What makes you say there is "no remote long term benefit"? The whole point about "long term" things is that they haven't happened yet. Unless you do the experiments, you don't know if the results may have useful benefits.
If the article is right about them being strangely shaped, then there could be new physics to be discovered, which could lead to all sorts of useful things. Maybe Uranium can be made strangely shaped, and therefore safer to use in reactors, who knows?
I don't recall making that claim, so I don't know what makes you sure of that. Whatever your reason is, you are wrong. (And yes, I do understand sarcasm)
I hope for your sake that you don't really belive that...
Remind me, what continent is the govenor of California from? (NB: I am not naming him as a good thing to come out of Europe, but the American's seem to think he is, so they're welcome to him.)
Hang on, they have radioactive heaters inside the radiation shielding? I know cosmic rays etc are much worse that a few alpha/beta particles, but isn't that still a little silly?
OK. The Crusades was a bad example. History isn't really my strong suit, I just knew the Crusades were in the name of religion, so there was a certain parallel.
Saudi Arabia isn't fundamentalist. It is a load of rock, it has no opinions or beliefs. The Saudi royal family is certainly fundamentalist, but that is not the same thing at all.
The major difference between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and SA is willing to trade its oil to the US. Call me a cynic, but...
The world is not at war with Islam, it is at war with Islam fundamentalists. How many times does the distinction have to be made before people will understand it?
Fundamentalists of any religion are just as bad. Look at the Crusades, that was Christian Fundamentalists.
Regular Muslims are no worse than regular Christians (or Jews, or Hindus, or whatever, i just chose Chistians because most Westerners, and therefore most/.ers know more about it (i would guess)).
And, before anyone asks, I am an athiest, and am equally critical of all religions.
It also says the asteroid orbits between earth and jupiter, which can't be true if it produces a shower. The orbit must cross Earth's orbit, so the meteors can hit Earth, unless the orbit has changed considerably, which i doubt.
"Unless someone catches a carp and keeps it alive until they can get to another continent (hint: Australia's pretty far away) and then releases it into a large carp population, there is NO chance AT ALL of it spreading outside of Australia."
How do you think infected rabits got out of Australia? If something is as publicly available as wild animal it is very easy for someone to transport it.
Causing it to go extinct in oz is fine, i'm worried about it going extinct in the rest of the world. Getting balances right is very difficult, one miss calculation and you have a big problem.
Of course the problem will go away if you intensively fish them. That's what has happened with Cod in the north sea, IIRC.
What's bad about it is the lack of control once it is released. I have no problem with them reducing the population, i do have a problem with them making it extinct.
I agree. Increased fishing would be much better. The article says there is an asian market, so why not sell to it?
I guess the key factor is how many they release, because each one they release is going to mate with a normal female, which will produce a load of males, which will in turn mate with a normal female, and so on ad infinitum. They also don't say if this male-only gene is dominant or resesive (sp?). If it is resesive you will only get one generation (it takes a female and a male to mate, only males can have the male-only gene, so you will always be hetrozygous), so it would be very easy to control.
That means you are relying purely on Will Power, if Will Power works for a person, then they don't need to worry about any special methods, the vaccine is for people who can't do it with just Will Power.
The flaw in your logic is that when you discover the pencil doesn't make you feel good you will go back to the cigs. If you have the vaccine you can't go back. (unless you stop having the vaccine shots, which is a problem someone has already pointed out)
What is the point of trying to make less deadly versions of TB? Are they trying to make a version that will stimulate the production of the same antibodies, but not harm someone, so they can make a live vacine? The article doesn't seem to worry about details like that, i guess the interesting bit is them making a harmless mistake, rather than the useful work they are trying to do...
That would make sense. I don't know how that would effect immune systems though... i would think it would be easy to the WBCs to "eat" the prions, but obviously it is more complicated than that. If they effect the brain they must be able to get through the barriers, which means they are very small (as you would expect for a single protein molecule), which would probably cause the immune system problems.
I'd forgotten about savenger's immune systems, but now you mention it, i do recall hearing it before. You make a good point.
As for prions, they are out of my field of knowledge, so i can't really say, but i would expect they are similar to viruses in detection, they are both sub-cellular organisms.
I wasn't aware the foundation series bore any relation to the positronic robots books, beside the author. Although i have only read the first 2, so i don't really know. I should have asked for the rest for xmas... too late now.:(
I must agree, I wouldn't put Will Smith in an Asimov story... The plot seems to be Caves of Steel with the characters from I, Robot. Why can't they just stick with the actual plot for the book they are making a movie of, for once?
Slashdot Mirror
What makes you say there is "no remote long term benefit"? The whole point about "long term" things is that they haven't happened yet. Unless you do the experiments, you don't know if the results may have useful benefits.
If the article is right about them being strangely shaped, then there could be new physics to be discovered, which could lead to all sorts of useful things. Maybe Uranium can be made strangely shaped, and therefore safer to use in reactors, who knows?
I don't recall making that claim, so I don't know what makes you sure of that. Whatever your reason is, you are wrong. (And yes, I do understand sarcasm)
Hi Yoz!
;-))
Someone should also point out that the url is now http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/ the url given before is extremely out of date.
Tango
(U32077 - don't mention me to any italics if you want a quiet life
I hope for your sake that you don't really belive that... Remind me, what continent is the govenor of California from? (NB: I am not naming him as a good thing to come out of Europe, but the American's seem to think he is, so they're welcome to him.)
Hang on, they have radioactive heaters inside the radiation shielding? I know cosmic rays etc are much worse that a few alpha/beta particles, but isn't that still a little silly?
OK. The Crusades was a bad example. History isn't really my strong suit, I just knew the Crusades were in the name of religion, so there was a certain parallel. Saudi Arabia isn't fundamentalist. It is a load of rock, it has no opinions or beliefs. The Saudi royal family is certainly fundamentalist, but that is not the same thing at all. The major difference between Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and SA is willing to trade its oil to the US. Call me a cynic, but...
The world is not at war with Islam, it is at war with Islam fundamentalists. How many times does the distinction have to be made before people will understand it? Fundamentalists of any religion are just as bad. Look at the Crusades, that was Christian Fundamentalists. Regular Muslims are no worse than regular Christians (or Jews, or Hindus, or whatever, i just chose Chistians because most Westerners, and therefore most /.ers know more about it (i would guess)).
And, before anyone asks, I am an athiest, and am equally critical of all religions.
Indeed, it could be interpreted like that, but I would normally take "orbits between" to mean "orbits ENTIRELY between".
All true, but it only takes one person to successfully transport one for an entire population to be effected.
It also says the asteroid orbits between earth and jupiter, which can't be true if it produces a shower. The orbit must cross Earth's orbit, so the meteors can hit Earth, unless the orbit has changed considerably, which i doubt.
"Unless someone catches a carp and keeps it alive until they can get to another continent (hint: Australia's pretty far away) and then releases it into a large carp population, there is NO chance AT ALL of it spreading outside of Australia." How do you think infected rabits got out of Australia? If something is as publicly available as wild animal it is very easy for someone to transport it.
Causing it to go extinct in oz is fine, i'm worried about it going extinct in the rest of the world. Getting balances right is very difficult, one miss calculation and you have a big problem.
Of course the problem will go away if you intensively fish them. That's what has happened with Cod in the north sea, IIRC.
What's bad about it is the lack of control once it is released. I have no problem with them reducing the population, i do have a problem with them making it extinct.
It doesn't cause infertility, it just causes males. Those males can still breed with normal females, speading the gene.
I agree. Increased fishing would be much better. The article says there is an asian market, so why not sell to it? I guess the key factor is how many they release, because each one they release is going to mate with a normal female, which will produce a load of males, which will in turn mate with a normal female, and so on ad infinitum. They also don't say if this male-only gene is dominant or resesive (sp?). If it is resesive you will only get one generation (it takes a female and a male to mate, only males can have the male-only gene, so you will always be hetrozygous), so it would be very easy to control.
That means you are relying purely on Will Power, if Will Power works for a person, then they don't need to worry about any special methods, the vaccine is for people who can't do it with just Will Power.
The flaw in your logic is that when you discover the pencil doesn't make you feel good you will go back to the cigs. If you have the vaccine you can't go back. (unless you stop having the vaccine shots, which is a problem someone has already pointed out)
What is the point of trying to make less deadly versions of TB? Are they trying to make a version that will stimulate the production of the same antibodies, but not harm someone, so they can make a live vacine? The article doesn't seem to worry about details like that, i guess the interesting bit is them making a harmless mistake, rather than the useful work they are trying to do...
That would make sense. I don't know how that would effect immune systems though... i would think it would be easy to the WBCs to "eat" the prions, but obviously it is more complicated than that. If they effect the brain they must be able to get through the barriers, which means they are very small (as you would expect for a single protein molecule), which would probably cause the immune system problems.
I'd forgotten about savenger's immune systems, but now you mention it, i do recall hearing it before. You make a good point. As for prions, they are out of my field of knowledge, so i can't really say, but i would expect they are similar to viruses in detection, they are both sub-cellular organisms.
Being at the top of the food chain doesn't stop your corpse being eaten by scavengers, does it?
There's a whole series of Caves of Steel books? I've read "Caves of Steel", is there a sequel somewhere or something?
I wasn't aware the foundation series bore any relation to the positronic robots books, beside the author. Although i have only read the first 2, so i don't really know. I should have asked for the rest for xmas... too late now. :(
I must agree, I wouldn't put Will Smith in an Asimov story... The plot seems to be Caves of Steel with the characters from I, Robot. Why can't they just stick with the actual plot for the book they are making a movie of, for once?