Slashdot Mirror


Cloned, Glow in the Dark Cats

eldavojohn writes "Well, you can finally get genetically modified cloned animals. South Korean scientists have shown it is possible to alter a protein via therapeutic cloning to 'artificially [create] animals with human illnesses linked to genetic causes.' The images of these animals are amazing. This research was headed by Kong Il-keun, the first person in the country to clone cats in 2004." There is always the chance that this is a hoax, but far too amusing to ignore.

222 comments

  1. I HAZ by Arthur+B. · · Score: 5, Funny

    A COLOR !

    --
    \u262D = \u5350
    1. Re:I HAZ by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, U haz florescence, which is something else entirely.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    2. Re:I HAZ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Flamebait?"

      Who gave mod points to The Humorless Fucktard Patrol today?

      You want to see flamebait?

      I hope somebody rapes your mother and burns the house down around her, you mincing fucknugget.

      Now *that's* flamebait, you jizzgargling assclown.

    3. Re:I HAZ by Arthur+B. · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe by saying color I hurt the feelings of the Fluorescent Americats.

      --
      \u262D = \u5350
    4. Re:I HAZ by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Funny

      Speaking of lolcats, did anybody else read this as "Stoned glow-in-the-dark Cats"? I think that would be much, much funnier to watch, personally.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:I HAZ by Notegg+Nornoggin · · Score: 0, Troll

      The word 'color' is derogatory to African-Americans, Bubba.

    6. Re:I HAZ by d3vo1d · · Score: 3, Informative
    7. Re:I HAZ by infonography · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I agree with you on the spirit of your response it's Someone who needs to be reminded of this important rule of Slashdot mods.

      --
      Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    8. Re:I HAZ by rodney+dill · · Score: 1

      I HAZ 18 half-lives.

      --

      Use your head, can't you, use your head,
      You're on earth, there's no cure for that
      - S. Beckett
  2. oblig. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can has bioluminescence?

    1. Re:oblig. by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Funny

      That made me think of a Eureka quote that made me want to do violent things to their writers...

      "Not just fireflies, bioluminescent fireflies!"

      Which then made me think "bioluminescent glowing cats!"

      *sigh* my head hurts.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:oblig. by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      or, I CAN HAS NITELITE

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    3. Re:oblig. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      > or, I CAN HAS NITELITE

      Upgrayedd ur Grammer!

      It's "I can is nitelite".

    4. Re:oblig. by mseidl · · Score: 4, Funny

      Glowing cat
      Glowing cat
      What are they feeding you...

    5. Re:oblig. by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      Retro-Rewind (70's)

      Narrator: What's NEW pussy-cat?
      Cat: Glaow, glaoww, glaowww...

      ------

      Chorus: PuuRINA CAT GLaow...
      Kitties: Glaow-glaow
      Chorus: PuuRINA CAT GLaow...
      Kitties: Glaow-glaow
      Chorus: PuRINA-
      Kitties: (stop-action/fwd/rev) Gla-gla-gla- glao--gla--gla--glaow-glaow-glaowwww....

      ----------

      Glaow-glaow-glawo-
      Glaow-glaow-glawo-

      Glaow-
      glaow-
      Glawo-
      glaow-
      Glaow-
      glawo-
      Glawo-

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    6. Re:oblig. by cizoozic · · Score: 1

      Upgrayedd? Sounds like a pimp's name, or at least that of an artist's boyfriend.

    7. Re:oblig. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's bioflourescence:

      I is highlighter cat!

      or...

      It's a shop!!!! I can tell by the pixels, and the fact that I've shooped a few whoops in my day.

  3. Obligitory... by pryoplasm · · Score: 1

    But do they run Linux?

    --
    Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who live by the gun...
    1. Re:Obligitory... by QRDeNameland · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, they run a little-known custom Ubuntu release...Fluorescent Feline.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    2. Re:Obligitory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      So this Ubuntu Frisky Fucker I downloaded from some .ru site may not be legit?

    3. Re:Obligitory... by GaryOlson · · Score: 1
      They will find openly sourced mice, common pile in your sandbox, and transmit the modified input as a compressed hairball to distributed publicly available targets.

      shrug Sounds alot like Linux to me.

      --
      Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
  4. Hooray for cat cloning! by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    Because we were all worried we'd run out of cats!

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:Hooray for cat cloning! by callmetheraven · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least these ones will be less likely to get run over by cars at night!
      Unless the drivers are cat-haters...

      --
      You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
    2. Re:Hooray for cat cloning! by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Funny
      "At least these ones will be less likely to get run over by cars at night! Unless the drivers are cat-haters..."

      Man...you don't see many dogs or cats in many Korean or Vietnamese neighborhoods as it is....but, now that they glow in the dark???

      Those poor little critters really don't stand a chance.....

      :-)

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:Hooray for cat cloning! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Ordinary cats are pretty road-safe too. Especially if they're on fire.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:Hooray for cat cloning! by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 1

      I really hate to spoil your fun, but I actually do see a lot of stray cats roaming the streets in Korea. I actually see more of them here than I did in Toronto. but you never see stray dogs here. (I almost typed 'naver' right there.)

      --
      -I only code in BASIC.-
  5. Finally! by techpawn · · Score: 1

    We have a something to fight the the glow in the dark mice

    --
    Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    1. Re:Finally! by bwcarty · · Score: 1

      And eat the glowing fish.

  6. Korea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now they have food-lit dinner instead of candle lit dinner?

    1. Re:Korea? by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      No, that's cat-lit dinner.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    2. Re:Korea? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Now they have food-lit dinner instead of candle lit dinner? In Korea, only old people's cats glow.

    3. Re:Korea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoooooooooooooooosh!

    4. Re:Korea? by bcat24 · · Score: 1

      Same difference. (They are in Korea, after all.)

  7. hrmmmm by BWJones · · Score: 4, Informative

    Those images do not look like images representative of cloned GFP containing animals that I have seen. Rather the green cat look slike the image was taken through a green filter or filtered light and the cat on the left simply looks illuminated by a laser. Whether or not these animals truly represent transgenic fluorescent animals from these images at least leaves me suspicious...

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:hrmmmm by BWJones · · Score: 1

      Sorry, did not read carefully enough... The cat on the right *is* a normal cat imaged through a green light filter as claimed.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    2. Re:hrmmmm by Rakishi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The green one is NOT glowing and it even says it's an ordinary cat that's simply reflecting the green light. I'd say RTFA but is likely a purposefully done misguiding picture for which the article writers should be kicked for.

      The red one seems to be the real deal as it only glows where it's fur doesn't block the skin. Granted it glows rather weakly but that may be simply because it's fur is not white (or doesn't appear to be) so it doesn't reflect the glow as much as say white mice would.

    3. Re:hrmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those images do not look like images representative of cloned GFP containing animals that I have seen. Rather the green cat look slike the image was taken through a green filter or filtered light and the cat on the left simply looks illuminated by a laser.

      I dunno... the cat on the left looks like it is brightest in areas like the nose, and dark where there would be fur. I'm not sure how you would get that effect with a laser.

      I'm not an expert, but that image does look consistent with a cat whose skin glows. Most of the skin is under fur so you don't see it, but exposed skin around the eyes and ears, and the nose, glow a lot.

    4. Re:hrmmmm by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      However, if it was glowing as brightly all over its skin as it appears on the nose,then the hair on the top of its head wouldn't block it all. The only place that the fur would be thick enough to block it completely would be the body imho.

    5. Re:hrmmmm by Smidge204 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't forget that an external UV light is required, rather than the skin glowing all by itself. The hair blocks the UV light from getting to the skin, and any glow from what little does get through it blocked on the way out.

      =Smidge=

    6. Re:hrmmmm by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      So did your distrust change after reading the article more carefully? Do you still feel that the image of the cat on the left is altered?

      I dunno about you, but this stuff gives me the creeps. Then again, I have been reading Next by Michael Crichton.

    7. Re:hrmmmm by Rakishi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To add to what the other reply said, here is a picture of glowing mice:
      http://www.forbes.com/2001/07/26/0726gfp.html

      Even the relatively short hair of the mice blocks out almost all of the glow.

    8. Re:hrmmmm by RingDev · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The red cat is either a rather good photoshoping, or the real deal. If the cat were being lit by an external source, the fur would reflect the light. But the fur appears to be blocking the light.

      My best guess for the picture though is that they used a UV/Low Light amplification filter. Then they pointed a UV light at the cats, and stuck some kind of obstruction between the light and the left cat. Thus the right cat and the tips of the left cat's ears appear green, while the left cat and the left side of the right cat's body appear black (save for the UV florescence off the left cat).

      The fact that it was shot with a Low Light filter, and further compressed via JPG, means that there is a lot of noise and artifacting in the picture. That much distortion could easily mask modifications. So I would say it's either the real deal, or a fake done by someone with a lot of time and experience in producing quality fakes.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    9. Re:hrmmmm by theelectron · · Score: 1

      Thank you very much for the link, but look at the mice eyes: they glow. The cat eyes aren't glowing, so it doesn't seem to be the same thing occurring. Also, why are the red cat's ears partly green? It just looks like a green light on the right and a narrow beamed red light on the left, perhaps on a black haired cat that would absorb the red light. This just looks like a hoax to me.

    10. Re:hrmmmm by realisticradical · · Score: 1
      It looks to me like they're using RFP which would excite in the green range and emit in the red.

      It's not too remarkable to make a fluorescent animal plenty of labs have done it with Zebra Fish and Mice.

    11. Re:hrmmmm by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The red cat is either a rather good photoshoping, or the real deal. If the cat were being lit by an external source, the fur would reflect the light. But the fur appears to be blocking the light. If this is real, they must try doing it with reindeer next.
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    12. Re:hrmmmm by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      My best guess for the picture though is that they used a UV/Low Light amplification filter.
      I can has catteraktz?
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    13. Re:hrmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The red one seems to be the real deal as it only glows where it's fur doesn't block the skin. Granted it glows rather weakly but that may be simply because it's fur is not white (or doesn't appear to be) so it doesn't reflect the glow as much as say white mice would.

      It says right in the caption they used RFP (Red Fluorescent Protein). This is new for cats, but definitely not new: See this story, for example.

      See the spectra to see how this is done. An excitation light must shine on the animal and excite the RFP with a wavelength somewhere in the leftmost curve, then light is emitted nanoseconds later with a wavelength from the rightmost curve.
    14. Re:hrmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's definately a fake; I know because of seeing many fakes in my time and because of some of the pixels.

      Radioactive cat is radioactive.

    15. Re:hrmmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It says in the article that the cat's cells have a red fluorescent protein. Further, the article is most definitely wrong that the cat would glow when illuminated with UV light. There are many versions of red fluorescent proteins with slightly different wavelengths, but none of them will give off light at that much shorter a wavelength than they are excited (called a Stokes shift). Most of these proteins are excited by light in the green/yellow range (~550 nm) then give off light in the red (~590). That's probably why they have two pictures of cats, one being green. They illuminate with a green light, and take a picture. Then put a filter on the camera to block green light and only pass longer wavelengths, and they see a red glow. Ta Da! Even though the article seems wrong, the pictures of the cats seem reasonable enough...

    16. Re:hrmmmm by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      Except that its mouth and lips aren't glowing at all. I would fully expect any lab studying fluorescence to have a UV lamp that can light up more than three square inches. And this isn't all that impressive; zebra danios were modified with this specific gene several years ago, and they've been available commercially in the US for close to three years now. Gene therapy such as this is not really difficult at all, it's the cloning that makes the feat somewhat impressive.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    17. Re:hrmmmm by shellbeach · · Score: 1

      Those images do not look like images representative of cloned GFP containing animals that I have seen. That's coz they're RFP (red fluorescent protein) cats, not GFP cats ...

    18. Re:hrmmmm by Eli+Gottlieb · · Score: 1

      Followed by the eyes of a Jewish zombie angry because alien 419-scammers have taken over Earth...

  8. More oblig. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DO NOT WANT

  9. Amazing? by Enoxice · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You really call that image "amazing"? Hardly. Hell, give me 2 cats and 2 flashlights and I'll come up with a better image.

    Also, I'm putting my money on hoax.

    --
    Anyone else think the comments just weren't rendering right before they turned off ABP and saw ads?
    1. Re:Amazing? by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      The right cat is definetly a green-fiter+flashlight candidate, however the left cat, I don't think so. The above person mentioned laser, which could work, but I'm fairly inclined to believe the left picture is authentic; If that was from laser, it would have closed eyes, and the eye positions don't strike me as being from blind cats. Short of computer manipulation. I don't feel like looking at it enough to figure that one out.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:Amazing? by techpawn · · Score: 1

      They where also taking the pictures from outside the box where the cat's are kept in an attempt to tell Schrödinger to eat it.

      --
      Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
    3. Re:Amazing? by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 1

      Also, I'm putting my money on hoax.

      Really? I'll have a piece of that. Shall we say, evens?

    4. Re:Amazing? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      give me 2 cats and 2 flashlights and I'll come up with a better image.

      I'm not sure I wanna ask where you're gonna stick the flashlights.

    5. Re:Amazing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  10. Black light cats by xPsi · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Because of the red fluorescence protein in their skin cells, the three Turkish Angola kittens look reddish under ultraviolet light, the researchers said. Calling them "glow in the dark" may be overstating the case. More like black light cats. Nothing like having a 70s poster that can scratch back while listening to Dark Side of the Moon.
    --
    i\hbar\dot{\psi}=\hat{H}\psi
    1. Re:Black light cats by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Funny

      Because of the red fluorescence protein in their skin cells, the three Turkish Angola kittens look reddish under ultraviolet light, the researchers said. Calling them "glow in the dark" may be overstating the case. More like black light cats. Nothing like having a 70s poster that can scratch back while listening to Dark Side of the Moon. Whatever first step takes us to cats who can walk through walls...
      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  11. Excellent... by 6Yankee · · Score: 5, Funny

    *turns off headlights*

    1. Re:Excellent... by ca111a · · Score: 2, Funny

      I wouldn't rush - that cat can be behind a skunk, raccoon, even a deer or a moose and those are still plain boring non-glowing type.

  12. Good by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now maybe I won't trip over them as I stumble around in the dark, on my way to the bathroom in the middle of the night.

    And if we plug one into a light socket, will it glow brighter? Can I use one as a night light?

    --
    "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
    1. Re:Good by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1

      I don't know if the light socket would work. But my friend has a cat, and that sounds like a GREAT idea to test.

      Oh wait, his cat isn't modified. Well, I'll try it anyway.

      --
      I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
    2. Re:Good by ross.w · · Score: 1

      It'll still attack you when you walk past it, but at least you'll see it coming.

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
  13. Cabbit by rlp · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm waiting for the version that's part cat, part rabbit, and part spacecraft.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
    1. Re:Cabbit by CaTfiSh · · Score: 1

      A Ryo-Ohki of my very own?

    2. Re:Cabbit by linumax · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting for the version that's part cat, part rabbit, and part spacecraft.
      I'm waiting for the version with four asses, each with a different color.
    3. Re:Cabbit by sexconker · · Score: 1

      Tenchi Muyo reference?
      Mod parent (and me for getting the reference) down.

  14. Just like that old cartoon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thunder...

    Thunder...

    Thundercats, GLOW!

  15. Next enhancement by ciaohound · · Score: 1

    Integrated Clapper (tm) so you can turn them turn on and off without having to get up.

    --
    Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
  16. Something like this done before with a mice... by holywarrior21c · · Score: 1
    and all that wonder was done by...

    demonstrating that the animal's body cells contain a gene from a jellyfish. The dark image in the center is of a paw of a mouse that has not been "infected" with the jellyfish glowing material and therefore it remains dark under fluorescent light. Researchers found that the successful transfer of the jellyfish gene to mice made almost all tissues of the animal fluorescent Photograph copyright Science Magazine http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0111_020111genmice.html
    and the motive behind this research is

    The red cloned cat research is expected to be utilized in dealing with certain genetic diseases in animals and humans. It will also help reproduce rare animals, such as tigers and wildcats, which are on the verge of extinction, the team said. http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15447.html
    surely they are not doing this for reanimating crazylolcat for evil world domination...
  17. nice maladaption by mattkime · · Score: 2, Insightful

    these cats won't be able to hunt mice at dance clubs or pot dens.

    --
    Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
    1. Re:nice maladaption by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      But they might be better at catching fishes.

    2. Re:nice maladaption by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pot den? Heh... well you must have lived quite the straight and narrow life to have come up with "pot den". FYI, most pot smokers are pretty casual about it... about as casual as one would be with eating a bag of chips.

  18. The Big Bang Theory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Glow in the dark cats would make great night lights. Like having luminous fish.

    1. Re:The Big Bang Theory by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      But if the luminous cat sits at night staring at the luminous fish, I'll stay away from all the light!

      BTW, for a nerdy show, they could have made the fish look a bit more 'real'.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  19. Brilliant! by InvisblePinkUnicorn · · Score: 1

    Great... we don't have enough stray animals running around. Let's clone 250 extremely deformed ones before we get 1 right.

    Actually... it's in Korea... maybe there's just trying to feed the poor?

  20. Not entirely new, but still cool by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 3, Informative

    Whereas this might be the first glow in the dark cat (for which I can think of many, many uses), there have been glow in the dark mice for ages (although now I wonder for how much longer). Also many animal models for human genetic diseases already exist, including fruitfly with early onset Alzheimer's disease, and mice with Down syndrome. I'm sure there are tons more.

  21. Glowing cat, why would I want that? by Starteck81 · · Score: 3, Funny

    My cat is already horrible at catching mice. I can't imagine she would catch any if she glows.

    ...come to think of it can you make the mice glow instead??!!!

    --
    "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed H
  22. outsourcing works by mishelley · · Score: 1

    leave it to South Korea to solve my plain cat problem

    --
    success often occurs in private, failure in full view
  23. Cat blood by hansamurai · · Score: 2, Funny

    I've always read that cat blood glows in the dark, something I've always wanted to see. And even though I have two wild and rambunctious cats, I've never seen fresh blood besides that crusty stuff in their ears from excessive scratching. Cats must be incredibly resilient not even considering their ability to fall from great heights.

    1. Re:Cat blood by Satanboy · · Score: 1

      Cat blood does not glow in the dark.

      I had a cat with cancer of the ears who bled from his ears very often, and his blood never glowed.

    2. Re:Cat blood by skeevy · · Score: 3, Funny

      The crusty stuff is often the feces of ear mites - you can get medicine to fix that and the scratching (also due to ear mites)

      Cats are really tough, though. My grampa used to comment how hard it was to beat them to death with a bat.

    3. Re:Cat blood by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1, Troll

      I've always read that cat blood glows in the dark

      You may be thinking of cat feces.
      To detect the glow you need to get a well filled litter box in a completely dark room and put your face right next to the material.

    4. Re:Cat blood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cats must be incredibly resilient not even considering their ability to fall from great heights.
      This is true. I saw a documentary recently about an experiment testing the survival instincts of cats versus humans. 100% of the cats passed the test, versus only about 14% of the humans.
    5. Re:Cat blood by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1

      I've always read that cat blood glows in the dark, something I've always wanted to see

      Cat urine fluoresces under UV light.

      I've never verified it myself, but I'm not kidding. A Google search turns up UV lights marketed specifically for the purpose of finding and cleaning it up.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    6. Re:Cat blood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cats aren't the only animals that can fall from great heights. Apparently all animals can.

      ds

    7. Re:Cat blood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're forgetting the human ability to fall from great heights. Some have fallen over 80000ft (with shute) and 30000 ft (without) and walked away.

      And that's ignoring our ability to fall without being able walking away from the resulting crater...

    8. Re:Cat blood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking mods.

      I found that hilarious if it's any consolation.

  24. Life imitates art by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Next of course, artists are going to have to create cloned animals with other bizarre characteristics. Since the cut up animals they need something even more controversial. Then life will be art. Could that ever be topped?

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Life imitates art by bhima · · Score: 1

      My GF died her cat purple years ago. He was embarrassed... I hadn't seen an embarrassed cat before.

      I'll have to get out those photos, I don't think our daughter remembers that :)

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    2. Re:Life imitates art by edittard · · Score: 1

      My GF died her cat purple years ago.
      Did it dye of embarrassment?
      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
    3. Re:Life imitates art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Slap*

    4. Re:Life imitates art by jonadab · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that could be topped. Genocide as art springs immediately to mind. Have yourself a nice big old-fashioned ethnic cleansing, and then when the international community starts whining about human rights just tell them that you're a serious artist, and that your work is deeply meaningful in ways that you wouldn't expect hoi polloi to understand.

      Note: I am NOT advocating this approach. I'm only saying that it would be more incomprehensible to the masses and more senseless than genetically malapulchrated cloned life as art.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  25. Ob. lolcat by lpangelrob · · Score: 1

    Obligatory lolcat

    I do better next time. Pew pew pew!

  26. And just in time for Christmas by alta · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll take one for the wife please. Can you make it pink? She really likes pink. And one that doesn't shed, get rid of the shedding gene. And how about one that doesn't need food, doesn't poop, doesn't spray, no claws and not moody. Hmm, I just described a stuffed cat. I'll take a stuffed cat please.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
    1. Re:And just in time for Christmas by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I'll take one for the wife please. Can you make it pink? She really likes pink. And one that doesn't shed, get rid of the shedding gene. And how about one that doesn't need food, doesn't poop, doesn't spray, no claws and not moody. One pink tribble. Anything else?
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    2. Re:And just in time for Christmas by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      Feed it NUKeNUBA and it'll be outta sight...

      And, while you're at it....

      "Put.. the.. PLUS.. ON.. YOUR.. CAT, the HERTZ 2+1 cat...

      And, to BHIMA:

      "My GF died her cat purple years ago. He was embarrassed... I hadn't seen an embarrassed cat before."

      Mwo? An effete male cat??? Was it a SHElion, then... Did he get "catty" later on?

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
    3. Re:And just in time for Christmas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're wife or the cat?

  27. What you say, fluorescent kitty!!! by my_left_nut · · Score: 1

    Fluorescent CATS: All your fluorescent litter box are belong to us!

    1. Re:What you say, fluorescent kitty!!! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If you cat shits on my lava lamp, you will see how cats fly.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  28. Ah HA by Technopaladin · · Score: 5, Funny

    If we put it in a box and dont look...will it still glow?

  29. Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible. I can't get over it, especially in light of where this took place: Asia.

    It's already profoundly simple for diseases to jump from one species to another, with either one species being a host carrier or an ill, infected carrier, and it's all the more common to happen with species which are:

    a) genetically and physiologically similar, ie. from pigs to humans, or from primates to humans (monkeypox)
    b) creatures which have regular contact, i.e. from cats to humans, deer to humans (chronic wasting disease), cattle to humans (mad cow), etc.

    And, specifically, a combination of the two: something like AIDS/HIV.

    Combining a species which has close, daily proximity with both humans and other cats, and which has the propensity to have large, expansive populations seems downright foolish. A parasite or virus from normal cats manages to get into the cloned cat (where it wouldn't infect the human, normally), mutates to the newer genes, and then migrates to the researchers. Voila, instant new disease (with potentially horrid results).

    (on a side note: anyone with kids who have been scared by cat eyes in a dark corner (my 3-year-old son would not go past the 'spare room' which is the cat's room for weeks after he saw the cat's eyes reflecting the hallway light) realize the potential for these cats as useful babysitters: kids, leave your room and the demoncat will get you!)

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    1. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Elemenope · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Toxoplasmosis, baby. The game is...already over. Our fuzzy diseased friends have been getting us sick for a long, long time. HIV made the leap unaided. Sure, playing with fire occasionally leads to crispy critters...but keep it up long enough and write down what you learn, and you eventually end up with internal combustion engines, beautiful steel blades to gut your neighbors, and beautiful vehicles that can transport men through the air. Fire, GOOD. Likewise, biomod, GOOD. Doesn't mean you shouldn't feel bad for the mutie victims of progress, of course.

      --
      All the techniques ever used to make men moral have been themselves thoroughly immoral... (Nietzsche)
    2. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Hatta · · Score: 2, Informative

      You have no idea what you're talking about. They inserted a single jellyfish gene under the control of a specific promoter into the cat's genome. Explain to me in detail how this is going to cause diseases to jump from cats to humans. Oh right, you can't because you have no idea what you're talking about.

      Please, there's already enough misinformed scare mongering going on in the biological sciences. If you don't know what you're talking about, STFU.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watch many bad sci-fi movies lately?

    4. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0, Troll

      No, I do know what I'm talking about.

      This is akin to the inexperienced or unfamiliar system administrator making a minute change he thinks will do one thing, but due to extenuating circumstances unbeknown to him, have broad implications. Except an order of magnitude more complex, with much more drastic possible implications.

      No, we can't really find these things out until we experiment some more, but we really do need to find out a) a good picture of what exactly the jelly fish's genome is, and how and what other genes in that jellyfish interact with the 'glow' gene, and b) a complete understanding of the modified organism. We have neither. We're like the inexperienced user who's installing christmas light programs on the desktop, unaware of the bundled spyware, or possible DLL conflicts.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    5. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Just more hand waving...

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by randyest · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm afraid you don't, really.

      a) Yes we do have a good picture of the jellyfish genome and what genes interact with the glow gene (warning PDF and sciency stuff.)

      b) How are we supposed to have a "complete understanding" of the modified organism without making one?

      --
      everything in moderation
    7. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      Why are you bothering to respond? He's obviously just come to his computer after watching Jurassic Park too many times, and he's not going to listen to reason.

    8. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Yeah, friggan Goldblum, i didnt see one single bifurcation graph showing the plausible points where the systems would become chaotic! WHAT A RIP!

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    9. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      Seriously, the idea of cloning seems horridly unethical to me, for some reason. Perhaps it allows for mad scientists to impose their will on beings, where as nature tends to be a random process which does not have an agenda, and that beings should have a right to be unique and have a body that is uniquely their own, and which is programmed by nature, and not interfered with or has an agenda pushed on it. Dystopian nightmares is what these sorts of tampering with life gives me, with beings genitally engineered for instance to be obedient and subservant or what have you. It is all deeply unsettling. I feel that it would be best to ban cloning and genitic engineering. There are various health and ethical reasons for this. We cannot and perhaps never will be able to understand all of the dynamics behind genetic systems. Scientists think they know everything and understand how it works but it is often true that there are completely unintended results from changing a gene that was thought to only have one function. There have been instances where a gene in a potato which was added which was thought to simply give it pesticide residue, also increased its starchiness. There are likely complex relationships and interdependancies between genes and as well importance in specific ordering and arrangements of genes that nature uses. Perhaps there are certain patterns and rules which are obeyed by the natural conception process that are critical for various reasons for the health of organisms and the environment.

      Again treating life as a computer program and trying to alter and manipulate, program the lives of other beings like a computer program, deeply bothers my sense of ethics and as well seems to be a great threat to freedom. It is better to leave these things to the randomness of nature (or perhaps if in fact, beings choose their own genes to their own bodies before they are born, who knows), rather than allowing the will of others to be imposed upon the life of any conscious being through genetic manipulation, where there body is not their own but is someone elses. I do not see this as being amusing but a great concern.

    10. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by bogjobber · · Score: 1
      Dystopian nightmares is what these sorts of tampering with life gives me, with beings genitally engineered for instance to be obedient and subservant or what have you. It is all deeply unsettling...Again treating life as a computer program and trying to alter and manipulate, program the lives of other beings like a computer program, deeply bothers my sense of ethics and as well seems to be a great threat to freedom.

      Sorry, that's part of what we do as humans. If you think that humans haven't been genetically modifying living creatures and imposing our will on nature before this you're crazy.

      Try and find a cat that looks anything like your cat Fluffy in the wild. It doesn't exist, house cats have been genetically created by humans. You think your dog Rover is affectionate and obedient towards you because of natural selection? Nope, humans have been breeding dogs that way for millenia. Try to pet a wolf and see how affectionate they are.

      This is just another level of sophistication to a process that has been happening since the dawn of civilization (and in fact could be considered the basis of civilization). Not that there aren't potential dangers. But unethical? Hardly.

    11. Re:Astoundingly disturbing and irresponsible by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      Well the huge difference between what you mention, selective breeding, and genetic manipulation directly is selective breeding still leaves coding of the DNA entirely up to random natural processes. One is not allowing scientists to force certain DNA structures on organisms, cloning, and other such madness. It still leaves a level of autonomy and individuality for the being, something that is uniquely its own and beyond the ability of humans to impose on. Even with selective breeding, the actual conception is still out of direct control of humans, and how the genes of the parents will be combined is left up to the randomness of nature. The organism can introduce its own mutations and combine the DNA in its own unique way without outside interderence. So the ability for the beings own freedom to a unique body unmanipulated by others is much less infringed upon.

  30. Please clone politicians the same way... by denis-The-menace · · Score: 1

    Please clone politicians the same way...
    So that their nose glows when they are lying.

    If it glows all the time we'll know the procedure was a success!

    --
    Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    1. Re:Please clone politicians the same way... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You mean, so they can read the proposals without a bedlight? Could be a solution to global warming. Unless those noses would radiate heat as well, then we'd have to add to the Kyoto protocol to eliminate all politicians by 2015.

      Now that I think about it... any chance we can get that implemented soon? Then again, I'm fairly sure all the countries that matter won't sign it anyway.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Please clone politicians the same way... by LowSNR · · Score: 1

      And for added fun, ask them to say that their nose is glowing and watch it explode trying to resolve the paradox!

  31. No thanks by kaoshin · · Score: 1

    Great... How long before someone creates genetically modified flying fish that can see in ulraviolet and they hunt down all our poor glowing kittens in a primal bloodlust! No thanks. In fact, I'd rather have a cat that emits powerful gamma ray bursts or something so it could at least take out the neighbors cat.

    1. Re:No thanks by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1

      In fact, I'd rather have a cat that emits powerful gamma ray bursts or something so it could at least take out the neighbors cat.

      We'll make it 8' tall and call it Q. T. McWhiskers!

      (And wait until you see the new 16' model!)

  32. I for one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    welcome our glowing cat overlords

  33. Which Korea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a feeling it was Evildoer Korea, not Good Korea... You can read more about their work in the New England Journal of Evil.

  34. Finally by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    We can create the animal with the loyality of a cat and the cleanliness of a dog.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  35. Just the one? by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just try and watch that show and find a single line that doesn't make you cringe. Go on, I dare you.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:Just the one? by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      Y'all realize it's all a joke, right?

      -roy

    2. Re:Just the one? by Z34107 · · Score: 1

      Just try and watch that show and find a single line that doesn't make you cringe. Go on, I dare you.

      "Don't thank me, thank the moon's graviational pull!"

      Oh, wait, wrong show.

      And you're still right...

      --
      DATABASE WOW WOW
  36. these cats don't glow, they reflect by teeloo · · Score: 2, Informative

    According to the article, these cats only look that way under ultraviolet light. People often confuse FLUORESCENCE with PHOSPHORESCESCENCE. The latter is transmissive and the former is refective. From Wiki: Phosphorescence is a specific type of photoluminescence related to fluorescence. Unlike fluorescence, a phosphorescent material does not immediately re-emit the radiation it absorbs. The slower time scales of the re-emission are associated with "forbidden" energy state transitions in quantum mechanics. As these transitions occur less often in certain materials, absorbed radiation may be re-emitted at a lower intensity for up to several hours. In simpler terms, phosphorescence is a process in which energy absorbed by a substance is released relatively slowly in the form of light. This is in some cases the mechanism used for "glow-in-the-dark" materials which are "charged" by exposure to light. Unlike the relatively swift reactions in a common fluorescent tube, phosphorescent materials used for these materials absorb the energy and "store" it for a longer time as the subatomic reactions required to re-emit the light occur less often.

  37. Pics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like the pics are dead. Enjoy: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,316592,00.html

  38. I, for one, welcome... by thewiz · · Score: 1

    our new flourescent kitty overlords!

    Wonder if I can have this done to my cats so I don't trip over them in the dark!

    --
    If "disco" means "I learn" in Latin, does "discothèque" mean "I learn technology"?
  39. OB Big Bang Theory by saxoholic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Does that mean I can finally get a goldfish night light?

    1. Re:OB Big Bang Theory by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, a friend of mine, a Japanese scientist here at the UW, she did make a glow in the dark worm, with a biochemical switch that was fairly easy to activate, so having a glow in the dark goldfish night light isn't that difficult.

      You just have to manipulate the embryo with a tag bioluminescent marker.

      I can see a definite market for them.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    2. Re:OB Big Bang Theory by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      Would you settle for something kinda like a goldfish, really only because it's a fish, too?

    3. Re:OB Big Bang Theory by saxoholic · · Score: 1

      Ooo, that's pretty cool, but not quite what I'm looking for. Awesome link though!

  40. For research only by heroine · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is for research only, so U can see if a protein is expressed by attaching a UV marker to it. It also doesn't glow unless U shine UV light on it. Don't expect glowing cats in pet stores.

    1. Re:For research only by spectro · · Score: 1

      I bet these guys are already working on it.

      --
      HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
  41. Please RTFA... by Stoenhenge · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A cloned Turkish Angola kitten, left, gives off a red fluorescence glow while an ordinary one appears to be green in this picture taken under ultraviolet light at a laboratory of Gyeongsang National University in Jinju, South Gyeongsang Province, Wednesday. The cloned cat's genes were modified with a fluorescent protein.
    Where exactly does it say "glow in the dark" ? If you're going to summarize an article, do us a favour and don't butcher the science by including your misinterpretations.
  42. Oblicatory by Morgor · · Score: 1

    I, for one, welcome our new glow in the dark cat overlords!

    Sorry, couldn't help it...

  43. I think a better questions is by cHiphead · · Score: 3, Funny

    But do they glow in the dark after they blend?

    Cheers.

    --

    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  44. Eh... by BUL2294 · · Score: 1

    Until a cat is born with a freakin' laser on its head, then what's the use?

    --
    Windows 3.1x calc: 3.11 - 3.10 = 0.00
  45. Engrish by seyyah · · Score: 1

    A cloned Turkish Angola kitten ...

    Angola is a country in Africa. Angora [Ankara] is a city in Turkey.
  46. Let me know when... by gillbates · · Score: 1

    I can get sharks with laser beams on their heads. Then I'll be interested.

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  47. The ape tricked him! by jpetts · · Score: 1

    Flanders: "My neighbor Homer released a radioactive ape in my house"
    Bart: "It wasn't Dad's fault. The ape tricked him"
    A fluorescent ape (actually more of a baboon) later slaps Ned around in the car.

    --
    Call me old fashioned, but I like a dump to be as memorable as it is devastating - Bender
  48. It isn't "Turkish Angola" by apoplectic · · Score: 1

    It is "Turkish ANGORA". This should say something about the quality of the reporting.

  49. Do you hear that? by cicatrix1 · · Score: 1

    Somewhere in the universe, Bob Barker is crying.

    --

    I know more than you drink.
    1. Re:Do you hear that? by beavioso · · Score: 1

      You do know he's still alive, right? So, we can presume he's somewhere in LA, crying. Unless he retired to somewhere else.

    2. Re:Do you hear that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know what Bob Barker does in his spare time? Neither do I.

  50. formula by Joe+the+Lesser · · Score: 1

    Oh, I see a good formula here for pointless refutations that have no actual substance.

    You really call that [topic] "[previously used adjective]"? Hardly. Hell, give me [objects in topic] and I'll come up with a better [topic].

    --
    "I only speak the truth"
    Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
    1. Re:formula by stranger_to_himself · · Score: 4, Funny

      I get it! Okay how's this..

      "You call that comment a pointless refutation that has no actual substance? Hardly. Hell, give me a scientific breakthrough and an ignorant bastard and I'll come up with a better pointless refutation that has no actual substance."

      Do I win £5?

    2. Re:formula by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [topic] = "comment"
      [previously used adjective] = "pointless refutation that has no actual substance"
      [objects in topic] = "scientific breakthrough and an ignorant bastard"

      then...

      [topic] = [previously used adjective]????

      I don't think you win £5...

  51. mod parent insightful by davidwr · · Score: 1

    I was gonna leave this blank but /. kept saying

    Glow in the dark cat got your tongue?

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  52. Haven't seen the show, then? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    It's all fun and games until someone goes crazy from the terrible writing. Scifi's been doing really poorly lately. They've got a show on right now where men can fly by sticking out their arms and wearing a poorly-tailored leather duster.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:Haven't seen the show, then? by ByOhTek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's a difference between suspension of disbelief (if you are referencing Heros - something that could be explained by being understanding of our current science), not-supposed to be technical (if you are referencing Dresden files - face it, that's magic), redundancy by trying to sound like you know something you don't (the Eureka quote), and campy plots (most scifi)

      The first two are fine in fiction/science fiction - if you don't like them, I'd avoid watching shows with faster than light travel, and stuff like that.

      I don't mind the first two - suspension of disbelief are needed for fiction anyway. The third irks the hell out of me, learn it or don't talk about it. The fourth - it can be annoying if it goes to far.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    2. Re:Haven't seen the show, then? by Mercano · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing the GP was talking about Flash Gordon, which probably pushes this into category four, campy.

      --
      #include <signature.h>
    3. Re:Haven't seen the show, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      something that could be explained by being understanding of our current science

      I'm not sure I can even being understanding of that sentence.

    4. Re:Haven't seen the show, then? by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      His sentence structure was fine. There's a gerund form of 'to be' and a gerund form of 'to understand'. It's grammatically identical to if he had said "... something that could be explained by us being more understanding of our current science." Of course, he's still wrong, but the grammar was fine.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    5. Re:Haven't seen the show, then? by ByOhTek · · Score: 1

      I forgot a "beyond", I was in a bit of a hurry, sorry.

      --
      Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
    6. Re:Haven't seen the show, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the grammar was fine.

      For values of "fine" in which he says something much different from what he intended. "The dog ate purple" Is also grammatically correct, but it is also difficult to being understanding of its meaning.

  53. Who cares. What about the AM OLED story? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who cares about phosphorescent cats. What about the AM OLED from Samsung with a 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio to be displayed at CES in the spring? That's the real story worth linking to from slashdot. http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2007/12/123_15417.html

  54. Re:I for one... by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    But in Soviet Russia, genetically modified glowing overlords welcome you!

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  55. Re: Schroedinger's Glowing Cat Paradox by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    If we put it in a box and dont look...will it still glow?

    Only if it wants to.

    It's a cat.

    Not a dog.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  56. Glow in the dark? by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Informative

    No, they are florescent according to the article. That wouldn't qualify as 'glow in the dark' since they dont make their own light.

    still cool tho.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Glow in the dark? by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      Glow in the dark is only one step away.

      Radium cat treats.

  57. Rabbits were first by xkr · · Score: 1
    An Italian guy, or maybe he is French, created glow-in-the-dark bunnies seven years ago. See link.

    http://www.ekac.org/gfpbunny.html

    --
    I will create a sig when innovation restarts in the U.S.
  58. Just on time by mrjb · · Score: 1

    Of the two cats, I particularly like the red one. Now they should do it on a raindeer. We'll call him Rudolph.

    --
    Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  59. I want a fluorescent bonsai kitten, please by Andreaskem · · Score: 1
  60. Considering it's ... by ZonkerWilliam · · Score: 1

    An experiment done by Korean scientists, it must be true!

  61. Re:I for one... by asCii88 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah, but does it run Linux?

  62. How about "Mutated Moggy" by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    ...it's Austrailian, I think....

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
  63. But we LOVE Kitty! by StressGuy · · Score: 1

    That's why we had her modified to suit our needs....

    --
    A goal is a dream with a deadline
  64. Aha! Conclusive disproof of the old myth by overshoot · · Score: 1

    ... that all cats are black at midnight!

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  65. R/L, same diff by SpeedyDX · · Score: 1

    This WAS in Korea, after all.

  66. Re:I for one... by CaptPungent · · Score: 1, Insightful
    My god. For 7 years now that I've been reading Slashdot, and even now in every single article, there is someone who somehow still thinks that is funny. And posts it.

    Meme police: Soviet Russia was stupid when it became a meme, the overlord one was stupid right after it was used the second time.

    Dear god you guys are worse than Barrens chat and Chuck Norris...

    --
    C Pungent
  67. Buttered Cat by AnotherAnonymousUser · · Score: 1

    We've all heard of the theory of the buttered toast strapped to the cat forming a perpetual motion machine as both try to fall right side up. Now we've got the added bonus of making them *glow*, too. Kinetic motion AND light. Hells yes!

  68. Re:oblig. Nukuler... by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Well, kitties are so close they practically have "nuclear bonds", anyway...

    Now, there can be not just "Eukanuba cat food", but Nukenub cat food...

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  69. Re:I for one... by techno-vampire · · Score: 2, Funny
    Meme police: Soviet Russia was stupid when it became a meme, the overlord one was stupid right after it was used the second time.


    Yes, but I couldn't resist the chance to combine the two. OMG! PONIES! Florescent pink, genetically modified pony clones!!!11!!!

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  70. South Korean Business Model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Develop "Glow in the dark" cat.
    2. ???
    3. Profit!

  71. Kong is King! by Subm · · Score: 1

    > ``We have proved our world-class ability in cloning animals that have modified characteristics,'' said Kong.

    Kong is king of genetic modification! I wonder what huge surprise "King" Kong will unleash next. Will he bring it to New York City and proclaim it from the tallest building?

  72. Re:I for one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of those things

  73. Yummy by fretlessjazz · · Score: 1

    What sort of culinary benefits are we looking at here?

  74. Old Reference by QuantumPion · · Score: 1

    Obviously, the cat is on fire.

  75. true facts, dat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..you go to the "Chambodia" area of metro Atlanta and you see ZERO cats or dogs...unless they are on a plate in front of you in a restaurant. No joke, real stuff. "city chicken" and "urban pork"

  76. umm.. ultraviolet = green?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when has ultraVIOLET light been green.. ok, so a night-shot camera would look green.. but it wouldn't also capture red. and what's with this strange, yet convenient shadow on the "white" cat... and how about the background noise - red, blue, black for the red cat, but only green and black for the "white" cat... hmmm, can we say photoshop? amusing.. almost.

  77. Re: all your photoshop are belong to us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RingDev wrote:
    >
    > The red cat is either a rather good photoshoping, or the real deal. If the cat were being lit by an external source,
    > the fur would reflect the light. But the fur appears to be blocking the light.
    >
    > ...
    >
    > The fact that it was shot with a Low Light filter, and further compressed via JPG, means that there is a
    > lot of noise and artifacting in the picture. That much distortion could easily mask modifications.
    > So I would say it's either the real deal, or a fake done by someone with a lot of time and experience
    > in producing quality fakes.


    Haha! You're joking, right? The red cat is obviously just a negative image of a normally lit cat (probably the green cat image itself flipped on the y-axis, if experience with previous cheap photoshop tricks is any guide).

  78. Re:hrmmmm These are missing the by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    FPGA glow stix

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  79. You excite red red FP with green light not UV by BurningRome · · Score: 2, Informative

    I use red fluorescent protein all the time in the lab - the photo in TFA looks pretty real to me, as you excite RFP with green coloured light (around 510-555 nm) to cause it to emit red fluorescence (607-610 nm for mRFP1/mCherry). TFA didn't say which of the many RFPs they used to make the cats, but if they did, and you wanted to see the fluorescence, you'd have to illuminate the cat in the dark with a green-wavelength light to see the red fluoro emission. And a nonfluorescent cat with white fur would appear to be green. Because the RFP cat has white fur (or so the article says), it would look greenish too, so they must have done something to avoid that and still make the red fluoresce.

  80. Re:hrmmmm Thank you for that technical.. by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    presentation...

    Butt, will the GIMP make'm glow, or does the GIMP blow?

    (It puts the kitties in the basket, or the blows' a' glowing...)

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  81. i'm not amused yet, but... by MellowTigger · · Score: 1

    Where are the mice with UV-emitting noses?

  82. Slashdot, all new low by Techman83 · · Score: 1

    I heard it in on the radio driving to work before I read it on Slashdot!

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i cat
    Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
  83. For the simple reason by DrYak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Also, I'm putting my money on hoax.


    For the simple reason that cats are hard to breed (require much more food and space than small rodents) and hard to clone (usually the higher up in the evolution tree, the harder to clone).
    That's why they aren't very popular research subject,

    Usually in research, nowadays, specially when genetic engineering is available :
    - You use mutated insects, yeast, etc. If you only wan to study some genetic stuff.
    - If you absolutely need mamals, you use mice. If no mouse has what you need, you need a mutated/cloned mouse, like some humanised strains. Far easier to breed and feed than bigger mamals.
    - If you definitely need human-sized organs, you use swines. And use humanisation mutation if you need.

    Most other animals are getting lot less popular by the day.

    The other reasons to use specific genetic types of specific animal is to give better control and reproductibility to research.
    It's easier to replicate some research and find the same results if you that the authours used a specific given strain of mice, rather than some random animal.

    In such circumstance, cloning genetically engineered cats has little purpose.
    Appart maybe from the "I haz successfully cloned a lolcat !" (to prove that a notoriously hard target was achieved).
    Or if counting on some commercial application (successfully cloning transgenic cat : easier to duplicate cat with interesting genes such less likely to cause allergy. Instead of breeding both sex and hope that the mutation il pass to the next generation, you just make copies of 1 successful cat.
    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
    1. Re:For the simple reason by sentientbrendan · · Score: 1

      >>Also, I'm putting my money on hoax.
      >For the simple reason that cats are hard to breed (require much more food and space than
      >small rodents) and hard to clone (usually the higher up in the evolution tree, the harder to clone).

      Ignoring what the slashdot summary said, which you should always do, there's no reason to think this was a hoax. Just because some other korean researcher committed fraud doesn't mean that *this* guy did. You didn't start to ignore all american science after the cold fusion fiasco did you?

      Also, that he cloned cats is not in question. As the article points out, the same guy also cloned cats back in 2004. Also, your argument about it being hard to clone animals "higher up on the evolutionary tree" is just silly. The first animals to be cloned were *sheep*. Don't you remember? It wasn't *that* many years ago... There's actually no reason that no humans have been cloned except for ethical concerns (or at least the reported clonings haven't been proven). There's no reason to think it would be difficult at all, or even to make flourescent humans.

      There's no real reason to doubt this article. The same guy cloned cats before, and fluorescence has been added to mice before. This is just combining the two proven techniques.

  84. Re:I for one... by theheadlessrabbit · · Score: 2, Funny

    All your glow-cats are belong to us.

    --
    -I only code in BASIC.-
  85. Been there, done that by KidSock · · Score: 1

    We've had these fluorescent cats in New Jersey for decades. No genetic modification necessary.

  86. Of course we all know what this means by wandering_ronin · · Score: 1

    Of course we all know what this means - GLOW IN THE DARK DIM SIMS!!!! Now tell me that's not awesome!

  87. GM or radiation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm... a picture of a green, glow in the dark cat.

    Let me guess, North Korea?

  88. How??? by Khyber · · Score: 1

    How do you get a red glow from exposing a modified animal to what is essentially blue-wavelength light? They're on totally different ends of the spectrum!

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:How??? by Vegeta99 · · Score: 1

      How much more energy does ultraviolet light have versus red light?

      What does the term "fluoresce" mean?

      Does this process require energy?

      Figure those ones out, and you'll have the answer to your question :P

    2. Re:How??? by Khyber · · Score: 1

      I've seen hair fluoresce green, purple, yellow, and hundreds of shades of blue. Not once have I ever seen a dye that would fluoresce red, EVER. Not even Manic Panic's "Wildfire Red" does what it claims under an ultraviolet light.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  89. Slashdotters gone mad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, when your girlfriend said you couldn't find a pussy if it glowed in the dark, this wasn't the way to prove her wrong!!!

  90. Overly complicated by sacrilicious · · Score: 1
    Researchers found a way to clone pet cats five years ago. Now they can play a trick on their genes to change their color.

    Not rocket science. Unless I totally mis-understand quantum physics, the Heisenberg-Schrodinger principle tells us that the mere act of observing these cats will change their color.

    --
    - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  91. Not the first transgenic pets by smchris · · Score: 1

    Slashdot covered glofish (tm) years ago.

    But, perhaps, the perfect gift for a glow-in-the-dark cat?

  92. no, not quite by m2943 · · Score: 1

    The cat isn't "glow-in-the-dark" it is fluorescent.

  93. Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "scientists" who did this should be executed: torture of innocent creatures.

  94. Why I though about a prank by DrYak · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's no reason to think this was a hoax. Just because some other korean researcher committed fraud doesn't mean that *this* guy did.

    No, not because some researcher who happened to be from the same country made one.
    Because fluorescent cats obviously look silly (and thus make very good prank material), and don't make really sense from a scientific point of view :
    - They are seldom used in research nowadays (for the reasons I said before : it's cheaper to work with smaller mammals or even simplier subjects if you don't need mamals)
    - Cloning cats has already been done.
    - The only new thing is having cloned cats *with* a mutation, for which, as I said, I fail to see advantages that aren't offered already by cloned genetically engineered mice (with the added bonus of being easier and faster to breed).

    - This is not Nature, this is the "Bizness" section of Korea Times.

    Also for the finer details :
    - As far as I know, cat fur doesn't tend to glow green in ultra violet light (in fact, for what I know, most animal furs don't glow in UV light which is handy to help diagnosing fungi-infections which DO glow in UV light. Also known as "Wood's lamp test" in Dermatology).
    Thus, this image may be photoshoped by TFA's author as a prank and not pulled out of a real scientific paper.
    - Angora species wouldn't have been the best species to show of body fluorescence (because of the thick fur blocking the light)

    That's why I initially suspected that TFA may be a prank.

    But then, some googling around revealed that there was actually a paper published in Biology of Evolution.
    So this maybe isn't a prank, after all.

    Also, your argument about it being hard to clone animals "higher up on the evolutionary tree" is just silly. The first animals to be cloned were *sheep*. Don't you remember? It wasn't *that* many years ago...

    Dolly was the first cloned *mammal*.
    Other species have been cloned before that.

    When going "higher up on the evolutionary" we start to see appearing a lot of peculiar modification on the DNA : epigenetic modification. That's information not contained inside the sequence, but additional modification made to the DNA molecule. It differs a lot between somatic cells and germ-line cells. As a matter of fact, they even differ between genetic material you received from your mother and genetic material you received from your father. Also somatic cell may have accumulated some damage and mutation (that's why there are mechanisms such as telomers to keep count of division cycles and may be part of the explanation of why somatic cells don't divide much).
    Thus, when cloning mammals you're starting with very poor quality material.

    As a result, the yields aren't very good :
    - With dolly, 277 eggs were used to create 29 embryos. Three lambs where born, only Dolly survived.
    - With the fluo-cat : 176 embryo were implanted in 11 surrogate mothers. Only 3 successful pregnancies, with only 2 live kitten at arrival.

    In comparison, frogs are much more easy to clone (probably because one may find nice undifferentiated cells in their body to get clean material for cloning)

    Mice are also known to have higher success rate (Dolly was around ~0.3%. First mouse cloning experiment encountered ~2% success rate), probably because of slightly less DNA modification hampering the cloning procedure.

    Also mice have another big advantage above cats in cloning :
    - once you got at least a couple of cloned mice, it's then very easy to produce a huge amount of this peculiar strain of mice, simply by controlled selective breeding of you clones, because mice are quickly fertile and reproduce very quickly.

    There's actually no reason that no humans have been cloned except for ethical concerns (or

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  95. 0110 1000 ~ 0110 0101 ~ 0110 1100 ~ 0111 0000 ~ by itstime13 · · Score: 1

    0111 0000 ~ 0110 1100 ~ 0111 1010 ~ 0010 0000 ~ 0110 1000 ~ 0110 0101 ~ 0110 1100 ~ 0111 0000 ~ 0010 0000 ~ 0110 1101 ~ 0110 0101 ~

  96. Re:oblig. Nukuler... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nuke a noob... that sounds like a good idea!

  97. Glowing, yes, but huffable? by Kamamura · · Score: 1

    Are these shinies huffable?

  98. Daddy! I want one for christmas! by MindPrison · · Score: 1

    ...Here kitty kitty

    *Cat gets spoon fed Thorium, Americum and uranium*

    MEEOW...POOF. Insta-Glow!

    There ya go kiddo!

    --
    What this world is coming to - is for you and me to decide.
  99. wtf? by wattrlz · · Score: 1

    DO WANT!!

  100. Allerca by Doug+Neal · · Score: 1

    They should get together with these guys. Hypoallergenic fluorescent cats - you can't lose!

  101. Laser Catz by dbdavids · · Score: 1

    Now how long till they can shoot lasers.

  102. I for one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...welcome our new fluorescent felinist overlords!

  103. What's next? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glow in the dark pussies?

  104. Weird. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I never thought I would say this about a glow-in-the-dark animal but, "Its been done".

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alba_(rabbit).

    Eduardo Kac made a rabbit glow with a gene from a jelly fish.

  105. Re:I for one... by g-san · · Score: 1

    welcome our cloned florescent pink genetically modified Pwny Overlords!

  106. now a fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pointed a friend to the article, friend happens to be a bio-chem.. so she points me to this, link below, which is a summary submitted to US national library of medicine.. bit more meat to it than the news paper piece.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=18003942&ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

  107. Trip to Korea by Stoutlimb · · Score: 1

    I've been considering a trip to Korea. This discovery would definitely help tourism. Now tourists who are uncertain what they are eating just need to bring a portable UV lamp with them to the restaurant! No more "kitty surprise" dishes.

  108. Is it hard to fake this video? by mu_shadow · · Score: 0

    There is a video on the right of this news story and they shut the lights on and off. Looks pretty real to me, but then again I don't know much about video. At least it isn't just a photoshop picture, but that doesn't mean these cats where injected with some sort of luminescent dye.

    http://cbs13.com/watercooler/cats.glow.in.2.611027.html

    --
    Thanks, because I don't know what I'm talking about and never claimed I did...