Human Coning
Human Coning
Personally, I'm against starting such a program no matter what the purpose, but I feel that it's inevitable and I would want there to be laws in place ahead of time to make sure that anyone born from such a program would be a person rather than a corperation's private property or a weapon of war.
What are your thoughts?
What are your thoughts?
Re: Human Coning
Well, cones are alright. Sure, most people who study math hate them just like any other quadric (Is x^2-y^2+5z^2+5xy-2y+3 a cone or an ellipsoid? I personally don't care. Discriminate how you want), but hey, ice cream cones are pretty good! The strawberry-flavoured Extrême (see here) tastes just like love.
As far as human coning though, I'm not so sure, the taste wouldn't be so good. Yeah, such a program wouldn't be a good idea.
Sorry, I just couldn't stop myself
As far as human coning though, I'm not so sure, the taste wouldn't be so good. Yeah, such a program wouldn't be a good idea.
Sorry, I just couldn't stop myself
Re: Human Coning
What do you have against coning? I might be a cone. Ever think of that? >:
Re: Human Coning
You guys are mean, this was clearly an honest spelling mistake.
Human conning is a bad thing as someone is always hurt by it.
It is sadly always an inevitability as there will always be those wanting to trick others . We should stick to conning only animals (Stupid horses pulling our wagons)
Human conning is a bad thing as someone is always hurt by it.
It is sadly always an inevitability as there will always be those wanting to trick others . We should stick to conning only animals (Stupid horses pulling our wagons)
Re: Human Coning
I don't think there's anything wrong with human conning. The benefit outweighs the cost.
Last edited by limepie20 13 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
- Falky
- Space Mountain, Real World's Champion, WOOOOO etc
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 13 years ago
- Pronouns: he/him/his
- Location: Workington, England
Re: Human Coning
What about simple bar bets? No harm done there, surely?freelop wrote:Human conning is a bad thing as someone is always hurt by it.
- Dollop of Mayo
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: Bonus Town
Re: Human Coning
<jerk> Of COURSE Walter Koenig is human! HE WAS CHEKOV, THE MOST HUMAN OF ALL THE STAR TREK CHARACTERS (except maybe McCoy) </jerk>
I fully embrace the idea of cloning human replacement organs for the benefit of people who would otherwise be on incredibly, and sometimes fatally, long wait lists.
The idea of cloning a full human being is of course a whole other kettle of fish.
To create a human being is to take responsibility for its creation : when it is born, in whatever capacity that birth takes place (currently restricted to natural childbirth producing an infant) the parents (currently restricted to one or more human beings that have participated in a process of impregnation typically involving sexual intercourse but more frequently involving artificial insemination) take up a responsibility to RAISE that child. To provide for their physical, mental, and emotional well being as best as they can.
Without pre-programming, though, which I believe will occur long after we are able to successfully and reliably clone another human being, you will always produce what is essentially an infant, even if not bodily.
To produce a new human being that physically resembles a fully-grown adult still brings with it the idea of needing to educate it from day one. You're going to have an adult that needs to be hand-fed and who will still need to learn extremely basic things like how to walk, how to talk, and hell, how to go to the bathroom in a way that doesn't involve diapers. And it's going to be harder for a variety of reasons.
An infant has little ability to affect its surroundings; in part because it lacks understanding, but largely because it lacks the physical strength to do so. You should be happy your baby just cries at the top of its lungs when it sees something it doesn't like, instead of lashing out at it and damaging him or herself AND the object in question, which could be fragile and irreplacable, a harmful chemical substance, or even another living being.
Imagine if your "infant" has the strength of a full-grown human being and they get spooked by your cat and snap its neck. Or the cat retaliates against your clumsy man-baby, injuring him or her in the process.
At the risk of lengthening an already overlong thought, I'll leave it at that and skip to the point where we are able to program and utilize cloned human beings for other purposes.
This is, of course, a huge moral gray area.
You could use cloned humans for many things, but what people would really want them used for is to perform more difficult tasks than they themselves would care to perform, not limited to military, industrial, athletic, exploratory, experimental, and even sexual tasks.
This falls into the exact same category of conflicted ethics as artificial intelligences. Most problematic of course, is that we can only currently speculate on what we would do with AI's or cloned human beings. Where do we draw the line on how we utilize these beings?
What it comes down to is that if you use a truly self-aware being to do something you don't want to, it is slavery. That's not really debatable. Humans have used other humans, often of different tribal/national/racial/ethnic/moral backgrounds as themselves, but just as frequently you can find examples of people as much as using their own children as slave labor.
SO, if we are to utilize clones as slave labor, do we "justify" it by programming them to not be truly self-aware? If so we are essentially creating flesh and blood robots; we already have robots that can do simple tasks in the world of today. We program a device to do something, and it performs that task so long as we desire it to or it breaks down.
If we could program clones like this, it would certainly FEEL wrong to a lot of people. Myself included.
And yet, sending programmed clones to fight wars, to explore dangerous areas, etc, sure sounds better than sending people who have their own lives and minds to do it, right? You could produce 1,000 soldier clones that go to die for you who have no friends or family to mourn their deaths, or you could send 1,000 men who have had a minimum of 18 years to develop themselves and their relationships, who would almost certainly be mourned by at least a handful of other people should they perish. And you can't get those guys back... or can you? Can a person be made effectively immortal through copying their memories and transferring them to new, healthy bodies? That could be another 1,000 words; another 1,000 pages written by somebody with more insight than myself.
I'm no precognate but I personally feel that we will have robots that can do all the things cloned human beings could before we are able to fully program cloned minds. In that light society will probably not even have to worry about having to make the decision on whether it's "right" to use clones to do unpleasant tasks in their place.
If that day comes I do not envy those that will have to look a clone in the eye and tell them that they are less than human, despite appearances. Even if the clone responds with an agreement, will that be enough?
tl;dr
I fully embrace the idea of cloning human replacement organs for the benefit of people who would otherwise be on incredibly, and sometimes fatally, long wait lists.
The idea of cloning a full human being is of course a whole other kettle of fish.
To create a human being is to take responsibility for its creation : when it is born, in whatever capacity that birth takes place (currently restricted to natural childbirth producing an infant) the parents (currently restricted to one or more human beings that have participated in a process of impregnation typically involving sexual intercourse but more frequently involving artificial insemination) take up a responsibility to RAISE that child. To provide for their physical, mental, and emotional well being as best as they can.
Without pre-programming, though, which I believe will occur long after we are able to successfully and reliably clone another human being, you will always produce what is essentially an infant, even if not bodily.
To produce a new human being that physically resembles a fully-grown adult still brings with it the idea of needing to educate it from day one. You're going to have an adult that needs to be hand-fed and who will still need to learn extremely basic things like how to walk, how to talk, and hell, how to go to the bathroom in a way that doesn't involve diapers. And it's going to be harder for a variety of reasons.
An infant has little ability to affect its surroundings; in part because it lacks understanding, but largely because it lacks the physical strength to do so. You should be happy your baby just cries at the top of its lungs when it sees something it doesn't like, instead of lashing out at it and damaging him or herself AND the object in question, which could be fragile and irreplacable, a harmful chemical substance, or even another living being.
Imagine if your "infant" has the strength of a full-grown human being and they get spooked by your cat and snap its neck. Or the cat retaliates against your clumsy man-baby, injuring him or her in the process.
At the risk of lengthening an already overlong thought, I'll leave it at that and skip to the point where we are able to program and utilize cloned human beings for other purposes.
This is, of course, a huge moral gray area.
You could use cloned humans for many things, but what people would really want them used for is to perform more difficult tasks than they themselves would care to perform, not limited to military, industrial, athletic, exploratory, experimental, and even sexual tasks.
This falls into the exact same category of conflicted ethics as artificial intelligences. Most problematic of course, is that we can only currently speculate on what we would do with AI's or cloned human beings. Where do we draw the line on how we utilize these beings?
What it comes down to is that if you use a truly self-aware being to do something you don't want to, it is slavery. That's not really debatable. Humans have used other humans, often of different tribal/national/racial/ethnic/moral backgrounds as themselves, but just as frequently you can find examples of people as much as using their own children as slave labor.
SO, if we are to utilize clones as slave labor, do we "justify" it by programming them to not be truly self-aware? If so we are essentially creating flesh and blood robots; we already have robots that can do simple tasks in the world of today. We program a device to do something, and it performs that task so long as we desire it to or it breaks down.
If we could program clones like this, it would certainly FEEL wrong to a lot of people. Myself included.
And yet, sending programmed clones to fight wars, to explore dangerous areas, etc, sure sounds better than sending people who have their own lives and minds to do it, right? You could produce 1,000 soldier clones that go to die for you who have no friends or family to mourn their deaths, or you could send 1,000 men who have had a minimum of 18 years to develop themselves and their relationships, who would almost certainly be mourned by at least a handful of other people should they perish. And you can't get those guys back... or can you? Can a person be made effectively immortal through copying their memories and transferring them to new, healthy bodies? That could be another 1,000 words; another 1,000 pages written by somebody with more insight than myself.
I'm no precognate but I personally feel that we will have robots that can do all the things cloned human beings could before we are able to fully program cloned minds. In that light society will probably not even have to worry about having to make the decision on whether it's "right" to use clones to do unpleasant tasks in their place.
If that day comes I do not envy those that will have to look a clone in the eye and tell them that they are less than human, despite appearances. Even if the clone responds with an agreement, will that be enough?
tl;dr
The nature of the signature is significant and natural.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
- ultratowel112
- Posts: 22
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Pronouns: He/him
Re: Human Coning
Who said anything about human cloning? This thread is either about human coning or human conning, we aren't sure which. The picture at the end of your post does fit in with the human coning portion of the thread, so you didn't fail completely. Read the thread before posting in it to see what it is about next time. It will save you from looking like an idiot who did a chemistry experiment for a history project.DancingMad wrote:Stuff
tl:dr: Read the thread before posting.
- Dollop of Mayo
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: Bonus Town
Re: Human Coning
tl;dr
The nature of the signature is significant and natural.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
Re: Human Coning
I am for human coning. Human-traffic cone hybrids provide intelligent and easier-to-move tools to direct traffic and will decrease the amount of construction worker deaths on roads that need improvement.
- Rameau's Nephew
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 13 years ago
Re: Human Coning
Wait, the what now?DancingMad wrote:how to go to the bathroom in a way that doesn't involve diapers.
- Dollop of Mayo
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: Bonus Town
Re: Human Coning
As in, not potty trained.Rameau's Nephew wrote:Wait, the what now?DancingMad wrote:how to go to the bathroom in a way that doesn't involve diapers.
The nature of the signature is significant and natural.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
- morsel/morceau
- Posts: 401
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: exotic horse island
Re: Human Coning
Human caning? I'm all for it.
butt pain ass whack bum paddle bottoms caned human caning school uniforms boys girls punishment humiliation domination hard wood smacking spanking cane stick broomstick Rikun Marisa babes beating free pictures download kinky spank strap erotic chastity amazing canings video korean german colorado whackystick theatre
butt pain ass whack bum paddle bottoms caned human caning school uniforms boys girls punishment humiliation domination hard wood smacking spanking cane stick broomstick Rikun Marisa babes beating free pictures download kinky spank strap erotic chastity amazing canings video korean german colorado whackystick theatre
dont wanna jihad no more
- Falky
- Space Mountain, Real World's Champion, WOOOOO etc
- Posts: 114
- Joined: 13 years ago
- Pronouns: he/him/his
- Location: Workington, England
Re: Human Coning
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpESayAnything wrote:I guess I am impartial to human canning. I wouldn't buy it, nor would I offer my own body for it, but if other people dream to be on grocery aisle shelves, who are we to stop them?
Re: Human Coning
Dangit, an I was going to suggest canning too! I got beat there.
- raocow
- the death of the incredible huge
- Posts: 4078
- Joined: 15 years ago
- Location: maybe the Wizards are the most complex, and the sales guys are up their daily
- https://raocow.talkhaus.com/
- RikunFrances
- Mentally Ill
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Pronouns: kunself/you
- Location: A Rainbow
Re: Human Coning
Cones are pretty sharp, a sphere might do a better job.
Then you can easily transport people.
Even better, an egg, we can all be Weebles.
Then you can easily transport people.
Even better, an egg, we can all be Weebles.
I'm a girl, not a gay dude, just to clear things up.
The RAoD thread, for anyone who doesn't know what it is.
Trufax: raocow's doorstep is now the gateway to Gensokyo, canon.
The RAoD thread, for anyone who doesn't know what it is.
Trufax: raocow's doorstep is now the gateway to Gensokyo, canon.
- Rameau's Nephew
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 13 years ago
Re: Human Coning
What trained now?DancingMad wrote:As in, not potty trained.Rameau's Nephew wrote:Wait, the what now?DancingMad wrote:how to go to the bathroom in a way that doesn't involve diapers.
- Dollop of Mayo
- Posts: 0
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: Bonus Town
Re: Human Coning
Forest WhitakerRameau's Nephew wrote:What trained now?
The nature of the signature is significant and natural.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
http://dollopofmayo.tumblr.com/ - I put comics here because they demand it.
Re: Human Coning
But what about woman coning? Do you guys make a difference between these two things?
-
Argumentable
the biggest shit
- Posts: 690
- Joined: 14 years ago
- Location: A butthole
- Contact:
- https://argu.talkhaus.com/
Re: Human Coning
You're right. Humans and women ARE different
I'm on Youtube andTwitter and Discord so say hi to me on there cause I don't really post here also I have sigs off so I can make my sig as ugly as I want and it won't bother me this is my sig btw