Cyborg Brain in a Box

Are we moving slightly closer to the sapient AI entities of science fiction? "A new type of computer that combines regular silicon-based hardware with human neurons is now available for purchase."

Computer That Combines Human Brain with Silicon

This "biological computer," the size of a shoebox, consists of neurons growing on a silicon chip that "sends electrical impulses to and from the neurons to train them to exhibit desired behaviors." The word "behaviors" carries connotations of actions resulting from choices, although I'm sure that's not what is meant. The cybernetic mini-brains don't have consciousness. The system's purpose is to "help researchers develop treatments for brain-related diseases." However, the article does allude to possible future ethical issues, in case the biological computer ever develops enough consciousness to suffer pain.

Or what if a "synthetic biological intelligence" becomes self-aware enough to realize it has a lifespan of only six months? At least, that's how long the neurons can be kept alive at present.

Here's an article analyzing some potential ethical challenges involved in creating "brain organoids." In particular, it addresses the difference between sentience (the capacity to feel sensations) and consciousness:

Playing Brains

Imagine a sapient organic computer system agitating for its rights -- e.g., to have a say in what experiments it's used for, to be protected from pain, for research into extending its lifespan, or maybe for decent working hours, time off, and intellectual enrichment to alleviate the tedium of existence confined to a lab.

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.

De-Extinction, Yes or No?

You've probably read about the recent alleged re-creation of dire wolves:

Dogs Who Birthed Dire Wolves

Colossal Biosciences claims "they have brought the Dire Wolf back from extinction with the birth of three Dire Wolves." In order to perform this feat, they went through the following steps -- "to extract and sequence DNA from two Dire Wolf Fossils, assemble ancient genomes from both, perform gene editing from their closest living relative (the Grey Wolf)." The embryos thus produced in vitro were implanted in dog surrogate mothers. Are these cubs really dire wolves, however, or merely "high-tech lookalikes" constructed by supplementing fragments of an extinct creature's DNA with genetic material from a closely related modern species? An article linked below points out that the alleged dire wolf puppies are in fact "genetically much closer to modern wolves than their prehistoric namesake."

Future projects under consideration include reviving the "Woolly Mammoth, the Dodo and the Tasmanian tiger."

One step toward breeding mammoths has actually occurred, the creation of an oxymoronic-sounding "woolly mouse":

Woolly Mouse

Projects such as these are regarded with skepticism by many experts on the same grounds as the "de-extinction" of dire wolves:

Can We Really Resurrect Extinct Animals?

Any such creatures won't really be resurrections of extinct species, but rather "hybrids, mosaics or functional stand-ins." Gene editing of this kind, though, does have potentially useful applications in preventing the further decline of endangered species and reviving bloodlines of nearly extinct creatures such as the northern white rhino.

Ethical considerations arise about lavishing resources on re-creation of extinct species rather than the conservation of still-living endangered animals. Another concern, if extinct species such as mammoths could be literally de-extincted and released into the wild, is how they would affect present-day ecosystems. The critical question is whether we use this technology "to heal broken ecosystems, to preserve the genetic legacy of vanishing species or simply to prove that we can."

Margaret L. Carter

Please explore love among the monsters at Carter's Crypt.