Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

interestingengineering.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 384 posts

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#161

Post by 1234fdsazxcv »

grawprog wrote: post #46

I find it hard to describe how I feel about this. These scientists essentially created what may have been a new species, that perhaps would have had similar sentience to us and had them terminated after 100 days. The cat's out of the bag with this research so to speak now. Someone's bound to do this again The part about whether they should have been born or not, which was the ethical thing is what tears at me. Is it…

Can we please use paragraphs to create a coherent thought/point rather than a series of one-liners? Perhaps spend a little more time to think through/build out your thoughts. It is more interesting for your reader and (I think) promotes more nuanced conversation if we all spend more time thinking about our ideas before we rush to post.

Note, this is not specific to the parent post but just a general comment made with the hope of raising the level of conversation beyond twitter.

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#162

Post by SimeVidas »

tibbydudeza wrote: post #48

So "Planet of the Apes" was not so far fetched after all. Now somewhere someone will think ... hmmm why can't we replace all our complaining factory workers and their wages/healthcare/retirement plans with these "creatures" and only pay them peanuts and banana's.

Future brainy monkeys will watch that movie like it’s a documentary.

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#163

Post by PeterisP »

downrightmike wrote: post #149
grawprog wrote: post #46

I find it hard to describe how I feel about this. These scientists essentially created what may have been a new species, that perhaps would have had similar sentience to us and had them terminated after 100 days. The cat's out of the bag with this research so to speak now. Someone's bound to do this again The part about whether they should have been born or not, which was the ethical thing is what tears at me. Is it…

Heinlein's Starship Troopers novel touched on this. Neo Dogs are a novelty in society, a sideshow to the general public, but they have the Intelligence similar to a human moron, but is a Mozart for their species. And they use them in war, which is their main use. The recruiter that works with the protagonist, was a bonded partner. They bond deeply to their Neo Dog and if the Neo Dog dies, it is more humane to kill th…

It's interesting that the novel assumes that the bonding is likely to be stronger than almost all other bonds humans form - for example, we grieve when our spouse, best friend or child dies, but we don't usually presume that euthanizing the grievers asap would be kinder than having them to go through grief and rehab. It would seem plausible for some of the individual bonds to be like that, but notas a general rule.

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#164

Post by hutzlibu »

ericffr wrote: post #156
hutzlibu wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I don't know of the specific case, it is just, that here in germany, the "invasive" species people complain about, I wittnes as a welcome variation. Brings in more color. The areas that do get dominated, will very likely balance it out with a different species, soon. edit: had to translate it, but: we also have knotweed and people complain, but I actually like it. And I do not see it dominating, just a spot here…

Not every weed moves as fast as a virus. It might take decades before we realize that some species have disappeared, and in their wake, others are going too, and we are left with a homogeneous ecosystem where a new virus will come and be even worse (like the wheat rust which decimated the single species of wheat growing in North America). Obviously, Nature, being random, might cause destruction on its own (like when…

"we realize that some species have disappeared, and in their wake, others are going too, and we are left with a homogeneous ecosystem "

Species come and go all the time. Globalisation just made it a lot faster. So there will be imbalances and local system collapsing and temporary a dominating species etc., but alltogether the diversity of species will be increased, with fast global exchange. Because there are more candidates to fill a niche.

Local established ones still have a home bonus. Their DNA is adopted to the local climate and soil, unlike the invaders. They won't vanish anytime soon.

The thing really threatening diversity are monoculture fields with pesticides.

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#165

Post by T-A »

tigerBL00D wrote: post #7

Did anyone else think about "Planet of the Apes" after reading this?

Of course. Given the times, this in particular:

https://vimeo.com/120831063

Now I wonder what effect ARHGAP11B would have on a shark:

https://youtu.be/oSz9MDN-iac?t=71

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#167

Post by kungito »

grawprog wrote: post #46

I find it hard to describe how I feel about this. These scientists essentially created what may have been a new species, that perhaps would have had similar sentience to us and had them terminated after 100 days. The cat's out of the bag with this research so to speak now. Someone's bound to do this again The part about whether they should have been born or not, which was the ethical thing is what tears at me. Is it…

"Is it right to create something that may be similar to us and then not even give it a chance to live?" If trying to be "good" doesn't this thought come off as really selfish? Just because something is more similar to us it should have more right to live? These thoughts are just basic survivalist instincts wrapped in nice 21st century "morals". We will do whatever the hell we want in the end and maybe we eradicate ourselves in the end before something else does

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#168

Post by Der_Einzige »

grawprog wrote: post #46

I find it hard to describe how I feel about this. These scientists essentially created what may have been a new species, that perhaps would have had similar sentience to us and had them terminated after 100 days. The cat's out of the bag with this research so to speak now. Someone's bound to do this again The part about whether they should have been born or not, which was the ethical thing is what tears at me. Is it…

"Is it right to create something that may be similar to us and then not even give it a chance to live?"

The only difference between this and abortion is that the species is somehow "novel".

You should resolve the ethical issues with genetic engineering research in a similar way to however you resolve the ethical issues related to abortion.

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#169

Post by aaron695 »

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #109
plutonorm wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a fabulous film that was. Never read the book.

The book was better (naturally); as I recall, they used technology instead of a "magic amulet" to work their way out of the problem, in keeping with the theme of hyperintelligent mice.

The sequels I thought were ok as well.

By his daughter, my one exception to sequels not by the author.

Re: Scientists grow bigger monkey brains using human genes, replicating evolution

#170

Post by salty_biscuits »

ben_w wrote: post #144
plutonorm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neanderthals had larger brains in proportion to their body mass than we do. They were possibly smarter than we were.

We don’t know enough to know if that’s a good measure; if it is, ants would be at the top of the list for all animals, and treeshrews for mammals: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-to-body_mass_ratio

The scaling power coefficient matters, they are so far off our mass that the coefficient might just be wrong. Neanderthals are about the same size so an error in the coefficient won't matter so much.
Post reply on HN