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

Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

blog.cloudant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 279 posts

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#91

Post by cickpass_broken »

pg wrote: post #70
oldstrangers wrote: post #2

Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant. "We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now and we couldn’t be more thrilled with the partnership." Thrilled? I guess money is thrilling. "The data & reporting interfaces will be used across Monsanto and should be instrumental in the making of key business decisions." Key business decisions like which small farmer to sue into oblivion? Or what third world nation…

It's an unfortunate sign for HN when the top comment on a thread is such a content-free rant. If the rule is, if x sells something to Monsanto, fuck x, then what you're saying is fuck the entire corporate world, because I'm sure Monsanto buys Apple computers and Chevrolets and Clorox too. It's sort of ridiculous to hold Cloudant to a standard that essentially zero other companies meet. There are frequently inane comm…

Such irony. Your comment seems much in the same style.

Tho oldstrangers vague logic was "by association" I don't think you should assume "if x sells to Monsanto." You can be much more specific in this case, as Cloudant clearly states, "We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now ..." Has Apple, Chevy, Clorox been "working with" Monsanto, or are their products just freely available for purchase?

I find it alarming that you think oldstrangers comment lacks sense. Food and water. That is the basis for human life. Monsanto threatens the freedom and right to access for those necessary things.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#92

Post by vijayr »

drivebyacct2 wrote: post #12

Heh. I didn't know what to expect when I came here, but frankly I was a bit surprised to see the ethical implications of this deal weighed so heavily here. Not that I view the HN community as cut throat necessarily, but certainly often business oriented. Granted this was only posted an hour ago, but I will try to less judgementally provoke a discussion regarding ethics and startups... Is it wrong to even associate wi…

It is a huge negative publicity, to be associated with a company like Monsanto. Not sure if that would affect Cloudant's future business prospects though. We all know of the sweatshops run by companies like Walmart and Nike, lots of people even complain loudly, but those companies seem to be doing very well, year after year.

On the other hand, given the size of Monsanto, there is no doubt that Cloudant could effectively demonstrate their expertise, and use them as a case study for landing big customers in future. Plus, the money must be pretty good.

I guess it isn't our job to judge Cloudant, they are running a business - their business, their choice (moral or not). HN crowd (me included) just can't digest associating with an entity as Monsanto, hence the extreme reaction.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#93

Post by run4yourlives »

pg wrote: post #70
oldstrangers wrote: post #2

Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant. "We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now and we couldn’t be more thrilled with the partnership." Thrilled? I guess money is thrilling. "The data & reporting interfaces will be used across Monsanto and should be instrumental in the making of key business decisions." Key business decisions like which small farmer to sue into oblivion? Or what third world nation…

It's an unfortunate sign for HN when the top comment on a thread is such a content-free rant. If the rule is, if x sells something to Monsanto, fuck x, then what you're saying is fuck the entire corporate world, because I'm sure Monsanto buys Apple computers and Chevrolets and Clorox too. It's sort of ridiculous to hold Cloudant to a standard that essentially zero other companies meet. There are frequently inane comm…

That's a bit of a cop-out.

There's a difference between company A purchasing some of your product and actively bidding to be the sole-source supplier to a major project. As they put it, "Cloudant’s BigCouch will be the core, for both storage and analysis of a new, company-wide platform powering a fundamental aspect of a Fortune 500 business: the analysis & identification of new traits & genomic combinations in agricultural crops."

You can bet that Apple's feet would be put to the fire in just the same way should they release a PR note suggesting they are impressed that Monsanto has decided to convert entirely to OSX/iOS.

The top comment might be a little low on direct substance, but it's high on feedback. It's actually perfect for HN, because it shows that to many people, ethics in business DO matter.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#94

Post by itaborai83 »

SODaniel wrote: post #8
achompas wrote: post #3

Congratulations to Cloudant for signing a big deal. Why work with a company as...ethically ambiguous as Monsanto? I would love to hear how your team decided to accept this deal, and I hope more than dollar signs crossed your minds. Personally, I would start a startup (if I ever have the guts) for freedom. How could dealing with Monsanto differ from wearing golden handcuffs?

Calling Monsanto 'ethically ambiguous' is akin to describing Hitler as a 'colorful leader with sporadic public relations issues'.

Godwin's law - As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#95

Post by shawndrost »

inmygarage wrote: post #16

For those looking for some background on Monsanto, take the time to read through this Vanity Fair article from 2008: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto... .

For another side of Monsanto's story, see Norman Bourlag's speech commemorating Monsanto's committment to rice and wheat breeding[1].

Norman Bourlag's life work was to develop and distribute high-yield crops. He's a Nobel peace prize winner and is often credited with saving over a billion lives. Monsanto is carrying on his work at a scale he always strived for.

People in this field is deeply passionate and morally involved in their work. Read the responses from this Monsanto employee at IAMA[2] -- his earnest attempts to explain his morals and his rationale speak for themselves. These people aren't even naked capitalists (not that I have any problem with that) -- they're empirical environmentalists and humanists.

I'm kind of disappointed to hear Monsanto shrilly decried here. Modern ag is a deeply interesting and controversial topic, but that Vanity Fair piece is just rhetoric and linkbait.

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1w4zM4SouM [2] http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/d83i9/i_work_for_the_m...

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#96

Post by biznickman »

pg wrote: post #70
oldstrangers wrote: post #2

Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant. "We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now and we couldn’t be more thrilled with the partnership." Thrilled? I guess money is thrilling. "The data & reporting interfaces will be used across Monsanto and should be instrumental in the making of key business decisions." Key business decisions like which small farmer to sue into oblivion? Or what third world nation…

It's an unfortunate sign for HN when the top comment on a thread is such a content-free rant. If the rule is, if x sells something to Monsanto, fuck x, then what you're saying is fuck the entire corporate world, because I'm sure Monsanto buys Apple computers and Chevrolets and Clorox too. It's sort of ridiculous to hold Cloudant to a standard that essentially zero other companies meet. There are frequently inane comm…

I agree that the comment is content-free but honestly what did the company expect when they're boasting about their partnership with one of the world's most hated companies?

I'm not exactly alarmed to see this comment at the top because it's ridiculous that the company was dumb enough to issue this press release. We all need to pay our bills but to boast about working with a hated company is just a stupid PR move.

Apple, Facebook, Google, Chevorlet, Clorox, etc, are all not stupid enough to write a press release like this one. Whoever advised them to do so should immediately be fired b/c they clearly don't get PR.

You know what else is hilarious is that they're not only admitting to power one of the most hated aspects of the company (genetic manipulation of seeds), but they're actually touting it as a win for the company.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#97

Post by [deleted] »

dionidium wrote: post #36
inmygarage wrote: post #16

For those looking for some background on Monsanto, take the time to read through this Vanity Fair article from 2008: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto... .

I don't think this article is as damning as many of the commenters seem to think. - The section addressing the lawsuits includes a lot of "farmers say this" type statements. It's not very long on facts. It even admits that some farmers simply aren't aware of their obligations in many cases. The only case that was actually litigated that I'm aware of is Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser -- a case in which the farmer a…

[deleted]

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#98

Post by dionidium »

tptacek wrote: post #69
dionidium wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this article is as damning as many of the commenters seem to think. - The section addressing the lawsuits includes a lot of "farmers say this" type statements. It's not very long on facts. It even admits that some farmers simply aren't aware of their obligations in many cases. The only case that was actually litigated that I'm aware of is Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser -- a case in which the farmer a…

Feel free to correct me on this, as I'm likely to be wrong. Loosely, the way Monsanto's GMO crop system works is, their crops are designed to resist a specific herbicide, which Monsanto also sells. Farmers pay a per-acre licensing fee to use the system, meaning they plant the GMO crops and then bomb their fields with the herbicide to kill everything but the crop, which improves yield. The fact pattern in these Monsan…

It is obviously possible for Monsanto GMO crops to end up in an unsuspecting farmer's field. But it's not possible for a farmer to accidentally use Roundup as an herbicide in that field. If they do that without paying Monsanto, they are trying to get something for nothing. That, to my understanding, is what's motivating the lawsuits.

It's not necessary that the farmer derive any benefit from mis-use of Monsanto's IP for them to be in violation of their contract with the company. They buy the seeds on the condition that they will not reuse them. Full stop. However, it's the case that Monsanto modifies crops in other ways, too (to be resistant to drought, for example [0]), so Roundup use is definitely not the only motivating factor.

[0] http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/09/us-monsanto-corn-i...

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#99

Post by tptacek »

dionidium wrote: post #98
tptacek wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feel free to correct me on this, as I'm likely to be wrong. Loosely, the way Monsanto's GMO crop system works is, their crops are designed to resist a specific herbicide, which Monsanto also sells. Farmers pay a per-acre licensing fee to use the system, meaning they plant the GMO crops and then bomb their fields with the herbicide to kill everything but the crop, which improves yield. The fact pattern in these Monsan…

It is obviously possible for Monsanto GMO crops to end up in an unsuspecting farmer's field. But it's not possible for a farmer to accidentally use Roundup as an herbicide in that field. If they do that without paying Monsanto, they are trying to get something for nothing. That, to my understanding, is what's motivating the lawsuits. It's not necessary that the farmer derive any benefit from mis-use of Monsanto's IP…

In the most famous (only?) case taken to trial, the party accused of breaching Monsanto's IP was in fact using Roundup.

Re: Monsanto chooses Cloudant to power its genome analytics

#100

Post by pornel »

pg wrote: post #70
oldstrangers wrote: post #2

Fuck Monsanto, and by association, fuck Cloudant. "We’ve been working with them for a few weeks now and we couldn’t be more thrilled with the partnership." Thrilled? I guess money is thrilling. "The data & reporting interfaces will be used across Monsanto and should be instrumental in the making of key business decisions." Key business decisions like which small farmer to sue into oblivion? Or what third world nation…

It's an unfortunate sign for HN when the top comment on a thread is such a content-free rant. If the rule is, if x sells something to Monsanto, fuck x, then what you're saying is fuck the entire corporate world, because I'm sure Monsanto buys Apple computers and Chevrolets and Clorox too. It's sort of ridiculous to hold Cloudant to a standard that essentially zero other companies meet. There are frequently inane comm…

It's a false analogy.

Monsanto unilaterally buying generally-available products is a different thing than getting into business partnership and sending happy press release about it.

You don't jail shoe salesman who happened to sell shoes to a criminal, but you jail people who planned the crime together.

If someone is actively, consciously supporting Monsanto at the core of their shady business, then they certainly deserve the hatred that Monsanto gets.

Post reply on HN