From: hal@finney.org
Date: Tue Sep 19 2000 - 16:24:43 MDT
James writes:
> I think the "slelling" issue depends on the level of access to cloning
> technology. If you can clone and incubate in the privacy or your own
> basement (a Clone@Home system perhaps), then it'd be difficult to stop
> someone intent on using your DNA for their own reproductive ends.
>
> However, if it's run by an organisation or govt. institution, they may have
> a "Consent Register", so if the DNA someone's provided for
> reproducing/cloning is not their own, they check it against the register,
> and see if your name pops up (assuming it's your DNA of course) as having
> given consent to this person, if at all. If you haven't, then no dice, and
> they destroy or retain the DNA and notify you of the attempt.
Yes, that's probably a reasonable approach for the medium term. By the
time we have Clone@Home (love that name) the handbasket we're in will
be well on its way to its final destination, whereever that may be.
For those who say, who cares, it's just a clone, consider whether a
more elaborate version of the same thing may become possible, where your
mind is cloned. Suppose that with sufficiently clever observation and
deduction a close approximation of your own mind can be produced. Then,
for those who believe in pattern models of identity, it would be possible
to have near-copies of yourself come into existence without your consent.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:04 MST