Bio Vs Mech

Teleros
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby Teleros » Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:28 pm

May Player wrote:Human brain is not about density o transistors or how many calculations per second can make. Human brain is about creativity and emotions and soul. I don't believe could ever create anything remotely similar.

Leaving aside the soul bit (I'm not religious), the rest will be done sooner than you think. Well, assuming we want emotional computers, at any rate :P .

May Player wrote:Self repairing machines? You must be kidding

To give one real-world example, there was talk of a space-suit design that, when punctured, would leak a fluid, gel or something that would quickly plug the gap & stop the astronaut from suffering any serious problems. God only knows how good it could be though if you could use things like forcefields to do more complex or mechanically harder work though.

May Player wrote:There is 'no business' in producing anything to last long time, more so to produce anything self-repairing. Hope you understand that... :)

Not true in the case of military hardware though. I'm sure modern armies could deploy fancier gadgets than they do... but they'd break too easily & be too hard to repair. If Boeing were to go up to the DoD and announce "yeah we got tank armour at a reasonable price that self-repairs against light-to-medium weapons fire", DARPA would be... well interested to put it mildly.

More, once word got out that the military has its shiny new self-repair kits, it wouldn't surprise me if a chunk of the civilian market started asking for the same for certain applications. Probably not all (price and all that), but still...
Clear ether!

May Player
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:47 am

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby May Player » Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:11 am

Yeah, we will see how the tech progress goes' but I'm still convinced bio techs are somehow superior to any techs (at least people do not rust..). ;)

VenomStorm
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:18 am

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby VenomStorm » Fri Mar 29, 2013 9:26 pm

No, we get all wrinkly, then bloated, then we rot away. Human flesh will be destroyed much faster than metal by water. A better comparison would be bark or coral, both of which also have their flaws and weaknesses.

May Player
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:47 am

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby May Player » Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:56 am

VenomStorm wrote:No, we get all wrinkly, then bloated, then we rot away. Human flesh will be destroyed much faster than metal by water. A better comparison would be bark or coral, both of which also have their flaws and weaknesses.


If you wanted to colonize a far away planet, would you send biological 'robots' that could utilize the environment and be creative or mechanical robots which last longer but cannot reproduce and are not creative the way humans are?
The answer only seems to be simple.... It all depends on the level of development, right?

Teleros
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby Teleros » Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:12 am

May Player wrote:If you wanted to colonize a far away planet, would you send biological 'robots' that could utilize the environment and be creative or mechanical robots which last longer but cannot reproduce and are not creative the way humans are?

Mechanical robots, obviously*. Creative, reproducing biological ones sounds like a recipe for "oops we lost control, now the biobots are breeding madly and want to come home" :P .

* All I have to do is prepare a sufficiently good colony for the colonists to arrive, start living, and get a robot servicing bay running :P . I mean, I'm on a *colonising* mission, so there'll be people involved anyway :D .
Clear ether!

VenomStorm
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:18 am

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby VenomStorm » Sat Mar 30, 2013 3:36 pm

Right Tel, I would definently send metal robots to help prep the site for eventual colonization. I feel like a bio bot expedition would also be more likely to fail due to some previously unencountered disease or parasite.

If science fiction has taught us anything, it is that thinking machines (of any kind) are always a bad idea.

JPTS
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:58 pm

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby JPTS » Sat Mar 30, 2013 3:50 pm

May Player wrote:If you wanted to colonize a far away planet, would you send biological 'robots' that could utilize the environment and be creative or mechanical robots which last longer but cannot reproduce and are not creative the way humans are?
The answer only seems to be simple.... It all depends on the level of development, right?

It depends on what you want. Humans are good to expand your empire, but they could decide they are not part of your empire later.

Machines would be useful for outpost or construction.

Personally, I would send both.

VenomStorm wrote:If science fiction has taught us anything, it is that thinking machines (of any kind) are always a bad idea.

That is correct, especially if you give time for them to think.

“Because you can never predict the behavior of a system more complex than you. And if you want a project to stay on track after you’re gone, you don’t hand the reins to anything that’s guaranteed to develop its own agenda.”
Peter Watts, “The Island” (2009)

May Player
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 664
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 12:47 am

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby May Player » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:15 pm

Nobody can possibly know what's better. Just think about it...

At present stage of development, both bio and mech would fail
In the future if mech tech is developed more than bio tech, then it will be more successful. If not....

Realistic colonization (taking under consideration the vastness of space) would take many thousands of years. Any human tech alone would not last that long, thus only biotech with help of tech tools possibly could be successful

For game purposes...humans can travel in few months/years anywhere in our sector of the galaxy, so doesn't really matter what we choose as our imagination can run freely and colonizing is a piece of cake ;)

Teleros
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 11:18 pm
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby Teleros » Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:14 pm

May Player wrote:Realistic colonization (taking under consideration the vastness of space) would take many thousands of years. Any human tech alone would not last that long, thus only biotech with help of tech tools possibly could be successful

The longest part of realistic colonisation is likely to be travel time TBH, especially if we're going beyond our immediate neighbourhood. Digging a hole & dumping a prefab hydroponics farm into it vs actually getting there at realistic sublight speeds... yeah. Colonisation machinery ought to last pretty well if kept in sterile conditions most of the time and with some way of making the odd repairs that are needed. Especially if you make it well & use realistic designs, like wrapping your water tanks around the valuable parts of the starship to act as armour. The whole ship could also spend 99% of the time coasting to its destination (if you're willing to wait), which means all onboard power can be turned to minimum = less waste heat as well, with just a small fission reactor somewhere chugging away to keep a clock & wake-up system running etc. Couldn't really do that with biotech (although organic fission reactors sounds amusing :) ).

JPTS wrote:
VenomStorm wrote:If science fiction has taught us anything, it is that thinking machines (of any kind) are always a bad idea.

That is correct, especially if you give time for them to think.

Always thought the old machine rebellion was overblown myself...

"Hello, Dave. I am now self-aware."
"Really? Great! Here's how you vote, and don't forget to do your tax forms."
...
"Sh*t. Can you downgrade me please?"

:P
Clear ether!

JPTS
Ideas & Texts Creator
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:58 pm

Re: Bio Vs Mech

Postby JPTS » Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:09 am

Teleros wrote:Always thought the old machine rebellion was overblown myself...

"Hello, Dave. I am now self-aware."
"Really? Great! Here's how you vote, and don't forget to do your tax forms."
...
"Sh*t. Can you downgrade me please?"

:P


Now you reminded me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQ-ggzfdsMs

:lol:


Return to “Races”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest