• jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I’m not generally one to advocate for free-market capitalism, but in this case, I think you would need to explain to me why genetic engineering would be withheld from people given that free access would be more profitable.

    • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      the cost. everyone gets everything, no stratified application. The only way to keep genetically engineered casts from developing due to this would be if everyone gets it. Similar thing with very advanced automation. Once the technology hits a certain point ownership has to be shifted to the public at large. If some ownership, and others don’t, for whatever reason, these technologies make a gap in power hitherto unknown. If the billionaire class exert outsized influence due to their resources now, then being able to simply decide how genetic engineering is used, or to own the machines that create almost all of our production, they will simply just be the god kings of an advanced tech era.

      These types of things need to be completely socialized, no owners, no IP holders, no cost gates, etc.

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        Yes, I agree it should definitely be accessible to everyone. Just like any other kind of healthcare is already in my country. As for the cost, one could redirect funds from healthcare toward it. It should save money on healthcare in the long-run. At least, once the price is in the low-thousands of dollars, it should definitely balance out. It’s still on the order of usd$10k though at present.