Live data from Hacker News

The Dire Wolf Is Back

newyorker.com

61–70 of 208 posts

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the beginning, only "a few wealthy people" could afford cars. This does not seem like a very good argument against anything new.

Yeah, as if we're all going to be riding dire wolves and mammoths to work in a few years...

We'll perhaps visit them at the zoo.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, as if we're all going to be riding dire wolves and mammoths to work in a few years...

We'll perhaps visit them at the zoo.

Oh, good, so when that happens they'll be making some flimsy claims about conservation and combating climate change to justify creating a poor imitation of Jurassic Park that wealthy and middle class people can visit.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#64
post #57

Here's[0] a recent editorial about Colossal, the company behind this. Basically, they make some flimsy claims about conservation and combating climate change to justify creating a poor imitation of Jurassic Park. Naturally, there's some real moral dilemmas that they gloss over in pursuit of the money a few wealthy people will pay to be able to say "I saw a Mammoth!" [0]: https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/04/editor…

Why would a zoo or something just be for wealthy people

Investors expect returns on the hundreds of millions of dollars they've invested.

At best, it'll be a very expensive zoo.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#65

Here's[0] a recent editorial about Colossal, the company behind this. Basically, they make some flimsy claims about conservation and combating climate change to justify creating a poor imitation of Jurassic Park. Naturally, there's some real moral dilemmas that they gloss over in pursuit of the money a few wealthy people will pay to be able to say "I saw a Mammoth!" [0]: https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/04/editor…

Every project I've seen of theirs has been like this one: take an existing animal and tweak its genome very slightly to make it look kinda like the extinct one, then declare that they've brought back the extinct species. Never mind that it's still just a wolf with 14 very specific genes tweaked.

That could be just a limitation of the current technology and one that they're working on fixing—maybe some day they plan to bring back large amounts of lost genetic diversity—but their PR around it definitely communicates that they see this as the de-extinction project itself, which sure does make it look like they're only really interested in building a zoo, not actually rebuilding true biodiversity.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#67
post #4

Containing fragments doesn't mean this is a dire wolf, or does it? Biological categories like species are fuzzy anyway. There is tremendous variation within each species. But where do you draw a line? It's something that perhaps has more in common with a dire wolf than extant wolves. Maybe it looks like one. Does it act like one? Do we have any way of knowing?

I have to agree. While this is a very cool achievement and I'm excited to see what this company does next, it seems disingenuous to claim they brought a species back from extinction. The pups are still genetically much more like modern wolves than they are dire wolves.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#68
post #59

Here's[0] a recent editorial about Colossal, the company behind this. Basically, they make some flimsy claims about conservation and combating climate change to justify creating a poor imitation of Jurassic Park. Naturally, there's some real moral dilemmas that they gloss over in pursuit of the money a few wealthy people will pay to be able to say "I saw a Mammoth!" [0]: https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/04/editor…

The mammoth is the big PR project but Colossal is working on a number of species, and the idea is the research will enable us to easily "de-extinct" or prop up the population of any number of species if and when they're in danger.

Any number of species?

Maybe in theory, but propping up an entire ecosystem in collapse is well beyond Colossal's reach and incentives. This money and research would be better spent preventing the ecosystems from collapsing in the first place.

If we fix climate change, I could see an argument for investing in restoring the ecosystems that were destroyed. But 'de-extincting' a species without addressing the root causes of that extinction is idiocy.

Realizing this, these types will give up on re-introducing the original organism and instead create a bioengineered version that can survive in the changed world. I fear this path will not end well for us.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#69
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mammoth is the big PR project but Colossal is working on a number of species, and the idea is the research will enable us to easily "de-extinct" or prop up the population of any number of species if and when they're in danger.

Any number of species ? Maybe in theory, but propping up an entire ecosystem in collapse is well beyond Colossal's reach and incentives. This money and research would be better spent preventing the ecosystems from collapsing in the first place. If we fix climate change, I could see an argument for investing in restoring the ecosystems that were destroyed. But 'de-extincting' a species without addressing the root caus…

Climate change is only one reason for extinctions. Humans also tend to hunt a lot of things out of existence, like the dodo, that Colossal is also trying to bring back.

Re: The Dire Wolf Is Back

#70
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a zoo or something just be for wealthy people

Investors expect returns on the hundreds of millions of dollars they've invested. At best, it'll be a very expensive zoo.

They could just get the government to pay the company gobs of money for conservation efforts...
Post reply on HN