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

Human genetic engineering is coming

theglobeandmail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 91 posts

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#71

Post by istinetz »

SemanticStrengh wrote: post #27
istinetz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on that? If it's "trivial to achieve for anyone right now", what does that mean? Is there any commercially available service?

An epigenetic alteration is a multiplier on the expression of a gene. it can either inhibit its expression or increase its expression, in a continuum like manner, and remarkably, in a tissue/cell specific manner. A complete inhibition is akin to a gene removal, behaviourally speaking and indeed there can be many synergies between multiples altered genes expressions. The effects of an epigenetic alteration usually las…

cool, can you elaborate on the "trivial to achieve for anyone right now"? How is it trivial for me to become permanently black or whatever?

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#72

Post by MacsHeadroom »

istinetz wrote: post #71
SemanticStrengh wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An epigenetic alteration is a multiplier on the expression of a gene. it can either inhibit its expression or increase its expression, in a continuum like manner, and remarkably, in a tissue/cell specific manner. A complete inhibition is akin to a gene removal, behaviourally speaking and indeed there can be many synergies between multiples altered genes expressions. The effects of an epigenetic alteration usually las…

cool, can you elaborate on the "trivial to achieve for anyone right now"? How is it trivial for me to become permanently black or whatever?

You can order the pipetides cheaply with a major credit card or PayPal online. It's as trivial as buying a book.

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#73

Post by knotofvipers »

istinetz wrote: post #67
adamcharnock wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intelligence really doesn’t seem like the solution to any of our big problems. I’ve heard this argument before (and probably made this argument at some point too), and it seems to boil down to thinking that people would agree with me if they would just be a bit smarter and/or more informed. But I don’t think this is true at all. If it was then smart people would agree, but they don’t. There is another line of thinkin…

>Intelligence really doesn’t seem like the solution to any of our big problems. Why not? >I’ve heard this argument before (and probably made this argument at some point too), and it seems to boil down to thinking that people would agree with me if they would just be a bit smarter and/or more informed. I don't want the next generation to agree with me. I want them to be on the next level. >I think there is a strong ar…

I just really wonder though if we have not taken the idea of the brain as computer too literally and this clouds our thinking on everything at this point.

Think about how much different the concept of IQ is if we don't have computers. With computers we just think of IQ as a type of clock speed of the brain. To get "smarter" people then we just need to do some kind of overclocking.

It seems likely to me we are confusing a model for reality. Even worse that in confusing that particular brain/computer model for reality we tend to confuse all models of reality for reality. Simulation theory on down.

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#74

Post by whoomp12342 »

acadapter wrote: post #4

This may seem like a controversial opinion, but I think that it's a good development. Some people have lost the "genetic lottery" in ways that make them dependent on medication. And for some, it may block career options, such as color vision deficiencies. We should embrace it, instead of painting dystopian scenarios. At least, we shouldn't stop people from fixing problems that they were unfairly born with.

Disagree. The assumption is that we can engineer better than natural selection. The weeds in my yard prove that natural selection always wins

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#75

Post by dekhn »

ravi-delia wrote: post #11
UweSchmidt wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article I learned that there is "somatic gene editing, a therapeutic application of CRISPR administered by injection to consenting subjects", as well as "germline editing, in which changes are made to the DNA of an embryo". The author is concerned by the latter and I think you describe the former.

What OP describes, at least to the extent that I agree with them, is both but mostly germline editing. Most genetic issues aren't really treatable after birth (though we are nowhere near the limit, so in the future who knows). Genes don't really code for traits so much after the embryo develops, most of the effect comes from the manual process of cells bumping against each other

this is far from the truth in multiple ways. There are a wide range of genetic issues (typically recessive mutations) where somatic engeering would work great. And genes continuous encode for "traits" (really, molecular phenotypes) after development (which ends long after the embryo is born).

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#76

Post by kwere »

adamcharnock wrote: post #44
istinetz wrote: post #18

It is coming, but too slowly. Everyone, including people itt, gesture vaguely towards "ethical considerations", without being able to specify what they are and how they outweigh the massive ethical benefits. >I expect that human genetic engineering, both therapeutic and “vanity” applications, will become an unfathomably profitable industry in the coming decades. The most important application, by far, dwarfing both t…

Intelligence really doesn’t seem like the solution to any of our big problems. I’ve heard this argument before (and probably made this argument at some point too), and it seems to boil down to thinking that people would agree with me if they would just be a bit smarter and/or more informed. But I don’t think this is true at all. If it was then smart people would agree, but they don’t. There is another line of thinkin…

>Intelligence really doesn’t seem like the solution to any of our big problems.

Simple example: how many people in the USA understand that inflation / money printing / quantitative easing is a tax and should be avoided at the level it is used to finance the spending? Not many, for sure.

Btw intelligence is not only sheer analytical power, it is also emotional control, selintrospection, focus skill, collaboration and interpersonal skill.

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#77

Post by kwere »

michaelt wrote: post #68
Nasrudith wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it remain affordable to them only? Economies of scale apply even if just the productivity learning curve. Doing the cost/benefit analysis it may make sense for a government to subsidize or outright provide it for free. It is downright bizzare that people worry about the non-trivial and highly useful applications. What happened to bitching about the spending on baldness cures and penis pill research?

> Why would it remain affordable to them only? It's at the intersection of education and healthcare. Is it so outlandish to think that, in a country where education is so expensive it takes the average college student 20 years to pay off their debt; and medical costs are the cause of more than 60% of bankruptcies; a procedure that combined the two might be expensive?

It will be a global market, like today cost savy people can go study in Europe and mtf bottom surgery is done in Thailand, future customers will go global, expecially with tens of thousands of dollars on the line

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#78

Post by netizen-936824 »

whoomp12342 wrote: post #74
acadapter wrote: post #4

This may seem like a controversial opinion, but I think that it's a good development. Some people have lost the "genetic lottery" in ways that make them dependent on medication. And for some, it may block career options, such as color vision deficiencies. We should embrace it, instead of painting dystopian scenarios. At least, we shouldn't stop people from fixing problems that they were unfairly born with.

Disagree. The assumption is that we can engineer better than natural selection. The weeds in my yard prove that natural selection always wins

You seem to be assuming that human selection is not natural

Humans are natural, we are part of nature

Re: Human genetic engineering is coming

#79

Post by hypertele-Xii »

whoomp12342 wrote: post #74
acadapter wrote: post #4

This may seem like a controversial opinion, but I think that it's a good development. Some people have lost the "genetic lottery" in ways that make them dependent on medication. And for some, it may block career options, such as color vision deficiencies. We should embrace it, instead of painting dystopian scenarios. At least, we shouldn't stop people from fixing problems that they were unfairly born with.

Disagree. The assumption is that we can engineer better than natural selection. The weeds in my yard prove that natural selection always wins

Natural selection augmented with human ingenuity performs better on average than natural selection alone.

After all, human ingenuity is a result of natural selection that emerged precisely because it works better.

Post reply on HN