Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Dupe. Kinda (Score 1) 80

Isn't this story kind of a dupe from a few days ago? Didn't we fret about this issue like 2 days ago already? The worry is about a small number of guys who generate DNA for bad proteins that someone else makes. But there is no worry about those same kind of guys that do it in-house. I think it's exciting to the /. crowd because they can argue about programatic issues to keeping a small window closed, while the garage door and the back door remain open.

Comment Much Ado! (Score 1) 29

I'm a medicinal chemist. I've been thinking about proteins for 50 years. It took me about two thirds of the way through the article to even figure out what it was about. So this only applies to those who take their DNA sequence to somebody else to get proteins expressed. What about the vast majority who just do it in-house? Frankly, I'm a lot more worried about guns.

Comment Re:The only reason the number is 95% (Score 2) 67

Really! This is the question. There's detectable levels and there's toxic levels. There's acute toxic levels and there's chronic toxic levels. How many orders of magnitude are these things separated. I grow weary of the alarmist crap that we're constantly bombarded with because journalist can't, in general, do math. We need numbers to be informed.

Oh, I'm sorry. I guess 95% of bears is a number after all.

Comment Timebomb? Really? (Score 1) 159

Bomb implies an explosion, something that happens really quickly. Regardless of what impact microplastics have on mankind, wether it's lethal or benign, It's not going to happen like a bomb. It's gonna be slow and deliberate. Using such analogies in the title diminishes the articles trustworthiness.

Comment No worries (Score 4, Informative) 90

I'm not a rocket scientist but I am an organic chemist. They ain't gonna make no damn mirror life anytime soon. Even if they did manage to make a few of them, they would die of starvation almost immediately. There's nothing for them to eat. Bacteria and anything else living require all this current chiral pool for survival. This is a load of hooey. This is for stupid people to fret and worry about. Me, I'm sleeping like a baby.

Comment Re:Making drugs? (Score 1) 32

No. This is not applicable. I've run plenty of photochemistry reactions. In those cases, the energy goes into the molecules that end up reacting. This article was about capturing energy, like some energy harvesting method. The drug part was bullshit. If what you're saying is that this is the same as the J. Med. Chem article, then it's not new or news. But it's not. Again, the "making drugs" connection was gratuitous bullshit. Trust me.

Slashdot Top Deals

Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. -- Wernher von Braun

Working...