Crush...Yiff...Destroy!

Tailgunner · Coadjutor Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 161

With all the advances with genetics (Human Genome Project, hormone therapy, etc...) who's to say this won't happen, say 40 years from now? I can see it now, real live chimeras roaming about. (Far and few between mind you, but roaming about none the less.)

I can see it now at some future con:

Loser X: "Hey man! Nice fursuit!"

Loser Y: "Thanks! But this ain't no suit!"

Discuss.

Tailgunner · Coadjutor Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 161

FYI

Go to google and run a search for a "Jeremy Rifkin" and "chimera"

Interesting reads, back in 98 he tried to get a patent for a chimera and was laughed out of the patent office.

Edit: He also wrote the book The Biotech Century. It seems well informed, however verges on "The sky is falling!" rhetoric.

21st Century Digital Boy · Qualificator Joined: 27 Dec 2003 Posts: 34

Few Problems, though:

1) Improbability: While I could see someone genetically engineering a chimera while it was still in its embryonic stage (which itself would have all sorts of problems: lack of consent, mishaps resulting in stillborns/fatal mutations, etc.), modifying a full-grown human through anything less than massive, massive plastic surgery, would be near-impossible, if that.

2) Cost: even assuming you could modify an adult human, the process would be insanely expensive, and furries aren't exactly known for their wealth. The only people I could imagine undergoing such a procedure would be rich eccentrics and porn stars.

3) Discrimination: If, by some chance, the furry wet dream of an entire race of human-animal hybrids should arise, a significant amount of discrimination and violence would be unavoidable, unless the human race had some sort of collective epiphany in the near-future and suddenly stopped being dicks to each other about race/religion/etc. Not likely.

4) General inconvenience: seriously, imagine constantly having to deal with trying to sit comfortably in a chair with a big tail sticking outta you butt, or wearing clothesover all that fur, or dealing with shedding, grooming, fleas, and so on. It might be nice for the first few days, but after that life would get pretty irritating.

There's probably more, but that's all my poor, sleep-deprived brain can muster for now.

Tailgunner · Coadjutor Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 161

That doesn't necessarily mean people haven't already tried. Run a search on Jocelyn Wildeinstein (aka The Cat Woman).

Genghis · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 186

I remember this topic cropping up somewhere else a few months ago. Some fanboy seemed convinced that genetic engineering would give us hot cat chicks within years, and supported his argument with hideous pseudoscience, statements that "japan would do it", and comparisons between genetics and the silicon chip industry whereby semiconductors are apparently "hard physics stuff" compared to the supposedly far easier task of manipulating DNA. :roll:

The real question here is one that deserves to be brought up in all these "what if" discussions: supposing there were attractive animal-people around, why on earth would they want to go out with some pathetic fanboy rather than, you know, someone with some actual worth? The same reason all those hot human chicks are beating paths to their doors, perhaps? Hang on a minute, I think I see a problem here...

mouse · Coadjutor Joined: 13 Jul 2003 Posts: 662

I remember this topic cropping up somewhere else a few months ago.

<...>
The real question here is one that deserves to be brought up in all these "what if" discussions: supposing there were attractive animal-people around, why on earth would they want to go out with some pathetic fanboy rather than, you know, someone with some actual worth? The same reason all those hot human chicks are beating paths to their doors, perhaps? Hang on a minute, I think I see a problem here...

Heh, this topic came up a few days ago on AFF for some reason. I basically said the same thing you did.

By the time scientists could be able to do this , I cant really think of a reason why they would. I mean, I think its very possible to create mutants (not that anyone should anyway) as it is, but the intelligence part would be hard. The more intelligent side of the discussion on AFF was that this sort of thing would most likely occur to use these being for labor or entertainment. Some people it seemed to me , were way to comfortable with that.

Aside from the obvious moral problems with slavery, the fact is the slave will eventually rise up and kill the master. It just doesnt work. By the time science advances to this point, you might begin to see biological machines..which is kind of scary idea in itself.(to me anyway)

Actually I really tend to like 'furry fiction' that deals with sociological aspects of this sort of thing

Natenate · Recusant Joined: 11 Jan 2004 Posts: 19

I remember this topic cropping up somewhere else a few months ago.

That would be "My Tanooki Suit has Balls" on the Portal of Evil.

Behold! A terrifying vision of the World yet to Come!

Mitch · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 290

I remember this topic cropping up somewhere else a few months ago.

<...>
The real question here is one that deserves to be brought up in all these "what if" discussions: supposing there were attractive animal-people around, why on earth would they want to go out with some pathetic fanboy rather than, you know, someone with some actual worth? The same reason all those hot human chicks are beating paths to their doors, perhaps? Hang on a minute, I think I see a problem here...

Heh, this topic came up a few days ago on AFF for some reason. I basically said the same thing you did.

By the time scientists could be able to do this , I cant really think of a reason why they would. I mean, I think its very possible to create mutants (not that anyone should anyway) as it is, but the intelligence part would be hard. The more intelligent side of the discussion on AFF was that this sort of thing would most likely occur to use these being for labor or entertainment. Some people it seemed to me , were way to comfortable with that.

Aside from the obvious moral problems with slavery, the fact is the slave will eventually rise up and kill the master. It just doesnt work. By the time science advances to this point, you might begin to see biological machines..which is kind of scary idea in itself.(to me anyway)

Actually I really tend to like 'furry fiction' that deals with sociological aspects of this sort of thing

You'd probably like S. Andrew Swann's SF novel "Forests of the Night" which covered just about all the implications years back.

Check out also where the author mentions how he picked up a furry following.

Wayd Wolf · Coadjutor Joined: 06 Oct 2003 Posts: 456

Few Problems, though:

1) Improbability: While I could see someone genetically engineering a chimera while it was still in its embryonic stage (which itself would have all sorts of problems: lack of consent, mishaps resulting in stillborns/fatal mutations, etc.), modifying a full-grown human through anything less than massive, massive plastic surgery, would be near-impossible, if that.

We're not talking genetic engineering letting cell structures do their normal slow thing. We're talking nanotechnology rebuilding everything at the level of atoms and molecules. Nanotech devices are simply like cells but specifically designed for narrow functions and with billions working in concert, then can do quite a bit. Or will when we finally start building the general nanotech machines that build others.

2) Cost: even assuming you could modify an adult human, the process would be insanely expensive, and furries aren't exactly known for their wealth. The only people I could imagine undergoing such a procedure would be rich eccentrics and porn stars.

See #1. The materials? Lay down in a grassy field. There's your materials. The grass the cow ate for your burger, the soil the tomato plant ate before you made ketchup/catsup with it. Ultimately the material for every organic thing is in the soil.

Which points out that nanotech healing devices might just be applied and covered with an organic-rich "mud pack" to heal serious wounds.

3) Discrimination: If, by some chance, the furry wet dream of an entire race of human-animal hybrids should arise, a significant amount of discrimination and violence would be unavoidable, unless the human race had some sort of collective epiphany in the near-future and suddenly stopped being dicks to each other about race/religion/etc. Not likely.

This is almost certain. In my writings, I went the predictable route of slavery and cheap soldiers/cannon-fodder with the animal people rebelling and staking out their own nation. I couldn't see them getting along. Perfectly from the start.

But there is one thing it would show, namely the group strength nature of humans. If such "morphs" did exist, you'd have white AND black people who'd prior to that been at each others' throats now on the same side hating the animal people.

4) General inconvenience: seriously, imagine constantly having to deal with trying to sit comfortably in a chair with a big tail sticking outta you butt, or wearing clothesover all that fur, or dealing with shedding, grooming, fleas, and so on. It might be nice for the first few days, but after that life would get pretty irritating.

With the nanotech to make these things in the first place comes the cure for everything else short of the tail thing. And any designer can make a chair with an off-axis back support to allow for a tail. My dogs sit on their behinds with their tails under them for attention and snacks. So it's not that big a deal.

The thing is, in light of these possibilities, it would likely be outlawed very early on to prevent it from ever happening. But laws are merely a minor nuisance to some and sooner or later...

More likely is that people will be made entirely biomechanized with nanotechnology and able to assume a bewildering variety of shapes like some sort of Plympton cartoon and live indefinitely. Given current progress, it is possible that some of the kindergardeners you see today will still be alive four billion years from now when Earth's sun goes red giant and engulfs the Earth, watching from some ship and saying goodbye to their ancestral home.

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Laws are a necessary evil. There's always some moron out there who ends up ruining it for everybody. This is why we can't have nice things. Personally, I say enough with the fucking nanny state. Let the idiots kill each other off and become candidates for the Darwin Awards. Remove the warning labels and let natural selection run its course. The problem with that though is that the damage is not always contained to the morons who bring it on themselves.

Michael Hirtes · Coadjutor Joined: 04 Aug 2003 Posts: 519

I remember one time when I was talking with a guy named Paul Dale (aka "Captain Cartoon"), who was staying at Steve Martin's place at the time (I was waiting for Bob Guthrie to come to the phone when Dale decided to talk me to death). At the time, Jurrasic Park had just come out, and it apparently made Paul a very happy man:

Paul: Isn't it just great? I'd love to see science get to the point where they could manipulate genes so that we can have animal/human hybrids.

Me: Why?

Paul: huh?

Me: Why?

Paul: What do you mean why?? We could have catgirls and fox girls and....

Me: Why?

Paul: ..............

Me: I mean, what's the purpose of that? A new race of slaves to exploit? Didn't we already go through that nasty part of history already? Do you REALLY want to see the "Dredd Scott case" brought back?

Paul: But think about the catgir.........

Me: Besides, aren't there already enough humanoids on the planet as it is? Now we gotta start thinking up more mouths to feed? I dunno. I think the whole catgirl/foxgirl/whatevergirl notion is just a latent desire to bring back slavery, because I really can't see any practical reason to create a life form that doesn't need to be made in the first place, and it's a pretty shitty thing to do to the critters themselves because they never asked to be gene-spliced either.

And anyway, how much do you think this is going to cost? I mean, a fake woman made of silicone costs at least five grand to make. How much do you think these corporations are going to charge for an actually living catgirl fuckslut to be created? Sorry, but the filthy rich have enough elite toys. Why give them yet another thing to flaunt in our faces? No way any of us regular schmoes will ever be able to afford one.

At this point, Paul reacts to this horsepill of logic by sending out a stream of sputterings and mental waves of pure hatred through the phone, hating my guts and wishing me dead for daring not to agree with him and his Great Dream of the future filled with foxgirls giving him lapdances. Thank god Paul didn't have much time to go apeshit, because Bob finally got to the phone and it was time for Paul to hang up the other line and go stfu somewhere.

Since that time, Paul's HATED my guts with a nuclear passion ever since.

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Paul sounds like one shallow fuck. Heh. Personally, I'm going to wait until we're good enough at it that the results don't look downright shitty...and it can be reversed easily. Think about spending a few years as, say, a dolphin, living on what you can snatch up, basically working off a severe case of Nature Boy Syndrome. The thing is, you'd probably eventually get tired of it or want to try something else. Oops! You're strapped for funds. You have to stay that way. You see what I mean? Not to mention that for years there'd be enough legal bullshit surrounding it to totally ruin the fun. Besides, with the fresh surge into biotech and the cause of aging already discovered, I don't intend to die anytime soon, therefore I can wait all millenium if I have to. Hey, beating death is not a clear shot, but you never know what can be discovered within a person's lifetime, especially if that person is busting his ass to do everything he can to help it along.

Wayd Wolf · Coadjutor Joined: 06 Oct 2003 Posts: 456

As I already said, we're not talking simple genetic manipulation, we're talking nanotechnology to do this sort of thing. And nanotech devices are basically grown by other devices from cheap raw materials common throughout the planet. Once the genie is out of the bottle, cost becomes a non-issue.

Most of our planetary economies, say 99.999% is based in the end on goods and services to apply those goods. When the goods cost nothing and no one is needed to provide them or services to apply them, the economy necessarily changes drastically into something else.

God only knows what. I don't see the furry dream of mere creativity being the coin of the realm and even if it were, furries are hardly going to provide the intellectual fodder for an idea-based economy. We may very well end up with nothing like a transactional economy of any kind. What would you need with selling ideas when the coin is merely someone else's ideas? Besides, you've effectively got damn near forever to get around to absorbing it all and at molecular-mechanical-optical-eletronic speeds, you'd pretty much have already absorbed the complete collected works of the entire planet in the first couple minutes of your transformation.

If you knew everything, you'd probably want to forget a whole lot of it.

But during the transition... What a fucking nightmare we could end up with.

I try not to worry about it. We might end up severely screwed. We might end up living in engineered living buildings more like giant trees that were completely photo-chemically powered. Being basically immune to needs of houses and food and so on, we could go without homes. We'd not need any place to put our stuff as George Carlin had it. We'd not need stuff to begin with. Maybe we'd stay somewhat squishy organic like we are and kick back in pastoral splendour like immortal hobbits. Who knows? I'd prefer not to think about it beyond being optimistic as the pessimistic view is downright suicidally depressing.

See K. Eric Drexler's bit on the "grey goo problem" for the simplest of problems. See The Matrix for another.

21st Century Digital Boy · Qualificator Joined: 27 Dec 2003 Posts: 34

nanotechnology

Good point, I hadn't thought about that.

However, there are still a few problems, most notably:

1) Cost, again: can you imagine the level of research required to make body modifying robots like that? Probably billions, if not more, dollars worth of research, and for what? a permanent fur coat? I'm not saying it won't be done, but it'd most likely have to be funded by private donors (i.e. rich eccentrics), who, at the same time, might want to research something a bit more useful, such as life-extension.

2) While I'm obviously not experienced in this field, I'd imagine that having one's skull reshaped to such a degree during the "transformation, or whatever you want to call it, would result in some not-nice aftereffects, such as brain-damage, insanity, and so on. The scientists would first need test subjects who's family isn't going to sue their ass into oblivion for squishing their child's brain, to gauge the effects of the changing.

And so on.

What I'm getting at here is that while it's probably not impossible that some time in the vague future such a thing could be possible, the original question was regarding the possibility of chimeras 40 or so years from now, and frankly, I don't see anyone spending that much time, research, and money on such a purely aesthetic body modification in the near future.

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Reality check. While nanotechnology may someday be able to do the sorts of things we're dreaming about, it's likely to, as any other technology, start out slow, clumsy, and expensive. I seriously think that we're likely to get biotechnology refined to an art long before nanotech becomes advanced enough to replace it.

As funny as it sounds at first, the tree idea is starting to sound attractive for some reason. Heh heh. Not likely, of course, but attractive.

Ole Sparky · Qualificator Joined: 07 Nov 2003 Posts: 21

Do pardon me while I gag. What part of ethics, but then I am a child of a different time, when scientists questioned the ethics of their discoveries.
Ke'Rist

With all the advances with genetics (Human Genome Project, hormone therapy, etc...) who's to say this won't happen, say 40 years from now? I can see it now, real live chimeras roaming about. (Far and few between mind you, but roaming about none the less.)

I can see it now at some future con:

Loser X: "Hey man! Nice fursuit!"

Loser Y: "Thanks! But this ain't no suit!"

Discuss.

Or worse...
Loser X: "This is the Vixen(DogFox) I had created for me.
Loser Y: "Wanna share?"
Anybody wanna ask that vixen, or that dogfox how they feel about being a toy to be swapped for pleasure?
That is, assuming that nameless being has ever even had the chance to have the concept of being a living, real person, with feelings and meaning inculcated in their being, to understand clearly that they should have the right to say "No"
Sorry, but I get intense about some things.
And let me toss this out to the folks at CYD for stories and art.
Hows about stories and art about freedom, and rights. About those anthro beings, that might one day exist, not being toys, about how they might feel, as people.
And other Furry Fantasies...
We gots genetic manipulation as is gonna make the world "All well" we don't have to worry about AIDS, or hepatitis, someday genetic manipulation is going to make it all well.
But that is someday, but this is today, and tomorrow, and people take drug cocktails, and die slowly, but "someday" is an excuse for today and a feeble attempt to pass it off on tomorrow.
Sorry, I get intense about stupidity.
Almost as bad as the species barrior the puppy plookers use. 'Cuse me, avian flu, rabies, plague, a thousand other diseases.
Sorry.
So, well, CYD, may I rest before you a challenge?
To destroy the fandom?
To write stories, and do art.
To take the Furry fantasies and turn them into a mirror and show how those beings might feel about being a sex toy, to show a real world where the Species barrier is little more than a speed bump.
Write and Draw the "Uncle Tom's Cabin" of Furry and of Today.
Ole Sparky

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Already been done! Numerous times, actually. In fact, some have even tried the reverse of it in which humans are oppressed in pretty much the same sort of light. Very thought-provoking stuff usually.

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

The arguments against creating a real life humanoid animal type creature make perfect sence to me.

Sure the idea of becomming an actuall (insert species here) person sounds cool but would being such a creature really be practical?

As for making people immortal, there is also the issue of population. If everyone lived forever, think of how quickly the world would get insanley overpopulated like that planet from that episode of the orignal Trek.

And if only a few are chossen to be immoral, how do we chose? The 'elite few' syndrome is something I cannot stand. Why should a select few people get to live five billion years+ while the rest of us only get to live a normal human lifespan? You think that older generations sometimes resenting younger generations, saying stuff like 'boy, we never had anything like that when I was a kid' is bad now? Just wait until the kids of tomorow have technology that can cure any injury, disease and even allow them to change their bodies in such a way that they can not only be virutally immortal, but also become completly diffrent lifeforms. Imagine how you'll have kids that can (as per an example mentioned) have the option of spending a few years as say, a dolphin for no other reason then just for the experience of it. Right now this is all fantasy but in 25 years, 50 years, 100 years, who knows what we'll be able to do.

As has been said, the technology to do this will be so expensive that only the upper class will be able to afford it. You think people resent the upper class now? Imagine when we start seeing rich people that live 10,000,000 years, are virutally immune to injury and illness and can change form as easily as we change clothes. It's a fantasy now, but 50 years from now? Who knows.

Personally, although such things may become possible some day, I find myself wondering if they should. IMO, the only time they should is when they are accessable to everyone who want to try it out and not just the elite few. But even then, I find myself thinking of the saying 'just because you can, doesen't mean you should'

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Excellent points! This is why we need to write about them today to help us deal with the issues tomorrow. How will we deal with immortality? I think that this is an excellent question that deserves thought. How many children does a person really want to have in a lifetime? Would it be possible to gradually implement a way to put constraints on the population? Let's look at the sociological issues. The reason many sociologists are against an excessively low birth rate is that the senior age bracket rises in response to dips in the population. However, if nobody ever lost their ability to pull their own weight, a birth rate of zero would be ideal. Given that the spread of technology is normally slow, we will be given plenty of time in which to place the appropriate constraints. What these constraints should be is uncertain which is one of our reasons for writing about such things.

Personally, I prefer the idea of BECOMING a fur, so while I might find the Uncle Tom story intriguing, it won't really impact my views. Try this: imagine a world in which we have engineered dolphins to have human-like intelligence. Supposing one day humans then had to migrate to the oceans due to population pressures, the political controversies between the two species would be interesting to write about.

Wayd Wolf · Coadjutor Joined: 06 Oct 2003 Posts: 456

Cost still isn't a problem as much as you'd think. Imagine if you were trying to design a Pentium IV processor on the same computers as were used to design the 8088. Nonsense, of course. Pentium IV chips were designed on much closer machines.

Well, we're talking the kind of superfast machines of science fiction here. A computer the size of a sugar cube with all the computing power of all the machines currently on the Internet today and more. Programmed with expert system apps interconnected and aimed at the development of even better things. Does it not sound obvious that the present best computers will be used to design the next best computers to come?

As expert systems, artificial life, and artificial intelligence programming become ever more mature and interconnected, and run on machines more and more like living brains with the ability to create complexities like neural networks, they will rapidly design better and better successors. Fast convergence is inevitable once the machines begin designing and refining themselves. They don't think of things like going home to families, they simply go on and on doing their task.

Yes, right now we're very primitive, but convergence has already begun thanks to the human element applying ever more advanced technologies to making even more advanced technologies.

As to reshaping you changing your brain, your brain is nothing more than the sum of its connections. Granted this is spirituality free, but the electrochemistry of the brain is fairly well understood and all it would take it being able to copy that as the transformation progressed into some other form that was comparable.

Yes, a long way off no doubt. But mere genetic engineering doesn't reshape and remake bodies the way Star Trek has it. You have to be able to reassemble all of it from the atoms up.

Now as to the ethics of making animal "morphs"... I don't see why making new life is such a bad idea but if we're to do it in the best spirit of copying our creator, we have to also give them FREE WILL, not create them for the purpose of serving us. Anything else will result in tragedy. Like humans are going to make other life for anything other than gain. Not likely as human society currently stands.

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

No! Not the R-word! Anything but the R-word! Nooooo!

Genghis · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 186

the electrochemistry of the brain is fairly well understood

Um, no it isn't. We've barely even begun to figure out just how exactly it is that the brain functions. Sure, we might know a lot, but that's completely dwarfed by what we don't know - as with most things, oddly enough.

Rankin · Coadjutor Joined: 03 Jan 2004 Posts: 488

the electrochemistry of the brain is fairly well understood
Um, no it isn't. We've barely even begun to figure out just how exactly it is that the brain functions. Sure, we might know a lot, but that's completely dwarfed by what we don't know - as with most things, oddly enough.

I know enough about my brain chemistry to realize that although it thinks it works better on a high alcohol content, it's just as slow as it ever was. :(

Tailgunner · Coadjutor Joined: 28 Oct 2003 Posts: 161

As far as cost goes, maybe these people are finding a less expensive, more natural way to cross-breed humans with animals. >:}

Link: Story

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Now as to the ethics of making animal "morphs"... I don't see why making new life is such a bad idea but if we're to do it in the best spirit of copying our creator, we have to also give them FREE WILL, not create them for the purpose of serving us. Anything else will result in tragedy. Like humans are going to make other life for anything other than gain. Not likely as human society currently stands.

Why bother trying to make an animal more like a human, when we already have perfectly good humans knocking about?

Humans are best at doing what humans do. It would just be too much work and bother to try and make another animal like a human.

Perhaps one could clone animals for fur and meat though.

Anonymous · Coadjutor Joined: 01 Jun 2003 Posts: 767

Don't mind me, just passing through.

But I note nobody here's mentioned the small issue of speech here. If a hybrid were to exist, animal mouths and tongues are generally differently shaped to human ones (and indeed, between species). This could cause quite a problem with pronounciation and articulation of most words in assorted languages. If one were to be intelligent enough to understand human speech, there'd be a profound language barrier.

In other words, if an oh-so-yiffable fox lady were to exist and have free will and an IQ of 140 or whatever, she's probably not going to be able to say "no" to a desperate furry loser without breaking his face. I mean, she'd not be able to call the cops on him or anything.

I'm not trying to be profound or anything, just sayin'.