Richard Dawkins on Eugenics

[Starlight]

I don't recall any scientists saying things like that. The media was rather hyped about it, though it's taken more than 15 years before we had CRISPR which finally allowed us to do in-vitro gene editing. People in general tend to overestimate what can be done in the short term, and underestimate what can be done in the long term.

I dunno, flying cars, fusion power, and generalized AI seem to have been promised long-term and under-delivered.

What time frame would you put on CRISPR or similar gene-editing becoming common for humans either in medical treatments of people with genetic conditions, or elective procedures for people wanting to improve themselves?

[MaxVel]

His name is mud in society at large. You seem to be making my point for me.

The greater point that I was trying to make that nobody addressed was that Matzneff depended on academic defenses of his sexual proclivities that have now gone out of fashion,

Uh-huh. What goes out of fashion can also come back into fashion. If there's no change in what people believe is the basis for moral values, then there's no reason to suppose that what was 'accepted' in the past won't be accepted in the future.

and this particular realm of academia seems to be what you all are most afraid of.

Nope. No idea why you would think that.

[Sparko]

CRISPR is both exciting and very scary technology. It could be a great benefit to mankind or the reason we go extinct.

[Leonhard]

I dunno, flying cars, fusion power, and generalized AI seem to have been promised long-term and under-delivered.

Flying cars will never happen. Fusion power might happen, but fission will always be cheaper. Those are more cases where we've either learned of the complete infeasibility of the concept because of a deal-killer (no way to solve the noise pollution problem of flying cars), or cases where we just learn of better alternatives (molten salt burner reactors will always beat fusion in terms of cost).

I agree with generalized AI, nobody can give a real timeline on that.

What time frame would you put on CRISPR or similar gene-editing becoming common for humans either in medical treatments of people with genetic conditions, or elective procedures for people wanting to improve themselves?

Before the end of the decade it will be common for solving certain genetic ailments in humans. Huntington's disease is a perfect candidate for something you can solve with CRISPR.

[Sparko]

Flying cars will never happen. Fusion power might happen, but fission will always be cheaper. Those are more cases where we've either learned of the complete infeasibility of the concept because of a deal-killer (no way to solve the noise pollution problem of flying cars), or cases where we just learn of better alternatives (molten salt burner reactors will always beat fusion in terms of cost).

I agree with generalized AI, nobody can give a real timeline on that.



Before the end of the decade it will be common for solving certain genetic ailments in humans. Huntington's disease is a perfect candidate for something you can solve with CRISPR.

Looking forward to the Eugenics wars and Kahn!

[Leonhard]

Looking forward to the Eugenics wars and Kahn!

Love that movie.

I am cautiously enthusiastic about the prospect of cleaning out various genetic ailments from human bloodlines, and tweaking the settings. I worry about unintended consequences though.

[Sparko]

Love that movie.

I am cautiously enthusiastic about the prospect of cleaning out various genetic ailments from human bloodlines, and tweaking the settings. I worry about unintended consequences though.

yeah, they could "fix" something that ends up being really bad a few generations down that they can't repair. I think I saw a TV show once about something like that, where they enhanced people's genetic code to make them live longer, but then ended up causing all women to be sterile a few generations later.

[Leonhard]

yeah, they could "fix" something that ends up being really bad a few generations down that they can't repair. I think I saw a TV show once about something like that, where they enhanced people's genetic code to make them live longer, but then ended up causing all women to be sterile a few generations later.

Or like how we've managed to breed flowers to be bigger and lusher, but over time they lost a lot of their smell. It's just something we have to be highly mindful of. That being said there's just some genetic settings that are really screaming for a tuning, especially those that lead to developmental disorders and ailments like Huntingtons (that's a single letter change at that!).

[Sparko]

Or like how we've managed to breed flowers to be bigger and lusher, but over time they lost a lot of their smell. It's just something we have to be highly mindful of. That being said there's just some genetic settings that are really screaming for a tuning, especially those that lead to developmental disorders and ailments like Huntingtons (that's a single letter change at that!).

Think what they could do for transplants. They could edit an organ to match the donor. No more waiting years to get an organ or having to take anti-rejection drugs for the rest of your life.

[Leonhard]

Think what they could do for transplants. They could edit an organ to match the donor. No more waiting years to get an organ or having to take anti-rejection drugs for the rest of your life.

Printing organs turns out to be very difficult (no surprise there), but there's a lot of interest in simply genetically engineering pigs to have immune compatibility with a particular recipient and getting the organs from there.

[Christianbookworm]

Does anyone remember the Gattaca movie where the protagonist was discriminated against due to not being genetically engineered?

[Starlight]

Does anyone remember the Gattaca movie where the protagonist was discriminated against due to not being genetically engineered?

I've seen it. But I don't trust movies to predict the future. They're wildly divergent anyway about what the future could be like.