Organic Technology vs. Computerized Automation (split)

[bean (OP)]

Instead of Computerized automation I would rather see the introduction of organic technologies that allow for the construction of living parts that would not require maintenance or crew but would require the presence of "brains" organic components that control any living parts of the ship.
At low levels this would lead to hybrid ships that are mostly Human crewed but contain a few organic components
At high levels a race could move to having entirely organic ships that essentially become new species of organisms that serve what ever race created them.

Please don't.  "Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it.  See http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/BrainBugs.html, and scroll down to organic technology.
For one thing, the "organic" element would not add intelligence by definition.  Particularly if you're using remote control, computers can already do the job.  Also, organics are squishy, and they take lots of care.  Radiation is a big problem, particularly if nukes are involved.  Shielding humans is one thing, but the entire ship?
To put it simply, I wouldn't support putting squishy things (humans) on spacecraft if I wasn't a squishy thing.
Please don't go for this.

[Eseraith]

Please don't.   "Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it.   See hxxp: www. stardestroyer. net/Empire/Essays/BrainBugs. html, and scroll down to organic technology.
For one thing, the "organic" element would not add intelligence by definition.   Particularly if you're using remote control, computers can already do the job.   Also, organics are squishy, and they take lots of care.   Radiation is a big problem, particularly if nukes are involved.   Shielding humans is one thing, but the entire ship?
To put it simply, I wouldn't support putting squishy things (humans) on spacecraft if I wasn't a squishy thing.
Please don't go for this.

Read the article and point taken, I guess that hard science wasent really covered in my economics degree.

[TallTroll]

>> "Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it

You are a living contradiction of that statement. Despite Moores Law, it will be centuries before we can build a non-organic computer that can even approach the complexity of the human brain. Until very recently, a spider could produce stronger material by almost literally pulling it out of its' ass than we could manufacture using all our technology, and it's interesting to note that a lot of the new, stronger materials are in fact carbon based. Organic, in fact.

Organic tech is astonishingly powerful now, and we've barely scratched the surface. Sci-fi writers are terrible at getting technical details right, but there's nothing wrong with ascribing a high value to organic technology

[Gidoran]

While the human brain IS incredibly complex, you have to also understand how many different things the brain does at any given moment. It runs every tiny sub-component that makes up your body, while an inorganic computer can happily put all of its processing power behind a single task. And while neither is really significantly more resilient than the other, they both have different weaknesses and requirements.

Now, as an argument about 'biological automation'... That's kind of what we have going now. We use the crew to do certain tasks aboard a ship, like things that require intuition or fine-scale manipulation (because let's face it, the human hand is a fantastically designed manipulator), while for things like maintaining control over the reactors or plotting a course, or operating the weapon systems we have dedicated computers for each of those things. There really wouldn't be a significant advantage towards growing a brain to slot into a fighter instead of just putting a cockpit on it and letting a guy climb in. You'd still require the same life support systems, and if anything they'd have to be larger. The pilot can get out of his fighter, go take a bath and use the head, get some food, relax and then go to sleep. But a brain in a jar is stuck there running on what's effectively constant life support.

[bean (OP)]

>> "Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it

You are a living contradiction of that statement. Despite Moores Law, it will be centuries before we can build a non-organic computer that can even approach the complexity of the human brain. Until very recently, a spider could produce stronger material by almost literally pulling it out of its' ass than we could manufacture using all our technology, and it's interesting to note that a lot of the new, stronger materials are in fact carbon based. Organic, in fact.

Organic tech is astonishingly powerful now, and we've barely scratched the surface. Sci-fi writers are terrible at getting technical details right, but there's nothing wrong with ascribing a high value to organic technology

And my brain is worse at crunching numbers then the computer I'm sitting at.  Your point?
And you're misrepresenting my statements.  I was speaking of organic technology in the sense of alive, not of materials that are organic in the sense that they contain carbon.  None of your points deal with that concept.  At all.

While the human brain IS incredibly complex, you have to also understand how many different things the brain does at any given moment. It runs every tiny sub-component that makes up your body, while an inorganic computer can happily put all of its processing power behind a single task. And while neither is really significantly more resilient than the other, they both have different weaknesses and requirements.

I'd make the argument that the computer is more resilient, or at least easier to harden.  And I don't have to write letters to its family.

There really wouldn't be a significant advantage towards growing a brain to slot into a fighter instead of just putting a cockpit on it and letting a guy climb in. You'd still require the same life support systems, and if anything they'd have to be larger. The pilot can get out of his fighter, go take a bath and use the head, get some food, relax and then go to sleep. But a brain in a jar is stuck there running on what's effectively constant life support.

Not true at all.  The human is also on constant life support, and the rest of the body takes up quite a bit of energy.  On a fighter alone, it might be a dead heat.  When you consider support facilities on the carrier (which nobody ever does) the jar wins.

[Gidoran]

I meant that the jar's life support in this instance is stuck crammed on the fighter constantly, which would increase its non-combat mass. The Carrier is intended to have life support stuck on it all over for the base crew, so adding a little more for the fighter jocks isn't very significant. It can even be exactly the same as all the rest of the life support, which means supply is easier. But that brain in the jar is going to need special care compared to Mr. Ima Fighterjockson, and will haul it with it everywhere it goes.

Now, if the thing piloting the fighter is in a UAV pod stuck in the carrier, we're cooking with gas. You get the best of both worlds: You've cut out the cockpit and reduced the mass of the fighter, and you've made it truly disposable. You could even do a tech tree to make them better: Longer maximum control range (I'd assume if the fighter flies out of range you'd just stop being able to order it around), better transmission speed (Less time between issuing and order and the order taking place), and reduced mass of the system. It'd certainly let you design carriers that are a little more interesting than a couple of hangar decks, some engines, a big fuel tank and some magazines.

Edit: Posted and immediately realized I mistyped something. Derp.

[Mel Vixen]

Systemes that are "alive" have some other problems too, they can get sick (flue, cancer, parasits?) , they constantly change dimensions, they age and maybe even get pregnant. They can be moody and undeterministic, the reliability of every single ship/system is even in question in comparsion to good old Metal and silicon. You can mass produce Bolts and Nuts with reliable performance and dimensions but can you be sure that your ships Kidney works as good as other ships kidneys?

Speaking of which, production is also easier on the logistics. Setting up a CNC mill (or any other part of Machinery) to produce a different machine parts and then dozens per hour is way faster then ordering 40k new eyes for the use in the fleet. A eye needs time to grow and develop and integrating the new components to your ship might be a headache.


Some biological systems thought have value say Algae for crunching Co2 into food and Oxygen (and by expansion Hydroponics as crew recreation, spices and airfiltering).  

edit: The brainjar can, depending on task, be as small as a petridish if you use a rats brain or for the heck of it bees for stuff like Asteroid mining.

[TallTroll]

>> And my brain is worse at crunching numbers then the computer I'm sitting at

Nope. Your brain is vastly superior at crunching numbers compared to any existing computer. You don't automatically have concious access to those capabilities, but getting up, running around and playing catch is a monumental exercise in computation. IBM have apparently just won a contract to build a supercomputer with processing power perhaps comparable to the human brain, but it's going to weigh 200 tons, and need a medium sized power plant to run it. The human brain is around 2 kilos, and runs on yoghurt

>> I was speaking of organic technology in the sense of alive, not of materials that are organic in the sense that they contain carbon

"Alive" is a tricky concept, at best, and it's a a fallacy to try and separate the two. Carbons' unique properties make it perhaps the most versatile element in existence, and uniquely suited to supporting life, and all its' variations.

The great strength of organic systems is their adaptability. We have found life in the reactor vessels of nuclear power stations, living in hard vacuum on the Moon, and at crushing pressures at the bottom of the ocean floor, breathing sulphur and tolerating huge temperature gradients. "Organic" does not have to mean "squishy"  

[chrislocke2000]

I'm pretty happy about the idea of having super organic tech that can largely replicate inorganic tech. After all we already have the swarm and are happy with the current leap of faith around the physics of jump engines, shields and terraformers. Plus I really like the idea of having some cylon raider equivalents!

On the idea of automation I could see this as being a great tech line that can only be obtained through the salvage of a certain hostiles. This would work up from crew replacement, to full automation to included damage control and repairs. And at the end of it you could get basically cylon troops which would be substantially easier to shift around the galaxy.

[bean (OP)]

I meant that the jar's life support in this instance is stuck crammed on the fighter constantly, which would increase its non-combat mass. The Carrier is intended to have life support stuck on it all over for the base crew, so adding a little more for the fighter jocks isn't very significant. It can even be exactly the same as all the rest of the life support, which means supply is easier. But that brain in the jar is going to need special care compared to Mr. Ima Fighterjockson, and will haul it with it everywhere it goes.

Yes and no.  I don't see any significant increase in the mass of the fighter.  Particularly if the supplies on the fighter are consumable, and the carrier refuels it.  Plus, I see the pilot, cockpit, life support, and so on massing at least two tons.  Do you really think that the brain in a jar is that heavy.
As for marginal penalty on the carrier, a good realistic estimate for life support is around 5 tons/person.  That adds up, not to mention things like hanger bays.

Perhaps I should clairify my statement earlier, because some people don't seem to have understood it.
""Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it." was meant to be read as follows:
Organic technology referred to the use of living organisms to replicate high-energy technologies, such as those used in internal combustion engines, rockets, or in any application where a lack of reactivity is important.  It was not meant to refer to all technologies ever called organic, nor to situations like life support.  The "life as we know it" caveat was added to prevent people from using alien life in argument.

edit: The brainjar can, depending on task, be as small as a petridish if you use a rats brain or for the heck of it bees for stuff like Asteroid mining.

I think the intention was for human brains, not for any random brains you happen across.  Good point on manufacturing, though.

>> And my brain is worse at crunching numbers then the computer I'm sitting at

Nope. Your brain is vastly superior at crunching numbers compared to any existing computer. You don't automatically have concious access to those capabilities, but getting up, running around and playing catch is a monumental exercise in computation. IBM have apparently just won a contract to build a supercomputer with processing power perhaps comparable to the human brain, but it's going to weigh 200 tons, and need a medium sized power plant to run it. The human brain is around 2 kilos, and runs on yoghurt

And this proves what?  To put it more bluntly, my computer is better at solving orbital mechanics problems then my brain is.  Full stop.

"Alive" is a tricky concept, at best, and it's a a fallacy to try and separate the two. Carbons' unique properties make it perhaps the most versatile element in existence, and uniquely suited to supporting life, and all its' variations.

The great strength of organic systems is their adaptability. We have found life in the reactor vessels of nuclear power stations, living in hard vacuum on the Moon, and at crushing pressures at the bottom of the ocean floor, breathing sulphur and tolerating huge temperature gradients. "Organic" does not have to mean "squishy"  

That is not what I meant.  Living ships are always portrayed as some kind of organism, not a bunch of bacteria.  And organisms of that size are squishy.  Plus, find me an organism that routinely deals in pressures in the Megapascals, is grown to tolerances in a matter of days, and can use nuclear power as an energy source.  And I find it hard to believe that any rational person would consider carbon nanotubes or spider silk alive any more then a silicon chip is alive.

I'm pretty happy about the idea of having super organic tech that can largely replicate inorganic tech. After all we already have the swarm and are happy with the current leap of faith around the physics of jump engines, shields and terraformers. Plus I really like the idea of having some cylon raider equivalents!

On the idea of automation I could see this as being a great tech line that can only be obtained through the salvage of a certain hostiles. This would work up from crew replacement, to full automation to included damage control and repairs. And at the end of it you could get basically cylon troops which would be substantially easier to shift around the galaxy.

I know that we have the swarm.  The problem is that while I can accept that Steve probably didn't know better, I see no reason to encourage this foolishness.  Why couldn't the swarm be some sort of self-replicating machines instead of being alive?  The stats don't change, and it makes a lot more sense overall.  But allowing what you want would probably break the game.
Edit: The more I think about this, the better I like it.  In one of my games, I have a ship running around with captured components.  That works a lot better if they're crazy AI rather then organic.

[xeryon]

Without wading into the technology feasibility argument I really like the concept of diverging technical systems: one which moves toward robotics and another which moves towards biologics.  Both of which would require proper salvaging operations to learn the new tech fields associated.

I am particularly fond of the idea of self-healing craft.  I don't envision a flying squishy blob breathing and pooping but I do see possibilities for something built out of carbon composites and tended to by microorganisms that are able to patch up the damage while in flight.  Not really a full biological arrangement, but organic-assisted tech.

[TallTroll]

>> ""Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it." was meant to be read as follows:
>> Organic technology referred to the use of living organisms to replicate high-energy technologies

Living organisms can generate electric fields strong enough to stun or kill, generate temperatures comparable with the surface of the sun, generate light without heat and survive pressures of around 100 MPa. And all of that is just the result of blind random chance. With a bit of intelligent direction, I see no particular reason a "living spaceship" would be impossible in some dim and distant future.

>> And this proves what?  To put it more bluntly, my computer is better at solving orbital mechanics problems then my brain is.  Full stop.

I'll have to disagree with you there. We can't use a brain for solving any arbitrary problems we'd like yet, but if we *could* interface with it properly, any human brain would be very superior at solving orbital mechanics problems, or any other large scale numbercrunching, to any existing computer. To take a similar class of problem, human pilots are still very much better at flying than fully automated systems. We use computers for some simple, repetitive tasks like constantly adjusting trim in some modern combat aircraft, because that plays to the strength of computers, which is great. But the human is still flying it.

Look at the trouble we have getting computers to perform a very basic function like walking. So long as you don't have some condition that otherwise prevents you from walking, anyone can do it. After decades of research, and millions of dollars, Hondas Asimo has finally mastered walking up stairs. Nearly

>> Plus, find me an organism that routinely deals in pressures in the Megapascals, is grown to tolerances in a matter of days, and can use nuclear power as an energy source.  And I find it hard to believe that any rational person would consider carbon nanotubes or spider silk alive any more then a silicon chip is alive.

Any creature living full or part time at the bottom of the ocean experiences around 100 MPa of pressure, and for those that come up to the surface, they have to tolerate that pressure, and sea level pressure, in the same body. There are bacteria that "eat" uranium, because apparently they have managed to develop electrically conductive appendages

>> And I find it hard to believe that any rational person would consider carbon nanotubes or spider silk alive any more then a silicon chip is alive.

Neither nanotubes or spider silk are alive, but they rely on the magic carbon atom for their properties. Unless you're a pretty strict Cartesian Dualist, there's nothing remarkable about the components of life, of any sort. It's all in the arrangement, and carbon is just the most ridiculously versatile element. If you proposed an element with it's properties, you'd be ridiculed as a fantasist, yet there it is, being both a superconductor and an insulator etc.

>> Why couldn't the swarm be some sort of self-replicating machines instead of being alive?

Like, say... a carbon-based virus? Or a prion?  

[sloanjh]

Ummm guys?  Does it make sense to take this (biology vs. computer discussion) to a separate thread?  If one of the main posters says "yes" I'll go ahead and tease the previous posts out....

John

[Girlinhat]

I want to respond but this is an important upcoming feature thread that I don't want to derail further, so I'm going to suggest a split

[bean (OP)]

Without wading into the technology feasibility argument I really like the concept of diverging technical systems: one which moves toward robotics and another which moves towards biologics.  Both of which would require proper salvaging operations to learn the new tech fields associated.

I am particularly fond of the idea of self-healing craft.  I don't envision a flying squishy blob breathing and pooping but I do see possibilities for something built out of carbon composites and tended to by microorganisms that are able to patch up the damage while in flight.  Not really a full biological arrangement, but organic-assisted tech.

I have an answer for that one, too.  http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Myths/Nanotech.html
All of the issues with nanotech as manufacturing agent apply to microorganisms.  

>> ""Organic technology" will never work with life as we know it." was meant to be read as follows:
>> Organic technology referred to the use of living organisms to replicate high-energy technologies

Living organisms can generate electric fields strong enough to stun or kill, generate temperatures comparable with the surface of the sun, generate light without heat and survive pressures of around 100 MPa. And all of that is just the result of blind random chance. With a bit of intelligent direction, I see no particular reason a "living spaceship" would be impossible in some dim and distant future.

Temperatures comparable to the surface of the sun?  What organism does that?
And you obviously don't understand pressure to be making that claim.  The organism is at the same pressure throughout.  It's like the fact that you're under the equivalent of 10 meters of water right now in air pressure.  Does that mean that if I cut an outline of you, and extended a column of water 10 meters up on it, and set it on you, you'd be just fine?  If we put you on total liquid ventilation, we could put you at 100 MPa, too.  
And an electric eel is not that impressive as a user of electricity.

>> And this proves what?  To put it more bluntly, my computer is better at solving orbital mechanics problems then my brain is.  Full stop.

I'll have to disagree with you there. We can't use a brain for solving any arbitrary problems we'd like yet, but if we *could* interface with it properly, any human brain would be very superior at solving orbital mechanics problems, or any other large scale numbercrunching, to any existing computer. To take a similar class of problem, human pilots are still very much better at flying than fully automated systems. We use computers for some simple, repetitive tasks like constantly adjusting trim in some modern combat aircraft, because that plays to the strength of computers, which is great. But the human is still flying it.

Look at the trouble we have getting computers to perform a very basic function like walking. So long as you don't have some condition that otherwise prevents you from walking, anyone can do it. After decades of research, and millions of dollars, Hondas Asimo has finally mastered walking up stairs. Nearly

And I don't think we know enough about the human brain to say that.  Plus, even if I grant your arguement, there was a note in the article I linked too that points out that quantum computers work on a smaller scale.

>> Plus, find me an organism that routinely deals in pressures in the Megapascals, is grown to tolerances in a matter of days, and can use nuclear power as an energy source.  And I find it hard to believe that any rational person would consider carbon nanotubes or spider silk alive any more then a silicon chip is alive.

Any creature living full or part time at the bottom of the ocean experiences around 100 MPa of pressure, and for those that come up to the surface, they have to tolerate that pressure, and sea level pressure, in the same body. There are bacteria that "eat" uranium, because apparently they have managed to develop electrically conductive appendages

The bacteria are changing the charge on the atom from +6 to +4.  That has nothing at all to do with nuclear power.  And I'm not sure where the "electrically conductive appendage" came from.

>> And I find it hard to believe that any rational person would consider carbon nanotubes or spider silk alive any more then a silicon chip is alive.

Neither nanotubes or spider silk are alive, but they rely on the magic carbon atom for their properties. Unless you're a pretty strict Cartesian Dualist, there's nothing remarkable about the components of life, of any sort. It's all in the arrangement, and carbon is just the most ridiculously versatile element. If you proposed an element with it's properties, you'd be ridiculed as a fantasist, yet there it is, being both a superconductor and an insulator etc.

Forgive me for asking, but what is your background in the sciences?  There's nothing magic about the carbon element.  All of its properties can be predicted by the electron configuration.  And I would point out that silicon is one period below carbon.

>> Why couldn't the swarm be some sort of self-replicating machines instead of being alive?

Like, say... a carbon-based virus? Or a prion?  

Or a silicon-based virus.  Like a rogue AI.  Or a Von Neumann probe gone wrong: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_probe#Von_Neumann_probes

Ummm guys?  Does it make sense to take this (biology vs. computer discussion) to a separate thread?  If one of the main posters says "yes" I'll go ahead and tease the previous posts out....

John

I have no problem with that.