It begins. :) http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/11/human-has-been-injected-gene-editing-tools-cure-his-disabling-disease-here-s-what-you …pic.twitter.com/LpnSJy6B5i
I think @gwern wrote the go-to reply to this argument somewhere? It's a typical argument of the precautionary principle style. One can make this kind of argument for every major tech change, and somehow they keep being wrong.
-
-
https://ethicslab.georgetown.edu/phil553/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Ord-and-Bostrom-Eliminating-Status-Quo-Bias-in-Applied-Ethics-.pdf … I have yet to see handwringing about 'reduced diversity' accompanied by a from-first-principles explanation of why 70 de novo mutations per (surviving) child is exactly optimal, parental age effects are optimal, and ever larger populations insufficient.
-
To expand a little: selection doesn't 'use up' variance bc it exposes rare variants and provides new genetic background for epistasis (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2871814/ …), larger populations get more mutations inherently to select from, and fixation makes selecting other alleles easier.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.