My main issue with this post is that it seems substantially concerned with losing the ability for humans to achieve significant levels of wealth and power relative to each other, which I agree is important for avoiding a calcified ruling class (which tends to go poorly for a society, historically). But it should be viewed as a transitional concern as we look towards building a society where radical wealth disparities (critically, here defined as the power of the wealthy to effectively incentivize the less wealthy to endure unwanted experiences or circumstances, e.g., long work weeks, poorer nutrition or education, long commutes) don't exist.
Human ambition isn't worth human poverty except exactly to the degree that it may be necessary to eliminate suffering.
Checking up on this because it looks like the market another commenter opened hasn't resolved yet.
Very interesting, has the vibe of technology that's at least 20 years out from really hitting (assuming ASI is later than that) (though even then maybe progress speeds up? Idk, a lot of the barriers will be regulatory and certain parts won't be able to move faster than human growth and development).
The biggest surprise to me was probably that IQ selection was already happening without much fanfare - I had thought that there would be some law on the books, especially given the culture wars around pro choice/life and current admin. Perhaps it skates by because it's rare, expensive, inconvenient, screening rather than editing, and a low boost to begin with?