3 ms·
Factual statement: "We have no technology to do what you're describing" Correct. We can only assemble synthetic bacteria right now. Synthetic sperm is years aw
by sbierwagen 6y ago
Factual statement: "We have no technology to do what you're describing"
Correct. We can only assemble synthetic bacteria right now. Synthetic sperm is years away. Synthetic eggs are too complicated, I wonder if they'll ever be made. Synthetic embryos would be true sci-fi stuff, requiring heavy engineering and many breakthroughs.
Emotional statement: "nobody is planning on"
Human germline engineering inspires strong feelings. I'm sure that the advent of motorized vehicles would have inspired the same strong feelings in horses, if they could have understood what was about to happen to them. Nevertheless.
- dekhn 6y agoWell, I used to plan on this stuff. I mean, it was my career path for 20+ years. Then, after learning a lot more about the field, I came to the conclusion that these sorts of aggressive ideas are far beyond what we can reasonably contemplate, and it generates unrealistic expectations in the lay public when we suggest it's possible. Genetic engineering for human treatments took a 20+ year hit because one guy died in a trial at UPenn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Gelsinger After He Jenkiu, genetic engineering took another huge hit because an irresponsible person ignored all advice and did a crappy job at fixing susceptibility to HIV infection. This is not a "engines vs. horses argument". This is a "faster than light AI supership vs. horses argument".