Evinceo
Resident Normie
No bio...
User ID: 224
The scenario I'm envisioning involves ill-advised embryo modification. It's entirely possible to introduce a shitty but not embryo-fatal mutation.
None of what you said will stop folks from trying, and some poor mutants who had no say in the matter will live with the consequences.
I read a decent primer on making zipguns (the name for what you're talking about) a while back. Takes some skill to make a weapon that isn't going to blow your hand off but it's definitely not rocket science. Sufficiently motivated people do it; Shinzo Abe was recently assassinated with a zipgun.
I'd take a zipgun made of metal over a plastic one any day.
Yeah you do, it's called Natural Selection.
What if running a social media platform — that both turns a profit and does good for society — has a higher degree of difficulty than rocket science?
Almost certainly. In fact, running a social network that does good for society may be intractable alone, putting profit aside.
Maybe the two axioms you have at the beginning aren't actually true. But even if they are, I'd be surprised if 'national intelligence' as a factor for economic success is enough to make a visible impact compared to much larger factors like population size, development, cranky neighbors, natural resources, or other regular international relations type stuff.
You could broadly say that NIH wants to be in the germs business but not the make people smarter business.
I would say that moves towards a GATTACA world are dangerous.
This is a wild supposition. What they're preventing is embryo selection for intelligence, or worse, people monkeying around with CRISPR. If it prevents HBD studies that's just icing.
You think the NIH is creating superintelligent superdoctors in secret?
Persuit of truth is important, but so is keeping a lid on data which can be misused. As far as I know, there's data that Joe Public just can't get about nuclear weapon internals, for example. I suppose they're treating 'which genes make you smart anyway' as similarly hazardous research. I can't blame them.
you
Me in particular, or just people who aren't HBD enthusiasts?
If it comes out later that you lied you're screwed, see Elizabeth Warren (though she thought family lore counted.)
America already has this in the form of Catholic schools and BYU. i assume other Christian denominations have set up schools as well.
I don't think that NIH wants to be in the Eugenics business, so they're taking steps to avoid it.
Because dead people's interests can't be served in any meaningful way?
You can't pay them enough to give up time for having babies
You sure about that? How much do you think it would cost?
We already have a system that allows for inheritance of power, concentration where you have fewer kids and disbursement when you have more: it's called property.
Why turn votes into property?
It's worth considering that in the case of severe civil wars, you might not want a one-state-solution at all. The current international relations regime is very anti-breakaway because it's made up of states that of course don't want breakaway regions to escape.
As for the rest of your argument, you're looking through an interesting lens, but not the one democracy is built around. Democracy is meant to serve living, voting individuals, not ghosts or imagined futures.
EDKH doesn't require that big a conspiracy though, and the number of potential people ordering the hit is potentially huge - for all we know, Musk had him whacked.
Providing enterprise support for bigcorps to use Twitter for press releases might be a worthwhile play but it would increase rather than decrease censorship because it would be used to keep brand images clean.
The way you're supposed to plan these is fire only a fraction of the total you want to lay off, knowing that many more will follow. He said he wanted to do 75% but only did 50... probably banking on some pf that 25 leaving now without severance.
Anyway, having seen a company do a big blind idiot layoff like this... Twitter is definitely in for a rough ride in the short term.
I don’t understand fight antisemitism movement.
I hope your people never face the kind of existential threat that leads to generations of people getting this defensive.
Jews seem to be doing fine in this country.
I don't understand the antiwoke movement, whites seem to be doing fine. I don't understand the AI risk movement, humans seem to be doing fine. I don't understand anti-trans folks because the straights are doing fine, but I likewise don't understand the trans rights movement because Trans people are doing fine. 'Doing fine' isn't very specific.
The stuff he promoted is bad but just let a guy do his job.
Believe it or not, part of every job is 'don't make your employer look foolish.' If you're making big public stupids and part of your job is appearing on TV in front of reporters, you may be in trouble with your boss.
I strongly advise everyone here boycotts woke brands.
Nike, NBA, and Disney are dead brands to me.
Is this cancel culture?
Actually really like Star Wars and here there’s a good new series out but I can’t watch it.
Proof that cancel culture is more trouble than it's worth. The CEOs endorsed Trump but I still wear New Balance and eat Goya. And if I could afford one, I'd certainly consider owning a Tesla even if I think Musk is an idiot.
Could you explain what this is supposed to mean?
If the argument is that modernity sucks, it's possible to live in the west and reject modernity.
Why would someone need to do that?
I dunno, but gp was arguing that Afghans are more free, and I was pointing out that a similar lifestyle is available to anyone willing to try it in the west.
but I can live a traditional life without doing that.
Indeed you can, and indeed you don't need to go amish to do it; amish are just an extreme example. This rather undermines the line:
corrosive American-style freedom
Doesn't it?
That's a conveniently comforting belief.
More options
Context Copy link