artist:cyrilsneer impending_doom safe

Image

main image
Uploader cyrilsneer,
Tags artist:cyrilsneer impending_doom
Rating safe
Source Unknown
Locked No

Comments


- Reply
PURPLEWOLF2005: aw its pretty cu-snake food?...hey i need some sauce i found my dinner
- Reply
ElCuCuyfeo: Biggest huggies!!!!

- Reply
Disintegral: All hope experienced by fluffies should be false. Unless they're utterly broken and hoping for forever sleepies.
- Reply
Theotherguy121: I'd like to ask a question: what obstacles stand in the way of creating fluffies in the real world?

- Reply
guodzilla: @Theotherguy121: Well, basic gene-splicing procedures for one...

- Reply
Guzziman: People really ought to feed snakes mice that are already dead. At least with fluffies you wouldn't have any sort of reason to care about whether they'd suffer, and no possible way that they could ever kill the snake. I'd still not rely on them for snake food, since they're 80% shit.

- Reply
RQ: This little guy is so adorable and innocent, unaware of the fate that awaits. Perfect

- Reply
HerdKing: @Theotherguy121: its waaaay beyond out scope imo. first, ethically no profession lab would be able to get it approved of. its not something you can do as an amateur. second, we dont understand enough about how human speach is created, let alone creating it, even in a rudamentery sense. third, gene-splicing, as goudzilla pointed out. in my HC fluffyes are possible in the near future because the rules of experimentation and eithics where different, allowing for a quicker but morally bankrupt progression of science. even then, tho, it makes little sense
- Reply
Arazur: Plus people talk about Hasbio a toy company spending billions on R and D, which I highly doubt they have the capital for even if the price tag is hyperbole

- Reply
Micron: @Theotherguy121: Genetically engineering vertebrates is hard.It can be done, but the best you can hope for is to knock out a gene or two or add an extra. A GM mouse is still a mouse. There is currently no animal even close to a fluffy to start with, and creating a semblance of intelligence by gene engineering alone is beyond any technology we will have fore millennia. The best you could hope for is a very realistic robot.

- Reply
HerdKing: @Micron: or a game...
- Reply
TheFoalFryer: What will we do with a little fluffy
What will we do with a little fluffy
What will we do with a little fluffy
Early in the morning?
- Reply
Cock_Anon: @Theotherguy121: *glove snapping sound* let us begin...

- Reply
Waaaghlord: Yeah you will have a new daddeh and it will give you a lot of huggies!!!
- Reply
Vanguard: @TheFoalFryer: Stab its eyes with a rusty needle
Stab its eyes with a rusty needle
Stab its eyes with a rusty needle
Early in the morning.

- Reply
FluffiesAreFood: @TheFoalFryer: Smash its nuts with a ball peen hammer
Smash its nuts with a ball peen hammer
Smash its nuts with a ball peen hammer
Early in the morning

- Reply
FluffiesAreFood: Also let me say: fluffies as snake food is a wonderful thing.
- Reply
Theotherguy121: @Micron: Well, we do have pigs..that's pretty the closest thing resembling a fluffy I can think of. That, and pigs do a level of intelligence that might make it a candidate for such a creation. But you're probably right, though.

- Reply
Danuis: Fluffies are, realistically, a whole form of sapient life.

At worst, they're programmed biological computers that shit a lot.

Both are still completely way out of our capability. Artificial life is artificial dna inserted into emptied cells at best. Cloning tech produces old babies who die young.

Mankind is far from being masters or even meddlers in the regard of life. Best we can do is just spread what we have, alter what we have, pray for the best. If we say, terraformed Mars, we'll probably struggle just to reproduce a facsimile of a biosphere, probably just loads of trees and algae mats with some few animals we can control. A veneer of Earth.

@theotherguy121

- Reply
FluffiesAreFood: @Danuis: All true. What we'd be talking about is a revolution in biological research that allows mankind to create fantasy animals. It's science fiction, possibly cyberpunk, if not actually Bizarro.

This revolution might be REALLY expensive, which would have to mean that the commercial potential for that product would have to be both (a) massive and (b) multi-faceted enough to be resilient to fads.

Ergo: the economics of fluffy R&D are such that a company like HasBio would never develop them solely as pets.

You might assume that I'm about to suggest that Hasbio would develop fluffies as food, and here I will surprise you: there's no way, none, that Hasbio would make a talking food animal. In my headcanon, fluffies became food because they were common pests that had destroyed the American economy; Americans had no choice but to eat them; and Americans discovered, against their will, that fluffies are actually pretty tasty.

In fact, IMHC, fluffies were originally developed for purposes other than pets.

Hopefully I will have some time to flesh this out further.
- Reply
Fluffocaust: Damn, petco charges me $5 a feeder mouse, I wish they sold fluffies!

- Reply
FluffiesAreFood: @Fluffocaust: Me too. I'm hungry.
Thread locked for the current user.