4 ms·

Dystopian anticipations have been 180 degrees wrong: 1.Genetic Testing - Anticpated: GATTACA What we got: A bunch of innocent people freed from jai

Dystopian anticipations have been 180 degrees wrong: 1.Genetic Testing - Anticpated: GATTACA What we got: A bunch of innocent people freed from jail. Who, today, would want to live in a world without genetic forensics? 2. Pacifying Narcotics - Anticipated: Brave New World What we got:War on Drugs, 80's crack epidemic. Huxley foresaw the gov't forcing people to take drugs. The real problem was the gov't trying to stop people from willingly taking drugs.

happyscrappy 11y ago
It is much more exciting to discuss strife and chaos. Doom sells. Continual progress is boring but more accurate.
onion2k 11y ago
GATTACA is about genetic design rather than genetic testing.
- stillsut 11y ago
  The protagonist doesn't wish his brother was born with his same gene for heart failure, he wishes companies would stop using genetic tests to filter out candidates. Most of the movie deals with bad guys trying to find trace hair and DNA from imposters. Genetic testing.
  - caskance 11y ago
    He wishes it the way modern antivaxxers wish big pharma would stop giving kids autism.
    - Dylan16807 11y ago
      What? In the movie he wishes for the companies to stop doing something they are actually doing. They are overzealously testing for any possible problem and marking people as unclean. It's unsubtle textbook discrimination, removing perfectly good candidates from consideration. The company is hardly affected, there are plenty of candidates, but since these people are shunned by most companies they suffer terribly. How in the world does that related to people with imaginary causes of autism.
      - caskance 11y ago
        From his perspective it certainly must seem that way. He can probably even point to a paper published by a legitimate researcher to show that it does happen. Even if it was written by someone who was paid to do so and all his coauthors later retracted their support.
        Dylan16807 11y ago
        You're actually arguing that it is a fringe opinion that the companies in Gattaca are discriminating based on genes?
        caskance 11y ago
        They discriminate in the same sense that that real companies today discriminate based on candidates' skills and experience. Selecting the most qualified candidates and filtering out candidates because they trip certain flags are procedurally very different.
        Dylan16807 11y ago
        Sure, when the qualifications have anything to do with the job. When you apply a test to applicants, if it happens to have a bias that touches protected groups you had better have a very good argument that it relates directly to core job requirements or you are leaving yourself open to a massive lawsuit. Which might happen anyway. Plus all the circumstances where you must make reasonable accommodations even if it has some impact, as long as they can still do the job.
        caskance 11y ago
        Applying real-life ideas about what is protected to a eugenicist utopia really makes sense to you?
        Dylan16807 11y ago
- Retra 11y ago
  Gattaca doesn't really show off any technological problems so much as it does a new kind of racism. Which, frankly, is not a problem so unmanageable that we should avoid genetic engineering to prevent. Basically, Gattaca's problems could be managed by passing a couple of well-designed laws.
  - xrange 11y ago
    "...This could explain why well-educated, intelligent people, all across the political spectrum, so often make the unspoken assumption that good intentions and well-crafted words are sufficient for making good public policy" http://jaltcoh.blogspot.com/2015/04/what-are-we-doing-when-we-teach-fiction.html http://jaltcoh.blogspot.com/2015/04/what-are-we-doing-when-w...
    - dalke 11y ago
      Why make a quip that can be pulled out for just about any topic, when we have an actual law in place - the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008? Is that a 'well-designed law'? It's certainly more than "good intentions and well-crafted words", as the $2.25 million award for the GINA lawsuit earlier this year shows. See http://www.nature.com/news/why-the-devious-defecator-case-is-a-landmark-for-us-genetic-privacy-law-1.17857 http://www.nature.com/news/why-the-devious-defecator-case-is... . While that's the first one to get to trial, the article says that the EEOC filed 333 cases last year which cited GINA.
gambler 11y ago
Bad examples. Both of those things were pretty much spot-on. Just don't get hung up on details. We don't yet have genetic testing as an entry barrier for things, but we have other similarly arbitrary tests. Companies checking your credit ratings and requiring annual health evaluations of their employees. Some companies "encourage" everyone to wear company-provided health monitors 24/7. Claims that you're predisposed towards certain diseases based on various parameters are everywhere. Brave New World wasn't wrong about drugs. People dope themselves on painkillers, antidepressants and other mood-altering drugs.
- cgh 11y ago
  Gattaca was specifically about genetic testing. Saying that's analogous to checking credit ratings is moving the goalposts. The government doesn't force or encourage people to take antidepressants or other "mood-altering drugs", except when they are eg incarcerated. Government involvement in the entire population taking such drugs is a crucial and explicit element of the BNW dystopia.
  - gambler 11y ago
    "Moving the goalposts" implies that I established some criteria and than changed it. I did no such thing. >Gattaca was specifically about genetic testing. If that's how you read/watch science fiction, you're wasting your time. Gattaca and Brave New World are dystopian stories. Dystopias are not meant to precisely predict the future. They are mean to show how the future will look like if certain conditions are met. The overall reasoning matters far more than specifics. The overall reasoning in Gattaca looks solid. And we're nowhere near the level of genetic testing/engineering technology shown in the movie. But we're getting there. >Government involvement in the entire population taking such drugs is a crucial and explicit element of the BNW dystopia. Where was this government involvement described? http://www.huxley.net/soma/somaquote.html http://www.huxley.net/soma/somaquote.html I don't recall the book explicitly speaking about government involvement with Soma at all, aside from the implication that government approved of it. FDA approves all the anti-depressants and painkillers as well. So?

happyscrappy 11y ago

It is much more exciting to discuss strife and chaos. Doom sells. Continual progress is boring but more accurate.

onion2k 11y ago

GATTACA is about genetic design rather than genetic testing.

stillsut 11y ago
The protagonist doesn't wish his brother was born with his same gene for heart failure, he wishes companies would stop using genetic tests to filter out candidates. Most of the movie deals with bad guys trying to find trace hair and DNA from imposters. Genetic testing.
- caskance 11y ago
  He wishes it the way modern antivaxxers wish big pharma would stop giving kids autism.
  - Dylan16807 11y ago
    What? In the movie he wishes for the companies to stop doing something they are actually doing. They are overzealously testing for any possible problem and marking people as unclean. It's unsubtle textbook discrimination, removing perfectly good candidates from consideration. The company is hardly affected, there are plenty of candidates, but since these people are shunned by most companies they suffer terribly. How in the world does that related to people with imaginary causes of autism.
    - caskance 11y ago
      From his perspective it certainly must seem that way. He can probably even point to a paper published by a legitimate researcher to show that it does happen. Even if it was written by someone who was paid to do so and all his coauthors later retracted their support.
      - Dylan16807 11y ago
        You're actually arguing that it is a fringe opinion that the companies in Gattaca are discriminating based on genes?
        caskance 11y ago
        They discriminate in the same sense that that real companies today discriminate based on candidates' skills and experience. Selecting the most qualified candidates and filtering out candidates because they trip certain flags are procedurally very different.
        Dylan16807 11y ago
        Sure, when the qualifications have anything to do with the job. When you apply a test to applicants, if it happens to have a bias that touches protected groups you had better have a very good argument that it relates directly to core job requirements or you are leaving yourself open to a massive lawsuit. Which might happen anyway. Plus all the circumstances where you must make reasonable accommodations even if it has some impact, as long as they can still do the job.
        caskance 11y ago
        Applying real-life ideas about what is protected to a eugenicist utopia really makes sense to you?
        Dylan16807 11y ago
Retra 11y ago
Gattaca doesn't really show off any technological problems so much as it does a new kind of racism. Which, frankly, is not a problem so unmanageable that we should avoid genetic engineering to prevent. Basically, Gattaca's problems could be managed by passing a couple of well-designed laws.
- xrange 11y ago
  "...This could explain why well-educated, intelligent people, all across the political spectrum, so often make the unspoken assumption that good intentions and well-crafted words are sufficient for making good public policy" http://jaltcoh.blogspot.com/2015/04/what-are-we-doing-when-we-teach-fiction.html http://jaltcoh.blogspot.com/2015/04/what-are-we-doing-when-w...
  - dalke 11y ago
    Why make a quip that can be pulled out for just about any topic, when we have an actual law in place - the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008? Is that a 'well-designed law'? It's certainly more than "good intentions and well-crafted words", as the $2.25 million award for the GINA lawsuit earlier this year shows. See http://www.nature.com/news/why-the-devious-defecator-case-is-a-landmark-for-us-genetic-privacy-law-1.17857 http://www.nature.com/news/why-the-devious-defecator-case-is... . While that's the first one to get to trial, the article says that the EEOC filed 333 cases last year which cited GINA.

gambler 11y ago

Bad examples. Both of those things were pretty much spot-on. Just don't get hung up on details. We don't yet have genetic testing as an entry barrier for things, but we have other similarly arbitrary tests. Companies checking your credit ratings and requiring annual health evaluations of their employees. Some companies "encourage" everyone to wear company-provided health monitors 24/7. Claims that you're predisposed towards certain diseases based on various parameters are everywhere. Brave New World wasn't wrong about drugs. People dope themselves on painkillers, antidepressants and other mood-altering drugs.

cgh 11y ago
Gattaca was specifically about genetic testing. Saying that's analogous to checking credit ratings is moving the goalposts. The government doesn't force or encourage people to take antidepressants or other "mood-altering drugs", except when they are eg incarcerated. Government involvement in the entire population taking such drugs is a crucial and explicit element of the BNW dystopia.
- gambler 11y ago
  "Moving the goalposts" implies that I established some criteria and than changed it. I did no such thing. >Gattaca was specifically about genetic testing. If that's how you read/watch science fiction, you're wasting your time. Gattaca and Brave New World are dystopian stories. Dystopias are not meant to precisely predict the future. They are mean to show how the future will look like if certain conditions are met. The overall reasoning matters far more than specifics. The overall reasoning in Gattaca looks solid. And we're nowhere near the level of genetic testing/engineering technology shown in the movie. But we're getting there. >Government involvement in the entire population taking such drugs is a crucial and explicit element of the BNW dystopia. Where was this government involvement described? http://www.huxley.net/soma/somaquote.html http://www.huxley.net/soma/somaquote.html I don't recall the book explicitly speaking about government involvement with Soma at all, aside from the implication that government approved of it. FDA approves all the anti-depressants and painkillers as well. So?