...since I imagine PHBs tend to believe things they read from "official" sources. Which brings up the question -- could somebody out there make an "official" page that demonstrates the benefits of playing Quake on the Office LAN?
"...our statistics show that regular frag-fests increase worker contentment and productivity by relieving stress..."
You're right, I omitted this point in my last post.
I'd like to point out the difficulty in knowing just exactly what Amazon's assets are, though. A quick look at Yahoo gives a "book value" of $1.24, but what does that really represent? You can assign hard values to things like cash, office buildings, and inventory, but it is difficult to calculate the value of intangibles like patents and trademarks--which is what Amazon mostly is.
PS: Are you the guppy I know?
Maybe, but your nickname doesn't ring a bell. I am 23 years old, Chinese-American, currently live in Pennsylvania, and graduated from Penn State. Need more personal info to ID?
An endothermic reaction can certainly occur without external energy input--those instant cold packs you sometimes find in first aid kits are a good example. They use a chemical (often ammonium nitrate) that adsorbs heat as it dissolves in water.
The catch is that the reaction is driven by an increase in randomness--so you might be able to take apart the patient, but not put him back together:). For more info, try this page on Gibbs Free Energy that describes the relationship between enthalpy and entropy.
In that case, it's no different that speculating with Beanie Baby or Pokemon cards -- as an investment, its value depends on you being able to find a "Greater Fool" to buy it from you.
Of course, the whole idea of currency depends on a similar abstract concept, that someone will give you soemthing desirable for that piece of paper. And we've seen that currencies can suddenly and completely collapse when they become disconnected from that expectation of value.
Oh really? When I was studying finance I learned that the value of a stock should be equal to the sum of a series of expected dividends plus the expected price of the stock when you sell it, all of which should be adjusted for the time value of money. In other words, stock values always have and always will reflect the future projected performance of a company. Amazon didn't invent this.
The stock price should also be discounted based on the uncertainty concerning the "expected price of the stock when you sell it". In the case of Amazon and similar stocks, this uncertainty is substantial. Add to this the fact that Amazon has no dividend (No +1 on your die roll), so that the current valuation is now based entirely on future expectations. The question is -- are these high-flyers sufficiently discounted to make the risk worthwhile?
Several people have already commented on the fact that more energy would be needed to regenerate NADH than could possibly be recovered from the methanol produced--this just from simple thermodynamics.
There's a couple of other problems, though. One example--in order to drive the enzymes "backwards" to produce CH3OH (instead of breaking it down as it does in nature), the CO2 probably has to be present at high concentrations, and purifying CO2 from air is energetically expensive.
Another one is the problem of constantly replacing the enzyme. Theoretically, catalysts are supposed to participate in a reaction without being consumed--but in practice, enzymes tend to "burn out" as they break down, react with impurities, etc...
Scientists ignited renewed hopes for Extra-Terrestrial Cheese today, as they reported discovery of a second "moon" orbiting the earth. The asteriod, named Cruithne, was first discovered in 1986, but has only recently been subjected to detailed analysis of its highly eccentric orbit and dairyon emissions.
The asteroid will remain in it's orbit for at least 5,000 years. "That's plenty of time for proper ageing," said one astronomer. "And with a diameter of 5 kilometers, this asteroid could supply the earth with Space Cheese for centuries."
Thanks to whoever posted the article "Hidden Agenda".
Just a guess, but the self destruction will probably act quite different from "laser rot". Laserdiscs use pulse-FM encoding, which has no error correction capability (Aside from "dropout compensation" which just replaces a missing scan line with a previous one). As the signal gets weaker, a digital signal with error correction should appear to be nearly perfect up until the moment it very sharply drops off and becomes completely unusable.
Several years ago, there was a T. rex fossil (Nicknamed "Sue") unearthed by the Black Hills Institute of Geological Research. The fossil was the largest and most complete T. rex skeleton ever found, and it became the center of a fierce legal battle that raised questions over such issues as legal aspects of collecting fossils and the possible of a specimen to science. The T. rex was eventually auctioned off by Sotheby's, to the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago for over 8 million dollars.
For a little background on sue, here's a link to a little piece at The Why Files.
Okay, here's what CmdrTaco is *really* thinking...
on
Getaway to Club Mir
·
· Score: 2
Just a coincidence this story was posted last month? Naaahh... Sex in Space
So, now we know where all that Andover IPO money will be going...
I was once at a meeting where the speaker--in the middle of discussing some business--happened to mention the word, "Monorail". Someone in the audience shouted out, "What'd I say?", and was answered by:
Since The Simpsons first aired as a prime-time series on December 17, 1989, millions of viewers have tuned in every week to laugh at and follow the adventures of Homer Simpson. What is so funny about him? Is it his poor health, his stupidity, his often anti-social behavior? Is Homer's appeal limited to the slapstick of his numerous injuries sustained throughout the series? In Robert Corrigan's Comedy, Meaning and Form, George Santayana opens his article, "The Comic Mask and Carnival", with this portrait of the classic clown figure...
Over the years, "quality TV" has come to be known for its generic style and formulaic code. In the preface of his book, From Hill Street Blues to ER: Television's Second Golden Age, Robert J. Thompson outlines the formulation of a quality TV program with eleven primary criteria which result in a twelfth criterion, that of recognition and achievement which solidify its place in television history...
In 1989, a new kind of show was born: the first prime time animated series since the The Flintstones, and a show with wit and a very different sense of humor than what had come before it. Based on the comic art of Matt Groening, it's characters were some of the first emotionally "real" ones that we had ever seen in an animated feature. The major characters emotional lives were the basis for the show and backing them up was a small town that many Americans might recognize, and that would provide the writers with an environment in which to entertain as well as inform the audience. Social commentary is made on The Simpsons, but often almost without the audiences knowledge, while still being entertaining and, as it's creator has said, entertainment is definitely the key...
Lisa taught me something important about theology
on
The Simpsons Turn 10
·
· Score: 1
Lisa Simpsons taught me something important once (BTW, I'm not a raving Simpsons fan, I just happened to watch it once in a while).
I'm a agnostic, but I'm the kind that very much cares about the question, "Is there a God?". It was a source of much anxiety when I was a child, but I had long since pushed that question to the back of my mind--so I could get on with growing up. Anyway, not too long ago I happened to catch the episode "Bart Sells His Soul", that had the following exchange between Bart and Lisa.
Bart: (sighs) I wasted five bucks on these [Expanding Sponge Dinosaurs].
Lisa: Where'd you get five bucks? I want five bucks.
Bart: Aw, I sold my soul to Milhouse?
Lisa: (incredulous) What? How could you _do_ that? Your soul is the most valuable part of you.
Bart: You believe in that junk?
Lisa: Well, whether or not the soul is physically real, Bart, it's the symbol of everything fine inside us.
Lisa: Bart, your soul is the only part of you that lasts forever. For five dollars, Milhouse could own you for a zillion years!
It's strange, but I suddenly felt calmer after hearing this from a character who I've always considered to be an agnostic (or maybe even an atheist). Whether or not the soul exists as a metaphysical entity is irrelevant. I don't know if there is an afterlife--but that's OK.
Microsoft has been giving away "free" Windows software Licenses to Penn State College students--Win98, WinNT, FrontPage, Office, Visual Studio Pro, etc... For instance, this offer, where a PSU student can get the license for free, and a CD for $1-2.
There are a few catches, of course. I've been told that installation requires an online registration and that they can only be re-installed a certain number of times, or maybe there is an expiration date past which it will not install (Not clear on this, haven't been to PSU in a while).
Of course, that's not the real catch. The real catch is that it's a Microsoft product, of course.
The animated TV show "The Critic" did what may have been a spoof of Reeves in Much Ado About Nothing.
In one scene, Jay is walking down the street, bemoaning the vulgarity of Hollywood films. He stops in front of a movie theater and looks up, overjoyed to see The Merchant of Venice on the marquee.
After Jay enters the theater, the camera pans over, showing the rest of the marquee--"Starring Keanu Reeves". We cut to inside the theater:
Reeves [As Shylock]: "If you cut me, do I not, like, get bummed?"
JULIET: O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo? Deny thy father and refuse thy name; Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love, And I'll no longer be a Capulet
NEO: Woah!
JULIET: Tis but thy name that is my enemy; Thou art thyself, though not a Montague. What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot, Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part Belonging to a man. O, be some other name! What's in a name? that which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet; So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd, Retain that dear perfection which he owes Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name, And for that name which is no part of thee Take all myself.
If B. subtilis and D. radiodurans are Martian, then just about everything else on earth is Martian in origin as well. Yes, the two organisms have some incredible survival abilities--but biochemically they just aren't that different from terrestrial life.
You can get sequence info on the genome for D. radioduranshere, and B. subtilishere.
Basically, science knows a lot about these two organisms, and what we know suggests that they fit right into the phylogenetic tree. And even if they didn't, the fact that we can get a genome sequence *at all* would tell us they are probably related to terrestrial life.
Re:Strangely enough, guess the growing medium
on
Living Terrors
·
· Score: 1
"Strangely enough, one of the most common growing mediums for biocultures is called agar, which is made from corn starch, refined by heating."
Hate to spoil a good joke, but Agar comes from seaweed. From the Encyclopedia Britannica:
"...also called AGAR-AGAR, gelatin-like product made primarily from the algae Gelidium and Gracilaria (red seaweeds)."
As a BioGeek whose primary interest and training is in biology and not computers, I'm often astounded by the expertise and insight that Slashdotters display when dealing with technology. However, I'm distressed by the relative lack of knowledge and FUD displayed by the typical response to to GM/Biotech articles--and I've occasionally noticed similar comments from the several other BioGeeks.
In this topic alone I've come across several posts which (IMHO as a biologist) were quite calm and rational, yet were labeled as flamebait. While certainly some of them have attracted flames, that is quite, *quite* different that deliberately encouraging a flame war.
I've repeatedly come across phrases like "Frankenstein", "Playing God", "Gattaca", and "Brave New World". Katz's Planet Gattaca is an almost perfect example of this. Imagine if he instead had written an article for the mainstream press, holding up movies like The Net or Hackers as "serious" examples of the dangers on the big scary Internet. Slashdotters everywhere would be breaking out the pitchforks and torches. An arguement laden with emotionally charged trigger words and no logical debate is not an arguement--it's propaganda, designed to produce a quick, instinctive "right bellyfeel".
I think part of the issue stems from the fact that there is no BioGeek equivalent to the Hacker. On Slashdot, there are individuals who not only understand the uses, risks, and abuses of software, but are actually capable of producing programs equal or even superior to what a mega-corp can code (While I'll bet most of us BioGeeks work for mega-corporations:).
Unfortunately, there is no BioHacker culture--and I believe that is why there is so much FUD here. Imagine for a moment we had some BioGeeks here who produce GM organisms in their bedroom, or run sequencing gels in their basement. I have yet to meet, or even hear about anyone who does this sort of thing as a hobby--currently economic and technical barriers are just to high. But imagine a few decades down the road. It might happen--Biotech is moving as fast as Silicon tech, becoming faster, better, cheaper. And it's like (hardware) Silicon tech in that you need corporations to plow serious $$$ into development to turn million-dollar mainframes into desktop PCs. Quite a bit of the critical equipment for biotech is actually not that expensive to produce.
For instance, consider PCR, one of the basic techniques of modern biotech. I can't believe this equipment won't become cheaper in the future. Nucleotides and buffers are already reasonably priced. Polymerase is expensive, but I've known poor professors who substituted by growing and purifying their own because they couldn't afford the commercial stuff. Thermocyclers are expensive, but their just fancy peltier heater/coolers--again, poor professors sometimes substitute, this time using hot/cold water baths (and a poor grad student:). And if you want to do sequencing by PCR, I can't imagine that plate scanners are that much mechanically different from a good flatbed reader. A lot of other biotech has the potential to become much cheaper, as economies of scale improve and patents expire (Much stuff is very new and very novel). As the tech becomes more accessible to individuals, we might have some voices that Slashdotters would trust. Of course, in that day ever comes, expect to see some *real* scare stories about rogue virii authors:P.
Anyway, what I'd really like to see is a technical debate on GM. For instance, are the problems brought up inherent in the technology itself, or are they merely solvable problems caused by an oversight, like some buffer overflow exploit, and that a technical problem may very well have a technical solution? For instance, consider the presence of BT protein in Corn Pollen? Could we design a plant such that the BT protein is produced only in the leaves/husk of the plant, and not the pollen or corn? It is almost certainly possible, in a theoretical sense. A more useful question might be: What knowledge do we need to design such a system that both selectively expresses the BT, and does it at a usably high level? What is are the experiments and projects needed to gain such knowledge? There are similar questions for Monsanto's potatoes. (Which were already substantially similar to their current form when they began development over five years ago--we've come a looong way)
On a completely different topic, I have another explanation for some of the points discussion in the article. First, how about an alternate explantation for the choice of BT as a pesticide? BT is a protein, and as such, can be encoded in a single gene. With almost any other system, you would have to engineer an entirely new pathway into the potato plant, and it would probably have greater safety problems to boot (Very few pesticides are as selective as these peptide ones). An entire pathway is *hard*--it may have been impossible several years ago, at the time development began on these potatos.
Second, the article makes a point how BT pesticide labels carry the warning not to ingest or allow it to come into contact with cuts. I believe the main reason for this is because BT pesticides contain the entire bacterium which produced the BT protein crystals. The bacteria themselves could trigger any of the usual things that bacteria do, like allergic reactions, and while they are probably dead I doubt the product has gone through a sterilization step during production.
Well, it's late for me and I'm tired, so please pardon spelling errors and the lack of citations. Hope I haven't been too cantankerous in this post.
Funny thing about Pons & Fleichmann-type Cold Fusion. The Cold Fusion cells themselves can be put together for a few thousand dollars--affordable for any University or even a sufficiently motivated individual. Unfortunately, the calorimetry is hard, and that's one of the critical areas in which the two screwed up.
An interesting side note: Japan only recently (1997) ended its goverment funded $20 million Cold Fusion project--over 8 years after the first P&F-type Cold Fusion announcement, and long after government funded research ended in the US.
Slashdot Mirror
...since I imagine PHBs tend to believe things they read from "official" sources. Which brings up the question -- could somebody out there make an "official" page that demonstrates the benefits of playing Quake on the Office LAN?
"...our statistics show that regular frag-fests increase worker contentment and productivity by relieving stress..."
You're right, I omitted this point in my last post.
I'd like to point out the difficulty in knowing just exactly what Amazon's assets are, though. A quick look at Yahoo gives a "book value" of $1.24, but what does that really represent? You can assign hard values to things like cash, office buildings, and inventory, but it is difficult to calculate the value of intangibles like patents and trademarks--which is what Amazon mostly is.
PS: Are you the guppy I know?
Maybe, but your nickname doesn't ring a bell. I am 23 years old, Chinese-American, currently live in Pennsylvania, and graduated from Penn State. Need more personal info to ID?
An endothermic reaction can certainly occur without external energy input--those instant cold packs you sometimes find in first aid kits are a good example. They use a chemical (often ammonium nitrate) that adsorbs heat as it dissolves in water.
The catch is that the reaction is driven by an increase in randomness--so you might be able to take apart the patient, but not put him back together :). For more info, try this page on Gibbs Free Energy that describes the relationship between enthalpy and entropy.
In that case, it's no different that speculating with Beanie Baby or Pokemon cards -- as an investment, its value depends on you being able to find a "Greater Fool" to buy it from you.
Of course, the whole idea of currency depends on a similar abstract concept, that someone will give you soemthing desirable for that piece of paper. And we've seen that currencies can suddenly and completely collapse when they become disconnected from that expectation of value.
Oh really? When I was studying finance I learned that the value of a stock should be equal to the sum of a series of expected dividends plus the expected price of the stock when you sell it, all of which should be adjusted for the time value of money. In other words, stock values always have and always will reflect the future projected performance of a company. Amazon didn't invent this.
The stock price should also be discounted based on the uncertainty concerning the "expected price of the stock when you sell it". In the case of Amazon and similar stocks, this uncertainty is substantial. Add to this the fact that Amazon has no dividend (No +1 on your die roll), so that the current valuation is now based entirely on future expectations. The question is -- are these high-flyers sufficiently discounted to make the risk worthwhile?
Several people have already commented on the fact that more energy would be needed to regenerate NADH than could possibly be recovered from the methanol produced--this just from simple thermodynamics.
There's a couple of other problems, though. One example--in order to drive the enzymes "backwards" to produce CH3OH (instead of breaking it down as it does in nature), the CO2 probably has to be present at high concentrations, and purifying CO2 from air is energetically expensive.
Another one is the problem of constantly replacing the enzyme. Theoretically, catalysts are supposed to participate in a reaction without being consumed--but in practice, enzymes tend to "burn out" as they break down, react with impurities, etc...
Scientists ignited renewed hopes for Extra-Terrestrial Cheese today, as they reported discovery of a second "moon" orbiting the earth. The asteriod, named Cruithne, was first discovered in 1986, but has only recently been subjected to detailed analysis of its highly eccentric orbit and dairyon emissions.
The asteroid will remain in it's orbit for at least 5,000 years. "That's plenty of time for proper ageing," said one astronomer. "And with a diameter of 5 kilometers, this asteroid could supply the earth with Space Cheese for centuries."
Thanks to whoever posted the article "Hidden Agenda".
...the steering wheel at the 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock positions. Driving one-handed is an safety hazard!
Amazing prescience from Userfriendly--
Userfriendly Jan 15, 2000.
"...Borg gear will look good on you, Steve..."
Just a guess, but the self destruction will probably act quite different from "laser rot". Laserdiscs use pulse-FM encoding, which has no error correction capability (Aside from "dropout compensation" which just replaces a missing scan line with a previous one). As the signal gets weaker, a digital signal with error correction should appear to be nearly perfect up until the moment it very sharply drops off and becomes completely unusable.
Since DVDs use 650nm and 635nm (red light) lasers, I'd imagine that these DVDs may degrade once exposed to sunlight.
Several years ago, there was a T. rex fossil (Nicknamed "Sue") unearthed by the Black Hills Institute of Geological Research. The fossil was the largest and most complete T. rex skeleton ever found, and it became the center of a fierce legal battle that raised questions over such issues as legal aspects of collecting fossils and the possible of a specimen to science. The T. rex was eventually auctioned off by Sotheby's, to the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago for over 8 million dollars.
For a little background on sue, here's a link to a little piece at The Why Files.
Just a coincidence this story was posted last month? Naaahh...
Sex in Space
So, now we know where all that Andover IPO money will be going...
I was once at a meeting where the speaker--in the middle of discussing some business--happened to mention the word, "Monorail". Someone in the audience shouted out, "What'd I say?", and was answered by:
"Monorail!"
"What's it called?"
"Monorail!"
"That's right! Monorail!"
"Monorail! Monorail! Monorail!"
Well, okay--it was a rather chaotic meeting to begin with. Still, pretty cool.
Here's a site full of Simpson's odds and ends, including academic papers based on "The Simpsons". Some examples:
Homer Simpson: Classic Clown, by Ellen Amy Cohen
Since The Simpsons first aired as a prime-time series on December 17, 1989, millions of viewers have tuned in every week to laugh at and follow the adventures of Homer Simpson. What is so funny about him? Is it his poor health, his stupidity, his often anti-social behavior? Is Homer's appeal limited to the slapstick of his numerous injuries sustained throughout the series? In Robert Corrigan's Comedy, Meaning and Form, George Santayana opens his article, "The Comic Mask and Carnival", with this portrait of the classic clown figure...
The Simpsons as Quality Television, by Dan Korte
Over the years, "quality TV" has come to be known for its generic style and formulaic code. In the preface of his book, From Hill Street Blues to ER: Television's Second Golden Age, Robert J. Thompson outlines the formulation of a quality TV program with eleven primary criteria which result in a twelfth criterion, that of recognition and achievement which solidify its place in television history...
From an Obscure Hell to Life in the Fast Lane, by W. Keith Work
In 1989, a new kind of show was born: the first prime time animated series since the The Flintstones, and a show with wit and a very different sense of humor than what had come before it. Based on the comic art of Matt Groening, it's characters were some of the first emotionally "real" ones that we had ever seen in an animated feature. The major characters emotional lives were the basis for the show and backing them up was a small town that many Americans might recognize, and that would provide the writers with an environment in which to entertain as well as inform the audience. Social commentary is made on The Simpsons, but often almost without the audiences knowledge, while still being entertaining and, as it's creator has said, entertainment is definitely the key...
Lisa Simpsons taught me something important once (BTW, I'm not a raving Simpsons fan, I just happened to watch it once in a while).
I'm a agnostic, but I'm the kind that very much cares about the question, "Is there a God?". It was a source of much anxiety when I was a child, but I had long since pushed that question to the back of my mind--so I could get on with growing up. Anyway, not too long ago I happened to catch the episode "Bart Sells His Soul", that had the following exchange between Bart and Lisa.
Bart: (sighs) I wasted five bucks on these [Expanding Sponge Dinosaurs].
Lisa: Where'd you get five bucks? I want five bucks.
Bart: Aw, I sold my soul to Milhouse?
Lisa: (incredulous) What? How could you _do_ that? Your soul is the most valuable part of you.
Bart: You believe in that junk?
Lisa: Well, whether or not the soul is physically real, Bart, it's the symbol of everything fine inside us.
Bart: (tsking sadly) Poor, gullible Lisa. I'll keep my crappy sponges, thanks.
Lisa: Bart, your soul is the only part of you that lasts forever. For five dollars, Milhouse could own you for a zillion years!
It's strange, but I suddenly felt calmer after hearing this from a character who I've always considered to be an agnostic (or maybe even an atheist). Whether or not the soul exists as a metaphysical entity is irrelevant. I don't know if there is an afterlife--but that's OK.
I have a Soul.
Microsoft has been giving away "free" Windows software Licenses to Penn State College students--Win98, WinNT, FrontPage, Office, Visual Studio Pro, etc... For instance, this offer, where a PSU student can get the license for free, and a CD for $1-2.
There are a few catches, of course. I've been told that installation requires an online registration and that they can only be re-installed a certain number of times, or maybe there is an expiration date past which it will not install (Not clear on this, haven't been to PSU in a while).
Of course, that's not the real catch. The real catch is that it's a Microsoft product, of course.
"Easy is what you're used to."
The animated TV show "The Critic" did what may have been a spoof of Reeves in Much Ado About Nothing.
In one scene, Jay is walking down the street, bemoaning the vulgarity of Hollywood films. He stops in front of a movie theater and looks up, overjoyed to see The Merchant of Venice on the marquee.
After Jay enters the theater, the camera pans over, showing the rest of the marquee--"Starring Keanu Reeves". We cut to inside the theater:
Reeves [As Shylock]: "If you cut me, do I not, like, get bummed?"
JULIET:
O Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name;
Or, if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love,
And I'll no longer be a Capulet
NEO:
Woah!
JULIET:
Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What's Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself.
Neo:
Dude!
etc...
If B. subtilis and D. radiodurans are Martian, then just about everything else on earth is Martian in origin as well. Yes, the two organisms have some incredible survival abilities--but biochemically they just aren't that different from terrestrial life.
You can get sequence info on the genome for D. radiodurans here, and B. subtilis here.
Basically, science knows a lot about these two organisms, and what we know suggests that they fit right into the phylogenetic tree. And even if they didn't, the fact that we can get a genome sequence *at all* would tell us they are probably related to terrestrial life.
Hate to spoil a good joke, but Agar comes from seaweed. From the Encyclopedia Britannica:
As a BioGeek whose primary interest and training is in biology and not computers, I'm often astounded by the expertise and insight that Slashdotters display when dealing with technology. However, I'm distressed by the relative lack of knowledge and FUD displayed by the typical response to to GM/Biotech articles--and I've occasionally noticed similar comments from the several other BioGeeks.
In this topic alone I've come across several posts which (IMHO as a biologist) were quite calm and rational, yet were labeled as flamebait. While certainly some of them have attracted flames, that is quite, *quite* different that deliberately encouraging a flame war.
I've repeatedly come across phrases like "Frankenstein", "Playing God", "Gattaca", and "Brave New World". Katz's Planet Gattaca is an almost perfect example of this. Imagine if he instead had written an article for the mainstream press, holding up movies like The Net or Hackers as "serious" examples of the dangers on the big scary Internet. Slashdotters everywhere would be breaking out the pitchforks and torches. An arguement laden with emotionally charged trigger words and no logical debate is not an arguement--it's propaganda, designed to produce a quick, instinctive "right bellyfeel".
I think part of the issue stems from the fact that there is no BioGeek equivalent to the Hacker. On Slashdot, there are individuals who not only understand the uses, risks, and abuses of software, but are actually capable of producing programs equal or even superior to what a mega-corp can code (While I'll bet most of us BioGeeks work for mega-corporations :).
Unfortunately, there is no BioHacker culture--and I believe that is why there is so much FUD here. Imagine for a moment we had some BioGeeks here who produce GM organisms in their bedroom, or run sequencing gels in their basement. I have yet to meet, or even hear about anyone who does this sort of thing as a hobby--currently economic and technical barriers are just to high. But imagine a few decades down the road. It might happen--Biotech is moving as fast as Silicon tech, becoming faster, better, cheaper. And it's like (hardware) Silicon tech in that you need corporations to plow serious $$$ into development to turn million-dollar mainframes into desktop PCs. Quite a bit of the critical equipment for biotech is actually not that expensive to produce.
For instance, consider PCR, one of the basic techniques of modern biotech. I can't believe this equipment won't become cheaper in the future. Nucleotides and buffers are already reasonably priced. Polymerase is expensive, but I've known poor professors who substituted by growing and purifying their own because they couldn't afford the commercial stuff. Thermocyclers are expensive, but their just fancy peltier heater/coolers--again, poor professors sometimes substitute, this time using hot/cold water baths (and a poor grad student :). And if you want to do sequencing by PCR, I can't imagine that plate scanners are that much mechanically different from a good flatbed reader. A lot of other biotech has the potential to become much cheaper, as economies of scale improve and patents expire (Much stuff is very new and very novel). As the tech becomes more accessible to individuals, we might have some voices that Slashdotters would trust. Of course, in that day ever comes, expect to see some *real* scare stories about rogue virii authors :P.
Anyway, what I'd really like to see is a technical debate on GM. For instance, are the problems brought up inherent in the technology itself, or are they merely solvable problems caused by an oversight, like some buffer overflow exploit, and that a technical problem may very well have a technical solution? For instance, consider the presence of BT protein in Corn Pollen? Could we design a plant such that the BT protein is produced only in the leaves/husk of the plant, and not the pollen or corn? It is almost certainly possible, in a theoretical sense. A more useful question might be: What knowledge do we need to design such a system that both selectively expresses the BT, and does it at a usably high level? What is are the experiments and projects needed to gain such knowledge? There are similar questions for Monsanto's potatoes. (Which were already substantially similar to their current form when they began development over five years ago--we've come a looong way)
On a completely different topic, I have another explanation for some of the points discussion in the article. First, how about an alternate explantation for the choice of BT as a pesticide? BT is a protein, and as such, can be encoded in a single gene. With almost any other system, you would have to engineer an entirely new pathway into the potato plant, and it would probably have greater safety problems to boot (Very few pesticides are as selective as these peptide ones). An entire pathway is *hard*--it may have been impossible several years ago, at the time development began on these potatos.
Second, the article makes a point how BT pesticide labels carry the warning not to ingest or allow it to come into contact with cuts. I believe the main reason for this is because BT pesticides contain the entire bacterium which produced the BT protein crystals. The bacteria themselves could trigger any of the usual things that bacteria do, like allergic reactions, and while they are probably dead I doubt the product has gone through a sterilization step during production.
Well, it's late for me and I'm tired, so please pardon spelling errors and the lack of citations. Hope I haven't been too cantankerous in this post.
Funny thing about Pons & Fleichmann-type Cold Fusion. The Cold Fusion cells themselves can be put together for a few thousand dollars--affordable for any University or even a sufficiently motivated individual. Unfortunately, the calorimetry is hard, and that's one of the critical areas in which the two screwed up.
An interesting side note: Japan only recently (1997) ended its goverment funded $20 million Cold Fusion project--over 8 years after the first P&F-type Cold Fusion announcement, and long after government funded research ended in the US.
...Kirk meets God. Kirk is not impressed.
"Join Starfleet! Travel to exotic lands! Meet strange and interesting Gods! Kill them!"
I'm going to remember this, next time I fire a Pilum up the tailpipe of a retreating Kilrathi in Wing Commander.