MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Crossposting from D&D
To the left is a wombat. To the right is dried wombat poop.
Wombats shit bricks. Instead of pooping like every other species that poops, where it's either rounded or amorphous (which effectively means it ends up being rounded) they make poops with corners. They produce about 100 cubes of feces a night.
Here's a picture of fresher poop:
Supposedly, why they do this is because they part their territory with their droppings and being cube means they won't roll away. Except that doesn't make sense to me because excrement isn't exactly known for being ambulatory. Rabbits make piles of small round poops and they just sit there. The only times they really roll away is when they get dung beetle assists. Basically, any question of why is just screaming into the void.
But at least we know how it happens now. It's a combination of lack of moisture and irregular wombat intestinal structure that forms them into cubes via pressure differentials and grooves. The fresher picture above with a bit rounder poops probably comes from a zoo where water is plentiful, whereas the dried more discrete cubes are probably from the wild.
aerospace engineer Steven Barrett recently test-flew the first-ever airplane powered with ionic wind thrusters—electric engines that generate momentum by creating and firing off charged particles.
The ion thruster is really the least interesting bit. You can build a tabletop demo ion thruster with toothpicks, some thin wire, and tin foil. I wanted to know how they were powering the thing and still keeping it light enough to fly, but they just skip over that bit with "he did something clever".
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
+1
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
Each subject kept a "stool diary," recording their bowel movements before and after swallowing the LEGO heads. They evaluated the frequency and looseness of their stool based on the research team's Stool Hardness and Transit (SHAT) score. (Who says pediatricians don't have a sense of humor?) After swallowing the toy, they spent the next three days sifting through their own poo to determine when the LEGO head reappeared. The number of days it took to pass and retrieve it was dubbed the Found and Retrieved Time (FART) score.
aerospace engineer Steven Barrett recently test-flew the first-ever airplane powered with ionic wind thrusters—electric engines that generate momentum by creating and firing off charged particles.
The ion thruster is really the least interesting bit. You can build a tabletop demo ion thruster with toothpicks, some thin wire, and tin foil. I wanted to know how they were powering the thing and still keeping it light enough to fly, but they just skip over that bit with "he did something clever".
Well if you can put a glass sphere inside another with ion gas and somehow get the sphere inside to move you have an effecent ion engine
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
3cl1ps3 on
+12
Options
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
I found a cached copy of the "informed consent" form. Along with the transcript from a talk and Q&A he gave at a Hong Kong conference this week, it paints a pretty clear picture of how this guy views medical ethics.
And there's plenty to talk about even without getting bogged down in the technical details (though a cursory look at his conference slides suggests the babies are mosaic at best). It doesn't matter whether or not it was a technical success, because of the way he bypassed ethical oversight, chose a target that was attention grabbing but medically unnecessary, and used the concept of informed consent and parental choice as a coercive instrument.
Tynnan on
+2
Options
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
I found a cached copy of the "informed consent" form. Along with the transcript from a talk and Q&A he gave at a Hong Kong conference this week, it paints a pretty clear picture of how this guy views medical ethics.
Optional?
0
Options
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
I found a cached copy of the "informed consent" form. Along with the transcript from a talk and Q&A he gave at a Hong Kong conference this week, it paints a pretty clear picture of how this guy views medical ethics.
Optional?
Highly. I edited the above comment with some more thoughts and I'll do a more detailed post on it in a few days when I can focus on it.
+2
Options
3cl1ps3I will build a labyrinth to house the cheeseRegistered Userregular
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
I found a cached copy of the "informed consent" form. Along with the transcript from a talk and Q&A he gave at a Hong Kong conference this week, it paints a pretty clear picture of how this guy views medical ethics.
Optional?
Highly. I edited the above comment with some more thoughts and I'll do a more detailed post on it in a few days when I can focus on it.
Yeah. I genuinely think that real or not this dude has just singlehandedly set back the first attempts at clinical trials of CRISPR-based gene editing therapies by at least a decade. It was already going to take awhile to get the technology there but this is going to be the human cloning/eSCs 80's/90's freak-out all over again.
+1
Options
Tynnanseldom correct, never unsureRegistered Userregular
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
I found a cached copy of the "informed consent" form. Along with the transcript from a talk and Q&A he gave at a Hong Kong conference this week, it paints a pretty clear picture of how this guy views medical ethics.
Optional?
Highly. I edited the above comment with some more thoughts and I'll do a more detailed post on it in a few days when I can focus on it.
Yeah. I genuinely think that real or not this dude has just singlehandedly set back the first attempts at clinical trials of CRISPR-based gene editing therapies by at least a decade. It was already going to take awhile to get the technology there but this is going to be the human cloning/eSCs 80's/90's freak-out all over again.
The only difference between this, and Jesse Gelsinger almost twenty years ago, is that Mr. Gelsinger died. The structural and ethical problems that caused his death are all present here.
I believe it like I believe the Raelians cloned a baby in 2002. If they actually did it baby Eve would now be 16 years old.
This is a lot more believable than human cloning. I'm not saying I believe it (although the fact that the data he presented all suggest that it didn't actually work correctly does make it more believable), but we do have the technology to do what he did, whereas cloning a human and bringing it to term is far more technically challenging.
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
So hey a scientist is China is claiming he used CRISPER to genetically modify some babies who were born last week, and more that will soon be born. Its a HUGE breach of ethics, and scientists are trying too get his research to see if hes telling the truth or full of it, but if he did...it will be the start of some huge and potentially world changing stuff.
I dunno, maybe this is just me being old, but everything about this is terrifying.
You're right to feel that way.
This isn't the sort of thing that you see in the Apocalypse Movie Intro Montage. Its scope is small and it's not going to advance our knowledge of gene editing to any degree. It is horrifying, though, because the investigator placed himself into the trust of his research subjects and then violated that trust in order to acquire fame. This sort of ethical breach is far too common, and in this case will greatly set back a field that, with the proper considerations to safety and necessity, could have served to help people. The best outcome we can hope for is that the subjects grow up healthy, and that we as a society develop better ways to express the relationship between researcher and subject without descending into coercion.
Honestly the worst thing about that isn't even the ethics violations, it's that there will be 10-15 more years of people being born with Huntington's and other serious congenital issues due to said ethical violations. That motherfucker probably caused thousands of people pretty severe quality of life issues.
during the debut demonstration of the International Space Station’s new AI-powered robot, CIMON, the free-floating device displayed some rather questionable behavior.
... Ok honestly I don't really care about the Kraftwerk.
during the debut demonstration of the International Space Station’s new AI-powered robot, CIMON, the free-floating device displayed some rather questionable behavior.
... Ok honestly I don't really care about the Kraftwerk.
Well it is a German talking to a German made robot it knows Kraftwerk all to well
My son asked me some questions about the size of our sun, it's size relative to other stars, that kind of stuff. So I showed him a YouTube video of the scale of the universe and when it hit the red giants his jaw dropped. I understand the feeling.
JedocIn the scupperswith the staggers and jagsRegistered Userregular
Oh, no! I'm afraid that most of the music circuits in my brain are clogged up with a couple of decades of Dr. Demento. My alzheimer's is going to be just the weirdest trip.
Well..
The article in question should have reported 'girls more likely to report feeling lonely than boys' by the looks of it.
I'm not sure this highlights garbage science reporting really, rather than the pervasive nature of expectations of masculinity.
You might think that this discussing this article with a bunch of highly trained scientists would result in a fascinating exploration of the phenomenal possibilities of this technology
Using the new technique, the researchers can create any shape and structure they want by patterning a polymer scaffold with a laser. After attaching other useful materials to the scaffold, they shrink it, generating structures one thousandth the volume of the original.
These tiny structures could have applications in many fields, from optics to medicine to robotics, the researchers say. The technique uses equipment that many biology and materials science labs already have, making it widely accessible for researchers who want to try it.
What actually occurred was a wide-ranging and animated argument about how many sequels there were to Honey I Shrunk The Kids
(but it's still a really fucking cool thing that people are doing).
... oh great, now I remembered Coco and I'm crying
It's incredible the difference in that guy it makes. He's barely responsive, then music, then his face lights up, he can answer questions... Quite remarkable
Evidence for branched feathers has been established in pterosaurs
The statistically most likely result (Fig. 3 and Supplementary Table 3; highest log-likelihood value) shows that the avemetatarsalian ancestors of dinosaurs and pterosaurs possessed integumentary filaments, with the highest likelihood of possessing monofilaments; tufts of filaments (especially brush-type filaments) are less likely ancestral states.
Posts
To the left is a wombat. To the right is dried wombat poop.
Wombats shit bricks. Instead of pooping like every other species that poops, where it's either rounded or amorphous (which effectively means it ends up being rounded) they make poops with corners. They produce about 100 cubes of feces a night.
Here's a picture of fresher poop:
Supposedly, why they do this is because they part their territory with their droppings and being cube means they won't roll away. Except that doesn't make sense to me because excrement isn't exactly known for being ambulatory. Rabbits make piles of small round poops and they just sit there. The only times they really roll away is when they get dung beetle assists. Basically, any question of why is just screaming into the void.
But at least we know how it happens now. It's a combination of lack of moisture and irregular wombat intestinal structure that forms them into cubes via pressure differentials and grooves. The fresher picture above with a bit rounder poops probably comes from a zoo where water is plentiful, whereas the dried more discrete cubes are probably from the wild.
So now you know too.
The ion thruster is really the least interesting bit. You can build a tabletop demo ion thruster with toothpicks, some thin wire, and tin foil. I wanted to know how they were powering the thing and still keeping it light enough to fly, but they just skip over that bit with "he did something clever".
https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/11/it-takes-about-two-days-for-legos-to-pass-through-the-body-science/
This will be here until I receive an apology or Weedlordvegeta get any consequences for being a bully
Well if you can put a glass sphere inside another with ion gas and somehow get the sphere inside to move you have an effecent ion engine
https://www.wired.com/story/he-jiankui-crispr-babies-bucked-own-ethics-policy/
It's all so depressing.
Few things to point out:
1) The claims haven't been independently verified, so this could all be total bullshit.
2) If the claims are true, it only partially worked (because duh, everyone who's ever even read about CRISPR could have told you that), and could have actually seriously fucked up one of the kids.
3) If the claims are true, this is some Tuskegee Experiment level unethical shit and it's going to move the timetable on CRISPR therapeutics even further into the future as regulators around the world slam panic legislation through.
I found a cached copy of the "informed consent" form. Along with the transcript from a talk and Q&A he gave at a Hong Kong conference this week, it paints a pretty clear picture of how this guy views medical ethics.
And there's plenty to talk about even without getting bogged down in the technical details (though a cursory look at his conference slides suggests the babies are mosaic at best). It doesn't matter whether or not it was a technical success, because of the way he bypassed ethical oversight, chose a target that was attention grabbing but medically unnecessary, and used the concept of informed consent and parental choice as a coercive instrument.
Optional?
Highly. I edited the above comment with some more thoughts and I'll do a more detailed post on it in a few days when I can focus on it.
Yeah. I genuinely think that real or not this dude has just singlehandedly set back the first attempts at clinical trials of CRISPR-based gene editing therapies by at least a decade. It was already going to take awhile to get the technology there but this is going to be the human cloning/eSCs 80's/90's freak-out all over again.
The only difference between this, and Jesse Gelsinger almost twenty years ago, is that Mr. Gelsinger died. The structural and ethical problems that caused his death are all present here.
This is a lot more believable than human cloning. I'm not saying I believe it (although the fact that the data he presented all suggest that it didn't actually work correctly does make it more believable), but we do have the technology to do what he did, whereas cloning a human and bringing it to term is far more technically challenging.
I dunno, maybe this is just me being old, but everything about this is terrifying.
Nah it's super fucked up.
You're right to feel that way.
This isn't the sort of thing that you see in the Apocalypse Movie Intro Montage. Its scope is small and it's not going to advance our knowledge of gene editing to any degree. It is horrifying, though, because the investigator placed himself into the trust of his research subjects and then violated that trust in order to acquire fame. This sort of ethical breach is far too common, and in this case will greatly set back a field that, with the proper considerations to safety and necessity, could have served to help people. The best outcome we can hope for is that the subjects grow up healthy, and that we as a society develop better ways to express the relationship between researcher and subject without descending into coercion.
https://gizmodo.com/in-video-debut-cimon-the-iss-robot-throws-an-unexpecte-1830768737
... Ok honestly I don't really care about the Kraftwerk.
The screen quickly corrects that notion.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Well it is a German talking to a German made robot it knows Kraftwerk all to well
Man, that shit was so bad-ass when I was 7.
https://imgur.com/gallery/FRDAoG3
PSN:Furlion
https://bigthink.com/news/ever-get-the-tingles-from-listening-to-good-music-that-part-of-your-brain-will-never-get-lost-to-alzheimers
... oh great, now I remembered Coco and I'm crying
This will be here until I receive an apology or Weedlordvegeta get any consequences for being a bully
Well..
The article in question should have reported 'girls more likely to report feeling lonely than boys' by the looks of it.
I'm not sure this highlights garbage science reporting really, rather than the pervasive nature of expectations of masculinity.
http://news.mit.edu/2018/shrink-any-object-nanoscale-1213
What actually occurred was a wide-ranging and animated argument about how many sequels there were to Honey I Shrunk The Kids
(but it's still a really fucking cool thing that people are doing).
It's incredible the difference in that guy it makes. He's barely responsive, then music, then his face lights up, he can answer questions... Quite remarkable
Ah yes, seismonology...
For context, this was the poster section name printed by the largest geophysics conference in the world, with I think over 25,000 people this year