Thinking about genetic engineering of people…
Why what you think doesn’t alter the outcome: healthier people.
- If you are FOR treating diseases (vaccines -> infectious disease, medication -> emotional/physical disease), then genetic engineering is just a means to treat genetic disease, making people healthier.
- If you are anti-treatment or believe in God’s will, then natural selection kicks in, culling out the people who are unhealthy, still ending up with a healthier population, just with more people suffering and dying unnecessarily.
When cannons were invented victims thought the world was comming to an end. Nope. When guns were invented, angry gods had come to destroy them. Still here! When nuclear bombs were invented, we are all going to die from nuclear winter. … Not dead yet! Now we have cyber war, AI, and DARPA…
Always Look On The Bright Side of Life – Life Of Brian (Monty Python) Lyrics
Several international regulatory bodies including the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation of United Nations (FAO) have concluded that there is no scientific evidence that the application of GM technology has resulted in substantial human health effects or environmental problems [22,23]. For example, a British government report released by a panel of experts found out that no verifiable ill effects have been reported from consumption of GM food products and that the risks to human health are very low for current GM crops on the markets .
from: BMC Research Notes 2011, 4:388
While this wouldn’t predict all the future, the future of technology and entertainment could be predicted by harvesting all the likes/dislikes/view counts…etc and their associated key words/descriptions from social media.
You could then use mapping + rates of change of these values to summarize the data.
If you know what people like, what they hate, what they care about, and why… you could predict what the next big thing will be. The ultimate ‘Know your customer’.
This is especially interesting as people from developing countries join the internet.
Since scientists are sure to create machines that can do anything a human can do, because we just have to know, we will at some point have to either 1. give up jobs altogether or 2. socially/legally restrict what jobs machines are allowed to do. This will require us to accept and forgive our humanity, and integrate economic allowance for more expensive/lower output human labor. Social incentive, such as a “made by humans” designation for products, is a minimal-legislative first step, but more extreme measures may become necessary. Concurrently, we will need to shift from a growth economy to a stability economy so companies look to maintain profits rather than increase profits.
Many of my professors in college (2000-2005) either couldn’t use or only just figured out how to use email, and I went to a rather high-end school. Maybe during educational reform, we should reconsider whether it is the kids or the adults (especially teachers) that need to be in school.