1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
Remove every unhealthy person and/or gene modify existing ones to eliminate every allergy orbodily defect caused by gene defect.
Also gene modify so that theres no mental detorioration and humans die just because they are old and the nody can't keep up with maintenance.
That's not even unethical, we just have bioconservatives in charge.
Remove every unhealthy person
Well that seems very unethical.
About gene modification, assuming it were to fully work without risks, it would still only be ethical if the patient were to consent, which not everyone would.
Fair enough, I was letting "or" do a lot of heavy lifting there.
How many billionaires need to be publicly executed to fix the usa political system.
Title says unethical
More than just the ones in America, I'd reckon.
Making a lot of clones of myself, raising them all differently, and seeing how many of them turn out in the same way as me.
AFAIK genes only account for physical properties like hair color and shit, and upbringing effects everything else.
Source: someone I met who claimed to be a psychiatrist told me and I've never confirmed it or that she actually was a psychiatrist.
There's a interesting sci-fi book with a (vaguely) similar premise - House of Suns by Alastair Reynolds.
Agreed, it's an interesting thing to think about at least. The nature vs nurture debate is practically as old as time itself but it feels like we're no closer to an answer outside of "it's a bit of both." But how much?
Worldwide, making all coffee decaf, and not telling anyone.
You fucking monster
Take ten or twenty thousand children, take over a fairly large portion of a midwestern state, build a large and complete environment for them to live in including towns, museums, theme parks etc. and raise them as normal Americans but absolutely 100% avoid introducing them to the concept of religion until they're 25.
I'm pretty sure that they would start making one up very soon.
I'm not meaning dump 20,000 children alone in the left half of Wyoming, I mean, keep them with their parents, hire teachers, teach them math and science and...basically a history that replaces a lot of "and they believed their gods said" with "the ruling class decided they wanted to". What happens to children when they are raised in a functioning, supportive, nurturing society that does not contain religion or superstition?
So you just wanna expand the absolute bonkers premise of Kid Nation . Lol
Actually no, I was figuring on having adults present to raise, educate and care for the children, but under strict orders to not introduce them to superstition.
Actually just stop allowing anyone with "defective" genes to reproduce.
I am fully I wouldnt exist in this hypothetical world (-11 vision in both eyes), but I would be curious what would happen if we only ever let perfectly healthy people with no genetic defects have kids.
Like would it eventually just become a perfect world where nobody needs glasses or asthma inhalers? Or would we die off because not enough genetically "perfect" people exist to make this plan work?
I'd be really curious about the Tarzan experiment, having a human infant raised by apes.
It will end up like every other feral kid found.
I'd like to see if we can build hybrid computer systems using cultured animal tissue (like Cephalopod or maybe GMO human / Cephalopod), basically grown onto an array of tiny wires. Push sensory information through the tiny wires and see if the lump of cells can learn. If it does, put it in a Eva. Or a butler robot. Or a robot vaccuum.
Idk. Its an idea for a scifi novel I've had. Some company does this and what people don't realize is the supposedly autonomous systems making their lives easier are fully conscious but live tortured existences. It would get more and more lovecraftian as the cephalopod hybrids some how take over (I was thinking maybe cancer? or networked mind) and start chopping everyone to bits. Maybe they try and eat them but they have no mouth, like how an octopus arm when detach will hunt and try to feed a non-existent mouth.
Making chimeras sounds cool as shit. What's even unethical about it? Why can't I have an army of beavermen to dam the world's waterways unless my ransom demands are met?
Ok, I think I see where the unethical part lies...
