[X] Agile hands, use tools [X] Smart, large brain [X] Omnivore [X] Potentially bipedal [X] Social
Racoons' "hands" (more like paws) do not have any.
I feel opposable thumbs tend to be brought up on the logic of "this is one of many features unique to humans, therefore it must be related to the important feature unique to humans, which is intelligence". In this case it's not even unique to humans: all Old World monkeys and apes have opposable thumbs to one degree or another.
Octopus are familiar with scuttling around on the seafloor and navigating around crazy terrain. Squid are used to using jet propulsion.
I've always thought that both species would be interesting to emulate in silicon for space exploration purposes.
Don't forget, human brains are squishy, too, and there are many more of them!
Sarcasm off
Not sure if your comment meant to be provocative, or if you just did not think through the ethical considerations of your statement. In fact, I am not sure how well protected octupus as a species are, since they lack a spine.
I think the ethics of something like this is a very challenging area. Legally, cephalopods already enjoy some protection in the EU against scientific experiments that can cause pain - http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2...
However we readily eat squid and octopus, to the point of endangering them. We breed chicken and other animals in factories, in the case of battery hen from hatching to killing them in 72 weeks max (about 10% of their normal life span), in often horrific conditions.
Would using octopuses be more ethical than chimps, since they lack a spine and are genetically further from us? What if the octopuses were bred on a farm instead of captured in the wild? What if instead of whole animals, just the nervous system structures were grown in culture?
We are still far away from the comprehension of state, or even computuation in living tissue. The technology underlying silicium based computers is quite primitive compared to biologics. Certainly - these are interesting thoughts in theory - but for the sake of science communications with the general public I am very careful in what context and what way I would articulate these concepts.
Animal welfare, and the health of ecosystems, is definitely another minefield of a discussion.
Although I had heard speculations of the sort through more reputable sources, I just can't find it at the moment.
"We always assume that intelligence is responsible for our success," says Hare. "That humans became smarter, which… allowed us to invent wheels and agriculture and iPhones. But what if that wasn't what happened?"
Hare suspects that, "like the foxes, and like dogs, we became friendlier first, and then got smarter by accident. This would mean that our prosocial skills, the skills that allow for cooperation and friendliness, were what made us successful."