Mankind continues to learn nothing from science fiction

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**reds8n**

...errmmm.

FBI Finds Bucket of Heads, Cooler of Penises, Sewn 'Frankenstein' Corpse at Body Donation Center

**Not Online!!!**

reds8n wrote:

...errmmm.

FBI Finds Bucket of Heads, Cooler of Penises, Sewn 'Frankenstein' Corpse at Body Donation Center

If this is supposed to be a joke, feth that guy.
If this is indeed a attempt at creating an functioning Frankenstein, Feth THAT GUY!

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also Suppoesed free cremation?
This is disgusting and revolting.

**Just Tony**

Given that the usual bust of a mortuary involves... intimacy, I'd say this was not as bad as it could have been.

**Grey Templar**

Just Tony wrote:
Given that the usual bust of a mortuary involves... intimacy, I'd say this was not as bad as it could have been.

I wouldn't rule that out just yet, given the cooler of ding-dongs they found.

**reds8n**

Skaven on their way then

**LordofHats**

reds8n wrote:

...errmmm.

FBI Finds Bucket of Heads, Cooler of Penises, Sewn 'Frankenstein' Corpse at Body Donation Center

There's literally a Law and Order episode that is this exact situation holy gak XD

**BaronIveagh**

LordofHats wrote:
reds8n wrote:

...errmmm.

FBI Finds Bucket of Heads, Cooler of Penises, Sewn 'Frankenstein' Corpse at Body Donation Center

There's literally a Law and Order episode that is this exact situation holy gak XD

But was there a rooftop lightening rod?

**greatbigtree**

Re: Skaven

There have been times in my life where I would have opposed this in any way shape or form. And other times I would have celebrated this as an advance for living humans.

I now have a sense of dreadful inevitability. I am aware that I would do anything in my power to prolong my existence to continue providing for my family, and to prolong the lives of my loved ones so that they can one day have families of their own.

And I eat meat. I kill (by proxy) so that I can eat things that I like, rather than subsist on other sources that I could survive on. I imagine that, since humans *can* survive without a pancreas, that other animals could too. This could even be a “vestigial” organ the host has no use for, similar to a tumor. A needless growth that just takes nutrients from the otherwise healthy host.

I also put little faith in slippery slope arguments. What’s to stop us from growing humans simply to harvest organs? The same thing that hopefully stops us from harvesting organs from live humans today.

Financially, raising a Pig to adulthood for slaughter (and harvest) would be astronomically cheaper than something like long term dialysis. Liver cancer? Treatment for years, or plug in a new part? Degenerative eye disease? Jeepers, creepers, where’d’ja get those peepers? Eye-mart. That’s where.

It seems to somehow degrade the dignity of humanity. I can’t quite put my finger on it.

It is such a pragmatic solution, it seems unavoidable. What is the life of a rat or pig compared to that of a human’s? We kill for food, wouldn’t a life saving organ be more reason? Aren’t we all (species) something like over 90% the same DNA? Is there a meaningful difference between a couple percentage points?

Yet it still doesn’t feel right. Perhaps it’s morally and ethically neutral, relative to current practices. Neither good nor bad, just different? I wonder at what cost we seek “immortality”, and then I wonder if there is a (moral / ethical) cost at all?

**nareik**

Pigheartboy. Anyone remember that?

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

**Grey Templar**

greatbigtree wrote:

I also put little faith in slippery slope arguments. What’s to stop us from growing humans simply to harvest organs? The same thing that hopefully stops us from harvesting organs from live humans today.

That exact thing happens today. There are plenty of people who have had the unfortunate experience of waking up after a bender to find their kidneys are gone. There is a huge black market for human organs.

**Not Online!!!**

Grey Templar wrote:
greatbigtree wrote:

I also put little faith in slippery slope arguments. What’s to stop us from growing humans simply to harvest organs? The same thing that hopefully stops us from harvesting organs from live humans today.

That exact thing happens today. There are plenty of people who have had the unfortunate experience of waking up after a bender to find their kidneys are gone. There is a huge black market for human organs.

indeed, it is allready a rather large industry, and as much as certain people belive a slippery slope is a fallacy not an argument, the issue is that this is completely relevant question itself.
Most people that tend to think Slippery Slope is a fallacy also tend to belive that utilitarism is a great philosophy of ethics. Which is basically just denial of an agument to be had.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Are there really plenty of people?

Or plenty of urban legends? Because extracting a kidney is difficult. Extracting a kidney so it can feasibly be transplanted into another is more difficult still. Doing so anywhere but a proper hospital with proper lighting and in such a way that the unwilling donor actually wakes up? Really?

Are people selling their organs willingly? Again, there's reports. But I'd want to check sources etc before saying 'plenty of people are'.

**Not Online!!!**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Are there really plenty of people?

Or plenty of urban legends? Because extracting a kidney is difficult. Extracting a kidney so it can feasibly be transplanted into another is more difficult still. Doing so anywhere but a proper hospital with proper lighting and in such a way that the unwilling donor actually wakes up? Really?

Are people selling their organs willingly? Again, there's reports. But I'd want to check sources etc before saying 'plenty of people are'.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_harvesting_from_Falun_Gong_practitioners_in_China
whilest normally not a fan of wikipedia, quite a lot of nice references to be found there.

You were saying?

**Crispy78**

That's people being executed to harvest organs from. While obvioulsy repellent, that's not people 'waking up after a bender to find their kidneys are gone'. The latter I believe is an urban myth.

**Not Online!!!**

Crispy78 wrote:
That's people being executed to harvest organs from. While obvioulsy repellent, that's not people 'waking up after a bender to find their kidneys are gone'. The latter I believe is an urban myth.

Again, if a state does so, in order to get money, do you think it would not happen?

**greatbigtree**

For the record, I associate myself with being Pragmatic, rather than Utilitarian. Amongst other things, Pragmatists will take a risk on a potential benefit, rather than needing proof that an activity is likely to produce something useful.

Given the death penalty is fairly common in some parts of the world (hearsay evidence: in China, a group was found guilty of significant theft and publicly executed) it seems more likely that persons being executed for crimes have their organs harvested “for the greater good” since they clearly don’t need them anymore.

That’s a different thing to being executed (without being guilty of a crime) for the purpose of harvesting organs.

In either case, this is not a case of slippery slope. That’s a case of someone willing to murder a living human, then harvesting the by-product of that murder. In Canada, for example, we do not have a death penalty for any crime (that I’m aware of) and so I have no concern that living beings will be grown for the express purpose of organ harvest.

However, not everywhere is Canada. Some places are very different regarding human rights and what-have-you. Which brings me back to a sense of inevitability. Some places will take the risks, and develop the technology. At which point we buy from “over there” or we produce locally.

Edit: To be clear, I don’t think a person deserves to be executed for their beliefs. But that’s Not-Canada. Again, in other locales if something is punishable by death, harvesting the organs is (darkly) pragmatic. If you’re going to kill something, best to make use of it as fully as possible.

**Kilkrazy**

Larry Niven wrote a number of short stories on the theme of organ transplantation.

**Grey Templar**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Are there really plenty of people?

Or plenty of urban legends? Because extracting a kidney is difficult. Extracting a kidney so it can feasibly be transplanted into another is more difficult still. Doing so anywhere but a proper hospital with proper lighting and in such a way that the unwilling donor actually wakes up? Really?

Are people selling their organs willingly? Again, there's reports. But I'd want to check sources etc before saying 'plenty of people are'.

Of course its not the safest or most reliable way to harvest a kidney, and a lot could go wrong. But if you've got some rich client who is dying and #1000 on the waitlist, that person is probably willing to take the risk of a bad kidney. Plus its cash up front and if the person dies its not like they can hold you responsible.

But kidney transport isn't that difficult. Its a simpler organ to harvest.

https://www.acamstoday.org/organ-trafficking-the-unseen-form-of-human-trafficking/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/27/kidney-trade-illegal-operations-who

https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/12/06-039370/en/

Of course the bulk of these harvested organs are willingly sold by their original owners, but if you are buying kidneys from people for $5000 and selling them for $200k its not a stretch to simply save yourself another $5000 and forcibly take it from someone. And if one of these 'doners' is also being trafficked well thats just as bad as a random abduction.

**Cronch**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

The Rich will do whatever they want anyway, as they always did. Controlling a market, putting proper laws in place at least ensures us disposables have access to it too.

**Not Online!!!**

Cronch wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

The Rich will do whatever they want anyway, as they always did. Controlling a market, putting proper laws in place at least ensures us disposables have access to it too.

"The only real power comes out of a long rifle."
Money is no freepass for amaglation of power.
Piss off the lower class and it's agitators enough and you get a bullet between the eyes.

**Overread**

Not Online!!! wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

The Rich will do whatever they want anyway, as they always did. Controlling a market, putting proper laws in place at least ensures us disposables have access to it too.

"The only real power comes out of a long rifle."
Money is no freepass for amaglation of power.
Piss off the lower class and it's agitators enough and you get a bullet between the eyes.

No no you've got it wrong - money is no freepass for innate breeding and the lower classes, well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tXBC-71aZs

**Not Online!!!**

Overread wrote:
Not Online!!! wrote:
Cronch wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

The Rich will do whatever they want anyway, as they always did. Controlling a market, putting proper laws in place at least ensures us disposables have access to it too.

"The only real power comes out of a long rifle."
Money is no freepass for amaglation of power.
Piss off the lower class and it's agitators enough and you get a bullet between the eyes.

No no you've got it wrong - money is no freepass for innate breeding and the lower classes, well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tXBC-71aZs

good one, i saw that some time ago actually.
Altough i prefer that :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_VFKlWtknY

**Albino Squirrel**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

But if reality has taught us anything, the wealthy subsidize the development of any new kind of technology and fund it's improvement so that the cost eventually comes down enough to be affordable for many more people. Do only wealthy people drive cars? Do only wealthy people have cellular phones? Do only rich people have access to MRI machines?

**Not Online!!!**

Albino Squirrel wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
My fear on 'Organs To Order' is that it can all too easily become the preserve of the already wealthy.

If Sci-Fi has taught us anything, that just worsens the 'Us and Them' divide, to the point where the wealthy become nigh on immortal, and everyone else is just temporary labour.

As a species, we're not even close to being morally equipped to deal with that.

Don't get me wrong. If an organ from a deceased person can prolong the life of someone otherwise critical ill? I'm all for it. But that's a whole different kettle of GMO Fish from 'Oh darling, don't forget to book in with the Doctor for your 10 year organ update'.

But if reality has taught us anything, the wealthy subsidize the development of any new kind of technology and fund it's improvement so that the cost eventually comes down enough to be affordable for many more people. Do only wealthy people drive cars? Do only wealthy people have cellular phones? Do only rich people have access to MRI machines?

Yes and yes.
Entirely depends on social security.
Take f.e. Cancer medication that is massively individualized nowadays.

**reds8n**

... you can see the UK is doing well currently

Spoiler:

uh huh.

Long as one proposes it modestly it's bound to be accepted.

**Ratius**

This kinda reads like science fiction.....

Russia will launch the world's first floating nuclear reactor and send it on an epic journey across the Arctic today, despite environmentalists warning of serious risks to the region.

Loaded with nuclear fuel, the Akademik Lomonosov will leave the Arctic port of Murmansk to begin its 5,000km voyage to northeastern Siberia.

Nuclear agency Rosatom says the reactor is a simpler alternative to building a conventional plant on ground that is frozen all year round, and it intends to sell such reactors abroad.

But environmental groups have long warned of the dangers of the project, dubbing it a potential "Chernobyl on ice" and a "nuclear Titanic".

A deadly explosion this month at a military testing site in Russia's far north, causing a radioactive surge, has prompted further concerns.

The reactor's trip is expected to last between four and six weeks, depending on the weather conditions and the amount of ice on the way.

AFP news agency
✔
@AFP
· 11h
Russia launches floating nuclear reactor in Arctic despite warnings.

Environmental groups dub it a potential "Chernobyl on ice" and a "nuclear Titanic"http://u.afp.com/J2iu

When it arrives in Pevek, a town of 5,000 in the Siberian region of Chukotka, it will replace a local nuclear plant and a closed coal plant.

It is due to go into operation by the end of year, mainly serving the region's oil platforms as Russia develops the exploitation of hydrocarbons in the Arctic.

Rashid Alimov, the head of the energy sector of Greenpeace Russia, said environmental groups had been critical of the idea of a floating reactor since the 1990s.

"Any nuclear power plant produces radioactive waste and can have an accident, but Akademik Lomonosov is additionally vulnerable to storms," he told AFP.

The float is towed by other vessels, making a collision during a storm more likely, he said.

Because Rosatom plans to store spent fuel onboard, Mr Alimov said "any accident involving this fuel might have a serious impact on the fragile environment of the Arctic".

He added that there is "no infrastructure for a nuclear clean up" in the region.

Global warming and melting ice has made the Northeast Passage, which connects the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific along Russia's northern coast, more accessible.

When AFP visited the Akademik Lomonosov in May 2018, it was a shabby brown colour. It has since been repainted in the red, white and blue of the Russian flag.

The vessel weighs 21,000 tons and has two reactors with a capacity of 35 megawatts each, close to that of those used by nuclear icebreakers.

It has a crew of 69 and travels at a speed of 3.5 to 4.5 knots.

Mr Alimov said the project was a missed opportunity as Chukotka, a region larger than Texas populated by only 50,000 people, "has a huge potential for the development of wind energy".

"A floating nuclear power plant is a too risky and too expensive way of producing electricity," he said.

The nuclear industry, seeking to reinvent itself in a gloomy market, is developing smaller, cheaper reactors to attract new customers.

They follow the examples of submarines, icebreakers and aircraft carriers, which have long used nuclear power, and are intended for isolated areas with little infrastructure.

**Nurglitch**

At least the UK no longer needs to deny incidents of cannibalism in the Royal Navy.

**reds8n**

reds8n wrote:
... you can see the UK is doing well currently

Spoiler:

uh huh.

Long as one proposes it modestly it's bound to be accepted.

well they would say that wouldn't they eh ?

..if it was White Castle then nobody'd bat an eyelid for sure but....

*disclaimer * I have eaten eaten at either chain.

and in other news :
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1165491692230721536

.@NASA is investigating what may be the first crime in outer space, with astronaut Anne McClain accused of identity theft and improperly accessing her estranged wife's private financial records while on the ISS http://u.afp.com/J2ds

So who had "criminal space lesbian" in their 2019 bingo then ?

**Just Tony**

reds8n wrote:
So who had "criminal space lesbian" in their 2019 bingo then ?

I've been trying to come up with a name for my newest musical project, and I now have one. You earn yourself an exalt.