5 ms·

What would happen though is eventually humans would lose the ability to naturally produce children.

derefr 10y ago
What is "naturally?" At some point in technological progress, we need to build machines to have children. But go a bit further along the line, and maybe we'd find the human body automatically building the machine that builds the human body—in effect, laying eggs.
- badosu 10y ago
  > At some point in technological progress, we need to build machines to have children Why?
  - SamReidHughes 10y ago
    To outbreed the bad guys.
  - derefr 10y ago
    Er, sorry, I just meant that as "at some [early] point along the timeline of the possible developments in biomedical technology, the world would look like one where—at least early adopters—would need a machine to make children." I didn't mean to imply that there's some sort of imperative to go toward that point.
shouldbworking 10y ago
I've seen this in a bunch of movies but it just occurred to me that this may eventually happen to humanity. Birthing children is dangerous for the mother and child, and if given the choice many women may decide to have one "grown" instead.
gscott 10y ago
There will be enough poor people that can't afford to have their children grown who will still be able to get pregnant.
- derefr 10y ago
  But the continuation of the human "species" as a single entity would then assume/require class miscegenation to re-constrain the DNA from the in vitro-grown humans every few generations. Otherwise, you'd now have two diverging human species, who might eventually not even be able to interbreed.
  - type0 10y ago
    > Otherwise, you'd now have two diverging human species, who might eventually not even be able to interbreed. It's a possible outcome in a few centuries. We might get one human species that would call themselves robot-overlords, those would be born in artificial wombs have artificially enhanced brains and have very prominent positions on Earth. The plebs would sleep on the stairs and drink their soylent green.
- SamReidHughes 10y ago
  In any reasonably competent universe the costs would head towards zero.
BronSteeDiam 10y ago
That's a situation we already face. There's a line of humans who can only reproduce with IVF.
- Oxitendwe 10y ago
  That's not a situation "we" as a culture/civilization/species face, it's a situation they face. The rest of us are perfectly capable of doing what our bodies are designed to do without doctors and scientists and other forms of assistance.
  - suddenseizure 10y ago
    IVF babies aren't guaranteed to be infertile, they just have a slightly higher chance of it (because of selection bias in the parents). My wife and I might well have babies via IVF because she can't get pregnant while on chemotherapy - but that doesn't mean we carry any infertility genes. She just had the bad luck to have some cells mutate into cancer.

What is "naturally?" At some point in technological progress, we need to build machines to have children. But go a bit further along the line, and maybe we'd find the human body automatically building the machine that builds the human body—in effect, laying eggs.

badosu 10y ago
> At some point in technological progress, we need to build machines to have children Why?
- SamReidHughes 10y ago
  To outbreed the bad guys.
- derefr 10y ago
  Er, sorry, I just meant that as "at some [early] point along the timeline of the possible developments in biomedical technology, the world would look like one where—at least early adopters—would need a machine to make children." I didn't mean to imply that there's some sort of imperative to go toward that point.

shouldbworking 10y ago

I've seen this in a bunch of movies but it just occurred to me that this may eventually happen to humanity. Birthing children is dangerous for the mother and child, and if given the choice many women may decide to have one "grown" instead.

gscott 10y ago

There will be enough poor people that can't afford to have their children grown who will still be able to get pregnant.

derefr 10y ago
But the continuation of the human "species" as a single entity would then assume/require class miscegenation to re-constrain the DNA from the in vitro-grown humans every few generations. Otherwise, you'd now have two diverging human species, who might eventually not even be able to interbreed.
- type0 10y ago
  > Otherwise, you'd now have two diverging human species, who might eventually not even be able to interbreed. It's a possible outcome in a few centuries. We might get one human species that would call themselves robot-overlords, those would be born in artificial wombs have artificially enhanced brains and have very prominent positions on Earth. The plebs would sleep on the stairs and drink their soylent green.
SamReidHughes 10y ago
In any reasonably competent universe the costs would head towards zero.

BronSteeDiam 10y ago

That's a situation we already face. There's a line of humans who can only reproduce with IVF.

Oxitendwe 10y ago
That's not a situation "we" as a culture/civilization/species face, it's a situation they face. The rest of us are perfectly capable of doing what our bodies are designed to do without doctors and scientists and other forms of assistance.
- suddenseizure 10y ago
  IVF babies aren't guaranteed to be infertile, they just have a slightly higher chance of it (because of selection bias in the parents). My wife and I might well have babies via IVF because she can't get pregnant while on chemotherapy - but that doesn't mean we carry any infertility genes. She just had the bad luck to have some cells mutate into cancer.