Ziusudra / Nyx questions

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

You keep repeating this denial, but has anyone actually claimed that?

You keep saying that I'm wrong to say that there's a difference between the assembly of a bioroid brain and the growth of a child's.

I've said only that the brain seems to do *some* growth during the time in the tank; it doesn't need to recapitulate the entire zygote-to-adult ontogeny for parts of it to be usefully included.

Which makes it not the same as normal human development.

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

You keep saying that I'm wrong to say that there's a difference between the assembly of a bioroid brain and the growth of a child's.

Cites, please?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

Cites, please?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developmental_biology, TS76

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

You keep saying that I'm wrong to say that there's a difference between the assembly of a bioroid brain and the growth of a child's.

I meant, can you cite the posts where I allegedly keep saying the above?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

I meant, can you cite the posts where I allegedly keep saying the above?

I keep saying it, and you keep saying I'm wrong. What is it that's wrong then?

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I keep saying it, and you keep saying I'm wrong. What is it that's wrong then?

You've made some strong statements to the effect that bioroids are built in a way that excludes any natural processes of growth or development. I have disagreed and shown where parts of the text allow and parts support that some natural growth and development can and does occur.
I'm not disagreeing there's no difference, I'm disagreeing there's no common processes.


And I see that one of the stronger statements to which I replied has quietly vanished, so that's all I have to say about that.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

You've made some strong statements to the effect that bioroids are built in a way that excludes any natural processes of growth or development.

Well, I also tried to clarify and say that I didn't intend a strong technical meaning of "built" versus "grown". Your response about what the words literally mean is perplexing. If I clarify and say I didn't mean them literally, then why insist on literal meaning?

I meant as I've tried to clarify, that biogeneisis isn't biological development. They are very different. That differences extends to the way the brain comes about. In biogenesis it's constructed at full size by nanobots. In biological development it grows from a zygote (along with all other organs!). I don't think we can draw strong parallels between the processes or assume that the way they accomplish learning and memory is more than superficially similar.

I have disagreed and shown where parts of the text allow and parts support that some natural growth and development can and does occur.

Again I'm not saying that bioroids don't grow in a technical biological sense. I'm saying that they don't "grow up" in a colloquial sense. They don't undergo the same process of biological development that humans do.

I'm not disagreeing there's no difference, I'm disagreeing there's no common processes.

I'm not saying that there's no common processes. I'm saying that we can't assume that any aspect of development (other than the most basic functions of living organisms) are identical or even much similar.

Again, I think it's important that the bioroid brain is full sized when the bioroid is decanted and that no organs (including the brain) of the bioroid are the result of cell differentiation.

And I see that one of the stronger statements to which I replied has quietly vanished, so that's all I have to say about that.

I do get to edit my posts, and my intent is to communicate clearly. I'm not trying to vex you.

[jeff_wilson]

Okay, moving forward and recording for posterity, I'm going to address some of the specifics of this post without regard to previous ones in the thread if I can.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I meant as I've tried to clarify, that biogeneisis isn't biological development. They are very different. That differences extends to the way the brain comes about. In biogenesis it's constructed at full size by nanobots.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Again, I think it's important that the bioroid brain is full sized when the bioroid is decanted and that no organs (including the brain) of the bioroid are the result of cell differentiation.

I agree with the second part, but the first part makes stronger claims I don't agree with. IIRC, biogenesis is distinguished from tissue engineering by the use of nanobots, but that does not mean that everything is the product of nanobot action. For example, I do not recall that nanobots are able to build new cells from scratch in 2100, at best they can reconstitute them from parts. It's possible that in biogenesis as in cellular rejuvenation that the mitosis is assisted, supported, regulated, monitored, etc by nanobots, but relies up on the manipulated cells for the heavy lifting of replication.

If this is the case, then one can assemble immature brains by biogenesis and proceed to use the favorable learning properties of the child mind, and then by design or manipulation, the growth and learning are accelerated such that the brain and body have become fully adult over the months between awakening and release. But during this interval, the attested child development milestones can happen as described in the text.

If there is any textev that spells out "all bioroid parts are always built at full adult size", then I'll rethink my position, but I haven't seen one and if any topic readers have I will thank you to show it to me.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by jeff_wilson

If this is the case, then one can assemble immature brains by biogenesis and proceed to use the favorable learning properties of the child mind, and then by design or manipulation, the growth and learning are accelerated such that the brain and body have become fully adult over the months between awakening and release. But during this interval, the attested child development milestones can happen as described in the text.

Are you saying that a bioroid then starts with a single neuron and grows a brain from that? Then a entire simulated childhood gets played via VR on fast-forward?

[jeff_wilson]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Are you saying that a bioroid then starts with a single neuron and grows a brain from that?

No, but I suppose it could if for some reason you wanted to.

What I think could happen is that there's a substrate or a stratum laid out in the topological shape of the brain or other structure desired, and cells of the desired type are affixed to it and/or embedded in it by nanomachines, then their growth, duplication, and repair mechanisms are set to the desired stages and allowed to commence, filling in any gaps and extruding fine substructures, like a chia pet's earthy patch is seeded and grows a series of grass blades.

Once the structure is suitably complete and functional, the biogenesis process can be ended or paused, and the machine-assembled tissues can do whatever its made to do. If the structure is an immature but fast-maturing brain, it can begin to learn and grow new cells and add grooves and wrinkles with all the "implants" hooked up, and so on for a year or so, then the probes withdraw and the biogenesis process resumes and closes the skull over it or otherwise integrates it into the desired final configuration.