Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.

Neutral [chat] Hotel

1235785

Posts

  • OrganichuOrganichu Registered User regular
    Mim wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    spoilers?

    I didn't think you'd care!

    i don't, this show sounds lame

    but other people might :O
  • MimMim Registered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    how do you turn a bisexual lesbian

    is it just a good deep licking

    3 licks and you're kind of just at the center dude.
    Really it's just bad writing.
  • MazzyxMazzyx Changing the World Order. Registered User regular
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    I suspect that genetic modification to eliminate chronic diseases won't be much of an issue. I suspect genetic modification beyond that point might bring up some bioethics issues. A lot of it will depend on what exactly ends up being feasible.

    And what we are finding things such as strength, intelligence and looks are so complicated it is unlikely we will really get to a Gattaca style world anytime soon. On top of we don't know if alter a few genes for improved intelligence won't cause a whole host of other issues.

    Even genetic chronic disease is very complicated and fixing markers that seem to correlate to these diseases doesn't mean the disease will be cured either.

    Still I would be up for the testing just because the change in my quality of life would be huge.
    falasig.png
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Registered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    how do you turn a bisexual lesbian

    is it just a good deep licking
    never underestimate the effects of a judicious application of tongue
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Registered User regular
    Have you guys been following Defense Distributed? Libertarian kid started an organization that develops guns that can be made from 3D printers and then shares the blueprints for free. From this faq:
    WHY GUNS?
    We are informed by the Internet itself. If we truly believe information should be free, that the internet is the last bastion of freedom and knowledge, and that societies that share are superior to societies that censor and withhold, then whynot guns?

    Jesus christ.

    I have several good reasons. One of them is smuggling guns in airplanes is bad idea.

    It's already super-illegal to make an undetectable weapon. The one they printed had a large hunk of metal molded into the grip.

    You'd need a metallic firing pin. They might be able to do 3-D printed springs but I'm not sure if they would be reliable enough for a trigger if made of plastic. I'd also be curious as to how much pressure the firing chamber can take using plastics from a 3-D printer.
    There's no living with a killing. There's no goin' back from one. Right or wrong, it's a brand... a brand sticks. There's no goin' back. Now you run on home to your mother and tell her... tell her everything's alright. And there aren't any more guns in the valley.
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    Mim is a murderer of fun.
    _J_ wrote:
    If we only allowed pedophiles to be parents, then we would never have to worry about children being left alone, unwatched.
    XBL: Fanatical One AIM: itskagera
  • Donkey KongDonkey Kong and a cast of thousands Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    Seriously though there has for to be some issues that in the future the current progressives will be seen as rev regressive and conservative on. Perhaps dual gentials? Cyborgasms? Meme citizenship?

    Affirmative action.

    goddamnit

    Affirmative action needs to be retired at some point. If the program's still around after 100 years, it's time to try something else.

    it's all but retired at present, already.

    When it comes to schools, which is what people are usually referring to with regards to affirmative action, I believe most colleges and universities say they don't even consider and sort of legal quotas because they've either been phased out or because they're already exceeding them so substantially they they don't need to. Any perceived bias in admissions is just internal policy to come up with a balanced student body.
    dkmouthsig.png
  • MimMim Registered User regular
    Organichu wrote: »
    Mim wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    spoilers?

    I didn't think you'd care!

    i don't, this show sounds lame

    but other people might :O

    I don't think anyone is going to be watching "The L Word". In fact, I'm betting I'm pretty much alone.

    Spoilering "The L Word" is like spoilering "Cinderella". You just KNOW what's going to happen.
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Have you guys been following Defense Distributed? Libertarian kid started an organization that develops guns that can be made from 3D printers and then shares the blueprints for free. From this faq:
    WHY GUNS?
    We are informed by the Internet itself. If we truly believe information should be free, that the internet is the last bastion of freedom and knowledge, and that societies that share are superior to societies that censor and withhold, then whynot guns?

    Jesus christ.

    Yawn.

    Zip guns have been a thing forever. I could tell you how to make a gun with materials from Home Depot, but other than being a different method (that's probably a lot more dangerous / less reliable) the 3d printer guns are nothing new or special.

    It's not the easily available homemade guns, the tech isn't important and it was only a matter of time before they started popping up on 3D printers. I can't even care too much, because they're shoddy and break after one shot.

    It's this guy's batshit outlook.

    Gun people with a scary and batshit outlook? No way.

    Read up on the camera crew that got attacked in KY today, and the newspaper reporter who was threatened...because they were in the town where that two year old was shot by their five year old brother's gun.

    Hell, as much as I disagree with some of the pro-gun people in our gun thread here, pretty much none of them are close to the pants-on-the-head crazy that's pretty ubiquitous in the pro-gun circles.
    steam_sig.png
  • Dread Pirate ArbuthnotDread Pirate Arbuthnot Registered User regular
    a show about a bunch of computer store employees who have to sell shitty equipment

    The Dell Word
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    I really like the world ubiquitous.

    It's been my favorite word for a while now.
    steam_sig.png
  • MimMim Registered User regular
    Kagera wrote: »
    Mim is a murderer of fun.

    I don't spoil things that are super important or intricate

    Like Game of Thrones or Twin Peaks.
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. Risk is our business.Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    emnmnme wrote: »
    Organichu wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Kagera wrote: »
    Seriously though there has for to be some issues that in the future the current progressives will be seen as rev regressive and conservative on. Perhaps dual gentials? Cyborgasms? Meme citizenship?

    Affirmative action.

    goddamnit

    Affirmative action needs to be retired at some point. If the program's still around after 100 years, it's time to try something else.

    it's all but retired at present, already.

    When it comes to schools, which is what people are usually referring to with regards to affirmative action, I believe most colleges and universities say they don't even consider and sort of legal quotas because they've either been phased out or because they're already exceeding them so substantially they they don't need to. Any perceived bias in admissions is just internal policy to come up with a balanced student body.

    iirc quota systems were ruled unconstitutional

    Lh96QHG.png
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    edited May 2013
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Have you guys been following Defense Distributed? Libertarian kid started an organization that develops guns that can be made from 3D printers and then shares the blueprints for free. From this faq:
    WHY GUNS?
    We are informed by the Internet itself. If we truly believe information should be free, that the internet is the last bastion of freedom and knowledge, and that societies that share are superior to societies that censor and withhold, then whynot guns?

    Jesus christ.

    I have several good reasons. One of them is smuggling guns in airplanes is bad idea.

    It's already super-illegal to make an undetectable weapon. The one they printed had a large hunk of metal molded into the grip.

    You'd need a metallic firing pin. They might be able to do 3-D printed springs but I'm not sure if they would be reliable enough for a trigger if made of plastic. I'd also be curious as to how much pressure the firing chamber can take using plastics from a 3-D printer.

    Yeah, the firing pin they used was purchased, not printed. It's a single shot pistol, I'm not sure how they propelled the firing pin though, but the action of loading and cocking it re-set the trigger afaik.
    matt has a problem on
    h1DI1.jpg
  • HamurabiHamurabi Registered User regular
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    I suspect that genetic modification to eliminate chronic diseases won't be much of an issue. I suspect genetic modification beyond that point might bring up some bioethics issues. A lot of it will depend on what exactly ends up being feasible.

    Leveling the playing field is one thing.

    But what about giving kids advantages (assuming it becomes possible) ? Why would you not predispose your kid to high IQ/g or to a fast metabolism or to Michael Phelps-esque long limbs and a broad frame for swimming (as an example) ? If the technology becomes practicable, there is eventually literally nothing that will be able to stop (some) people from doing it. Sure, you can make something illegal, but the historical record shows that trying to defeat something with enormous demand through legislation only drives it underground, with potentially worse consequences.
    network_sig2.png
  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    The Fell Word, part one of a trilogy by Terry Goodkind
    Per3th.jpg
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    Hamurabi wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    I suspect that genetic modification to eliminate chronic diseases won't be much of an issue. I suspect genetic modification beyond that point might bring up some bioethics issues. A lot of it will depend on what exactly ends up being feasible.

    Leveling the playing field is one thing.

    But what about giving kids advantages (assuming it becomes possible) ? Why would you not predispose your kid to high IQ/g or to a fast metabolism or to Michael Phelps-esque long limbs and a broad frame for swimming (as an example) ? If the technology becomes practicable, there is eventually literally nothing that will be able to stop (some) people from doing it. Sure, you can make something illegal, but the historical record shows that trying to defeat something with enormous demand through legislation only drives it underground, with potentially worse consequences.

    When everyone is special, no one will be.
    h1DI1.jpg
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    spool32 wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    Beyond repairing "flaws", I believe progressives of today will be opposed to augmenting the body to make it better or genetically modifying babies in utero to be "better".

    Also, the issue of equality and fairness will lead today's progressives to oppose technological augmentation that give the rich a competitive advantage in the marketplace that is insurmountable by 'natural' humans and is unavailable except at a high price.

    Social justice progressives who oppose space exploration (because we should spend that money on the poor) will also find themselves on the wrong side of the argument in the coming decades.

    it's not obvious to me that genetic enhancement will break along party lines. if anything, i'd guess that conservatives will tend to oppose it out of the traditional right-wing troika of "religious objections," "fear of change" and "general orneriness."

    the left-wing objection would be that it gives those who can afford it an even larger advantage. it's worth noting that these sorts of ideals haven't really done anything to influence politics since, like 1910.

    publicly funded space exploration will continue to be a stupid waste of a money-pit and will be eliminated as soon as private exploration makes some minor strides and the big defense companies see the writing on the wall and stop lobbying their republican congresspeople for space funding.
  • Sir LandsharkSir Landshark Registered User regular
    When in doubt, spoiler tags throughout
    Please consider the environment before printing this post.
  • Donkey KongDonkey Kong and a cast of thousands Registered User regular
    The only problem I have with genetic modification is that I'm way too old to benefit properly, having already been born.

    So obviously it's bullshit and unethical or whatever and should be banned.
    dkmouthsig.png
  • MazzyxMazzyx Changing the World Order. Registered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    Beyond repairing "flaws", I believe progressives of today will be opposed to augmenting the body to make it better or genetically modifying babies in utero to be "better".

    Also, the issue of equality and fairness will lead today's progressives to oppose technological augmentation that give the rich a competitive advantage in the marketplace that is insurmountable by 'natural' humans and is unavailable except at a high price.

    Social justice progressives who oppose space exploration (because we should spend that money on the poor) will also find themselves on the wrong side of the argument in the coming decades.

    Lots of assumptions for something that probably won't come around for a few decades. Societal changes of this scale tend to be opposed more by conservatives than liberal groups but I can see where you are coming from.

    And there is also a large group of liberals and educated folks who will see it as moving forward in evolution.

    I mean if we don't wipe ourselves out in the next 20 to 30 years.

    Also I think you are missing what an actual social justice progressive is verse the caricature of a social justice progressive.
    falasig.png
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    Mars One will never get out of the interview phase.
    _J_ wrote:
    If we only allowed pedophiles to be parents, then we would never have to worry about children being left alone, unwatched.
    XBL: Fanatical One AIM: itskagera
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    The only problem I have with genetic modification is that I'm way too old to benefit properly, having already been born.

    So obviously it's bullshit and unethical or whatever and should be banned.

    Just eat a bunch of fetuses for their delicious stem cells.
    h1DI1.jpg
  • TehSlothTehSloth On that ass like Charmin Registered User regular
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Have you guys been following Defense Distributed? Libertarian kid started an organization that develops guns that can be made from 3D printers and then shares the blueprints for free. From this faq:
    WHY GUNS?
    We are informed by the Internet itself. If we truly believe information should be free, that the internet is the last bastion of freedom and knowledge, and that societies that share are superior to societies that censor and withhold, then whynot guns?

    Jesus christ.

    Yawn.

    Zip guns have been a thing forever. I could tell you how to make a gun with materials from Home Depot, but other than being a different method (that's probably a lot more dangerous / less reliable) the 3d printer guns are nothing new or special.

    It's not the easily available homemade guns, the tech isn't important and it was only a matter of time before they started popping up on 3D printers. I can't even care too much, because they're shoddy and break after one shot.

    It's this guy's batshit outlook.

    Their durability is getting pretty impressive. Their AR lower is supposed to be pretty resilient and all the other parts are purchasable online. They just tested a new pistol I think that is completely 3d printed except for the firing pin which is a nail. It's gonna be a while before it can get through an entire magazine though.
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Registered User regular
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    I suspect that genetic modification to eliminate chronic diseases won't be much of an issue. I suspect genetic modification beyond that point might bring up some bioethics issues. A lot of it will depend on what exactly ends up being feasible.

    And what we are finding things such as strength, intelligence and looks are so complicated it is unlikely we will really get to a Gattaca style world anytime soon. On top of we don't know if alter a few genes for improved intelligence won't cause a whole host of other issues.

    Even genetic chronic disease is very complicated and fixing markers that seem to correlate to these diseases doesn't mean the disease will be cured either.

    Still I would be up for the testing just because the change in my quality of life would be huge.

    And there are just some upper limits you hit just based on our design. It's possible under extreme conditions for muscles to break the bone they are attached to. Increasing muscle strength could mean serious problems if you shift the capability from extreme to unlikely. Particularly when that group gets older and osteoporosis becomes an issue.
    There's no living with a killing. There's no goin' back from one. Right or wrong, it's a brand... a brand sticks. There's no goin' back. Now you run on home to your mother and tell her... tell her everything's alright. And there aren't any more guns in the valley.
  • Solomaxwell6Solomaxwell6 Registered User regular
    Kagera wrote: »
    I think unions and socialism need to make a come back right the fuck soon.

    I've been watching The Wire, and unions are pretty great. Just say you can't pay your bills, then get a few thousand bucks next time you go to the bar? Need some extra cash so you sell some chemicals to drug dealers and get another few thousand? Yes, please!

    Jesus, I was part of a union for about two months once, and I didn't get any of those awesome perks.
  • HonkHonk Registered User regular
    zagdrob wrote: »
    Have you guys been following Defense Distributed? Libertarian kid started an organization that develops guns that can be made from 3D printers and then shares the blueprints for free. From this faq:
    WHY GUNS?
    We are informed by the Internet itself. If we truly believe information should be free, that the internet is the last bastion of freedom and knowledge, and that societies that share are superior to societies that censor and withhold, then whynot guns?

    Jesus christ.

    Yawn.

    Zip guns have been a thing forever. I could tell you how to make a gun with materials from Home Depot, but other than being a different method (that's probably a lot more dangerous / less reliable) the 3d printer guns are nothing new or special.

    Also his 3D printer thing, last I saw, still required you to buy the registered and serial numbered working parts of an AR-15 from Colt or whoever makes them.

    His part of the equation you could as well carve in wood for all I care. It is far from the case where you press print and end up with a weapon. Basically it's a frame so who cares. Just ignore another deluded libertarian kid among the thousands of deluded libertarian kids already best ignored.
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    Hamurabi wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    I suspect that genetic modification to eliminate chronic diseases won't be much of an issue. I suspect genetic modification beyond that point might bring up some bioethics issues. A lot of it will depend on what exactly ends up being feasible.

    Leveling the playing field is one thing.

    But what about giving kids advantages (assuming it becomes possible) ? Why would you not predispose your kid to high IQ/g or to a fast metabolism or to Michael Phelps-esque long limbs and a broad frame for swimming (as an example) ? If the technology becomes practicable, there is eventually literally nothing that will be able to stop (some) people from doing it. Sure, you can make something illegal, but the historical record shows that trying to defeat something with enormous demand through legislation only drives it underground, with potentially worse consequences.

    Nah, you're overthinking it.

    It won't get pushed underground. It'll get pushed offshore.

    How long do you think we'll be letting China churn out Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt caliber athletes? Or super-smart students? Hell - even if it doesn't have much to do with genetics, all we'll need is a PERCEPTION of a 'genetics gap' to get that stuff all legalized up ins.
    steam_sig.png
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    There must not be a genetic super-mutant gap.
    h1DI1.jpg
  • KageraKagera Registered User regular
    It should work like rpg stats you only have so many points to allocate and if you want more you have to dump charisma.
    _J_ wrote:
    If we only allowed pedophiles to be parents, then we would never have to worry about children being left alone, unwatched.
    XBL: Fanatical One AIM: itskagera
  • Irond WillIrond Will Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    The only problem I have with genetic modification is that I'm way too old to benefit properly, having already been born.

    So obviously it's bullshit and unethical or whatever and should be banned.

    Just eat a bunch of fetuses for their delicious stem cells.

    but stem cells adapt to whatever part of the body they're placed in

    and the last thing i need are more tongue and stomach cells
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    Putting all my points in dick size.
    h1DI1.jpg
  • HamurabiHamurabi Registered User regular
    Kagera wrote: »
    I think unions and socialism need to make a come back right the fuck soon.

    The Tea Party engenders a reaction from the left that spawns The New Deal 2: House Rules: Return of the Happy Warrior: The Search for Keynes's Gold.

    An Aaron Sorkin joint.
    network_sig2.png
  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    Kagera wrote: »
    It should work like rpg stats you only have so many points to allocate and if you want more you have to dump charisma.
    seriously

    my charisma is already at the minimum, at least let me max intelligence

    god

    reroll pls
    Per3th.jpg
  • Sir LandsharkSir Landshark Registered User regular
    man what if we created a whole population of genetically perfect babies and then a super plague wiped everyone out cuz we eliminated any genetic diversity
    Please consider the environment before printing this post.
  • zagdrobzagdrob Registered User regular
    Kagera wrote: »
    It should work like rpg stats you only have so many points to allocate and if you want more you have to dump charisma.

    You can always fix Charisma.

    Cosmetic surgery is where it's at.
    steam_sig.png
  • SarksusSarksus TEN FUCKING DOLLARS Registered User regular
    I want a designer clone and my mind downloaded into it.

    Or just put me in a computer and make me a hundred times more intelligent.
  • ThomamelasThomamelas Registered User regular
    Hamurabi wrote: »
    Thomamelas wrote: »
    Mazzyx wrote: »
    spool32 wrote: »
    Polyamory.

    Genetic modification, especially of the human body and most especially for selecting / designing children in utero.

    Biotech augmentation of the body, esp. embedded computing.

    These are all things today's progressives will find a bridge too far.

    I would be up for biotech augmentation and embedded computing.

    Genetic modification for certain things is a good idea for and if I have kids. I have Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis and this is all tied to a genetic autoimmune disease. Which also have a few other things that could show up down the line.

    I would be up for genetic modification in the womb so my children would never have the chance to suffer through these chronic genetic diseases.

    I suspect that genetic modification to eliminate chronic diseases won't be much of an issue. I suspect genetic modification beyond that point might bring up some bioethics issues. A lot of it will depend on what exactly ends up being feasible.

    Leveling the playing field is one thing.

    But what about giving kids advantages (assuming it becomes possible) ? Why would you not predispose your kid to high IQ/g or to a fast metabolism or to Michael Phelps-esque long limbs and a broad frame for swimming (as an example) ? If the technology becomes practicable, there is eventually literally nothing that will be able to stop (some) people from doing it. Sure, you can make something illegal, but the historical record shows that trying to defeat something with enormous demand through legislation only drives it underground, with potentially worse consequences.

    I think it's more a question of if it's possible. A lot of what you are proposing to tinker with are some very complicated systems. And not all of them can be replicated in test species. I can test muscle improvements in rats but tinkering with brain functions is going to be a nightmare to test.
    There's no living with a killing. There's no goin' back from one. Right or wrong, it's a brand... a brand sticks. There's no goin' back. Now you run on home to your mother and tell her... tell her everything's alright. And there aren't any more guns in the valley.
  • matt has a problemmatt has a problem Six pack on a dick Registered User regular
    Irond Will wrote: »
    The only problem I have with genetic modification is that I'm way too old to benefit properly, having already been born.

    So obviously it's bullshit and unethical or whatever and should be banned.

    Just eat a bunch of fetuses for their delicious stem cells.

    but stem cells adapt to whatever part of the body they're placed in

    and the last thing i need are more tongue and stomach cells

    Like some freakish cow-stomached Gene Simmons impersonator...
    h1DI1.jpg
This discussion has been closed.