Slavery? What slavery? People would be buying one of those just to pamper it. ;)

Whoa too fun!

Sheer evil? Thought it was just plain evil.

Yep, the idea of a live in cute little house maid that you own seems nice at first until you think about it for awhile and realize you are a slave owner.

I hear they sell well in Texas and all stops east of there.

When we start dealing with something that begins to blur the distinctions between 'slave,' 'pet.' and 'roommate,' it gets hard to apply morals and ethics concretely.

After all, who here would complain if they could train their dog to clean up her own messes, or better yet, be able to use the bathroom properly, including the shower?

She has a very cute design.

If she wants to live and work in one's home, and if she is free to leave whenever she wishes, she is not a slave. Presumably, those desires would be engineered in - but that doesn't make it slavery any more than a dog's instinctive desire to be with his "master" makes the dog a slave.

This is going to become an issue much sooner than you might expect. A single gene appears to be responsible for about 60% of the intelligence difference between humans and other animals (it controls the degree of cortex convolutions and possibly other things, too). Installation of functioning genes in animals has been successfully accomplished literally thousands of times - most commonly in mice!

There is already a commercially available gene spliced pet: the glowfish. It fluroesces rave green under blacklight because a jellyfish green fluorescent protein gene has been installed in the zebra fish.

Would I like a much more intelligent dog? Absolutely! Does this raise issues of personal autonomy versus slavery? You bet!

There is a superbly imaginative science fiction novel on this point: "Gun, With Occasional Music". I highly reccommend it. It is imagination stretching, thought provoking, and very very funny! Used copies are cheap on Amazon.com.

Will we see the day when one will have to lock up their credit cards so that their pets/companionanimals can't use them to by pet goodies over the internet? I wouldn't bet against it.

The world is going to be a lot furrier in the very near future.

First, it will be expensive (but well worth it) intelligence enhanced guide dogs for the blind. Who could argue against that? At least successfully...

And I really like your ad!

An interesting anime to check out on that point is Geneshaft. One of the main characters is shown writing home from the prototype starship she's on and who she's writing to is her dog. Looks completely non-anthro but at a minimum can read and type english and has apparently human (or our level of human) intelligence.

Thanks for the link! Beautiful art, amazing production values, interesting characters. I hope some producer buys the show. I'd watch TV (or the internet - even with commercials) to see more.

The cut/censored for the fearful american public version ran on Anime Unleashed years ago, not sure what hope there is of it coming out uncut. Should at least be fansubs of it floating around though.

http://geneshaft.bandai-ent.com/homevideo.html

The listed rating suggests an uncut version.

Thanks, nice to know there's an uncut version available without having to hunt it down online and try downloading it on a dial-up.

Ah, the wonderful domain of Bio-Ethics. When we do end up creating human-animal parahumans, I'm sure some people will try to argue that, as non-humans, they have no human rights and -can- be sold as slaves, while others will argue that any sapient race should be treated as human.

Of course, a newly-created parahuman may end up born with a debt to the genetics firm that created it, so even a legally free parahuman may end up in endentured servitude to it's creators until it's debt has been paid off.

that delves into extra-terrestrials too.

Once we finally have documented proof, which eventually we will, can they truly be called "human" rights if there are scensient non-human species out there? ^_^

Very good point! There is lots of documented proof, though much is not available to the public, and the quality incidents that are unclassified are buried in the entropy. For example, how many people know that we successfully tested nuclear rocket engines nearly half a century ago! Politics killed them, not engineering problems; they worked far better than the best chemical rocket engines that we have today.

I am an aerospace physicist and rocket scientist. On two occasions I have seen real spaceships of extraterrestrial origin: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/308905/

very good point about the politics.

and I like that composite drawing you did.

The NERVA engines also had issues with corrosion in the heat-exchanger tubes, as I recall - still an engineering issue, not a deal killer.

On the other paw, the only nuclear engines that can blast off from Earth (thrust/weight >= 1) are the Orion drive (AKA "old boom-boom") which, were there two dud bombs in a row would kick off its pusher plate rather catastrophically, and the nuclear saltwater rocket, which was rather ... impractical, in that it was theoretically tricky, and its engineering would be problematic, and it was a criticality accident waiting to happen since you need to somehow make the fuel tanks not a critical mass, when a 3" spherical region is the designed reactor cavity. Don't forget issues like engine nozzle erosion and heat, too.

Nuclear simply was not the answer to the question of the time, that being "How do we climb up the gravity well?"

Now that we're discussing manned Mars missions, nuclear-electric is getting real viable.

Engine nozzle erosion is managible with regenerative cooling. Water cooled copper can take a heck of a lot of heat flux, and liquid cooled niobium can do even better. That is what we used for the propellant injector pintle in the lunar excursion module descent engine which had to tolerate severe thermomechanical shock.

As far as Orion is concerned, I really don't think that dud bombs would be likely - let alone two in a row. It is just a matter of quality assurance and non-destructive inspection of the bomb components and their assembly.

Our computer engineering simulation capabilities are far better and cheaper now, so the hardware experimentation would have a greater chance of success.

Nuclear electric propulsion to Mars or the asteroid belt sure beats LOX and LH2.

Exactly my point. We have adequate chemical heavy-lift rockets now, and we can put the efficient nuclear engines up where they belong.

Drive-bomb duds aren't too likely these days, and would be less likely still if we engineered a new, reliable design for them. The problems are twofold: Proliferation, and Casaba-Howitzer. If you take the Orion drive-bomb, producing a 22-degree arc of tungsten plasma and use a thinner and lighter metal foil, you can produce a much finer plasma beam. And suddenly your drive component is a directed energy weapon, to quote Atomic Rocketship. Still, after exposure to hundreds or more of explosions, plus cosmic radiation for six months, how reliable can we make our nukes?

My money is on a hybrid NERVA-nuclear electric drivetrain running a megawatt-class VASIMR. NERVA system for open-cycle cooling in an emergency, and high-thrust burns when called for; the highly efficient VASIMR for cutting the travel time to a month or so.

What about mechanical stresses? Nuclear chemistry transmuting the copper or niobium? I recall they were using graphite in the prototypes for some reason (which may have been easy fabrication of prototypes).

Also, one more fun fact for the casual reader: hydrogen gas propellant is not made radioactive by its trip through the reactor. No glowing craters, unlike the saltwater rocket.

I like the directions suggested by your comments.

For speculation: Increased intelligence isn't going to automatically make co-existence with anthro 'servants' any easier. 'Domesticated' animals (at their present levels of intelligence) have been absolutely culled for thousands of generations for survivors that will fit within humanape social organization.

More intelligence might allow that guidedog to act on her misinterpretation of her place in this strange dog society.

Makes for good stories. 8p

"There is already a commercially available gene spliced pet: the glowfish. It fluroesces rave green under blacklight because a jellyfish green fluorescent protein gene has been installed in the zebra fish."

I recently came across a discovery channel special on that particular invention and they mentioned that they had successfully done it with mice as well. Under normal light the pinkies looked only slightly off color than the ones who had been bred normally, but under blacklight they glowed neon green. So, the day is coming, whether people enjoy it or not. ^_^

Also, awesomely cute ad!! ^_^ *Insta-faves.*

Look up the book "Wild Boy"--it deals with what would make mankind into a pet, and why. It is, perhaps, a matter of partnership, but unfortunately, most pets are not equals in any contracts with their owners, and a dog will be just as loyal to an abusive, cruel master as to a good one. Given intelligence, this may change. But, what would happen if it does not?
Would we create an intelligent species, without wimping out? I find it doubtful we would. Too many people would raise a stink, today.

I think that companion/caregiving dogs with enhanced intelligence will inevitably be developed in Japan and China because of their inverted age pyramids. Most people care a lot about their dogs.

A species I designed, the Thalu Ir, have institutionalized "slavery"--in fact, they never use another translation for it, and find it offensive if people suggest a slave is a worker. They abolished physical labor as such (happens when robots and biological processes work FOR you), so being a worker would indicate something entirely OTHER for them--being little more than a process, a cog in a machine. Being a slave--that is, under a contract to perform "artistic" duties (stuff that cannot be replicated, or simply unusual enough to merit an audience), on the other hand, is considered normal, and slaves have rights of a sort, closely resembling those of an indentured servant.
A species that I think would make an interesting first encounter for mankind, with its American Work Ethic.

It all depends on the values and beliefs of the society that institutes such things, I think--for instance, in some societies, limited contract slavery was preferrable to being indebted to a person, and such slavery was not abused without a punishment.

Indentured servants provide a useful historical model.

Slavery or not, I want one! Wouldn't even do anything nasty with her. Just having a clean house would be wonderful enough, plus the cuteness and easy to feed. I want what, give me the number!!!!

I must admit, as controversial as your topic might've been, your fontography is still pretty good. Great composition <:3

Man, I've seen text and photoshop filters abused like crazy these days..

Well, while she's for sale one isn't sure how much of a slave she'd be. From the advertisement she seems to be not much more than a skilled made with benefits. Plenty of people serve submissive house-cleaning roles and even doing sexual favors without being slaves. I think it matters more about the purchaser's thoughts, whether he/she thinks that their new purchase is a toy to use and abuse at their pleasure or deserving of greater respect.

You are right. Whether it is slavery or compansionship depends very much on the values, intent, and character of the purchaser.

Exactly. A lot of actual slaves in the old south were almost like family to their owners (and some WERE family even if not acknowledged for it). I think Thomas Jefferson and the story about his female slave he apparently had children by is a prime example where he only kept her as a slave for her safety in a hostile world, the only way to keep her with him that was publically acceptable.

You know at least some of those who'd buy a 'slave' mouse maid would treasure her and only keep her as a slave because of public perception's of acceptability. Besides, even if you saw her as property, she'd surely be expensive and one doesn't benefit from abusing and lowering the value of what one owns.

Sally Hemmings undoubatedly had lots of oportunities to escape from Jefferson when they were living in Paris, but apparently chose not to do so. I rather doubt that his slaves in Virginia had that choice.

The genetic tests only show that Hemmings had a child by someone in the Jefferson paternal line, such as Thomas, or his brother or uncle.

The fundamental limit to abuse is the freedom to leave.

True, but still makes them part of the family (which the white side shows that many are still amazingly racist with their efforts to reject any black family members). I just wish people would get over it and stop expecting apologies for stuff that happened centuries ago. We've plenty going wrong today to worry about. Plus if/when anthros are born ensuring they grow up accepted and feeling neither superior nor inferior to their creators.

I think that the Jefferson family reunion now welcomes the Hemmings family -- I hope.

So painfully true. It is insane to expect me to apologise for something that someone else did a century and a half ago.

I suspect that it will be intelligence enhanced dogs that open the floodgates to a furrier future. "What a cute puppy! I'm sure I heard him say, 'I love you! Please take me home!'"

Just so long as it isn't the intelligence-enhanced cows from The Restaurant At The End Of The Univers. *shudder*

It amazes me how we've got several states right now debating declarations apologizing for slavery, when no one living today ever had the right to legally own anyone (other than their wife, that legal slavery didn't end until the ERA). Just get over it, and just because your great grandfather was a slave doesn't mean you've any entitlement for special favors. Hell he probably died fighting for the education so many treat as 'being white' now. :/

I believe the apology thing is less an apology from the people who owned the slaves (for which you are right: they are long since dead) and more an apology from the *state* that aided and abetted the slavery (which *does* still exist).

My country's government recently made an apology to the descendants of Chinese immigrants that were unfairly discriminated against during the gold-rushes in the 1800s (exorbitant poll-taxes, discriminatory laws etc.) - again the people directly affected weren't there but as they say: it's the *thought* that counts.

I don't think the apology really helps though, since it was individuals long dead responsible for things, a state or country doesn't really qualify. The only reason it still applies for Japan during WWII and its turning of women into sex slaves for their soldiers is there are still living victims and perpetrators and the history must be acknowledged to overcome. Plus those victims deserve reparations for being forced into slavery, rather than that recent tripe that they were all volunteers.

Hmmm, we certainly discriminated against many chinese as well, even as we used them as pretty much slave labor building the transcontinental railroad and so many other things. Unfortunately we just can't get them to assimilated into the rest of the country as they should have, instead they effectively create little islands that function as if they're sovereign nations in various cities.

If your ancesters came from Britain or Europe like mine, you have slave ancesters, too.

Considering we're all related just a few thousand years ago we all have slave ancestors.

Actually, slavery, depending on definition, existed among European and Middle Eastern populations without racial tensions. Romans had white, European slaves. Egyptians, according to the Bible, had a permanent hold over the Jews for many years. Native Americans had certain traditions that suggest slavery was present--capturing one's wife might be called enslavement, if I am not mistaken. Arabic-speaking countries also had slavery, of a sort, for many years.
Being descdended from a slave is a certainty in everyone's life.

Problem is, when genetic engineering gets advanced enough, custom-engineered organisms will come into existence.

Is that necessarily a problem? The glowfish is a genetically engineered pet that you can buy right now. A mouse maid that can talk presents ethical problems that a glowfish doesen't, but the nasty things that bad people will do condem the bad people, not the IQ 80 genetically engineered dogs.

Let me clarify: Its inevitable, I think, that people will start creating sentient custom organisms.

You are absolutely right. Both carbon and silicon based. And it is thoughtful discussions like this that will both help to make it happen, and help to make the world a good place for them.

One can hope. but there will always people who try to exploit.

Of course, but forewarned is forearmed. There is a lot of thoughtful constructive forewarning here!

Lets hope its enough.

Indentured servitude?

That is an interesting model. Many people left Europe for America as indentured servants, with a specific period of indenture, in return for the ship passage and room and board for the indenture period. Many of them continued as employees after their indenture periods had expired.

*dials the number so fast the keys break* o.o

Can I get one that speaks Pascal?

They all speak with a LISP.

It was said that scientists would soon be able to recreate the Neanderthal. The man who said that said something along the lines of "Would we want to? Imagine being born and discovering that the rest of your kind has been extinct for thousands of years."

Your negative attitude about slavery may have intensified, but it doesn't hurt the realism of this "advertising copy" -- which would promote the most positive view of the situation for someone who was inclined towards buying a "housemouse" anyway! 8p

Rental service.
You pay for the service, and not for the creature itself.
So its not really owning anybody.

Creepy, but very interesting. Though I think mouses would make better spies than maids.