That video just made me think, maybe, a human being without genetic therapy, or whatever you want to call it, simply exposed to a severe situation of survival, in which survival can only be solved through intelligence, would always far surpass a mildly motivated genetically superior being.
The video brought up a question which is quite interesting, if we remove the genetic ability to be moved greatly by stress, would we as a race simply stagnate, and succumb to an oppressive government simply because we are happy with whatever situation we are currently in?
An example of this may be seen in the near future, as there have been roomers of local governments wanting to add Lithium to the water supply to make people happier. We will quickly see if that society stagnates, and makes different political decisions.
Back in the 50's and 60's all of our science fiction was looking towards a better future. Stuff like Star Trek imagined a world where science was truly valued, and shortsighted issues of the day like racism and sexism were long gone. Also a lot of the technological advancements that were present on Star Trek are things we have and take for granted now.
Modern science fiction seems to be entirely pessimistic and post-apocalyptic. The only thing we've apparently got to look forward to is the zombie apocalypse (which won't be as awesome as it sounds) or dying a slow death from radiation. There is no talk of new technology, it's all about scrounging old technology that still functions.
The Singularity and Transhumanism seem to be the spiritual successor to the optimistic sci-fi of the 60's. It actually gives me something to look forward to. (On a less serious note, I can't wait until we all get our matching jumpsuits.)
It may be due to a separation of people at this moment. There are the "super savvy" who gain all the power and wealth through the new technologies, and those who simply do not think they can learn how to do the same, and they feel powerless.
I feel that the choice of media currently is a reflection of the fact that the general population does not understand technology, and those who do, appear to be god-like, and appear to retain the power to make greatly oppressive decisions against the general population.
This kind of idea that we should halt human progress, or deprive others of things which enhance their standards of living in the name of equality is an issue I raised, this is equivelant to the idea that the so called 'rich' should pay there 'fair share', when in reality there are very, very few truly rich people. Often justified by the idea of a so called oppressive upper class.
For example many small family buisiness owners (whom by the way often can't really take holidays) and people in well paying jobs (which still need to work in order to pay their bills) such as tradesmen, accountants, lawyers, technicians etc..etc... get classified as such and even then many of these people aren't on that great of a wage (especially some self-employed tradesmen).
The problem with thorium energy(ignoring weaponization), particularly LFTR is the lack of commercial availability, these more efficent forms of power generation need funding and time in order to be developed into comercially available products, on the other hand more conventiona NPPs have been available for a long time and in many cases adoption has been an issue of social stigma. Furthermore what I was getting at before was how some outdated, and/or poorly designed/built plants have not been replaced with safer, larger capacity plants for political reasons (mainly political cost/risk and regulation), and in other cases adoption has been negligable to non-existent for the same reasons.
In regards to ideas like LFTR I think it is a failure of forward thinking, I would like to see some sort of grant system and possibly prize/award system implemented that provides grants to research things like improved transportation, energy, communications, robotics/machines, computing etc..etc.. technologies. Unfortunately I think many people (possibly the majority by far) are present orientated, and this is reflected in low national savings levels, the election of financially irresponsible governments (the Federal government of the USA has close to 100Tn dollars of unfunded liabilities, mostly medical care), and the actions of organizations like nasa which seem to heavily foccused on manned space activities as opposed to things like propulsion technology and astronomy which arguably have a much better long term impact than hundred million dollar manned space missions.
Thats not to say thinking about yourself (individulism), about 'the now' isn't bad, everything in moderation, but I think we are far in excess of that given that the majority of americans don't have a retirement plan, and that the government is going to bankrupt itself and devestate the economy trying to fulfill promises (which it makes more of all the time) that it can't possibly fulfill.
"and those who simply do not think they can learn how to do the same, and they feel powerless".
I can't agree with this. Some simply have a great amount of disdain for electronics in general. They live fine with what they have, and don't seem to believe in using technology to make things easier, or becoming lazier. On our way to this singularity I envision the fat people in that space ship in that one Disney movie with the robot that was a garbage compacter who roamed around the trash filled Earth. My brain is crapping out on me. Might try google, but not sure what that sentence will bring up.
I know, I just felt it blended in, don't take offence, I didn't want to say lies about you, I just wanted to put it out there, hopefully I'll do a new blog post soon...
To those who say this is ethically wrong i say, fuck you and if you don't like it then you can go live somewhere else, well give your own continent to live in fear and ignorance. Honestly why can't we just do away with ethics and morals, I'm not talking about getting rid of laws that say we can't rape and murder because that doesn't fall under morals or ethics its under common sense, if we didn't have certain laws civilization would fall apart and I believe everyone has a right to life but if a persons life is lost in order to better everyone else then under those circumstances its ok. Also this will not kill anyone, it will only make us better and the only casualties will be people that were genetically engineered or augmented and died as a result of it, but we learn from mistakes. They say were playing god, well i say some one has to and were the closest thing to god, at least by our own standards. Who are they to hold everyone else back with their pesky stupid ethical codes, I dont even understand what's so unethical about transhumanism.
As a farm kid, it is never good to completely engineer livestock. To much vitality is lost , I assume that it applies to human also. That random factor is still all important.
Fair enough, but fusion, if all goes well, will be brilliant. Sadly, most of the international funds aren't spent on scientific research, but on, well, crap.