0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
CRISPR gene-editing technology is advancing quickly. What can it do now—and in the future?The revolutionary gene-editing tool known as CRISPR can alter, add, and remove genes from the human genome. The implications are immense: It could help eliminate illnesses like sickle cell disease and muscular dystrophy, and could even allow us to alter the genes of future generations of humans, leading to so-called designer babies. But will this ever really happen? Medical journalist and pediatrician Alok Patel investigates the current state of CRISPR—starting with a bull calf named Cosmo. Patel discovers how scientists edited Cosmo’s genome so he would produce more male offspring, and what that means for humans. In conversation with scientists, artists, and ethicists, Patel explores what kind of gene editing is actually possible right now—and what we should be thinking about when we consider manipulating human traits and, ultimately, the human experience.
Through life changing accidents, and data minded through NASCAR, human beings are finding ways to rebuild one another so that we are better, faster, and stronger than ever before and all with the help of A.I.. Once nothing more than the stuff of comic books and TV shows, we truly have the technology to become modern superheroes. The Age of A.I. is a 8 part documentary series hosted by Robert Downey Jr. covering the ways Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning and Neural Networks will change the world. 0:00 Introduction1:34 The End of Disability?13:40 Enhancing Our Abilities26:33 Life And Death Situations36:36 Facing Cathedral Ledge
Quote from: alancalverd on 20/03/2021 22:50:50But radical genetic change would produce a new species, so it wouldn't be human improvement but human replacement.Why is that bad?
But radical genetic change would produce a new species, so it wouldn't be human improvement but human replacement.
Humans evolved from other species anyway. Some of our cousins may haven't changed a lot since humans split from our common ancestors. What makes us better than them? Are we already perfect?
Most ethicists disapprove gene editing on human embryo based on inaccuracies of current CRISPR methods. Will they approve it if the accuracy can be improved to be comparable to current heart surgery?
not bad, but makes the argument irrelevant!
Taking pleasure from unnecessary killing makes the species morally worse than anything except a fox, and killing for the greater glory of god or a politician is utterly despicable and entirely human.
The ethical argument more often involves concern that producing "perfect" babies devalues those with disabilities.
Quote from: alancalverd on 22/03/2021 12:31:56Taking pleasure from unnecessary killing makes the species morally worse than anything except a fox, and killing for the greater glory of god or a politician is utterly despicable and entirely human.On what ground can we claim that it is indeed morally bad? Is it universally accepted? Is there any exception?
Quote from: alancalverd on 22/03/2021 12:38:23The ethical argument more often involves concern that producing "perfect" babies devalues those with disabilities. Is there any supporting data to support this claim?
1. You wouldn't like it if I killed you for my pleasure or to please my god2. You wouldn't kill your nearest and dearest for pleasure. Though plenty of perverts have killed their families to please a god.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 22/03/2021 15:45:02Quote from: alancalverd on 22/03/2021 12:38:23The ethical argument more often involves concern that producing "perfect" babies devalues those with disabilities. Is there any supporting data to support this claim?Not since the fall of the Third Reich, but that doesn't stop people making it!
To win a competition, there are two major ways:Improving oneself to be better than our competitors.Preventing our competitors from being better than us.If most contestants adopt the first strategy, the overall competition tends to be better off over time.If significant number of contestants adopt the second strategy, the competition tends to be worse off. The winners of this kind of competition will have smaller chance to compete against the winners of other competitions that proceed independently.
Visionary biochemist Jennifer Doudna shared the Nobel Prize last year for the gene-editing technology known as CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats), which has the potential to cure diseases caused by genetic mutations. Correspondent David Pogue talks with Doudna about the promises and perils of CRISPR; and with Walter Isaacson, author of the new book "The Code Breaker," about why the biotech revolution will dwarf the digital revolution in importance.
I asked about the data showing that more ethicists disapprove genetic modification on humans due to devaluation of the disabled, rather than on the risk of the new and immature technology.
Technical standards reflect what is possible at the time they are written, and therefore develop towards greater complexity or a presumption of improved safety, performance or interoperability. I haven't seen any change in my moral standard tests since they were coined in the distant mists of history.