> Here is a likely contravercial matter. With the coming decade of genetics we
> will then have the ability to utilize our DNA and manipulate it to create a
> race of humanoid drones which we could use for labor but there would be
> little to no grey matter in the skull cavity, they would be strictly drones.
They wouldn't be very useful; if they are utterly unintelligent they are
not better than industrial robots (and much weaker and more expensive),
and if they have more brain power we get into tricky ethical questions
about when they become deserving of human rights (I usually say they
deserve them when they can demand them). Making these drones will
probably be rather expensive and take some time (a few years of
maturation, at least). The only use I can see of them is making clones of
ourselves with no brains, intended as organ donors.
> This then brings up the two contravercial topics of whether we should toy
> with DNA.
Doesn't this depend more on what we use it for than the act itself? I
know some people regard the genome as sacrosanct, but I doubt many on
this list does.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension!
nv91-asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~nv91-asa/main.html
GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y