Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Brilliant. Got to prioritize... (Score 1) 50

by mellon (#48001237) Attached to: FAA Clears Movie and TV Drones For Takeoff

You're seriously worried that a drone is going to somehow fly up to 30k feet and hit a jet? Do you know how hard it is to get a non-jet-powered airplane up that high? How hard it would be to get that airplane with a maximum speed of 100mph to collide with a jet moving at ~500mph? When did we Americans turn into such lily-livered cowards? You are jumping at shadows.

Comment: Re:Welcome to government science (Score 1) 348

by mellon (#47876785) Attached to: When Scientists Give Up

Free market capitalism gives us Viagra. Which is a dramatic way of saying that it encourages short-term thinking, because human beings have a well-documented cognitive bias toward near-term results, and tend to heavily discount the benefit of long-term results. And so we get cattle ranchers abusing antibiotics even though in the long run many people will die as a result of the antibiotic-resistant bacteria this practice breeds. And we get pharma companies developing Viagra analogues instead of antibiotics.

I say this not for your benefit, since you are not interested in being contradicted, but because it's possible that someone else reading your diatribe might believe you if nobody points out the problem with what you've said.

Comment: Re:Welcome to government science (Score 4, Insightful) 348

by mellon (#47873581) Attached to: When Scientists Give Up

No, actually the government was very dynamic at one time and got a lot of really impressive research done. Then people like you who think "government bad" started to complain about taxes and regulation, and over the course of the past 40 years or so, you've managed to suck a lot of life out of the government. It's the whole Gordon Gecko philosophy: greed is good. No, actually, it isn't. What's good is working together.

Comment: Re:Yeah, because that's a good idea. (Score 1) 167

by mellon (#47838897) Attached to: Scientists Sequence Coffee Genome, Ponder Genetic Modification

Yes, all plants produce chemicals that repel or kill pests. Some of them are deadly neurotoxins. Some do not exist in any foods. Caffeine is actually a good insect killer, but you wouldn't want caffeine in your corn, would you?

Your arguments about glyphosate sound great, but don't actually contradict what I said.

I don't work for free, but patents are a huge detriment to my work. They are simply the wrong way to pay for research: they slow down research, increase uncertainty for people who are actually doing productive work, and most of the cash they throw off goes to lawyers rather than to people who are actually doing the work. Of course people (even lawyers!) have to eat, but farmers have to eat too. Monsanto's practices have put many farmers out of business (more in India than here in the U.S.).

Comment: Re:Motherfuckers (Score 5, Interesting) 167

by mellon (#47834235) Attached to: Scientists Sequence Coffee Genome, Ponder Genetic Modification

I recommend that you try cold brew with a medium roast of good-quality arabica beans. Not *$$: go to your local co-op and get some good shade-grown beans. I've had good success doing a 12-hour cold brew: you take about a cup and a half of course ground coffee and add it to two quarts of water (I use a two-quart mason jar) and put it in the fridge overnight. After it's sat twelve hours, filter it through paper into another container. This is kind of an annoying process, and there are devices that you can get to simplify it, but I would start off just using a regular filter so that you can try it.

The coffee this produces is much mellower than the equivalent coffee brewed hot. If you want it hot, it's okay to heat it: the reason you don't re-heat hot coffee is that the transition from hot to cold causes chemical changes that wreck the flavor, but the transition from cold to hot doesn't have this effect.

Comment: Re:Yeah, because that's a good idea. (Score 2) 167

by mellon (#47834143) Attached to: Scientists Sequence Coffee Genome, Ponder Genetic Modification

The problem with Monsanto modifying the genes of plants is that:

  • they make plants that produce chemicals to kill pests, with possibly unknown health effects (although at this point these effects have been studied pretty thoroughly)
  • they make plants that are resistant to herbicides, which promotes the use of these herbicides, which promotes the development of superweeds
  • they patent everything and engage in licensing schemes that are really harmful to small farmers.

In my mind, the last item is the one that I care most about, although the superweeds are a close second. Also, as kruach aum says, you appear to be pretty ignorant about how this all works, so your opinion as to what's safe or unsafe or a good idea is not well-informed, and hence not something anybody needs to pay much attention to. I say this not to put you down, but rather to encourage you to become better informed: to actually try to understand the science rather than just making a simplistic mental model of it and then conjecturing on the basis of that model. That way of thinking is extremely damaging to our culture at present, and you really should stop doing it.

Our informal mission is to improve the love life of operators worldwide. -- Peter Behrendt, president of Exabyte