5 ms·

Slippery slope here. Most people don't understand or accept evolution, even engineers. For example, anyone who accepts equitable distribution of attributes ac

Slippery slope here. Most people don't understand or accept evolution, even engineers. For example, anyone who accepts equitable distribution of attributes across genetic variances(a commonly accepted social narrative). Evolution is messy. Epigenetics makes it even messier. We have to be careful not to conflate the value of someone by anything genetic. Especially not epigenetics, which seems from this article to be related to childhood trauma. I'm interested in how we can use AI to modify genetic code to improve and fix our past epigenetic and genetic shortcomings.

killjoywashere 8y ago
I gather you watched Google's Selfish Ledger video?
mrkurt 8y ago
> For example, anyone who accepts equitable distribution of attributes across genetic variances(a commonly accepted social narrative). Can you give an example?
- GauntletWizard 8y ago
  Don't feel the trolls. It's a racist dogwhistle.
  - elefanten 8y ago
    You read that comment with bad understanding or bad faith. They explicitly argue against tying (epi)genetics to evaluating someone's potential. Whether you agree with that guidance or not, whether you agree with the implications, such data exists. Trying to wish it away contributes to the toxic hellstorm that exists in public discourse around these subjects. It retrenches the people who are curious about it and sends them into the narrative arms of the people who want to misuse it for their own social ends. It's much more productive to argue why such data is extremely limited, poorly understood and not conclusive.
  - whataretensors 8y ago
    I'm of course against racism. If epigenetics is multi-generational then what of things like slavery and the ungodly number of atrocities littering our history, both race-based or otherwise. What things do we do now that are going to be harmful in such capacity, beyond the obvious prison system. More importantly, I think we could potentially improve ourselves collectively by harnessing this power. I know my own family history is littered with trauma.
Terr_ 8y ago
> people don't understand or accept evolution [...] For example, anyone who accepts equitable distribution of attributes across genetic variances Even if the straw-man "everybody is totally equal" can't stand up, I think there's a good argument for: "We have to assume everybody is equal by default,(A) because we are absolutely too ignorant and limited to determine the long-term value or trade-offs within a gene or gene-combination, (B) because some diversity is itself a collective benefit to the species, and (C) because history shows most people who claimed they had the answers were often wrong and racist."
- elefanten 8y ago
  I'd add a corollary along the lines of: "We also have extreme difficulty parsing what may be caused by (epi)genetics and what may be caused by differences in experiences or development" Not only do we lack fine-grained data with which to make that comparison, we probably lack the epistemological capabilities and experimental infrastructure to even attempt gathering such data. This doesn't have to be mutually exclusive with the argument(s) that population-scale difference in distribution of [whatever] have been experimentally observed. It's just that for most conceivable [whatever] with some kind of relevant social impact, we still can't assign causality with high confidence to the actual (epi)genetics themselves.
- danieltillett 8y ago
  The only thing I don't like about people who deny the strong influence of genes on the individual are they tend to shout racist at anyone trying to study this question. This shouting has made whole areas of human research impossible to study in practice. Does anyone know of anyone who became a racist because they looked at the scientific literature? My experience is people become racist for a variety of reasons and then (occasionally) draw upon a paraody of science to try and justify their beliefs.
  - remarkEon 8y ago
    >This shouting has made whole areas of human research impossible to study in practice. Maybe here in the West, but something tells me China isn't going to get caught up in either the ethical or political implications of such research. They'll just do it and quickly operationalize (or weaponize) whatever they discover as fast as possible.
Nomentatus 8y ago
There are chemical means of removing methylation. Early days, and you basically get the equivalent of a disk wipe, I gather.

killjoywashere 8y ago

I gather you watched Google's Selfish Ledger video?

mrkurt 8y ago

> For example, anyone who accepts equitable distribution of attributes across genetic variances(a commonly accepted social narrative). Can you give an example?

GauntletWizard 8y ago
Don't feel the trolls. It's a racist dogwhistle.
- elefanten 8y ago
  You read that comment with bad understanding or bad faith. They explicitly argue against tying (epi)genetics to evaluating someone's potential. Whether you agree with that guidance or not, whether you agree with the implications, such data exists. Trying to wish it away contributes to the toxic hellstorm that exists in public discourse around these subjects. It retrenches the people who are curious about it and sends them into the narrative arms of the people who want to misuse it for their own social ends. It's much more productive to argue why such data is extremely limited, poorly understood and not conclusive.
- whataretensors 8y ago
  I'm of course against racism. If epigenetics is multi-generational then what of things like slavery and the ungodly number of atrocities littering our history, both race-based or otherwise. What things do we do now that are going to be harmful in such capacity, beyond the obvious prison system. More importantly, I think we could potentially improve ourselves collectively by harnessing this power. I know my own family history is littered with trauma.

Terr_ 8y ago

> people don't understand or accept evolution [...] For example, anyone who accepts equitable distribution of attributes across genetic variances Even if the straw-man "everybody is totally equal" can't stand up, I think there's a good argument for: "We have to assume everybody is equal by default,(A) because we are absolutely too ignorant and limited to determine the long-term value or trade-offs within a gene or gene-combination, (B) because some diversity is itself a collective benefit to the species, and (C) because history shows most people who claimed they had the answers were often wrong and racist."

elefanten 8y ago
I'd add a corollary along the lines of: "We also have extreme difficulty parsing what may be caused by (epi)genetics and what may be caused by differences in experiences or development" Not only do we lack fine-grained data with which to make that comparison, we probably lack the epistemological capabilities and experimental infrastructure to even attempt gathering such data. This doesn't have to be mutually exclusive with the argument(s) that population-scale difference in distribution of [whatever] have been experimentally observed. It's just that for most conceivable [whatever] with some kind of relevant social impact, we still can't assign causality with high confidence to the actual (epi)genetics themselves.
danieltillett 8y ago
The only thing I don't like about people who deny the strong influence of genes on the individual are they tend to shout racist at anyone trying to study this question. This shouting has made whole areas of human research impossible to study in practice. Does anyone know of anyone who became a racist because they looked at the scientific literature? My experience is people become racist for a variety of reasons and then (occasionally) draw upon a paraody of science to try and justify their beliefs.
- remarkEon 8y ago
  >This shouting has made whole areas of human research impossible to study in practice. Maybe here in the West, but something tells me China isn't going to get caught up in either the ethical or political implications of such research. They'll just do it and quickly operationalize (or weaponize) whatever they discover as fast as possible.

Nomentatus 8y ago

There are chemical means of removing methylation. Early days, and you basically get the equivalent of a disk wipe, I gather.