Actually, isnt the plot around Deus Ex:HR start with an attack on Sarif while they were close to realising a cure to the immunosuppressant problem? Oh god... plot flashes...
Poll: Human Augmentations. Your Stance?
- Thread starter Fuselage
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd certainly want nano-machines that could filter my blood and selectively remove poisons, not interested in much more though.
This kind of augmentation reminds me of the transition from mechanics/simple electric systems to electronics that happened just half a century ago (and look at how beneficial that turned out). We already have a lot of augmentations available to us already, like drugs, cosmetics, dental braces, artificial hearts, artificial limbs and probably a lot of other enhancements. Granted, some of those are for correcting defects, but others are for improving life.
But as with all of those, I prefer to limit myself to what I need. I'd certainly do the same for any new improvements that may come along.
This kind of augmentation reminds me of the transition from mechanics/simple electric systems to electronics that happened just half a century ago (and look at how beneficial that turned out). We already have a lot of augmentations available to us already, like drugs, cosmetics, dental braces, artificial hearts, artificial limbs and probably a lot of other enhancements. Granted, some of those are for correcting defects, but others are for improving life.
But as with all of those, I prefer to limit myself to what I need. I'd certainly do the same for any new improvements that may come along.
Hrm. I'm not convinced immuno-suppressants would be required. People inserting metal into their flesh has been happening for millennia (I personally have my ear pierced, and had no adverse effects), non-invasive neuron triggering is possible already (whilst the caps required for those are quite unwieldy at the moment, that tech can only improve), and it's not exactly like current prosthetics, which are, of course, just primitive augmentations, require immuno-suppressant drugs as far as I'm aware. Nor, indeed, do pacemakers or artificial cochleas - which, again, are primitive augmentations - to my knowledge.
Therefore, it stands to reason that advanced augmentations such as strength-enhancing limbs or replacement, more efficient organs, should not require constant immuno-suppressing drug usage, which does, regrettably, still leave the potential for external control. The only possibility there would be to ensure that all prosthetics are deaf and dumb when it comes to signals from outside the body, but that would be disadvantageous if it comes to brain augs that could be used to bypass computers and get straight onto the web...
Anywhom, I'm big on human augmentations
I would certainly upgrade myself, given the chance: I personally don't plan on living and dying on this one little rock, I'd like to eventually upload into a fully electronic chassis and live for centuries exploring the universe, or simply the cultures that we humans create in them. We've been augmenting ourselves since we developed the sharp rock that makes the spear, and now we get the chance to bring those augmentations inside the body. It's not exactly like our previous inventions have had no impact on our internal workings; the internet, whilst being a continuously external influence, is demonstrating just how plastic the human brain is, so we're just taking the next step.
In regards to losing our humanity, I always point people to Aaron Diaz's A Thinking Ape's Critique of Trans-Simianism, found here: http://dresdencodak.com/2009/05/15/a-thinking-apes-critique-of-trans-simianism-repost/
Therefore, it stands to reason that advanced augmentations such as strength-enhancing limbs or replacement, more efficient organs, should not require constant immuno-suppressing drug usage, which does, regrettably, still leave the potential for external control. The only possibility there would be to ensure that all prosthetics are deaf and dumb when it comes to signals from outside the body, but that would be disadvantageous if it comes to brain augs that could be used to bypass computers and get straight onto the web...
Anywhom, I'm big on human augmentations
I would certainly upgrade myself, given the chance: I personally don't plan on living and dying on this one little rock, I'd like to eventually upload into a fully electronic chassis and live for centuries exploring the universe, or simply the cultures that we humans create in them. We've been augmenting ourselves since we developed the sharp rock that makes the spear, and now we get the chance to bring those augmentations inside the body. It's not exactly like our previous inventions have had no impact on our internal workings; the internet, whilst being a continuously external influence, is demonstrating just how plastic the human brain is, so we're just taking the next step.In regards to losing our humanity, I always point people to Aaron Diaz's A Thinking Ape's Critique of Trans-Simianism, found here: http://dresdencodak.com/2009/05/15/a-thinking-apes-critique-of-trans-simianism-repost/
Honestly? If an augmentation aids someone who needs it...I see no issue at all. Frankly, elective cybernetic surgery isn't any different than getting a nose job or breast augmentation. Further, medical augmentations that actually help say injured or crippled people live with a better quality of life? Why would ANYONE oppose such?
Being a massive cynic, I'd say those two terms are pretty much synonomous.GrizzlerBorno said:
The only character in the trailer that this shows extracts from who I have any understanding for is the dad with the augmented arm, tossing an American football in the air and catching it. He explains that he lost his arm (though exactly how isn't specified), and one of his first thoughts was not being able to play with his son any more. For that reason, I empathise with him. Replacing body parts that have been destroyed through accident or injury if 100% good in my book, although hyper-priced immuno-suppressants sours the deal somewhat. But as for the hiker and the piano player, augmenting out of feelings of superiority, is just not right. As the professor in the video states, there really is no reason for trading perfectly functional body parts for mechanicals which won't be fully under your control. If she had had crippling arthritis in her fingers, fine. If he had damaged cataracts, fine. But swopping them out because you can? Stupid.
I think that the replacement body parts are the right way to go for badly injured people, but they should be limited to replacements, not enhancements, or else the fear factor emphasised in the video grinds into being. And of course, the ruinous prices for the pharmaceuticals is corporate greed at its worst.
I'm for heavy augmentations as long as they're not superficial. It'd be neat to safely jump another 20 feet high and run 50+ miles per hour.
The problem with that idea is that giving people totally awesome robo-arms with the strength of twelve gorillas actually makes them better humans... or just gives them a new tool to be assholes.EverythingIncredible said:
Other than that, I'm totally pro transhuman. I can't wait until I can have a laser-eye, rocket feet, and hands that can transform into laser guns! At least, that's what it SHOULD be like, but we all know that scientists are a bunch of lazy, humorless BEAN COUNTERS. If they weren't, we'd have had our flying cars back in 2000, which is when the jetsons said we would have them or something. Jetsons was in the future and the future = science, therefore it is the fault of Scientists that the world is still uncool and not the future. If you DON'T think about that chain of logic, it makes PERFECT SENSE.
but you do know that you will most likely wait for a very long time and then won't even be compatible with the tech? and since human revolution is the second deus ex game nanotechnology never reached the point where it would work for anyone.The Artificially Prolonged said:
Two words; nano-bots (okay, maybe one conjoined word but whatever). Fuck robo-arms, I wanna live forever. Besides, if I ever get into a fire fight, there are such things as guns and bullet proof vests. Plus they don't require major surgery.
Hell yeah, sign me up. And if your augmentations fuck me up I'll just rip them off and replace them with Google's. They're much better. Well, except that they come with Brain Logic for Eyeball and you can't uninstall it.
So don't think NO ONE EVER READS the EULA. Plenty of people do. Companies can get away with plenty of stuff, but not exactly 'our stuff is addictive'.
There was a massive shitstorm about one year back when someone pointed out that the way the Gmail EULa was written it gave Google the right to use anything sent through it to promote Gmail (i.e., if you are on a band and you send a song to your producer through Gmail, Google could use it on a Gmail ad without paying you for it). It's a standard clause in most EULAs, it essentially means 'if you do something cool with our product we can use it to show how cool it is' but Gmail's was poorly written. Google excised that clause shortly afterwards - they didn't even replace it with a standard thing, they just cut the whole thing off.GrizzlerBorno said:
So don't think NO ONE EVER READS the EULA. Plenty of people do. Companies can get away with plenty of stuff, but not exactly 'our stuff is addictive'.
Beat me to it. I was irrevocably sold on human augmentation way back in the 80s, on the day I put on my first pair of eyeglasses.Esotera said:Yeah, damn human augmentations, who would ever need those?
The maintenance fees aren't nearly as bad as y'all are making it out to be. There's plenty of available replacement providers, cost is a couple hundred bucks recommended once a year and insurance covers most of it.
I would do it with very little hesitation. The only thing I don't like about the augmentation as seen in the trailer is that they would possibly have the ability to control or at least influence my thoughts. Those against augmentation talk about giving up your humanity by getting augmented, but I don't think your physical body is what makes you human. It's you mind. Your consciousness. Replace my body with machines and plug the parts into my brain but don't mess with the underlying bits that make me human. Does this make sens to anybody?
I don't get the whole addiction thing as a plot device. Isn't the whole deal with your artificial implants being rejected by your body already making you completely dependent on the substance?