body { -ms-overflow-style: scrollbar; overflow-y: scroll; overscroll-behavior-y: none; } .errorContainer { background-color: #FFF; color: #0F1419; max-width: 600px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 10%; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; } .errorButton { margin: 3em 0; } .errorButton a { background: #1DA1F2; border-radius: 2.5em; color: white; padding: 1em 2em; text-decoration: none; } .errorButton a:hover, .errorButton a:focus { background: rgb(26, 145, 218); } .errorFooter { color: #657786; font-size: 80%; line-height: 1.5; padding: 1em 0; } .errorFooter a, .errorFooter a:visited { color: #657786; text-decoration: none; padding-right: 1em; } .errorFooter a:hover, .errorFooter a:active { text-decoration: underline; } #placeholder, #react-root { display: none !important; } body { background-color: #FFF !important; }

JavaScript is not available.

We’ve detected that JavaScript is disabled in this browser. Please enable JavaScript or switch to a supported browser to continue using twitter.com. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.

Terms of Service Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Imprint Ads info © 2023 Twitter, Inc.

Conversation

Replying to

Assuming we had the tech, is it okay or not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child's eventual beauty/handsomeness? Assume by doing this their child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
27.6%
it's okay
46.7%
it's not okay
15.1%
it's actively horrific
10.7%

1,407 votesFinal results

2

1

10

Assuming we had tech, is it okay or not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child's neurotypicalness (no autism, adhd, etc)? Assume by doing this their child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
31.2%
it's okay
44.7%
it's not okay
12.9%
it's actively horrific
11.2%

1,390 votesFinal results

4

2

12

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child's lack of genetic diseases/physical health? Assume by doing this their child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
67.8%
it's okay
21.6%
it's not okay
4%
it's actively horrific
6.5%

1,412 votesFinal results

1

9

Assuming we had the tech, is it okay or not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be hard working/conscientious? Assume by doing this their child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
23.4%
it's okay
50.9%
it's not okay
14.7%
it's actively horrific
11%

1,363 votesFinal results

1

9

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be self-assured/self-prioritizing/confident? Assume by doing this the child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
20.6%
it's okay
53.7%
it's not okay
14.1%
it's actively horrific
11.6%

1,380 votesFinal results

2

1

9

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be high openness/novelty seeking/unusual? Assume by doing this the child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
12.3%
it's okay
58.9%
it's not okay
17.5%
it's actively horrific
11.2%

1,363 votesFinal results

2

8

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be autistic? Assume by doing this the child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
5.6%
it's okay
23.6%
it's not okay
36.6%
it's actively horrific
34.3%

1,471 votesFinal results

4

1

9

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to have attractive (large/tight) genitals after reach adulthood? Assume the person comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
14.1%
it's okay
50.9%
it's not okay
17.8%
it's actively horrific
17.2%

1,451 votesFinal results

1

1

8

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be more artistically/musically skilled? Assume by doing this the child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
21.5%
it's okay
55.1%
it's not okay
12.8%
it's actively horrific
10.6%

1,431 votesFinal results

1

1

9

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be optimistic/happy/emotionally resilient? Assume by doing this the child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
39.3%
it's okay
36.5%
it's not okay
11.3%
it's actively horrific
12.9%

2,460 votesFinal results

3

1

11

Assuming we had tech, is it okay/not okay for parents to do embryo selection to optimize for their future child to be taller? Assume by doing this the child comes out 1 full standard deviation better by this metric than they would have otherwise.

They *should* do this
15.2%
it's okay
51.4%
it's not okay
17.7%
it's actively horrific
15.7%

2,497 votesFinal results

5:31 AM · Dec 16, 2022

35.6K

Views

Replying to

Being pro-life is based. “It’s not okay” right across the board.

@snoopy_dot_jpg

Replying to

take the brave new world route. most kids come from the state via artificial means once we have the tech. at that point gender matters less for the health of the population, so yolo.

1

@snoopy_dot_jpg

Replying to

@snoopy_dot_jpg

and

I likely have a fairly extreme opinion here.

Replying to

Ditto

1

Replying to

A standard deviation of height is actually non-trivially bad for your lifespan (every additional inch raises all-cause mortality by several percent). Simply having more cells that can get cancer ends up mattering.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Now, the Taller Die Earlier: The Curse of Cancer - PubMed

This study estimates the relationship between height and mortality. Individuals in the National Health Interview Survey 1986, a nationally representative U.S. sample, are linked to death certificate...

1

6

Dean Madden (yes, THAT Dean Madden)

Replying to

Didn’t even fully read through any of them, so “let’s optimize for a thoroughly homogenized species w no deviations from the norm” and be done with it

2

Wtf Is going on here.

@WutTFisGoingOn

Replying to

These things are ONLY ok if they can be done by ány parent without cost. If this is some expensive treatment, good luck, youre well on your way of and creating a rich sub-species of human as physical succes and wealth increase the feedback loop.

3

Reddit.Com/r/EroticEntertainment

@TheGreatestOfEE

Replying to

We need more tall men, they really should.

Replying to

I know taller ppl are more likely to succeed but I don't think being short is a legitimate deficiency just a cultural one. I'd rather genetically enhance ppl to not care how tall their partner/leader is.

1