The Rise of Smart Baby Fever in Silicon Valley

The Rise of Genetic Optimization in Silicon Valley

In the heart of Berkeley, California, Tsvi Benson-Tilsen, a mathematician, spent seven years studying how to prevent advanced artificial intelligence from causing harm to humanity. His conclusion was stark: stopping AI might not be feasible anytime soon. Rather than focusing on preventing AI, Benson-Tilsen turned his attention to an alternative approach—enhancing human intelligence through genetic optimization.

Benson-Tilsen is the co-founder of the Berkeley Genomics Project, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing the field of genomic research. He believes that creating smarter humans could be one of our best hopes for addressing the challenges posed by AI. “My intuition is it’s one of our best hopes,” he said, highlighting the growing interest in this area among tech leaders and futurists.

This isn’t just science fiction—it’s a real movement taking shape in Silicon Valley. Parents in the region are increasingly investing in genetic-testing services that promise to screen embryos for traits such as IQ. Tech visionaries like Elon Musk have even encouraged the intellectually gifted to have more children, while professional matchmakers are helping tech executives find partners who can contribute to the creation of brilliant offspring.

The IQ Obsession and Its Implications

The fascination with what some call “genetic optimization” reflects deeper Silicon Valley beliefs about merit and success. Many in the tech community believe that intelligence is a key factor in achieving success and that having “good genes” contributes to one's accomplishments. This belief has led to a growing demand for genetic screening services that can help parents select embryos based on their predicted IQ.

Jennifer Donnelly, a high-end matchmaker, noted that many of her clients, including tech CEOs, prefer partners from top-tier institutions like Ivy League schools. She charges up to $500,000 for her services, emphasizing the importance of intelligence in the selection process.

However, the trend has sparked significant debate among bioethicists. Hank Greely, director of the Center for Law and the Biosciences at Stanford University, raised concerns about the potential for creating a genetically superior class of individuals. “It is a great science fiction plot: The rich people create a genetically super caste that takes over and the rest of us are proles,” he warned.

Despite these concerns, Silicon Valley remains largely unbothered by the moral implications of using technology to select for intelligence before birth. The region’s culture values innovation and novelty, and many parents are eager to take advantage of new genetic technologies.

The Role of Startups in Genetic Screening

Startups like Nucleus Genomics and Herasight have begun offering IQ predictions based on genetic tests to help parents choose which embryos to use for in vitro fertilization. These services come at a cost, with prices ranging from around $6,000 to $50,000.

Kian Sadeghi, founder of Nucleus Genomics, noted that Silicon Valley has a particular affinity for IQ. “Silicon Valley, they love IQ,” he said. However, this focus on intelligence may not resonate with parents elsewhere. “You talk to mom and pop America…not every parent is like, I want my kid to be, you know, a scholar at Harvard. Like, no, I want my kid to be like LeBron James.”

Simone and Malcolm Collins, leaders in the burgeoning pronatalist movement, have used genetic testing to select embryos based on their predicted IQ. They have four children through IVF and chose an embryo with a low risk of cancer and a high likelihood of exceptional intelligence. Their son, Tex Demeisen, will carry a middle name inspired by a science-fiction novel, reflecting their interest in futuristic concepts.

The Limitations of Genetic Prediction

While the idea of selecting for intelligence is appealing, experts caution that current genetic tests are not very accurate in predicting IQ. Shai Carmi, an associate professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, explained that current models explain only 5% to 10% of the differences in cognitive ability between people. “If parents rank their embryos by the predicted IQ, they could gain between three and four points on average compared with choosing randomly,” he said. “It’s not going to be something to make your child a prodigy.”

Additionally, there are concerns about unintended consequences. Selecting for high IQ could inadvertently increase the risk of other traits, such as autism. “If you’re selecting on what you think is the highest IQ embryo, you could also be, at the same time unwittingly selecting on an embryo with the highest Autism Spectrum Disorder risk,” said Sasha Gusev, a statistical geneticist at Harvard Medical School.

The Rationalist Movement and the Future of AI

Among those most invested in genetic optimization are the rationalists, a group of computer scientists in Berkeley who fear that AI poses an existential threat to humanity. They believe that creating smarter humans could be the key to developing safe AI. “Some of these guys are committed to a long-term eugenics program where they create smarter humans, and the smarter humans are the ones that make AI safe,” said Stephen Hsu, co-founder of Genomic Prediction.

Tsvi Benson-Tilsen, a leader in this movement, emphasizes the importance of parental choice in genetic decisions. “I’m interested in things that will have sort of large effects,” he said, “and in particular things that will make more geniuses, as it were.” He believes that more intelligent individuals may be better equipped to address global challenges and ensure that AI aligns with human values.