3 ms·

> But researchers discount these concerns. This idea "is so far in the distant future that it's not worth discussing its implications in relation to the cur

> But researchers discount these concerns. This idea "is so far in the distant future that it's not worth discussing its implications in relation to the current technology", Werner says. That sentence really deflated me It makes me ashamed to call myself a scientist in world where others claiming the same status show such a stunted, parochial outlook. Haven't we just lived through this with AI, and now face a rude reckoning? Surely the "distant future" in this case is about 10 years, making such dismissive, offhand remarks pure political deflection. It's always "worth discussing" the implications of your work. Having the courage to use sceptical imagination, and even express doubts about how your work might be misused, is surely an essential characteristic of a worthy researcher.

calgoo 3y ago
I see that sentence as a preempt defense against the ultra conservatives that would otherwise attack it. If we where to discuss those alternatives, then it becomes an enormous political battle. By stating it as a "save the children" they are making it harder for anyone to object, which to me as a parent of twins who where born premature (not this early, but where still in incubators for 1 week) this could be fantastic news for some if it works.
- nonrandomstring 3y ago
  I think it's fantastic news too. I'm at an age where know 20 or 30 women who've been through horrendous, mentally and physically injurious experiences chasing fertility. Obviously natural birth is the gold-standard, but this research looks like good medicine that, in limited contexts, will save lives (of babies and mothers). Yet I am dismayed to read so many negative, borderline paranoid comments. And to hear the glib remarks of researchers and their PR spokespeople caught in the corporate power dance. We have such a deep problem with ethics in technology. I think it is bound to the epoch, and arises mainly in the era of massive power inequality, monopoly, poor education and massively distorted communications. As a result, there's general scientific hubris in the air, and the descent of the West into corporate crypto-fascism is making wonderful scientific advances only look threatening (robots, AI, genetics...). These are Frankensteinian times. Now the first thing we think about when a brilliant new technology emerges is "how will the rich, powerful and malevolent misuse this to further enslave people?" That can't be healthy, but unfortunately it's become a necessary scepticism. Scientists need to (wo)man up and learn to talk about this stuff.

calgoo 3y ago

I see that sentence as a preempt defense against the ultra conservatives that would otherwise attack it. If we where to discuss those alternatives, then it becomes an enormous political battle. By stating it as a "save the children" they are making it harder for anyone to object, which to me as a parent of twins who where born premature (not this early, but where still in incubators for 1 week) this could be fantastic news for some if it works.

nonrandomstring 3y ago
I think it's fantastic news too. I'm at an age where know 20 or 30 women who've been through horrendous, mentally and physically injurious experiences chasing fertility. Obviously natural birth is the gold-standard, but this research looks like good medicine that, in limited contexts, will save lives (of babies and mothers). Yet I am dismayed to read so many negative, borderline paranoid comments. And to hear the glib remarks of researchers and their PR spokespeople caught in the corporate power dance. We have such a deep problem with ethics in technology. I think it is bound to the epoch, and arises mainly in the era of massive power inequality, monopoly, poor education and massively distorted communications. As a result, there's general scientific hubris in the air, and the descent of the West into corporate crypto-fascism is making wonderful scientific advances only look threatening (robots, AI, genetics...). These are Frankensteinian times. Now the first thing we think about when a brilliant new technology emerges is "how will the rich, powerful and malevolent misuse this to further enslave people?" That can't be healthy, but unfortunately it's become a necessary scepticism. Scientists need to (wo)man up and learn to talk about this stuff.