That is still a consequence of editing as opposed to the editing itself. Perhaps it's unfair to discuss eugenics in the way it would be used in an ideal world.

That is still a consequence of editing as opposed to the editing itself. Perhaps it's unfair to discuss eugenics in the way it would be used in an ideal world. I agree with you that the scenario you sketch seems far from impossible. But I would like to submit your example now for your own consideration. Are computer today not so ubiquitous that it's reasonable for an employer to require you to be skilled in their operation? Don't certain jobs just _require_ you to possess a certain physical or mental trait? I know I'm begging the question here, and that 'being good with computers' is very different from 'forced to modify body because out of financial necessity'. But is is also very different from 'accepting that time moves on, and that nowadays (2100AD) it's very normal to get a job-related tune-up'? As opposed to the 'culture fit' and personality tests (which may or may not have a causal relation to the benefit that you provide to the company) a specific and objectionably verifiable improvement to a part of your body or mental capacity is not something that companies should be barred from expecting from their employees I think.