A Doctor Who Story that Doesn't Need the Doctor
Story. I was trying to put my finger on what bothered me about "The Rebel Flesh," and I finally decided it was the fact that the Doctor's presence adds nothing to the episode — at least, until the final moments. In fact, the whole thing would have been considerably more interesting without the Doctor.Of course, I haven't seen part two yet, and maybe things will look differently after that. But for now, here's a first reaction to "The Rebel Flesh."
Spoilers ahead...
It's a bit hazardous to try and review the first half of a two-part story. You just have to take it on its own merits, and reserve a lot of the heavy-duty analysis for part two. (Which, for BBC America viewers at least , won't air for two long weeks.)
But as an episode on its own, "The Rebel Flesh" started out sort of promising and then quickly became a bit dull. It was the first time this season I haven't been excited, or at least diverted, by an episode. (Some people seemed a bit bored by the pirate episode, but I found it a fun bit of fluff, which is all I really expected.)
"The Rebel Flesh" had a premise that could have made for a pretty decent stand-alone science fiction story: There's a group of humans who are in a hazardous work situation, pumping out some highly corrosive acid off an island. There's a high fatality rate in this line of work, so they're happy when someone invents the "Flesh," a kind of synthetic life that can mold itself to look like anyone, and allow you to pilot it remotely. The Flesh even duplicates the clothes you're wearing, so there's no icky nudity on British TV at teatime.
So basically, it's a mixture of Surrogates and super-rapid cloning, along the lines of "The Invisible Enemy" (which also had the "cloning with clothing" thing.) You can imagine all sorts of ways this could go wrong, including the Flesh attaining a separate sentience. (But also including people being unable to disengage their consciousness, or suffering ill effects from porting their consciousness into bodies that keep dying.) So it's not really a surprise when it does go wrong, and the Flesh copies of people, known as "Gangers," gain independent life and start wanting individual rights.
It's not a bad set-up for a story, and it allows you to ask all sorts of questions about identity, and our relationship to technology, and "Measure of a Man"-type questions about who gets to be considered a person, and so on. People have to confront their duplicates, which share all their memories, and it's hard to keep thinking of those living, feeling, thinking creatures as just tools, the equivalent of a forklift truck. Like I said, as a standalone science fiction story, it has some potential.
Why Is Cloning Bad - News
Formatting a drive will erase all data from it, but with either Time Machine or a system cloning tool you can back up your data, format the drive, and then restore your data to the drive and be free of any bad blocks slowing you down.
So basically, it's a mixture of Surrogates and Avatar and super-rapid cloning, along the lines of "The Invisible Enemy" (which also had the "cloning with clothing" thing.) You can imagine all sorts of ways this could go wrong, including the Flesh
Cloning and stem cell research often get a bad rap because the words conjure up images of human experiments gone wrong coupled with the destruction of embryos. However, if you know anything about stem
Scientists would take a patient's DNA, put it into an emptied shell of a human egg to create an embryo and then harvest stem cells from that embryo. This “therapeutic cloning” would undoubtedly end up back in the thicket of the ethics debate.
Could lawyers consider that to be human cloning?” he asked. “It isn't the business of legislators to decide what researchers can do.” The group that gathered to denounce the bill as “very bad for Minnesota” and a “fundamental and significant risk” to
clone - Does cloning a hard drive also copy over errors like bad ...
For example, I have Windows 7 on a hard drive where SMART reports "many bad sectors". If I buy a new hard drive, and attempt to clone over Windows to the new hard drive, will that fix the problem so I have Windows on a clean hard drive, or will that also copy over the bad sectors and so therefore SMART will find errors on the new hard drive?
My guess is that bad sectors aren't propagated during a clone process, but I could be wrong, so I wanted your opinion. THanks!
EDIT: Actually, I copied windows to a new hard drive, and the new hard drive has the bad sectors. So my question is a bit backwards, but you get the idea. :)
Based on the answers: cloning from a clean drive to a bad-sector drive is fine, data-wise. From a bad-sector drive to a clean drive is also fine. And, the cloning process itself won't destroy any data. The only thing to worry about is if data was lost when the original drive acquired bad sectors.
The actual bad sectors are a property of the physical material in the drive, and are not copied. In other words, if you have ten bad sectors on hard drive A, and five on B, and you clone A onto B, B still has exactly the same five bad sectors that it did before the cloning process.
I would assume that the hard drive itself (or any checkdisk-style process run on the drive) will map those sectors elsewhere so that the cloning software doesn't try to write data to them, but that has no impact on the actual bad sectors present on the drive, and doesn't change the answer to your question.
You do have one problem, however. If the hard drive you're trying to clone has lots of bad sectors on it, then data may have already been lost. So you're probably better off reinstalling anyway, and moving your data over afterward.
Thanks for the answer! The cloned Windows 7 works perfectly (from what I can tell) and is on hard drive B (the destination drive after cloning and which has the bad sectors), so I'm guessing that the copied data is fine if there were no errors on hard drive A. Thanks! That means I have no worries as to data loss! I just need to make a back up. :DBad sectors are not transferred during the cloning process. So SMART will not see the bad sectors from the old drive appearing on the new drive.
One problem you may have is file damage depending on how many unreadable bad sectors you have. You may see some damaged files that have missing data or "holes" in them. There are advanced cloning methods that can identify which files are damaged due to bad sectors.
Why Is Cloning Bad - Bookshelf
Cloning after Dolly, who's still afraid?
Here reproductive cloning is claimed to be wrong because it is psychologically bad in some way for the cloned child or because the genes of the cloned child ...Star wars and philosophy, more powerful than you can possibly imagine
Public opposition to cloning is visceral, but I'll argue that much of it is misplaced. I don't think cloning is inherently bad. It can be wrong, ...Human Cloning, Science, Ethics, and Public Policy
By this analysis, cloning is neither intrinsically good nor intrinsically bad. Rather, when done for good reasons, it is ethically acceptable. ...The cloning sourcebook
Or is cloning wrong only if we can show that the life of the cloned human being would be so bad as not to be worth living? Think for a moment about the fact ...Medical Humor
WHY CLONING IS BAD Harder than ever to land a role in those new Wrigley's commercials featuring the Doublemint Octuplets. Two words: Gilbert Gottfried Any ...Day-by-day Walkthroughs Directory
Answers.com - Why is cloning bad
Microbiology question: Why is cloning bad? There is good and bad side about cloning but since you are asking about the bad side,let me give you answer ...
Why Human Cloning is Bad Science (Spring/Summer, 2002)
Why Human Cloning is Bad Science. You have probably seen the news ... For use in medicine, human cloning has been called therapeutic cloning, but now is often referred to as ...
Why is therapeutic cloning bad? - Yahoo! Answers
Why is therapeutic cloning bad? ... These are the main two reasons why people oppose therapeutic cloning, but there are a variety of other reasons. Source(s) ...
Why Human Cloning Is Bad?
Social Sciences Question: Why Human Cloning Is Bad? Because ONLY GOD is the Creator. He Himself created humans and to start messing around with cloning ...
Reasons Against Cloning - VIDEOS & ARTICLES
Why investors are moving away from human cloning and why human cloning now looks a last ... We think that cloning is a bad thing because it could start ...