The Perfect Girl project is launched

[HandsInTheDark]

https://www.statnews.com/2016/05/13/harvard-meeting-synthetic-genome/

Yes, I know very well that's Perfect Girls are not remotely the stated goal, and that a ton of great stuff is going to come out of a project like this. I also know that creating synthetic human DNA (which is only under discussion now, not in progress) is only a tiny step towards creating an actual synthetic human.

But if I was around in 100 years to collect on the bet, I would be willing to gamble that the technology will be developed, and then misused by someone rich and unscrupulous to create women who look (and if possible via genetics, act) the way men want them to.

There will be no stopping this project, and once it advances into actual creation of custom designed humans, no stopping the misuses. I'm glad I won't be around to see where that leads.

It should provide awesome insights into curing many diseases, though...

 

[Ewobbit]

This is what happens when nerds don't watch movies or read comic books.

 

[lovecraft68]

Of course its always possible one of the people working on the project could decide a perfect woman would not tolerate sexist abusive demeaning men and be equipped to dispatch them to deserving deaths.

The feminist version of West World.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

This is what happens when nerds don't watch movies or read comic books.

As far as I can tell, nerds do nothing BUT fantasize about creating some variation of perfect females, for a very obvious and shallow definition of "perfect". Generally, it goes poorly, but the fact that it's mostly all morality plays doesn't seem to decrease interest.

From memory:

Galatea, greek myth. IIRC it went pretty well.
Metropolis, 1927. The robotic perfect woman turned out to have... issues.
Bride of Frankenstein, 1935. Arguably this didn't go so well either.
Stepford Wives, 1975. Didn't go very well.
Cool World, 1993. (I hate this movie). Don't think it ended well but mercifully I don't remember.
Anime - They're always happy sexbots as far as I know, but that's anime for you.
The theme pops up in sci fi writing as well, and is usually better handled. They are either kick ass heroines or unhappy sex toys.

Well, that's fantasy for you. None of it's real, of course. Except, google Roxxxy. Last I heard they hadn't produced any actual, sellable robots, but the technology is definitely feasible, if you don't demand a lot from your robotic lovers. 4,000 orders were placed according to Wikipedia. I'm going to be charitable and guess those were mostly novelty purchases.

My personal belief is that the AI approach is never going to be successful. By the time there's an AI complex enough to handle what men want from women, bio-engineering will produce the real thing.

For the record, the first sex with an online bot happened a couple decades ago. Someone tacked together an IRC script that was good at generating ambiguous and vague encouragements, and gave it a female name. Despite the fact that its responses were not much better than random, at least one guy got convinced it was female enough to jerk off at. I saw the transcript and it was a horrifying testament to how some guys can be delusional when it comes to sex.

 

[legerdemer]

Geeking out

The technology is pretty much here now. It's a matter of scaling it up, and dealing with the mistakes introduced by that scaling. The question of scale is more complicated by the fact that we have a large fraction of what we think may be "junk" DNA but may in fact have small but measurable significant effects. Or even large effects. Shortcuts to reduce the scaling problem would potentially run into introducing big unforeseen problems.

Cloning humans is officially illegal, but can be done now (like cloning Dolly the sheep, which happened nearly 20 years ago; in vitro fertilization is fairly close to cloning a human baby), and the newest methods to modify mammalian genomes are relatively easy, though may have side effects when a relatively large genome is the target. George Church, Craig Venter and company are not talking far-out science fiction. The ethics need to be thought out asap. The potential for good is huge (correcting genetic defects that would otherwise be lethal or crippling, for example the defined mutations that cause cystic fibrosis, and some of those that cause early onset of cancer, eventually Alzheimer's, and so on).

On the other hand, the potential to have a situation like Kazuo Ishiguro described in Never Let Me Go is also there (his book describes humans bred to be used as organ donors, then terminated as their "usefulness" is exceeded, and what might happen when they realize their "purpose").

Let's just say we live in very interesting times.

 

[R. Richard]

There is a story about an old man, a lifelong bachelor. He tells a friend, "I never got married, because I was looking for the perfect woman. Actually. I found her. Alas, she was looking for the perfect man."

 

[HandsInTheDark]

On the other hand, the potential to have a situation like Kazuo Ishiguro described in Never Let Me Go is also there (his book describes humans bred to be used as organ donors, then terminated as their "usefulness" is exceeded, and what might happen when they realize their "purpose").

Let's just say we live in very interesting times.

This. I started doing little thought experiments about what would happen when humanity has to ability to create designer humans, some years ago, as part of other fiction projects. Both times, even from different premises, I came to the conclusion that sex slaves were inevitable results. I mean we already have such slaves now, though it's illegal almost everywhere. But when you can custom make to order, in quantity... the "I made it, so it's mine to do with as I please" stance is going to be a terrifyingly strong legal argument. The scenarios are incredibly grim. We presumably will never be able to form adult bodies, or accelerate aging in any positive way, so you'll have the rich creating sex slaves for their children, etc. Really chilling.

That's the tip of the iceberg. Sex slaves would be of course sterile (females without periods would be high on the list, inevitably), but improved humans of other sorts wouldn't have to be. So do you create something better than you with the potential to reproduce, creating a race that's simply superior? Would that race want a lot of ugly/slow/stupid/unhealthy ordinary humans around? Evolution sucks when you're on the losing end. Cue every X-man movie ever, except instead of impossible mutant powers we'll have actual improvements.

Or do you make any improved humans sterile, too? Sounds like a human rights violation. Oh, they aren't "really" human? What's your criteria for human, then? This is an instant quagmire. We struggle with the definition of what's human now - that's the core of the abortion debate. As intense as that debate is, it will be far more difficult to define "human" when you're discussing human creatures who can supplant homo oldfashionedus.

I second the call for ethical review, but there's no real hope such review will change things. There are plenty of people who are convinced abortion is the extermination of human life (and genetically there's no other way to view it). That didn't stop it from becoming widespread. Custom humans will be far more seductive (no pun intended) because the business will be worth trillions to those who own the technology. At that economic level, you simply buy politicians in some country and you're off and running; the populace can howl all it wants. Can you imagine the backroom deals? "Back us and you'll get five million for your campaign now... and a hot little sex slave in, say, 16 years. Sign here."

I don't mean to be all gloom and doom. Vast good will come out of a full understanding of the effects of the human genome. And it might indeed force people to decide once and for all what a human being is.

But once we fully understand the genome and what it does, nothing will stop people from researching the rest of the puzzle and creating human life, no matter what the laws and ethicists may say.

 

[Handley_Page]

This is what happens when nerds don't watch movies or read comic books.

Well Kelly Brock was as near a perfect specimen as one might hope for.
Pre-Zero hour went clean over my head; was that a comic ?

Of course its always possible one of the people working on the project could decide a perfect woman would not tolerate sexist abusive demeaning men and be equipped to dispatch them to deserving deaths.

The feminist version of West World.

Oh how true.

The technology is pretty much here now. It's a matter of scaling it up, and dealing with the mistakes introduced by that scaling. The question of scale is more complicated by the fact that we have a large fraction of what we think may be "junk" DNA but may in fact have small but measurable significant effects. Or even large effects. Shortcuts to reduce the scaling problem would potentially run into introducing big unforeseen problems.

Cloning humans is officially illegal, but can be done now (like cloning Dolly the sheep, which happened nearly 20 years ago; in vitro fertilization is fairly close to cloning a human baby), and the newest methods to modify mammalian genomes are relatively easy, though may have side effects when a relatively large genome is the target. George Church, Craig Venter and company are not talking far-out science fiction. The ethics need to be thought out asap. The potential for good is huge (correcting genetic defects that would otherwise be lethal or crippling, for example the defined mutations that cause cystic fibrosis, and some of those that cause early onset of cancer, eventually Alzheimer's, and so on).

On the other hand, the potential to have a situation like Kazuo Ishiguro described in Never Let Me Go is also there (his book describes humans bred to be used as organ donors, then terminated as their "usefulness" is exceeded, and what might happen when they realize their "purpose").

Let's just say we live in very interesting times.

I suspect we may need to actually implement the three or four Laws of Robotics.
Asimov postulate the 3, but someone realised that it's incomplete and added a forth which I cannot remember.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

I suspect we may need to actually implement the three or four Laws of Robotics.
Asimov postulate the 3, but someone realised that it's incomplete and added a forth which I cannot remember.

This is biology, not computer software. You'll never breed rule-breaking out of human DNA and still have anything resembling a human, and I suspect it would be a mistake to try. Humanity doesn't lack for bad rule sets.

Besides, if you're even thinking of programming behaviour into DNA like that (assuming it's possible - I don't know) you're on the exact slippery slope I'm worried about. When humans can build behaviours, they will build behaviors that please whoever's building. Even tossing aside the obvious point of beautiful women who always want sex and how devaluing that is... once humans get their hands on the reins of other humans, history shows it often goes poorly. Imagine submissiveness can be coded into people. Can you imagine how abusable that is going to be? Historically, slaves have at least had a shot of throwing off slavery. What if they literally cannot even try?

legerdemer, you seem to have some amount of training here. Do we have any handle on how much of human behaviour is genetic, vs learned? Do we have even the faintest idea how much behaviour is dictated by our makeup?

 

[Ewobbit]

~snip~
Pre-Zero hour went clean over my head; was that a comic ?

Les-oops. "Zero Hour" was DC's attempt to clean up the mess they had made with alternate realities and etc. After that, everything in DC canon was pretty much "Pre-Zero Hour" or "Post-Zero Hour".

The specific character I was linked to was "Rainbow Girl", usually listed in the top ten worst super hero lists. To the best of my knowledge, she only appeared in a couple of episode and only the most rabid DC fanbois even know who she is. Her superpower was being able to alter people's emotions. Her weakness was that her own emotions were out of control. Those that know of her usually refer to her as "PMS girl".

It's been awhile, but as best I can recall, she stopped by to help out on her way to be a fashion model.

But, she does usually rank a little higher than "Matter Eater Lad" with the power to eat any sort of matter (including Superman). So, like the same powers as every teenage boy ever.

 

[astuffedshirt_perv]

This. I started doing little thought experiments ...I came to the conclusion that sex slaves were inevitable results...We presumably will never be able to form adult bodies, or accelerate aging in any positive way, so you'll have the rich creating sex slaves for their children, etc.

Presuming that becomes true--sex slavery as a legal option for humans--it is difficult to imagine the costs of raising a baby for 18? years to be worth it. Why not just cull the herds, perform the requisite surgeries and avoid all the hassles of waiting.

Further, the trend of civilization has been to expand the definition of "human" and therefore expand those entitled to rights, not restrict it. People today are agitating for animal rights, difficult to see regression in that area.

More likely this technology would be a boon to parents, avoiding a host of heartbreaking uncertainties that come with "organic" reproduction.

 

[lovecraft68]

Hmmm, have a couple of fans of the ladies here.

We have the OP, a supporter of legalized rape and now stuffed shirt perv. Take a look at his sig, where he has won an 'award' from me.

That 'award' was given based on this idea of his in story ideas:

A singer is brutally throat fucked, so bad that her voice changes(he leaves out this would be due to severe swelling and bruising of the throat) and somehow....she can sing better.

So now she goes back to the guy and begs to be brutally skull fucked again!

Awesome! I can just imagine what the idea of the perfect woman would be to these stellar supporters of women's rights.

Credit where its due though, its a neat trick to type with hooves.

Couple of woman haters drooling over the thought of genetically created female slaves.

Times like this remind me of why both my daughters were taught self defense and how to shoot.

 

[loquere]

Deleted

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Presuming that becomes true--sex slavery as a legal option for humans--it is difficult to imagine the costs of raising a baby for 18? years to be worth it. Why not just cull the herds, perform the requisite surgeries and avoid all the hassles of waiting.

Without getting into how chilling your statement is, surgery just gets you a certain shape and no guarantee of keeping it. Culling the herd... I'm not even going to ask what that means. None of that is going to be the equivalent of custom designing sex toys to your specifications and all of it has the downside of requiring changes in people who might not be up for those changes.

Anyway, I didn't start this thread with the intention of exploring the most efficient way to enslave members of my own species. I'm just pointing out we are on the cusp of developing another technology with really disturbing potential.

Further, the trend of civilization has been to expand the definition of "human" and therefore expand those entitled to rights, not restrict it. People today are agitating for animal rights, difficult to see regression in that area.

I don't see that. It's been willing to expand the definition of "worthwhile human" to other races, women, etc. The only recent change in the actual definition of humanity seems to have been formally ruling that unborn children are insufficiently human to warrant legal protection below a certain age. That's not a more inclusive definition to my mind. We have made progress in seeing the mentally ill as actual humans, though. Well, until it comes time for funding their care, anyway...

 

[legerdemer]

....
legerdemer, you seem to have some amount of training here. Do we have any handle on how much of human behaviour is genetic, vs learned? Do we have even the faintest idea how much behaviour is dictated by our makeup?

The jury is still out on the nature vs nurture question. It is clear from studies of twins that some aspects of behavior are genetically determined, and it is equally clear that environment and diet and exposure to diseases etc. have a large influence as well. We now know that the environment can affect whether, when and how much our genes respond (this is called epigenetics). But we'll probably know a heck of a lot more in the next 10-20 years - we're now in a position to take huge steps in learning about the brain and how it really works.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Les-oops. "Zero Hour" was DC's attempt to clean up the mess they had made with alternate realities and etc. After that, everything in DC canon was pretty much "Pre-Zero Hour" or "Post-Zero Hour".

The specific character I was linked to was "Rainbow Girl", usually listed in the top ten worst super hero lists. To the best of my knowledge, she only appeared in a couple of episode and only the most rabid DC fanbois even know who she is. Her superpower was being able to alter people's emotions. Her weakness was that her own emotions were out of control. Those that know of her usually refer to her as "PMS girl".

It's been awhile, but as best I can recall, she stopped by to help out on her way to be a fashion model.

But, she does usually rank a little higher than "Matter Eater Lad" with the power to eat any sort of matter (including Superman). So, like the same powers as every teenage boy ever.

There is a character named Saturn Girl who has similar powers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_Girl

 

[Zeb_Carter]

As far as I can tell, nerds do nothing BUT fantasize about creating some variation of perfect females, for a very obvious and shallow definition of "perfect". Generally, it goes poorly, but the fact that it's mostly all morality plays doesn't seem to decrease interest.

From memory:

Galatea, greek myth. IIRC it went pretty well.
Metropolis, 1927. The robotic perfect woman turned out to have... issues.
Bride of Frankenstein, 1935. Arguably this didn't go so well either.
Stepford Wives, 1975. Didn't go very well.
Cool World, 1993. (I hate this movie). Don't think it ended well but mercifully I don't remember.
Anime - They're always happy sexbots as far as I know, but that's anime for you.
The theme pops up in sci fi writing as well, and is usually better handled. They are either kick ass heroines or unhappy sex toys.

Well, that's fantasy for you. None of it's real, of course. Except, google Roxxxy. Last I heard they hadn't produced any actual, sellable robots, but the technology is definitely feasible, if you don't demand a lot from your robotic lovers. 4,000 orders were placed according to Wikipedia. I'm going to be charitable and guess those were mostly novelty purchases.

My personal belief is that the AI approach is never going to be successful. By the time there's an AI complex enough to handle what men want from women, bio-engineering will produce the real thing.

For the record, the first sex with an online bot happened a couple decades ago. Someone tacked together an IRC script that was good at generating ambiguous and vague encouragements, and gave it a female name. Despite the fact that its responses were not much better than random, at least one guy got convinced it was female enough to jerk off at. I saw the transcript and it was a horrifying testament to how some guys can be delusional when it comes to sex.

You forgot the best movie ever about creating the perfect woman...

Weird Science (1985) Two high school nerds attempt to create the perfect woman, but she turns out to be more than that.

Oops...I guess Ewobbit kinda mentioned it indirectly via a link.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Here is an effort I have described to make the perfect woman:https://www.literotica.com/s/yvette-the-amorous-robot

 

[Hypoxia]

Factory-farming genetically-modified brainwashed sterile Azis for slavery is unlikely to be economically viable anytime soon. For slavery (sexual or otherwise) it's YGBM (You Gotta Believe Me) mindcontrol technology that's key -- when They know which of your buttons to push, you're toast.

 

[Ewobbit]

Maybe I should have chosen the screen name "Glitch". Of all the symptoms, I think my memory issues bug me the most.

Any rate, I've been thinking about this thread and it seems like I recall a sci-fi story. Parts of it at least. I think it was clones rather than genetic tinkering. However, they had somehow managed to "speed grow" entire human bodies for the purpose of doing brain transplants as the latest "immortality". Meanwhile a "more reputable" competitor was only growing parts. For example, the heart that a person needed and so on.

At any rate, as I recall the author wrote it so that they would "decant" the body about a year before it was needed and put them through exercise classes. But, they carefully didn't have them do any other kind of class. I believe the phrase used was "throwaway brain".

Naturally, there was a sideline super soldier project (isn't there always?) and a... *ahem*... well, let's just say that it was pointed out that they looked for the "seal of virginity" on most of their "client's merchandise".

I keep thinking Phillip K. Dick or maybe Lois McMaster Bujold, but I can't be certain.

Anyway, what do I need a younger body for? I'm bald, chubby, and toothless. If youth is sexy, all I need is some pampers and I've got it in spades. Yeah, baby.

At any rate, I'm probably biased. Many, many blue moons ago, a couple of kids played Doctor Frankenstein and whoopsied and here I be. She had the alternative to have me sliced up in chunks and pulled out of her, but she didn't. Instead, she stuck me in a cardboard box with "Free to a Good Home" on the side and the rest is history. I guess that's why being called a "bastard" and other names doesn't bother me much. Technically, they are true.

But, whether it's because two snot nosed kids bumped uglies or their mother was a test tube and their father was a knife, so long as they are treated like people, I just don't get the foorahrah.

But, eh. You know. Haters got to have something to hate. Be it skin color. Shape of the eyes. Which god is believed in. Whether they can write their name in the snow as they pee without moving their legs. How they got onto this carnival ride we call Earth. Whatever.

But, according to lore, the genie never wants to go back in the bottle.

Edit to Add: Oh, and Boxlicker. As I recall Saturn Girl sat on the panel that rejected Rainbow Girl. But, everyone they rejected got a nifty flying belt for a consolation "thank you for applying" prize.

 

[astuffedshirt_perv]

I'm just pointing out we are on the cusp of developing another technology with really disturbing potential..

TL;DR I totally agree with HandsInTheDark that "we are on the cusp of developing another technology with really disturbing potential."

But I think that the ethical precipice will be crossed out of love, not lust.

Allowing slavery is all but inconceivable, even if they are non-sentient. As you point out, even the mentally infirm have rights.

I see it unfolding like this: A rich couple can't conceive, and the doctors say they have a technique. The procedure uses his and her genes, spliced to eliminate all the problems a fertilized egg could have. Who would deny a couple the joy of having a child? But while using this technique, you would want to eliminate disease, like Down's syndrome and birth defects. At that point you are tinkering, so why not tinker more? Make sure they don't have the gene for alcoholism, that they are immune to heart disease. Why not go further while you are making changes?

Out of the near infinity of possible (male) children you may conceive, various physical traits would likely fall out on a bell curve. Some would be average height, some taller, some shorter for example. Why not choose the mixture that yields a child of yours that is +5 standard deviations above your mean child? What about intelligence? Beauty? Athleticism? Green eyes? Once you start down tinkering, why stop?

Then rich parents will rationalize that since a "custom" child is still from their genes, it would be unfair to give their child anything but the best, and so more parents would do it.

And then a real class divide opens up: the "organic" kids vs the "custom" kids.

 

[legerdemer]

HandsInTheDark, why do you hate Cool World?

 

[Ewobbit]

~snip~

And then a real class divide opens up: the "organic" kids vs the "custom" kids.

Actually, I can tell you from painful experience just how this will go. Along about six or seven, the little snooty smartass will say something like; "My parents chose me, yours got stuck with you." And then get said smartass whupped by about five or six of the cornfed types in the bathroom topped with a "swirly".

 

[HandsInTheDark]

TL;DR I totally agree with HandsInTheDark that "we are on the cusp of developing another technology with really disturbing potential."

But I think that the ethical precipice will be crossed out of love, not lust.

Allowing slavery is all but inconceivable

It exists in the world today. It's been a feature of mankind for all of recorded history and only in the last 200 years as there been any persistent move at all to get rid of it anywhere. It's fairly widespread in America. You talk as if mankind is on some steady incline towards better and better ethics. It's not; there have been some overall improvements in some times and places, but plenty of falling back to the old ways. Google "human trafficking".

Artificially created life should, in theory, be as protected and free as the more organic version. But will it be? The fact that people aren't supposed to own other people is a relatively modern idea and was loosely based on the recent premise that as a God-created race we haven't got the right to claim ownership over what we didn't create. Well, that philosophy worked fine 150 years ago, but belief in that fundamental premise has waned, and it's not going to apply at all when humans are designing the whole newborn from the DNA and rNA up. In court is going to be "I designed this DNA. I paid for construction and 18 years of development, training and conditioning. What the HELL do you mean it's not mine to do with as I please? It's MY machine, and I'll use it as I like." The defense will be stuck with "well, it looks human and genetically it's very much like a human, except for that encoded serial number..."

Yeah. Of minor interest is the point that Anton LaVey, and if you don't know who he is you'll miss the point but you aren't missing much, was calling such created human slaves "An economic “godsend” which will allow everyone “power” over someone else. Polite, sophisticated, technologically feasible slavery..."

The point is there are people who will want this, and if they are rich enough they'll get it. Laws are inconveniences at a certain level.

Virtually any technology is abusable. Look at drugs. A fantastic boon to mankind - but there are people making their forture on addiction and the ruination of lives. Why would this be different?

 

[HandsInTheDark]

HandsInTheDark, why do you hate Cool World?

I sat through the entire movie (with a friend) waiting for something to happen. The cartoon creatures were boringly crude and vapid. The main female character didn't do a lot for me as a cartoon - I can never find cartoons erotic - and Kim Basinger, for all her pretty face and curves, seemed like a fish out of water in this movie; I thought her acting sucked. I don't recall a plot; it probably had one but it mattered so little it didn't stick.

I had the distinct impression that I was supposed to find the whole thing sexy as hell and totally, well, cool. Another friend of mine (not present) who was into drawing sexy cartoons thought it was the best movie in the history of whatever. Maybe you need to be deeply into porn/graphic arts to like it? I just remember resenting sitting through it and at the end feeling like there was NO payoff for my time.

I don't think I was alone. It got a 4% on Rotten Tomatoes, about the lowest score I've seen, other than Manos, which of course got a 0%. I found Manos more entertaining. It was completely awful but you never had any hopes for it, and at least you kept wondering how much lower it could go. Cool World lacked that kind of suspense.