Not if you're an entrepreneur or into modern homestead living.

Knowing people could buy and use drugs with it would you be in favor of mandatory monthly drug testing for illegal substances?

Not talking pot or alcohol where that's legal...hard drugs. This debate already exists with welfare.

The following submission statement was provided by /u/rherbom2k:

It's exciting to think about the possibilities of gene editing, but we have to be careful about how we approach it. We've heard some amazing success stories about CRISPR-based treatments, but we need to make sure that everyone can benefit from these therapies, not just the wealthy few. There are also important ethical and technical concerns that we need to take into account, like unintended effects or the potential for rogue scientists to exploit the technology. It's not all doom and gloom though - we can also find some humor in the situation and bring diverse perspectives into the conversation. As we move forward with gene editing, we need to keep both our heads and our hearts in the game.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/11nxok1/more_than_200_people_have_been_treated_with/jbpkk8u/

i would stop working in IT, that's for sure.

allowing people the freedom to work on things they are passionate about without risking poverty would be great. sometimes people don't find out what they REALLY want to do until much later in life. being forced to stick with a career that you eventually come to hate solely because you need the money it provides to survive sucks.

U.B.I is inevitable and studies have shown it helps to create work, just not the work the super rich use you for, more of the creative stuff, anytime the super rich spend millions trying to convince people it's a bad idea the more you know it is something we should have. A.I will be taking almost all forms of work away from us, it's about time as a species we begin to look at our future it's either star trek or mad max...U.B.I. is star trek and True A.I. is the cure, we have enough resources for all if we could keep the 1% from hording it and taking advantage of workers.

> It's going to come with strings attached to keep people in line.

Unlike the current situation..? I mean, people have to be "in line" with their company to keep a roof over their head.

It's not pessimistic it's realistic. It's going to come with strings attached to keep people in line. Economics has always had the free rider problem and you can't pretend it won't be an issue with UBI.

It's every technocrats wet dream because it can give an incentive for societal compliance.

Unless you're wealthy enough not to need it that is...

No. We’ll just work on things we enjoy instead of things we have to. Beyond that it’s not like UBI is going to provide lifestyles of the rich and the famous. It should be enough to provide food, shelter and clothing with a little left over. If you want more than that you’ll need to work.

Not everyone...but you're partially right. If you're interested in what motivates people this is good:

https://youtu.be/u6XAPnuFjJc

It lists purpose but within a capitalist and performance based model.

If people don't have to work they can openly pursue pleasure. It's nice when that means art or sport or something cool but sadly pleasure is purpose for many.

Look at the drug addled streets of Philadelphia or any ghetto.

My argument is that UBI will simply come with strings attached to keep people in line. To get it you'll need all your vaccines and maybe even birth control if you have a bad social credit score and would in turn most likely make a terrible parent.

It's sad but can anyone tell me it ain't true?

BTW...I'M NOT ADVOCATING THIS OR SUGGESTING EUGENICS BUT THAT MAY BE THE ULTIMATE END RESULT.

>Maybe it might prevent someone from falling into poverty, but barely.

So it's probably worth it!

Yeah, this was a weirdly pessimistic take.

Why would people do anything in their free time if that was true? Why do people volunteer to homeless shelters at night after a crushing work day?

Some people might want to drink and smoke all day, but I'm sure they're somehow already doing that. Harm reduction and prevention is the answer - not depriving society as a whole of positive social measures.

100% bullshit. People will not just drink smoke and fuck all day. People want a purpose.

No. Basic income won't cover the costs of living. Maybe it might prevent someone from falling into poverty, but barely.

Maybe...we're more likely to stop reproducing if anything.

https://nationalpost.com/news/bill-gates-funds-birth-control-microchip-that-lasts-16-years-inside-the-body-and-can-be-turned-on-or-off-with-remote-control

Imagine that being tied to UBI and social credit scores. There's no such thing as a free lunch. You can pretend that people will do creative things for the common good if they didn't have to work but chances are they'll just drink, smoke, and fuck all day.

Brazil has already tied their version of UBI to COVID vaccination compliance. I'm not making any kind of argument or trying to discuss vaccines but just showing the slippery slope of UBI.

It will be used to control and tied to social credit scores...but it'll likely be sold as freedom.

Only the rich who don't need UBI will get the privilege to live outside the rules.

Just interested in everyone's thought on the topic.

I've been thinking about this on the way to work lately and I just don't think anyone hates working per se - they hate selling their time and obeying to arbitrary orders. Giving a hand to move a friend's home is often super fun and rewarding - why? It's shared work on a voluntary basis that feels super useful with a clear goal that is achievable by cooperation.

So yeah, I would definitely still work on a UBI, but I would definitely think about work differently, ands I think this is what universal income is all about. I might work more locally, take more risks or be more involved in causes I truly care about. I don't like feeling useless and I don't think most people would become lazy because they suddenly earn a guaranteed 700$ a month.

What are your thoughts on the matter? What would you do with a guaranteed income every month, no matter your situation?

[removed]

It's exciting to think about the possibilities of gene editing, but we have to be careful about how we approach it. We've heard some amazing success stories about CRISPR-based treatments, but we need to make sure that everyone can benefit from these therapies, not just the wealthy few. There are also important ethical and technical concerns that we need to take into account, like unintended effects or the potential for rogue scientists to exploit the technology. It's not all doom and gloom though - we can also find some humor in the situation and bring diverse perspectives into the conversation. As we move forward with gene editing, we need to keep both our heads and our hearts in the game.

I logged in to my electricity provider and it's my actual price in the night.

It's more expensive in the day and peaked at $0.45.

historically speaking, people with power often use that power on people without it.

[removed]

very well put.

but i disagree with your conclusion. yes, due to our current economic system, ai is being developed by different groups with different intentions. there is no central authority deciding what algos are or aren't released to the public. but this is because governments still don't have legislation towards it. this is due to the fact that corporations are still trying to find the profit angle that these current algos have. once that happens, and considering that the profits could be massive, the pressure to curtail the wild west of ai development will increase.

and thus in no time you'll see campaigns in mass media asking for certain regulation, lobbying/bribes on a massive scale towards politicians that decide the regulations. "grassroot movements" will emerge to give legitimacy to specific demands.

after that, the multiple possibilites of ai will be reduced to what can keep the capitalist machine going.

the biggest legal battle will be over on who as the legal rights to what is created by the ai.

[removed]

I take back the statement about Australia's immigration, but I doubt your statement is true as well. Below are my sources, where AUS is neither among the most difficult nor the easiest (although consider they're experiencing labor shortage rn). You'll need to provide support for your statements too.

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/121114/5-hardest-countries-getting-citizenship.asp

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/hardest-countries-to-immigrate-to

If it makes us overall more productive why not use it? I for one wouldn't want to be doing a robots job

I have a feeling more people will get laid that day than any other Valentines Day in history