this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2025
25 points (100.0% liked)

news

264 readers
751 users here now

A lightweight news hub to help decentralize the fediverse load: mirror and discuss headlines here so the giant instance communities aren’t a single choke-point.

Rules:

  1. Recent news articles only (past 30 days)
  2. Title must match the headline or neutrally describe the content
  3. Avoid duplicates & spam (search before posting; batch minor updates).
  4. Be civil; no hate or personal attacks.
  5. No link shorteners
  6. No entire article in the post body

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ArseAssassin@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 day ago

Ah, it did feel like eugenics was due for a comeback. Now just keeping my fingers crossed that someone in Silicon Valley starts working on cracking that phrenology puzzle again.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago
  1. Very few could afford this.
  2. CRISPR editing is not infallible, off targets are a thing.
  3. Farming has proven unintended consequences of gene editing
  4. In most countries, this is illegal.
[–] Lembot_0005@lemy.lol 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Claudia Cockerell asks:

Who is she, why is her opinion important and what does she imply? The article doesn't answer any of these questions.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

She's the author of the article and editor of the Londoner's Diary.

[–] Lembot_0005@lemy.lol 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So... Nobody who might have an educated opinion on the matter? Plus, she hasn't even tried to express her point.
Typical yellow pages journalism.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago)

It's an editorial; an opinion piece. It really shouldn't be in this community at all as it isn't news.