The Orion's Arm Universe Project Forums





"Weeding" the Timeline & Early Timeline Contribution Guidelines?
#46
My (ongoing) PhD is in nanomedicine and my background is biology; IRL I'm hugely skeptical that we'll see significant human genetic engineering or the wilder aspects of pop-sci nanotech (at least in near-mid future sense). But OA is a transhumanist worldbuilding project. Alongside the commitment to plausibility is the assumption that technological progress will accelerate, largely due to AI and robotic automation.

I think we should be wary of treating OA (or any sci-fi for that matter) as some sort of future prediction project. It's not, it's for entertainment and interest. Obviously we want things to be realistic and plausible where possible but we have to remember that all fictional universes have some fundamental "what if..." assumptions baked in.

That aside I don't find genetic engineering in the early timeline totally implausible. We have minor tweaks (which could be anything) in the near future but the practice doesn't really take off until the 2100s when various advances in disparate fields come together to make phenotype modelling and total gene therapy possible. We could probably do with writing in some more "disasters", like tweaks with deleterious effects that don't become apparent until old age or generations later. Or genemod conflict disorders. But I'm not concerned about the trend overall.

If I have time later I'll post more detailed thoughts on the timeline.
OA Wish list:
  1. DNI
  2. Internal medical system
  3. A dormbot, because domestic chores suck!
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: "Weeding" the Timeline & Early Timeline Contribution Guidelines? - by Rynn - 10-06-2016, 07:25 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)