Genetic manipulation of human beings for the purposes of space exploration

[Lancer]

People were made for this earth but when the environment changes so should our bodies and genetics gives us the tools we need. Our spirits, souls, self awareness or whatever it is that provides the spark will not be altered by altering the double helix imo. Bones that don't decay in space could be one advantage.

It may be that there are space faring civilizations out there that visit us to gather genetic material for the purpose of perfecting themselves, or creating beings of their species able to survive the various environments they encounter. If there is no such space faring civilization then we may well become just such in a million years or ten million. Imagine finding life on an otherwise uninhabited planet that would, by using its dna, allow us to breath methane or amonia, or to withstand terrific gravitational forces.

Perhaps the life forms that survive on volcanic vents in the sea would allow us one day to occupy Venus. Don't change the planet, or change what you can, but change the people.

[Cort Haus]

Anal probes FTW!

[Zoid]

Eugenics war

[Ari Rahikkala]

It's a good idea, but by the time we'd be able to do such manipulation with the kind of ethical and safety guarantees that would be demanded of such an effort, the uploads will have been up there exploring space for ages already

[Lorizael]

I wouldn't be so sure about that, Ari. There's always the possibility that we go the brain-in-jar route rather than the brain-in-computer route.

[Elok]

Yes, by all means get the crazy transhumanist bastards digging around in Venus and Mars. More Earth for us and our inferior biology.

[Lorizael]

What's wrong with transhumanists?

[Elok]

Well, they're laughably implausible, for starters. The idea of computers outperforming millennia of evolution is silly, and as for biological tinkering there's always a tradeoff to be made. I'd rather be optimized for living on nice, hospitable Earth than have expensive modifications made so I could gnaw on Martian rocks.

And even if faster-than-light travel were possible, the energy costs would be prohibitive. Let's just maintain the world we've got, hmm?

[Riesstiu IV]

If you were able to manipulate genes, it would still be hard on the body. Is there really any evidence that a life-form could be improved enough withstand long periods of cosmic radiation in deep space or a zero gravity environment for long periods of time?

Unless propulsion, life support, and artificial gravity technologies are improved, space will always be a dangerous place for long term exploration.

Right now it seems only intelligent robotic probes or perhaps in the future something strange like human minds uploaded directly into space vehicles have a chance of conducting deep space exploration.

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Elok
The idea of computers outperforming millennia of evolution is silly...

I think you dismiss this far too quickly. There are plenty of tools humans have invented fairly recently that replace or out perform us.

Don't fool yourself into thinking there's anything intrinsically special about the brain, which is actually a lot younger, in terms of evolution, than other parts of our body.

[Pekka]

Computers already do outperform us in many fields. Moore's law says the capacity doubles every year and so far it has been true. We're in the brink of such resources that in theory things start to become a possibility, that haven't been possible before.

THe idea of computers outperforming is not silly. The issue is time, when it becomes possible. It isn't that possible now though. But the statement is like "the idea of life outside Earth is silly". I mean really, how can you be so confident? Because when you say it's a silly idea, you are 100% confident it isn't possible even on theory.

[Elok]

Yes, they replace us or outperform us...by using far more energy and specializing in one area at the expense of others. A car can't feed itself, climb trees, or swim, and the gas it consumes is the product of millions of years' accumulation of dead plant and animal tissue. It's just a tool. And many of our recent breakthroughs in engineering have come about through aping nature's solutions to similar problems, e.g. spider-robots and beelike miniature flying drones.

If a computer could improve on the human brain's performance--while consuming comparable amounts of energy, lasting for about forty years before starting to break down, and having the ability to self-assemble in utero--it would still not be human. It would be an alien creature. I prefer computers as our slaves.

[GePap]

While I agree with Elok on the superiority of nature work's over man's currently, i would like to see a bunch of folks put in a tin can and sent to Mars, if only for the cool pics.

[Pekka]

Right, right, if you put it that way, I would agree.

I just thought that the notion of computers never outperforming humans was kind of strong.

It's not really a nature vs. technology debate with me here though, which one can become better, I think it's not a debate or something that is a question anyway. Even if technology becomes better, as in it can start to make decisions for humans with fairly complex things that involve social issues as well.. I mean at that point I'd say it' smore advanced, HOWEVER it is still based on human design, so it's not a product of its own.

When that tech starts to develop new tech that we can't, well you could argue that it is still human product because we allowed it to happen, but I'd see that would be the breaking point. THAT however is still kind of ...far away.

Even at that point, I'd like to see it as a tool. They are tools. They don't have human value. You could always go into extreme relativism and say humans have no value but ... I think they're tools, they're supposed to be tools and we should not recognize them as beings or entities that are close to humans or animals, because they aren't and thus shoudl be separate. Then again the problem really starts when we start to have embedded tech in humans. What is the point when a human becomes a cyborg? And when does the human part become so little that it couldn't be considered a human anymore and should that thing have rights or value... hmhh..

well anyway, tools they be. IMAGINE WE COULD MAKE SEX ROBOTS THAT ARE BETTER THAN HUMANS! THE ULTIMATE GOAL OF TECH :B:

[Lorizael]

Originally posted by Pekka
What is the point when a human becomes a cyborg? And when does the human part become so little that it couldn't be considered a human anymore and should that thing have rights or value... hmhh..

I don't think we'll actually ever reach this conundrum, because I think the transition to cyborgish humans will be so gradual that such things will simply be accepted in small steps over time. And really, it's already begun.