But you are not taking into consideration 2 factors. Parents want a limited number of children (with exceptions). Parents for all intents and purposes have unlimited embryos (only limited by the number of ova the woman has). If sequencing can come down to under 100$ (who's to say it won't be next to free) then you supply 200 ova, enough sperm and you develop embryos in the lab.
Now when they have become a zygote you DNA sequence the lot to find the best (with least flaws/potential vulnerabilities) and then implant enough of them to get 1-2 successful children and the rest are discarded.
When it becomes wholesale, instead of on a case by case basis, it will become the norm and what is ethical will change to fall in line.
You might complain now about the 190 embryos that are discarded, but in 10-20 years time? Most people see Eugenics as a bad thing, partially because of the Nazis and partly because, right now, it is only in the realm of the super rich. But if you read the first line of the Wikipedia Article,
Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population"
Then you see, that there really isn't anything to be feared from using Science to produce the greatest success rates for our offspring. We do it for food, scientifically picking breeds of animals and plants to produce the best traits in offspring, and we subconsciously do it ourselves when selecting partners (how often have you looked at someone from a different race and considered him/her 'exotic'.) This is your body telling you that such a diverse pairing of very different DNA lineages would be greatly strengthening for your progeny.
If couples were able to go to a 'bank' and select embryos that had been paired together from extremely diverse and strengthening DNA lines, who's to say it isn't a much more efficient and ultimately acceptable way of producing the best human race?
The problem, you see, is that in the film Gattaca they differentiated between those who were and were not born with help. What happens when nobody is born without help? Or like the old line used to describe Picard's baldness (paraphrase: in the 22nd century they wouldn't have cured baldness, they just wouldn't care) would the Eugenically developed people be more benign? Would they, perhaps be more accepting of un-assisted people than we fear them to be?
You are going to get it, it's not a mater of if, but when. The sooner we get over it and move on to accepting it for the benefit it will provide and not for the loss to society it might entail (that early onset Alzheimer's child might cure cancer!!!) the better. We can instead produce fewer, more meaningful children, instead of relying on pot luck as we do now.
It's a numbers game, and we're on the brink of winning it.
I don't see how it's relevant, since the Olympic Committee isn't a profit making corporation, but is actually only a group who organise a non-profit event for the promotion of sports worldwide, right? What's a trademark if they're not actually trading in anything after all.
I watch a lot of my TV from torrents (I do have Netflix and a cable TV subscription, but being in Ireland, I usually miss much of the US TV by either a day (Game of Thrones) a week (NCIS) or a year (Castle, Bones).
Recently I was sitting with the wife and was watching an old movie that just happened to be on the cable tv, and I got quite a shock when I saw an add. I think you had a greater effect from those set of adds because you hadn't seen them in such a long time, like me. As the saying goes, "Absence makes the heart grow fonder."
i've never had a probleM with prODuct placeMent in moviEs and tv. if it means more show and less adds, then i'm happy if the advertising is sUbliminally Placed.
No need to be so narrow-minded. Now Heinz can sell you the bottle once, and then you buy plastic sachets (that flatten completely) to refill your condiment bottle. They will jump at this.
Filling needles and tubing for TPF machines. It can be quite hard to fill 1ml of liquid into a vial. The coating would have to be durable enough to be sterilised regularly, though.
I remember the Military withdrew its support on the making of Independence Day because they wouldn't remove reference to Area 51. If they gave the movie their support despite it including Area 51, it would look like they were confirming its existence.
Exactly, this is why we need to monitor everything that everyone does on a computer from an early childhood. This way, when someone from the BSA produces a report about pirating software, we can refute anything they say, because they themselves have broken the rules in the past.
Funny how people will defend Google for taking publicly available information from unsecured wifi
"Hey, if I shout out my email conversations from my balcony, why should I be surprised if someone intercepts that information"
Is this different to someone standing at the side of an interstate and writing down the plates of everyone who drives by? Considering how people say that the government is in the pockets of the corporations, why do people give different rational when an issue of recording publicly available information comes up.
Google = Fine, Government = Bad?
This post is not directed specifically at the parent, but at the general trend of posts in this thread.
Slashdot Mirror
Andromeda / Star Trek crossover, about time.
You know, they should put someone very smart in charge of everyone else. It would save so much time if only one person had to do all the deciding.
Switching to vodka shots instead of pints of beer hasn't solved my drinking problem...
We can just hope that when we have the Knowledge to perform these procedures, we also have the Wisdom to perform them right.
More importantly, is it made of cheese?
Since when has "been to the US" been a requirement for Extradition?
Photobucket
He's peeved because William Wallace stole his day off.
But you are not taking into consideration 2 factors. Parents want a limited number of children (with exceptions). Parents for all intents and purposes have unlimited embryos (only limited by the number of ova the woman has). If sequencing can come down to under 100$ (who's to say it won't be next to free) then you supply 200 ova, enough sperm and you develop embryos in the lab.
Now when they have become a zygote you DNA sequence the lot to find the best (with least flaws/potential vulnerabilities) and then implant enough of them to get 1-2 successful children and the rest are discarded.
When it becomes wholesale, instead of on a case by case basis, it will become the norm and what is ethical will change to fall in line.
You might complain now about the 190 embryos that are discarded, but in 10-20 years time? Most people see Eugenics as a bad thing, partially because of the Nazis and partly because, right now, it is only in the realm of the super rich. But if you read the first line of the Wikipedia Article,
Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population"
Then you see, that there really isn't anything to be feared from using Science to produce the greatest success rates for our offspring. We do it for food, scientifically picking breeds of animals and plants to produce the best traits in offspring, and we subconsciously do it ourselves when selecting partners (how often have you looked at someone from a different race and considered him/her 'exotic'.) This is your body telling you that such a diverse pairing of very different DNA lineages would be greatly strengthening for your progeny.
If couples were able to go to a 'bank' and select embryos that had been paired together from extremely diverse and strengthening DNA lines, who's to say it isn't a much more efficient and ultimately acceptable way of producing the best human race?
The problem, you see, is that in the film Gattaca they differentiated between those who were and were not born with help. What happens when nobody is born without help? Or like the old line used to describe Picard's baldness (paraphrase: in the 22nd century they wouldn't have cured baldness, they just wouldn't care) would the Eugenically developed people be more benign? Would they, perhaps be more accepting of un-assisted people than we fear them to be?
You are going to get it, it's not a mater of if, but when. The sooner we get over it and move on to accepting it for the benefit it will provide and not for the loss to society it might entail (that early onset Alzheimer's child might cure cancer!!!) the better. We can instead produce fewer, more meaningful children, instead of relying on pot luck as we do now.
It's a numbers game, and we're on the brink of winning it.
I don't see how it's relevant, since the Olympic Committee isn't a profit making corporation, but is actually only a group who organise a non-profit event for the promotion of sports worldwide, right? What's a trademark if they're not actually trading in anything after all.
Earth-shattering robots, that's the LAST thing we need!
Wasted a perfect opportunity to call it "Wisdom of Solomon Array"
I watch a lot of my TV from torrents (I do have Netflix and a cable TV subscription, but being in Ireland, I usually miss much of the US TV by either a day (Game of Thrones) a week (NCIS) or a year (Castle, Bones).
Recently I was sitting with the wife and was watching an old movie that just happened to be on the cable tv, and I got quite a shock when I saw an add. I think you had a greater effect from those set of adds because you hadn't seen them in such a long time, like me. As the saying goes, "Absence makes the heart grow fonder."
i've never had a probleM with prODuct placeMent in moviEs and tv. if it means more show and less adds, then i'm happy if the advertising is sUbliminally Placed.
So what you're saying is, "De Beers should get into advertising"
OMG! Mind-rebooted.
Computer screens.
No need to be so narrow-minded. Now Heinz can sell you the bottle once, and then you buy plastic sachets (that flatten completely) to refill your condiment bottle. They will jump at this.
Filling needles and tubing for TPF machines. It can be quite hard to fill 1ml of liquid into a vial. The coating would have to be durable enough to be sterilised regularly, though.
Yeah, that's quite odd. I wonder about that. Perhaps they have different rules regarding TV shows and (blockbuster) Movies.
I remember the Military withdrew its support on the making of Independence Day because they wouldn't remove reference to Area 51. If they gave the movie their support despite it including Area 51, it would look like they were confirming its existence.
It's great to see the robots are joining in on the discussion.
Excellent response, and something I completely missed. Thanks.
Exactly, this is why we need to monitor everything that everyone does on a computer from an early childhood. This way, when someone from the BSA produces a report about pirating software, we can refute anything they say, because they themselves have broken the rules in the past.
Funny how people will defend Google for taking publicly available information from unsecured wifi
"Hey, if I shout out my email conversations from my balcony, why should I be surprised if someone intercepts that information"
Is this different to someone standing at the side of an interstate and writing down the plates of everyone who drives by? Considering how people say that the government is in the pockets of the corporations, why do people give different rational when an issue of recording publicly available information comes up.
Google = Fine, Government = Bad?
This post is not directed specifically at the parent, but at the general trend of posts in this thread.