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

381–388 of 388 posts

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#381

Post by Tv9m »

majani wrote: post #380
Tv9m wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And then the slippery slope, “we can also improve the odds of higher intellect, being taller , thinner, etc”. I would love to have been born in a world that had slid to the bottom of that particular slope.

Many species have already slid to the bottom of that slope. The phenomenon is called Fisherian Runaway, and it's not pretty.

> and it's not pretty.

It feels somewhat ironic that when I looked up "Fisherian Runaway" the first thing I saw was an image of a peacock.

Evolution by "persistent, directional female choice" seems like exactly what our species needs to unfuck itself.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#382

Post by Tv9m »

Eisenstein wrote: post #314
Tv9m wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And then the slippery slope, “we can also improve the odds of higher intellect, being taller , thinner, etc”. I would love to have been born in a world that had slid to the bottom of that particular slope.

Cross your fingers to be born rich!

I'm always confused. The NWO conspiracy people say that gene editing will be prohibitively expensive (like owning a yacht is), but the real life examples I see don't seem that way. What are some good examples of services that could be done cheaply but are intentionally made expensive for the sake of exclusion?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#383

Post by Eisenstein »

Tv9m wrote: post #382
Eisenstein wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cross your fingers to be born rich!

I'm always confused. The NWO conspiracy people say that gene editing will be prohibitively expensive (like owning a yacht is), but the real life examples I see don't seem that way. What are some good examples of services that could be done cheaply but are intentionally made expensive for the sake of exclusion?

> but the real life examples I see don't seem that way.

In what situation would removing an egg, fertilizing it, altering its genetic sequence, and them implanting the embryo into a person be consider cheap?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#384

Post by Tv9m »

Eisenstein wrote: post #383
Tv9m wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm always confused. The NWO conspiracy people say that gene editing will be prohibitively expensive (like owning a yacht is), but the real life examples I see don't seem that way. What are some good examples of services that could be done cheaply but are intentionally made expensive for the sake of exclusion?

> but the real life examples I see don't seem that way. In what situation would removing an egg, fertilizing it, altering its genetic sequence, and them implanting the embryo into a person be consider cheap?

Looks like IVF costs around $12,000 today. Considering that this is for your own child, I bet it would be one of the least expensive parts of raising them. I also expect it would become very cheap after it went mainstream.

> The Human Genome Project was the international research effort to determine the DNA sequence of the entire human genome. It took 13 years and was published in 2003, with an estimated cost of over $300 million. Today, a whole human genome can be sequenced in one day for under $1000.

https://frontlinegenomics.com/a-history-of-sequencing/

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#385

Post by Eisenstein »

Tv9m wrote: post #384
Eisenstein wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the real life examples I see don't seem that way. In what situation would removing an egg, fertilizing it, altering its genetic sequence, and them implanting the embryo into a person be consider cheap?

Looks like IVF costs around $12,000 today. Considering that this is for your own child, I bet it would be one of the least expensive parts of raising them. I also expect it would become very cheap after it went mainstream. > The Human Genome Project was the international research effort to determine the DNA sequence of the entire human genome. It took 13 years and was published in 2003, with an estimated cost of over…

$12,000 is more than the average yearly income for a person on this planet. The USA has only 300 million or so people in it. What are the chances you are born in a place where $12,000 is considered 'the least expensive parts of raising a child'?

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#386

Post by Tv9m »

Eisenstein wrote: post #385
Tv9m wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looks like IVF costs around $12,000 today. Considering that this is for your own child, I bet it would be one of the least expensive parts of raising them. I also expect it would become very cheap after it went mainstream. > The Human Genome Project was the international research effort to determine the DNA sequence of the entire human genome. It took 13 years and was published in 2003, with an estimated cost of over…

$12,000 is more than the average yearly income for a person on this planet. The USA has only 300 million or so people in it. What are the chances you are born in a place where $12,000 is considered 'the least expensive parts of raising a child'?

Would you have made the same argument for mobile phones back when they costed $12,000? I'm assuming that many people will want to use this technology.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#387

Post by Eisenstein »

Tv9m wrote: post #386
Eisenstein wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$12,000 is more than the average yearly income for a person on this planet. The USA has only 300 million or so people in it. What are the chances you are born in a place where $12,000 is considered 'the least expensive parts of raising a child'?

Would you have made the same argument for mobile phones back when they costed $12,000? I'm assuming that many people will want to use this technology.

A mobile phone can be mass produced based on one design. This is not the case with removing eggs and doing custom gene work on them, incubating them, and implanting them in a person. You are making an invalid comparison. There are no 'economies of scale' with individual procedures.

Re: Gattaca is still pertinent 25 years later

#388

Post by Tv9m »

Eisenstein wrote: post #387
Tv9m wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you have made the same argument for mobile phones back when they costed $12,000? I'm assuming that many people will want to use this technology.

A mobile phone can be mass produced based on one design. This is not the case with removing eggs and doing custom gene work on them, incubating them, and implanting them in a person. You are making an invalid comparison. There are no 'economies of scale' with individual procedures.

It doesn't seem like you're addressing the HGP example, which at the time, would have been an "individual procedure" as well.
Post reply on HN