Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:21:45 UTC No. 16616936

Ethics is what separates humans from insects

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:29:11 UTC No. 16616941

>>16616936
As you can see he is already an Asian. I don't know why we have to use racial slurs like bugman but I understand and agree with your point.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:35:28 UTC No. 16616946

>>16616934
yes, but not like how you think

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:40:45 UTC No. 16616951

how you think it is
>if only we could torture more animals and clone shit without limitations then we could figure out x, y, z
how it actually is
>"if I bullshit my research to look conclusive, I get funding"
>"so I'll just try to spam journals to bullshit nobody will bother falsifying to pad out my amazing academic career"
>everyone does this
>unexplainable stagnation
>and the malpractice seeps into industries downstream of academia like medicine and psychology
Right now the brilliant people and morons alike are wise to distrust scientific research. Just go with gut instinct if it's not important. If it is important, weigh both sides. Because unlike a popular falsehood that academics love to push, so many "conclusions" are not so conclusive and many important issues have many parties with opposing arguments. None of this is new either.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:48:06 UTC No. 16616959

>>16616936
>>16616941
This guy modified the genes of two embryos that led to the birth of twins who were immune to HIV but got cancelled due to muh "ethics"

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 16:49:56 UTC No. 16616961

>>16616959
How did he test they were immune? Did he try to give two babies AIDS?

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:12:57 UTC No. 16616989

>>16616934
I think God has been getting lazy with evolution, so we need to pick up the slack.

>>16616961
Pretty sure he gave them this mutation and did not test it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCR5#CCR5-%CE%9432
>tl;dr increased resistance to some infections, decreased resistance to others, maybe also better cognition.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:21:21 UTC No. 16616993

>>16616961
>In November 2018, media from all over the world reported that two twin girls had been born with modified genes to make them HIV immune. Their birth was the result of an ‘experiment' (presently it can only be called that) conducted by He Jiankui with couples in which the males were HIV carriers. Using CRISPR technology to immunise the babies against the HIV virus, He Jiankui managed to disable the CCR5 gene that enables the HIV infection (although he still did not present complete evidence of this achievement). However, Chinese existing regulation, thought not very detailed, does not provide legal basis for the experiment carried out by He Jiankui and his team (Nie, 2018; Nie & Cheung, 2019). In particular, the 2003 “Ethical Guiding Principles for Research on Embryonic Stem Cell” issued by China's Ministry of Science and Technology and then Ministry of Health (now National Health Commission), very clearly bans research to be performed on human in vitro embryos after the 14th day of existence, and its subsequent implantation into a human uterus. Furthermore, in spite of the alleged reason for the genetic intervention related with the prevention of HIV, the scientific community also knows that the CCR5 gene is related with major brain functions. He Jiankui might have done some kind of human enhancement by created two especially intelligent human beings, with better memory and higher IQ (Joy et al., 2016).
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6724388/

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 17:41:21 UTC No. 16617009

Berds have no ethics, they are driven by a need to avenge their past social reject self. Just look at that balding bug, he wouldn't think twice about creating some new endocrine disruptor to dump in the water or putting smart lead dust in baby food

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 18:41:24 UTC No. 16617036

>>16616993
>claims he made aids resistant babies
>knows no one has the balls to try to infect the babies with aids to call him out
Maybe the chinks really are smart.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:23:02 UTC No. 16617080

>>16616934
>Is ethics holding back scientific innovation and progress?
Hypothetically, imagine that 100 years ago we started up NIH's "Intervention Testing Program" except instead of on mice, on like half of the human population. Guarantee our average lifespan would be 130+ by now.

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 19:38:12 UTC No. 16617102

>twitter screencap thread from the same attention whore already in the catalog

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 20:46:35 UTC No. 16617156

>>16616959
Just don't be gay. It's that simple. No genefucking needed.

🗑️ Cult of Passion at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 21:06:11 UTC No. 16617169

>>16616934
>ethics holding back scientific innovation
Regulations*.
[takes a half step forward]

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 21:17:18 UTC No. 16617185

>>16617169
>let's put some scientifically illiterate Alzheimer's boomers in charge, duly elected by millions of Walmart fatscooter people
>have 'em write some papers explaining what's good
>WCGW?
>2025

Anonymous at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 23:21:47 UTC No. 16617284

>>16616934
Yes. The scientific establishment is too scared to make actual progress (like on AI and on genetic engineering) and just focusing on low hanging fruit and monetary gain. Hell, there's still some low hanging fruit like editing some easy germline fixes for certain diseases a la jiankui. Now, it would be a really bad thing if we let the chinks develop the tech first, but basically all other developed countries are still held back by outdated and backwards (((ethics))) made to control and sissify the populace. Its a real shame what happened to mr jiankui, but its the chinks shooting themself in the foot. Our benefit technically.
>>16616936
>muh ethics
>muh bugs
Ethics is a byproduct of culture. Culture is what actually separates us from bugs and each other. Different humans can have different ethical systems, even if they are the wrong ones. Do better next time luddite.

🗑️ Cult of Passion at Wed, 12 Mar 2025 23:41:04 UTC No. 16617297

>>16617284
>(((ethics)))

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 01:39:58 UTC No. 16617398

>>16617297
>"don't wear the masks people, especially not N100s that we've never even heard of! what r u, asbestos contractors!?"
>-2020 Burger Goobermint

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 02:33:43 UTC No. 16617449

>>16616936
insects are evolutionarily superior and will easily outlive us.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:24:27 UTC No. 16617641

>>16616959
And what is he going to do after it turns out he also gave them genes that will lead to cancer in their 30s?

🗑️ Cult of Passion at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:29:27 UTC No. 16617643

>>16617641
So youre saying I should patent cancer treatments and ban cures? I like your style...say, are looking for a job?

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:37:51 UTC No. 16617648

>>16616934
Moral qualms are the single greatest force behind stagnation

>”WHY SPEND MONEY ON GOING TO MARS WHEN THAT MONEY COULD BE USED TO FEED HOMELESS CRACKHEADS! OR PAY OFF MY WORTHLESS DEGREE!”

>“WHY DO WE NEEEEED TO BRING BACK THE WOOLY MAMMOTH??? SPEND THAT MONEY INSTEAD ON MORE EMPOWERING MARVEL SLOP MOVIES!!!”

>”JAMES WATSON IS RACIST AND STOLE HIS WORK FROM A WOMAN! NASA STOLE ALL THEIR EQUATIONS FROM A BLACK WOMAN! SHAKESPEARE WAS ACTUALLY A BLACK WOMAN! NEWTON DIDNT INVENT CALCULUS IT WAS INVENTED BY SOME JEET 500 YEARS EARLIER!!!”

Now we have Reddit leftists torching electric vehicles in the streets and boycotting AI since it puts their favorite furry porn artists out of work. It’s all so tiresome.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 09:26:08 UTC No. 16617665

>>16617648
>nooo don't look at opportunity costs haha, just give me the grant money already
Don't misunderstand i don't care about feeding the homeless over space exploaration either, but there's plenty of opportunity cost within science itself. Who the fuck even cares about the wooly mammoth?

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:52:44 UTC No. 16617804

>>16617641
>>16616959
>>16616934
This. Them randomly getting some shit when at 30 or 50 scares me. Otherwise you can probably get some African or Latin dictator to do this.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 13:54:18 UTC No. 16617805

>>16617804
Rich people, not just in the bay area do this shit for their kids. Elon did a bunch of shit on this new kids.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 15:17:47 UTC No. 16617843

>>16616934
>ethics holding back scientific innovation and progress?
apparently not. I exist, so fuck all of that.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 18:02:57 UTC No. 16617947

>>16617641
And what happens when they don't, and it turns out they're actually immune to HIV?
Then this guy got cancelled for creating a permanent cure for HIV.
Perhaps that's why he got cancelled. Big pharma doesn't like permanent cures, it doesn't bring money.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 18:09:44 UTC No. 16617949

>>16616934
>muh ethics
This is why China keeps advancing scientifically and technologically, while the west appears to be stagnating.
This is specially true when the ethics concern has to do with religious or political beliefs, and not anything actually morally questionable.

If you ask a Christian what he thinks of stem cell and anti-aging research, he'll tell you that it's unethical and his deity doesn't approve of it.
Does that mean we should cancel all stem cell and anti-aging research just because of the sky wizard worshippers? Of course not.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 18:11:39 UTC No. 16617951

>>16617805
>Ethics for thee but not for me
It's hilarious. It's unethical for the poor, but the rich are allowed to have HIV immune superhuman children.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 18:21:22 UTC No. 16617956

>>16617947
If you look at the specific mutation, it also increases intelligence but additionally decreases resistance some other infectious diseases. It's not so clear-cut that it's *entirely* beneficial, even though there is a decent argument for it.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 18:45:58 UTC No. 16617975

>>16617956
>some other infectious diseases
Depending on what those are, they could just get a vaccine and never have to worry about it. There's no vaccine or cure for HIV though, so it could still be worth it as a way to eradicate HIV.

You're immune to HIV, in return you need a few more vaccines. Doesn't sound that bad.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 19:14:50 UTC No. 16617992

>>16617947
>And what happens when they don't
See, that's the thing. It's hard to prove they won't. For all we know, these genes might be expressed down a few generations, and then you have higher prevalence of cancer already mixed into the population and there's literally nothing that can be done about it. Do this on a large enough scale and you can literally sentence a significant chunk if not all of humanity to genetic defects forever.

Curing HIV is just not worth a risk like this. HIV treatments went a long way, it can be brough down to undetectable viral load if you're taking your meds, which is basically remission. You can also not be retarded and wear a rubber.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 19:47:31 UTC No. 16618029

>>16617975
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CCR5#Potential_costs
>Patients homozygous for CCR5 Δ32 were found to be at higher risk for a neuroinvasive form of tick-borne encephalitis (caused by a flavivirus).
>After infection with West Nile virus, CCR5 Δ32 mice had markedly increased viral titers in the central nervous system and had increased mortality
Overall, I think there are many better targets for genetic "upgrades" than this mutation, but at least this kind of research is finally happening.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 20:38:56 UTC No. 16618086

>>16616934
Yes, because it's not ethics, but antics.
Nothing ethical about preventing people the cure on the basis of the insignificant fact that its developers didn't pay few billions to the fda.

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 21:41:42 UTC No. 16618141

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:03:23 UTC No. 16618206

>>16618141
This was considered high art by millenials

Anonymous at Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:08:04 UTC No. 16618213

>>16617080
>the test subjects are all thirdies because obviously
>Africans and Indians now live to be 150 years old

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 23:28:32 UTC No. 16619267

>>16616934
Logic in its extremes operates in a state of benevolence. Questioning ethics is like questioning transparency and considerate distribution of technological progress. What we end up with are world changing benefits locked away forever because it would be too much effort for those in charge to actually do something beneficial for society. So we end up with a lame cycle of stagnation with gradual progressions and regressions because they could never handle change or things actually being better for this existence. But if it satisfies a meager morbid curiousity? They are all about it. Says a great deal about them actually.

Anonymous at Fri, 14 Mar 2025 23:52:13 UTC No. 16619338

>>16616934
>Is ethics holding back scientific innovation and progress?

See: >>16616951

I don't agree entirely with Anon's statement, I will say he's right when he says that Academia isn't being bogged down by "radical geniuses who're bound by red tape preventing them from doing the hard decisions that make great science".
It's being bogged down by fucking dipshit east-Indians with fake qualifications and AI generated medical journals, old men who don't want to do anything but collect cheques and sexually assault students, and to some extent out of touch retarded venture capitalists in the government, who are either Technocrats and are hoarding access to technology and education to become even richer at the expense of everyone else, or they're actually just know-nothing overconfident faggots who see poorly named experiments as a waste of time.

To some extent it's also this: >>16617643

Privatized healthcare is satanic and inherently prioritizes a business model built on treatments and pain medicine, as opposed to permanent cures and/or public infrastructure that would better segway healthier lifestyle changes. There's a bunch of graphs and charts trying to advertise how America is leading the world in papers and medical development, but this numbers becomes signifcantly less impressive when you realize it's just companies making incremental improvements to a drug so they can upcharge or some allergy medicine or designer drug that'll make you shit to death if you take too much or too little.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 01:47:01 UTC No. 16619423

>>16616936
fpbp

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 03:19:59 UTC No. 16619468

>>16616934
Buy an ad.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:11:58 UTC No. 16620023

>>16617036
sponsor them an education in the US to turn them gay and find out

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:21:02 UTC No. 16620034

>>16616934
If he's willing to subject his loved ones to barbaric and inhumane experiments then more power to him. This is the result of midwits in STEM

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:34:45 UTC No. 16620046

relevant:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/5FrpeM7L2kfhxycNQ/the-case-for-human-genetic-engineering

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 20:42:35 UTC No. 16620056

>>16620034
>barbaric and inhumane experiments
well, I've been "playing god" with the *epigenetics* of my own hair growth for many months, and it has been going pretty well overall.
>protip: ain't even that difficult, bunch of different chemicals do it.

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 21:26:29 UTC No. 16620084

>>16620056
>Midwit proves my point about midwits
Thank you

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 21:46:04 UTC No. 16620094

>>16620084
You're probably on finasteride, lol. It's actually an epigenetic modifying drug too, but not a very good one overall...

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:41:27 UTC No. 16620117

>>16620094
>I-I'm n-not a midw-wit you're a t-tranny!
Again, thank you

Anonymous at Sat, 15 Mar 2025 22:46:08 UTC No. 16620124

>>16620117
I'll be nice and actually drop the two safest "drugs" I'm using to do that shit: Vitamin C and Ginseng. They both hit picrel protein pretty hard.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 00:06:47 UTC No. 16620182

Of course it is, but it's worth the price. If we start treating ourselves and others as disposable resources then what's the point of scientific advancement? Just for its own sake? Because at that point it's no longer for our benefit.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 00:19:10 UTC No. 16620192

>>16620182
It gets stickier when you start considering the opportunity cost of not having new medical treatments available faster. From the perspective of *individual* test subjects for new treatments, ethics obviously have a benefit. When you expand it to a whole patient population dealing with outdated therapies and waiting for something better while their diseases take their natural course, it sort of turns into the "Trolley problem."

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 01:17:09 UTC No. 16620223

>>16620192
That's true, I see what you mean. How much prevention of future suffering does it require to justify how much suffering now, and who gets to make that decision? Tricky stuff.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 01:59:19 UTC No. 16620254

>>16620223
I think somewhat restructuring the clinical trial system would be beneficial; allow marketing of drugs for serious diseases after phase 2 trials with an "EXPERIMENTAL" label if there is *preliminary* evidence of efficacy better than the current "standard of care" treatment.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 02:55:02 UTC No. 16620286

Progress towards what?
Towards human flourishing? Ethics does not hold us back. Ethics are necessary for this end.
Progress towards a dystopian future where the human experience is reduced to expressing wants that are instantaneously answered by technology? Yes, ethics holds us back from that. Rightly so. A world with some natural difficulty is a better world. Otherwise we will atrophy our brains and regress to insect nervous systems (I mean it literally if given enough time). Humans will cease to exist.
https://gizmodo.com/the-curious-case-of-a-woman-addicted-to-her-brain-impla-5402584

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 04:17:17 UTC No. 16620376

>>16616936
Based

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 06:50:54 UTC No. 16620513

>>16616934
>Is ethnics holding us back
Yes. Imagine if it wasn't such a pain in the ass to get approval to experiment on any animal "higher" than a rat.

Anonymous at Sun, 16 Mar 2025 19:47:08 UTC No. 16621081

It looks like NATO got jealous of this guy’s memeability and created a “parody” account

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 02:36:17 UTC No. 16621325

Virginijus Šikšnys and Jiankui He will go down in history as founding fathers of gene editing and the two people that changed humanity forever, glory to both of them.

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 04:29:10 UTC No. 16621364

>>16616936
Then why did chinks imprison him for that achievement? Maybe because he didn't jump through all the hoops of party-plan-comittee? Nah, both sides are cucked by pussy-ratterds who fight to keep the status quo, because they're not guaranteed their positions beyond the horizon they can plan.
Well, I guess I can see further then them, and I have to tell them that they will be alright, with or without the positions they are not even going to need to be alright.
They may be scared of manmade horrors beyond their imagination, fine, may them work towards building countries able to survive even if the deadly virus or some grey goo appears from some lab. Because whatever they prohibit, there's always such a probability, and the more they make knowledgable people mad, the higher that probability gets.

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:00:56 UTC No. 16621472

>>16616934
No, you can’t vivisection prisoners sorry.

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:02:07 UTC No. 16621474

>>16616951
> >"if I bullshit my research to look conclusive, I get funding"
>"so I'll just try to spam journals to bullshit nobody will bother falsifying to pad out my amazing academic career"
>everyone does this
>unexplainable stagnation
>and the malpractice seeps into industries downstream of academia like medicine and psycholog
Susienet

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 09:32:15 UTC No. 16621488

>>16616993
this is actually more ethical than not doing anything.
>>16617648
>"WHY SPEND MONEY ON GOING TO MARS WHEN THAT MONEY COULD BE USED TO FEED HOMELESS CRACKHEADS! OR PAY OFF MY WORTHLESS DEGREE!”
you can literally do both though. there is enough resources to finance every aspect without downplaying others. Cooperation is necessary for that and since communism is a plague, capitalism should be manipulated towards the same goal. There's shortage of smart people at the top positions, but not of fools and not of greedy bastards running things from their demented shadows.

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 16:37:40 UTC No. 16621719

>>16617949
Right, right, the problem with the West is our high ethical standards.

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 20:59:37 UTC No. 16621911

>>16620513
>Yes. Imagine if it wasn't such a pain in the ass to get approval to experiment on any animal "higher" than a rat.
This, how come it ok to experiment on animals but not humans?

Anonymous at Mon, 17 Mar 2025 22:00:05 UTC No. 16621961

>>16616993
>the males were HIV carriers
Why is this ok? Do the daughters of this experiment consent to their dad being an HIV carrier?

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 04:02:00 UTC No. 16622204

>>16616934

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 04:29:36 UTC No. 16622213

>>16617804
>>16617956
>>16617975
I wont say what he did was inherently bad. However, what he did was essentially chop a piece of DNA out of the twins genomes, the same deletion which occurs naturally in about 10% of people of European descent. I personally have the deletion, pic related.

The problem is that this deletion is more nuanced. There are mutations surrounding the piece of deleted genome which he did not change, and could not have changed with the technology he used. These mutations, in all likelihood, prevent the deleted base pairs from causing autoimmune diseases, like multiple sclerosis.
>https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.06.15.23290026v1.full
>We discovered that the CCR5delta32 allele arose on a pre-existing haplotype consisting of 84 variants.
So there are 84 other mutations which the twins do not have. I would say they're a ticking time bomb at this point. This guy is going to fuck up the field of gene editing for decades when these twins inevitably get MS or something.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 04:33:56 UTC No. 16622214

Apparently almost nobody was afraid or didn’t have a choice of being experimented on with the new never used before mRNA technology Covid vaccine. This isn’t standard procedure.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 04:34:57 UTC No. 16622215

>>16617956
>>16622213
Also other primates have evolved similar CCR5 mutations which protect against SIV, such as sooty magabies. However the main driver of these evolved genes is HIV and not whatever caused Europeans to get the delta32 gene, so the fact that it increases your susceptibility to other infectious diseases, like west nile, is likely due to the mutation only being a few thousand years old in humans

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 06:32:59 UTC No. 16622259

>>16616934
>>16622204
I love how he makes his declarations with such finality.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 06:35:38 UTC No. 16622261

This Bryan Johnson guy is kinda growing on me

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 07:13:20 UTC No. 16622279

>>16622261
>supposedly has like 30 "doctors" on his staff.
>they haven't even put him on ergothioneine yet or figure out how to manage his minerals.
no damn wonder he's reaching out for help at this point, LMAO.

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 08:48:41 UTC No. 16622303

>>16620286
This. I hate these tech obsessed nerds that think that everything will be better for some reason just because we have fancy toys and hecking sci fi irl. It's obvious that these people like Musk and the guy in OP do not have fulfilling lives and therefor dream of technology somehow making everything better. Same with people thinking that AI or 300 IQ engineered people will make life more interesting. So what if AI and super humans can solve all of science's questions like the origin of life and the beginning of the universe, what the heck are we going to do with that information that makes life more interesting?

Anonymous at Tue, 18 Mar 2025 17:28:23 UTC No. 16622503

>>16616934
isn't this the guy that let some guy with hiv/aids have a biological son/daughter without hiv/aids using gene editing?

Anonymous at Wed, 19 Mar 2025 13:32:17 UTC No. 16623602

>>16616934
Why the fuck does he keep posting his own pictures at different times in the same lab with the same uniform, pose and facial expressions with every single post as if it adds something?
It's fucking driving me insane. I want to dissect his brain and look into his mind. Fuck Ethics.

Anonymous at Wed, 19 Mar 2025 16:30:40 UTC No. 16623719

>>16616934
> mah ethics

Anonymous at Wed, 19 Mar 2025 17:21:14 UTC No. 16623744

>>16616934
Yes, human choice (=ethics) is inherently opposed to technique (=progress). Read Ellul

Anonymous at Wed, 19 Mar 2025 21:52:26 UTC No. 16623917

>>16616936
Ethics is why Jews and Nigs are allowed to do the things they do.

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Mar 2025 04:55:33 UTC No. 16624131

>>16623602
I like it, it adds to the absurdity of his declarations. I'm sure he knows the effect it has.

Anonymous at Thu, 20 Mar 2025 13:13:27 UTC No. 16624242

>>16624131
I kneel He-san

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 04:01:43 UTC No. 16624738

>>16622214
Yes, it’s kinda crazy that they did that but at least they are saving some people using that technology now.

https://youtu.be/RqWJHmxXM2E

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 09:17:36 UTC No. 16624822

>>16616934
To a point. Yes. They are still necessary, though. Honestly I would be fine with ethics committee tyranny if it was actually enforced like it's supposed to and not arbitrarily based on emotions.
Bio-tech gets permacastrated and banned forever but AI tech gets complete freedom and billions in investment to further empoverish the human condition because it just doesn't make some hag in the ethics board feel icky inside. Can't have anything nice.

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 09:59:39 UTC No. 16624832

>>16624822
Stop pretending that parasite clerks of all people have some higher ethics than those who actually work on solving problems instead of creating them. We all know that the opposite is true. All those ethics committees are nothing but another tentacle of corruption. FDA included.

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 11:20:03 UTC No. 16624876

>>16616934
It's a kind of an obvious statement, isn't it? That what ethics is needed for, it withhold us from doing risky things.

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:01:10 UTC No. 16625036

>>16623917
Not really. Israel is supported into war crimes because of ethics? No

Anonymous at Fri, 21 Mar 2025 15:18:59 UTC No. 16625051

>>16616993
>He Jiankui might have done some kind of human enhancement by created two especially intelligent human beings, with better memory and higher IQ (Joy et al., 2016).
Oh no! What a monster. He made them immune to HIV AND might have given them super intelligence? BAN THIS SICK FILTH NOW.

Anonymous at Sat, 22 Mar 2025 05:19:04 UTC No. 16625605

>>16617949
> If you ask a Christian what he thinks of stem cell and anti-aging research, he'll tell you that it's unethical and his deity doesn't approve of it.
Lol what nigga?
China is the Strongest because every other country in the world is super gay and replacing themselves with foreigners
Also Chinese people work 996.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Mar 2025 10:31:15 UTC No. 16627203

>>16624832
I'm just bitter human cloning is never going to happen because it makes people feel icky and uneasy but no one has any problem in rushing forward into uncharted territory with AI.
If some stupid whore on a clerical position castrated both technologies equally, we could at least have obscurantism without AI worsening people's quality of life.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Mar 2025 10:42:18 UTC No. 16627206

>>16627203
>AI worsening people's quality of life
wtf is your life? a truck driver?
It helps me with my research already, checking it for logical consistency and today it even delivered me working links to exactly the page in an ancient book I was looking for.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Mar 2025 10:44:55 UTC No. 16627207

>>16616934
No. The only people who say this are those who want an excuse to be racist. There are zero exceptions to this.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Mar 2025 11:46:14 UTC No. 16627230

>>16627207
Why would they want an excuse to be racist?
Races obviously exist, and that is why commies are constantly butthurt of genetics. And even the inconvenient fact that a nation can be better than another (on average) ON SOMETHING (not in general) directly follows from those genetic differences. So maybe blacks, who tell that Mississippi Mass Choir is better without white instruments with different timbre and sense of rhythm breaking the groove, have a point or two.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Mar 2025 12:27:12 UTC No. 16627241

>>16627230
>Why would they want an excuse to be racist?
Why would you use "they" instead "we" or "I" here? It's because you're mentally deficient and want to pretend to be objective when in fact all you're doing is pop-sociology informed by nothing other than the instincts you picked up in your culturally impoverished childhood.

Anonymous at Mon, 24 Mar 2025 13:57:31 UTC No. 16627277

>>16627241
What makes you think me being racist? I think I explicitly told you "on average" and "not in general", but those people may only care of science and not of sports or hiphop. So I understand their sentiment and consider it justified, but this understanding doesn't make me one of them, as me studying stars or frogs doesn't make me a star or a frog.
So I understand that you're too retarded for this board, since you instantly resorted to ad hom, but it doesn't make me one of you either. And pop-soc would disagree either, because it's full of retarded cowards like yourself.
> the froggie in the car
I didn't paint that picture either, but I can appreciate a good pun.

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Mar 2025 15:02:21 UTC No. 16628234

>>16616936
>diomedes burst into the classroom with a plucked insect in hand and said: behold, a man!

Anonymous at Tue, 25 Mar 2025 23:21:01 UTC No. 16628584

>>16617284
>Now, it would be a really bad thing if we let the chinks develop the tech first
why? at this point they're the only country that seems to deserve it

Anonymous at Wed, 26 Mar 2025 22:55:48 UTC No. 16629423

>>16627277
you did, by the way they were driving

Eyedol at Wed, 26 Mar 2025 23:44:06 UTC No. 16629443

God, Schmod, I want my monkey-man!

Anonymous at Thu, 27 Mar 2025 08:07:01 UTC No. 16629643

>>16628234
>Diomedes
>>16629443
Brezhnev.