I really do think that some political valence is built-in, but once a field is abandoned to the enemy, this also creates bias in what stories are told from that perspective. Eg. evo thinking is incremental rather than revolutionary, primes us to explain the value of status quo.
ok, so thought experiment is needed here. compare and contrast: CRISPR style adult gene editing vs. germ-line gene hacking that is only expressed in the children. the former "cures" cancer like an anti-biotic cures strep throat. the latter prevents cancer inter-generationally.
-
-
the former case is boring. too obvious that it would be widely accepted. how about the latter case. that's a eugenics program that could make treated people no longer have offspring that are vulnerable to the most common types of heritable cancers. how would that be accepted?
-
Now, a gene therapy for poverty, that would be something. This is SF premise land. One story I read had good dystopic educated elite/flyover masses setting, and then nanotech weapon is repurposed to make everyone photosynthesize. Basic minimum calories anyway.
End of conversation
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.