True, I had another comment on mind when I wrote it. Someone talking about brain implants. But that's also valid in this case.

If it will go in someone's body, it should be completely opensource, from hardware to software.

Assuming your honesty and good faith on asking this question, the real treasure on our gene pool is it's diversity. Eugenics would, by definition, reduce it. You could assume that it's a low price to pay for health, longevity, strength, intelligence, beauty and so on, but it's not that simple. Even some diseases (~~out~~ or the possibility to develop it) can be beneficial under the right circonstances, e.g. sickle cell anemia can improve resistance to malaria.

It would be great to be able to prevent most diseases before it happens and treat it if it happens (for free, in a universal health care system), but eliminate the genes would be a very bad idea, a healthy specie needs it's diversity to avoid extinction, and we sometimes feel like we are above that risk, but we are not that special.

Much more secure 👍🏾

Yeah, depending on what you consider "new".

• Nose shapes to account for dryer air on Africa and middle east.
• Nose shapes to account for colder weather.
• There are a group of people that have larger spleens to make them able to ~~drive~~ dive for longer periods (Bajau People).
• "Asian" eye-shape, afaik, is an adaptation to protect the eyes from sand.

The list is actually very long.

I think you are lost in the language. There are no absolute rights, in any legal systems. So any "law" necessarily restricts someone's "rights".

Therefore, you need to think about what "authoritarian decision" means, because if all law restricts someone's rights, all laws are authoritarian by your definition.

Also: terrible example to begin with.

A rough translation of a brazilian quote for you: "In a fight between these guys, I cheer for the fight".

Sunglasses and UV-blocking clothes.

With the first I discovered that I have a high sensitivity to light, now I can see much more during the day.

And the second is very useful, protecting me from sun without the need to worry about sunscreen (except for the face)

Hope that backfire on IBM.

"What can be told without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"

Until they back their claims with evidence open to the scientific community and press, that's just smokescreen and diversion. The are more important things to care about right now.

And the attester will know where you're navigating, always.

Do you remember the Fibonacci sequence? You can use it to convert miles to kilometers .

2 mi ~= 3km

5mi ~= 8km

8mi ~= 13km

13mi ~= 21km

And so on.