Avatar Polymorph <way@warehouse.net> writes:
>In line with animal liberationists, I am proposing a law to make it
Which of course is 100% infeasible until you have extremely advanced nanotech making us effectively autotrophic, space-living and able to peacefully relocate all parasites (guess how many bacteria your own immune system is killing each second?). Somehow this sounds rather silly, especially since we don't mind other animals killing other animals. It is better to look at here-and-now or near future possibilities instead (for example, what about growing meat artificially?).
> I believe extensive ethical discussion now would be very wise. Any
> attempt to restrict practical initial telomere therapy to an elite might
> annoy everyday people.
Has anybody really proposed that? At least here on the list the consensus seems to be the reverse, that new technologies should be made as available as possible through efficient means. I have noted that worries about this kind of restriction crop up more among people who are not part of the transhumanist discussions; they seem to be based on a fairly limited understanding of economics and politics.
> Perhaps what you need is a Transhumanist Bill of Rights that is simple
> and clear to moderately informed people.
A good idea, in fact. Transhumanism do suffer from misunderstandings in the public, and this may be a way to amend that. The transhumanist principles may be a first step.
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Anders Sandberg Towards Ascension! asa@nada.kth.se http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ GCS/M/S/O d++ -p+ c++++ !l u+ e++ m++ s+/+ n--- h+/* f+ g+ w++ t+ r+ !y