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

Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–218 of 218 posts

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#211

Post by mentos »

dang wrote: post #51
mentos wrote: post #2

I think this could have far greater dangers in the creation of super diseases. How long until China turns this into a weapon by creating a virus with the spread of a common cold and the devastation of Ebola?

Taking this thread straight into nationalistic flamewar is wildly off topic and outright vandalism on this site. I'm sure you didn't mean it intentionally but please don't do this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Wasn't the intention, insert in place of China

Please delete the comment as I do not seem to be able to.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#212

Post by bastawhiz »

marviel wrote: post #97
bastawhiz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should never avoid discovering something out of the fear that it could be misused. We have an imperative to learn all that is learnable and then use the findings to ensure safety and develop countermeasures. Otherwise, someone else will discover it and we will be unprepared. Top scientists would struggle to create a super disease today. Worrying that a kid will do it when the technology is commoditized is putting…

Would you stand by your initial statement provided the discovery was something which was certain to eliminate all life?

Yes I would.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#213

Post by dang »

ethbro wrote: post #204
dang wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

anigbrowl is right. Please don't post in the outrage style to HN. Your comments would be more persuasive for being less flamey. This is a case of medium-is-the-message. Also, please don't use quotes to make it look like you're quoting someone when you're not. That's also a flamewar trope and a vector in the unwanted direction.

Apologies. I'd be in favor of removing the first line, and decapitalizing THAT. I feel everything else stands as content. I'll try to limit double quotes to avoid confusion, though I was under the impression quote consensus was > demarked. I'd certainly characterize my reaction as incredulous and shocked. I re-read the parent 3 times to make sure I wasn't misunderstanding their point. I realize we're not making progr…

I think you misinterpreted sgc's comment to mean that everything about the industrial revolution was bad. More likely it meant that some things, not all, were bad. Of course sgc didn't specify what things—which made that comment pretty unsubstantive. Still, that's no reason to go on a flamewar tangent.

The site guidelines try to address this like so: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#214

Post by danieltillett »

beginningguava wrote: post #171
danieltillett wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very droll. Nice elude to dysgenics [0]. 0. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dysgenics

why would evolution stop at the neck? If intelligence isn't heritable and has nothing to do with genetics, please teach a paramecium how to do quantum physics and I'll give you a million dollars

Why would you think that I thought it did?

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#215

Post by IWeldMelons »

laretluval wrote: post #89
marktangotango wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The equivocation to programming language is misleading, it implies the “language” is context free or context sensitive when dna is probably on the order of natural language complexity (posits I).

DNA is less formally complex than natural language. Natural language is somewhere between context-sensitive and context-free. Valid DNA sequences are fully characterized by {Start codon + {Amino Acid}* + Stop codon}*, a regular language.

Yes, however the "machine" that executes the code< namely the physical world is not deterministic and not a Turing machine, generally, at least because it is governed by unpredictable quantum effects.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#216

Post by code_beers »

albertgoeswoof wrote: post #164
code_beers wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That talking point has already been attempted by others. Using one term, genetic modification, for several completely different processes doesn’t hide the truth, it just confuses people. And no, grafting entire sections of bacterial DNA into plant genomes absolutely does not happen in nature. Please read the link, then get back to me with any actual scientifically founded refutations you may have. Citations are throu…

The site you linked to is from this guy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_M._Smith Who has written 2 anti GMO books and made a movie about it. It’s a direct conflict of interest, there’s no point in reading what he writes because it’s obviously biased. He’s not a scientist either and the Institute for Responsible Technology is just his personal blog.

No citations from you either. How about some peer-reviewed studies proving their long-term safety rather than ad hominem attacks on an author pointing out scientific studies proving actual harms? I’ll say it to you, too: Read the damn citations and get back to me with your own.

And now having written a book about a subject which you are knowledgeable about and writing about that subject online together form a “conflict of interest”? Sure, but trusting studies funded by the food industry stating food industry products are safe for consumption by the entire population with absolutely zero long-term safety studies is completely sensible.

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#217

Post by code_beers »

mr_toad wrote: post #156
code_beers wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That talking point has already been attempted by others. Using one term, genetic modification, for several completely different processes doesn’t hide the truth, it just confuses people. And no, grafting entire sections of bacterial DNA into plant genomes absolutely does not happen in nature. Please read the link, then get back to me with any actual scientifically founded refutations you may have. Citations are throu…

> Using one term, genetic modification, for several completely different processes doesn’t hide the truth, it just confuses people. That’s exactly what the article you linked to does too. The takeaway is that any alteration to the genome of food is bad.

The article could have definitely been more specific. Good thing there are citations with all the specifics you could ask for...

Re: Deformities Alarm Scientists Racing to Rewrite Animal DNA

#218

Post by code_beers »

zilian wrote: post #146
code_beers wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...What future of humanity? Call me cynical, but we seem absolutely bound on wiping ourselves out one way or another. Our focus on money above all else is killing us all. We’re playing useless games, winning useless tokens, and spending them on useless prizes, all inside an arcade that’s on fire. Climate change, GMO foods, overpopulation, water pollution, nuclear war, ecosystem destruction, we’ll find a way eventuall…

Listing all hard problems is a common trope/trend we see often these days with doomsayers. Is it an excuse to be a nihilist and not act on those problems ?

Not at all, and I did not intend to give that impression. But that “list of hard problems” contains things which are MORE LIKELY THAN NOT to kill us all. Climate change, in particular.

I don’t advise inaction. But I’d be a hypocrite if I said I’m personally doing anything to change it. I’m just trying to live my life and get by. Problem is, that’s EVERYONE.

So if we’re headed off a cliff, and nobody is grabbing the wheel... Where’s the hope? Why would humanity have a sudden change of heart, come together, solve our shared problems, and move forward with a plan that could actually prevent climate change? How would we get everyone to do that simultaneously?

Because if anyone can answer that question, they’ve just saved the world. And if nobody can...

Post reply on HN