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

371–380 of 384 posts

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

#371

Post by nwienert »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #231
berdario wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> population "balance" maintained through periodic overpopulation and starvation (How do people think it happens? Forest fairies tell the deer how many babies to have?) Thinking about this, I just realized a simple thing: balance in animal population via starvation might not be as grim as we expect (i.e. it happens completely because the weakest/least fit individuals cannot compete for food and literally starve). The…

It's still very grim if you recognize that animals - particularly advanced animals like deer - feel and suffer. Also makes you wonder if the fragility of reproductive system wrt. malnutrition isn't an evolutionary adaptation that smooths out the population crash a little bit after hitting the carrying capacity of a niche. (Also: many (most?) living things have things that eat them, which is another population mainten…

Even more grim: a world where we lose touch with death and suffering and start treating them as grim and unnecessary.

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

#372

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

Veedrac wrote: post #294
yeetman21 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the scientist create a GMO chicken and they get killed by the billions to feed us, no body bats an eye. Please, "new kind of soul" is a vast over statement. When horse breeders thousands of years ago artificially bred into existence new horses, no body cared, why is this any different?

Certainly some people care a lot about factory farming. Even so, the key difference here is that brain function and intelligence are tied so tightly to the idea of human exceptionalism; that it is OK to enslave a horse but not a human, because humans have more capacity for autonomy, suffering, and so forth. How precisely to draw the line is very much a matter of disagreement.

Hey, Veedrac. You're probably bored with that by now, but I did reply to your last message- I just didn't see it in time:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25063580

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

#374

Post by cscurmudgeon »

danieltillett wrote: post #275
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Thalidomide - Leaded fuel, the highest ever source of lead exposure and poisoning for Humans. - Asbestos still present in 60' to 80's construction - Refrigerants with Ozone destroying CFCs - 1800's arsenic pesticides still contaminate today's rice fields and most of the world's rice crops. - DDT - Plastics are currently leaching estrogenic-mimicking endocrine disruptors and contaminating water supplies, wildlife an…

Thalidomide wasn’t a failure of chemistry, but of medicine. CFCs were an amazing breakthrough as they stopped people getting gassed by their refrigerator and killed (ammonia was used before). Once a problem was identified then changes were made. Similar with asbestos (not actually chemistry), leaded fuel and DDT. As for the others you have concentrated on the tiny percentage of bad outcomes rather then the millions o…

> takes a very special mind to see it in such a negative light

It takes an even more special mind to pretend we know all the consequences, to assume our knowledge is complete and that there are no unknowns.

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

#375

Post by erickj »

flatline wrote: post #146
erickj wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However in the exact same vane that "Nature doesn't care"... We as Humans should and DO care. We are not Nature, and thus these existential defining issues should at least give us some pause to debate and evaluate the moral quandaries and responsibilities that this level of engineering power wields.

We are very much Nature. Possibly something independent of our own minds exist; we can never really know. Anything worth preserving, caring for, or caring about, is a product of the human mind. The meteor careening into the earth does not feel a moral quandary, but we do, and as such I agree that given our limited knowledge we should care. But we should also pay heed to how ignorant we are: we cannot possibly know ho…

I'm not saying we aren't a product of Nature... I'm saying that the defining trait of man that sets us outside of our natural surroundings is our capability to use intellect, empathy, and morality to guide our decisions.

This is not a tool that "Nature" has in its toolbox. Nature has, natural selection. The random smatterings of dice throws that takes place trillions of times per day over the course of billions of years. The equivalent of throwing paint against the wall for a millennia to eventually recreate a Picasso.

This is not how humans work. Our efforts are efficient (at least more so than Nature's efforts), and when honed and optimized can be made into machines of frighteningly impressive efficiency.

There is certainly a difference between the creative and destructive processes of Man vs Nature.

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

#376

Post by erickj »

schrodinger wrote: post #215
cubano wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you possibly even say "We are not Nature"? Of course we are Nature. We came to being the exact same way every other current living species did, thru natural selection. So then how can we be living, as you say, somehow outside this "Nature" you speak of? Hell, I know I may be in a small minority who says, by definition, nothing that we do is "wrong" because we are simply doing what our brains, which are 100% a…

I believe the point is that “the interest of humans is not the same as the interest of nature.” We are part of nature, but not referentially equal. “Nature” may not care what happens to the human species, but we do!

Exactly. Well said.

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

#377

Post by Veedrac »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #372
Veedrac wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly some people care a lot about factory farming. Even so, the key difference here is that brain function and intelligence are tied so tightly to the idea of human exceptionalism; that it is OK to enslave a horse but not a human, because humans have more capacity for autonomy, suffering, and so forth. How precisely to draw the line is very much a matter of disagreement.

Hey, Veedrac. You're probably bored with that by now, but I did reply to your last message- I just didn't see it in time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25063580

HN seems to hide replies once they get deep enough. I honestly think we've mostly exhausted that conversation, though.

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

#378

Post by newen »

nwienert wrote: post #371
TeMPOraL wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still very grim if you recognize that animals - particularly advanced animals like deer - feel and suffer. Also makes you wonder if the fragility of reproductive system wrt. malnutrition isn't an evolutionary adaptation that smooths out the population crash a little bit after hitting the carrying capacity of a niche. (Also: many (most?) living things have things that eat them, which is another population mainten…

Even more grim: a world where we lose touch with death and suffering and start treating them as grim and unnecessary.

Humanity should strive for that world instead of accepting this world.

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

#379

Post by nwienert »

newen wrote: post #378
nwienert wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more grim: a world where we lose touch with death and suffering and start treating them as grim and unnecessary.

Humanity should strive for that world instead of accepting this world.

Without it we’re not human, people raised without it would have a value system alien to you and likely disgust you.

We can certainly avoid the worst of it - but entirely is more dangerous than none.

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

#380

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

Veedrac wrote: post #377
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, Veedrac. You're probably bored with that by now, but I did reply to your last message- I just didn't see it in time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25063580

HN seems to hide replies once they get deep enough. I honestly think we've mostly exhausted that conversation, though.

Of course, I just didn't want you to think I've huffed off or something. Take care.
Post reply on HN