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

Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 388 posts

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#321

Post by thatfrenchguy »

giberson wrote: post #218

I though about this movie a lot going through IVF with my wife. Particularly when selecting the embryo to implant. For those that don’t know: With IVF, the doctor harvests as many eggs from the woman as possible. Then after taking the make sample and cleaning, selecting the semen with best modality , fertilize each embryo. Then let the embryo grow for a couple of days then freeze the embryo until it’s ready to be imp…

One interesting balancing thing though is that because people who do IVF tend to be older / have more high risk pregnancies, you’re more likely to have issues there.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#322

Post by chii »

meindnoch wrote: post #273
cm2187 wrote: post #147

Eugenism is inevitable. You can't stop parents trying to get the best life for their children, that's pretty much their top priority. We don't like to frame it that way but we are already there with pre-natal tests. Even the selection of mating partner is a form of eugenics. College graduates only marrying college graduates, repeat that for many generations and it is bound to have an effect.

In the future the state will collect sperm and eggs from all citizens, and implant random embryos into women who want children. Natural conception will be shunned like arranged marriages today.

> implant random embryos into women who want children.

so what happens to men who want children?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#323

Post by kinghtown »

speed_spread wrote: post #59
duxup wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was watching an Industrial Light And Magic documentary on Disney+ and it had Spielberg talking about the transition to digital, and he goes out of his way to make the point that effects are great but if you're not presenting it right and telling a story that is worthwhile the film just won't last.

Too bad he didn't follow his own advice when doing A.I.

Maybe he learned that lesson with AI.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#324

Post by chii »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #304

I don't share the prevailing opinion of Gattaca. I recall the main character as lying and cheating to to hide their genetic predisposition to heart failure. So they can take a place on a space mission, endangering a billion-dollar craft and the lives of the other crewman, all for hubris.

> endangering a billion-dollar craft and the lives of the other crewman

which is the an outcome that was produced by the societal bias towards imperfect people.

For example, instead of denying the role to him purely based on genetics tests, they could measure the actual performance against a standard (a standard which you'd need to perform at to do the job).

Then, if he is predisposed to heart failure, there could be provisions made to ensure it doesn't interrupt the mission or endanger people on board. Even perfectly healthy people could get a heart attack due to something unpredictable, so having the facility and knowledge to handle such a situation is good regardless.

Instead, the society is choosing to eliminate heart failure (or failure modes) - and i think they're blinded by the idea that they must've succeeded by using genetics.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#325

Post by chii »

readams wrote: post #24
kanzure wrote: post #11

Gattaca set the field of biotech back by decades. Countless hours have been wasted pointing to the movie for why we should not go down the slippery slope of genetic choice. Cool movie though, that's part of the problem. "If the audience is supposed to accept that genetic determinism is true in Gattaca, then no amount of Vincent's hard work should make Vincent a hero. He's just a fraud. If the audience is not supposed…

I don't think that's at all what you should get out of Gattaca on discrimination. Rather, even in a world where you have people who are statistically overwhelmingly likely to be better in every way, the morally right thing to do is _still_ to allow people the same opportunities to excel, and succeed or fail on their merits.

> the morally right thing to do is _still_ to allow people the same opportunities to excel, and succeed or fail on their merits.

let me play devils' advocate for a minute: should the cutting edge of human endeavour (in the case of the movie, it's going to space) be available to all and sundry, even tho statistically the superior humans would do better and thus achieve the goals of said endeavour?

If it costs the equivalent of billions or even trillions of dollars, would you make the choice to allow equal opportunity to all, at the cost of potential mission failure, rather than discriminate heavily and only allow those considered perfect?

I agree that discrimination is usually bad. But is it really discrimination, or is it competition, to only allow those that would be statistically overwhelmingly likely to be better to do the thing?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#326

Post by goatlover »

wonderwonder wrote: post #233
goatlover wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is genetics is messy as the article states, and we have a long way to go to unentangle the role the environment plays, plus there are always unpredictable environmental factors. There’s also the possibility of negative side effects to certain genetic advantages. You might predispose your child to being a genius and mentally ill. I don’t think the movie’s caste system is realistic, because the role of genes is…

While I don't disagree with you based on today's genetic mastery I think things could look very different in 25 years. Also all of human history is essentially different castes deciding they are better and society adapting to it.

And what if in 25 years we're able to show that environmental factors are more important than genetic for a majority of things?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#327

Post by chii »

jasmer wrote: post #318

It's odd that everyone talks about 'genetic enhancements' as a measure of success or opportunity because I never even thought about the film as being about that. I thought the film was far more about eugenic fascism, and that kind of thing being wrong in the first place? It's not a story about a kid who 'beat the system in which he wasn't supposed to belong'. It's a story about a system of 'stupid requirements'. It w…

> have it about students meeting 'genetic criteria' for Ivy League admissions

the film's premise was that space exploration is still relatively new frontier, and selection into the program is both a prestige affair, as well as expensive (with potential failures costly). Pre-screening candidates with high statistical rates of success makes sense for such a program imho.

Not everyone in society has to have the opportunity to be at the frontiers of human affairs.

Now, having genetic criteria for admission into education, on the other hand, is pure discrimination. There's no need, unless the resources put into education is high, such that the failure of the student puts heavy cost burdens into the system.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#328

Post by glued »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #304

I don't share the prevailing opinion of Gattaca. I recall the main character as lying and cheating to to hide their genetic predisposition to heart failure. So they can take a place on a space mission, endangering a billion-dollar craft and the lives of the other crewman, all for hubris.

What incentive does someone born perfect have to strive for perfection?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#329

Post by giberson »

KMag wrote: post #240
giberson wrote: post #218

I though about this movie a lot going through IVF with my wife. Particularly when selecting the embryo to implant. For those that don’t know: With IVF, the doctor harvests as many eggs from the woman as possible. Then after taking the make sample and cleaning, selecting the semen with best modality , fertilize each embryo. Then let the embryo grow for a couple of days then freeze the embryo until it’s ready to be imp…

Did you find a very skewed sex ratio in your embryos? My dad has a sister, but has only two sons. My brother has 3 sons and one daughter, all natural pregnancies. My wife and I have 1 son via IVF, and the other 4 embryos we had checked for chromosomal abnormalities happened to all be male. I am aware that some IVF processes can inadvertently introduce a sex bias by exacerbating the tiny speed advantage the lighter Y…

We did. The majority were female embryos. I mentioned report cards, we had 5 embryo's with grade A, 1 of which was male. We had a similar prevalence for female with lower grades as well, though there were 2 or 3 males each in the lower grades.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#330

Post by thrown_43 »

imachine1980_ wrote: post #162
thrown_43 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eugenics is a comforting story the middle classes tell themselves feel better about being ruled by liars and swindlers. If you want the best life for your children teach them to be selectively sociopathic without a shred of decency. One day they can be the next Obama or Trump. Or Gates. Or Musk.

Three of the four people(I think Obama wanst) are white sons of millioneirs, I don't think smart is the important part of the equation.

[dead]
Post reply on HN