IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Jaid
post Jun 22 2010, 09:05 PM
Post #51


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,089
Joined: 4-October 05
Member No.: 7,813



QUOTE (Lucyfersam @ Jun 22 2010, 02:47 PM) *
Leonization in SR2 had an essence cost, so it wasn't true immortality (I think those have been gotten rid of since, can't remember for sure though). I was also assuming an immortality that is automatically passed on to children, which Leonization isn't. Once you have 100,000 genetically immortal people, the idea of controlling that to prevent it from becoming a rapidly growing population of immortals is nigh impossible, unless that genetic immortality also dramatically changes the fertility of the immortal.

it still has an essence cost, i think.

but, you can get your essence back now iirc.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hermit
post Jun 22 2010, 09:09 PM
Post #52


The King In Yellow
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,922
Joined: 26-February 05
From: JWD
Member No.: 7,121



QUOTE
I don't have my books handy, but I'm pretty sure Running Wild talked about HMHVV potentially activating the magus complex rather than rewriting the DNA as an explaination for why many but not all vampires are magicians.

RC and RW are not exactly eye to eye with what the virus does. By the rules, though, it generates a magus complex. I will not go into that further, and you kow you don't want me to anyway. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

QUOTE
True, but what is the minimum population size you need for an Ark when everyone is immortal? Two? 10,000? I'm not sure how to go about answering that question.

You will want a viable gene pool. So you need at least 10.000 genetic samples, preferably diverse ones. Of course, a few incubators and eggs/sperm would maybe work. It's be rather risky, but possible, that this would be a robotic probe that builds a sustainable environment with advanced nanostuff and then proceeds seeding new humans. That would, I imagine, be the minimum ark.

QUOTE
With Leonization, SR basically has 100,000 immortals NOW.

Leonisation costs essence and thus, does not give you immortality. Just extended life at the cost of your soul.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 22 2010, 09:22 PM
Post #53


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



$imon$ez:
Augmentation: 83 "By cleaning up your own genetic background, you won’t pass any diseases to your progeny. Further, you can pass certain special abilities along."
$imoff::
--$imon$ez in an open source [Knowsoft]::code provided by TrnZhX--

I also would avoid sister-boinking on a general basis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 22 2010, 09:24 PM
Post #54


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



Leonization doesn't cost Essence, but it can only be used a "number of times" before it makes your cells go kerspolody. I think the genetics in SR4 might be worse than the space physics.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hermit
post Jun 22 2010, 09:31 PM
Post #55


The King In Yellow
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,922
Joined: 26-February 05
From: JWD
Member No.: 7,121



QUOTE
Augmentation: 83 "By cleaning up your own genetic background, you won’t pass any diseases to your progeny. Further, you can pass certain special abilities along."
$imoff::
--$imon$ez in an open source [Knowsoft]::code provided by TrnZhX--

The narrowing down of the gene pool and the becoming of till then unknown genetic conditions can't be cleaned up that way, if you ask me. Though an onboard sperm/egg bank might work.

QUOTE
Leonization doesn't cost Essence, but it can only be used a "number of times" before it makes your cells go kerspolody. I think the genetics in SR4 might be worse than the space physics.

I liked the old rules a lot better.

QUOTE
but, you can get your essence back now iirc.

Not if the implant/genemod is still in place.

Also, what if the sibling is really sexy?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 22 2010, 10:00 PM
Post #56


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (SkepticInc @ Jun 22 2010, 10:22 PM) *
$imon$ez:
Augmentation: 83 "By cleaning up your own genetic background, you won’t pass any diseases to your progeny. Further, you can pass certain special abilities along."
$imoff::
--$imon$ez in an open source [Knowsoft]::code provided by TrnZhX--

I also would avoid sister-boinking on a general basis.

So here's the problem, and an interesting distinction between "genetic disease" and "genetic abnormality". Just because you're not passing on any of your own genetic baggage doesn't mean a) your progeny won't spontaneously develop their own genetic baggage, and b) wide-scale genetic catastrophes caused by inbreeding will be avoided.

Let's posit a medical black box by which any known or possible pathogenic genetic anomaly could be cleansed from a genome. This will eliminate all of the diseases we think of as inherited (or germline) diseases, like cystic fibrosis. This process can't stop any disease caused by a new (or de novo) mutation, however, like certain forms of ataxia, certain cancers, and Liddle's disease. De novo mutation has also been cited as a possible cause for autism.

And that's just the problems with normal, non-incestuous reproduction. As I said before, the real problem with inbreeding, especially with a species as (relatively) genetically "brittle" as homo sapiens, is that our black box wouldn't pick up any problems imposed by systematic genetic drift caused by inbreeding until the genome was beyond repair. Take inbred dogs, for example. Their problems aren't even pathogenic, for the most part - a weird-looking stupid dog with a bad temper produced by generations of inbreeding doesn't have any genetic disease, it's just the victim of artificial selection.

This post has been edited by martian_bob: Jun 22 2010, 10:01 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 22 2010, 10:04 PM
Post #57


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (hermit @ Jun 22 2010, 10:31 PM) *
Also, what if the sibling is really sexy?

Cold showers, my friend. Cold showers.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lucyfersam
post Jun 22 2010, 10:05 PM
Post #58


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 29-July 03
Member No.: 5,137



QUOTE (martian_bob @ Jun 22 2010, 04:00 PM) *
So here's the problem, and an interesting distinction between "genetic disease" and "genetic abnormality". Just because you're not passing on any of your own genetic baggage doesn't mean a) your progeny won't spontaneously develop their own genetic baggage, and b) wide-scale genetic catastrophes caused by inbreeding will be avoided.

Let's posit a medical black box by which any known or possible pathogenic genetic anomaly could be cleansed from a genome. This will eliminate all of the diseases we think of as inherited (or germline) diseases, like cystic fibrosis. This process can't stop any disease caused by a new (or de novo) mutation, however, like certain forms of ataxia, certain cancers, and Liddle's disease. De novo mutation has also been cited as a possible cause for autism.

And that's just the problems with normal, non-incestuous reproduction. As I said before, the real problem with inbreeding, especially with a species as (relatively) genetically "brittle" as homo sapiens, is that our black box wouldn't pick up any problems imposed by systematic genetic drift caused by inbreeding until the genome was beyond repair. Take inbred dogs, for example. Their problems aren't even pathogenic, for the most part - a weird-looking stupid dog with a bad temper produced by generations of inbreeding doesn't have any genetic disease, it's just the victim of artificial selection.


This is actually not only an argument against inbreeding, it is also an argument against complete elimination of genetic diseases and abnormalities. The further we reduce the genome variability, the more difficult it is to adapt to problems arising from any number of sources. If the de novo mutations are the only thing selection can act on, your species has a huge problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 22 2010, 10:11 PM
Post #59


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (Lucyfersam @ Jun 22 2010, 11:05 PM) *
This is actually not only an argument against inbreeding, it is also an argument against complete elimination of genetic diseases and abnormalities. The further we reduce the genome variability, the more difficult it is to adapt to problems arising from any number of sources. If the de novo mutations are the only thing selection can act on, your species has a huge problem.

Yup. Two words - banana blight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 22 2010, 10:28 PM
Post #60


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



The genetics section of Augmentation is, as far as I can tell, early 90's genetics scifi (body horror trope). It's wrong in it's basic assumptions, and takes them in directions that make the mutant baby jebus cry.

Similar to the thread running right now on SR Space, would you start one on how genetics should be done using our present knowledge of genetics? I want gene scifi that isn't 20 years old. Martian_Bob: your serve.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hermit
post Jun 22 2010, 10:29 PM
Post #61


The King In Yellow
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,922
Joined: 26-February 05
From: JWD
Member No.: 7,121



QUOTE
Let's posit a medical black box by which any known or possible pathogenic genetic anomaly could be cleansed from a genome. This will eliminate all of the diseases we think of as inherited (or germline) diseases, like cystic fibrosis. This process can't stop any disease caused by a new (or de novo) mutation, however, like certain forms of ataxia, certain cancers, and Liddle's disease. De novo mutation has also been cited as a possible cause for autism.

Genetics don't work as easy, though. A mutation may have positive and negative effects, or may express a genetic disease in one sex but not the other. A disease may be caused by introns or triggered by environmental circumstances. Not every inherited disease is as dependable as Huntington's.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 22 2010, 10:43 PM
Post #62


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (hermit @ Jun 22 2010, 11:29 PM) *
Genetics don't work as easy, though. A mutation may have positive and negative effects, or may express a genetic disease in one sex but not the other. A disease may be caused by introns or triggered by environmental circumstances. Not every inherited disease is as dependable as Huntington's.

That's why I called it a black box - it's a rhetorical device used to make a point, not an actual solution. I know that genetic diseases are much more involved than that, I'm currently a postdoc working in a molecular pathology lab at Columbia University studying the genetic causes of some neurodegenerative diseases.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hermit
post Jun 22 2010, 10:51 PM
Post #63


The King In Yellow
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,922
Joined: 26-February 05
From: JWD
Member No.: 7,121



QUOTE
The genetics section of Augmentation is, as far as I can tell, early 90's genetics scifi (body horror trope). It's wrong in it's basic assumptions, and takes them in directions that make the mutant baby jebus cry.

Similar to the thread running right now on SR Space, would you start one on how genetics should be done using our present knowledge of genetics? I want gene scifi that isn't 20 years old. Martian_Bob: your serve.

Genetics in SR is presented as genetics is perceived by most people. I'm always amazed at 3what kind of ignorance there is among people. "I eat only organic food, because it is gene free!" "I do not want genes in my food!" "Genetic engineering will generate plant monsters AND THEY WILL RISE AGAINST US AND KILL US!"

It's the same with many things in SR, like computers (you can blow up shit by hacking!).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 22 2010, 10:52 PM
Post #64


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (SkepticInc @ Jun 22 2010, 11:28 PM) *
The genetics section of Augmentation is, as far as I can tell, early 90's genetics scifi (body horror trope). It's wrong in it's basic assumptions, and takes them in directions that make the mutant baby jebus cry.

Similar to the thread running right now on SR Space, would you start one on how genetics should be done using our present knowledge of genetics? I want gene scifi that isn't 20 years old. Martian_Bob: your serve.

The real issue isn't one of bad info, just one of scope. The idea of cleansing your genome of diseases would do a world of good for the human race, assuming it was of the magic-black-box type that only does good things and never makes anything bad ever happen ever. The issue, rather, was that the tech referenced in Augmentation was never designed to harden a genome against inbreeding. That's something that only generations of careful selection can accomplish.

As far as the progress of gene sci-fi goes, I think our big picture understanding hasn't changed enough to warrant a re-write, at least as far as Shadowrun is concerned. Don't get me wrong, the things we've learned have expanded our horizons greatly, but I don't know that the changes are on the level of things that your average player would really care about. I mean, if we're trying to get our science right, we need to start with the fact that any kind of large-scale genetic rewrite, even one taking a genome in a "better" direction, would be quite likely to kill you, and that's just no fun.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 23 2010, 12:06 AM
Post #65


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



Still nothing on the horizon for gene writing? I know retrovirus don't work, as they kill you dead with the cancer, but I was holding out hope that there was a somewhat reasonable future ahead a bit like GATTACA or something. If 90's gene scifi is as good as we get because it's simply unmanageable for the foreseeable future, then yea, no rewrite.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 23 2010, 12:31 AM
Post #66


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (SkepticInc @ Jun 23 2010, 01:06 AM) *
Still nothing on the horizon for gene writing? I know retrovirus don't work, as they kill you dead with the cancer, but I was holding out hope that there was a somewhat reasonable future ahead a bit like GATTACA or something. If 90's gene scifi is as good as we get because it's simply unmanageable for the foreseeable future, then yea, no rewrite.

Oh, don't get me wrong, there's all sorts of awesome going on in gene research, it's just a question of what would be of interest to gamers. For example, a recent advance in gene sequencing uses a nanoscale zero-mode waveguide to detect polymerase activity down to a volume of 20 zeptoliters.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 23 2010, 12:44 AM
Post #67


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



QUOTE (martian_bob @ Jun 23 2010, 01:31 AM) *
Oh, don't get me wrong, there's all sorts of awesome going on in gene research, it's just a question of what would be of interest to gamers. For example, a recent advance in gene sequencing uses a nanoscale zero-mode waveguide to detect polymerase activity down to a volume of 20 zeptoliters.


Please elaborate. That does sound wicked cool.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 23 2010, 12:45 AM
Post #68


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (SkepticInc @ Jun 23 2010, 01:44 AM) *
Please elaborate. That does sound wicked cool.

Single Molecule Real Time Sequencing
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 23 2010, 12:57 AM
Post #69


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



QUOTE (martian_bob @ Jun 23 2010, 01:45 AM) *


please continue.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 23 2010, 01:02 AM
Post #70


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



It's a link to the Wikipedia page.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 23 2010, 01:52 AM
Post #71


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



Is it really SMRT? I'm having a Homer moment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lucyfersam
post Jun 23 2010, 01:57 AM
Post #72


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 29-July 03
Member No.: 5,137



SR is also already incorperating some of the cooler genetic work going on today, in the form of "soft" nanites. These are basically using genetic code to design and instruct a biological base nanite to perform a set task. Genetic engineering on that scale is a whole lot easier than doing so on a human scale (and hey, eventually may be able to be used to do some work on the human scale). On the whole I think SRs genetech is pretty reasonable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
martian_bob
post Jun 23 2010, 02:01 AM
Post #73


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 17
Joined: 4-June 10
Member No.: 18,657



QUOTE (SkepticInc @ Jun 23 2010, 02:52 AM) *
Is it really SMRT? I'm having a Homer moment.

Yes, it really is SMRT.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SkepticInc
post Jun 23 2010, 02:03 AM
Post #74


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 376
Joined: 20-June 10
From: Nerva L3 Station
Member No.: 18,735



Genetic infusions? I mean, I like the as a tool, but I don't think the science behind it can be very sound. The leonization/revitalization stuff is interesting, but it feels like it's artificially limited to dodge the issues we are tackling in this thread.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Lucyfersam
post Jun 23 2010, 02:13 AM
Post #75


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 29-July 03
Member No.: 5,137



QUOTE (SkepticInc @ Jun 22 2010, 08:03 PM) *
Genetic infusions? I mean, I like the as a tool, but I don't think the science behind it can be very sound. The leonization/revitalization stuff is interesting, but it feels like it's artificially limited to dodge the issues we are tackling in this thread.


I can't say as I particularly worry about the science behind SR being that sound, as long as the ideas are fun to play with and not so utterly absurd as to break the suspension of disbelief (or at least if they are that they get put under Magic rather than Science as that's what Magic is for).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 5th June 2025 - 11:40 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.