Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter
NYT ‘Op Eds From the Future’ Launch With Sci-Fi Writer Ted Chiang (nytimes.com) 23
Science fiction authors, futurists, philosophers and scientists write op-eds that they imagine we might read 10, 20 or even 100 years in the future. The challenges they predict are imaginary — for now — but their arguments illuminate the urgent questions of today.
The first one is by science fiction writer Ted Chiang (best known for the short story which became the Hugo-winning movie Arrival). Apparently riffing on the college admissions scandal, Chiang writes that “It’s 2059, and the Rich Kids Are Still Winning. DNA tweaks won’t fix our problems…” His op-ed complains that a “philanthropic effort to bring genetic cognitive enhancements to low-income communities” has failed to get most of them into elite colleges or into jobs with good salaries and prospects for advancement.
“With the results in hand, it is time for us to re-examine the efficacy and desirability of genetic engineering….”
- I don’t see why NYT is entering the sci-fi genre. News: good. Interpreting the news for us: OK, to some degree… Fiction: let others do it. You can’t beat Black Mirror and 10000’s of books.
They’re struggling to find content people want to read.
Let them sink. No great loss.
These are essentially op-ed pieces under the guise of (sort of) fiction.
All for a quick buck, all for a quick buck. Integrity an honor is dead in the journalism space.
Or rather Futurists are a subclass of idiots that unfortunately have learned to write and are now pestering everybody with their deranged ideas. SciFi authors usually are aware that their writings are fictional and meant to entertain. That I have no problem with.
- by Applehu Akbar ( 2968043 ) on Sunday June 02, 2019 @11:50AM (#58695458)
Long before we can identify the genetic complex that facilitates intelligence, we will find and knock out the addiction gene. This, just by itself, will allow a much larger number of people to qualify for college.
The study was rigged to fail. With only 500 subjects and no controlling for nutrition and educational resources, it is no surprise that they did poorly. The gened and pharma companies designed it that way, to strange the public subsidy of cognitive enhancement in the crib. They’re terrified of an even playing field, even if it guaranteed billions coming their way, because it would have boostrapped the next generation right out of their dependency. A smarter populace is a less credulous populace, and their v
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
- 840 comments‘Captain Marvel’ Review Bombers Have Dropped Rotten Tomatoes Audience Rating To Lowest Among MCU Movies
- 579 comments‘Solo’ Will Lose $50+ Million In First Defeat For Disney’s ‘Star Wars’ Empire
- 566 comments‘Two Years Later, I Still Miss the Headphone Port’
- 549 comments‘Captain Marvel’ Smashes Box Office Record, Laughs Off Review-Bombing Trolls
- 548 commentsIs Disney’s Star Wars Franchise In Trouble?
Slashdot Top Deals
- Get more comments
- 23 of 23 loaded
It is wrong always, everywhere and for everyone to believe anything upon insufficient evidence. – W. K. Clifford, British philosopher, circa 1876
