Hard News: That Buzzing Sound
757 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 13 14 15 16 17 … 31 Newer→ Last
-
But no, Google shows me it is true, how wonderful.
I'm going to have to go with "phew", since I've put it in my dissertation.
-
Besides, only hippies and weirdos cycle to work, whereas Great Rides will be ridden by tourists, with their lovely overseas currency..
Key on 3 News just confirmed they had access to rail corridors through Ontrack to build the cycleways in - so no possibility now that we could actually develop a good rail network for the trainspotter tourists (or even locals)
-
-
Ok, Ok, back to work to make a Frankenmato - well I would but I need to figure out the "benefit to New Zealand" and confirm "end user support" first but just as soon as I've done that... oh and filled out the safety impact form... oops I need to enter the project into SAP... and fill out the projected budget sheets for the next 5 years ... and sort out the development of human resources ... er what was I doing again...
-
Key on 3 News just confirmed they had access to rail corridors through Ontrack to build the cycleways in - so no possibility now that we could actually develop a good rail network for the trainspotter tourists (or even locals)
Yep there goes the East Coast line from Palmerston to Gisborne. More trucks on the road than ever.
-
you see, this is why Steven Joyce is so darn dangerous. The thread starts off with Christine Rankine but ends up with different types of Greens scratching each others' eyes out over soy and cotton.
Genius. Evil genius...
-
just a note from a seemingly newly pluckfilled little p, to ask for fresh consideration of posts just made at the threadbare tail-end of 'when that awful thing happens' ..
-
Ok, Ok, back to work to make a Frankenmato - well I would but I need to figure out the "benefit to New Zealand" and confirm "end user support" first but just as soon as I've done that... oh and filled out the safety impact form... oops I need to enter the project into SAP... and fill out the projected budget sheets for the next 5 years ... and sort out the development of human resources ... er what was I doing again...
Bart, do you think that all universities and research institutions are as careful about their transgenic research as you are? I have to say, I'm not entirely convinced. I say this, however, as a person who'd rather have carefully controlled research than a straight-out ban (oh and this isn't a gotcha set-up, it's a genuine question).
-
That's one of the main problem with the current patent system - it's the death of a 1000 cuts - everywhere you turn someone's patented the bleeding obvious and you can spend all your time designing around them - the patent system is supposed to be there so that people are encouraged to disclose bright ideas so that others can build on them and create even better stuff - these days it's become something that's used to do almost exactly the opposite.
Paul, I have plenty of clients making a living from their patent portfolios. I'll acknowledge that some areas of science and technology are crowded by patents, but in many other fields of science and technology there are plenty of opportunities to protect something new. I am probably biased, as I work in the IP field, but without a patent system we'd have very little innovation.
Equally copyright should apply to genomes - but at some minimal size - you can't copyright a single character, or even a word, equally I don't think you should be able to copyright a sinhle base pair, or for that matter anything shorter than some minimal length - lets say 100 base pairs just as a strawman. Unless the entire genome is de-novo you shouldn't be able to copyright the bits you didn't invent.
I'm not sure how relevant copyright is to what you're describing. Copyright laws apply to creative works. Genomes are not creative worls. They exist already. Copyright laws allow people to claim copyright in compliations, so it is conceivable that a database or compliation of genome information might in some circumstances attract copyright protection as a copyright work. But the bits of information themselves are not protectable by copyright.
-
(Sacha) "I remember noting here that Asian passes as diversity in our leafy eastern suburbs."
Delish... Perhaps the next ethnic sensitivity trainer could do a refresher course on why you don't show your own Eurocentric dumb-arseness by slapping a reductive and basically meaningless label on over a billion human beings into.
Ahem, Craig (and Simon and Mark while I'm at it). I go away for less than a day and get mistaken for a racist. Not often that one prepares a rebuttal several days beforehand, which I presume you all missed:
Keith, thank you for resisting the lazy media tide that lumps Chinese, Korean and Pakistani into one simple and manageable blob of people who our grandparents felt wary about.
and more:
(DeepRed) "the little-mentioned divide between the 'old generation' (which includes those descended from Otago goldminer stock like myself) and the 'new generation'."
Agreed. The huge regional differences within "Chinese" also tend to be glossed over, especially Mainland vs Hong Kong. I recall some good discussion hereabouts at the time of the first Bananas conference that introduced me to the "1.5er" concept.
Mind you we do the same when we use the blunt label "Pacific" - or even "Maori" for that matter, as if iwi are all the same.
Let's put it down to the cough medicine.
-
I guess the way I look at it is that copyright applies to information and patents applies to processes - you copyright a genome, you patent something you can do with a newly invented gene is a process
-
And my quote about the Nats election advert was:
And did that choir seem a little short on non-Asian, non-Pakeha faces to you? I guess in Parnell that's diversity.
As you were.
-
I don't normally engage in such arseholery but between the catheter and the prostate I thought it was worth highlighting the trend.
Taint a good look..
-
I guess the way I look at it is that copyright applies to information and patents applies to processes - you copyright a genome, you patent something you can do with a newly invented gene is a process
To put it extremely crudely, patents protect ideas that can be reduced to practice (i.e. inventions), while copyright laws protect the expressions of ideas. There is no copyright in mere information. But if that information is expressed in a particular form (e.g a database or a compilation) then that form might attract copyrght protection.
-
Ahem, Craig (and Simon and Mark while I'm at it). I go away for less than a day and get mistaken for a racist.
I was going for lazy and ever so slightly hypocritical, and I've got to figure out how to make a hot key that just pastes "if I wanted to call you a racist, I wouldn't fadge around".
Let's put it down to the cough medicine.
No, let's put it down to taking ownership of one's own shit. If it's good enough for Melissa Lee etc.
-
JLM,
Fascinating discussion on GE. As someone closely involved in GP policy process, I can assure you that all sides are being listened to with great interest.
-
Although it's worth noting that they're probably wearing GM cotton.
Yeah, and people also wear stuff made in sweatshops. All this shows is that keeping consumers in the dark about product provenance is good for business, and bad for informed decision-marking.
Which - with respect to food - is one of the things that Greens wanted Labour to implement, to no avail. I suppose this is the difference between National and Labour. Labour's real problems were the things they couldn't face, whereas National's problems are rooted in how they face things, especially those they should leave well enough alone.
Thanks, Bart, for your eloquent posts on GE from a scientists perspective. I can see a business model based around GE kept in the lab, with standard breeding techniques used to replicate those breeds that are deemed useful. If it can't be bred conventionally, then ditch it. No pigato's, no problem, and probably a braeburn or two in the mix.
However, Bart, your post about the awesomeness of GE being realised in the near future with respect to longer shelf times etc, is basically a pandering to the worst kind of Western consumerism.
Call me a luddite, but I think in-season foods are great, and processed foods are part of the problem, not the solution, to the issue of quality diets in Western cultures.
In the final analysis, I see many of the "problems" that GE purports to solve as fundamentally being socioeconomic/political, and the involvement of multinationals as an aggravating factor rather than a solution.
Keeping GE in the lab, at this stage, is, IMO, a prudent step.
-
Scott: so taking a list of bases and creating a genome (an expression of that idea) would be copyright?
I realise we're on the cutting edge here - but think of it this way - the genome is an embodiment of a set of instructions that can perform certain actions (create proteins that can do other things) just like a computer program is a set of instructions that perform certain actions
You can copyright the program because it's an embodiment of the idea and patent its use in a process to transform one thing to another
Equally I'd argue that a strand of DNA is an embodiment of a genome and can be copyrighted - and it's use in a process (creating a particular drug for example) could be patented.
(maybe I should have used 'DNA' when I used 'genome' above)
-
No, let's put it down to taking ownership of one's own shit.
Get. over. yourself.
-
Copyright only applies to certain types of "work". The Copyright Act has pretty specific definitions for "works" that attract copyright, and a genome isn't one. However a sequence listing could be a literary work, but I don't think an organism that includes that listing would be an infringement.
On the patent front the key issue is novelty and inventive step. There is a worldwide trend to apply these tests more aggressively. Sequencing a gene is no longer enough to get a patent. Nor is simply proposing an EST for the sequence (in USA it once was). These days you need some product with an actual purpose or function.
I understand that alot of genetic research on plants is about enhanced natural selection (eugenics?). Once you isolate the gene you want, you can test for it and select your breeding stock. I also understood that more glysophate (roundup) resistant crops have been bred using these methods than using GM methods.
lawyers disclaimer: This is not my technical field, so don't ask curly questions.
-
Craig, Sacha, put it away, please. It's getting embarrassing.
JLM, I understand the need to contain risk, and act in accordance with the precautionary principle. But it needs to recognised that not all risk can be eliminated, and that acceptable low levels of risk do exist. I think that this would actually strengthen the position of the Greens with regards to toxic and bioaccumulative chemicals, which are in the field and environment, and are sickening and killing New Zealanders.
-
AA Gill presents the case against the Greens in his usual subtle style
-
AA Gill presents the case against the Greens in his usual subtle style
Wow. A long restaurant 'review' that has only a couple of paras actually about the restaurant. Bitter, much?
-
That's one of the main problem with the current patent system - it's the death of a 1000 cuts
I think it can be proved mathematically that the inventive step required to secure a patent reduces as the field becomes more congested. The same applies to academic papers and doctorates.
When someone made the first motorcar people said "yeh that's kind of clever, but its really just an extension of applying steam engines to ships". Later on someone invented intermittent wiper blades and the world bowed in amazement. And now you're a genius if you develop one-touch climate control of the front passenger seat foot well using fuzzy logic.
-
I knew this Government would be good for satire. I had no idea it would be this good. They're writing it for us, literally.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.