THE TRANSHUMANIST SCRAPBOOK: GENETIC SEQUENCING, 3-D PRINTING, AND ...
Take a very deep breath.
Try to relax.
In fact, you may want to chase your coffee with a shot of your favorite alcoholic beverage and then strap yourself into your chair, because this one was shared with me by M.J-S.(whom I heartily thank for bringing it to my attention), and I still find it incredible.
So why all the precautionary advice? Well, it seems that genetic sequencing, forensic art, and three-D printing are merging to create...to create... well, to create what, exactly? Before I get to that, first, you'd better read this:
Creepy or Cool? Portraits Derived From the DNA in Hair and Gum Found in Public Places Read more: http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/artscience/2013/05/creepy-or-cool-portraits-derived-from-the-dna-in-hair-and-gum-found-in-public-places/#ixzz2W8p610I3
Now, imagine you are a New York detective or perhaps an FBI special agent assigned to the newly created Cigarette Butt and Hair Follicle Detail, and after a hard day of gathering such flotsam from the streets and subways of New York City along the favored routes of the target of your investigation, you finally decide to approach the owner of the bar or grocery store your target frequents, and you place your laptop computer with its new-fangled DNA squencer program onto the counter, and say "One moment please" to the clerk or bartender. Popping your cigarette butts and hair samples into the computer, you do a quick scan, the program models your target's face, and plugging in your portable three-D latex printer, you print off a life-size mask, complete with hair, of your target's face Mission Impossible 3 style, and placing it on a model styrofoam head, you ask "Have you seen this woman?" Imagine the transformations of forensics that are coming because of these types of technologies combinations. Call it 3-d DNA-based forensic reconstruction.
Want to disseminate accurate pictures of a suspected criminal? Just visit his or her frequent haunts, gather some chewing gum samples, some cigarette butts, some hair, et voila! You can then nail 3D masks to telephone poles or, better yet, place them on store counters or in display cases at the post office under a sign that says "Have you seen this person?" or "Wanted...." You get the idea.
Imagine, too, a whole new field of archaeology. Call it Paleo-facial reconstruction, or PFR(since we seem to love abbreviations and acronyms these days). We can now remove, say, the hair follicles of JS Bach, Frederick the Great, Voltaire... you name it, and construct 3-D representations of their faces to find out, more or less accurately, what they looked like.
Imagine also a whole new field of ... oh nevermind. I'm sure you get the idea. The article asks, "Creepy or cool?" Well, for my own two cents, I'll file this one under "creepy," though, I admit, I'd really like to know what my favorites Bachs really looked like.
Try and have a good day, try not to think about this, and I'll see you on the flip side.
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
Creepy? Yes. Fascinating? Yes. Artsy? In the eye of the beholder for certain. Dewey-Hagborg’s sculptures are certainly interesting and her DNA-derived self-portrait is a dead-ringer for her face to my eyes. I enjoyed this article.
Does the potential exist to abuse this technology? Well, consider the life and times of Alfred Noble. DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) has, and is spending billions on DNA research, as well as robotics and so much more. Their scientific and actual physical results are light years beyond what this article reveals. If you consider Dewey-Hagborg’s work a little creepy, DARPA’s results are well beyond creepy and perhaps beyond scary.
Since I’m re-reading Genes, Giants, Monsters & Men for the third time, there may be an opportunity to get a “real” live Sirrush, that would be really cool.
Now I don’t think the Smithsonian would be terribly impressed, and would turn the academic main stream on it’s ear, but I’d love to see one.
If it were possible, then we could resurrect good old Robert Koldewey and get the skinny on exactly where this loveable animal came from.
Shades of 2075…………
LSM your right at least the twenty fifth dynasty was when I lived in NYC. I went the Brooklyn Museum the is a large black stone bust of a pharaoh and he does look black. When I was returning to my apartment in the Bronx there was a woman on the train who’s face looked exactly like the face on that bust and she was black thou her skin color was that of a pale carrot. As for The Smithsonian that institute has along record of scientific dishonesty as for this technology it will be put to use tracking down dissenters against the state as well as identifying unknown bodies.
” try not to think about this”- Dr. Farrell, if you didn’t want us to think about this then why did you post this? 🙂
anyway, consider the source of linked article: The Smithsonian Institution-
although I’ve never been into throwing babies out with bathwaters, the Smithsonian is notorious for obfuscating/hoarding important archealogical info-
and knowing how today’s photo-shopping (even in 3-D) can turn a turd (I apologize profusely for the visual) into a tomato I think we can safely assume all 3-D objects (whether re-created photos of humans or otherwise) are a complete dececption-
anyway, what is 3-D?- it’s a manipulation of the original light source- the splitter beam is a good start for those who want to understand how holographs/grams are created to begin with- a great explaining source for this is Michael Talbott’s “The Holographic Universe” if one has not yet read it-
we’ve been told our eyes can only see visible light, right?- and we assume everything we can see picked up by our optical nerves is everything out there to be seen/sensed, right?- well, maybe not-
my point: anyone can sell a computer-generated image of ANYTHING if one believes that all computer-generated images (including the deception of 3-D of anyone’s face or whatever) are created by people who are working in our interest- it’s all a deception-
awhile back came the report that King Tut’s genes were of western European origin- may/may not be- then look at all the effigies in Egypt and pre-Mayan/Inca cultures; if these weren’t portrayals of blacks then I’ll eat my living room-
so to the Smithsonian article: everyone seems pristine white, right?- I somehow don’t think so- I tend to think someone like M. Tellinger is more into reality than most as far as the origins of mankind (but then assuming there was no outer influence afterward which I haven’t ruled out) but we all know darker-skinned people are less susceptible to the negative rays of the sun than blonds/redheads-
and if my read source was correct (can’t remember anymore- was so long ago) circadian rhythm tests carried out on Africans as well as lighter-skinned people showed that blacks’ circadian rhythms corresponded exactly to the circadian rhythms of the earth where as lighter-skinned people (the lighter the better) corresponded to the circadian rhythms of…Mars-
I hope I’m making sense of myself- here in the western world the images of the most influential people are always whites- so what about blacks, asians, etc.?-
’nuff for now-
please stay well Dr. Farrell and readers- many regards-
Larry in Germany
Great book, The Holographic Universe.
The actors like Jack Nicholson have said that digital stars/ virtuals bits will be the future.
Now we’ll soon be everywhere were not, and see everything that not.
No thing being every thing.