Visual cues of artificial people, replicants, synthetic life, etc.

[Onyx]

I've been working on something lately that involves non-natural humanoids that are not machines - they can reproduce sexually. I'm searching for ways to make them visually distinct from regular people, and while I have lots of ideas, I'd like to hear any suggestions anyone else has. I would like them to be close kin to human beings, but different enough to be obvious and interesting. But also attractive.

The list, so far:
Very different coloration - especially less organic looking colors.
Translucent skin, especially revealing "processes" just below the surface.
Unusual facial proportions - obviously the 'elf look' comes to mind.
Musculature that is different or revealed as if skin is thin and attached to the muscle.
Complex and overly active eyes.
Skin markings that look like some other systems/organs are below the skin.
Unusual coloring or tooth shape - revealed only when characters speak.
Unusual limb proportions - longer than normal legs, arms, thinner or thicker joints.
Flexibility and posture.
Number of fingers. toes or the number of joints.
Lacking normal human minor features - nipples, belly button, fingernails, veins.
Variable or multiple coloration.
Clothes that blend seamlessly with skin.

Would love to hear your suggestions, thoughts or discussion.

This is an image I found of an artist's idea for a tattooed Culture humanoid from Bank's Surface Detail. She isn't supposed to be synthetic, but displays all sorts of great cues that she is not a standard human being while looking related. (Also, just a great image.)

 

[Victoria Silverwolf]

It sounds like you have already thought this out very carefully, and I am not sure if I can offer any other distinguishing characteristics. I would like to offer a few random thoughts.

It sounds like what you are describing is what used to be called androids in classic SF (before that word got confused with robots.) Artificial human beings who are created biologically; NOT machines.

My question: For what reason is it necessary for these artificial persons to be distinguished from ordinary people? There could be a couple:

1. They are second-class citizens, and the characteristics are mandatory to make sure everybody knows who is artificial and who is natural.

2. The androids choose to be distinguishable from ordinary people; they have pride in their own identity.

Either situation suggests obvious analogies with modern society.

In any case, it sounds like you are working on something interesting.

 

[Onyx]

It sounds like you have already thought this out very carefully, and I am not sure if I can offer any other distinguishing characteristics. I would like to offer a few random thoughts.

It sounds like what you are describing is what used to be called androids in classic SF (before that word got confused with robots.) Artificial human beings who are created biologically; NOT machines.

My question: For what reason is it necessary for these artificial persons to be distinguished from ordinary people? There could be a couple:

1. They are second-class citizens, and the characteristics are mandatory to make sure everybody knows who is artificial and who is natural.

2. The androids choose to be distinguishable from ordinary people; they have pride in their own identity.

Either situation suggests obvious analogies with modern society.

In any case, it sounds like you are working on something interesting.

Alas, it is not commentary on any sort of class system or racial divide.

I'm trying to work out a way to make a number of "species" of human beings that are "related" enough to sometimes interbreed by making the division between them technological. On group is purely synthetic, one wholly homo sapien, and an in between that is essentially a cyborg - human "improved" with the synthetic life technology.

If anything, the artificial people are the ones on top.


But I like the way you're thinking about this. Anything else you have to share would be most welcome.

 

[Brian G Turner]

Skin colour would be an obvious way to signal a humanoid as different.

Additionally, there's a lot in the science press about different types of skin patches that could be used either to power electronic devices or to act as electronic devices in themselves. Once this technology matures I can see it being used like tattoos - both decorative, as well as declaring any group identity/affiliation, which may or may not be relevant.

 

[WaylanderToo]

gene-engineered people and (as mentioned above) cyborg style .

eg:
Abe Sapiens
The mind-flayer from D&D
'Heavy earthers' (ie people who've been engineered to survive on planets like Jupiter)

 

[Graymalkin]

Do you visualise them as having evolved within a specific environment?

 

[Onyx]

Do you visualise them as having evolved within a specific environment?

Earth normal, but not necessarily evolved. Designed as reproductive life forms analogous to people.

 

[Graymalkin]

Hmm. One wonders why a species (or AI system?) Would 'design' an organism analogous to a pre existing version. Particularly us with our more or less random mutability. Sounds like an interesting story coming together ...

Define attractive.

Exactly how uniform must they appear to be ?Are they also analogous in identity/belief/cultural variation?

How about the:

Bllues - skin pigment a la rogue trooper (I think there is a scale of energy requirements for different pigment proteins making some more energy efficient than othes.)

Watchers - large distintive, lidless photoreceptors.

Children - haven't gone through the vagaries of dietery adaptation: reduced dentition (and chewing muscles giving the appearance of small jaw, wide mouth,) possibly freeing the cranium and brain for accellerated growth, adding to general neonate features due to self domestication.

Hex - due to their optimised synthetic skin cell shape.

If rationale is less important why not take a leaf out of R. Scott's engineers source of inspiration. Instead of the David statue, how about Henry Moore or Van Gough? The architecture of trilobites.

Always fancied having some antennae.

 

[Onyx]

Hmm. One wonders why a species (or AI system?) Would 'design' an organism analogous to a pre existing version. Particularly us with our more or less random mutability.

What would you call the decision to improve the human species through genetic or other reengineering?

The general idea is that we may someday modify ourselves in various ways, but keep some backwards compatibility with the old genes. It is common to portray that kind of advanced person as looking just like us, but different people may be quite happy to be obviously identifiable as their distinct subspecies.

Thank you for the suggestions!

 

[farntfar]

They could have very distinctive voices, high pitched or deep and gravely, and use phrases like, 'The old ones. Yes. The ones who made us."

 

[Graymalkin]

Translucent skin, especially revealing "processes" just below the surface.
Skin markings that look like some other systems/organs are below the skin.

The idea of processes revealed on or under the skin sounds really interesting. Could convey alsorts of physiological, social and emotional information.

I always liked the notion that we're each in a sense, a colony organism. Even micro structures like mitochondria etc. could be truly modular and transferable and to feed off Brian's observation about patches allows for all kinds of augmentation/networking/group activity/identity signifiers.

I pictured your cyborgs mimicking each other in close proximity through some of these processes coordinating. it reminded me of an idea I've been trying to develop around a Pandoravirus which triggers carriers to identify themselves to others when close enough to other infected and if sufficient carriers gather together it triggers off another stage in the life cycle. VERY early days but ...