Tramper: oppå taket

Nissen: tillbake

Gaver: under grana

Tomtegløgg: i krana

Life in Code: A Personal History of Technology

All this comes together to say you are not likely to find any person who is not a carrier for at least one genetic issue. So you have the option of either selecting for people who have no genetic issues, which will have such a small breeding population that your desired Übermensch will be glorified human pugs within a few generations; or selecting against specific genes, which will result in the same effect, just on a longer timeline, because one genetic disease being eradicated will never be enough. Plus, a lot of the time, genes code for more than one function, and "harmful" genes may be beneficial in certain conditions.

death of the author is not 'miku wrote this'

I don't think you have to read either essay to grasp the basic concepts

death of the author means that once a work is complete, what the author believes it to mean is irrelevant to critical analysis of what's in the text. it means when analysing the meaning of a text you prioritise reader interpretation above author intention, and that an interpretation can hold valid meaning even if it's utterly unintentional on the part of the person who created the thing. it doesn't mean 'i can ignore that the person who made this is a bigot' - it may in fact often mean 'this piece of art holds a lot of bigoted meanings that the author probably wasn't intentionally trying to convey but did anyway, and it's worth addressing that on its own terms regardless of whether the author recognises it's there.' it's important to understand because most artists are not consciously and vocally aware of all the possible meanings of their art, and because art is communal and interpretive. and because what somebody thinks they mean, what you think somebody means, and what a text is saying to you are three entirely different things and it's important to be able to tell the difference.