0
chwe

Daily (tech related) news diet

Recommended Posts

@chwe I've read your post before souper , I didn't read the whole story ...

During souper, watching TV, the same subject comes there in the news ...

In summary from Canadian's news, this chinese scientist is braking ethic rules a lot, the reportage says that if he would do what it did in Canada, he could ended-up with 10 years of prison.

I hope those "newly baken childs" won't become "monsters" since "crisp" isn't safe at all !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

probably in most countries around the world. China has the most liberal laws when it comes to genetics.. Might be a reason why a bunch of researchers in this area moved to China.. :rolleyes:

 

On 11/28/2018 at 2:21 AM, martinayotte said:

I hope those "newly baken childs" won't become "monsters" since "crisp" isn't safe at all !

Depends on definition. :rolleyes: As far as I know (and I'm neither an expert in genetics nor crispr), crispr as a technique should be save.. But I would assume we're far away from a complete understanding of our DNA... So we might 'cut out' peaces which shouldn't be cut out.

 

[this part may be a bit 'too general' but I think it's better not going too much into details here...]

Our DNA is the 'blueprint' for all the proteins and they organize then 'more or less' everything else. 3 nuclebases (T, A, C, G - called a codon) from our DNA coding for one amino-acid and a bunch of amino-acids 'glued' together together (sometimes) with some modifications form a protein.

dnacode.gif

There's some more stuff involved (e.g. RNA) but let's be simple here. Except Methionine (Met) there's always more than one combination which ends in for the same amino acid - nature is smart here, we've redundancy... But there are still possibilities which are not here in this list (e.g. AAA) this parts were called 'junk DNA' in the past before we figured out that it isn't junk... At least not all of it..

It's still not fully clear what the purpose of those non-coding areas of our DNA is for.. We might need it even when we don't understand (yet) what it is for. Also knock out a protein which might save this kids from HI-Virus might not be 'as cool' as you think.. Maybe the same protein has another job which we still need.. Well, only time can tell us if it was a 'good idea'. I personally think we shouldn't mess too much with stuff we don't understand. Interestingly, in a lot of tech-forums/ tech-sites the comments below such articles were more open to modify ourselfs.. Partly arguing with stuff like: humans don't have evolution pressure anymore that's why we should start to 'optimize' ourselfs cause nature can't help us anymore.. What an arrogant position and IMO complete bull shit! There's still evolutionary pressure, maybe not the same kind of pressure a bacteria has.. But not the same doesn't mean ours is weaker.. It's just a different one.

 

Personally I think let humans be humans, rice be rice and corn be corn, I'm not a big fan of GMO food (and newly GMO babies) but our American friend here might have a different opinion on this.. :P It solves us some problems, but it might open new ones in the future (a bit like nuclear plants :lol:)..

 

On 11/28/2018 at 2:21 AM, martinayotte said:

with 10 years of prison.

well but he's still the first..

 

I think this liberal stand-point on genetics 'motivated' researcher to try something like that. If you think you don't have to fear the consequences for doing something like that, you might do it. Let's see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to eat organic when available and cost effective.  I also grow my own vegetables in the summer.  I also cut all the high-fructose corn syrup and a lot of sugar out of my diet, unless I need something to mix my rum or whisky with.  :lol:

 

Playing with genetics seems a risky game, but then again scientists love diving into the unknown and the loud ones live lives of pure hubris, thinking their tiny addition to the sum of humanity's knowledge somehow makes them a god.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I made bacteria lightening green years ago.. :D Am I god now?:ph34r::lol:

 

iynetvhle9yz.jpg

 

The gene came from some animals living in the ocean and expressed in a bunch of different cells.. mostly bacteria like E. Coli...

If you now freak around with this gene-sequence you'll end like this:

800px-FPbeachTsien.jpg

 

Quote

The diversity of genetic mutations is illustrated by this San Diego beach scene drawn with living bacteria expressing 8 different colors of fluorescent proteins (derived from GFP and dsRed)

 

 

but it's not just joking around making pictures with bacteria you normally find in your toilet...  Normally you add those GFP gene-sequences to something interesting. E.g to a protein of interest. With a fluorescence-microscope you can now look were this protein is:

120217-occludin-fluorescent-protein.jpg

 

or when attached to cells in animals it looks like this:

769px-GFP_Mice_01.jpg

and no, that's not photoshop... those mice 'light' up green when exposed to UV light. Normally such experiments are strictly controlled, you're not allowed to manipulate a mouse without clearance from the govt. You write a proposal and govt. and people related to ethics check it if it's ethically acceptable and if it's worth. In china the 'bars' for such an approval are lower that's why a lot of researcher in this field moved to China. I've never worked with animals so I never had to deal with such proposals.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Behold the @chwe!  He brought light to the Goo!

 

16 hours ago, chwe said:

those mice 'light' up green when exposed to UV light

I see no downside to fluorescent mice and rats, as long as the genes don't make them poisonous to all the benefiting cats.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2018/12/15/the-face-in-the-feces-nature-paper-hides-trumps-visage-in-a-monkey-turd/

 

well read it on your own.. I better don't comment on this one..

 

Only thing I can tell you cause I've access to the full-paper (paywall).. it is there, it's not some sort of a 'hoax'.. chance that this happens 'by mistake' are rather low cause you normally check your stuff really well before send it to nature (they only accept roughly 10% of the stuff which people want to publish in it... ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

German politicians may realize that collecting too much data can bite them back... :rolleyes:

 

https://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Gehackte-Daten-Politiker-beklagen-schweren-Angriff-auf-die-Demokratie-4265847.html (German)

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2019/01/04/germany_mass_hack_merkel/ (English)

 

Quote

"Contact details such as hundreds of mobile phone numbers and addresses of politicians from the Bundestag and partly also from state politics were reported,"

 

Besides politicians (from most parties except the one which sits on the right side of the Bundestag) also journalists and a few comedians were targeted. Welcome to #Neuland! They might realize that data collection isn't always the best option.. Just a few weeks back Germany's 'Digital State Minister' claimed that privacy in health care data blocks the country from 'being on top in digitization'.. (https://www.onlinepc.ch/business/digitalisierung/datenschutz-blockiert-digitales-gesundheitswesens-1664217.html) well, hopefully all her friends in the party which have a leaked phone numbers tell her that privacy isn't such a bad thing.. :rolleyes: (I've no idea if her number was leaked as well, but it might help her to understand how much privacy is worth)...

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don`t ever give your kids a name, use a whistle sound instead. You`ll spare them a lot of misery.

`Hey pfwwwtwt, go help pfjuttfju do the dishes.`


That`s what you get when `professional politicians` take decisions what should be made by professionals in the given domain. They know almost nothing about it, in times where everything keeps getting more complicated.
And listening to experts isn`t their best aspect. They must always know better...
 

Germany + collecting data = bad memories

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, NicoD said:

That`s what you get when `professional politicians` take decisions what should be made by professionals in the given domain.

well we have what you would call a militia parliament.. It's not always that they understand stuff better.. :ph34r: But hey.. data is the new oil.. we might need a few exxon valdez'es or deep water horizons to figure out how this new oil is handled safely..

some other bad jokes..

  • we don't understand it fully yet but let's build up a cartel (that's some years ago for the real oil)...
  • wherever the pipeline goes.. someone is upset
  • once it's in the environment it needs years until it disappears..

seems that this 'dataset' also contains information of their kids (account-names etc.), maybe this helps them a bit to understand the issue better...

 

cloud-cloud-cloud-everywhere.jpg

 

feeling like grandpa simpson

old.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, chwe said:

may realize that collecting too much data can bite them back

I suppose this a call from you against: Vorratsdatenspeicherung

While in this case no Internet-Provider where hacked, they mention AWS, Twitter and such instead.

 

As nobody from the right side was attacked, it looks to me like a strike to the left. Well, the Munich guy who kicked Linux away in favor of Microsoft  got hopefully hacked too :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As those doing in science know, Elsevier journals tend to be rather expensive (so for example Tetrahedron, one in my field has an annual subscription fee of ~14k $ for print :ph34r: - keep in mind, normally you read through ~10-50 different journals of your field to get a broad overview of what happens, doesn't mean that you read everything of them it's more like cherry-picking the hopefully good commits) but also often qualitative... Since years libraries and universities complain about those fees but Elsevier didn't really listen to them... This might change in the future cause more and more universities just drop the journal fully or partly (means that they try to publish their results elsewhere, don't provide free peer-review to their journals anymore and don't buy those unlimited access contracts anymore). Nevertheless even journal editors now leave elsevier to found a competitive journal which will be open access..

 

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/14/elsevier-journal-editors-resign-start-rival-open-access-journal

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for whatever reason a 'clone gene-sequence into animal and express it' paper got some media attention:

https://futurism.com/genetically-modified-chickens-cancer-drug/

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-46993649

 

for those not so familiar with this.. it's not the first time.. people already cloned a spider gene coding for the fiber proteins into goats (no not tom brady :D).. and a few other.. The goal is always to produce *random proteins* cheaper as when you do it in cell cultures. Depending on which cells you must use for it, keeping them alive isn't as easy - people try to use cells like E. coli as often as possible, unfortunately those bacteria cells can't 'grow' everything, bacteria is a rather simple organism.. not able to do the same post-transnational modifications as eukaryotes.. Keeping eukaryotes alive in cell culture medium is expensive (e.g. a lot of work to keep everything sterile).. let an animal do the job might be cheaper as a 'living bioreactor'.. somehow similar to the vaccines and their first trials.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

happens when you take a nap during your statistic courses.. seeing A, thinking about B and conclude C.. :lol: Unfortunately, it's not only he who should be blamed for it.. Quite a long time we tried to fit every storm, hot weather period, *random climatic phenomena* into this 'climate change thing'.. Not as surprisingly people don't believe it anymore.. The worst thing you can do to a field of science is to steal its trustworthiness.. And at least for a (growing) fraction of the population we must conclude that we achieved this since a few years now.. Well done... :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, it becomes a problem when we get a hurricane that is a 10 or 25 year phenomenon:. "OMG global warming", and then the same people say "So what if Michigan is an icicle? That's just weather". Both sides practice this fallacy, and both sound stupid doing it, it is destructive to science itself, not to mention making world leaders look stupid.


Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, TonyMac32 said:

not to mention making world leaders look stupid.

well, I'm quite confident that they don't need 'our help' in those days to look stupid.. :ph34r::lol:

 

In case someone asks it's mostly the Austrians and the Germans fault why we can observe greenhouse gases (Boltzmann & Planck). :lol: For those wanna lock smarter as they are...  A heretical explanation which 'works' is that every gas consisting more than two atoms is a greenhouse gas (e.g. the famous CO2). To be a greenhouse gas, a gas has to absorb near-IR radiation. If you dive now into quantum physics, only so called vibrational& vibrational-rotational transition which change the dipole moment of a molecule are allowed. If you compare now CO2 (greenhouse gas) and N2 (not a greenhouse gas):

bookchap7-23.gif

Carbon dioxide has two normal modes (2&3) which end in a change of the dipole moment (and one mode without such a change) whereas Nitrogen gas hasn't such a normal mode (only a symmetric stretch). But before we dive more into smart ass mode... :D I'm by no mean an expert in quantum mechanics I'm more like Dwayne Johnson in No pain no gain... :D Luckily, smarter people at Harvard rolled the topic better up that I could do it ever on myself from a quantum mechanical standpoint. Feel free to dive into it:

http://acmg.seas.harvard.edu/people/faculty/djj/book/bookchap7.html

They don't try to make up conclusions which their data doesn't cover.. They just try to explain it for people at least somehow able to understand quantum mechanics basically. Unfortunately there aren't as many 'scientific journalists' around the world to analyze and understand scientific papers to come to the right conclusion. In fact they mostly try to catch up some 'dramatic looking' sentences inside a publication to get some attention assuming that every sentence in a publication is so 'well-crafted' that it must be still valid if you change it a little bit. A *random expert* adds then some other dramatic sentences as well and there you get your 'it's the global warming, stupid'-article..  Small hint, not every scientific publication is on such a high level and it needs a lot of skills to break down such an article to make it understandable for the average joe and still being scientifically correct. Unfortunately it often ends in "reading A, thinking it means B and conclude C".. Maybe we could do better try to explain what our research tries to achieve in a manner that the 'average joe' also partly understands what we're doing... Not every detail, but at least partly..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://medium.com/@jeffreypbezos/no-thank-you-mr-pecker-146e3922310f

:ph34r::lol:

 

seriously? As head of a crappy newspaper you write a mail to jeff bezos hopping that he gets silent once he knows that you've a dickpic of him? With a, whenever you talk about it we'll release the dickpic move in the end??

Quote

6. In the case of a breach of the agreement by one or more of the Bezos Parties, AM is released from its obligations under the agreement, and may publish the Unpublished Materials.

 

you better don't use amazon services for your newspapers it might have some 'maintenance shutdowns' the next days... :lol: But here's a blackmailer 101 course for you.. Your target has to believe that the issue is solved after it accepts your deal. Means he gets back the dickpic and is save for the future.. Claiming that you'll keep the pics anyway isn't a smart move.. Cause people don't want to fear that those pics are released in the future.. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0