From: Ross A. Finlayson (raf@tiki-lounge.com)
Date: Wed Dec 27 2000 - 07:50:44 MST
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> For the record, the impression I got from GATTACA was that genetic
> engineering worked for physical strength to the extent that an average
> genemod human would be in, say, the top 1% relative to today's
> distribution of physiques, but that intelligence engineering would be only
> the top 10% if it worked at all. Thus a not-very-exceptional exceptional
> human could easily outcompete an average genemod for brains, but it would
> be a surprising coincidence if this natural-born prodigy also had a
> competitive physique.
>
> -- -- -- -- --
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
It seems like in that movie the genetic engineering part was only a few
decades old, (for the characters to be a few decades old) but the government
was fascist in only letting genetic "valids" work in the space program, or
presumably anywhere they test for drugs now, although that wasn't in the
movie.
I think I learned from this list that Gattaca is for G-T-C-A, the base
compounds or sequences of the genome (guanine, thymine, cytosine, adinine,
etc.).
I though it was a good movie, I like most movies with Uma Thurman. It wasn't
necessarily plausible. For example, the swimming competitions and where the
invalid brother saves his valid brother from drowning are symbolic. Also, the
everpresent genomic sniffing seems pretty easily fooled. It would be nice to
know why the one brother is valid and the other not, ie, the conditions of
their birth.
One good thing about the movie is that there is a lot of subtext to many of
the scenes.
About genetic engineering, if you've ever caught a cold you've been
genetically engineered.
Ross
-- Ross Andrew Finlayson Finlayson Consulting Ross at Tiki-Lounge: http://www.tiki-lounge.com/~raf/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:32:34 MST