• Etterra@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    17 days ago

    Ethics are supposed to throttle human activity. That’s their fucking job. That guy is a goddamn sociopath.

      • easily3667@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        No he used crispr to give babies HIV resistance.

        People on the side of classical ethics say the outcome was unknown so manipulating the embryo was wrong (ie maybe it makes them more likely to have a birth defect or something else wrong with them). Others might say “an embryo isn’t a person” or “the risk was low and the gain was high” but unfortunately he also didn’t tell anyone so.

        There’s also the fake “ethics” where people claim humans have more inherent value than chimps or mice, which of course we do not. Unfortunately this false platform is where a lot of the arguments are based: humans special, so we can’t manipulate their genome before birth. Once they are born of course these kids would get HIV and die, or be sent to work in a suicide (apple) factory, or help murder Uyghurs…but god forbid you experiment on people that’s bad.

        I’m on the side of he shouldn’t have done things the way he did, but there are hiv-resistant babies and we know how to make them now and it’s easy.

    • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      But there is probably a lot of wiggle room between what we have currently and stitching babies together at the skull or whatever people think of.

      We can’t have the perfect ethics. And I’m pretty certain company’s use ethical limits to limit competition like the do everything else.