←back to thread

Baby is healed with first personalized gene-editing treatment

(www.nytimes.com)
1160 points jbredeche | 1 comments | 15 May 25 18:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.203s | source
Show context
throw7 ◴[15 May 25 20:12 UTC] No.43998840[source]▶
Gattaca here we come!
replies(3): >>43999792 #>>44000149 #>>44001430 #
GenshoTikamura ◴[15 May 25 22:01 UTC] No.43999792[source]▶
One can not simply raise valid concerns about gene editing technologies in the hands of the entities that don't hesitate sending people en masse to kill and die and otherwise manifest their fascist cravings in the open, here on HN and walk away undownvoted
replies(1): >>44002878 #
kubb ◴[16 May 25 08:03 UTC] No.44002878[source]▶
Science fiction pattern matching is a problem nobody talks about. People see something that vaguely resembles a movie that they saw and act like that movie is reality now.
replies(1): >>44003074 #
GenshoTikamura ◴[16 May 25 08:37 UTC] No.44003074[source]▶
Another problem nobody talks about is the cognitive dissonance of living in the world today but dismissing all matching patterns as science fiction or conspiracy theories. Maybe narrow focus and short attention span are to blame
replies(1): >>44004944 #
kubb ◴[16 May 25 13:00 UTC] No.44004944[source]▶
When someone tells you they know how the future plays out because they saw it in fiction, oh boy you better be skeptical.
replies(1): >>44008081 #
1. goda90 ◴[16 May 25 17:48 UTC] No.44008081[source]▶
Maybe they are actually saying "we should take steps to avoid possible futures that we've already established would be bad in our works of art". You can't just hand wave away the idea that some technology could allow for greater invasion of privacy and worse social stratification when we still live in a world where invasion of privacy and social stratification actively occur.