In the relatively near future, I see the human race coming to a crossroads. We will be faced with developing our machines or developing ourselves.

On the path of developing our machines, we become more and more dependent on them, risking becoming slaves to our own creations or being taken out of the picture entirely. The positive side would be that it is easier to make it morally acceptable.

The other side is biological technology. This doesn't nescessarily involve genetic engineering, but that would open up more options. I suppose it would be something like introducing brain/muscle growth hormones to a developing fetus, or something along those lines. The problem with this is that it proves to be a moral dilemma.

The middle ground between the two may be something like melding with our machines, taking some of the good and bad of both disciplines, or perhaps all of it...

Where there's greed, there's a way.

Where there's money to be made, rest assured the technology will continue to develop.

At the age of 12, some kids are glued to their smart phones. You can barely have a convo with someone without them texting or taking a call. Why I'm saying this is: If technology can be made accesible to the public for cheap, they will get hooked. If technology that makes us lazy and distracted is developed, there will be both a supply and demand.

I meant more along the lines of what would/should be legal. If the idea is out there, of course someone is going to try it.

i.e Right now, it's illegal to perform genetic engineering on human DNA.

Not really lagslayer it is not illegal as it is impractical at the moment with our current technology. We are still in the baby steps in cloning and genetic alterations which are still in testing phases. Maybe in the next 50 years it might be liabel and a reasonable thing to have gentic modify humans that can perform better than the original alothugh it can produce a Gattaca paradox.