Slashdot Mirror


The Next X Prize

BlueCup writes "The X Prize Foundation, sponsor of a widely noted 2004 award for developing a reusable rocket suitable for private space travel, says it is now teaming with a wealthy Canadian geologist to offer $10 million to any team that can completely decode the genes of 100 people in 10 days. And that's not all. As an encore, the winning team will be paid $1 million more to decode another 100 people's genes, including a bevy of wealthy donors and celebrities. Already accepted for future decoding: Google Inc. co-founder Larry Page, Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul G. Allen and former junk-bond king Michael Milken."

114 comments

  1. Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by cp.tar · · Score: 4, Funny

    See if they can find the chair-throwing gene...

    --
    Ignore this signature. By order.
    1. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by buswolley · · Score: 1

      Believe me I've seen gene before in my wife. That should be the XX Prize

      --

      A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

    2. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use Bobby Knight's DNA as a baseline.

    3. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by cp.tar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Like... an X-Prize for an X-wife?

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    4. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by AaronBenage · · Score: 3, Funny

      If Gene was in your wife, wouldn't that be the XXX Prize?

      --
      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -
    5. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

      See if they can find the chair-throwing gene...

      I sure they find that gene that gets people stuck repeating same old jokes for years, although they are not funny.

    6. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ATTACAATHROWCHAIRGGAG CCATGFUCKINKILLAGGAT AGGATTDEVELOPERSGGA ILUVTHISCUMPANYTTAGA

      Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

    7. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by mikael · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't that be on the same chromosome with the monkey dance gene?

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    8. Re:Will they decode Ballmer's genes as well? by toomz · · Score: 1

      I resemble that comment!

      --
      If a chair is thrown in a forest, and there are no witnesses, did Ballmer still do it?
  2. What's the matter, Chuck? Cerebro broken? by krell · · Score: 1

    Too bad there is not a more direct way to sift through humanity to find examples of Homo Superior.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
  3. This is the beginning of the end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe MY genes are worth decoding too, despite the fact that I'm not a C-level executive at a Fortune 500 company.

    Welcome to the World of Tomorrow! Where only the obscenely rich can afford immortality for themselves and their families, and the rest of us are left out in the cold... we are called "invalids" with an icy, sneering indifference by the wealthy, geneticly gifted sons of Paul Allen and Larry Page.

    Wake up people. There's a war on the horizon and the denying this technology to us proles us is going to be a major weapon.

    1. Re:This is the beginning of the end by Verdict · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, there will always be lo-tech. Wealthy bodies are as vulnerable as poor ones. If we can just get our hands on a navy trained dolphin we should be alright.

    2. Re:This is the beginning of the end by LaughingCoder · · Score: 2, Insightful
      There's a war on the horizon and the denying this technology to us proles us is going to be a major weapon.
      Calm down. Technology, if it is useful, invariably gets cheaper and hence more accessible. Once upon a time only the "rich" had cell phones. Only the "wealthy" had home computers. Only the "powerful" had access to the internet. Only the "elite" had access to medicines and health care. Cars were in the domain of the rich. Ditto air travel. The list goes on and on. Mark my words, if mapping your genomes is something you as an individual want and will pay for, companies will find a way to bring it to you at an affordable rate. And when that happens, we can thank all those wealthy, rich and powerful people who payed huge sums in the earliest days, thereby giving the developers of the technology (and their investors) the cash they need to make improvements. More often than not, early consumers of advanced technologies are subsidizing its development for subsequent offerings to the masses.
      --
      The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
    3. Re:This is the beginning of the end by iabervon · · Score: 1

      Your genes, Anonymous Coward, were sequenced by the Human Genome Project before anybody else's. But really, at $1m for 100 people at a prototype stage, this isn't hugely expensive (if anyone manages to make it cost-effective). Going into production from the prototype stage is commonly a factor of 100 drop in price, at which point, it's cheaper than going to the dentist.

    4. Re:This is the beginning of the end by evil_Tak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      On a global scale, these things are still true.

    5. Re:This is the beginning of the end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh, you're insightful because you pulled the, "Think of the poor children in Guatemala." Then look at the government and how rich their leaders are.

    6. Re:This is the beginning of the end by confusednoise · · Score: 1

      if mapping your genomes is something you as an individual want

      Of course, if you have multiple genomes to map, I for one would like to talk to you as that would probably make for an interesting paper. (an individual has one and only one genome).

      Sorry, I know I'm a pain in the ass :-)

    7. Re:This is the beginning of the end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have faith that Nature will sift through the crap, no matter how much we fsck with it. And it's not like poor people aren't able to spread their genes without this stuff. It sure as Hell doesn't stop them now.
      But, hey, my <sarcasm> meter was going off anyway, so every one just chill with your comments above.

    8. Re:This is the beginning of the end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And make more rich people! Great...

    9. Re:This is the beginning of the end by Nef · · Score: 1

      I realize what you're trying to say, but where would a chimera fall in that description? Technically, a chimera should have at least 2 genomes right?

    10. Re:This is the beginning of the end by Rich+Klein · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I want my genes decoded. It would be interesting, and might turn up some possible health issues before they become a serious problem, but I don't think it would do me any good if that data fell into the hands of my insurer or the government, or even some group I haven't imagined that hates one of my ancestors or something.

      --
      -Rich
    11. Re:This is the beginning of the end by ndogg · · Score: 1
      --
      // file: mice.h
      #include "frickin_lasers.h"
    12. Re:This is the beginning of the end by evil_Tak · · Score: 1

      OK. The wealth of the few in those areas doesn't take away the poverty of the many.

  4. Didn't know by Esion+Modnar · · Score: 2, Funny

    they were encrypted.

    --

    They say the first thing to go is your penis. Well, it's either that or your brain. I forget which...
    1. Re:Didn't know by ronadams · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, Sony and Microsoft partnered to create Digital Rights Management for Humans. We should be careful, though. As I understand the EULA, if we attempt to decode Paul Allen's genetic code without purchasing a license to his soul, he might be obiliterated. Not to mention that we'd be stealing all the thousands of years of God's hard work. Didn't you watch that commercial before the last movie you went to?

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    2. Re:Didn't know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution is claiming prior art, God. See you in court.

    3. Re:Didn't know by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      As much as you joke, with all the patenting of the parts of the human genome, we'll have to see whether we'll be allowed to reproduce at all without breaking someone's patent...

      We might be looking at some Genome Rights Management in the not-so-distant future...

      Funny, that... I've maintained that humans should not be allowed to reproduce until they prove they're capable of taking care of the children, but this is getting too far even for me.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
  5. And to sweeten the deal by krell · · Score: 4, Funny

    "And to sweeten the deal, we've hidden special codes somewhere the spleen section section of the genes of everyone on earth. Make sure to check these codes at www.mountaindew.com to win your free iTunes music: and one prize winner WILL RECEIVE A NEW NISSAN XTERRA!"

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:And to sweeten the deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahaha.. wish I had mod points

  6. From TFA by cp.tar · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Are the rich and famous really different from the rest of us, down in their genes?

    Hmmm... is there a gene (or a set of genes) responsible for, say, the desire to make huge amounts of money?
    Or are there actual genes which determine how much introverted or extroverted a person is?

    Of course, I don't think the rich and the famous are substantially different from the rest of you, but still... it's a valid question.

    --
    Ignore this signature. By order.
    1. Re:From TFA by dptalia · · Score: 1

      The drive to be an entrepeneur is like the drive to be creative - you're born with it or not. Whether you can see it in your genes is another question.

      --
      Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration, which is why engineers sometimes smell really bad.
    2. Re:From TFA by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      If it can't be seen in your genes, are you really born with it?

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    3. Re:From TFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >I don't think the rich and the famous are substantially different from the rest of you

      ... from the rest of YOU? So you're not human?

    4. Re:From TFA by ambivalentduck · · Score: 1

      Given highly advanced biomolecular engineering, you probably could engineer in a desire for money. That said, money is an *extremely* recent concept in the grand scheme of things. I think you'd have a much better chance finding genes that ***correlate*** with greed, loose morals, sex-addiction, power-addiction, etc. Overall, I think you'd find that such things are mostly environmental and luck-based. I mean, most people who *want* to get rich aren't. And genes only predispose you to things. Almost all genes require at least some environmental factors.

    5. Re:From TFA by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      Of course, I don't think that money as such (or the desire for it) is encoded in our genes... but the greed, the lust for power... if they can be spotted in one's genes...

      I'm not sure I'd like that, actually... imagine a world in which your job interview relies on your gene scan.
      And if your personality doesn't fit the company... well, you're screwed.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    6. Re:From TFA by dptalia · · Score: 1

      Good question. It brings back the whole nature versus nuture debate. I'm not sure how much is just the way you are, but I know kids can be raised the same way and turn out differently. How much is inheirent in their genes?

      --
      Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration, which is why engineers sometimes smell really bad.
    7. Re:From TFA by Gospodin · · Score: 1
      If it can't be seen in your genes, are you really born with it?

      Perhaps you mean "conceived with it", since you have 9 months of nurture working on you by the time you're born. A crack baby may be born with an addiction, but that doesn't mean it's encoded in his genes.

      --
      ...following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat...
    8. Re:From TFA by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but I wouldn't mind being able to say that I personally decoded the genes of a bunch of rich and famous people. The 10 million dollars sounds pretty nice too.

    9. Re:From TFA by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected.

      Or should I say "hvala na ispravku".

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    10. Re:From TFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but why would you want to work at a company that has been screened for selecting the most ruthless, greedy, back-stabbing psychopathic assholes you could find, if you were a "normal" ethical person, it would be like living in what some religions call "hell".

      You would be better off finding a company that screened for individuals that are thoughtful, creative, and actually do useful, productive things instead of climbing some cultural ladder that mandates a "screw you" attitude. This of course, reminds me of the movie Gattica.
      The only thing that Gattica missed, was the fact that we will soon (20, 30 years?) be able to modify a persons dna, or add nanomachines to the existing dna so as to "improve" them, so it won't matter what you were born with, you could just mod yourself either on a temporairy basis or a permanent basis. One question, if you could "dual boot" your brain/personality/body, it might be undesirable if you were to boot into a mode of say, bill gates/steve balmer/hitler and then find out you liked it and did not want to go back....?

    11. Re:From TFA by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      First of all, it's Gattaca, not Gattica.

      Even more accurately, GATTACA - it's a DNA sequence.

      Besides, no company would select ruthless, greedy, back-stabbing S.O.B.s. They'd select determined, task-oriented people.
      Explaining the distinction - or lack thereof - is left as an exercise for the student.

      Frankly, I think I'd sooner believe horoscope than that kind of genetic screening. It's the devil I know.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
  7. I'll take the coach seats. by Verdict · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So a hundred wealth donors only had to put up 10,000 to get their genes decoded in 10 days? That means I can sign up for the 100 day process for only $1000, and the 1000 day process for just $100. I can wait three years.

    1. Re:I'll take the coach seats. by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      The first batch costs $10,000 apiece. The second only costs $1,000 apiece.

      By that logic, you only need to wait 40 days and you'll have your genome decoded for mere $10.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
  8. Pipeline or embarassingly parallel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is the procedure to decode one person's genes really a pipeline with 100 stages, or are they basically asking competing groups to pay for many copies of the same hardware to produce the desired throughput?

  9. I'm sponsoring a prize too by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sponsoring the XXX prize for two women willing to accept my genetic code at the same time.

    1. Re:I'm sponsoring a prize too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You paying out a a million dollars to the winners?

    2. Re:I'm sponsoring a prize too by gosand · · Score: 1
      I'm sponsoring the XXX prize for two women willing to accept my genetic code at the same time.

      You paying out a a million dollars to the winners?

      Since this is Slashdot, I'll go with the odds and say that the only winner in this situation would be the poster.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    3. Re:I'm sponsoring a prize too by PeelBoy · · Score: 1

      We are all winners in my eyes.

    4. Re:I'm sponsoring a prize too by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      >> I'll go with the odds and say that the only winner in this situation would be the poster.

      Close. The poster is the only weiner in this situation.

    5. Re:I'm sponsoring a prize too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will co-sponsor, but I'm looking for 100 women to swallow my genetic code in 10 days.

  10. 1000 TB by fragles · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You just need to buy lot of 454 sequencing devices (http://www.454.com/) or Solexa http://www.solexa.com/wt/page/index and have big datacenter. Then you use those sequencers to re-sequence those 100 people and compare them with the reference human sequence. Big datacenter - You will need 30 Solexa devices and around 1000 TB data storage this is a nice task for Google datacenter.

    1. Re:1000 TB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's seriously lacking in the article is a good description of the competition rules, including the coverage and quality of results required. Sure, 454 and Solexa technology could resequence the genome quickly and do so with today's technology, but they could not accomplish the job de novo (assembling the shotgun genome just from their data) and they would not approach the >99.99% accuracy of the reference human genome produced by the Human Genome Project.

    2. Re:1000 TB by lionheart1327 · · Score: 1

      Next thing you know, Google will be asking you for a genetic sample to better target their ads.

      When that happens, if you start seeing ads for mesothelioma everywhere, you'd better pay attention.

  11. "wealthy Canadian geologist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    how does one become a wealthy geologist?

    1. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by cosinezero · · Score: 1

      Find a couple of shiny rocks?

    2. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably working for the oil or mining industry - you find a nice virgin ecosystem to rape and pillage, they give you a cut of the loot.

    3. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by hubie · · Score: 1

      Just like these.

    4. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it's better to send more money to the middle east instead of Canada... That way nothing is hurt.

    5. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      how does one become a wealthy geologist?

      Google "Fort McMurray"

    6. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by pacalis · · Score: 1

      Or you find kmberlite in the artic, buy up a shit load of frozen acres, and develop diamond mines there. http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/ms/diam/index_e.htm

    7. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want to know how one becomes a wealthy canadian geologist...

    8. Re:"wealthy Canadian geologist" by Rxke · · Score: 1

      Probably a guy in the oil-prospetor business. Good ones make lots of moolah...

  12. GRM by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 2, Funny

    Actually Sony's Gene Rights Management technology rootkits your own genes, so that if you attempt to copy Steve Allen's DNA without permission they can basically turn you into someone else.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:GRM by just_another_sean · · Score: 2, Funny

      So if I reverse engineer this GRM rootkit properly I can turn myself into whoever I want? Say, Chuck Norris? Sweet...

      (Legal implications aside of course)

      --
      Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
  13. Problem by sherms · · Score: 1

    Its still way down the line as far as cures. Because as they have found combinations of genes have other functions within the body. Hence "yes we found the gene for asthma!" but if they alter that gene it will have many affect to other functions. This is one of the current problems they have been trying to figure out. Yes its still a benefit but we still have many other obstacles.

    1. Re:Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... the human genome is spaghetti code. GOTO considered FATAL! :(

  14. They can decode me... by S810 · · Score: 1

    They can decode my DNA for the sale price of $500K

    --
    "I think you know what I'm talkin' about, Mr. President; We're gonna kill us a mummy!" - Bruce Campbell as Elvis Presley
  15. Man, this is scary! by Snarfangel · · Score: 1

    Now, where can I go to get my genes encrypted?

    --
    This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
    1. Re:Man, this is scary! by Snarfangel · · Score: 1

      Just ignore my above comment, because another poster already mentioned encryption.

      Nope, data compression is where it's at. I want my genes 50% smaller!

      (*sobs at making such a pathetic joke after my first choice was redundant*)

      --
      This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
  16. The smart inventor... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ...would not take the encore--$1mil for the 100 extra.

    They're trying to force 2 prizes in 1 here: (1) the ability to do the sequence of individuals en masse, (2) put a new/instant market and price cap on the invented tech from the get go.

    First, why put a price cap on the new service at $10,000 a person, esp. for these wealthy individuals? It would be an artificial cap, for minimal gain. Second, they'd make more money from that same group of people with the "introductory price" when their tech comes out. If they are worried about proof to investors they they'd keep the price of the tech low (or get it there eventually), that's more easily proved later down the line without hampering their now/then present business prospects.

  17. Not the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The point of the X Prize is for someone to come up with a cheaper/faster/easier way of doing it.

    Just like the first X Prize. I mean you could have used a regular space shuttle to accomplish the goal but it would have enormous expense and probably not be very safe. Hell, you could have used a reusable capsule on top of Soyuz rockets for that matter. That wasn't the point of the contest though.

    Basically you will want to accomplish this with somewhere around 10 million dollars (give or take a few 10 million) to make it even worth the effort.

    1. Re:Not the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original poster is right, except it depends on the rules of competition. If the rules are lax enough, the prize could be won very soon (in 1-2 years) essentially using existing technology.

  18. $10,000 Per Rich Bastard by pacalis · · Score: 2, Funny

    Given you can't do crap for $10K these guys are getting a pretty good deal. As for our genetic differences, I've seen the pictures of Larry Page in a speedo and I am proud to say we have clear genetic differences.

  19. The Next X Prize by BigCheese · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wouldn't that be the 'Y' prize? They had better make it take a while. There's only one left.

    --
    The obscure we see eventually. The completely obvious, it seems, takes longer. - Edward R. Murrow
    1. Re:The Next X Prize by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, this should be the XX/XY prize. Or something like that.

    2. Re:The Next X Prize by dmatos · · Score: 1

      It's actually the X-2 prize.

      --

      It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
      --Scott Adams
    3. Re:The Next X Prize by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1
      Wouldn't that be the 'Y' prize? They had better make it take a while. There's only one left.
      Do you have a problem with the possibility of an opening square bracket prize?
      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
  20. Ah, Demographics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can see the value of decoding the genes of the wealthy, as it's often the case that they are smarter than those around them, thus that's how they got to where they're at. However, I fail to see the value in decoding the genes of celebrities.

    This must be appeal to vanity, cause aside from the ones who are actually highly intelligent (see those who have degress from Yale, Harvard, Stanford, etc..) the rest probably contain no genetic value other than being attractive. Well...... I suppose it would be ok to decode Kate Beckinsale, Scarlett Johansson, Elisha Cuthbert and a few others, just for posterity's sake.

    Ok, maybe its not a bad idea. Who decides on the celebrities....

    1. Re:Ah, Demographics... by e1618978 · · Score: 1

      I want the DNA for Milla Jovovich, for future use as a cloned sexbot. I have to have SOME kind of hobby in my old age...

  21. Interesting sample group by Valdrax · · Score: 1

    Hmmm... is there a gene (or a set of genes) responsible for, say, the desire to make huge amounts of money?

    I just wonder if we'll be able to isolate genes for sociopathy from the sample group.
    I mean, Michael Milken, the Junk Bond King? I know he's done a lot of charity work since then, but he, like some other people on that list, got where he is through highly unethical (sociopathic?) business behavior.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  22. Correctness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not an expert in the technical aspects, but it said that the Sanger sequencing (which I'm assuming provides the correct result) took 300 million dollars + 10 years. How will the verification process work?

  23. Nature vs. Nurture by Nutty_Irishman · · Score: 3, Informative

    Before this turns into a large nature vs. nurture argument, I thought I'd pipe in here with a really great paper that really throws a wrench into the argument.

    In one of the largest Nature vs. Nurture shakeups, it was shown that the maternal behavior of the mother can cause epigenetic variations in the child that ultimately cause the child to grow up to become a nurturing mother or a non-nurturing mother (http://www.neurobio.ucla.edu/~lmp/Meaney.pdf ). This is one of the biggest breakthroughs in Neurobiology connecting specific epigenetic alterations to behavioral response (yes, there were controls, switching mothers/children, read the paper for the full details).

    However, the genetic alterations here are not on the sequence level, but rather on the Epigenetic level (the state of the DNA). Therefore sequencing the genome of two identical twins who had different mothers (one nurturing, one non-nurturing), can lead to entirely different epigenetic levels, yet the sequences would be identical. The take home message here is that while the underlying sequence is important and full sequences will certainly help in the understanding of biology, the underlying state is just as important. This epigenetic variation is also one of the causes of cellular differentiation (stem cells, etc.), and also certain cancer types. In an effort to make my post slightly controversial, I'd go as far to say that a high throughput epigenetic snapshot is probably more important for understanding success in individuals than the underlying DNA sequence (however, it is my hope that a high-throughput sequencing approach would be a first step towards a high-throughput epigenetic approach, as they are tightly coupled in a sense)-- as well as providing great breakthroughs in other areas of biology (tissue regeneration, cancer treatement, etc.).

    1. Re:Nature vs. Nurture by cds0922 · · Score: 1

      There is a high-throughput project to look at epigenetic markers in humans. Its called the ENCyclopedia Of DNA Elements (ENCODE) project (http://genome.gov/10005107) in which 10% of the human genome is being studied in extream detail for a variety characteristics including the best understood epigenetic marks (histone modification, DNA methylation etc).

    2. Re:Nature vs. Nurture by Iron+Condor · · Score: 1

      However, the genetic alterations here are not on the sequence level, but rather on the Epigenetic level (the state of the DNA).

      In other words: gene-expression. And? Where is the news here? How is this a "shakeup"? This strikes me as trite old long-known, well-understood stuff. Genes set the range over which you can turn out, but which genes are used and how and how much and how they're balanced against others -- well, that's management. Nurture. That's what "nature vs nurture" means.

      You're light-skinned or dark-skinned: that genetic. But if you sepnd much time in the sun, you'll become somewhat darker-skinned than if you spend all your time indoors. That's gene-expression. What part of this is new or earth-shaking?

      --
      We're all born with nothing.
      If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  24. What are the advantages? by r00tman · · Score: 1

    So, asides from the coolness factor, what are the real advantages of decoding your genes?

    1. Re:What are the advantages? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To find the secret message, obviously!
      I bet it says "Be Sure To Drink Your Ovaltine."

    2. Re:What are the advantages? by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 1
      o, asides from the coolness factor, what are the real advantages of decoding your genes?

      It's the ability to quickly spot genetic variations that's important. For example, it may turn out that a small genetic variation partially determines the effectiveness of chemotherapy for a particular type of cancer. Say a particular chemotherapy shrinks the tumor in 60% of people who have an 'A' at position 12342245 on chromosome 1, but is completely ineffective in people who have a 'T' at that position. If you were in the unfortunately position of having to decide whether or not you were going to do chemotherapy, you would probably want to know whether you were an 'A' or a 'T'.
  25. Why?!? by vondo · · Score: 1

    The original X-prize was to encourage development in an area without much activity and where it was small companies already doing the work. I'm sure Celera Genomics could win this prize more easily than anyone. What do they need with $10M? There are billions being suck into genomics research, why would anyone think another $10M is going to accomplish anything other than publicity?

    1. Re:Why?!? by CarlJagt · · Score: 1

      Not only that ... the private (read not-a-government) advancement of space technology and low-cost flights kind of made sense in a Gene Roddenbery sort of way.

      On the other hand, ramping up the tech to rapidly decode bulk batches of DNA ... seems to only make sense in a George Orwell sort of way.

      Can anyone enlighten me as to how this X Prize is going to make the world a better place? Are they hoping the winners will identify every gene?

  26. What exactly does "decode" mean here? by m0nstr42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe TFA is more precise, or maybe it's more obvious to someone who does genetics, or maybe I'm tragically out of the loop, but what exactly does it mean to "decode" the genes of 100 humans? It seems like the real "decoding" would be to look at the ensemble of human genomes and match sequences and combinations of sequences in certain locations with specific phenotypes. That is, after all, the Holy Grail of genetic research isn't it? Given that information, looking at any given person's DNA and classifying their phenotype should be a more-or-less trivial task. Maybe it is the pure procedural/logistical problem of processing that much information in that amount of time that they are after?

    1. Re:What exactly does "decode" mean here? by ADamiani · · Score: 1

      I was really wondering that myself. Have we ever done this completely for a single individual, matched the entire genotype to the phenotype? Surely that can't be what they're proposing?

    2. Re:What exactly does "decode" mean here? by AnyoneEB · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure that most of the human genome is unknown. Although, having the complete genome of another 100 people matched with their identities/characteristics would probably make figuring out genotype/phenotype matchings a lot easier. If you had, say, 100,000+ (which would probably be reasonable if someone develops a method cheap enough to win this X-prize), then you could probably find some very strong relations between sets of genes and characteristics of the person.

      --
      Centralization breaks the internet.
  27. Decoding@Home by Glacial+Wanderer · · Score: 1

    My prediction is that someone creates a client similar to a folding@home client. They might offer a chance to get paid for your work if they happen to win. Seems to make sense to me.

    1. Re:Decoding@Home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can I use my X1K series ATI graphics card for this?

    2. Re:Decoding@Home by Glacial+Wanderer · · Score: 1

      Of course! I bet the GPU is at least 40x faster at simulating DNA-sequencing machines than a CPU is. Plus the GPU would be way faster at the image processing needed to take the camera input and convert that image to a DNA sequence. Hot damn, were onto a breakthrough here.

  28. 1000 TB is simply a petabyte. by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

    You had to learn the word gigabyte. Learn the word petabyte.

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
  29. Meanwhile, on Genosis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Zalgon, are you telling that no humans survived their planet's destruction?"

    "Yes, sir. However, we were able to the complete genetic sequences of 100 individuals from the Terran datasphere before it collapsed. Apparently, it was some sort of time capsule effort on their part."

    "Who were they? Scientists? Artists? Ooh! Sexy celebrities? Please tell me they were sexy celebrities, Zalgon..."

    "Uh, no sir. According to my research, they were nerds. Very wealthy nerds."

    "Ah, well, not all is lost. Make 10,000 clones of each wealthy nerd, put them to work in the sodium slave pits, and notify the Irony Counsel immediately. We should get a nice Poetic Justice bonus in our next paycycle!"

  30. old news by jaimz22 · · Score: 1

    i read about this in popular science atleast a month ago...

  31. Here you go... by Salsaman · · Score: 1

    AGGTACCCATGGTAAACCCGTGC...

    Can I please have my money now ?

    1. Re:Here you go... by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      Your cat called. He wants his hairball back.

  32. Great paper by Lurker2288 · · Score: 1

    This sort of research really lays low the idea often trumpeted in the popular media that totally decoding the genome will immediately open the door to genetic therapies and cures for hereditary diseases. Between epigenetic modification of DNA and the existence of micro-RNA based expression control, we're finding that there's a lot more subtlety and intricacy in how genes work than we would have guessed 10-15 years ago.

  33. How do they check it you got it right? by Comboman · · Score: 1
    The current technology took over 10 years to decode one human gene set. At that rate, it would take over 1000 years to check the results for 100 people. I'm not willing to wait that long to collect my prize. And if they're not checking the results then here's my submission:

    atgactgactagctacacactcgatcatgcatatatttaaaacctactac cttaccttaaatttgggtactgagcgagaagctaactacgactacgcctc tagcatcgatcgtagcccatgctacgatgcatgcatcgatcgatcgatcg atcgatcgatcgatcgatgcactagcgcgcgtattatacggctagatcga tcgtagctagtcgatcgatgctacg

    etc. etc. etc. I win!

    --
    Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    1. Re:How do they check it you got it right? by Iron+Condor · · Score: 1

      The current technology took over 10 years to decode one human gene set. At that rate, it would take over 1000 years to check the results for 100 people.

      That was a while ago.

      Our ability to directly read the human genome has been improving much faster than Moore's law.

      (It will, however, ultimately become dependent upon and thus limited by Moore's law).

      --
      We're all born with nothing.
      If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  34. WTF is this good for? by theCat · · Score: 0, Troll

    OK, a prize for first-to-space-in-a-private-rocket sorta made sense. But this "give me 100 gene profiles right now" stuff? What possible use is it to be able to sequence that many individuals of a single species in a short time? The only practical value worth that kind of money is genetic profiling; sort of the Nazi eugenics approach to social purification, but on steroids, with none of that messy subjective stuff like whose brow sticks out the furthest, or nose is largest, or jaw is most rugged.

    Look, just because we can doesn't mean we should. Lots of nasty sh1t lurking under the surface of something like this. The smart guy would walk away from it and never look back. But it will be those clever-but-in-a-stoopid-kinda-way guys that will belly up to the trough here. Build it and they will come; pretty soon parents-to-be will be genetically screening their potential offspring (at $5K a pop) for statistical genetic matches against... well Bill Gates and Warren Buffet I suppose... in the completely unrealistic expectation that if they can just (approximately) find out who their child is similar to genetically (by some arbitrary measure) then they can give them (somehow) the training (whatever they think that is) that the child needs to enjoy a similar life experience as that person. Same way they enrole their UNBORN children in prestigious private prep schools, thinking that they've now done their best for them and can relax for 18 years. WTF is the matter with people? 5 million years of evolution and THIS kinda of monkey see monkey do CR4P is all we have to show for it?!?

    Oh wait, I changed my mind. Sequence me 100 people who know what the fsck they are doing with their lives.

    --
    =^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
    1. Re:WTF is this good for? by CharlesEGrant · · Score: 1
      What possible use is it to be able to sequence that many individuals of a single species in a short time? The only practical value worth that kind of money is genetic profiling; sort of the Nazi eugenics approach to social purification, but on steroids, with none of that messy subjective stuff like whose brow sticks out the furthest, or nose is largest, or jaw is most rugged.

      If you have a technology that can sequence that many individuals in that short a time, then you are in spitting distance of making genomics a clinical tool. Think: "You have disease X. We generally treat disease X with drug Y, but it turns out that you have genotype A, and drug Y is ineffective in people with genotype A, and in fact will kill 10% of them. We're going to give you drug Z instead." Or, "You have genotype B. People with genotype B who are exposed to benzene are 100,000 times more likely to develop cancer the people with genotype A. Stay away from benzene!" Some specific tests like this are done now, but usually only after a problem has developed. The prize is motivated by wanting to have a cheap multipurpose screen.
    2. Re:WTF is this good for? by tqft · · Score: 1

      I suggest you look up RPF's comments on gene technology.

      If this prize spurs advancement to what he thought was possible it is worth it.

      Short summary - it will become cheap enough for everyone to get profiled (for good or bad).

      --
      The Singularity is closer than you think
      Quant
  35. Celebrities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since they are often caught with their jeans down,
    we might as well catch them with their genes down!

  36. It won't be long... by zugurudumba · · Score: 1

    ...before some Korean geek will release unde GPL and torrent Bill Gates' decoded genome. I'm eagerly waiting for the forks.

    --
    Sig
  37. The "no worries club" by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    Google Inc. co-founder Larry Page, Microsoft Corp. co-founder Paul G. Allen and former junk-bond king Michael Milken

    All of them are people that wouldn't be effected by insurance companies refusing to insure them because of potential future health problems.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  38. Wrong constraint by pacalis · · Score: 1

    I think they screwed up the constraint - its not time but chemical/enzyme costs that currenly make such a thing infeasible. Its not obvious that the costs of sequencing a genome is less then $10000K in raw materials, ignoring capital and labor constraints.

  39. Limited Immortality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Immortality can have its limitations.

    From Mao's 'Little Red Book':

            "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun."

  40. I can do that now... by clambake · · Score: 1

    Let me just get out my codebook...

    Ok, so, here is what I decoded on the last 100 humans genes I looked at:

    Organic

    Yep, they all say the same thing. Gimme money.

  41. okay... by kdachev · · Score: 0

    ...here it is - I've decoded them! Gimme the money!!

    And, now - give me the next 100. No probs! Next one, please.