Thanks for replying!

The link is: https://habr.com/ru/articles/933324/ 

I'm preemptively sorry if this question have already been raised, I don't feel like reading all the comments. 

What am I doing now is reciting the points from Habr (a mostly-coding-oriented site where this article have been translated in Russian and criticized in comments) 

The main criticism is against the key point of the article, the graphs of "edit N genes, get M bonus to IQ". 

The arguments are:

1. There are only a few hundred IQ-related genes, and they're found through a correlation in over 240k people, so it's not necessary that you can just edit all these genes to set them on a "more IQ" version in a specific genome, and get maximum IQ. 
   www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2018/03/genes-intelligence.page
2. By editing more nucleotide sequences, you will only increase the risks of breaking the genome's reading, replication, expression and other mechanisms, killing the cell. DNA isn't merely a line of text that encodes proteins, it's full of commands for enzymes to work with it. As a tip of the iceberg: there are 20k genes that encode 100-1000k proteins in human body, because 1 gene contains several exons (and introns), which, during transcription, are combined in different ways to encode several proteins. 

Yeah, a strange hobby I have found for myself: connecting two sides in an internet argument, like a novice chess player copying moves from two grossmeisters to not lose against at least one... 

Yes. Trying to make up a new way to redistribute the products among the whole society is pointless, if the means of production are still owned privately.

Thanks.

1. You seem to miss the point. It's not about concepts. The GPT-4 is advertised as a system that can work with both text and images. It doesn't. And isn't being developed any further, beyond increasing the amount of symbols and other quantitative stuff.

No matter the amount of gigabytes it writes per second, I'm not afraid of something that sees the world as text. +1 point to capitalism for not making something that is overly expensive to develop and may doom the world.

2. Thanks, I'll read.