I think people tend to set up a false dichotomy between absolutely no genetic knowledge whatsoever and full on Gattaca. Basketball is a good example here. The d

I think people tend to set up a false dichotomy between absolutely no genetic knowledge whatsoever and full on Gattaca. Basketball is a good example here. The desired genetic expression is quite visible in that game, and indeed most basketball players are quite tall. Yet on the other hand there have also been professional 5'3" players. Genetic information can tell you that, all other things being equal, one person is probably going to be more capable at some task than another person. But in reality it's never the case that all other things are equal, and so genetic expression is just yet another component that can ideally simply help create a more accurate profile of who you might be hiring. On the other hand there is one very paradoxical risk. Consider fields where people work to marginalize the magnitude or relevance of inherent differences between people. Imagine you're hiring for a basketball team and think people are mostly about equal and any differences can be made up with training and effort. What are you going to do? Simply hire all the tallest people! And the same would be true in any field where individual exceptionalism is not emphasized. It's quite a peculiar notion that focusing on 'blank slate' equality would be what would lead to Gattaca, but I can find no flaws in the logic.