Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

X-Prize to Award $10M for Fast Sequencing 48

Posted by timothy
from the prizes-for-possibilities dept.
Shipud writes "The X-Prize foundation has announced the $10 million Archon X PRIZE for Genomics — for the first privately financed group to sequence 100 human genomes in 10 days. The motivation is to create an incentive for faster, cheaper genome seqeunceing, heralding the era of preventative personalized medicine. The winner will also receive an extra $1,000,000 for sequencing the genomes of 100 additional people; among them Larry King and Stephen Hawking. Apparently this is the largest medical prize in history."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

X-Prize to Award $10M for Fast Sequencing

Comments Filter:
  • teh win! (Score:1, Funny)

    by wish bot (265150)
    X-prize for first post!
    • by ccarson (562931)
      Why Larry King? Genetic replication of anyone who has the propensity to wear suspenders should be outlawed.
  • Dupe (Score:5, Informative)

    by Kazzahdrane (882423) on Friday October 13, 2006 @06:16AM (#16420903)
    This was already covered by /. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/04/151323 6 [slashdot.org] 9 days ago.
    • Slashdot only has one day left to dupe this another 98 times if they hope to claim the prize...

      TFA? Whats that?
    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by nyri (132206)
      Good. Because last time the discussion was a disgrace. Let's hope this one will be better. I'm sorry for this off-topic rant but the state of slashdot is really bugging me.

      I just read the last discussion. Two of the three score:5 comments were jokes. They weren't even very funny. First one was about Steve Ballmer and his chair throwing as if that thing isn't a cliche. The second one was obvious. It was about XXX-Price and "genetic material". You can figure the rest. It was pretty well writen. Hence, it was,
      • by dsanfte (443781)
        The IT types are not scientists. Most of them work tech support, some work in data centers, many are consultants. Comparatively few work as engineers in software or hardware. Fewer work at the bleeding edge of their fields.

        Slashdot's target audience is, as a whole, uneducated with respect to molecular biology, genetics, and soforth. Most are pretty good with mathematics, but throw some advanced genetics at them and they will get lost in a hurry. It's just the way this site is.

      • Your post gave me a flashback to the terrible BackSlash that timothy always posts.
  • keeps us all certain that the "editors" don't actually read slashdot.
  • Yeah (Score:2, Funny)

    by joaommp (685612)
    In China, they have the same competition. But then you win and they send the bill to your family.
  • Dupe (Score:5, Funny)

    by tttonyyy (726776) on Friday October 13, 2006 @06:29AM (#16420973) Homepage Journal
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/04/151323 6 [slashdot.org]

    I, for one, don't welcome our fabulous editing underlords.
  • by javilon (99157) on Friday October 13, 2006 @06:42AM (#16421033) Homepage
    Gattaca [wikipedia.org]
    • I was thinking the same thing the moment I read the headline. How long before such a device fits the size/profile of an inkjet printer? You just know potential employers and health insurance agencies will absolutely SWOON over such a product!

      Do we have laws in place for genetic discrimination? If not, we should.

      I don't know about the rest of Slashdot, but I don't recall the option of picking out my genetics prior to conception.
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Teancum (67324)
        There are laws against racial discrimination that could, with a good judge that is using his/her head, would also apply in this sort of situation as well in most cases. There certainly are racial characteristics that are mapped in DNA sequences. In fact, when DNA "profiling" is used for matching up parents with kids and in forensic evidence for like a police investigation, they specifically target those DNA sequences which are not related directly to specific racial profiles, but there isn't a law that sa
  • ok but (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FateStayNight (1000465) on Friday October 13, 2006 @07:05AM (#16421185) Journal
    Stephen Hawking I can understand but why is Larry King included. What makes him worthy of having his genomes sequenced.
    • but why is Larry King included
      The size of his bank account.
    • part of genetic engineering is isolating and removing unwanted genetic material from the gene pool...
    • by Shivetya (243324)
      So we don't repeat him.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by dewie (685736)
      Maybe we can finally find out how his father managed to impregnate a frog.
    • Maybe they're looking for extreme examples of the population. Hawking represents some of the best, while King represents... the other end of the spectrum.

      Typical Larry King interview:

      Larry: Bob, did you kill your wife as the prosecution claims?
      Bob: (covered in blood, holding an axe still dripping from the night's first guest, whose head has been chopped into an unrecognizable blob) No, Larry, of course not. I could never hurt a fly.
      Larry: There you have it, folks!

      Now, if they'd been going for the extreme
    • > Stephen Hawking I can understand but why is Larry King included. What makes him worthy of having his genomes sequenced.

      I would assume to get lots of TV exposure.

      jfs

  • Welcome to DNA RAR. We have developed an exclusive peptide encryption method using random RNA sequences as hash key while pinching out false exclusives, just for yucks.

    DNA RAR allows all of your genetic material to be encoded within an encryption program that is both free source code and open source.

    All of this fucking harcore science for DMCA.

    Woo!
  • Rules details (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nyri (132206) on Friday October 13, 2006 @08:09AM (#16421455)
    Rules are available in here [xprize.org].

    In short:

    100 human genomes within 10 days or less with an accuracy of no more than 1 error in 10,000 base pairs, with sequences accurately covering at least 98% of the genome, and at a demonstrated cost of no more than $10,000 per genome.


    An intresting detail:
    During each X PRIZE competition test, a TEAM must use its device to sequence within 10 days 100 human dip-
    loid genomes of 6 Gbp (6 giga base pairs, i.e., six billion pairs of DNA base molecules) each.


    Note that Human Genome Project mapped and sequenced only some 3Gbp. And that was considered to be whole genome. Basically X-Price want winner to sequence all 46 cromosomes. This sounds quite difficult as the method have to be sure that is has sequenced both of the cromosomes (from a pair), not just the other one twice. And this must be valid all the 3Gbp. By bet? The working method just sequences emultiple chromosomes and determines the exact basepairs statically.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by wikdwarlock (570969)
      I think what's more interesting is that they want the sequences to be 98% accurate, but according to a national geographic report I found here [nationalgeographic.com] chimps and humans are only 4% different anyways. So they only want an accuracy of half the difference between people and chimps? What's the genetic similarity between Stephen Hawking and Larry King? Probably 99% or more.
    • With regards to this post, and the following post about 98 % coverage.

      The quality (i.e. the error rate) must be 0.01%, which is the convention adopted as the Bermuda Standard back when large scale sequencing was becoming mainstream, and the first genomes (of bacteria) were being produced. The coverage must be 98%. Usually, the last 2% are virtually impossible to elucidate because they are so repetitive (e.g. around centromeres) that you cannot tell how many copies of the repeats there are. The repeat regi
    • by mlush (620447)

      An intresting detail: During each X PRIZE competition test, a TEAM must use its device to sequence within 10 days 100 human dip- loid genomes of 6 Gbp (6 giga base pairs, i.e., six billion pairs of DNA base molecules) each.

      Note that Human Genome Project mapped and sequenced only some 3Gbp. And that was considered to be whole genome. Basically X-Price want winner to sequence all 46 cromosomes. This sounds quite difficult as the method have to be sure that is has sequenced both of the cromosomes (f

  • Should have been "Darwin Award", but that was taken already...
  • In modern America, researchers search for cures to genetic disease in Soviet Russia, the party cures your genetic defect called life...by sending you to the gulag for "research"
  • The winner will also receive an extra $1,000,000 for sequencing the genomes of 100 additional people; among them Larry King and Stephen Hawking.


    I've been browsing the site now for some time and haven't found a single shread of evidence for this "extra price". I call bullshit. It's just a joke to mock the slashdot "editors".
    • by eightball (88525)
      I wondered about this before but I think I have it. In section 1.5, there is a limit of $10,000 cost per genome on average. In section 1.21, they state that they will pay a fee at actual cost per genome determined by the judge (nb this presumably may actually be less that $10,000). Hence, a maximum of $1,000,000.
      It also seems that if you refuse the 'bonus', you may be penalize by twice that amount from the initial prize.

      rules here [xprize.org]. Thanks nyri [slashdot.org]
  • My cash is on CodonDevices. George Church has an incredible new sequencing technology, and he's making it open source. I know some of the peeps there writing software, and between the tech and the IT team, they'll be able to generate and handle the data - the big sequencing companies ought to be scared...

  • Genes are your Destiny.

  • Too bad the sequencing research these days is not so much focusing on fast sequencing (though that is of course still a major concern), as it is on accurate sequencing. One of the problems bio-folk are encountering is that the human genome is relatively easy to sequence: you can get all your DNA from one individual (so you only need to worry about getting two unique DNA sequences getting mixed up in the final result, one from the male and female parents) and there isn't as much repetition as compared to say
  • You mean government doesn't have to fund all research by forcibly taking money from its citizens?
  • by JDevers (83155) on Friday October 13, 2006 @09:51AM (#16422507)
    any true revolutions at a company or other entity that allows this level of an improvement over current sequencing tech will have so much VC money (or parent company cash) rolling in that $10 million won't even be worth the time for application. Then when the tech is validated and ready for use, they wouldn't have time to cash the check for $10 million while the billions are rolling in.

    For those of you in other fields, imagine in the next jet propulsion X prize was $10 million to the first group to come up with a working drive capable of 20% of the speed of light within a day of ignition. Or how about a single computer CPU capable of processing 100 peta flops. Or a system capable of cracking a gallon of water but using only 100 joules of electricity.

    Sure, some day these may all be possible, but right now they are pie in the sky at best.
  • They'll try to make a super baby from the 100 people and it'll get the brains of Larry King and ALS from Hawking..

    Reminds me of a George Bernard Shaw quote (mis-attributed sometimes to Einstein I think). When it was suggested to him by a beautiful woman that they could make super-babies together, he replied:

    "But what if they had my looks and your brains?

One small step for man, one giant stumble for mankind.

Working...