Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 241 posts

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#161

Post by dragonwriter »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #154
dragonwriter wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Accepting GMO crops would mean accepting Monsanto No, actually, accepting GMO crops could quite well go along with targeting specific unliked business practices engaged in by Monsanto. > who has a monopoly on the industry No, they don't. They are the biggest player, but there a numerous others, several not much smaller. (There's some concerns that the relations within the industry are cartel-like, and I wouldn't be…

>>No, actually, accepting GMO crops could quite well go along with targeting specific unliked business practices engaged in by Monsanto. Can you explain this? It would seem as the biggest player, they have a huge advantage over other smaller companies. So much so, I couldn't name two other companies who currently compete with them.

>> No, actually, accepting GMO crops could quite well go along with targeting specific unliked business practices engaged in by Monsanto.

> Can you explain this?

The less noise there is about GMOs qua GMOs, the more possible it is to focus attention on Monsanto's (or other GM crop firms') -- or, for that matter, non-GM crop firms -- particular business practices of concern, rather than the kind of technology that goes into creating their product.

> It would seem as the biggest player, they have a huge advantage over other smaller companies. So much so, I couldn't name two other companies who currently compete with them.

Monsanto, I think, gets disproportionate attention for two reasons: (1) it absolute dominates a GM crops in two key markets in the US (virtually all the US GM corn and soy is Monsanto), and its also, of the big GM seed companies, the one that is best known as a big GM seed company, and not as a chemical (etc.) company (though, of course, Monsanto is also a chemical company, so this is completely about perception) -- most people may not think of "GM crops" when they think about DuPont, Dow, BASF, or Bayer, but they're all significant players in the GM industry.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#162

Post by mark-r »

baldfat wrote: post #35
dragonwriter wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely, the first profitable applications will not have anything to do with editing the human genome, as bad been the case for every other technique useful for genetic engineering.

Curing Genetic Defects will be the first use starting with Children. OR they will have a gene that cures Diabetes which will cause a major change in millions of lives. I still think of CRISPER as the new graphine though. Awesome discovery with promise around the corner for years and years.

You don't understand. You won't see any cures, because there's no money in cures - cure somebody and they're no longer a customer. The money's in treatments, so that's where the research goes too.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#163

Post by natrius »

nostrademons wrote: post #145
natrius wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not talking about Bitcoin in particular, nor am I talking about transaction fees . I am talking about transaction costs and blockchains in general. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transaction_cost

Of the categories of transaction cost listed in that article, the only one blockchains address is the policing & enforcement cost. Even then, it only addresses one side of the policing cost: it ensures that the seller receives payment without need for a trusted intermediary, but it does nothing to ensure that the buyer receives a good that is of acceptable quality and performs the function agreed upon.

All of those transaction costs can be handled by decentralized communication backed by reputation systems. Blockchains are great platforms for reputation systems. We will soon see that while it's hard to get systems off the ground that require network effects, making them entirely open and run by no one makes them a great choice for developers and consumers. I expect that decentralization yields its own sort of network effects.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#164

Post by avn2109 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #22
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely the first (profitable) applications will be: changing eye color, hair color, losing fat, changing height, changing skin tone. Billions in each market.

More likely, the first profitable applications will not have anything to do with editing the human genome, as bad been the case for every other technique useful for genetic engineering.

If internet advertising is any guide, there is plenty of demand for baldness cures, penis enlargement, and bigger boobs. These might not be the first applications of genetic modification tech but I suspect they'll be among the commonest.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#165

Post by DustinCalim »

mark-r wrote: post #148
Protostome wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're GMOing crops long before the DNA revolution. Plants were selectively bred for certain qualities since the dawn of agriculture. None of fruits or vegetables we eat in the present (even without GMO) could be found naturally few hundred years ago. We were genetically modifying them without really knowing the mechanism. There some ecological as well as regulatory challenges. That doesn't mean GMO isn't a solid appr…

The magnitude of the changes that are possible now are so far beyond what was available with selective breeding, it's nonsensical to consider them in the same league. I wish people would stop trotting out that argument.

Are you sure? The Chihuahua was bred out of a wolf.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#166

Post by dragonwriter »

mark-r wrote: post #148
Protostome wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're GMOing crops long before the DNA revolution. Plants were selectively bred for certain qualities since the dawn of agriculture. None of fruits or vegetables we eat in the present (even without GMO) could be found naturally few hundred years ago. We were genetically modifying them without really knowing the mechanism. There some ecological as well as regulatory challenges. That doesn't mean GMO isn't a solid appr…

The magnitude of the changes that are possible now are so far beyond what was available with selective breeding, it's nonsensical to consider them in the same league. I wish people would stop trotting out that argument.

> The magnitude of the changes that are possible now are so far beyond what was available with selective breeding, it's nonsensical to consider them in the same league.

The pace, more than magnitude, of changes achievable is greater now (either with GMOs or mutation breeding) than with older forms of selective breeding (mutation breeding is, after all, a form of selective breeding.)

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#167

Post by dragonwriter »

nickbauman wrote: post #140
Protostome wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're GMOing crops long before the DNA revolution. Plants were selectively bred for certain qualities since the dawn of agriculture. None of fruits or vegetables we eat in the present (even without GMO) could be found naturally few hundred years ago. We were genetically modifying them without really knowing the mechanism. There some ecological as well as regulatory challenges. That doesn't mean GMO isn't a solid appr…

Selective breeding is not the same as editing a genome. You cannot "selectively breed" a fish gene into a tomato.

> You cannot "selectively breed" a fish gene into a tomato.

The actual results of breeding and natural selection, including particularly convergent evolution, suggest that its quite possible to achieve equivalent results to that by breeding, though the timescale required, if you are relying on natural mutation as your source of variation, might be very long.

Which is why selection breeding techniques that kick up the pace of mutation with radiation or chemical mutagens are still competitive means of developing new desired traits in a world that has gene editing.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#168

Post by dragonwriter »

beat wrote: post #59
Protostome wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would first want to see people accept GMO crops. Then I'll be willing to think of people going to the doctor to change their eye color.

The problem with GMO is that it's basically a vendor lock-in scheme for agribusiness giants. It's not a good engineering solution to the real food problems we face. Of course, the DONT EAT THE SCIENCE OR IT WILL GIVE YOU THE CANCER political nonsense is wrong. That doesn't let GMO off the hook, though. The problem it attempts to solve, on the surface, is increasing the productivity of monocropping. But productivity i…

> The problem with GMO is that it's basically a vendor lock-in scheme for agribusiness giants.

That may be a problem with the IP regime and some specific common business practices around GMOs, but its not a problem with GMOs qua GMOs -- its a social, not technical, problem.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#169

Post by dragonwriter »

beat wrote: post #159
vinceguidry wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But productivity isn't the problem of our food chain. We can grow plenty of food, and cheaply. We can. The rest of the developing world has a lot of trouble keeping people fed. There's only so much aid can do, but if we can find ways for small-time farmers to produce more, and also to transport those goods, then the rest of the world could feed itself, something small-time agriculture has historically had a lot of…

GMO crops aren't invented for developing world conditions. They're invented for the developed world that can afford them. They're an extension of Green Revolution agriculture ideas. The core of Green Revolution is a focus on cash crops rather than subsistence farming - high intensity monocropping to create raw feedstock for junk food factories in the global market, rather than immediately edible food for local consum…

> GMO crops aren't invented for developing world conditions

There are, in fact, ag biotech firms that have expended resources to develop GMOs for developing world conditions and problems. Of course, there's more money in solving first world problems, attracting more investment, but that's true of pretty much every industry, not something special about GMOs.

Re: Ask HN: What are the greatest discoveries in the last few years?

#170

Post by prewett »

beat wrote: post #159
vinceguidry wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But productivity isn't the problem of our food chain. We can grow plenty of food, and cheaply. We can. The rest of the developing world has a lot of trouble keeping people fed. There's only so much aid can do, but if we can find ways for small-time farmers to produce more, and also to transport those goods, then the rest of the world could feed itself, something small-time agriculture has historically had a lot of…

GMO crops aren't invented for developing world conditions. They're invented for the developed world that can afford them. They're an extension of Green Revolution agriculture ideas. The core of Green Revolution is a focus on cash crops rather than subsistence farming - high intensity monocropping to create raw feedstock for junk food factories in the global market, rather than immediately edible food for local consum…

Could you give some links? I'd love to read about this but can't find anything on Google that talks about anything earlier than 2000.
Post reply on HN