GATTACA!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kalbear]

25 minutes ago, lacuna said:

Why is it a given that prices will be gouged to a level only available for the super rich? The science is out there and available. I envision "package deals", "affordable rates", "limited time offer" "NOW 50 % OFF ON HAZEL EYES!".

For small things like that (in theory), maybe. The reason I suspect it'll be for the super-rich only for a long time is that companies which are going to research this are going to be spending a LOT of money, and they won't be able to mass-market it for a while. Current genetic therapies can cost as much as a million per therapy year, and you can bet that things like this, which are going to be tailored not only for specific traits but specific people, are going to be quite a bit. At some very distant future prices may make it more affordable, but it's still going to be quite expensive for anything particularly good. 

[lacuna]

59 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

For small things like that (in theory), maybe. The reason I suspect it'll be for the super-rich only for a long time is that companies which are going to research this are going to be spending a LOT of money, and they won't be able to mass-market it for a while. Current genetic therapies can cost as much as a million per therapy year, and you can bet that things like this, which are going to be tailored not only for specific traits but specific people, are going to be quite a bit. At some very distant future prices may make it more affordable, but it's still going to be quite expensive for anything particularly good. 

Possible derail ahead, but I wonder what impact AI will have (if or when we ever get there) on availability. If it's a question of number crunching and running simulations, it should be pretty massive, no? Then again, AI will outstrip us, even the "enhanced" ones, in sheer problem solving skill anyway, so why bother enhancing intelligence, if such a thing can be done? And AI-designed machines will take care of most production jobs, leaving us to do... what?

I wrote a lot more paragraphs originally, but it was all waffle and open-ended questions, which isn't much of a contribution, so I think I'll just throw in the towel here.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

6 hours ago, lacuna said:

Why is it a given that prices will be gouged to a level only available for the super rich? The science is out there and available. I envision "package deals", "affordable rates", "limited time offer" "NOW 50 % OFF ON HAZEL EYES!".

Depending on what the costs end up looking like, one could also end up with a situation where it is profitable for a country to have all its newborns undergo such therapies. Having a national population solely consisting of highly intelligent and healthy individuals could probably be worth it even at pretty steep prices. 

Also, if some countries start doing that, the rest would pretty much have to follow in order to not get left behind. 

But yes, then there is the question of AI. Certainly, if artificial intelligence develops at the speed that Kurzweil, Musk and so on are expecting, then genetic modifications of humans won't end up being very important in the end. On the other hand, there are no guarantees that their speculations will turn out to be correct. Predicting long run technological change is next to impossible. 

 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

On 11/26/2018 at 5:26 PM, Fragile Bird said:

You know what I find interesting? Men are valued far more than women in Chinese culture, mainly, I gather, because a son will look after his parents and a daughter will go off with her husband. China has 40 M extra men who may never have wives unless they go overseas, because Chinese parents aborted or got rid of females in some way.

So they experimented on female embryos. Lovely start.

Without having any expertise on the matter, but I suspect they might have gone with female embryos for more practical reasons. Namely they are just less sensitive than male embryos. What I mean is, the second x-chromosome is sort of a good back up, while the xy combination simply lacks that.

So if I were some mad scientist, thoughts like that might have guided my decission more than cultural concept of superiority/inferiority.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 hours ago, Kalbear said:

So? 

Again, what would that change compared to what we have now? What would Warren Buffett be different if he was a bit smarter than he is now? They might be really really good humans, but they'd still be human. 

Now, if you're talking about genetic alterations that are adding things to the human genome to make it different than a baseline human, that's a different and far more dangerous thing to do on a lot of levels - but making people better humans doesn't scare me that much. It's unfair, but so is being born rich. 

 

That’s exactly what I’m talking about. I’m not worried about wealthy people making themselves a few inches taller or adding 10 IQ points to their kid. I’m worried about the incremental escalation that could lead to essentially an entirely new spices. If you can play with the gene code, what’s stopping someone from making their children eight feet tall, as strong as a gorilla and ten times smarter than Einstein? And if you can achieve that, why not push it further?

This story justifies my fears. Because at the end of the day, it only takes one person to try.

 

Quote

But nonhuman intelligence? Intelligence that does not think or dream or behave like humans do? That's far scarier. 

Gotcha. Wasn’t sure if you were talking about AI or  something else, and I agree, it’s something to be feared.

[lokisnow]

18 hours ago, Kalbear said:

 

But nonhuman intelligence? Intelligence that does not think or dream or behave like humans do? That's far scarier. 

I foresee some libertarian tech billionaires with no prior interest in children suddenly being excited to “procreate” if they can have their “children” engineered to have no (or minimal) emotions at all. They would think they’re creating superior humans unencumbered by the limitations that hold them back or they hate in others. Libertarian tech billionaires would not hesitate to pursue this route.

or even just the Nancy Kress route, engineered to need minimal or no sleep. That would appeal to a ton of the workaholic insane billionaires that are out there, not just the libertarian sociopath billionaires.

[maarsen]

2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

That’s exactly what I’m talking about. I’m not worried about wealthy people making themselves a few inches taller or adding 10 IQ points to their kid. I’m worried about the incremental escalation that could lead to essentially an entirely new spices. If you can play with the gene code, what’s stopping someone from making their children eight feet tall, as strong as a gorilla and ten times smarter than Einstein? And if you can achieve that, why not push it further?

This story justifies my fears. Because at the end of the day, it only takes one person to try.

 

Gotcha. Wasn’t sure if you were talking about AI or  something else, and I agree, it’s something to be feared.

If it was feasible or advantageous to be a super strong Einstein,  then evolution would have given us one. The energy demands of a human brain now are enough to make an increase likely not feasible. Then there is the fact that there is no one gene responsible for intelligence.

[Kalbear]

11 minutes ago, maarsen said:

If it was feasible or advantageous to be a super strong Einstein,  then evolution would have given us one.

That's not how evolution works. 

11 minutes ago, maarsen said:

The energy demands of a human brain now are enough to make an increase likely not feasible. Then there is the fact that there is no one gene responsible for intelligence.

Energy demands are probably not a big deal here. The brain isn't consuming energy at nearly the rate the rest of the body is. Cells need energy period. 

There is no one gene responsible for intelligence but that's true of eye color too. So? CRISPR can edit whatever. The bigger problem is that we do not understand at all what makes people intelligent - from a genetic or even baseline standard. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

13 minutes ago, maarsen said:

If it was feasible or advantageous to be a super strong Einstein,  then evolution would have given us one.

Kanye West.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Additionally, we need to consider the possibility of scientists experimenting and creating new genes. They kind of technology could lead to a lot of unethical experimentation if it falls into the wrong hands, which it inevitably will.

[Rippounet]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

That’s exactly what I’m talking about. I’m not worried about wealthy people making themselves a few inches taller or adding 10 IQ points to their kid. I’m worried about the incremental escalation that could lead to essentially an entirely new spices. If you can play with the gene code, what’s stopping someone from making their children eight feet tall, as strong as a gorilla and ten times smarter than Einstein? And if you can achieve that, why not push it further?

Basically the fears that made historian Yuval Noah Harari famous, since he predicts human becoming godlike -"homo deus"- but such godlike abilities being reserved to the super-rich. With two separate species eventually existing, with everything terrifying that it entails.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Rippounet said:

Basically the fears that made historian Yuval Noah Harari famous, since he predicts human becoming godlike -"homo deus"- but such godlike abilities being reserved to the super-rich. With two separate species eventually existing, with everything terrifying that it entails.

So basically he plagiarized me. Where are my royalties?!?!?!?

[Ice Queen]

The Chinese government has ordered this group to stop its research. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/china-orders-halt-gene-editing-after-scientist-s-claims-n941556

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

The Chinese government has ordered this group to stop its research. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/china-orders-halt-gene-editing-after-scientist-s-claims-n941556

I was listening to a report on this yesterday and it seems like everyone in the scientific community is somewhere between shocked and horrified. The university he works at has condemned his research and the Chinese government is locking into his actions.