halogirl

"flood goop would seem pretty realistic"

That is an oxi-moron, 'flood goop' isn't real, it doesn't even look remotely like anything you'd find in the real world.

 

Not to mention the worst thing I've heard a marine say was

"He's totally loco, man"

 

The AI in Bioshock and F.E.A.R. are much more explicit.

i think i pointed out that flood goop is not real. either way you seriosly havn't been listening to the marines have you? check out halo 3 the graphics are very life-like for a video game, even the flood goop. also like i said the halos are probably a minimum for an M rating.

you want a really good series of sci-fi books, read something by Octavia E.Butler.

my favorite series is Lillith's brood, its a post-apocalypse series, where mysterious gene-tradeing aliens rescue the human race, but they underestimate our abilities to disillusion ourselves. the first one is called Dawn.

the other series by her that i like is called the patternmaster series its about an immortal parasite who is attempting to build a race of psychics, the first one is i beleive called wild seed check them out, they're some of my favorite books right next to the Halo series.

no i think halo was rated just right we know its not real but if it were the flood goop would seem pretty realistic i think. not only that but theres also some pretty harsh language have you listened to the marines when they talk?

whats really fascinating is how people are interbreeding now. remember that humans were seperated for centurys and now we've all been suddenly exposed to each other. people bred with people who looked like them because there weren't any other options. now within the last couple of centuries we've had a chance to inter-breed. do you think if left to our natural devices we would eventually lose genetic diversity? another benefit of genetic engineering

quote): lucuspa

Changing the ratio of sexes would have social consequences -- China is facing some of that right now. You don't think that the process of GM to get what you consider "beautiful" people is also going to have social consequences? Some people have already brought those up: at first only the rich will have the opportunity. SkepticLance thinks the cost will come down. How long? If it is a generation, what is the social disruption as the have nots look at what the have's are getting for their children (especially if it is health) and their kids are not. People have started revolutions for less. So, Halogirl, how many killed in social unrest do you consider worth GM for "healthier" and more "beautiful"?

first of all i already mentioned the down-side of the ratio of sexes, i also mentioned that i don't approve of determining the sex of a person.

not only that, but if we can prevent scumbags from taking over then the engineering can be available to everyone.

second of all i've been voting to make people healthier, and smarter, but we all know that physical appearance will be the main concern of the public, not us. if you can convince people that physical appearance is unimportant then good for you, but in the mean time we will continue to make people "beatiful" and "smart" and "healthy" so answer me this, lucaspa, how many uprisings do you need to see before you realize that the majority of people don't actually care if other people are healthy or smart. the only thing that matters to the majority of society is physical appearance.

indeed,theres actually quite a lot of blood and gore around the time you start fighting the flood, i think its the minimum of an M rating.

Halo 1 got M, which I find outrageous. There's no blood, except in multiplayer, there's some violence, but it's not really realistic, and it's an overall not M-deserving game.

actually thats not true theres alot of blood in halo all three of them. halo 2 cleans it up faster though. also it would seem alot more realistic if you read the book.

i don't think its beaty that matters in the train of genetic engineering, but once we have physical appearance out of the way, that would leave people open to new things. imagine if our childeren could learn twice as fast as us. next thing you know they'll be developing animals that can travel through space. like that book series by Octavia E. Butler. this is the way i think we should go. this would make the human race more efficient at protecting our own and protecting the earth.

to: skepticlance

i don't think theres anything wrong with determining physical appearance, i was just trying to come up with an example. personally i feel that genetic engineering is a great idea. in fact its my hope to one day be a genetic engineer.

I teach a few classes in a video games curriculum, and they really make me feel old. Most of the students were born after Star Trek: The Next Generation went on the air. No, really.

 

But the funny thing is, the games they all know are completely different from the ones I know. They're all console-oriented -- PS3, Xbox 360, or Wii. Their idea of video game history is the previous version of a long series that shipped three years ago for the PS2. Ugh.

 

I'm only 42, for pete's sake!

heh i was born in the middle of all that. i remember both computer games, really old video games, and console related games.

Dang, your old. :}

please do

i think i've mentioned that before....

you know thats a good point i didn't take age into consideration, though common sense should imply that you don't let little kids see violent stuff if you can avoid it. then again little kids usually show little interest in violent war games. my dad played halo and call of duty all the time but it was usually boring to me. you died too easily and he always got me on the duels. in fact i wasn't interested in any of them until i read the books. i don't think age has much to do with it. in fact i think peoples tendency towards their violent instinct is mostly genetic

(i pawn him all the time now no matter what game we're playing)

its true that there could be some serious repercussions along with genetic engineering,unless we came up with some kind of code that the work can be done by.

ex. (1) the control of genetic strands will have nothing to do with physical appearance.

you know something like that, this could easily prevent the repercussions you speak of.

big deal, it would most likely be an option if people ever began to use genetic engineering in humans. the question is would we begin before or after conception? that would be the decisive part in deciding on the sex of the child.

indeed, it really is great.

did they pay?

i dunno i kinda agree with 'A Clown' i think people are generally just looking for an explanation for the increased violence in people, i think that they're so undeveloped that they can't comprehend that other people are thinking entities just like them and their underdeveloped-ness prevents them from restraining the violent streak found in humans. some people can just access it easier then others.

thank you. i completely agree, although i doubt any of us shall ever truly understan the ways of the universe, as much as we would love to.

i dunno i don't think theres anything wrong with determining physical appearance or physical strength, this would maojorly change the rules of sports, but appearance would only change the people that they are attracted too. so your're right i don't fully support genetic engineering because i think that determining the sex of a person could dramatically change the ratio of different sexuality(not that its necesarily a bad thing) but at the same time it would be very reasonable to give each generation a better chance then the first, you know like " better, faster, stronger" imagine our descendants being able to learn at twice the rate we do, they would be able to discover so much more and make a truly sudden and dramatic change. this would truly be amazing so i am for genetic engineering. also it would be bad if we ensured genetic compatibility simply for organ farming, but controlling it would mean there was constant diversity.

i completely support genetic engineering, in fact that is the line of work i am aiming for, imagine being able to ensure that your child didn't have a specific disease.

the only part i disaprove of is determining the sex of the person.

in all probability...and beware wikipedia it lies, but thanks anyway. i too am merely a biology nerd doomed to ask questions about physics forever. ;]

aah my confusion, it happens every now and then. in that case i resent you causing my confusion...must...resent...something..agh! :]

hehe me too. but really video games might desensitize you to blood and gore, but skinning an elk does the same thing(Yuck! and Yuck!) and if you've ever been hunting, it's disturbing to see something die, but that is way more likely to cause a killing spree then video games. eh, if someone's gonna kill people they've probably been hunting.

(Elk guts are not fun)

Exactly! Those activists who think that videogames are bad - they may not have really played them. They judge them too quickly the moment they see them.

 

This really famous lawyer who's practically spent the last decade fighting videogames, even claims that videogames influenced the Viriginia Tech Massacre and other shootings. He goes so far as to call it "mental masturbation." But you can see that the guy doesn't know what he's talk about. He call Counter-Strike "Counter-Strike Half Life," and it's "Half Life: Counter-Strike."

 

He also claims that videogames are a way of rehearsing school shootings and points out the fact that weapons often used are those found in popular shooters like COD and Counter-Strike. Did it ever occur to him that that's because only the most common, readily available weapons would be famous enough to be put in a game? He never realized that these weapons are common, and that's why school shooters often used them.

 

Well, voice your thoughts on my rantings.

he would seriously argue that? yeesh, i think i've mentioned that i play games all the time and i'm not violent so far as i know. what a weirdo