Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:How do they define GM? (Score 1) 318

You further a strawman argument. People who don't fear GM food would still want to choose between products. For example, we have the "made in " labels. It isn't because we consider Chinese products unsafe..

Monsanto products should be simply banned in the EU on the basis of being an invasive monopoly which, if left unchecked, will take over the whole agricultural sector. Their patented genes escape in the wild, infecting GM free cultures. Their policy about these GM infected plants is that anyone have them should pay their tax and/or destroy their own seeds. What is this, if not a hostile takeover?

Even if you are not scared by GM stuff, i'm only mildly afraid, you should be scared by the fact, that Monsanto will be the Microsoft of agriculture. And in this case, if they mess up something, they take everyone with themselves.

Comment Re:And you call the Americans anti-science (Score 5, Insightful) 318

I call myself anti-monsanto. Them monopolizing agriculture is the most evil and reckless act i've ever seen. And that includes the oil companies killing all living in the oceans.
Monsanto play with all our lives. I'm not fearing of a sentient corn, i'm fearing of famine due to their corn one day becomes scarce because they are unable or unwilling to sell seeds.

Comment Re:Hey mister negative.... (Score 1) 37

If you think about it, nanomachines shouldn't be smaller than a bacterium. Just because something isn't below 1 micron it could be qualified as nanotecnology, especially stuff that moves around in a living body. Microtechnology is already used for a different thing. So what, 30k nanometers is still small enough to work safely in blood vessels. Probably it can become smaller by a factor, but i doubt "nanomachines" can or should become smaller than that.