this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2026
764 points (94.2% liked)
Fuck AI
6809 readers
3126 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Firstly, I would be much more swayed by your argument had you not linked some AI slop article sprinkled in em-dashes and containing zero sources/links, much less reputable ones.
Secondly, we can imagine that such technology would be much more mature if it were legal and considered ethically acceptable to perform on humans.
Third, you could grow multiple people simultaneously and in intervals, such that multiple clients' needs can be met by taking apart one host. We already have existing variable pricing systems, so a less-efficient scenario would simply cost the customer more. To a multi-billionaire, what is a couple billion dollars if you might live 10 more years? To the service provider, what is 'wasted [insert organs]' to the tune of a billion dollars or more in profit?
I'll take the hit for a bad link - I was on my phone and didn't have time to dig up a college-level course of information for your to have to simply understand that for nearly 30 years cloning of all mammals has ran into the same types of problems that make cloning problematic. You're talking about a scifi-level of development, and for a quarter of a century, the same problems have persisted with all animal cloning. This isn't about humans, this is about fundamental elements not working.
Ultimately, it's that the genes of adults aren't good for cloning. Telomere length is the key part of our genes that, as we age, burns like a fuse. Solving telomere length issues in a clone would be equivalent to also solving a way to make normal people or new babies immortal. Our cells wouldn't change as we age, and it would be more about turning on/off the right genes in any stage in life to get the effects you want.
Here's a link to a teaching module for school in the UK explaining how animal cloning - of any animal - doesn't work well. Clone a sheep, clone a hedgehog, same problems.
https://www.abpischools.org.uk/topics/cloning/cloning-problems/
Here's a link to an article from MIT in 1997 explaining the problems they had. You'll notice they are still the same problems today.
Here's another link from a .gov site where the "What are the potential drawbacks of cloning animals?" section explains it again.
https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Cloning-Fact-Sheet
I'm not making this up, this is well-established and well-studied limitations of cloning. The only fiction here is you refusing to accept that the world and science have something that doesn't exist, and that real research problems can be solved by "Well, but what if"-ing your way out of it.
I'm not suggesting that you made up anything or that you're wrong about the limitations. I just don't think it's reasonable to make a claim and justify it with an LLM output article (I noticed because I read it, since I wanted to see the actual science). Thanks for the new links.