http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177

It’s excellent.

– Arik

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119177

It’s excellent.

– Arik

Well this would be probabilistic at the best. One needs also to understand many other factors and genetics is just a small step right at the moment to that phase.

All genetic assessments are a complexity based assessment where we do not have much of the information.

As for personality, the Mylar casing on nerve fibres does not complete formation until the age of 20-21 and thus there is a large amount of variation due to this alone.

Well this would be probabilistic at the best. One needs also to understand many other factors and genetics is just a small step right at the moment to that phase.

All genetic assessments are a complexity based assessment where we do not have much of the information.

As for personality, the Mylar casing on nerve fibres does not complete formation until the age of 20-21 and thus there is a large amount of variation due to this alone.

I mean, I do see how you guys got that, but trust me — it was unintentional. I was more focusing on the idea of deciphering one’s genetic code and using it to gauge your place in society due to integration with technology that private companies would leverage.

I mean, I do see how you guys got that, but trust me — it was unintentional. I was more focusing on the idea of deciphering one’s genetic code and using it to gauge your place in society due to integration with technology that private companies would leverage.

Well, I’d fight hard against some (most) of the things you list. I’d consider them abuses.

I’m not going to go through your list point by point, but I will mention your insurance example, since this has LONG been discussed as a place of potential abuse (and one which has NOTHING at all to do with a National ID system). I believe that the purpose of insurance is to spread risk. (And, I’ll add in passing that I think that this is a good thing.) I do not believe that rates should be higher for those with higher genetic risk factors (though I am in favor of waiting periods for those who go without insurance until they suddenly need it). On the other hand, if someone has a history of driving violations, they CERTAINLY should pay more in auto insurance. (I expect that this last sentence will spawn some hypotheticals.)

Well, I’d fight hard against some (most) of the things you list. I’d consider them abuses.

I’m not going to go through your list point by point, but I will mention your insurance example, since this has LONG been discussed as a place of potential abuse (and one which has NOTHING at all to do with a National ID system). I believe that the purpose of insurance is to spread risk. (And, I’ll add in passing that I think that this is a good thing.) I do not believe that rates should be higher for those with higher genetic risk factors (though I am in favor of waiting periods for those who go without insurance until they suddenly need it). On the other hand, if someone has a history of driving violations, they CERTAINLY should pay more in auto insurance. (I expect that this last sentence will spawn some hypotheticals.)

The idea is however flawed. Frogs have a greater amount of genetic material than humans. Many find this surprising as we are supposedly superior. Frogs however have to lay eggs in ponds that change in temperature and have to have embryos that fend for themselves.

People have a material development; we have a womb and breast feeding. As a result we have a controlled environment to develop.

There are genetic similarities, twin studies have shown this, but there are also differences – clone studies (not on humans to my knowledge) have demonstrated this in mammals.

We are a combination of both nature and nurture and the situation is reflective in this.

Take as an example a non-genetic result that has been experimentally proven. A woman with a restricted diet during pregnancy will create a child with a better than average calorific storage capability. This is the child will gain weight easier.

So the comment “Genetics indicate he’s likely to fight if we attempt to arrest him.” Is not correct. Genetics coupled with increased adrenal excretion during pregnancy maybe… This is still a little way out of reach though.

The idea is however flawed. Frogs have a greater amount of genetic material than humans. Many find this surprising as we are supposedly superior. Frogs however have to lay eggs in ponds that change in temperature and have to have embryos that fend for themselves.

People have a material development; we have a womb and breast feeding. As a result we have a controlled environment to develop.

There are genetic similarities, twin studies have shown this, but there are also differences – clone studies (not on humans to my knowledge) have demonstrated this in mammals.

We are a combination of both nature and nurture and the situation is reflective in this.

Take as an example a non-genetic result that has been experimentally proven. A woman with a restricted diet during pregnancy will create a child with a better than average calorific storage capability. This is the child will gain weight easier.

So the comment “Genetics indicate he’s likely to fight if we attempt to arrest him.” Is not correct. Genetics coupled with increased adrenal excretion during pregnancy maybe… This is still a little way out of reach though.