Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:48:00 +0000
OK, seeing as some physicist in Chicago has decided that he is going to
start cloning human beings at the rate of 3-500 per month (infertility
clinic), in complete opposition of President Clinton's opposal to the
cloning of human beings. And, seeing as clones has been a hot topic of
the science fiction genre in general, and... cloned body parts are a
commonly accepted part of Shadowrun. What are the thoughts of the
people here.


I'm not interested in a moralistic opinion of cloning. There are other
forums for that sort of debate, this is a cyberpunk list, so, all views
are encouraged, but let's keep souls, god, politics out of it. OK?


The reason I ask, is because of programs like Space:Above & Beyond (the
cloned memmbers of society described in derogatory terms as tubies) with
no history, memoriers to speak of etc.

Replicants (slightly different but...) from Bladerunner.
(I use these in my games for the same purpose as the film, hard
labour/exploration)

Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
for body parts.
(I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)

Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memories intact.
(Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
through re-programmable BTL implant)

And of course Star Wars - The Clone Wars (if it means the same thing at
all - Bull???)

Followed by a considerable number of Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episodes
and a few rather sad comedy films.
(A lot of the ideas from these programs are likely to be
implemented in my games at some point for general mayhem value)


I use cloning in Shadowrun, and have done so to my players chagrin on
one occassion, when their clones became more famous then them, but in a
very unpopular way. (but then I use cyborgs and androids as well, so...)
A large number of other possibilities occur to me.


I'm curious to see how other list members view clones/cloning in their
campaigns, and whether they are used simply to repair broken PC's or if
the process is expensive to the point where only those of "wealthier"
status are able to employ such methods. Obviously the applications for
medical use are limitless, but farming body parts? How would that be
viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
almost racial hatred?


In a way I'm a bit nervy (those who know me will realise this is not a
natural condition for me) :) of asking this sort of question because it
has a chance of becoming volatile, So, for those who want to get
excited and start screaching at each other over social/religious issues,
please take it somewhere else. After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk, and
cyberpunk by it's very nature, breaks the boundries of many accepted
social values.

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 2
From: Wyrmy <elfman@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 13:21:45 -0600
> After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk,

It is not!! it has no magic,or elves or trolls or orks or dwarfs(well
mybe midgets.Please refrase what you said avenger.shadowrun is a gritty
and dark game,but the people atleast have a chance.Cp is just dark and
gritty, and the people dont' have a chance.
Message no. 3
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:17:34 -0500
On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 06:48:00PM +0000, Avenger wrote:
<BIG SNIP>
> And of course Star Wars - The Clone Wars (if it means the same thing at
> all - Bull???)

If I remember correctly, clones were basically used to
generate crews for the large startships. I'm not sure if they've
ever said anything about memories etc.

>
> Followed by a considerable number of Twilight Zone/Outer Limits episodes
> and a few rather sad comedy films.
> (A lot of the ideas from these programs are likely to be
> implemented in my games at some point for general mayhem value)
>
>
> I use cloning in Shadowrun, and have done so to my players chagrin on
> one occassion, when their clones became more famous then them, but in a
> very unpopular way. (but then I use cyborgs and androids as well, so...)
> A large number of other possibilities occur to me.
>
>
> I'm curious to see how other list members view clones/cloning in their
> campaigns, and whether they are used simply to repair broken PC's or if
> the process is expensive to the point where only those of "wealthier"
> status are able to employ such methods. Obviously the applications for
> medical use are limitless, but farming body parts? How would that be
> viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
> status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
> almost racial hatred?

I have yet to use full clones, or androids in my game.
Such things remain good plot devices (like AI's).
I don't see SR tech having progressed that far (yet).
I have used the idea of farming body parts (Tamanous from the
Underworld sourcebook IIRC), etc.
I would think that cloned parts are just a part of everyday life
in 2059. I'm guessing if there are organizations to hate elves
etc, if clones were viable, there would be quite a bit of social
mistrust etc initially, and then you would be left with
the policlubs etc.
I think I like the word etc, today. Anyway...as far as societal
issues are concerned it may also depend on location. CFS is
far more "racist" then Seattle seems to be, where Japan
seems to mistrust and quarantine anything non-japanese (island
of Yomi).
Later.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 4
From: James Paul Morgan <jpmorgan@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 12:26:44 -0700
On Thu, 8 Jan 1998, Avenger wrote:

> I'm curious to see how other list members view clones/cloning in their
> campaigns, and whether they are used simply to repair broken PC's or if
> the process is expensive to the point where only those of "wealthier"
> status are able to employ such methods. Obviously the applications for
> medical use are limitless, but farming body parts? How would that be
> viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
> status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
> almost racial hatred?
>

I don't have full cloning of human beings. For body parts, they force
grow them to maturity. Unfortunately, they cannot clone the whole body
cleanly, so they focus on the needed organ(s) or limb and let the errors
and cancers and such creep into the other parts. You don't end up with a
viable clone, you end up with viable parts and a bunch of biomass you need
to recycle.

Also, if you just want an arm, you don't have to clone the whole body.
You get the arm and some of the stuff around it so that the proper
connections are all there, but you don't need legs or a head or anything
like that.


There are a couple of organizations that has cloning.... except that it
only works sometimes. There's a group in the Tir that my players have
encountered. Of twenty-some clones, they only had two that were still
around and viable when the party arrived to trash the lab, and one of
those looked 90 when he was only "5". The other one, while exceptionally
fast and strong, has other problems, such as complete color blindness.

There is another group that has had more accurate results, but they have
far more failures. They can determine early on if the clone is developing
properly. They have to make literally dozens of "flushed jobs" before
they can get a clone to come to proper maturity. It's not a cheap process
by any means. Nor is the clone really a true "clone". It's just close to
the original.



A quick plea to the list: Can we please avoid bringing modern morality
into this? We're looking at a dark future world, not today. I'm not
trying to knock of support any modern view, but discuss the idea of
cloning from what appears to be 2058 morality. (Parts and pieces are
legal and proper, but whole-cloning is still "illegal" and frowned upon.)




See ya around the Mulberry bush.

--James

:)
Message no. 5
From: "Panther`" <qmilton@**.NET>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 20:52:18 -0800
Lehlan Decker wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 06:48:00PM +0000, Avenger wrote:
> <BIG SNIP>
> > And of course Star Wars - The Clone Wars (if it means the same thing at
> > all - Bull???)
>
> If I remember correctly, clones were basically used to
> generate crews for the large startships. I'm not sure if they've
> ever said anything about memories etc.

Don't forget the character C'baoth from 'Heir to the Empire'. he was a
clone, too :)

Panther`
Message no. 6
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 20:32:57 +0100
Avenger said on 18:48/ 8 Jan 98...

> Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
> for body parts.
> (I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)

The replacement organ tables in SRII and Shadowtech list cloned parts,
yes.

> Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memories intact.
> (Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
> through re-programmable BTL implant)

And some ideas about what might happen (from the POV of an interesting
adventure) when the subject you're cloning is only really used as a
necessary step in getting something else...

> And of course Star Wars - The Clone Wars (if it means the same thing at
> all - Bull???)

That depends... If you take the comics and all the other stuff around them
ovies as canon, then it probably means what the name suggests: cloned
people. However I don't think George Lucas has actually said what the
Clone Wars are supposed to have been, and AFAIK he considers the movies to
be the only _true_ SW.

Some books suggest (IIRC) that imperial stormtroopers are clones, BTW.

> I use cloning in Shadowrun, and have done so to my players chagrin on
> one occassion, when their clones became more famous then them, but in a
> very unpopular way. (but then I use cyborgs and androids as well, so...)

If you go BTB, then cloning a person is impossible because, for a reason
that hasn't been really explained, it's not possible to clone nervous
tissue to the degree necessary to give the clone a personality to speak
of.

> Obviously the applications for medical use are limitless, but farming
> body parts? How would that be viewed by extremist organisations in
> Shadowrun

Very bad, I think. Considering that today, members of lots of religions
groups do not want to receive organ transplants or even vaccinations (for
example the strict protestants in my area) I think similar gtoups in the
2050s would reject cloning for the simple reason that it's humans making
humans, and not God or some other "higher power" (disregarding the way in
which humans have made other humans for thousands of years :)

> does a clone have any status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated
> with contempt and almost racial hatred?

Since according to FASA it isn't possible to fully clone someone, this
question is irrelevant if you go BTB. Otherwise, I don't know... people
are afraid of what they don't understand and/or is new, so most likely
yes, they'd get treated much as in Space: Above & Beyond. IMHO, of course.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
In the garden.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:35:52 -0500
On Mon, Jan 05, 1998 at 08:52:18PM -0800, Panther` wrote:
> Lehlan Decker wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 06:48:00PM +0000, Avenger wrote:
> > <BIG SNIP>
> > > And of course Star Wars - The Clone Wars (if it means the same thing at
> > > all - Bull???)
> >
> > If I remember correctly, clones were basically used to
> > generate crews for the large startships. I'm not sure if they've
> > ever said anything about memories etc.
>
> Don't forget the character C'baoth from 'Heir to the Empire'. he was a
> clone, too :)
>
True, he was also mental unbalanced. Not sure if that was due to
his clone nature or the dark side. That does bed the question, can
you clone a human being, and keep memories etc intacted.
Also would their aura's, true names, etc be the same?
Or is that touching on the whole soul issue again.



--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 8
From: "Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA)" <Durand.Graves@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:40:35 -0500
Cloning could open a lot of doors for fun in Shadowrun. If used correctly
by the GM, every character has to ask themselves if the people around them
are who they say they are. Even worse they have to ask the same question
about themselves. How do we(the characters you play) know if the contact
that just gave you a job is the same woman that gave you one last week.
What if she's a cloned ally to the corp that your job assignment depicts
as the target? (try Conspiracy Theory.) Government cover-ups, corp
cover-ups. . . "How can you say I was in Chicago assassinating this
political leader, when everyone was with me in Japan on a research trip?"
(DID he do it, or did he get framed?) Just a couple of thoughts. . .


Durand
Message no. 9
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:46:42 -0500
On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 02:40:35PM -0500, Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA) wrote:
> Cloning could open a lot of doors for fun in Shadowrun. If used correctly
> by the GM, every character has to ask themselves if the people around them
> are who they say they are. Even worse they have to ask the same question
> about themselves. How do we(the characters you play) know if the contact
> that just gave you a job is the same woman that gave you one last week.
> What if she's a cloned ally to the corp that your job assignment depicts
> as the target? (try Conspiracy Theory.) Government cover-ups, corp
> cover-ups. . . "How can you say I was in Chicago assassinating this
> political leader, when everyone was with me in Japan on a research trip?"
> (DID he do it, or did he get framed?) Just a couple of thoughts. . .
>
>
Nope..Nope...Nope...that is way too close to the Paranoia game system.
Fun, but not the way I want to see Shadowrun (IMHO of course).
I've used "clones" per se as a villian once, but generally I have
plenty of fodder for villians without these.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 10
From: "Panther`" <qmilton@**.NET>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 21:21:34 -0800
Lehlan Decker wrote:
> >
> > Don't forget the character C'baoth from 'Heir to the Empire'. he was a
> > clone, too :)
> >
> True, he was also mental unbalanced. Not sure if that was due to
> his clone nature or the dark side.

IIRC, he was mentally unbalanced because he was one of teh 'early'
clones, made before they'd perfected the technique...

Panther
Message no. 11
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:06:29 -0500
On Mon, Jan 05, 1998 at 09:21:34PM -0800, Panther` wrote:
> Lehlan Decker wrote:
> > >
> > > Don't forget the character C'baoth from 'Heir to the Empire'. he was a
> > > clone, too :)
> > >
> > True, he was also mental unbalanced. Not sure if that was due to
> > his clone nature or the dark side.
>
> IIRC, he was mentally unbalanced because he was one of teh 'early'
> clones, made before they'd perfected the technique...
>
Perhaps, but always wondering if I was the original or not, would
certainly drive me mad. Anyway read the Spider-Man Clone stuff?
Clones touch on alot of areas, where we just don't know, and no
matter what answers you seem to find, there are more questions.
Life is never dull I guess.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 12
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 20:00:50 +0000
In article <34B52749.5234@*****.net>, Wyrmy <elfman@*****.NET> waffled &
burbled about Clones and other thingies
>> After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk,
>
>It is not!! it has no magic,or elves or trolls or orks or dwarfs(well
>mybe midgets.Please refrase what you said avenger.shadowrun is a gritty
>and dark game,but the people atleast have a chance.Cp is just dark and
>gritty, and the people dont' have a chance.

I'm Sorry old chap, but no I will not rephrase my comment. CP2020 is a
different game, but part of the same genre as Shadowrun. That genre is
Cyberpunk.


Cyberpunk is not a game, it is a descriptive term used to centralise a
concept of a dark future, the primary concern of which is
cybernetic/biological integration - or machine and meat as one.


(BTW, this kind of comment could very easily start a nasty little war
between tbe game fans, so be careful where you post a comment like this)


People die as quickly in Shadowrun as CP2020, so you're a tad wrong
there also.


If you check the basic definitions of the cyberpunk concept you'll find
that Shadowrun fits inside very neatly indeed, the only difference is in
the inclusion of Fantasy elements (dragons, magic etc)


To anyone else thinking of answering the SR isn't cyberpunk comment,
please don't, let it die before it gets blown out of all proportion.

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 13
From: "Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA)" <Durand.Graves@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:18:41 -0500
So I take it that most of ya'll haven't, don't, and probably won't use the
idea of full fledge humanoid clones in your games? I could see where the
"Paranoia" Could kick in to overdrive. My question is this, and I know its
a wee bit off topic, but I have to ask. If it is within our imaginable
technology to begin creating clones today, what would it(cloning) ACTUALLY
be like in the world of Shadowrun? I think that if the advances in
technology has allowed the people of Shadowrun to incorporate into
themselves inanimate materials, then by all means organic versions of
themselves should be running around. After all, isn't it easier to get an
organic substance to respond and work with another organic substance rather
an organic to inorganic? I may be wrong, but I could see a clone walking
down the street smiling and waving at people, before I could see a
cyberzombie knocking the crap out of everything it sees. Something about
the preservation of self instead of the replacement of self.


Durand
Message no. 14
From: "Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA)" <Durand.Graves@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:50:34 -0500
a little while ago I said,
<snip>
I think that if the advances in technology has allowed the people of
Shadowrun to incorporate into themselves inanimate materials, then by all
means organic versions of themselves should be running around.
<snip>

OK "inanimate" isn't the right word.
Message no. 15
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 15:57:09 -0500
On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 03:18:41PM -0500, Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA) wrote:
> So I take it that most of ya'll haven't, don't, and probably won't use the
> idea of full fledge humanoid clones in your games? I could see where the
> "Paranoia" Could kick in to overdrive. My question is this, and I know its
> a wee bit off topic, but I have to ask. If it is within our imaginable
> technology to begin creating clones today, what would it(cloning) ACTUALLY
> be like in the world of Shadowrun? I think that if the advances in
> technology has allowed the people of Shadowrun to incorporate into
> themselves inanimate materials, then by all means organic versions of
> themselves should be running around. After all, isn't it easier to get an
> organic substance to respond and work with another organic substance rather
> an organic to inorganic? I may be wrong, but I could see a clone walking
> down the street smiling and waving at people, before I could see a
> cyberzombie knocking the crap out of everything it sees. Something about
> the preservation of self instead of the replacement of self.
>
>
Your talking about two different things. Replacing your arm,
making you faster, etc, doesn't involve changes to "you" the
person. It just involves changes to your body. We may be nearing
the point of cloning, but what does this mean? Can human brain
tissue be cloned? (Which is more complex then a sheeps I sure)
If so, what does this mean? Just the built in limits you
have already, but with a blank slate? Does the clone have
the same memories, or just the potential you do.
Even if we're close to being able to clone somebody, we
still have a long way to go, before we know how the brain
truly works, and how to repair it.
What makes somebody truly alive? See this argument is doing it again.
Sheesh....


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 16
From: Andy Gardner <A.Gardner@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:07:56 +0000
> Avenger said on 18:48/ 8 Jan 98...
>
> > Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
> > for body parts.
> > (I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)

It goes a lot further than that. In shadowtech (P 11-12)the comments
from the research group indicate that ALL cloned parts come from a
completely cloned body, with the left-overs being broken down and
recycled. It does indicate when refering to re-engineered organs
(bioware) that the rest of the host is only superficial but later
when referring to normal body parts it says that you have to grow the
whole thing and then 'harvest' the bit you need.
That suggests total cloning. The main problem would be the mind of
the clone. With no education or opportunity to learn it would not be
able to act. If the clones are grown to full maturity then the brain
would reach the mature (slower learning) phase before it had the
chance to learn much.
Another pointer is with Doc-Wagon contracts.
I thinks in the NAGRL but somewhere it points out that within a few
months of your contract (Platinum or higher I think) starting cloned
body parts are available immediately when required. I don't see this
as being a viable business prospect if you have to grow and store all
the parts seperately. Much easier to force grow an entire body and
then halt further development. A natural extension of forced growth
would be the ability to stop retard growth as well.

> > Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memories intact.
> > (Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
> > through re-programmable BTL implant)

A clone is just a copy of your genes. This are fixed at conception
and are unrelated to memories. Unless you believe in a racial
sub-conscious (which may be what ripley had, afterall she had vague
impressions of what the aliens were doing as they were doing it) or
racial memories a grown clone would have no memories.
But when considering BTL's, why not go back to the LS method of
sim-sense imprisonment and adapt it ?
Give the clone a lifetime's worth of memories in the space of a few
days. With the right simulation or background info you could even
try to give it a copy of the originals memories.

Fox on the Net
ICQ UIN - 5239612
Message no. 17
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:21:53 +0000
In article <19980108155709.20276@****.fsu.edu>, Lehlan Decker
<decker@****.FSU.EDU> waffled & burbled about Clones and other thingies
>On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 03:18:41PM -0500, Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA)
>wrote:
>> an organic to inorganic? I may be wrong, but I could see a clone walking
>> down the street smiling and waving at people, before I could see a
>> cyberzombie knocking the crap out of everything it sees. Something about
>> the preservation of self instead of the replacement of self.
>>
>>
>Your talking about two different things. Replacing your arm,
>making you faster, etc, doesn't involve changes to "you" the
>person. It just involves changes to your body. We may be nearing
>the point of cloning, but what does this mean? Can human brain
>tissue be cloned? (Which is more complex then a sheeps I sure)

Just to clear up a small misconception, the cloning originally
mentioned, and that which is about to undergo a beginnning in Chicago
this year, does not grow one from genetically created chromosones in a
tank. It is done at the cellular level, inpregnating fertile eggs with
genes from the same cell and implanting these into the womb of a fertile
woman.

The sheep created were from the same cell, grown in a dish, implanted
into a female sheep, and then developed as normal lambs.

The concept employed by the Chicago physicist is exactly the same, take
cells from the parent, implant these into a fertile egg and them in a
female, and let them grow into normal human children, the natural
development governs all growth of materials used to make up a human,
there is no scientific creation of brain tissues or anything like that,
it is a natural growth process, following the artificial placement of
cells.

>If so, what does this mean? Just the built in limits you
>have already, but with a blank slate? Does the clone have
>the same memories, or just the potential you do.

That is not yet known, but the clone would certaily be identical in all
physical respects. Within the next two years, we will know whether the
clone grows with all it's "parents" memories intact. If this is the
case, it opens a massive can of worms I certainly don't want to get
into.

Looking at it from the SF pov, yes the clone grows with all memories etc
intact, the growth process halted medically at whatever age the
biologists wish the subject ot be, then normal aging process takes over.
I find it interesting that the argument in SF circles regarding this
process has nothing to do with the moral issues, but rather precisely
how much information about a persons life would be contained in single
cells. One school follows that it would contain a complete blueprint of
the donor up to that point including illnesses, hereditary diseases etc.
while the other says that the clone would be a mindless automaton,
requiring schooling and teaching to bring it to any reasonable standard,
much like a normal child. (I prefer this particular thought myself,
which is why I tend to use re-programmable implanted BTLs to
subliminally "teach" the subject. Techniques I hasten to add, already
in place today - not the BTLs but subliminal teaching - the hiding of a
tape recorder or similar article near the head of a sleeping subject,
the recording, when played continually over a period of months, begins
to be remembered by the conscious brain as well as the subconscious, it
was used in the 60's I believe to teach languages and suchlike, but with
the scares over mind control and brainwashing, the project sunk into the
depths never to re-appear.

>Even if we're close to being able to clone somebody,

Not close. We can.

>What makes somebody truly alive? See this argument is doing it again.
>Sheesh....

Don't want to go down this path, but IMHO Life is life. I think
therefore I am. Or are you all a figment of my overfertile imagination
and I am in fact non-existent/comatose/dead. Reality is what you make
of it.


--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 18
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 16:52:22 -0500
On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 09:21:53PM +0000, Avenger wrote:
> In article <19980108155709.20276@****.fsu.edu>, Lehlan Decker
> <decker@****.FSU.EDU> waffled & burbled about Clones and other thingies
> >On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 03:18:41PM -0500, Graves, Durand E. (Temporary at ALCOA)
> >wrote:
<SNIP excellent explanation on current cloning>
>
> >If so, what does this mean? Just the built in limits you
> >have already, but with a blank slate? Does the clone have
> >the same memories, or just the potential you do.
>
> That is not yet known, but the clone would certaily be identical in all
> physical respects. Within the next two years, we will know whether the
> clone grows with all it's "parents" memories intact. If this is the
> case, it opens a massive can of worms I certainly don't want to get
> into.
>
> Looking at it from the SF pov, yes the clone grows with all memories etc
> intact, the growth process halted medically at whatever age the
> biologists wish the subject ot be, then normal aging process takes over.
> I find it interesting that the argument in SF circles regarding this
> process has nothing to do with the moral issues, but rather precisely
> how much information about a persons life would be contained in single
> cells. One school follows that it would contain a complete blueprint of
> the donor up to that point including illnesses, hereditary diseases etc.
> while the other says that the clone would be a mindless automaton,
> requiring schooling and teaching to bring it to any reasonable standard,
> much like a normal child. (I prefer this particular thought myself,
> which is why I tend to use re-programmable implanted BTLs to
> subliminally "teach" the subject. Techniques I hasten to add, already
> in place today - not the BTLs but subliminal teaching - the hiding of a
> tape recorder or similar article near the head of a sleeping subject,
> the recording, when played continually over a period of months, begins
> to be remembered by the conscious brain as well as the subconscious, it
> was used in the 60's I believe to teach languages and suchlike, but with
> the scares over mind control and brainwashing, the project sunk into the
> depths never to re-appear.
>
> >Even if we're close to being able to clone somebody,
>
> Not close. We can.
>
> >What makes somebody truly alive? See this argument is doing it again.
> >Sheesh....
>
> Don't want to go down this path, but IMHO Life is life. I think
> therefore I am. Or are you all a figment of my overfertile imagination
> and I am in fact non-existent/comatose/dead. Reality is what you make
> of it.
>
>
Excellent comments, and you also cleared up some points I hadn't
heard. Heh..most SF are like this. Personally I don't believe
its morally or religiously wrong. But should we do it?
Will it cause more problems then it solves? Only time will tell.
What was the comment, that sci-fiction, frequently foreshadows the
future?
Hmm..Sleep teaching tapes are still out there, and perhaps more
research could be done. After all, in SR, you don't need a sleep
tape, you just need skillwires! Ever fall asleep to certain types
of music and have wierd dreams. Same sort of thing.
Anyway..I now return you to your regulary scheduled debate.
I have a feeling there will be even more male, after everybody
checks in tonight. :)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 19
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 00:25:05 +0000
Durand wrote:
[SNIP]
> I think that if the advances in
> technology has allowed the people of Shadowrun to incorporate into
> themselves inanimate materials, then by all means organic versions of
> themselves should be running around. After all, isn't it easier to get an
> organic substance to respond and work with another organic substance rather
> an organic to inorganic? I may be wrong, but I could see a clone walking
> down the street smiling and waving at people, before I could see a
> cyberzombie knocking the crap out of everything it sees. Something about
> the preservation of self instead of the replacement of self.

You won't see the cyberzombie knocking the crap out of everything it
sees first. (Good illustration of your view on things! The
clone smiling and waving while the chromed guy kills everything in
sight. TSK TSK! :)

You will, though, see the paraplegic with nerves replaced
by electric impulses walking around first. You will see the blind man
seeing well with a camera in his eye first. You
will see the legless man walking on his new Sony legs first. You will
see the alzheimer case remembering something he said five minutes
earlier because of the chip in his brain first.

Interfacing biology with biology is several orders of magnitude
harder than interfacing flesh and chrome. (Plastic, glass, stainless
steel, ceramics, gold - very chemically inert materials). If you put
metal in a person it will only be rejected if it came with bacteria
attached or it oxidizes(which is why it is sterilized and uses inox
materials - it won't be rejected.). If you put biology in a person,
the best possible match will only not be rejected if you almost kill
the person with immunosuppressives for the rest of his life, a
process which reduces his life expectancy by more than 20 years - of
course only done if the other option is a rapid death.

Today some things are around that might make mixing bio into people
easier in the future. But putting steel into people is way ahead so
far. And what you posted on - people cloned with the thougths and
memories of the original - will only be available after the human
mind has been thoroughly mapped and can be recorded out of and into a
brain. (This might well be possible, eventually, but it's the big
brother of ghosting or creating flatliners, for instance, since that
only requires it read into an electronic medium, but I'm inclined to
allow that, so...).



--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 20
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 00:25:05 +0000
> OK, seeing as some physicist in Chicago has decided that he is going to
> start cloning human beings at the rate of 3-500 per month (infertility
> clinic), in complete opposition of President Clinton's opposal to the
> cloning of human beings.

I wish him good luck. I suspect he will need it. If abortion can turn
peaceful people into mad bombers....


> What are the thoughts of the people here. (?)
Speaking only on my own behalf here, of course, not 'the people
here'.

> Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
> for body parts.
> (I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)

It does. Note that they do a process similar to growing an ear on a
rat's back - they force grow the limb needed, while the rest is
sacrificed to make the forced growth possible. I am not sure wether
they use a human host or an animal one - as it is possible to use an
animal one, I would think that more likely.

> Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memories intact.
> (Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
> through re-programmable BTL implant)

Well, two things. First: Cloning a full human with memories intact is
not possible with 2056's technology. (That's canon. And realistic.
Which is enough for me.).

Secondly: It's possible to make a person believe he is another
person, give him the same skills etc. But you don't need a clone to
do that. (Doesn't hurt either, of course, but that's not the point.).

> I'm curious to see how other list members view clones/cloning in their
> campaigns, and whether they are used simply to repair broken PC's or if
> the process is expensive to the point where only those of "wealthier"
> status are able to employ such methods. Obviously the applications for
> medical use are limitless, but farming body parts? How would that be
> viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
> status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
> almost racial hatred?

Present day cloning tech is planning to use pigs as universal organ
donors, which is then cloned. This appears a lot more promising than
cloning humans for the same purpose for a simple reason - pigs can
become universal donors. Humans can't. And ethically it is a lot
easier. Still, human clones grown for medical purposes will almost
certainly grow up vegetables or headless. Creating clones of
yourself would be technically possible (It is today) but they would
undoubtedly grow up the long way. You will not see a situation where
a blood sample is taken on monday, and tuesday you meet your
identical twin in the door. It would be possible to accelerate
growth, but the result would not be a healthy (mentally or
physically) individual. Inflicting the methusaleh syndrome on someone
and also giving massive amounts of steroids could do the trick, for
instance, except that the methusaleh syndrome is a
genetic disease, and so it cannot be a clone. Another possibility
could be to have your genes vectored into another person, in effect
giving that person the disease of being you. (Turning him into you
genetically, that is - he won't *LOOK* like you, at least not without
plastic surgery, but hey, it might be enough to fool a very thorough
coroner.).

> After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk, and
> cyberpunk by it's very nature, breaks the boundries of many accepted
> social values.

I agree. I view SR as cyberpunk with some magic, rather than fantasy
with tech. A certain closeness to real life makes it that much
darker. It can be 'dark and gritty', as some say, with a lot of
fantasy too, but it looses its impact when it ceases to be plausible.
There is only so much 'It's magic, so it works anyway' or 'He's an
Immortal elf*, he can do anything' you can throw at a setting before
it looks decidedly weak.
(Or dragon, or enemy, or whatever. Bah, humbug! :)

I'm not saying I don't like the fantasy part. I'm saying I like magic
to be a thread in the shadowrun weave, not the whole bloody carpet.

--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 21
From: NightLife <habenir@*****.UC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:28:41 -0500
>Perhaps, but always wondering if I was the original or not, would
>certainly drive me mad. Anyway read the Spider-Man Clone stuff?
>Clones touch on alot of areas, where we just don't know, and no
>matter what answers you seem to find, there are more questions.
>Life is never dull I guess.

Fortunately answering which one is the orginal should have been kind of
easy. I'll elaborate on this. Take a look at yourelf and good look you'll
notice scars, dental fillings, perhaps a body piercings or maybe you broke a
bone when you were a kid anything like that will tell the difference. If a
clone you your's truly was created he wouldn't have a cresent shaped scar on
the back of his hand or the fillings I have in my teeth. Things like that.
If you want to say well the scientist filled his teeth and copied the scars
then you compare which scar has more scar material in it because all scars
fade with time. This also applies to bone being broken, stiches and the
like. So figuring out which on was the original shouldn't have been that
difficult. So this paticular solution also applies to clong in Sr. The clone
has been created later and wouldn't have suffered the damage a person does
in their lifetime.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nightlife Inc.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

"I am telling you nothing - merely asking you to remember that death come in
many shades. Some are harsh and infinitely painful to look upon; others can be
as peaceful and beautiful as the setting sun. I am an artist, and many colors
lie on upon my palette. Let me paint him a rainbow, and give you the means to
decide where it ends."

Erik from the book Phantom.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Document Classified
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Message no. 22
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 01:08:42 +0000
>Perhaps, but always wondering if I was the original or not, would
>certainly drive me mad. Anyway read the Spider-Man Clone stuff?
>Clones touch on alot of areas, where we just don't know, and no
>matter what answers you seem to find, there are more questions.
>Life is never dull I guess.

Hm.. I do not think I would have a problem with either being a clone
or being cloned as such, even if the clone 'was' me (retained memory
etc.). Why? I'm alive. I perhaps have a few doubts about life, but
what's new? The human psyche is not so frail as to be crushed by
something like an existential question or two.

At least not usually.

--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 23
From: s c rose <scrose@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 18:10:51 -0600
Gurth wrote:

> > Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
> > for body parts.
> > (I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)
>
> The replacement organ tables in SRII and Shadowtech list cloned parts,
> yes.

Yeah so what's the point what do you think cultured bio ware is? Made to
order for a certain person if that is not cloning I don't know what is.


> > I use cloning in Shadowrun, and have done so to my players chagrin on
> > one occassion, when their clones became more famous then them, but in a
> > very unpopular way. (but then I use cyborgs and androids as well, so...)

Sounds like an intersting set of house rules you make use of to say the
least.

> If you go BTB, then cloning a person is impossible because, for a reason
> that hasn't been really explained, it's not possible to clone nervous
> tissue to the degree necessary to give the clone a personality to speak
> of.
>
> > Obviously the applications for medical use are limitless, but farming
> > body parts? How would that be viewed by extremist organisations in
> > Shadowrun
>
>
> > does a clone have any status in society or is it a "tubie" to be
treated
> > with contempt and almost racial hatred?

They would probally considered to be less than human but the pure human
policlubs who is to say what everyone else thinks about them.

> Since according to FASA it isn't possible to fully clone someone, this
> question is irrelevant if you go BTB. Otherwise, I don't know... people
> are afraid of what they don't understand and/or is new, so most likely
> yes, they'd get treated much as in Space: Above & Beyond. IMHO, of course.

I tend to agree with this but who is to say what a full clone is or is
not you have someone with a body index of 5.5 and .25 essance what is
left of the organinal person at that point.
Message no. 24
From: PsiGuru <PsiGuru@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 19:14:17 EST
runefo wrote:

<Snip>
>You will, though, see the paraplegic with nerves replaced
>by electric impulses walking around first. You will see the blind man
>seeing well with a camera in his eye first. You
>will see the legless man walking on his new Sony legs first. You will
>see the alzheimer case remembering something he said five minutes
>earlier because of the chip in his brain first.

Not true I say!!! A human ear has already been cloned/grown on the back of a
rat AND reattched to a human being. And further more, interfacing biology
with biology is much easier than "flesh and chrome" especially when its the
same DNA structure.(DNA/tissue sample taken, grown, and put back on the same
person). This has already been proven. Sure, steel bolts made their way into
the human body first, but more complex "attachments" such as sight are still
in the fake 3D stages(much like you see in Duke 3D only worse) and are
progressing much slower than biological advances. I agree, however, that as
far as the human mind goes, we will have to wait and see. Will it retain
original memories, who knows?

And That's all I Have To Say About That.


Durand
Message no. 25
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 01:02:11 +0000
In article <199801082326.AAA21619@***.uio.no>, Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
waffled & burbled about Clones and other thingies
>
>> Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
>> for body parts.
>> (I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)
>
>It does. Note that they do a process similar to growing an ear on a
>rat's back - they force grow the limb needed, while the rest is
>sacrificed to make the forced growth possible. I am not sure wether
>they use a human host or an animal one - as it is possible to use an
>animal one, I would think that more likely.

I thought so, a couple of other posts pointed out where the notes were
int he books - disappointingly vague really, but never mind, means I can
get a little exotic :)

I'm not sure about the animal/carcase/vat growth of spare limbs. As you
mention below it would take time to grow a clone without causing
integral damage through accelerated growth, that might even apply to
limbs, though they're likely to take it far better. There are a couple
of vague statements regarding Doc Wagon growing spares (they must use a
psychic to find out what is going to happen to one of their customers),
which is one of the things that started me off on the whole clone thing
in my games. I find it curious that so many of the things inherent in
Cyberpunk and SF were left out of SR sourcebooks - I'm not knocking the
game, I wouldn't run it if I didn't enjoy the thing - but there are so
many things that are happening in our lives today, that are not
reflected upon, even in passing in any of the source material.

A conversation I've been having recently with one of the list members of
Shadowtk, has opened my eyes to the world of alternative fuels and power
plants, things that have been around and under research for the last
decade or so, yet not mentioned. Cloning is mentioned in passing, which
sstarted giving me all sorts of nasty ideas and moments of hysteria
(Nothing worse than coming home after a hard job, to meet yourself and
find out you've trashed your own room looking for something, and that
you've just killed your own girlfriend for being in the wrong place at
the wrong time... Causes all sorts of confusion, and for some reason
people don't believe you. :) )

Not having much to refer to, and trying to keep magic from being too
involed in everything (I don't like Cybertechnology very much -
prefering to keep magic as a seperate entiry all together) I can't bear
the thought of turning round to my players and saying something as sad
as "Well, it's done by magic, which can do anything, because we don't
know what it can/can't do. (They'd probably lynch me and hang me by my
toenails for the neighbourhood cats)

It's one of those things that I do, and was wondering on other people's
view of the whole thing. Looks like I'm getting it too. :)

> Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memories intact.
>> (Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
>> through re-programmable BTL implant)
>
>Well, two things. First: Cloning a full human with memories intact is
>not possible with 2056's technology. (That's canon. And realistic.
>Which is enough for me.).

I'm inclined to agree with you, I subscribe to the more popular view
that a full clone would be an empty vessel until the "parent's"
consciousness was introduced - or it was taught how to behave.

The other thing that appealed to me was cloned soldiers, genetically
engineered to be superior to the normal (like that's not happening
already huh?) Steering away from the super soldier, but trying to come
up with something that would fight wars without needing an explanation,
depriving families of loved ones, and without the social issues attached
to loss of life. (Again, I rather like the S:A&B view of cloned humans)
though I can see a political movement fighting for "Clone rights" :) and
it's reverse of course.

>Secondly: It's possible to make a person believe he is another
>person, give him the same skills etc. But you don't need a clone to
>do that. (Doesn't hurt either, of course, but that's not the point.).

That can be done without the need to produce a doppleganger, plastic
surgery in 2056 is pretty amazing, allowing articles that resemble
animals (whiskers, tails, multifaceted eyes etc) in Shadowrun, which
again made me think of the cloning aspect. If it's possible to clone
someone/something - and in animals traits and behaviour is genetically
controlled, it might be possible to replace some of the endangered
species with new creatures, similar in all respects to the originals, If
done through artificial insemination in a controlled environment (safari
park) there's little reason for some animals to be made extinct, and for
the stupid rich, furs and souvenirs could be grown on demand. "Shoot
yourself a cloned tiger or elephant "Don't worry mate, we can grow
another one to replace it." And (Nightlife is gonna kill me for this
one) there's so many other possibilities <g> If cells could be found of
other "extinct" creatures. (such as Dodo's or somesuch Apparently Dodo's
taste better than Chicken.)

It does tend to bring into question - if we/they (SR) can clone
bodies/body parts and we can produce sheep (and other livestock), there
is the question of world hunger - would cloning reduce the starvation so
prevelant in our world and SR, or is it likely that the greed of
corporations and the insipid stagnation of world governments would
sstall the process, agravating a situation that could be ended within a
decade. (No profit if something is bountiful after all).

>> medical use are limitless, but farming body parts? How would that be
>> viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
>> status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
>> almost racial hatred?
>
>Present day cloning tech is planning to use pigs as universal organ
>donors, which is then cloned. This appears a lot more promising than
>cloning humans for the same purpose for a simple reason - pigs can
>become universal donors. Humans can't.

There is that of course. Matching human tissue is a serious problem
now, in 62 years? I'm not so sure.

>And ethically it is a lot
>easier.

Ethics. Hate 'em, they interfere far too much with interesting
developments. How on earth are we ever supposed to create a Cyberpunk
future if everyone keeps coming up with ethical reasons not to do
something. I'm a smoker, but I won't smoke where I'm not allowed to,
however, I won't go into those sorts of places very often, now, it's
unlikely I'll ever visit California - until they repeal their tobacco
laws anyway (assuming of course I win the lottery anyway). I'm sorry,
but things have become too ethical and politically correct these days,
it just turns my stomach.

>identical twin in the door. It would be possible to accelerate
>growth, but the result would not be a healthy (mentally or
>physically) individual.

Again, accelerated growth, using logic, current technology and a bit of
common sense would result as you say, in problems - either physical or
mental. However, the Doc Wagon clone growth waffle seems to indicate
that accelerated growth is possible, at which point FASA drop the
subject before they get into deep water. If someone is caught in a
grenade blast, or serious automobile accident, their body smashed, what
do you do? Hack off the head and re-attach it to a new body, or attempt
to grow a new body from the healthy parts of the whole? When is a
clone, not a clone?

Sorry to keep asking these dumb questions but it is a subject I intend
to pay more attention to in my games, to the benefit and detriment of my
players. :)

>giving that person the disease of being you. (Turning him into you
>genetically, that is - he won't *LOOK* like you, at least not without
>plastic surgery, but hey, it might be enough to fool a very thorough
>coroner.).

And as mentioned elsewhere, scars, fillings, etc would not be
replicated. The clone would be a "perfect" image rather than an
identical replicant.

>> After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk, and
>> cyberpunk by it's very nature, breaks the boundries of many accepted
>> social values.
>
>I agree. I view SR as cyberpunk with some magic, rather than fantasy
>with tech. A certain closeness to real life makes it that much
>darker. It can be 'dark and gritty', as some say, with a lot of
>fantasy too, but it looses its impact when it ceases to be plausible.

Agreed wholeheartedly. As my players will vouch, magic is very much a
background thing in my world, it's rare very, feared by many (because
they don't understand it) and treated as a ridiculous rumour by others.
It's very much a threat to the players, but the chances of them meeting
a full blown mage hurling spells at them is pretty remote. I think
they've only encountered magic once in the last few months, and that was
from one of their own team (his first and only attempt at casting magic-
but then, he hasn't been around much - too busy or something)

>There is only so much 'It's magic, so it works anyway' or 'He's an
>Immortal elf*, he can do anything' you can throw at a setting before
>it looks decidedly weak.
>(Or dragon, or enemy, or whatever. Bah, humbug! :)

No, no no nonononononnooooo. <grits teeth> I won't start, I won't.
<but he mentioned "them">
I know, but that doesn't mean I can start on _that_ again
<but...>
NO!
<awww - sulk>

>I'm not saying I don't like the fantasy part. I'm saying I like magic
>to be a thread in the shadowrun weave, not the whole bloody carpet.

Interesting statement. One I agree with wholeheartedly, and a concept
that has made me a few "we don't like you very much" types. :)

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 26
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:26:44 -0500
At 09:21 PM 1/8/98 +0000, you wrote:
>That is not yet known, but the clone would certaily be identical in all
>physical respects. Within the next two years, we will know whether the
>clone grows with all it's "parents" memories intact. If this is the
>case, it opens a massive can of worms I certainly don't want to get
>into.

Clones, without something to give them the donor's memories, shouldn't have
any of them. Memories are not carried in your DNA, they're a function of
stored patterns in developed tissues... Unless you have something to carry
those to the cloned body, they'd have to be absent.


losthalo@********.comGoFa6)7(Im6TJt)Fe(7P!ShMoB4/19.2Bk!cBkc8MBV6sM3ZG
oPuTeiClbMehC6a23=n4bSSH173g4L??96FmT1Ea4@*********************
4h7sM8zSsYnk6BSMmpFNN0393NRfmSLusOH1Whileyouarelisteningyourwillingat
tentionismakingyoumoreandmoreintothepersonyouwanttobecome
Message no. 27
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:33:18 -0500
At 07:14 PM 1/8/98 EST, you wrote:
>runefo wrote:

{snip}

And further more, interfacing biology
>with biology is much easier than "flesh and chrome" especially when its the
>same DNA structure.(DNA/tissue sample taken, grown, and put back on the same
>person). This has already been proven. Sure, steel bolts made their way
into
>the human body first, but more complex "attachments" such as sight are still
>in the fake 3D stages(much like you see in Duke 3D only worse) and are
>progressing much slower than biological advances.

We're not even close to growing replacement eyes, we _are_ getting
gradually closer to implanting replacement mechanical eyes. Implantation
itself may be easier with biologicals once grown (biological-biological
interface should be more comfortable at first than cyber-biological), but
that doesn't mean we aren't _much_ better at artificial substitutions than
biological ones right now overall (we can't make any biological
replacements today, just transplant ones freed from generous corpses).

I agree, however, that as
>far as the human mind goes, we will have to wait and see. Will it retain
>original memories, who knows?

Shan't. How can it? How would they be transferred? DNA? That's
laughable. Each cell of the body of the donor doesn't include all its
memories, so some method would have to carry those memories and the like to
the new body.


losthalo@********.comGoFa6)7(Im6TJt)Fe(7P!ShMoB4/19.2Bk!cBkc8MBV6sM3ZG
oPuTeiClbMehC6a23=n4bSSH173g4L??96FmT1Ea4@*********************
4h7sM8zSsYnk6BSMmpFNN0393NRfmSLusOH1Whileyouarelisteningyourwillingat
tentionismakingyoumoreandmoreintothepersonyouwanttobecome
Message no. 28
From: losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 21:40:37 -0500
At 03:18 PM 1/8/98 -0500, you wrote:

I think that if the advances in
>technology has allowed the people of Shadowrun to incorporate into
>themselves inanimate materials, then by all means organic versions of
>themselves should be running around. After all, isn't it easier to get an
>organic substance to respond and work with another organic substance rather
>an organic to inorganic? I may be wrong, but I could see a clone walking
>down the street smiling and waving at people, before I could see a
>cyberzombie knocking the crap out of everything it sees. Something about
>the preservation of self instead of the replacement of self.

Well... I'd say that cloning an entire organism is a lot more complex to
implement that designing and implementing a single cyber system (an arm,
say, or even something complex like a datajack with peripherals). Biology
is still a poorly-undertood thing at the most basic levels (how it comes
about, and how it intereacts), and that's the level that must be understood
in order to effectively control a process for creating it.


losthalo@********.comGoFa6)7(Im6TJt)Fe(7P!ShMoB4/19.2Bk!cBkc8MBV6sM3ZG
oPuTeiClbMehC6a23=n4bSSH173g4L??96FmT1Ea4@*********************
4h7sM8zSsYnk6BSMmpFNN0393NRfmSLusOH1Whileyouarelisteningyourwillingat
tentionismakingyoumoreandmoreintothepersonyouwanttobecome
Message no. 29
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 11:46:24 +0100
Lehlan Decker said on 14:35/ 8 Jan 98...

> True, he was also mental unbalanced. Not sure if that was due to
> his clone nature or the dark side. That does bed the question, can
> you clone a human being, and keep memories etc intacted.
> Also would their aura's, true names, etc be the same?
> Or is that touching on the whole soul issue again.

That is very similar to the question whether things like basic, native
language skills get passed from parents to child in a similar manner as
eye and hair color. AFAIK it's not been proven that they are, but also not
that they aren't.

You can also look at it like this: does a clone reflect the person being
cloned as he/she is now, or as he/she was when born? In the former, then
I'd say memories, skills, auras, etc. would be the same. In the latter,
the clone would develop all those by him/her/itself and likely end up as a
twin brother or sister to the original person.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
In the garden.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 30
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 08:01:53 -0700
losthalo wrote:
/
/ At 09:21 PM 1/8/98 +0000, you wrote:
/ >That is not yet known, but the clone would certaily be identical in all
/ >physical respects. Within the next two years, we will know whether the
/ >clone grows with all it's "parents" memories intact. If this is the
/ >case, it opens a massive can of worms I certainly don't want to get
/ >into.
/
/ Clones, without something to give them the donor's memories, shouldn't have
/ any of them. Memories are not carried in your DNA, they're a function of
/ stored patterns in developed tissues... Unless you have something to carry
/ those to the cloned body, they'd have to be absent.

Ditto that.

In the following post I use the word "soul". I do not want to get into a
religious debate. I'm just trying to express some ideas using the only
words that I know :)

In SR people can be cloned, no problem. However, if the clone is
forced to grow into full maturity (I'm talking about the body) I can
see how things would get really screwed up.

A baby's brain can, and does, suck up information at an incredible
rate. The learning curve before puberty is very impressive (the best
time to learn a foreign language is before puberty). But at puberty
a change in brain metabolism takes place and the learning curve drops
off and the brain "fixes" in place (figurativly speaking), to a
certain extent.

So, if you clone a person and quick grow the clone to adulthood you
take away the clone's ability to learn at a child's rate. I.e.,
you've just created a mentally challenged adult (gee, does this mean
we're all mentally challenged? ;)

And that's only one aspect that I'm aware of. There are probably many
more aspects of development that would be affected by forcing a
clone to grow to adulthood.

Also, if the soul/lifeforce/spirit is an issue (the original's soul
is divided) then in SR terms that might be like dividing up the
essence. The original's essence would drop and the clone would have
a low essence.

Or, if the soul/lifeforce/spirit requires time to develop a
force-grown clone probably isn't viable because it has no
soul/lifeforce/spirit. I.e., it has no essence.

Now, using the rules from cybertechnology it could be possible to
create a force-grown clone and keep it alive just like you would a
cyberzombie. And then you could rig the clone (like a drone) and
have a duplicate of somebody running around. This would require a
lot of resources and somebody would have to have a good reason, but
it could make for fun for an aspect of an adventure <EGMG>.

Anyway, as far as I'm aware the only way to clone someone (in SR) is to let
the clone develop at a normal rate. IMHO, such a clone would be an
individual and would not share any memories with the original. In an
X-Files universe they might share a telepathic link :)

-David
--
"All glory comes from daring to begin." - Shakespeare
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 31
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:18:41 -0500
On Fri, Jan 09, 1998 at 01:08:42AM +0000, Fade wrote:
> >Perhaps, but always wondering if I was the original or not, would
> >certainly drive me mad. Anyway read the Spider-Man Clone stuff?
> >Clones touch on alot of areas, where we just don't know, and no
> >matter what answers you seem to find, there are more questions.
> >Life is never dull I guess.
>
> Hm.. I do not think I would have a problem with either being a clone
> or being cloned as such, even if the clone 'was' me (retained memory
> etc.). Why? I'm alive. I perhaps have a few doubts about life, but
> what's new? The human psyche is not so frail as to be crushed by
> something like an existential question or two.
>
> At least not usually.
>
Perhaps. Then again, I've dated some screwed up women. :)
(No offense ladies). And it doesn't have to be crushed.
Think about the social/religious problems abortion presents.
Or the church's stance on birth control etc.
Anything that deals with the creation or "deletion" of life,
is a touchy subject for many. I see cloning (regardless
of memories etc) will raise many of the same issues and
have similiar problems. (Bomb any good cloning clinics lately?)
What's the saying "Morality is only "morally right" if its
not forced" or something to that affect.
I better stop this thread, its getting into that whole moral
issue we agreed to avoid.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 32
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:31:10 -0500
On Thu, Jan 08, 1998 at 09:33:18PM -0500, losthalo wrote:
> At 07:14 PM 1/8/98 EST, you wrote:
<SNIP>

> >progressing much slower than biological advances.
>
> We're not even close to growing replacement eyes, we _are_ getting
> gradually closer to implanting replacement mechanical eyes. Implantation
> itself may be easier with biologicals once grown (biological-biological
> interface should be more comfortable at first than cyber-biological), but
> that doesn't mean we aren't _much_ better at artificial substitutions than
> biological ones right now overall (we can't make any biological
> replacements today, just transplant ones freed from generous corpses).
>
> I agree, however, that as
> >far as the human mind goes, we will have to wait and see. Will it retain
> >original memories, who knows?
>
> Shan't. How can it? How would they be transferred? DNA? That's
> laughable. Each cell of the body of the donor doesn't include all its
> memories, so some method would have to carry those memories and the like to
> the new body.
>
Laughable?! Perhaps, it may be because, we haven't figured out
how it works. Tommorow may be different. 20 years ago, we thought
alot of things were laughable. Who would have even thought
a computer could do what it does now? Or even imagine what it
can do 20 years from now. Speculating is fun, who knows
we may be right. I'm not sure which is scarier, if we are or aren't.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 33
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 10:40:52 -0500
On Fri, Jan 09, 1998 at 11:46:24AM +0100, Gurth wrote:
> Lehlan Decker said on 14:35/ 8 Jan 98...
>
> > True, he was also mental unbalanced. Not sure if that was due to
> > his clone nature or the dark side. That does bed the question, can
> > you clone a human being, and keep memories etc intacted.
> > Also would their aura's, true names, etc be the same?
> > Or is that touching on the whole soul issue again.
>
> That is very similar to the question whether things like basic, native
> language skills get passed from parents to child in a similar manner as
> eye and hair color. AFAIK it's not been proven that they are, but also not
> that they aren't.
>
> You can also look at it like this: does a clone reflect the person being
> cloned as he/she is now, or as he/she was when born? In the former, then
> I'd say memories, skills, auras, etc. would be the same. In the latter,
> the clone would develop all those by him/her/itself and likely end up as a
> twin brother or sister to the original person.
>
Heh..your replies never cease to amaze me. Excellent examples.
Perhaps Kenson will comment on the whole magic aura questions.
But I'm guessing its a topic FASA would rather not touch,and
leave to the players/GM's. We're also basing this on
the clone tech we know about now. 10 years from now, will be
a whole nother story, and by 2060? With corps doing all sorts
of research without government control. Lots of things are "theoretically"
possible.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 34
From: Paolo Marcucci <paolo@*********.IT>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 17:52:16 +0100
At 10:40 09/01/98 -0500, Lehlan Decker said:
>Perhaps Kenson will comment on the whole magic aura questions.
>But I'm guessing its a topic FASA would rather not touch,and
>leave to the players/GM's. We're also basing this on
>the clone tech we know about now. 10 years from now, will be
>a whole nother story, and by 2060? With corps doing all sorts
>of research without government control. Lots of things are "theoretically"
>possible.

I think that it is effectively possible to transfer memories/skills even
auras to a clone only with an "instant" copy of the body. Ie, a kind of
teleport device that doesn't destroy the original. If the process is
perfect, you are recreated 2 meters to the right exactly as you are here.
And given that I'm not an easy believer, by copying exactly the position of
all the atoms in your body IN THE SAME INSTANT you are getting an exact
copy, memories, skills, aura included. Of course the two persons will
immediately start to diverge (for example the first view of the clone will
be slightly moved to the left respect to the original position, in fact the
clone would think he has just experienced an instant travel 2 mts to the
right...)

____________________________________________________________
Paolo Marcucci paolo@*********.it
InterWare Service Provider Trieste, Italy
http://www.interware.it/ Tel. +39-40-360630
Message no. 35
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 9 Jan 1998 14:41:59 -0500
On Fri, Jan 09, 1998 at 05:52:16PM +0100, Paolo Marcucci wrote:
> At 10:40 09/01/98 -0500, Lehlan Decker said:
> >Perhaps Kenson will comment on the whole magic aura questions.
> >But I'm guessing its a topic FASA would rather not touch,and
> >leave to the players/GM's. We're also basing this on
> >the clone tech we know about now. 10 years from now, will be
> >a whole nother story, and by 2060? With corps doing all sorts
> >of research without government control. Lots of things are
"theoretically"
> >possible.
>
> I think that it is effectively possible to transfer memories/skills even
> auras to a clone only with an "instant" copy of the body. Ie, a kind of
> teleport device that doesn't destroy the original. If the process is
> perfect, you are recreated 2 meters to the right exactly as you are here.
> And given that I'm not an easy believer, by copying exactly the position of
> all the atoms in your body IN THE SAME INSTANT you are getting an exact
> copy, memories, skills, aura included. Of course the two persons will
> immediately start to diverge (for example the first view of the clone will
> be slightly moved to the left respect to the original position, in fact the
> clone would think he has just experienced an instant travel 2 mts to the
> right...)
>
Heh..sounds like a transporder (star trek) mishap to me. :)
Sounds plausible however.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 36
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 14:11:08 +0000
> > Hm.. I do not think I would have a problem with either being a clone
> > or being cloned as such, even if the clone 'was' me (retained memory
> > etc.). Why? I'm alive. I perhaps have a few doubts about life, but
> > what's new? The human psyche is not so frail as to be crushed by
> > something like an existential question or two.
> >
> > At least not usually.
> >
> Perhaps. Then again, I've dated some screwed up women. :)
> (No offense ladies). And it doesn't have to be crushed.
> Think about the social/religious problems abortion presents.
> Or the church's stance on birth control etc.
> Anything that deals with the creation or "deletion" of life,
> is a touchy subject for many. I see cloning (regardless
> of memories etc) will raise many of the same issues and
> have similiar problems. (Bomb any good cloning clinics lately?)
> What's the saying "Morality is only "morally right" if its
> not forced" or something to that affect.
> I better stop this thread, its getting into that whole moral
> issue we agreed to avoid.

I didn't agree anything of the sort, so hit me with it! :)

I think examples can be advantageous here.

Let us say you have been cloned without your knowledge or consent.
You do not have any idea that you have been cloned (or noone bothered
to tell you you are a clone, of course). It is unlikely that it would
be a problem if you didn't know about it. Agreed?

So what is the difference if you did know it?

It would perhaps be more troublesome than learning you are a bastard
child, or adopted, or similar, and such things has been known to
alter someone's life somewhat, but it often happens without much, or
any, reaction. It would be dealt with individually, but probably
seldom with as grave results as those originally outlined.

(Which I don't remember, so not sure they were all that grave, but
ok. :)




--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 37
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 14:11:08 +0000
Avenger wrote this in reply to a post by me::

> >Well, two things. First: Cloning a full human with memories intact is
> >not possible with 2056's technology. (That's canon. And realistic.
> >Which is enough for me.).
>
> I'm inclined to agree with you, I subscribe to the more popular view
> that a full clone would be an empty vessel until the "parent's"
> consciousness was introduced - or it was taught how to behave.

From what current litterature speculates, you have a few options that
might become legal eventually. (The current trend is to ban research
into, and any experimentation with, human cloning.).

The first is to create a vegetable clone. This is a clone
specifically grown without a sentient brain, and grown
for spare parts for a particular person. This is probably the kind of
clone docwagon grows 'in advance', then kills and freezes down until
parts needs to be hacked off and put on the lucky guy. The
clone can possibly be grown as a cell culture or similar to create a
copy body faster. This kind of growing, even if they kept what was
supposed to be a sentient brain, would preclude any form of
intelligence. (See below about childhood.).

Secondly, a clone can be made. This is a full clone, and should and
most likely would grow up as a normal child. Much in the way of an
identical twin, the clone would have some of the same mannerisms as
the original, but otherwise be a unique individual. (Identical twins
is a good example of naturally occuring cloning.). This is the kind
of cloning possible today. There is not any good arguments for why
one should be created beyond 'it can be done', which isn't a good
one. There is also a worry that someone's motive to create one
would be to create a source of spare parts.

Thirdly, replicants can be made. Force grown vegetables, but instead
of killed and kept for spare parts, would have skillsofts implanted
with the appropriate skills. Current social theories assume that a
childhood is necessary to learn to communicate, to learn any form of
intelligence, logic, etcetera. (Why do you think it took 80000
years for someone genetically capable of being exactly as
intelligent as we are to develop language, society, culture,
intelligence? Society and interaction is needed to develop it, and
when you start with almost nothing, you have almost nothing to
work with. But miniscule improvements were made all the time...
Two examples of children with extremely aberrant childhoods: A child
grew up with a wolf tribe. He learnt to communicate with wolvs, but
was impossible to integrate with normal society. He did not learn to
speak a human language, and did not develop much intelligence. A
french girl was kept in a closet for the first eight years of her
life, and her only interaction with other people was when her father
raped her or brought her food. She did not, and never did, learn to
speak a human language, or show any kind of intelligence. It was hard
to get her to do anything except sleep, eat or masturbate. Both cases
illustrate the point that for a human being, also a clone, a
childhood is necessary as a stage of development. And this would have
to be both a physical and mental childhood, as this has most probably
to do with the physical development of the brain as well. Thus, the
replicants can be two things - they can be very inhuman, with all
their actions totally dependant on the chips in their brain. They
wouldn't be all that smart either - in fact fairly similar to a drone
or robot since all their intelligeence and skills would be from their
electronic parts. They can also be grown and raised for the purpose
of being soldiers, trained in combat from birth and indoctrinated to
be perfectly loyal. While regular kids could be used instead, there
woudl be two advantages - clones would not have full human rights,
and could also be clones of a genetically engineered
'superior' individual. (Why not gengineer every one of them? It's a
slow, hit and miss process that produces one good one out of several
hundred failures - when they get a hit, they clone it to get more of
it. Simple logic. That's what's cloning's for - when you get
something rare, and you want more of it, you clone it.).


> The other thing that appealed to me was cloned soldiers, genetically
> engineered to be superior to the normal (like that's not happening
> already huh?) Steering away from the super soldier, but trying to come
> up with something that would fight wars without needing an explanation,
> depriving families of loved ones, and without the social issues attached
> to loss of life. (Again, I rather like the S:A&B view of cloned humans)
> though I can see a political movement fighting for "Clone rights" :) and
> it's reverse of course.
*nod* wish i saw S:A&B, whatever that is. :)

> It does tend to bring into question - if we/they (SR) can clone
> bodies/body parts and we can produce sheep (and other livestock), there
> is the question of world hunger - would cloning reduce the starvation so
> prevelant in our world and SR, or is it likely that the greed of
> corporations and the insipid stagnation of world governments would
> sstall the process, agravating a situation that could be ended within a
> decade. (No profit if something is bountiful after all).

Why should you go through the process of cloning a sheep,
when normal breeding works without you having to do anything?
As long as the sheep has to eat to grow, grasslands is the limit, not
the birth rate of sheep. (unless you envision an apparatus where you
pop a blood sample in in one end, and in the other end wooly things
that say 'Baaaaaah' pops out fairly quickly onto the butcher's
table. Fish farming, algae, and ever improving agriculture would be
enough to keep the rich countries happy.

[Pigs gengineered to universal donors and cloned]
> There is that of course. Matching human tissue is a serious problem
> now, in 62 years? I'm not so sure.

From what I know and guess, it will not be much easier in 62 years.
They will work around the problem rather than fix the problem itself
- and the workaround is cloning.

[snip about cloning pigs rather than humans]
> >And ethically it is a lot
> >easier.
>
> Ethics. Hate 'em, they interfere far too much with interesting
> developments. How on earth are we ever supposed to create a Cyberpunk
> future if everyone keeps coming up with ethical reasons not to do
> something.

Well, because cloning pigs is legal, cloning humans isn't? Ethical
rules very often rapidly turns into legal rules. NOw they might be
lifted, but until they are, the ethical reasons are fairly compelling
as they have been turned legally bindings. Now megacorps has their
own laws, so they do not need to bother with it, technically, but
they still have to consider public relations. Anyway, while things
might have changed in 2058, universal donor pigs is the solution they
are thinking of today. (They hope to have it within 10 years, btw, so
if you need a new kidney or something, start hoping.).




> Again, accelerated growth, using logic, current technology and a bit of
> common sense would result as you say, in problems - either physical or
> mental. However, the Doc Wagon clone growth waffle seems to indicate
> that accelerated growth is possible, at which point FASA drop the
> subject before they get into deep water. If someone is caught in a
> grenade blast, or serious automobile accident, their body smashed, what
> do you do? Hack off the head and re-attach it to a new body, or attempt
> to grow a new body from the healthy parts of the whole? When is a
> clone, not a clone?

That is part of the problem right there - 'When is a clone, not a
clone?'. A cloned arm is a piece of flesh identical to the one you
have attached to your shoulder. You might as well ask, when is flesh,
flesh? It is not a problem. (Until you can create the (IMHO
impossible) full clones. Then, say you had half your brain implanted
in the clone. (That was all that was recovered after a nasty
accident, say). Would that then be your clone, or you? Would the fact
that noone would notice a difference change it? Legally it would
matter, btw.Say you're the CEO of Microtech, you get your body
cloned, and has an accident... then a panel of experts (Paid by
the Acting President) say the clone isn't the CEO (The CEO is in the
morgue, the clone isn't him.) and he's kicked out on the street.
(With the legal rights of the CEO's child, probably, which due to his
will (some stupid things about a foundation) won't get dddly.



{genetic vectoring]
> >giving that person the disease of being you. (Turning him into you
> >genetically, that is - he won't *LOOK* like you, at least not without
> >plastic surgery, but hey, it might be enough to fool a very thorough
> >coroner.).
>
> And as mentioned elsewhere, scars, fillings, etc would not be
> replicated. The clone would be a "perfect" image rather than an
> identical replicant.

One thing:
If you can afford to get cloned you can afford to be a perfect image
yourself. There's no need to go around with fillings and scars, only
if you can't afford to have it done properly. Can even have the same
surgeries done on the clone (unnecessary, probably, but would add to
the likeness.). Besides, that wasn't the purpose of the vectoring.
Come to think of it, there's not much purpose beyond planting a
corpse.
--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 38
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 14:11:08 +0000
> That is very similar to the question whether things like basic, native
> language skills get passed from parents to child in a similar manner as
> eye and hair color. AFAIK it's not been proven that they are, but also not
> that they aren't.

.. but the current evidence hints they aren't.

> You can also look at it like this: does a clone reflect the person being
> cloned as he/she is now, or as he/she was when born? In the former, then
> I'd say memories, skills, auras, etc. would be the same. In the latter,
> the clone would develop all those by him/her/itself and likely end up as a
> twin brother or sister to the original person.

Consider this: The DNA of a person is identical when he is 1 day or 1
millenium old. If you cloned someone dead, would the clone be a
corpse? No. Would the clone be different if you cloned a 1 year old
or a 1 century old? No. DNA is a contstruction blueprint. Whatever
happened to another construct doesn't affect what the next
construction is like, at least not directly.

--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 39
From: Matb <mbreton@**.NETCOM.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 12:05:34 -0800
Fade wrote:

> Let us say you have been cloned without your knowledge or consent.
> You do not have any idea that you have been cloned (or noone bothered
> to tell you you are a clone, of course). It is unlikely that it would
> be a problem if you didn't know about it. Agreed?

Maybe true, maybe not. If my Evil Twin (tm) committed a crime, and the
only evidence at the scene of the crime was a blood trail, I might just
end up being bars. (Assumptions abounding, here.)

Knowing that I've *been* cloned might be harmless. Knowing that I *am*
a clone could lead to downright evil thoughts.


-Matt

------------------------------------
With nomads I am numbered. -- E. MacColl

SRTCG Website: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/2189/ccgtop.htm
Message no. 40
From: AirWisp <AirWisp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 1998 23:06:33 EST
In a message dated 98-01-08 14:00:22 EST, you write:

> In a way I'm a bit nervy (those who know me will realise this is not a
> natural condition for me) :) of asking this sort of question because it
> has a chance of becoming volatile, So, for those who want to get
> excited and start screaching at each other over social/religious issues,
> please take it somewhere else. After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk, and
> cyberpunk by it's very nature, breaks the boundries of many accepted
> social values.
>
I agree with you Darkavenger .. this is one of those topics that would lead to
some pretty nasty threads in it's own right ...

My views ...

A clone of a person ... a duplicate of a person can be grown for medicinal
purposes ... beyond that I would have serious problems with ... I don't want
something else out there running around that looks just like me in all ways
...

Using clonal tissue to grow people ... I would consider these as normal people
and not considered as part of the property owned by a corporation .. I know
this flies in the face of cloning animals, but we are talking about people
here ...

From a game POV ...

Cloning could be used widely to produce food for ghouls and other flesh-eating
members of society ...

As for the programming of a clone via direct neural feed and subliminal
learning techniques ... it would create someone with initially little to no
street sense and social interactive skills of their own (though this can be
taught during the subliminal teachings) ... perhaps the best way to consider
this person is that the clone starts out like the doctor (the EMH program) on
board Voyager ... not much of personality, besides being obnoxious and cold)
to, as of now, someone with a personality and still growing in themselves ...

The other problem that could crop up with making too many clones is that the
clones may decide that they do not want to be slaves forever ... and as they
say in the JP movies ... Nature will find a way ... which could then lead to
the clone terrorists from Space : Above and Beyond and some other movies and
series ...

Cloning could also be something that could be used in cybermantic rituals also
... the person to become cybermantic own body is too damaged, so a new one is
grown, and the cyber is put into the clonal body as it is regrown ... this
could cut down on some of the essence cost of the cyber ... and then once the
cybermantic ritual is performed, the spirit of the person is moved (the moving
would cost at least a point of essence maybe some more) ...

This is just the beginning of this moral issue, and I hope we, as a world,
come up with some good reasons for the further development of this technology
... which unfortunately will find someplace to continue the development
regardless of how hard the world may decide to come down onto it ...

Mike
Message no. 41
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 06:42:07 +0000
In article <199801101312.OAA03374@***.uio.no>, Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
waffled & burbled about Clones and other thingies
>Avenger wrote this in reply to a post by me::
>> >Well, two things. First: Cloning a full human with memories intact is
>> >not possible with 2056's technology. (That's canon. And realistic.
>> >Which is enough for me.).
>>
>> I'm inclined to agree with you, I subscribe to the more popular view
>> that a full clone would be an empty vessel until the "parent's"
>> consciousness was introduced - or it was taught how to behave.
>
>From what current litterature speculates, you have a few options that
>might become legal eventually.

Eventually. Interesting word. Which leads to many many comments which
I won't use here because it would start a huge series of threads that
have little or nothing to do with Shadowrun :)

There are always options, but as an issue, even in Shadowrun it holds a
great many possibilities for some interesting situations. I still don't
think it likely that a consciousness could be transferred successfully
in its entirety.

>(The current trend is to ban research
>into, and any experimentation with, human cloning.).

Yes I know, and I don't agree with that.

>The first is to create a vegetable clone. This is a clone
>specifically grown without a sentient brain, and grown
>for spare parts for a particular person. This is probably the kind of
>clone docwagon grows 'in advance', then kills and freezes down until
>parts needs to be hacked off and put on the lucky guy.

Freezing, I assume this would be cryogenic freezing, as any other type
is likely to destroy the tissue through the formation of ice crystals in
the blood eventually rotting the tissue (hence the time limit on
freezers and food stuffs) Unless of course they're only looking at a
year before renewal of contract at which point they grown a new one.

Even so, force growing a clone for body parts to answer the need of
someone with a Platignum contract would take some time, even a month or
a week might be too long.

>The
>clone can possibly be grown as a cell culture or similar to create a
>copy body faster. This kind of growing, even if they kept what was
>supposed to be a sentient brain, would preclude any form of
>intelligence. (See below about childhood.).

Yeah... <grin> And not doing what he asked others not to do...


>Secondly, a clone can be made. This is a full clone, and should and
>most likely would grow up as a normal child. Much in the way of an
>identical twin, the clone would have some of the same mannerisms as
>the original, but otherwise be a unique individual. (Identical twins
>is a good example of naturally occuring cloning.). This is the kind
>of cloning possible today. There is not any good arguments for why
>one should be created beyond 'it can be done', which isn't a good
>one. There is also a worry that someone's motive to create one
>would be to create a source of spare parts.

If for a moment we ignore the transference of a consiousness. Clones of
this type would most likely not turn out to be identical replicas of the
"parent". Even identical twins who spend all their time in the same
environment experience things in different ways, making them slightly
different people. It is unlikely that the stimuli experienced by one
person could be effectively or accurately reproduced in any environment,
making the clone just that little bit different. To many this would
probably not be noticeable, and in many ways it's not really important
to the concept of clones in SR, but it does add a few things to the
concept of clones and whether or not they would be accurate
dopplegangers or simple "mirror images"

The concept of having a living intelligent being kept around just to
supply one with parts is quite frankly repulsive, but I can see that
some might consider it an advantage, in some cases, it might even be
amusing. <thinks of some bad guys in movies>

>Thirdly, replicants can be made. Force grown vegetables, but instead
>of killed and kept for spare parts, would have skillsofts implanted
>with the appropriate skills. Current social theories assume that a
>childhood is necessary to learn to communicate, to learn any form of
>intelligence, logic, etcetera. (Why do you think it took 80000
>years for someone genetically capable of being exactly as
>intelligent as we are to develop language, society, culture,
>intelligence?

Intelligence in it's most rudimentary forms can be found throughout the
animal kingdom, some people call it animal intelligence, inherited
through natural progression of the species, but still young animals must
be taught to survive and interact with their environment, in much the
same way that human children must be taught. There are many examples
two of which you cite, where human development has been retarded by
their environment and the input available to them, there are also the
popular fiction alternatives to these views. Intelligence is a matter
of definition and assumption. Manking assumes it is intelligent because
we have culture, society, language etc. Yet there are examples of
intelligence in nature that defies our ability to analyse it, but it is
not intelligence as defined by human standards.

>Society and interaction is needed to develop it, and
>when you start with almost nothing, you have almost nothing to
>work with.

Not sure about society, but certainly interaction and some form of
learning process can be achieved. In the examples you use there is
still signs of intelligence, the people were not vegetables, they were
simply affected by the sensory input available to them. Animals
communicate through body language and sounds, position and facial
expressions, some like wales and porpoises communicate through a complex
series of sounds with possible body language and possibly other forms of
communication we are not yet aware of. I believe that Dolphins have a
brain as large if not larger than that of humans, yet although they work
in a society, and have a language (of sorts) we do not consider them to
be a species on a level with us. Yet they could be.

I'm very nervous of classifying intelligence by human standards, because
there is much about human society that loudly denies intelligence.

>illustrate the point that for a human being, also a clone, a
>childhood is necessary as a stage of development.

Another example is that of the replicants in Bladerunner who are
designed and genetically engineered without memories or childhood, their
knowledge and skills are somehow programmed into them, they are in all
other ways human, but genetically engineered ( I realise this is a
slightly different ballgame, but still one that illustrates the
possibilities rather nicely)

>And this would have
>to be both a physical and mental childhood,

Depends really. In the cases of subliminal input, as proved in the US
experiments, they are powerful stimuli resulting in physical reactions.
For example one that was run in several cinemas in California, where a
hot dog was flashed on screen ever few minutes for microseconds, too
fast for the conscious mind, but picked up by the subconscious. Hot Dog
sales rose over 90 percent. Other examples are common. Another form of
stimuli used in modern advertising is the sexual implications behind
alcohol adverts on billboards, phallic symbols based around some form of
femal interpretation to appeal to the base need in the human mind - that
of reproduction - yet done in a desirable (sexy) way. It works on male
and females and is relatively successful. Vodka adverts are especially
guilty of this.

Add into this mine field of subliminal influence on the human psyche and
mind, there is the "learning" process whereby it is possible to be
taught certain things whilst asleep, someone mentioned that language
tapes are still available that can be played while the subject sleeps, I
thought the whole procedure had been killed off during the paranoia of
the early 70's. Then there is the extra added option (which I'd
forgotten) that of simsense. We know that simsense needs restrictors to
prevent the mind from "believing" the movie and dying with the star/bad
guy/whatever through sensory overload. The possibilities for abuse and
use of simsense is phenomenal. It would be possible to create an entire
life and environment for a subject to grow in. Depending on how rapidly
the brain can soak up information of this nature would by needs affect
how fast it can be implied and when the learning process would be
started.

However, if the sensory input began early enough... Almost anything is
possible.

I mentioned a while back about CEO's of corporations. If a corporation
is based around the head, say that of the Royal Family, and that head
inherited it from their father/mother before them, there is a
possibility that someone has been recording the input they've recieved
since birth (a calculated and deliberate action, but not beyond a few of
the figures in Shadowrun) this input is then fed to a clone in an
accelerated format every >>insert number<< months or so. When the
"donor/parent" dies. The clone only has a short learning process before
it is up to date prior to the actual death - it emerges from the
hospital a few weeks later - miraculously healed by modern medical
science, and resumes it's life... This could, in the cases of the super
rich be abused horribly to achieve a form of immortality.

There are many implications, and it really comes down, in the end to
individual interpretation of the person thinking about the subject.
(part of the reason I brought it up in the first place - for the views
and input of other individuals). :)

>as this has most probably
>to do with the physical development of the brain as well. Thus, the
>replicants can be two things - they can be very inhuman, with all
>their actions totally dependant on the chips in their brain.

These do have possibilities, and probably pose the least threat to
humankind in general. They wouldn't understand that the situations they
work in are dangerous and that most people wouldn't want to go near the
process. Clearance of radioactive/toxic areas. Deep sea exploration
(guidance of an exploratory sub or similar) space exploration,
performing the functions of an astronaut in space to repair or replace
things thereby not exposing an expensive and highly trained individual
to danger. And a number of other possibilities.

>They can also be grown and raised for the purpose
>of being soldiers, trained in combat from birth and indoctrinated to
>be perfectly loyal. While regular kids could be used instead, there
>woudl be two advantages - clones would not have full human rights,
>and could also be clones of a genetically engineered
>'superior' individual. (Why not gengineer every one of them? It's a
>slow, hit and miss process that produces one good one out of several
>hundred failures - when they get a hit, they clone it to get more of
>it. Simple logic. That's what's cloning's for - when you get
>something rare, and you want more of it, you clone it.).

Exactly. The fun starts in this situation when you (or the players or
whoever) realises who it is that decides what is "a hit".

I agree with the soldiers though, and personally consider this to be one
of the most likely implications behind human cloning. Something that
would benefit many, yet also create a potentially dangerous situation.
Wars would, possibly become a more casual thing, where the implications
and repurcussions of a war are not felt so strongly by the
governments/military/populace there would be less caution concerning
conflicts, and less care taken in the preperation of battles. What the
heck, we can clone another few hundred or thousand within "x" time, so
let's do it... Some nations wouldn't hesitate at this.

Other applications I've mentioned above regarding using "non-status"
clones in dangerous tasks where a highly trained individual would
oversee them, but be a far less risk.

"So we lost a few clones, hell George is OK, we'll just grow a few more,
can't grow another George though."

Until one day someone figures out how to, and another George walks
through the door. :)

>> though I can see a political movement fighting for "Clone rights" :)
and
>> it's reverse of course.
>*nod* wish i saw S:A&B, whatever that is. :)

Space: Above & Beyond. :) mentioned earlier

>> corporations and the insipid stagnation of world governments would
>> sstall the process, agravating a situation that could be ended within a
>> decade. (No profit if something is bountiful after all).
>
>Why should you go through the process of cloning a sheep,
>when normal breeding works without you having to do anything?

Cloning allows the guaranteed production of x number, normal breeding
can produce sometimes unpredictable results. With a cloned sheep, you
know precisely what you are getting and can clone ones for their wool,
for meat whatever. Natural breeding does not produce this surety.

>As long as the sheep has to eat to grow, grasslands is the limit, not
>the birth rate of sheep. (unless you envision an apparatus where you
>pop a blood sample in in one end, and in the other end wooly things
>that say 'Baaaaaah' pops out fairly quickly onto the butcher's
>table. Fish farming, algae, and ever improving agriculture would be
>enough to keep the rich countries happy.

Agreed, but it is in the production of guaranteed healthy livestock for
a particular purpose. Take dairy farmers. They will always strive to
produce a herd of good milkers, weeding out those who are less than par.
Now if you could guarantee that herd, rather than the hit and miss afair
of breeding and auction, there is a better chance that the farmer will
be able to invest more knowing he'll get a better return on the herd and
people will benefit from having more available meaning the farmer gets
more in his pocket to invest more in the herd, etc...

>[Pigs gengineered to universal donors and cloned]
>> There is that of course. Matching human tissue is a serious problem
>> now, in 62 years? I'm not so sure.
>
>From what I know and guess, it will not be much easier in 62 years.
>They will work around the problem rather than fix the problem itself
>- and the workaround is cloning.

That of course is a distinct probability. If nothing else, the human
race is adaptive and prefers easy work arounds if available. So you do
have a valid point there.

>> Ethics. Hate 'em, they interfere far too much with interesting
>> developments. How on earth are we ever supposed to create a Cyberpunk
>> future if everyone keeps coming up with ethical reasons not to do
>> something.
>
>Well, because cloning pigs is legal, cloning humans isn't? Ethical
>rules very often rapidly turns into legal rules. NOw they might be
>lifted, but until they are, the ethical reasons are fairly compelling
>as they have been turned legally bindings. Now megacorps has their
>own laws, so they do not need to bother with it, technically, but
>they still have to consider public relations. Anyway, while things
>might have changed in 2058, universal donor pigs is the solution they
>are thinking of today. (They hope to have it within 10 years, btw, so
>if you need a new kidney or something, start hoping.).

That's where the fun starts. Something illegal in the US might not be
illegal in another country, which means that whatever it is is treated
to a lesser amount of legislative monitoring than would be experienced
in the US, UK or Europe. And nasty things result. In the case of
megacorps who's law is on their own land, written in their own hand,
legal restrictions would not apply until that research left their land,
at which point there are legal implications and a potential
international incident. But if the host country was unaware, how couled
they prove that the corporation had broken their treaties or the laws of
the host nation? Which brings me back to the earlier question regarding
greedy corporations. :)

I personally cannot see that the corporations, Ares, Aztechnology etc
would pass over the opportunity to create something that in their
interpretation was the perfect tool for a particular task. And the
military - they are naturally opportunists, what _are_ they up to?
Supersoldiers have been a dream of research and science fiction for
decades. SF tends to reflect life in many ways, or at least is the
precursor of real world events. Jules Verne's prediction of nuclear
weapons that earned him such ridicule in 1914 is one such example. Men
in the moon, portraying space flight, and a large number of other
examples.

Who's wrong, us for speculating, or them for saying it couldn't happen?

We may know by the end of the century.

>> grenade blast, or serious automobile accident, their body smashed, what
>> do you do? Hack off the head and re-attach it to a new body, or attempt
>> to grow a new body from the healthy parts of the whole? When is a
>> clone, not a clone?
>
>That is part of the problem right there - 'When is a clone, not a
>clone?'. A cloned arm is a piece of flesh identical to the one you
>have attached to your shoulder.

Agreed.

>You might as well ask, when is flesh,
>flesh?

I think I did somewhere... :)

>It is not a problem. (Until you can create the (IMHO
>impossible) full clones.

Depends on what you mean by full clones. I'm going to assume from your
following text that you mean a perfect replicant of a person, including
their mind, experience, knowledge and personality. An exact replica in
every imaginable way. If that is the case I agree.

>Then, say you had half your brain implanted
>in the clone. (That was all that was recovered after a nasty
>accident, say). Would that then be your clone, or you? Would the fact
>that noone would notice a difference change it?

Interesting questions that I will allow someone far more intelligent
than I to answer.

>Legally it would
>matter, btw.Say you're the CEO of Microtech, you get your body
>cloned, and has an accident... then a panel of experts (Paid by
>the Acting President) say the clone isn't the CEO (The CEO is in the
>morgue, the clone isn't him.) and he's kicked out on the street.
>(With the legal rights of the CEO's child, probably, which due to his
>will (some stupid things about a foundation) won't get dddly.

And there is another possibility that could be explored in a Shadowrun
scenario. :) I'm not versed in either science or the legal profession,
so I can't say, but I feel there would be certain legal implications
regarding the above. If the replicant is considered the child of the
CEO, it comes down to more than a will for the purposes of deciding
conditions. Even in the case of a will leaving moneys to a foundation,
there is usually something that states the "child" must be kept in a
particular style. And funds from the foundation are used to fullfill
the wishes written into the will. Also, in the case of a family
business, there are inheritance problems. A long legal battle would
likely result, ending possibly in some form of legislation regarding
clone rights or some such. That wouldn't make a particulary interesting
run except for people inclined to this sort of thing. Howevcer, it does
again bring to bear the question of when is a clone a clone...

>{genetic vectoring]
>> >giving that person the disease of being you. (Turning him into you
>> >genetically, that is - he won't *LOOK* like you, at least not without
>> >plastic surgery, but hey, it might be enough to fool a very thorough
>> >coroner.).
>>
>> And as mentioned elsewhere, scars, fillings, etc would not be
>> replicated. The clone would be a "perfect" image rather than an
>> identical replicant.
>
>One thing:
>If you can afford to get cloned you can afford to be a perfect image
>yourself.

Allowing for the fact that you mentioned operations etc to keep the
flesh intact and heal/hide scars etc. There are also the other types of
scars which the comment was aimed at. Emotional scars. Without being
able to transfer the entire thoughts and memories of a person, it would
not be possible to replicate the scars that life awards everybody.

>There's no need to go around with fillings and scars, only
>if you can't afford to have it done properly. Can even have the same
>surgeries done on the clone (unnecessary, probably, but would add to
>the likeness.). Besides, that wasn't the purpose of the vectoring.
>Come to think of it, there's not much purpose beyond planting a
>corpse.

And yep, that just about sums it up. :)

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 42
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 05:44:04 +0000
In article <a86f3b25.34b8454a@***.com>, AirWisp <AirWisp@***.COM>
waffled & burbled about Clones and other thingies
>> has a chance of becoming volatile, So, for those who want to get
>> excited and start screaching at each other over social/religious issues,
>> please take it somewhere else. After all, Shadowrun is cyberpunk, and
>> cyberpunk by it's very nature, breaks the boundries of many accepted
>> social values.
>>
>I agree with you Darkavenger .. this is one of those topics that would lead to
>some pretty nasty threads in it's own right ...

Yeah, which can make things a tad dodgy. Thankfully the list has been
sensible about this thread, and I've managed to gather a few ideas,
including a couple of things I wasn't aware of. :)

I love it when a plan comes together.

>My views ...
>
>A clone of a person ... a duplicate of a person can be grown for medicinal
>purposes ... beyond that I would have serious problems with ... I don't want
>something else out there running around that looks just like me in all ways
>...

A medicinal purposes clone would be the one that appears to exist in
Shadowrun, one that is essentially a non-intelligent vegetable
simulacra. This would appear to be a force grown vat based clone or
"tubie". The other two types of clone that I think are feasible for
Shadowrun are the Vat based "tubie" /born/ at childhood and raised by
the corporation. These would make (depending on education level and
corporate desire) make soldiers, workers, people no-one cared about
overly much to be used in toxic clearance etc, much as the replicants
from Bladerunner are used to amuse, fight and explore for mankind.

Dump two dozen clones onto a planet, and they die - who's going to care?
Dump two dozen astronauts with relations and family - there are a lot of
people to care. Whole new social issues could be evaded - at least
until the pressure groups got their voice heard.

The second type would be the "naturally" grown clone, the type
scientists are considering today, grown naturally from ova in a suitable
womb. The children of those who have difficulty conceiving, or those
(depending on your world view) with sufficient money to replicate
themselves and achieve immortality by proxy.

>Using clonal tissue to grow people ... I would consider these as normal people
>and not considered as part of the property owned by a corporation .. I know
>this flies in the face of cloning animals, but we are talking about people
>here ...

Possession is nine tenths of the law. The corporation created and grew
these people, they paid for them, in research and upkeep, they trained
and nurtured them - they /belong/ to them. After all they have no
families, the corporation can do anything they want with them.

(Notice I'm being deliberately very relaxed with social issues that
would most certainly come to light in this sort of situation)

>From a game POV ...
>
>Cloning could be used widely to produce food for ghouls and other flesh-eating
>members of society ...

Dumb clones? I would think that most likely. The food being fed to
them would be human flesh - mmmm, their favourite - but that flesh would
not contain any intelligence therefore, it is not technically alive - no
sentience, no intelligence therefore not alive. However, in some
religions it is not one's intelligence that reflects life it is one's
existence, the existence of a piece of meat designed to resemble human
flesh, could conceivably have been a human in another form... Oh boy,
just from a GM point of view, there is much fun to be had with this in
society, and not a few runs. :)

>As for the programming of a clone via direct neural feed and subliminal
>learning techniques ... it would create someone with initially little to no
>street sense and social interactive skills of their own (though this can be
>taught during the subliminal teachings) ... perhaps the best way to consider
>this person is that the clone starts out like the doctor (the EMH program) on
>board Voyager ... not much of personality, besides being obnoxious and cold)
>to, as of now, someone with a personality and still growing in themselves ...

That's pretty much the way I saw it as well, then someone mentioned the
possibilities of simsense input as well (ala Lone Star sourcebook, and
as portrayed in DS9 recently) Simsense can be used to program emotions
and emotional experience through interaction, also there is also the
possibilities not yet explored of the matrix - I remember in Virtual
Realities the story in that book, concerning a child born to and of the
matrix. Some of the possibilities are quite incredible, and bear some
serious possibilities for Shadowrun scenarios.

>The other problem that could crop up with making too many clones is that the
>clones may decide that they do not want to be slaves forever ...

something explored quite nicely in Bladerunner. The "feelings" of the
Replicants, in many ways were more human than human (much like Tyrrels
logo) Clonal rebellion is always a possibility, and depending on the
nature of their employment in society this would rise and fall with the
type. Combat clones would be brought up as dumb as possible while still
maintaining sufficient intelligence that they weren't just cannon
fodder, and would most likely have a fierce patriotism instilled into
them. Though as you say, nature finds a way, and if these were to turn
on their masters...

Pleasure clones are possibly the least likely to turn, whereas those
used in research and scientific situations or areas where intelligent
thought is a pre-requisite there is a good chance they might start to
question the logic of what they do and rebel.

>and as they
>say in the JP movies ... Nature will find a way ... which could then lead to
>the clone terrorists from Space : Above and Beyond and some other movies and
>series ...

Oooh, I wonder if someone will notice that reference <g> A certain
gentleman on this list got very upset with me when I mentioned Jurassic
Park <grin> can't imagine why <smirk>.

I have to confess that I am one of the few who was enthusiastic about
Space: Above and Beyond. OK, it was about a few people in a section of
the military, and didn't offer the mass combat and stuff it initially
promised, but the exploration of characters and the social implications
behind "tubies" or "nipple-necks" was quite profound on occassion.
Great series, pity it was cancelled.

>Cloning could also be something that could be used in cybermantic rituals also
>... the person to become cybermantic own body is too damaged, so a new one is
>grown, and the cyber is put into the clonal body as it is regrown ... this
>could cut down on some of the essence cost of the cyber ... and then once the
>cybermantic ritual is performed, the spirit of the person is moved (the moving
>would cost at least a point of essence maybe some more) ...

The only problem with this has been explored already on the list and
that is in the transferance of the intellect (soul or whatever you want
to call it) We are aware of a certain person who is already abusing
this and will end up with their character back to normal, but it is a
fundamental question that is touching dangerous ground. Where does the
person stop and the meat begin. Transferring an entire consciousness
intact into a cloned body would be difficult at best, impossible at
worst, possibly the only way would be transference of the head, but then
we get into that area of "the person" again. The body remembers pain,
though synaptic connections in the brain, a hand that is missing itches,
but it's not there, there are no nerves, it's the mind playing tricks.
A whole body... connecting the spinal cord itself would be an operation
of phenomal proportions, let alone the nerve endings and other fine
tissues - it might be possible if nannites were employed, but I'm not
overly familiar with the capabilities of nannites in SR.

There are other things as well, but I'm not convinced that a "thought"
transferrance would be possible using SR tech, it does have
possibilities though. I'll probably try to explore this in another
thread - because there are implications for the matrix in this as well.

>This is just the beginning of this moral issue, and I hope we, as a world,
>come up with some good reasons for the further development of this technology
>... which unfortunately will find someplace to continue the development
>regardless of how hard the world may decide to come down onto it ...

I do agree with you. This is not something that should be swept under
the carpet and turned into the hands of those who's whole ideal is to do
things that are illegal, or in the hands of those to whom illegality in
the US, UK and Europe does not apply. I'm sure everyone here could
think of one or two who would take advantage - in ways not necessarily
desireable. It is far too important to treat in such a way, and might
just provide many answers that could be highly beneficial to humankind.
We shall see.

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 43
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 19:47:59 +0000
In article <MwKVaUBg9Rt0Ewyu@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
<Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>The reason I ask, is because of programs like Space:Above & Beyond (the
>cloned memmbers of society described in derogatory terms as tubies) with
>no history, memoriers to speak of etc.

>Replicants (slightly different but...) from Bladerunner.
> (I use these in my games for the same purpose as the film, hard
>labour/exploration)

I can see both of these to a point, but as with Blade Runner the clones
may not be happy about being expendable non-citizens.

The other example would be Robert Heinlein's "Friday".

Ah... I think I guess where Pete's going with this question :)

>Cloning of body parts, as witnessed in other movies or farming of clones
>for body parts.
> (I /think/ even FASA canon has this occurring)

Yep. DocWagon grow clone bodies (using accelerated techniques) to
support replacement body organs while they grow.
>
>Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memories intact.
> (Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
>through re-programmable BTL implant)

Don't see how it could be done: it's like saying I could build a
computer with the same hard disk contents as yours, if I use a couple of
casing screws from your PC in my new one.

Car Wars uses "Gold Cross" as a resurrection device: but you need to
program your clone with your memories. If you die and your body's
usable, they can rush it to the clone and transfer your memories up to
the point of death: othwerwise your clone remembers only to the last
programming.

>I'm curious to see how other list members view clones/cloning in their
>campaigns, and whether they are used simply to repair broken PC's or if
>the process is expensive to the point where only those of "wealthier"
>status are able to employ such methods. Obviously the applications for
>medical use are limitless, but farming body parts? How would that be
>viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
>status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
>almost racial hatred?

Right now the public version is that functional clones are not viable,
so creating a cloned body and then ripping the organs out of it for
transplant is not generally considered a problem.

Once the first clones are seen to emerge from the growth vats as pretty
little babies just like the ones Ma made, and people start to think that
those clones could have grown up into babies that could grow into real
people, then you might see the sort of anti-clone campaign in SR that
you see about abortion today: ranging from peaceful protest to
extremists murdering DocWagon staff.

Status of a clone: pass. Officially there aren't any. Any clones out
there will be trying hard to keep it that way. After all, once they're
decanted and grown to adult size, how do you tell the difference between
a clone and a normal human?


My personal take is that it's bad both ways :) A handful of militants
are violently trying to prevent anything being done to clones except
their being decanted and then raised naturally: most of society would be
anything from indifferent to outright hostile to anyone who wasn't born
the old-fashioned way.

After all, clones are all raised to be homicidal killers, or mutate into
tentacle-faced monstrosities that eat everyone at the most awkward
moments... so nobody really wants to be at a party with one.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 44
From: "cloud guy(Wyrmy)" <elfman@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Sun, 11 Jan 1998 18:40:03 -0600
> (much like Tyrrels
> logo)
who's logo? are you talking about me,or the guy from Bladerunner?
Message no. 45
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 02:50:06 +0000
In article <34B96663.59B2@*****.net>, cloud guy(Wyrmy)
<elfman@*****.NET> waffled & burbled about Clones and other thingies
>> (much like Tyrrels
>> logo)
>who's logo? are you talking about me,or the guy from Bladerunner?

More human _than_ human. Tyrrel Corporation's "logo".

Why... do you have a _personal_ logo that is similar?

And considering your addy is
elfman, Wyrmy, cloud guy, (jeez, smoke something else for a change will
ya)

The only other relevant information I can pull from your mail at this
time is

from hughest.flash.net (dasc29-184.flash.net [209.30.118.184]) by
endeavor.flash.net (8.8.7/8.8.5)

it's kinda difficult to figure out your name might be Tyrrel. :)

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 46
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 10:10:50 -0500
On Sat, Jan 10, 1998 at 02:11:08PM +0000, Fade wrote:
> > > Hm.. I do not think I would have a problem with either being a clone
> > > or being cloned as such, even if the clone 'was' me (retained memory
> > > etc.). Why? I'm alive. I perhaps have a few doubts about life, but
> > > what's new? The human psyche is not so frail as to be crushed by
> > > something like an existential question or two.
> > >
> > > At least not usually.
> > >
> > Perhaps. Then again, I've dated some screwed up women. :)
> > (No offense ladies). And it doesn't have to be crushed.
> > Think about the social/religious problems abortion presents.
> > Or the church's stance on birth control etc.
> > Anything that deals with the creation or "deletion" of life,
> > is a touchy subject for many. I see cloning (regardless
> > of memories etc) will raise many of the same issues and
> > have similiar problems. (Bomb any good cloning clinics lately?)
> > What's the saying "Morality is only "morally right" if its
> > not forced" or something to that affect.
> > I better stop this thread, its getting into that whole moral
> > issue we agreed to avoid.
>
> I didn't agree anything of the sort, so hit me with it! :)
>
> I think examples can be advantageous here.
>
> Let us say you have been cloned without your knowledge or consent.
> You do not have any idea that you have been cloned (or noone bothered
> to tell you you are a clone, of course). It is unlikely that it would
> be a problem if you didn't know about it. Agreed?
>
> So what is the difference if you did know it?
>
> It would perhaps be more troublesome than learning you are a bastard
> child, or adopted, or similar, and such things has been known to
> alter someone's life somewhat, but it often happens without much, or
> any, reaction. It would be dealt with individually, but probably
> seldom with as grave results as those originally outlined.
>
> (Which I don't remember, so not sure they were all that grave, but
> ok. :)
>
I'll grant you that. However, what happens if the clone person is
a SIN. His finger prints match someone else, so does his voice, etc.
(Hell of a plot thread really, find an unknown clone, so you can
break into a place etc). Now the government knows,and anyone
who has access to the databanks can find out. So the potential
is there. if I go to hire you, will I discriminate against you?
If you live in the shadows, its not a big deal. Most shadow teams
wouldn't care as long as you could uphold you end of the deal.
SIN'd society is a different story.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 47
From: William Gallas <wgallas@*****.FR>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 16:24:57 +0100
A question about clones. If you use them (I don't), you could create
immortal elves :)
They explain in Threats that it's a genetic factor.


Cobra.

E-mail adress : wgallas@*****.fr
Quote : "Never trust an elf"
Message no. 48
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 11:01:30 -0500
On Mon, Jan 12, 1998 at 04:24:57PM +0100, William Gallas wrote:
> A question about clones. If you use them (I don't), you could create
> immortal elves :)
> They explain in Threats that it's a genetic factor.
>
>
Possible. But the question is, is the immortality linked to magic,
etc. Since we still don't know what causes someone to be able
to handle magic, its a hard one to debate.
Second I want to see you go ask Harliquien or Elhran, if they
mind you making a clone of them. Ick! more then one would
be scary. Worse yet, go ask Lady Deigh. :)



--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 49
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 09:12:21 -0700
William Gallas wrote:
/
/ A question about clones. If you use them (I don't), you could create
/ immortal elves :)
/ They explain in Threats that it's a genetic factor.

<shudder>

Ooh, ooh! You could clone a dragon and then sell stuff like candied dragon
eye, and dragon tooth swords, and dragon bone armor, and.. <a sound of
flapping gets louder and David is suddenly plucked from his terminal by an
enourmous, taloned, dragon's claw>

:)

-David
--
"Who dares nothing, need hope for nothing." - Johann von Schiller
--
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 50
From: William Gallas <wgallas@*****.FR>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 17:21:58 +0100
>Possible. But the question is, is the immortality linked to magic,
>etc. Since we still don't know what causes someone to be able
>to handle magic, its a hard one to debate.
>Second I want to see you go ask Harliquien or Elhran, if they
>mind you making a clone of them. Ick! more then one would
>be scary. Worse yet, go ask Lady Deigh. :)

Hek. That's right !
I didn't thought about asking them. If you only need some ADN, you only
have to collect some fresh blood and to conserve it. Occasions exist, like
in H or H'back campaigns.


Cobra.

E-mail adress : wgallas@*****.fr
Quote : "Never trust an elf"
Message no. 51
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 11:23:44 -0500
On Mon, Jan 12, 1998 at 05:21:58PM +0100, William Gallas wrote:
> >Possible. But the question is, is the immortality linked to magic,
> >etc. Since we still don't know what causes someone to be able
> >to handle magic, its a hard one to debate.
> >Second I want to see you go ask Harliquien or Elhran, if they
> >mind you making a clone of them. Ick! more then one would
> >be scary. Worse yet, go ask Lady Deigh. :)
>
> Hek. That's right !
> I didn't thought about asking them. If you only need some ADN, you only
> have to collect some fresh blood and to conserve it. Occasions exist, like
> in H or H'back campaigns.
>
Possible. But I'm not volunteering for the job. Besides could
the world possibly stand two Harliquins?! More IE's?! That would
certainly be the end of the world. Heh...perhaps we should suggest
it to FASAMike. [Evil Grin]


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Some people are alive, only because its illegal to kill them.
Message no. 52
From: Wyrmy <elfman@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 16:34:10 -0600
> More human _than_ human. Tyrrel Corporation's "logo".
>
> Why... do you have a _personal_ logo that is similar?
>
> And considering your addy is
> elfman, Wyrmy, cloud guy, (jeez, smoke something else for a change will
> ya)

> it's kinda difficult to figure out your name might be Tyrrel. :)
>

My logo(its not in my .sig BTW) is : more human than the average human.
Message no. 53
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 00:16:24 +0000
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul J. Adam <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Date: 11 January 1998 21:20
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies


>In article <MwKVaUBg9Rt0Ewyu@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
><Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes

<clones/replicants>
>I can see both of these to a point, but as with Blade Runner the clones
>may not be happy about being expendable non-citizens.

Assuming they know any different? That would depend on the level of
intelligence assigned to each one. People do the strangest of things
today partly because they don't know any better. (Ok, that's a bit
simplified, but...)


>The other example would be Robert Heinlein's "Friday".
>
>Ah... I think I guess where Pete's going with this question :)

Oh yeah... Do tell?

>>Alien: Ressurection - the cloning of a full human with memoriesintact.
>> (Not done this yet, I use an accellerated subliminal teaching method
>>through re-programmable BTL implant)
>
>Don't see how it could be done: it's like saying I could build a
>computer with the same hard disk contents as yours,if I use a couple of
>casing screws from your PC in my new one.

What! You mean it can't be done that way? Darn, so that's what I've
been doing wrong. Squiffy will be so disappointed.

>Car Wars uses "Gold Cross" as a resurrection device: but you need to
>program your clone with your memories. If you die and your body's
>usable, they can rush it to the clone and transfer your memories up to
>the point of death: othwerwise your clone remembers only to the last
>programming.

Car Wars also prevents people committing suicide with a .44 magnum, by
making it stun damage only - so that just about up that game. :)

>>viewed by extremist organisations in Shadowrun, does a clone have any
>>status in society or is it a "tubie" to be treated with contempt and
>>almost racial hatred?
>
>Right now the public version is that functional clones are not viable,
>so creating a cloned body and then ripping the organs out of it for
>transplant is not generally considered a problem.

Now? As in RL? Wrong. Clones are more than viable, they are a
certainty. We will see human clones within the next 18 months
(according to news reports) President Clinton is opposed to it on
presumably moral grounds. Europe is signing an accord to make cloning of
humans illegal (a mistake IMHO) The UK is not, partly because we haven't
signed some other document, and partly because the government feels that
research into human cloning should continue - for rather obvious
reasons, though the creation of a full human clone is frowned upon. If
the US bans it, it is likely that research will move to countries with a
less moralistic view and continue in areas where a more
"individualistic" and selfish moral rules.

>Once the first clones are seen to emerge from the growth vats as pretty
>little babies just like the ones Ma made, and people start to thinkthat
>those clones could have grown up into babies that could grow into real
>people, then you might see the sort of anti-clone campaign in SR that
>you see about abortion today: ranging from peaceful protest to
>extremists murdering DocWagon staff.

Yes, I tend to agree with this, but why assume they will be from vats?
That's the logical way to go for accelerated life, but selective
breeding of species is no new thing, Gather together a group of
"perfect" (loose phrase to cover intellect etc) women, pay them vast
sums of money to be breeding machines and begin the cloning process.
Perfectly natural human beings created through a cloning process, but of
natural birth.

>Status of a clone: pass. Officially there aren't any. Any clones out
>there will be trying hard to keep it that way. After all, once they're
>decanted andgrown to adult size, how do you tell the difference between
>a clone and a normal human?

Human birth clones, would be the hardest to notice. Vat grown would
possibly show a variety of signs, from the S:A&B "nipple neck" to other
"unique" trauma/markings. Then again, in 62 years it may well be that
the process is perfected, and there is no essential difference. Which
opens a whole new ballgame altogether.

I've been trying to steer away from the "Paranoia" clones, but one can't
help returning there occassionally.

>My personal take is that it's bad both ways :) A handful of militants
>are violently trying to prevent anything being done to clones except
>their being decantedand then raised naturally: most of society would be
>anything from indifferent to outright hostile to anyone who wasn't born
>the old-fashioned way.
>
>After all,clones are all raised to be homicidal killers, or mutate into
>tentacle-faced monstrosities that eat everyone at the most awkward
>moments... so nobody really wants to be at a party with one.

Clones are also raised to do all those things that are overly dangerous
to "normal" humans, and are a great benefit to humankind in general.
They operate in the deepest mines, areas of radioactive and toxic
conditions, they fight wars to prevent a mothers' child from becoming
maimed or killed, they explore areas of space that would be considered
too dangerous for highly trained expensive professional humans, they go
deeper in the ocean than would normally be possible (thanks to genetic
alteration etc) Clones are a great benefit to mankind for the simple
reason they prevent the unneccessary deaths of normal humans, they also
occupy the more mundane and dirty jobs in society, allowing peoplpe
greater flexibility, more free time to spend with their families, and a
more stable income. Clones maintain the sewer systems, they clear and
destroy the tons of garbage accumulated every day in the cities (etc.
etc. blah, blah)

OK, so occassionally one is a little screwy, hey, it's not like that
doesn't happen with normal people, huh? How many serial killers? How
many psycho's? How many despotic dictators with delusions of godhood?
Clones <replicants> are a great benefit, surely the occassional mishap
can be overlooked when the greater good is considered? It has been
before... <g>

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 54
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1998 23:51:43 +0000
-----Original Message-----
From: Wyrmy <elfman@*****.NET>
To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET <SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET>
Date: 12 January 1998 22:25
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies

>> More human _than_ human. Tyrrel Corporation's "logo".
>>
>> Why... do you have a _personal_ logo that is similar?

>My logo(its not in my .sig BTW) is : more human than the average human.

It's not in your sig. Righto. I'd noticed that. :)

So, how again - how was I supposed to know? Oh yeah I'm psychic (not
something many would agree with) :)

Speaking of which... <g>

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 55
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 12:45:51 +0100
Wyrmy said on 16:34/12 Jan 98...

> My logo(its not in my .sig BTW) is : more human than the average human.

So you're more average than average? Sounds kinda dull, you know... :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
Round here, hey man, I got a lot of time...
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 56
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 22:32:35 +0000
In article <EOlPPIAYJru0EwJY@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
<Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Paul J. Adam <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
>>I can see both of these to a point, but as with Blade Runner the clones
>>may not be happy about being expendable non-citizens.
>
>Assuming they know any different? That would depend on the level of
>intelligence assigned to each one. People do the strangest of things
>today partly because they don't know any better. (Ok, that's a bit
>simplified, but...)

Yep. The drones would be selected to be unimaginative, not to think too
much, and would be conditioned to be loyal. (Shades of Brave New World
and their caste system: isn't it much easier to clone your unskilled
labour and breed them for loyalty?)

It's the combat models you'd have to watch, they need to be smart enough
to evaluate their surroundings and draw conclusions.

>>The other example would be Robert Heinlein's "Friday".
>>
>>Ah... I think I guess where Pete's going with this question :)
>
>Oh yeah... Do tell?

Like cyberware, but there was no interface, no links. It was as though
it was a part of him, as though he were born with it...

(Discussion of a severed and rather battered head recovered and
dissected by the FBI last year, out on ShadowTK)

>>Right now the public version is that functional clones are not viable,
>>so creating a cloned body and then ripping the organs out of it for
>>transplant is not generally considered a problem.
>
>Now? As in RL? Wrong. Clones are more than viable, they are a
>certainty. We will see human clones within the next 18 months
>(according to news reports)

I _do_ occasionally look out of the window, you know :)

Now, according to FASA, human clones aren't known to be viable. That was
written a while ago, before Dolly (let alone any cloned people). So the
game's been outpaced by events, big deal, I was talking FASA canon
rather than real life.

Pay attention, Pete... ;)

>>Once the first clones are seen to emerge from the growth vats as pretty
>>little babies just like the ones Ma made, and people start to thinkthat
>>those clones could have grown up into babies that could grow into real
>>people, then you might see the sort of anti-clone campaign in SR that
>>you see about abortion today: ranging from peaceful protest to
>>extremists murdering DocWagon staff.
>
>Yes, I tend to agree with this, but why assume they will be from vats?

Because it's the only way to know for sure that they're cloned: because
if you want them to be expendable drones, it helps if they don't have
mothers who might get all maternal and reluctant to surrender "their"
baby for the greater good of the corporation/government...

Remember some of the problems of surrogate parenthood, when the host
mother decided she didn't want to part with what she now saw as her
child?

>>My personal take is that it's bad both ways :) A handful of militants
>>are violently trying to prevent anything being done to clones except
>>their being decantedand then raised naturally: most of society would be
>>anything from indifferent to outright hostile to anyone who wasn't born
>>the old-fashioned way.
>>
>>After all,clones are all raised to be homicidal killers, or mutate into
>>tentacle-faced monstrosities that eat everyone at the most awkward
>>moments... so nobody really wants to be at a party with one.
>
>Clones are also raised to do all those things that are overly dangerous
>to "normal" humans, and are a great benefit to humankind in general.

Like tax collectors, sewage workers, garbage collectors or Special
Forces soldiers?

Doesn't mean you'd be delighted to have dinner with any of the above,
however much you respect and admire their difficult, unpleasant and
dangerous work. (Think Tim Zahn's "Cobra", for instance).

>They operate in the deepest mines, areas of radioactive and toxic
>conditions, they fight wars to prevent a mothers' child from becoming
>maimed or killed, they explore areas of space that would be considered
>too dangerous for highly trained expensive professional humans, they go
>deeper in the ocean than would normally be possible (thanks to genetic
>alteration etc)

Yep. These guys are faster, tougher, meaner than any normal human. They
can benchpress a Chevy, breathe poisoned air that would kill you or I,
shrug off wounds that would leave most people screaming and writhing in
pools of their own blood.

They're Superman and you don't have any kryptonite to hand.

You're very grateful they're out there on the frontiers, saving lives,
helping humanity, doing the work only they can do.

And you'd rather they stayed there.

It's not that _you_ mind, of course not, some of your best friends are
clones, you're not at all prejudiced, but there are small children
living here, and for their sake you'd rather that scary woman with the
stories about war on the Frontier found somewhere else to make her home
just in case some awful accident happened, you know, these people are
like Rottweilers, sometimes they just react on instinct, they don't mean
to do any harm...

>OK, so occassionally one is a little screwy, hey, it's not like that
>doesn't happen with normal people, huh? How many serial killers? How
>many psycho's? How many despotic dictators with delusions of godhood?
>Clones <replicants> are a great benefit, surely the occassional mishap
>can be overlooked when the greater good is considered? It has been
>before... <g>

The difference is, a merely human serial killer dies when the police
shoot him or her. Merely human megalomaniacs can't rally an army of
genetically engineered soldiers, bred and trained from birth to be
unstoppable mayhem machines, who are indistinguishable from you or I...

In short, the same problems associated with being known to be a wired-up
ex-soldier, or a trained combat mage :)

I wouldn't think you'd see squads of blade runners "retiring" runaway
clones, but they wouldn't exactly be made welcome if their identity was
known. So, most would try hard to conceal their nature IMO - prove they
_are_ a clone :)


--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 57
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 23:49:16 +0000
In article <J5MwjUAD0Tv0EwiT@********.demon.co.uk>, Paul J. Adam
<shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK> waffled & burbled about Clones and other
thingies
>In article <EOlPPIAYJru0EwJY@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
><Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>>Assuming they know any different? That would depend on the level of
>>intelligence assigned to each one. People do the strangest of things
>>today partly because they don't know any better. (Ok, that's a bit
>>simplified, but...)
>
>Yep. The drones would be selected to be unimaginative, not to think too
>much, and would be conditioned to be loyal. (Shades of Brave New World
>and their caste system: isn't it much easier to clone your unskilled
>labour and breed them for loyalty?)
>
>It's the combat models you'd have to watch, they need to be smart enough
>to evaluate their surroundings and draw conclusions.

Yeah, they'd need to be. Can;t have a brainless thing walking in one
direction on a battlefield of the future. The situation is likely to be
so dynamic as to make high intelligence a necessity. Some conditioning
would make the majority fanatically loyal, but there's always going to
be one "rebel".

>>Oh yeah... Do tell?
>
>Like cyberware, but there was no interface, no links. It was as though
>it was a part of him, as though he were born with it...
>
>(Discussion of a severed and rather battered head recovered and
>dissected by the FBI last year, out on ShadowTK)

<snigger> Nah, you're making assumptions here. <grin> Mind you, now
that you mention it...

>>>Right now the public version is that functional clones are not viable,
>>>so creating a cloned body and then ripping the organs out of it for
>>>transplant is not generally considered a problem.
>>
>>Now? As in RL? Wrong. Clones are more than viable, they are a
>>certainty. We will see human clones within the next 18 months
>>(according to news reports)
>
>I _do_ occasionally look out of the window, you know :)

Really? Damn, and there goes another illusion :( I thought you spent
your entire life in front of the computer or that strange place you work
at. <g>


>Now, according to FASA, human clones aren't known to be viable. That was
>written a while ago, before Dolly (let alone any cloned people). So the
>game's been outpaced by events, big deal, I was talking FASA canon
>rather than real life.

Well, it's only canon from the early material :) It might have changed,
we just haven't been told about it yet.

>Pay attention, Pete... ;)

Aw, and ruin the habit of a lifetime Paul? That just wouldn't be right.
If I started to pay attention, people might think something was wrong
with me.

>>Yes, I tend to agree with this, but why assume they will be from vats?
>
>Because it's the only way to know for sure that they're cloned: because
>if you want them to be expendable drones, it helps if they don't have
>mothers who might get all maternal and reluctant to surrender "their"
>baby for the greater good of the corporation/government...

Expendable drones would be from vats. That I agree with. It cuts out
any possible personal attachments with surrogate parents. But for a
more "humanlike" clone I think normal birth processes and teaching
techniques would be used.

>>Clones are also raised to do all those things that are overly dangerous
>>to "normal" humans, and are a great benefit to humankind in general.
>
>Like tax collectors, sewage workers, garbage collectors or

Tax Collectors, absolutely. After all, the clone wouldn't even need to
be intelligent, just damn goood at making stones bleed.

>Special
>Forces soldiers?

Special Forces? Not a chance. Can't let a clone be that clever, and
skilled <grin> Of course, that would make them even more expendable.
Hmm.. I might have to emply this one day. <g>

>>too dangerous for highly trained expensive professional humans, they go
>>deeper in the ocean than would normally be possible (thanks to genetic
>>alteration etc)
>
>Yep. These guys are faster, tougher, meaner than any normal human. They
>can benchpress a Chevy, breathe poisoned air that would kill you or I,
>shrug off wounds that would leave most people screaming and writhing in
>pools of their own blood.

Absolutely. Guaranteed to cause public unrest if the news ever got out.
:)

>They're Superman and you don't have any kryptonite to hand.

Ah, but there are limitations, they can be superman, or super
intelligent, but some process in the creation moulding and genetic
manipulation denies the possibility of incredibly strong and
intelligent. Muscles detract from the essential flow of blood and
oxygen to the brain, cutting off that flow to the brain results in
strong and stupid. Of course, scientists are working on resolving that
problem, there are times when strong and intelligent might work. In the
main though, you've got your thinkers and your oxen, but ne'er the twain
shall meet.

>You're very grateful they're out there on the frontiers, saving lives,
>helping humanity, doing the work only they can do.

Damn right. Means I can sit at home watch the football (I hate) play
with the kids, eat, drink beer, mess about on the 'pooter and all the
things that people don't normally have the time for. I'm happy to have
clones dying and grovelling in the crap for me, while I sit back and
lord it up. O'course, when they rebel, we'll just call out the military
to sort them.. What d'ya mean the military are clones? There's _how_
many humans left? Why? What happened? <g>

>And you'd rather they stayed there.

Darn tooting pard.

>It's not that _you_ mind, of course not, some of your best friends are
>clones,

Only one that I know of so far and that may be a simple genetic mistake.
:)

>you're not at all prejudiced, but there are small children
>living here, and for their sake you'd rather that scary woman with the
>stories about war on the Frontier found somewhere else to make her home
>just in case some awful accident happened, you know, these people are
>like Rottweilers, sometimes they just react on instinct, they don't mean
>to do any harm...

Keep 'em where they belong that's what I say. :)

>>Clones <replicants> are a great benefit, surely the occassional mishap
>>can be overlooked when the greater good is considered? It has been
>>before... <g>
>
>The difference is, a merely human serial killer dies when the police
>shoot him or her. Merely human megalomaniacs can't rally an army of
>genetically engineered soldiers, bred and trained from birth to be
>unstoppable mayhem machines, who are indistinguishable from you or I...

Yeah, so?

>In short, the same problems associated with being known to be a wired-up
>ex-soldier, or a trained combat mage :)

Not quite. Clones are unlikely to be magically aware or capable. That
takes a very special set of circumstances - something many games seem to
ignore, by having large numbers of mages lurking around every corner. I
don't think I'd allow a mage clone. Much to risky, best to destroy them
at birth, hack them to bits and find out what made them magical in the
first place - much less unlikley to result in a violent reaction fromt
eh mage community because it's not even a real mage that's being
butchered. In fact, magical awakening in clones would benefit science
massively. Saves having to torture and hack to bits all those real
mages out there.

>I wouldn't think you'd see squads of blade runners "retiring" runaway
>clones, but they wouldn't exactly be made welcome if their identity was
>known. So, most would try hard to conceal their nature IMO - prove they
>_are_ a clone :)

What is a Blade Runner, except a Bounty Hunter with a badge. Get this
replicant - dead or alive, preferably dead. And then he/she gets paid
for retiring a skin job. No biggie.

Having said that, no I don't think a clone would be a normally accepted
member of society, same as the clones in S;A&B were not accepted in
society, being labelled "tubies" and "nipple necks" as derogatory
terms.
Also, with no family and no memories to speak of beyond their wakening
and conditioning they are immediately at a disadvantage already.


--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 58
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 00:42:18 +0000
In article <5x9wA2A87Uv0Ew1a@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
<Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>In article <J5MwjUAD0Tv0EwiT@********.demon.co.uk>, Paul J. Adam
><shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK> waffled & burbled about Clones and other
>thingies
>>I _do_ occasionally look out of the window, you know :)
>
>Really? Damn, and there goes another illusion :( I thought you spent
>your entire life in front of the computer or that strange place you work
>at. <g>

Or both. Just made _Senior_ systems engineer, now that VDU or assorted
UK SECRET documents are all I seem to get to look at :(

>>Now, according to FASA, human clones aren't known to be viable. That was
>>written a while ago, before Dolly (let alone any cloned people). So the
>>game's been outpaced by events, big deal, I was talking FASA canon
>>rather than real life.
>
>Well, it's only canon from the early material :) It might have changed,
>we just haven't been told about it yet.

Like I said: the general public think you can't make clones. The clones,
and probably most of the people making them, want it to stay that way.

>>Pay attention, Pete... ;)
>
>Aw, and ruin the habit of a lifetime Paul?

I know, I'm so unreasonable...

>>Because it's the only way to know for sure that they're cloned: because
>>if you want them to be expendable drones, it helps if they don't have
>>mothers who might get all maternal and reluctant to surrender "their"
>>baby for the greater good of the corporation/government...
>
>Expendable drones would be from vats. That I agree with. It cuts out
>any possible personal attachments with surrogate parents. But for a
>more "humanlike" clone I think normal birth processes and teaching
>techniques would be used.

Agreed. But then, if you've got a mother and you went to school and
you're "normal" except for being made in a Petri dish instead of being
the product of sperm meets ova, then who's to know you're a clone? _You_
probably don't know you're a clone. Even if you do, so what? Your mother
needed in vitro fertilisation in order to concieve. Prove otherwise.

Vatborn "expendables" are where the fun comes in.

>>Special
>>Forces soldiers?
>
>Special Forces? Not a chance. Can't let a clone be that clever, and
>skilled <grin> Of course, that would make them even more expendable.

Gotcha. No parents to miss them, no records to show who the dead guys
you caught inside the wire at your top secret facility came from.
Perfect SF material for the 2050s, in some ways.

>>Yep. These guys are faster, tougher, meaner than any normal human. They
>>can benchpress a Chevy, breathe poisoned air that would kill you or I,
>>shrug off wounds that would leave most people screaming and writhing in
>>pools of their own blood.
>
>Absolutely. Guaranteed to cause public unrest if the news ever got out.
>:)

Why can't _I_ be that strong, that tough, that smart?

Mutter mutter mumble. Bet they can eat curry and drink ten pints of
lager every night and don't get a beer gut. Not fair. I want to be able
to do that. It says I can in the Constitution, probably. Why can they do
it and I can't?

>>They're Superman and you don't have any kryptonite to hand.
>
>Ah, but there are limitations, they can be superman, or super
>intelligent, but some process in the creation moulding and genetic
>manipulation denies the possibility of incredibly strong and
>intelligent. Muscles detract from the essential flow of blood and
>oxygen to the brain, cutting off that flow to the brain results in
>strong and stupid. Of course, scientists are working on resolving that
>problem, there are times when strong and intelligent might work. In the
>main though, you've got your thinkers and your oxen, but ne'er the twain
>shall meet.

"How To Be A Superhero" - intelligence scales with SuperStrength. By the
time you can move the Earth in its orbit and use the Moon as a bowling
ball, you're as stupid as Dan Quayle :)


>>In short, the same problems associated with being known to be a wired-up
>>ex-soldier, or a trained combat mage :)
>
>Not quite. Clones are unlikely to be magically aware or capable.

And those that are will _really_ be scared of saying so.

>That
>takes a very special set of circumstances - something many games seem to
>ignore, by having large numbers of mages lurking around every corner. I
>don't think I'd allow a mage clone. Much to risky, best to destroy them
>at birth, hack them to bits and find out what made them magical in the
>first place - much less unlikley to result in a violent reaction fromt
>eh mage community because it's not even a real mage that's being
>butchered. In fact, magical awakening in clones would benefit science
>massively. Saves having to torture and hack to bits all those real
>mages out there.

Oh, surely nobody vivisects magicians in your game! I mean, it's not
like anyone wants to know how magicians happen and how their corporation
can make more magicians than any of their competitors, is it? It's not
like there's a huge advantage to having lots of loyal magicians, and so
"if you don't behave we'll give you to the lab" is a useful threat?

>>I wouldn't think you'd see squads of blade runners "retiring" runaway
>>clones, but they wouldn't exactly be made welcome if their identity was
>>known. So, most would try hard to conceal their nature IMO - prove they
>>_are_ a clone :)
>
>What is a Blade Runner, except a Bounty Hunter with a badge. Get this
>replicant - dead or alive, preferably dead. And then he/she gets paid
>for retiring a skin job. No biggie.

Until you "retire" a human by mistake. Oopsie. In a world of cyber and
magic, that's a big risk unless the clones cause _real_ problems. If you
kill some corp's cybermonster testbed, thinking they're a clone, you
just cost them a _lot_ of money. That's the only thing that makes a
corporation angry.

>Having said that, no I don't think a clone would be a normally accepted
>member of society, same as the clones in S;A&B were not accepted in
>society, being labelled "tubies" and "nipple necks" as derogatory
terms.

Hence, their definite interest in not being identifed as clones, but as
passing themselves off as John and Jane Doe.

>Also, with no family and no memories to speak of beyond their wakening
>and conditioning they are immediately at a disadvantage already.

That's one thing I liked from Blade Runner: the replicants' search for
some sort of identity, even if it was only borrowed.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 59
From: Avenger <Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 03:18:48 +0000
In article <eQ2lJWBqzqv0EwT9@********.demon.co.uk>, Paul J. Adam
<shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK> waffled & burbled about Clones and other
thingies
>In article <5x9wA2A87Uv0Ew1a@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
><Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>>Really? Damn, and there goes another illusion :( I thought you spent
>>your entire life in front of the computer or that strange place you work
>>at. <g>
>
>Or both. Just made _Senior_ systems engineer, now that VDU or assorted
>UK SECRET documents are all I seem to get to look at :(

Well, I trust your wages have taken a climb up. It's about time. More
responsibility, same wages... Bloody British business logic. :(

>>Well, it's only canon from the early material :) It might have changed,
>>we just haven't been told about it yet.
>
>Like I said: the general public think you can't make clones. The clones,
>and probably most of the people making them, want it to stay that way.

Hey, haven't you been watching TriD, they make clones all the time in
Star Trek: The Wasted Years <g>

>>>Pay attention, Pete... ;)
>>
>>Aw, and ruin the habit of a lifetime Paul?
>
>I know, I'm so unreasonable...

Damn right you are. Asking _me_ to pay attention. <hmph>

>>any possible personal attachments with surrogate parents. But for a
>>more "humanlike" clone I think normal birth processes and teaching
>>techniques would be used.
>
>Agreed. But then, if you've got a mother and you went to school and
>you're "normal" except for being made in a Petri dish instead of being
>the product of sperm meets ova, then who's to know you're a clone? _You_
>probably don't know you're a clone. Even if you do, so what? Your mother
>needed in vitro fertilisation in order to concieve. Prove otherwise.

No problem, I've got the petri dish - Say hi to Mom. :)

>Vatborn "expendables" are where the fun comes in.

I don;t think you'll be wanting too much of that fun Paul. :) Don't
forget, I'll arrange it so that its you character who has to clean up
the mess. And regarding your Superman comments, well, the gun you've
got, just isn't going to cut the mustard. :)

>>Special Forces? Not a chance. Can't let a clone be that clever, and
>>skilled <grin> Of course, that would make them even more expendable.
>
>Gotcha.

Got who? Whatchaonabowt?

>>Absolutely. Guaranteed to cause public unrest if the news ever got out.
>>:)
>
>Why can't _I_ be that strong, that tough, that smart?

Because you're not a clone, your some ex-mil wimp working for some
research establishment that's gonna get creamed when the Druids come
round. <g>

>>strong and stupid. Of course, scientists are working on resolving that
>>problem, there are times when strong and intelligent might work. In the
>>main though, you've got your thinkers and your oxen, but ne'er the twain
>>shall meet.
>
>"How To Be A Superhero" - intelligence scales with SuperStrength. By the
>time you can move the Earth in its orbit and use the Moon as a bowling
>ball, you're as stupid as Dan Quayle :)

Dan Quayle? You'd be _that_ generous with their mental abilities...
Wow. :)

>>Not quite. Clones are unlikely to be magically aware or capable.
>
>And those that are will _really_ be scared of saying so.

Assuming they get a chance of denial. OK, yeah I've seen Project X, I
know what happens when the monkey sees his dead buddy, but that's an
ape, it's not as though corporate conditioning is going to have any
effect on that, but a nice malleable human? hehehe

>>butchered. In fact, magical awakening in clones would benefit science
>>massively. Saves having to torture and hack to bits all those real
>>mages out there.
>
>Oh, surely nobody vivisects magicians in your game!

Of course not! How dare you suggest such a thing. Mages are _far_ too
common and well understood for this to be necessary. :)

>I mean, it's not
>like anyone wants to know how magicians happen and how their corporation
>can make more magicians than any of their competitors, is it? It's not
>like there's a huge advantage to having lots of loyal magicians, and so
>"if you don't behave we'll give you to the lab" is a useful threat?

"We'll give you the lab", doesn't sound much like a threat "Give? Oh
gee, thanks, I could do with some decent research facilities? But tell
them you'll issue the surgeon with a spoon, and you might have a chance
of enforcing the threat. :)

>>What is a Blade Runner, except a Bounty Hunter with a badge. Get this
>>replicant - dead or alive, preferably dead. And then he/she gets paid
>>for retiring a skin job. No biggie.
>
>Until you "retire" a human by mistake.

Never happen. They're issued with this wonderful "clone" detector that
works in some wierd and wonderful way immediately identifying clones
when you ask them about their mother. :)

>Oopsie. In a world of cyber and
>magic, that's a big risk unless the clones cause _real_ problems.

Not really, information manipulation is not a new thing. Robocop and
Total Recall give good ideas on "rearranging facts" :)

>If you
>kill some corp's cybermonster testbed, thinking they're a clone, you
>just cost them a _lot_ of money. That's the only thing that makes a
>corporation angry.

At which point, if it's financially viable guess who becomes the next
testbed? <g> Ask Jonathan what happened to "Bob" some time. :)

>>Having said that, no I don't think a clone would be a normally accepted
>>member of society, same as the clones in S;A&B were not accepted in
>>society, being labelled "tubies" and "nipple necks" as
derogatory terms.
>
>Hence, their definite interest in not being identifed as clones, but as
>passing themselves off as John and Jane Doe.

Something always seems to give them away though. One day I'll
understand how the movie general public came to be so observant against
their RL cousins' natural habit of not seeing/hearing anything.

>>Also, with no family and no memories to speak of beyond their wakening
>>and conditioning they are immediately at a disadvantage already.
>
>That's one thing I liked from Blade Runner: the replicants' search for
>some sort of identity, even if it was only borrowed.

Yeah. It was kinda cute, pity they spoiled the end though. :( If it
wasn't for a US audience we would've had a much better movie with less
blatant answers.

--
Dark Avenger -:- http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm -
Unofficial Shadowtk Newbies Guide, Edgerunners Datastore &
Beginnings of the Underseas Sourcebook.
http://freespace.virgin.net/pete.sims/index.htm - Alternative UK Sourcebook
(U/C)
Message no. 60
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Clones and other thingies
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 1998 18:00:59 +0000
In article <LIUseIAYGtv0EwBG@*******.demon.co.uk>, Avenger
<Avenger@*******.DEMON.CO.UK> writes
>In article <eQ2lJWBqzqv0EwT9@********.demon.co.uk>, Paul J. Adam
><shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK> waffled & burbled about Clones and other
>thingies
>>Or both. Just made _Senior_ systems engineer, now that VDU or assorted
>>UK SECRET documents are all I seem to get to look at :(
>
>Well, I trust your wages have taken a climb up. It's about time. More
>responsibility, same wages... Bloody British business logic. :(

Not yet. This is GEC, remember?

>>Like I said: the general public think you can't make clones. The clones,
>>and probably most of the people making them, want it to stay that way.
>
>Hey, haven't you been watching TriD, they make clones all the time in
>Star Trek: The Wasted Years <g>

And if you claim your neighbour's a cloned ubermensch, you get laughed
at and told to watch less science fiction.

>>Vatborn "expendables" are where the fun comes in.
>
>I don;t think you'll be wanting too much of that fun Paul. :) Don't
>forget, I'll arrange it so that its you character who has to clean up
>the mess. And regarding your Superman comments, well, the gun you've
>got, just isn't going to cut the mustard. :)

More fun than man was meant to handle, then...


>>Until you "retire" a human by mistake.
>
>Never happen. They're issued with this wonderful "clone" detector that
>works in some wierd and wonderful way immediately identifying clones
>when you ask them about their mother. :)

At which point they blow great big holes in you and run away. Still a
few bugs in the system :)

>>Oopsie. In a world of cyber and
>>magic, that's a big risk unless the clones cause _real_ problems.
>
>Not really, information manipulation is not a new thing. Robocop and
>Total Recall give good ideas on "rearranging facts" :)

Yep, but then you've got competitors hungry to rearrange the facts to
make them look even worse... decisions to go assassinate anyone, people
or clones, aren't made casually. The risks and costs may outweigh the
benefits.

>>That's one thing I liked from Blade Runner: the replicants' search for
>>some sort of identity, even if it was only borrowed.
>
>Yeah. It was kinda cute, pity they spoiled the end though. :( If it
>wasn't for a US audience we would've had a much better movie with less
>blatant answers.

At least the director's edition got rid of the happy ending, and left
the possibility that the Blade Runners were replicants themselves
open...

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Clones and other thingies, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!