On 6/24/2015 1:48 AM, Richard Aiken wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Greg Chalik <xxxxxx@gmail.com

>     Cyborg is a rather more defined term than you think . . .
>
>
> I did not mean "Terminator robot." I meant EXACTLY what you had put
> forward: children who remotely control drones from birth. That would
> have to include "mechatronic integrations." Unless you're seriously
> supposing a newborn infant can use a Gameboy remote? Or else you didn't
> actually mean your "from birth" and this was mere hyperbole?

I may regret stepping into the midst of this, but:

I suspect that Mr. Chalik may be using "cyborg" in the sense that I -
with corrective lenses suspended in front of my eyes in a metal frame,
typing at a device which allows me access to information, long-range
communications and other capabilities far beyond those of my unaided,
unaugmented physical body (not least of which is almost entirely
removing my need to do basic math) - can be described as one.

As a tool-using, technological species, it can be said that we've been
off-loading, replacing, and augmenting our abilities with/onto bits of
the environment - thereby incorporating it into "ourselves" - since the
first simple machines and systems of writing and counting.

--
---------------
Kelly St. Clair
xxxxxx@efn.org