2 ms·
Another thing I just thought of with my Michael Phelps example: genetically engineering people isn't necessarily going to make them superpeople, so I wonder how
by midoridensha 4y ago
Another thing I just thought of with my Michael Phelps example: genetically engineering people isn't necessarily going to make them superpeople, so I wonder how this will be handled. Phelps is really good at swimming with his body type, but that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling. Different body types are better optimized for different activities. Currently, people just get lucky usually, born with physical attributes that make them good at those tasks. So you don't see any pro cyclists that look like the "The Mountain" guy from Game of Thrones, for instance (whereas that guy is really good at weightlifting).
- AussieWog93 4y ago>that same body type probably means he's also really bad at other sports, such as weightlifting or cycling I wouldn't be so sure of that. I'm sure Phelps could lift more and cycle faster/further than most people on earth. If anything, the fact he's good at swimming means it's likely that he's also really good at other sports - just like someone good at one sort of cognitive task is probably good at most.
- midoridensha 4y agoI disagree. Sure, he's probably better at those sports than "most people", but that's not important, it's whether he can compete at an Olympic level in those sports. I'm sure he can't. He's optimized for world-class performance in just one sport, but not likely to be able to excel (at that level) in many others, no matter how much he trains. I can cycle faster and farther than most people on Earth too. That doesn't mean I can compete at a pro level, or worse an Olympic level. I'm nowhere near that level of performance; the bar for "most people on Earth" just isn't very high for most sports, in fact it's pathetically low. Most people are laughably bad at any sport.