RE: EVOLUTION: Germline engineering

From: Avatar Polymorph (avatarpolymorph@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Nov 29 2002 - 19:20:07 MST


STRAY THOUGHTS:

Re: informed consent of an embryo:

I do not consider it productive to discuss whether non-modified babies will
be created. It may be that childhood remains like foetal development a sort
of echo of evolutionary development, at least in terms of some of what we
now undersand to be the one to six or seven year old period. It might be
compressed somewhat in the zero to two year period.

Much more to the point, any attempt to consciously engineer free will and
the ability to self-boost out of a baby or child should be resisted - this
applies as much to AI as to human-form sentients.

Really though, these terms - human and AI - and quibbling over mixes of the
two - are going to become very redundant. I have very little belief in
uploading as a concept, much more belief in Tiplerian quantum splitting of
consciousness, and no belief in restrictions of sentient identity based on
form. In real life, it may well be that a core part of our neurological
systems will remain akin to a 3-D model of an existant human brain. It may
even be that many beings will retain a cell-like structure system while
having very sophisticated neurological systems capable of interacting with
virtuality and interfacing through broadcast linkage (or cable-like systems
in some cases).

EMBRYO VS ADULT:

However, Ramez also notes

---
"So, to my mind, adult gene therapy will never catch up with
embryonic genetic engineering in terms of its effects.  To match embryonic 
genetic engineering you're going to need something like
molecular nanotechnology, and we've already seen how bullish I am on that.
:)
cheers,
mez"
I agree. I can see that adult stem cell/gene therapies are going to need a 
lot of input. How many types of cells are there? 250? How many types of 
cellular ballet occur? Lots. E.g. 100,000 genes for skeletal structure. 
There are many levels of expressions of genes too. Obviously there is coding 
within coding within coding etc. because the whole multicellular organism 
derives from one cell. You are talking about the most complicated thing in 
the known universe currently per cubic metre (at least I think it is).
However I feel confident that you could stem off gross effects without 
nanotech and be guaranteed two centuries. In which time, further extensions 
would be possible, and so forth. However, in the real world the Singularity 
and computing power interverene and result in so-called "superintelligence", 
which like intelligence comes in different shapes and forms. It certainly 
becomes "superintelligence" from an engineering point of view, and that is 
crucial to this debate.
It is difficult to see how you could have an adult current mortal without 
some form of nanotech or without totally redesigning his body system to 
allow more easy cell upgrades and monitering (reducing treatment time). That 
is, without nanotech insert at either the inter or intra cellular level you 
have to be relying on some tech beyond our current understanding (though 
envisagable). A current mortal human who doesn't want even short-term 
bionanotech devices and molecular supercomputers inside their body is going 
to be having an awful lot of monitoring and pill swallowing or pill release. 
If they accept some form of genetic surgery (say laser dna alteration of all 
their stem cells over the first century or two) this will help them.
One would assume however that generically those who do not go for 
augmentation or section-by-section-upgrading-to-pure-AI neurology (or even 
uploading, though don't count me in this particular boat) will require some 
form of nanotech for easy body maintenance. I would assume that for most 
people nanotech inside their cells becomes a simple and accepted form of 
controlling their body, one that is very detailed and relatively finessable. 
In a century people won't blink their eyes at the concept, it will be as 
natural as having mitochondria in one's cells, as obvious as antibiotics or 
dentistry are as tools for the body's health (only more effective). I'd be 
willing to bet you'll even be able to tell the number of cells in your body, 
roughly anyhow...
However one thing I'm not sure about is how many of your cells will be 
environmentally (topologically) immortal? Currently the brain doesn't like 
replacing neurons, with their thinking settings consequentially reset. 
However, with nanotech you could replace the neuron with settings in place 
(electrochemical barriers etc.).
Is it sufficient to have one cell (overlooked by internal molecular 
supercomputers and cell repair devices) going indefinitely or do we allow 
for traditionally splitting and discarding of some or all cells? Is there 
some inherent chemical requirement or entropic agency working towards cell 
division and replacement as a necessity BEYOND simply prenanotech tradition? 
Currently, even "immortal" cells are not immortal topologically, constantly 
splitting for the last few billion years and cyclying between different 
forms (egg cell, blastocyst cell etc).
The interesting thing about inter/intra-cellular nanotech is that it 
operates as a part of Damien Broderick's "EXe" hypothesis. That is, 
evolution as it moves into self-direction becomes weird. Immortals are 
removed from evolutionary pressure to a large extent. Self-direction (cell 
command, body command) allows for the expression of new forms and the 
reversal of new forms (currently evolution cannot "backtrack" the same route 
because of the complexities involved - thus some obvious improvements cannot 
be reached because a different "path" has already been taken through random 
mutation and natural selection - and so on, including with regard to 
redundant organs and (some) junk dna).
I wouldn't be surprised if people in the future (us) weren't similar to now 
except immortal and capable of doing more and less limited physically. 
Cultural exploration and world-design and virtuality will probably move to 
be the area of interest. Perhaps some areas like mathematical exploration or 
exotic protein design may however be around for billenia?
Towards Ascension
Avatar Polymorph
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:29 MST