/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12670923
I am very instering in that topic

>>12670923
I rather want to live in Brave new World then being With feminist

>>12670923
Confused matthew did nothing wrong

>>12670923
Having a kid is the highest stake gambling most people ever get to do.

If you're not ready for a bad roll you're not really ready to be a parent.

>>12670923
Eugenics is bad because qualities you think are bad aren't actually bad or so we think.

>>12670923
Eugenics are bad because humans are not good for artificial selection like that due to our reproductive timing and selection timing for the traits that we care about.

The problem with eugenics and genetic engineering is >>12670978 . Where we may remove a trait from our population only to find out 50 years down the line that we really really needed it.

Genetic engineering is based though and I'm down for crispr babies for days cause we can always just alter the next generation. And at the least we can stop some of the more gnarly SNP diseases

>>12670923
Because technology has commodified and turned everything in the world into something to be sold and traded. While NPCs hate eugenics because it makes them feel non-special, smart people are wary because human nature has long been the hold out from commodification. It has the capacity to do as much harm as good, and while it could create a utopia if taken up by enlightened elites, a free market baby designing economy with the individual making the decision or any implementation of eugenics where the elites are corrupt and evil will be an unmitigated disaster. Only an enlightened elite could implement eugenics effectively, but you don’t see many of those around.

>>12670923
Eugenics bad cuz morals, its more of a grey area like abortion
Crispr is shit, cant really edit much and we still dont know what we can edit and not fuck shit up
Pic related is a general overview of emryo editing there is out there

>>12670923
>Why is eugenics bad
>Don't give me the answer, I want schizo theories
>>>/x/

>>12671146
Genome synthesis is the future. Not even full genome synthesis is required, one could synthetize segments and insert them easily.

>>12671146
>>12671158
There are labs doing synthesis for 0.10 $/bp. That's "just" 32 million $, and one doesn't even need to synthetize the whole genome.
>>12671158

Humans are short sighted and random mutations can be beneficial.

>>12670923
organic life has no future

>>12670923
People against it usually are afraid that are the ones who would be weeded out by it. The rest are mainly politicians scared of losing reliable easy to manipulate voters.

>>12670989
I take crispr babies over feminist Any day

>>12671291
This why i like it >>12671068
>>12670989

>>12670962
Meh >>12671146
And also we tech for it too so fuck no and but also yes i take that over feminist crap Any day

>>12670978
Not really >>12671672
>>12671158

>>12670978
If people whiny lack of this media o rather take eugenics then being With dumbass like dusty smith or Hannah and Jake

>>12670978
I take eugenics over feminist and also sjw any day >>12670989
crispr rules >>12671068

>>12671280
Not really

>>12671291
Same with stupid feminist that should dies in hell for being anti real science

Woman like her should get rape and stay in kitchen and male baby

>>12670989
I take gattaca World them a woke sjw one

>>12671708
Just rape her in the ass>>12670923
Gattaca was right

>>12671708
Feminist should be dead

Eugenics rules and two Can we really live in fucking gattaca World

>>12670923
The way I see it is threefold:

1) We don't know for sure which qualities are good/bad (it's pretty reductive to even think that way given that most attributes rely on many many genes) especially given the long time-scales that gene pools work with, and it could easily backfire.

2) Who gets to do it? Basically no one on 4chan will because we are all retards, and the people who make those decisions might not have your best interests at heart.

3) How is it done? Stopping some people from breeding? That's fucked up. Forcing people to breed? Even more fucked up. CRISPR? Given how little we know right now (and the grey ethics of gene editing), also fucked up.

>>12670923
Eugenics are obsolete, ineffectual as humans are very bad breeding animals (long lifespan, low child rate, lots of ressources, resistance against being forced to marry a chosen partner) and the government shouldn't choose to what humans should be.
Genetic engineering offers the solution as you can skip the dice roll and enhance future offspring independently from any greater project. Some support systems and regulation will be necessary (universal health care system, medical standarts/lines).

>>12670923
>Why is eugenics bad and do not say nazi or White supremacy.
It's not bad. It's the best thing ever.
If we let genetic engineering do its thing to everyone everyone would be white 150 IQ in two generations and world peace would happen.

>>12670962
Why not just have lots of kids?

>>12670923
crispr is a great tool in the right hands and a nightmarish tool in the wrong hands.

>>12670923
Because when people are given a choice they try to get sperm from Aryan chads and will abort kids with down syndrome, and that's bad because a brown race of mutts must be the future in order to protect our sacred democracy

>>12670923
Because we don’t know which genes are necessary but only rarely. So if you overly zealously optimize humans for today’s conditions you will likely eliminate some rarely useful variants from the population, and then when the rare condition comes along it can wipe out all of humanity instead of only a fraction of it.

>>12671146
>killing babies is a gray area

>>12670923
>And also Thought about crispr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwaM1mmu1GU

>>12671146
>killing babies is a grey area

It makes bad slaves if you're making them smarter stronger and more virtuous. The opposite is what they want.

>>12672574
Yes

>>12670923
>Why is eugenics bad
Because right now it's politiically popular opinion to push "morals" and "equality". Eugenics is scientific method that will allow you to prove that certain genes are superior.
This is exactly the opposite of the current political agenda.
The issue is, that science is always right. The real science, not "science" popular media is pushing.
And once the agenda is proven wrong what do you think will happen?

>>12670923
scenario #1:
Lets make humans genetically designed to be obedient, dumb, consoomer-coomers so the few persons running the show, can endlessly milk their wallets without them getting wise.

scenario #2:
supreme ubermensch created. All other humans are now obsolete wastes of resources that should be, and are exterminated (you, your family and everyone you've known included).

scenario #2.1:
supreme ubermensch created again, but no exterminating this time... Imagine racism, but dialed up to 11. Designer humans trashed into suicide 99% of time for being "unnatural," "unhuman," "not even alive," "of the devil," "nazi scum".

scenario #2.2:
supreme ubermensch created again. This time everything is fine, their genes spread like wild fire and humanity is made of ubermensch super beings in 100 years. A disease emerges that has its cause rooted in the man-made genetic changes. Huge die-offs and or birth-defects or infertility unlike anything before.

>>12670923

CCP diplomats will justify Uyghur genocide as transforming baby making machines into feminist women but the moment human gene editing is involved they dissapear researchers from public sight for over two years.

Materialist party ideology offers no "imago dei" justification for this response. International relations cannot suffer more from gene editing humans than from genociding them.

Why would the CCP take such a drastic measures towards a mediocre scientist who only wanted fame and china to be numba won?

Because cloning human look-alikes offers a way out. It invalidates the mechanisms that control the elite.

Consider Hunter Biden, foreign agents didn't just gift millions expecting goodwill in return. They forced him (okay he enjoyed it) to have sex with people, the more taboo the better, record it and use it as blackmail as part of the deal.

Thread related
>https://archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/286632247
Wonder why porn sites normalize incest?

All the blackmail can be plausibly denied as a clone. "I didn't do it, they cloned a look-alike".

Deepfake price-points and quality now prohibit this arrangement, had He Jiankui waited a few years he wouldn't have dissapeared.

Now that the value of blackmail for elite contract enforcement has tanked, crude means have returned.

Few recent notables that could be related:
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ny-john-gilbert-getty-cause-of-death-reveiled-20210127-eqa3oaxnkneqlgyfmaofrswcre-story.html
https://apnews.com/article/benjamin-de-rothschild-dead-68483e58a3cff3b6dd143e9b12f81328
https://nypost.com/2021/01/13/chinese-american-socialite-lili-luo-plunges-to-death-with-baby/

This explains it comprehensibly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlmhhh9HYqc

>>12672573
Better takes from the same dude than everyone else ITT.

Disorder from changing elite arrangements once allowed a lower noble to rise and almost conquer the world. Let's hope this time one can leverage this to conquer the stars.

>>12672579
Fetuses can hear, form memories, move. They have already come into being. 3 months old are about as useless. Your lofty theories can’t explain why abortion is different from infanticide.

>>12670923
>why is eugenics bad, and do not say the reason why it's bad
fuck off back to /pol/ retard

>>12670923
I always figured it was because of our microfauna. There would be a favorable set of genes and most people would take them until they become the norm. Then, someone creates a bioweapon or a microbe evolves to attack a particular set of genes eventually striking one that could wipe out everyone of that gene set.

For example, carriers of the sickle cell genes in Africa have an advantage against malaria. Now imagine everyone got that gene to protect against malaria. Now Imagine that a new disease evolves that attacks your sickle cell gene and everyone with the sickle cell gene is dying. If you didn't allow Eugenics only the small portion of sickle cell gene carriers would die, everyone else lives.

That's the natural issue. Now imagine everyone has a set of genes they think is favorable. That would imply it is common knowledge, which would give way for someone to try and create a bioweapon that targets those genes in particular and takes a while to activate. Everyone with those sets of genes will either die or suffer immensely.

Essentially, life evolves to adapt, evolution requires mutations and diversity. You take those two out and you're just waiting for a predator to evolve in just the manner to target you and everyone like you.

>>12672842
>implying infanticide is bad
Why would you want babies to suffer any longer on earth than they have to?

>>12671722
The point of Gattaca was that Eugenics is bad

>>12671291
this but unironically

>>12671291
>The rest are mainly politicians scared of losing reliable easy to manipulate voters.
Who said they're going to be less gullible voters? Everyone likes to think eugenics will create some super intelligent uber-chads with rainbow colors and telekinesis or whatever they believe. But it might be more realistic that the people with the means to implement eugenics will desire to create a more complacent and unquestioning populous.

>>12670923
They're only "bad" because people are afraid of humans reaching any kind of higher level. Augmented humans would be a threat to society's elite due to their intelligence. In turn, regular people have been brainwashed by these elites into automatically associating eugenics with nazism, and have a negative view towards it because augmented humans would shatter their ingrained beliefs that everyone is equal and deserves a participation trophy for simply existing.
Eugenics should be embraced. We should create disease resistant humans with super strength and massive intelligence in order to expand every facet of society, to have them create technology that could enable space exploration and colonization.
We should artificially advance evolution if we can.

>>12672844
China is deep into eugenics though.

>>12672985
Genetic engineering isn't eugenics though.

>>12672844
I was talk about the concept of eugenics. Why is bad not the fucking nazi thing omg god

>>12672582
Good point but

>>12672985
If 1984 and demolition man Said pc culture is bad and no one care so fuck it

I rather take the gattaca World then a feminist World

>>12673554
I mean there basic the same thing to me >>12672985
And would some like Vincent into space Again

>>12672985
If 1984 and demolition man Said pc culture bad omg i do not give a shit

>>12672985
If people whiny the lack of this media i rather take the gattaca World then woke one

>>12671829
And best part With crispr is When it happend the sjw would die out. Becosue in crispr No would give a shit about race or gender

>>12671708
She should dead before the eugenics thing

>>12671722
Brave new World too

>>12671716
Same here >>12674089
>>12674084
>>12674081

>>12670930
Fuck feminist

>>12671708
Feminist should get rape

>>12671708
Gattaca was right

>>12672842
Oh sure i dont really like the concept of baby killing as well, but a 2-3 week i would say is ok since almost nothing is formed
what was it in the us, like 22 weeks or something ridiculous like that?

the answer to why gene engineering is bad is incredibly simple: it will either result in tragedy of the commons or the engineering of a slave race of humans by governments. if individuals control evolution it will spiral out of control with sexual selection until humans are as deformed as purebred dogs today, if governments control it they will use it to make humans irrepairably docile and domesticated.

>>12670923
it's a bad idea because we won't select the right traits for proliferation. you can already see the effects of this if you look at the way people choose mates. even smart people are bad at it.

>>12672842
ELS activity begins only at the 20th week though, prior to it feels nothing. I would legalize abortion prior to the 16/18th week as the embryo is still unfeeling but beyond it I would qualify such attempts at abortion as infanticide.

>>12670923
>I regard central aspects of both transhumanism and liberal eugenics as plausible and morally justified. Educative freedom implies the parental right to genetically modify their offspring.
> On close analysis, the genetic modification of one’s own offspring as determined by parents is analogous to parents determining their child’s education, and should therefore be evaluated analogously from a moral point of view. Moreover, the latest insights from epigenetics with regard to the study of the environmentally-caused alterations of genes underline the assessment that education has always included actual genetic modification. We are already in a position today to make genetic selections following pre-implantation diagnosis as part of artificial fertilization processes. The ethical, political, and legal frameworks are why we’re not yet doing what we’re already technically capable of doing.

gene editing is only useful for qualitative genotypes and dominant allele genetic diseases (the thing that must be eradicated from the human genome) are very rare. besides biological systems are extremely complicated and interconnected, you modify or select/eliminate one feature and you could end up with millions of problems. you select for height you could end up with more pituitary gland problems, you breed successful people you could end up with more psychopaths and less empathy. it's difficult to predict and for this experimentation you are risking what is objectively the most valuable thing which is the human genome.

The technology might need a decade or two to get all potential pitfalls fixed but it could be utilized right now. It wouldn`t wonder me if some black clinics are modifying people right now. The thing with CRISPR is that you don`t cause side effects (science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2017/10/24/science.aaq0180), you need of course understand the workings of the gene allells but once we have advanced enough to be to edit 10k loci reliably we would be able to safly make genetic changes with effects that would be big enough to make a distinction between gene modified and baselines appearable.
There will be massive social consequences, if everyone is a born genius, has a olympic physique and don`t have to worry about getting ill until hitting 100 years, that will make changes necessary but not necessarily negative ones. I`m less afraid of its implementation in democratic societies and more worried about the potential abuses that will occur in dictatorships. Super-soldiers would be the least of our worriest.
Most parents will love their children, independetly if they are genetically modified or not. It is more likely though that genetically engineered humans will perform better in general and those genetically engineered who do not, will be seen as weird or lazy, wasting their potential. But that is the right of any person and people will be people, even those bred in a artifical womb. Most gene moddified will just see themselves as vaccinated 2.0, just that medical technology also allowed them to have a greater variety of gifts and talents they can use however they want.
A greater problem will be heli-parents that force their child to be what they wish it to be or treat it as a superhuman instead of raising it as its own person. Such forceful treatment will lead to the creation of a perfection or superior complex in some genetically engineered people.
The greatest dangers will be religious fanatics or radical enviromentalists that will not see such people as people.