However, back in 2003 he was granted a patent on the prestin molecule. Prestin is a protein found in the inner ear of every mammal.
Oddly enough, it turns out that 20% of the human genome is patented by someone. This of course leads to problems for, among others, drug researchers who cannot create vaccines targeted at specific genetic defects without permission/royalties on patented genes.
In fact, there is a whole slew of problems that were recently addressed in an informative article in the NY Times entitled Patenting Life — which was written by controversial author Michael Crichton. [Note: one of the more humorous comments regarding his piece was at Slashdot]
One of the biggest problems with being allowed to patent biology is that quite simply: no human invented it, let alone the individual(s) laying claim to it. Sure they may have discovered it, but would that not open up the floor to debate on who owns the rights to mitochondria, T-cells, or heaven forbid: proteins found in semen?
The tie in with prestin is that, as the New Scientistnoted, “it may be 10,000 times more efficient at generating power than the best manmade material.”
If Dallos owns an artificial monopoly on it, what could be the negative consequences of his judicious enforcement upon the technology sector?
Unfortunately this looming issue will continually come back to hinder technological and potentially life saving progress, and will invariably effect individual freedoms — after all if you are currently not allowed to do what you want with your own organs, what won’t you be allowed to do with your itty bitty genes?
The developers have released yet another useful feature, to add interconnectedness between your FB account and your websites. It’s called a badge (many other web 2.0 services are creating them too).
It’s a javascript, so end-users end up sucking down a lot of bandwidth FB must pay for. I mention this because aggregated over a long period of time, it will cost a pretty penny to continually load the images every time someone visits your site. Note: this is an internally created application, not one from the newly released API.
If you look at the right side of the front page and scroll down, you will see mine (you can flip through the recent images I’ve uploaded by clicking “prev” or “next”).
I was not aware of this tax subsidized service provided by polymath’s at the New York Public Library. If nothing else, that hotline is definitely going to be used as my “Phone a Friend” option on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.
News.com had a good round-up of funny quotes surrounding the following situation: love bots.
By far the best list came from The Daily Gut. Muy originale. Is the “Realdoll” old fashioned already? And speaking of robots, Ray Kurzweil recently did a live internet chat thingy with the Washington Post and touched on the future of robots.
First rule of promoting a bunch of rules: know what the rules are. Like usual, Colbert does not even have to try to make Congressman George Mitchell look like a critter.
I have mentioned this topic several times, including what I consider perhaps the best non-academic article on the subject from The New Yorker and also a lengthy essay from the Mises Institute. Today’s lesson involves a high school graduation ceremony in North Dallas.
Prior to my younger brother walking across the stage, the principal at his school introduced the valedictorian — a peppy, petite girl. The principal remarked that she and her twin sister (who is graduating 3rd in the class) were both going to attend MIT. Upon hearing this, the entire auditorium let out a collective “WHOA.”
As funny as this sounds, the unseen aspect to the exasperation is that schools such as MIT have done a great job at promoting their pedigree as the gold standard — a lofty position held by the Crème de la Crème.
Other notes of interest:
Podcast lectures for University Students: the instructor does not hold classes anymore, he simply has the students download the lectures and meet in small groups
Educators Vilify Technology In Attempt To Preserve Outdated Model: while I do not support plagiarism, academic dishonesty, cheating or using technology to partake in these behaviors, one wonders when the Ivory Tower will modify the way tests are given (i.e. replace multiple-choice scantron with practical hands-on work experience). Perhaps even a simple essay exam…
Why American College Students Hate Science: while not necessarily revolutionary or breath-taking, this NY Times article shows one way colleges can market STEM more effectively. Note: some argue that there is already an over-supply of scientists and mathematicians saturating the job market
Since my academic allies are few and far between (every techno law professor is apparently pro-net nationalization), I’d like to point out that our good ‘ol friend Bram Cohen of BitTorrent fame has thrown down the gauntlet on the issue. And surprisingly he grasps the economics of scarcity. One down, 300 million more to go.
So the game over six million people play and some consider “the new golf” has been analyzed for Higher Education usage patterns: MapWoW. No big surprises as the largest schools (in terms of enrollment) correlate with a high percentage of student usage.
It is kind of weird to see A&M ranked 13th… why would you attend a college with so many coeds and real-life social networks and then play video games all day?
The Dallas Fed recently published a surprisingly good article on the issue of supply, demand, scarcity and economic intervention within the petroleum market.
Note: the always entertaining MythBusters television show aired an interesting episode on alternative fuels a couple weeks ago. The biodiesel solution made of used cooking oil from french fries worked fairly efficiently (~90%) in an unmodified diesel engine.
I see no economic law being violated or market failure occurring when the concept of “scalping” is lorded around. Every price point above zero is technically “scalping.” There is no thin red line or grey area that this emotionally-based argument can be justifiably used. In fact, among others, investigative reporter John Stossel argues that “price gouging” ensures that scarce resources go only to those who really need it.
With this said, it appears that everyone’s favorite ticket-selling business is now joining the Reality-based community and will auction off back-row seats rather than merely sell at “below market prices.” In effect, they are trying to knock the wind out of the sails of competitors who are reselling their tickets at higher than face value (management just got a memo on the whole “scarcity” thing).
This whole quagmire smacks of ignorance to how prices come about. Although this is a fairly complex issue, it’s a microcosm of socialism in action — the fiat declaration of what something is valued. In fact, I discuss this issue in my recent article on Net Neutrality.
Variable pricing, based upon the relative demand of a service, is effectively used to price cell phone minutes, seats in an airplane, and even where you will sit at a baseball game. Consequently, this is an issue that has been debated for decades by economists, however for a non-academic overview regarding the conundrum in the sport world see: “Case 7.1: Variable Ticket Pricing, Should the Minnesota Twins Catch the Wave?”
A widget is only worth as much as someone is willing to pay for it and apparently, Ticketmaster has been leaving money on the table. While there are numerous statistical methods used for determining how to set prices for products (which try to take into account variables like weather, time of day, location, opponent, etc.), the fact remains that the consumer has the ultimate authority, as they vote for prices with their wallets.
In 1980 astronomer Carl Sagan televised a production he had worked on the previous two years. It was the study of life on the grandest scales as seen with galaxies and at the smallest, as seen with atoms (ala Powers of Ten) — and was appropriately called Cosmos.
I’m not entirely sure how I missed its broadcast and its subsequent showings year after year, however, thanks to the internets, you can see all 13 episodes (with Spanish subtitles no less).
Below are a few comments I noted while watching the first two episodes.
While it is my understanding that there was a revised and updated version recently released last year (the 25th anniversary edition), this edition lacked several notable headline items that would probably excite any astrobiologist such as extrasolar planets.
These were first discovered in 1992 and over 150 have been discovered thus far. While most of these planets are larger than Jupiter, new telescopes are being developed which can shrink the measurable size (mass) to that of earth itself.
In fact, recently a planet merely 5 times the size (mass) of earth was discovered. This is in addition to 3 planets the size of Neptune recently found as well. And while I do not have the resources to fund it, one could argue that this is an area that should be included in any update.
In episode 2, Sagan discusses the Heikegani crab from Japan. Its shell looks like that of a scowling samurai warrior. Apparently over the years it has been a tradition to throw crabs back into the water if their shell looks like this scowling samurai, whereas those that did not were then consumed. And as a result of this artificial selection, many of the crabs populating the sea floor have shells with these scowling warriors on them, simply because they had a chance to reproduce and flourish.
While Sagan then goes on to discuss other parallels in the natural world, one historical note that popped into my head was that of Gresham’s law, “how bad money drives good money out of circulation.” The debasement of currency through fiat has been done through a process of artificial selection. The classic example is the case of dimes and quarters minted prior to 1964; they actually were comprised of about 90% of silver. Post-1964 they were made with copper and nickel. As time passed and people learned of the changes, these denominations were removed from circulation by individuals of every political stripe, creed, religion and so on. Why? Because they were worth more than their replacements which were being pumped into circulation. As a result, the “bad money” effectively drove the “good money” into the safety boxes of history.
Mid-way through the episode, Sagan put together a rather neat illustration of how the “option tree” of life separated into different organisms. He did this through the use of computer morphing and looked vaguely similar to what Will Wright has done with the upcoming game of “Spore.” In fact, this episode highlighted many of the early stages that a player will encounter in the game — from fragile water-bound cell to an intelligent multi-organ creature capable of walking and even flying.
If you missed it, I recall watching a show on the Discovery Channel several years ago that fleshed out Sagan’s theory of life existing in the seemingly inhospitable climates of gas giants. He called these hypothetical organisms, floaters, hunters and sinkers. Neat to see where this original idea first came from — nor is it too far fetched considering extremophiles here on earth.
The only two major distractions I have had thus far is the way Sagan speaks. He sounds and talks a lot like Agent Smith from The Matrix. His slight stammering and accent immediately set a light off in my head — I wonder if he likes the smell of humans?
The other annoyance was his little desk in the spaceship. I don’t quite get how or why he gets up out of his seat to look at the screen. I wonder if subsequent cinematic space operas used this tactic to emphasize dramatic events. While it might have worked for Star Trek Voyager, it really didn’t work on me… he had me with “I fly a space ship the size of a dandelion.”
So where do you get authority to be a bioethicist? Is there some curriculum and instruction you have to master to become an official bioethicist? Or is it simply academic welfare for washed-out has-been pseudo-intellectuals?
I have a theory that anyone can be a bioethicist, just like anyone can be a philosopher, football coach or campfire builder. You just need a mouth and an audience and wham-bam you’re a bonified bioethicist. It’s hard to see any kind of objective or meritable criterion one should posses to be an official expert on “bioethical” issues.
Hell, can you imagine the absurdity of the following conversation:
Cop: sorry to interrupt your evening sir, but we have reports that you were practicing bioethics without a license
Bioethicist: but I submitted the proofs-of-purchase to the local chapter of skull-drudgery
Cop: ahh, but it’s not official unless it’s been notarized by the president of the Super Adventure Club
Actually, if you’ve watched South Park there is one episode that pokes fun of people claiming to be certified telepaths.* Eric Cartman bonks his head and after coming out of a coma, several detectives use him and his supposed “telepathic abilities” to track a serial killer. At one point his is confronted by some yahoos claiming to have similar powers and they complain that he never filled out the necessary forms to be a legitimate telepath.
Anyways, while that is neither here nor there, MSNBC published an article on how some bioethicists’ are concerned with the “social injustice” brought about by medical technologies that allow humanity to live longer, healthier lives.
In truth, the only “social injustice” that occurs with such longevity is when other people coercively prevent individuals from living longer. After all, who can have the authority to tell someone how long they should live, or can live?
I’ve mentioned the terrible god-awful movie, Logan’s Run before. The basic premise is that a small group of humans commits mandatory euthanasia at the age of 30. Their justification is not much different than the bioethicists quoted in the piece.
For instance, a friend noted that this age-longevity debate could be made into a science-fiction critique of modern day fundamentalism: a battle between rabid fundies and the first generation of “immortals.” The plot would likely involve court battles, whereupon judges and juries are asked to make the ethical decision and seek the death penalty for individuals living too long… past their “natural lives.”
“You’ve had your fun on earth, lived a rich and productive life, now make room for a new generation.” - Generalissimo Paul Ehrlich
Fortunately, the late economist Julian Simon did this world a great service by doomslaying many of the fallacies surrounding Malthusian “overpopulation” and a decline in the standard of living that are touted by proponents of anti-longevity (the same supporters who mysteriously receive medical treatment for illnesses and ailments, thus artificially thwarting a “natural death”).
At any rate, I for one am going to practice what I preach and continue working towards prolonging my life, long enough to see the actual retail release of Duke Nukem Forever.
*[Note: the same can be said for any kind of licensed profession whether it is medicine or law. In fact, would it not be insane to hear: "sorry sir, but you were practicing history without a license"?]
Yea, they won a seemingly tough series against the defending champs, in overtime no less. However, despite having been born and raised in Dallas, I will honestly say that I have never been a hard-core fan of the team — I’m no hater either. In fact, I’ve only attended one game (at the mothballed Reunion Arena) and swear that they have lost every game I ever watched on tv (jinx).
With that said, I have followed the last few seasons with a genuinely reserved level of interest, primarily due to my friends’ renewed enthusiasm. I’ve even been known to patronize sports bars during these festive times…
But this kindred spirit was dampened due in part to ESPN’s Skip Bayless spotlight on how Mark Cuban has arguably bullied referee’s into submission at home. No bueno.
Mr. Bayless’s thesis reminded me of an analogy used by one of my economics professors comparing regulation in the market place to officiating in sports. When companies use regulations and State intervention to get their way, it is no different than team managers manipulating officials for their own ends. If the integrity of officiating was a matter of on-field lawyering, then coaches and players would be recruited not based on athleticism or talent, but debate and acting skills.
Last month I discussed organisms that live and thrive in environments that are relatively inhospitable. The California Academy of Sciences has an interesting exhibit in the museum of natural history which illustrates the various alienesque creatures we have living throughout the planet. Be sure to check out the Snottites.
EE Times is reporting that many biologists-cum-engineers are excited about the future uses of nanotechnology in their field. No surprises there.
Oddly enough, economist Arnold Kling points to another study suggesting the trade-offs that both disciplines have and will to continue to encounter. His prediction, biotech will eventually overtake nanotech.