, and you've got a passive population unable to resist force. Good for the government, until their enemies hit them with specially breed violent offenders.

 

[BlackMoria]

There are genome scientists working on genetic markers related to diseases. And a smaller number working on genetic markers related to aberrant personality disorders. So it is coming.

And I am not saying I prefer that future or that future is any more likely than anyone else's best guess.

The OP talked of genetically created sex slaves but since the vast majority of us don't go around raping people or spending the paycheck on hookers or spend 23 hours a day looking at porn (the majority of people are not fixated on sex) then the notion of having a sex slave indicates an abnormal or skewed view point about sex, which as been linked to aberrant personality disorders.

I just find it odd that the OP wrote about the darker side of humanity using the technology to engage in hedonist behavior and aberrant behavior and my point was that it is more likely that such behavior will be controlled by the technology rather than let it facilitate such behavior.

Very few mental illnesses are completely genetic; a schizophrenic twin is only 50% likely to be schizophrenic, and schizophrenia is blatant malfunction of the brain, unlike most mental illness.) But Adolf Hitler was a charismatic nationalist racist, and none of those have simple genetic causes, and do you really want to delete charisma?

I could get into a discussion about genetics and environmental and developmental factors during fetal development but that is not productive to the discussion. If you have the technology to manipulate the human genome, you also have the technology to correct developmental problems. In either case, the vast majority of personality disorders and mental illness would be render moot if such technology existed.

Hitler's issue was not he had 'bad charisma' nor that he was a racist. Hitler was a psychopath. And certain elements of psychopathy personalilty is that they can be charismatic and very manipulative.

History shows what one psychopath is capable of given the right variables and circumstances. A future society is going to screen for abnormal personality like psychopathy and nip it in the bud simply because the threat of such personalities pose to society.

You propose that the government should genetically modify everyone's children to be friendly and cooperative around here, I suspect many people would start reaching for their shotguns. I can believe a lot of people genetically modifying their children for what they want, and in most cases getting rid of head cases, like in TS, but not the government forcing this.

Really? As a doctor, I tell you your unborn child has the genetic markers for psychopathy which means he has the real potential to be danger to himself and others and that it can be corrected by a simple procedure of gene therapy and you are going to say no?

Don't underestimate the power of the state to change perceptions about certain subjects. Hitler did it and lead the German people into the disaster of history called WW2. Leaders and governments never had a real problem in getting the populous to do thing their way. History is so full of such examples, I will not even to begin to start. Don't think that people rejecting government initatives is a given. It is not.

 

[WayneLigon]

Really? As a doctor, I tell you your unborn child has the genetic markers for psychopathy which means he has the real potential to be danger to himself and others and that it can be corrected by a simple procedure of gene therapy and you are going to say no?

Some people will, for various reasons; people do that today. There have been a number of cases I've read about of parents letting their children die rather than consent to a simple everyday drug regimine such as insulin. I have no doubt that there will be hold outs in the future. We'll call them 'the Third World' and ignore them as long as they don't upset too many people and keep to themselves.

 

[Nifft]

There are religious sects who make their children unagressive, with little interest in even sex...

Turns out that fails. Ask a Shaker.

-- N

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Turns out that fails. Ask a Shaker.

-- N

Not if they genengineer the sex drive out of them. I mean, it's not as if sex is necessary for reproduction in that era...