Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

IT'S ALIVE

11213141618

Posts

  • TaskmanTaskman Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Until we get more than halfway finished with Proteinspace, nothing really cool is going to happen on the human constructed multicellular organism front. It's too difficult to set up a complex organism that doesn't just immediately enter apoptosis and there's very little desire to do so at the moment, frankly.
    Still, advanced gene-splicing techniques are getting more efficient for making organic molecules, as you'll know if you've ever eaten a soft centre chocolate.
    Meissnerd wrote: »
    i am not knowledgeable in scientific matters. i just want scientists to please for the love of god be careful.

    Okay.

    (The ethics and practicality review for Venters' experiment has been going on for fifteen years, back even before he finished shotgun-sequencing the human genome. Despite a lot of shit-talking, we're being very careful.)

    uGn5f.png
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    NotACrook wrote: »
    GameGrrl wrote: »
    rogue scientists

    i was gonna say "its me. i am the scientist"

    but pip said it

    damnit pip

  • Skull ManSkull Man Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    hey yo gamergrrl our bodies aren't the way they are because of some "purpose"

    this is just what has worked thus far to get people walking around long enough to breed a little before dying

    there are still a ton of genetic defects that cause people incredible amounts pain and humiliation for no reason for their entire lives

    you can still bust a nut with half a liver but that doesn't mean that's the way it "should" be

  • TamTam I hate art I love artRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Taskman tell us about how those chocolates are made

  • PiptheFairPiptheFair Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Taskman wrote: »
    Until we get more than halfway finished with Proteinspace, nothing really cool is going to happen on the human constructed multicellular organism front. It's too difficult to set up a complex organism that doesn't just immediately enter apoptosis and there's very little desire to do so at the moment, frankly.
    Still, advanced gene-splicing techniques are getting more efficient for making organic molecules, as you'll know if you've ever eaten a soft centre chocolate.
    Meissnerd wrote: »
    i am not knowledgeable in scientific matters. i just want scientists to please for the love of god be careful.

    Okay.

    (The ethics and practicality review for Venters' experiment has been going on for fifteen years, back even before he finished shotgun-sequencing the human genome. Despite a lot of shit-talking, we're being very careful.)

    wat

    STEAM
    Spoiler:
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • NotASenatorNotASenator Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    basically this is like what I said- very similar in concept to nuclear transfer (the method used to clone dolly the sheep) and it has about the same success rate and only applies to prokaryotes

    of course, since bacteria reproduce exponentially, they can more than cover for a 1 in 150,000 chance of transplantation

    so this is cool, but nothing really THAT groundbreaking and CERTAINLY not something to get into a panic about

    Explain why it isn't ground breaking wrt the synthesized DNA being stitched, please.

  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    basically this is like what I said- very similar in concept to nuclear transfer (the method used to clone dolly the sheep) and it has about the same success rate and only applies to prokaryotes

    of course, since bacteria reproduce exponentially, they can more than cover for a 1 in 150,000 chance of transplantation

    so this is cool, but nothing really THAT groundbreaking and CERTAINLY not something to get into a panic about

    Explain why it isn't ground breaking wrt the synthesized DNA being stitched, please.

    i meant the transplantation, not the synthesizing of the DNA

    sorry if that wasn't clear

  • NotASenatorNotASenator Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    bongi wrote: »
    my only worry about this kind of thing is the potential damage that an engineered organism could do to an ecosystem

    not in terms of it being magically better or evil or something

    just in the sense that what seems to be a fairly innocuous change to an ecosystem (rabbits) can sometimes do a lot of damage (rabbits now rule australia send in the troops)

    this is literally one of the two reasons I don't support GMO crops currently

    the other one has to do with gene patents and the holders of those patents

    what

    why are you doing this to me, Arch?

  • PiptheFairPiptheFair Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    I have made truffles, and I can assure no gene splicing transpired

    STEAM
    Spoiler:
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    bongi wrote: »
    my only worry about this kind of thing is the potential damage that an engineered organism could do to an ecosystem

    not in terms of it being magically better or evil or something

    just in the sense that what seems to be a fairly innocuous change to an ecosystem (rabbits) can sometimes do a lot of damage (rabbits now rule australia send in the troops)

    this is literally one of the two reasons I don't support GMO crops currently

    the other one has to do with gene patents and the holders of those patents

    what

    why are you doing this to me, Arch?

    dude we have been over this

  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • Viscount IslandsViscount Islands [INSERT SoKo HERE] Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Gene patenting is pretty fucked up.

    I want to do with you
    What spring does with the cherry trees.
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    besides crook we are already at opposites- i answer yes to the "playing god" question

    i just want everyone to be able to play god without gettin' sued

  • NotASenatorNotASenator Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    bongi wrote: »
    my only worry about this kind of thing is the potential damage that an engineered organism could do to an ecosystem

    not in terms of it being magically better or evil or something

    just in the sense that what seems to be a fairly innocuous change to an ecosystem (rabbits) can sometimes do a lot of damage (rabbits now rule australia send in the troops)

    this is literally one of the two reasons I don't support GMO crops currently

    the other one has to do with gene patents and the holders of those patents

    what

    why are you doing this to me, Arch?

    dude we have been over this

    You and me have been over this? I don't recall.

  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    bongi wrote: »
    my only worry about this kind of thing is the potential damage that an engineered organism could do to an ecosystem

    not in terms of it being magically better or evil or something

    just in the sense that what seems to be a fairly innocuous change to an ecosystem (rabbits) can sometimes do a lot of damage (rabbits now rule australia send in the troops)

    this is literally one of the two reasons I don't support GMO crops currently

    the other one has to do with gene patents and the holders of those patents

    what

    why are you doing this to me, Arch?

    dude we have been over this

    You and me have been over this? I don't recall.

    maybe it was someone else then; i could have sworn at one time i was all "dude i hate GMOs not because OMFG scary science! but more because the people running and supplying these things are dirtbags"

    and that person was all "no you are dumb"

  • ButlerButler 89 episodes or bust Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Yes don't give funding for research to scientists unless they are directly working on curing something

    also don't buy a lottery ticket unless it has the winning numbers on it

    and don't teach your children to walk unless they're going somewhere important

    The Genius of the Daleks

    Latest upload: Chapter Five on 13th of March, 2014
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Butler wrote: »
    Yes don't give funding for research to scientists unless they are directly working on curing something

    also don't buy a lottery ticket unless it has the winning numbers on it

    and don't teach your children to walk unless they're going somewhere important

    actually that last one has a nice ring to it- it would make a good motivational quote or something

  • TamTam I hate art I love artRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • TaskmanTaskman Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    PiptheFair wrote: »
    Taskman wrote: »
    Until we get more than halfway finished with Proteinspace, nothing really cool is going to happen on the human constructed multicellular organism front. It's too difficult to set up a complex organism that doesn't just immediately enter apoptosis and there's very little desire to do so at the moment, frankly.
    Still, advanced gene-splicing techniques are getting more efficient for making organic molecules, as you'll know if you've ever eaten a soft centre chocolate.
    Meissnerd wrote: »
    i am not knowledgeable in scientific matters. i just want scientists to please for the love of god be careful.

    Okay.

    (The ethics and practicality review for Venters' experiment has been going on for fifteen years, back even before he finished shotgun-sequencing the human genome. Despite a lot of shit-talking, we're being very careful.)

    wat

    The chocolate thing is one solitary, shitty example of industrial biotech in food. Basically, in some chocolates (like those caramel-filled things) the soft centre starts off solid, mixed with an enzyme that denatures it into a soft centre after a little while. You coat the solid centre in chocolate, and let it harden and leave it.

    The enzyme is acquired through various means. A couple of decades ago it was a pain in the arse. Now, the gene for the enzyme is pushed into a simple bacteria that produces it for use extracellularly.

    uGn5f.png
  • Kevin CristKevin Crist I know you love me I am loving you more.Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Hey, if I want to inject temporary dolphin traits into my DNA so I can take an ocean swim for the weekend, I should have that right.

    Don't take this away from me.

    acpRlGW.jpg291.gif
    Steam: cristke| Battlenet: SkinnerSweet#1401
  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    yeah tam I saw that; made me really happy

    except i dont know that i agree with what led him to his decision, i agree with the decision

  • jackaljackal Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Taskman wrote: »
    PiptheFair wrote: »
    Taskman wrote: »
    Until we get more than halfway finished with Proteinspace, nothing really cool is going to happen on the human constructed multicellular organism front. It's too difficult to set up a complex organism that doesn't just immediately enter apoptosis and there's very little desire to do so at the moment, frankly.
    Still, advanced gene-splicing techniques are getting more efficient for making organic molecules, as you'll know if you've ever eaten a soft centre chocolate.
    Meissnerd wrote: »
    i am not knowledgeable in scientific matters. i just want scientists to please for the love of god be careful.

    Okay.

    (The ethics and practicality review for Venters' experiment has been going on for fifteen years, back even before he finished shotgun-sequencing the human genome. Despite a lot of shit-talking, we're being very careful.)

    wat

    The chocolate thing is one solitary, shitty example of industrial biotech in food. Basically, in some chocolates (like those caramel-filled things) the soft centre starts off solid, mixed with an enzyme that denatures it into a soft centre after a little while. You coat the solid centre in chocolate, and let it harden and leave it.

    The enzyme is acquired through various means. A couple of decades ago it was a pain in the arse. Now, the gene for the enzyme is pushed into a simple bacteria that produces it for use extracellularly.

    Plus omega-3, rennet, insulin and an ass ton of other stuff. [edit] Woops, the omega-3 is algea...

  • YoSoyTheWalrusYoSoyTheWalrus Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    There is a big difference between just patenting some genes you found (Myriad) and patenting a gene that only exists because of the conditions you created (Monsanto).
    Also I want to work on corn for Monsanto so bad, they make you go to Hawaii and it just looks awesome.

    tumblr_mvlywyLVys1qigwg9o1_250.png
  • NotASenatorNotASenator Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    NotACrook wrote: »
    Arch wrote: »
    bongi wrote: »
    my only worry about this kind of thing is the potential damage that an engineered organism could do to an ecosystem

    not in terms of it being magically better or evil or something

    just in the sense that what seems to be a fairly innocuous change to an ecosystem (rabbits) can sometimes do a lot of damage (rabbits now rule australia send in the troops)

    this is literally one of the two reasons I don't support GMO crops currently

    the other one has to do with gene patents and the holders of those patents

    what

    why are you doing this to me, Arch?

    dude we have been over this

    You and me have been over this? I don't recall.

    maybe it was someone else then; i could have sworn at one time i was all "dude i hate GMOs not because OMFG scary science! but more because the people running and supplying these things are dirtbags"

    and that person was all "no you are dumb"

    That wasn't me.

  • JordanthehuttJordanthehutt Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Odds are the public will never really interact with man made bacteria anytime soon. They will probably just stick around in the laboratory setting for the next 30 years at least. The issue we have right now is with horizontal gene transfer, and if they put some strange metabolism gene out there in the wild things might go poorly.

  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    oh whoops, sorry NaC

    but basically i think most of the big agricultural biotech companies are kinda shady

    i love the idea of gmo crops...but i want them open sourced! if that analogy makes sense?

    it probably doesnt

  • redheadredhead Registered User
    edited May 2010
    Odds are the public will never really interact with man made bacteria anytime soon. They will probably just stick around in the laboratory setting for the next 30 years at least. The issue we have right now is with horizontal gene transfer, and if they put some strange metabolism gene out there in the wild things might go poorly.

    i appreciate this post because it made me realize "horizontal gene transfer" is a fantastic euphemism for sex

  • TamTam I hate art I love artRegistered User regular
    edited May 2010
  • MrMonroeMrMonroe Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    There is a big difference between just patenting some genes you found (Myriad) and patenting a gene that only exists because of the conditions you created (Monsanto).
    Also I want to work on corn for Monsanto so bad, they make you go to Hawaii and it just looks awesome.

    gene patenting of any kind is completely fucked and serves no purpose other than enriching a very few people at the expense of a great many

  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    redhead wrote: »
    Odds are the public will never really interact with man made bacteria anytime soon. They will probably just stick around in the laboratory setting for the next 30 years at least. The issue we have right now is with horizontal gene transfer, and if they put some strange metabolism gene out there in the wild things might go poorly.

    i appreciate this post because it made me realize "horizontal gene transfer" is a fantastic euphemism for sex

    yes it is, but not really accurate? horizontal gene transfer refers to gene transfer between different tree branches in a clade- i.e. not between an organism and its descendants

    THIS ISNT TO KILL THE JOKE

    it is still really funny

  • redheadredhead Registered User
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    redhead wrote: »
    Odds are the public will never really interact with man made bacteria anytime soon. They will probably just stick around in the laboratory setting for the next 30 years at least. The issue we have right now is with horizontal gene transfer, and if they put some strange metabolism gene out there in the wild things might go poorly.

    i appreciate this post because it made me realize "horizontal gene transfer" is a fantastic euphemism for sex

    yes it is, but not really accurate? horizontal gene transfer refers to gene transfer between different tree branches in a clade- i.e. not between an organism and its descendants

    THIS ISNT TO KILL THE JOKE

    it is still really funny

    :x

  • ArchArch Viruses are totally dependent on knowledge of every eternity. Renounce faith. Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    OHMY GOD OH MY GOD

    a paper that i am fourth author on just went up for review in Gene Therapy

    i figure this is an appropriate place for this

    basically i made figures 4 through 6

  • YoSoyTheWalrusYoSoyTheWalrus Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    MrMonroe wrote: »
    There is a big difference between just patenting some genes you found (Myriad) and patenting a gene that only exists because of the conditions you created (Monsanto).
    Also I want to work on corn for Monsanto so bad, they make you go to Hawaii and it just looks awesome.

    gene patenting of any kind is completely fucked and serves no purpose other than enriching a very few people at the expense of a great many

    Yes let's forget about the fact that a lot of significant advances have come from private industry and just go ahead and remove their monetary incentive to continue making these advances.

    The fact that corporations of all kinds are run in a totally fucked way from the top down is a different discussion.

    e let's also completely forget about the labor theory of value while we are at it and not make any distinctions between genes that were discovered and genes that were produced.

    tumblr_mvlywyLVys1qigwg9o1_250.png
  • YoSoyTheWalrusYoSoyTheWalrus Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    Arch wrote: »
    OHMY GOD OH MY GOD

    a paper that i am fourth author on just went up for review in Gene Therapy

    i figure this is an appropriate place for this

    basically i made figures 4 through 6

    That is awesome congratulations.

    tumblr_mvlywyLVys1qigwg9o1_250.png
  • MrMonroeMrMonroe Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    MrMonroe wrote: »
    There is a big difference between just patenting some genes you found (Myriad) and patenting a gene that only exists because of the conditions you created (Monsanto).
    Also I want to work on corn for Monsanto so bad, they make you go to Hawaii and it just looks awesome.

    gene patenting of any kind is completely fucked and serves no purpose other than enriching a very few people at the expense of a great many

    Yes let's forget about the fact that a lot of significant advances have come from private industry and just go ahead and remove their monetary incentive to continue making these advances.

    The fact that corporations of all kinds are run in a totally fucked way from the top down is a different discussion.

    except that there would still be an enormous incentive to engage in this kind of research if you could not patent the genes you created

    like how you could patent the method you used to create them, or if they are actually in any way useful, you could directly profit by their creation

    it's an exceptionally gray area of patent law with no real corollaries in other industries, and the reasoning you just gave for protecting gene patents is exactly the lie the people who are engaged in this fuckery give when they are trying to protect their giant fucking mountains of cash

    patenting genes themselves slows research rather than encouraging it

  • YoSoyTheWalrusYoSoyTheWalrus Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    MrMonroe wrote: »
    MrMonroe wrote: »
    There is a big difference between just patenting some genes you found (Myriad) and patenting a gene that only exists because of the conditions you created (Monsanto).
    Also I want to work on corn for Monsanto so bad, they make you go to Hawaii and it just looks awesome.

    gene patenting of any kind is completely fucked and serves no purpose other than enriching a very few people at the expense of a great many

    Yes let's forget about the fact that a lot of significant advances have come from private industry and just go ahead and remove their monetary incentive to continue making these advances.

    The fact that corporations of all kinds are run in a totally fucked way from the top down is a different discussion.

    except that there would still be an enormous incentive to engage in this kind of research if you could not patent the genes you created

    like how you could patent the method you used to create them, or if they are actually in any way useful, you could directly profit by their creation

    it's an exceptionally gray area of patent law with no real corollaries in other industries, and the reasoning you just gave for protecting gene patents is exactly the lie the people who are engaged in this fuckery give when they are trying to protect their giant fucking mountains of cash

    patenting genes themselves slows research rather than encouraging it

    You have as little basis for that argument as you imply I have for mine. What evidence do you have that the ability to patent something you create slows scientific progress? For example legal battles over the patents associated with PCR and Taq continue to this day, but that doesn't mean nobody is using it. It is not a lie that patents help encourage companies to innovate. Arguments about whether or not patents slow down the pace of scientific progress are much more nebulous.

    Would it be nice if everything was open source and nobody had to pay for it? Sure. The preference for that sort of thing is one of the things I like best about the science community. But no patents would mean there would be no biotech companies either. I can tell you from experience that those companies innovate at a much faster rate than government-funded projects (look at the HGP vs Craig Venter for an additional example).

    A good compromise for now, given that you are right that this is an exceptionally gray area, might be to enable patents as usual but have them expire much sooner.

    tumblr_mvlywyLVys1qigwg9o1_250.png
  • Viscount IslandsViscount Islands [INSERT SoKo HERE] Registered User regular
    edited May 2010
    The thing where farmers have their crops contaminated by patented genes, which would naturally happen, and then end up having to pay corporations for it is so messed up.

    I want to do with you
    What spring does with the cherry trees.
Sign In or Register to comment.