"Tim Tyler"  wrote in message
news:btvpaj$241l$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
> William Morse  wrote or quoted:
> > Tim Tyler  wrote in
>
> >> If we don't engineer ourselves and our symbiotes, you
can be sure
> >> that machine-based systems will have no such qualms
about using
> >> engineering to further their own development - and will
adopt the
> >> available niches themselves.
>
> > Actually man-machine symbiotes are probably the least
threatening and
> > therefore the most likely avenue for extending human
capabilities, at least
> > in the short term. In fact after I had started this
response, I ran into an
> > article that noted that our bodies increasingly include
artificial
> > components which are becoming more and more
sophisticated, e.g. pacemakers,
> > artificial knees, etc. But while developments such as GM
foods and
> > embryonic stem cell research are subjects of public
outcry, nothing is said
> > about our gradual metamorphosis into cyborgs.
>
> Some recent comments from me on the issue of whether the
cyborgs will beat
> out the machines - or not:
>
> ``/Generally/, I'm on the side of the machines.  Typically
I *like*
>   being able to start again from scratch, with a clean,
original
>   design, rather than carrying lots of incomprehensible
hacked
>   together, uncommented code that nobody can properly
understand.
>
>   However, I'm not convinced that's what will happen.  I
suspect that
>   there is too much wisdom in the genes for nature to be
willing to
>   discard it.  Rather I expect those who extensively reuse
the technology
>   developed as part of our existing biological heritage
will be the
>   ones making the dominant organisms over the next
thousand years or
>   so - despite the engineering problem of figuring out
exactly how
>   everything works.

Yes, it all won't be immediately discarded IMO. I expect the
future cyborgs will just over ride it all, creating
"supergenes" which will create new genes (or their machine
equivalents) at will, on an ad hoc basis, for their
needs--such supergenes will act as operating systems for new
gene/(or "nanochine") sets/complexes, turning on and off,
old and new ones. While this redundancy will take a slight
toll on efficiency, having available a hard library of all
old and new, bio- and nanogenes,  in ROM, so to speak, will
be invaluable for each individual cyborg in making
day-to-day changes in new "working genomes" to fit changing
needs. This is the ultimate in fitness that never could be
even dreamed of by Darwin.

>   Generally speaking, I would like to see as long and
intimate man-machine
>   symbiosis as is possible.  The more rapid the transition
away from
>   conventional biological forms is, the more knowledge is
likely to be
>   irretreivably lost during it - in the form of unrecorded
extinction
>   events.''

I agree with this. It certainly insures the survival of the
sucessor species of humans, along with their heritage of
their past. The new, ultimate species of man will be able to
survive as long as the universe does, trumpeting its past
glories to the stars. (ok, today I feel poetic, with the
President's speech on the proposed new space program, moon
base, and manned Mars shots, coming up in a few minutes.)
.....tonyC
> -- 
> __________
>  |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim{at}tt1lock.org  Remove
lock to reply.
>
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 1/15/04 8:39:10 PM