US Supreme Court Rules Against DNA Patents

They just handed down a unanimous decision that DNA code cannot be patented.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2013/jun/13/supreme-court-genes-patent-dna

cDNA, synthetically created DNA that, like inimalists name, not capitalized when you start a sentence with it, is still patentable because it is created by a lab technician and is not a product of nature. It's unclear what effect this will have on the legal status genetically modified organisms, probably none.

I'm actually extremely happy they didn't ban patents on genes modified in labs. As touchy as the subject is, there is a lot of science that depends on that atm.

Hey Oliver, you've been summoned at the Writer's Tournament thread.

ha, ya, Bardock was mentioning that to me earlier

saving the long explanation, I've been an emo-wreck after my grandfather's death + finishing my masters + finding a new job + trying not to lose my apartment and needing to move thousands of miles back to my parent's house + everything else in probably the most chaotic 2-3 months in my life.

I should have mentioned something, but I'm hoping either to have something up tonight or this weekend, I have a job shadowing/interview tomorrow though /shrug.

I've said I'm not as interested in winning the tourney as I am in completing the story, but man... this is probably my weakest issue as well...

Sorry Sym for the derailing.

Of course.

We're a bio-conservative nation, dictated by a deliberately perplexing myriad of political hierarchies.

The founders of our republic-democracy wanted to avoid both fascism AND communism, what they resulted in was chaotic fascism. Humans can't govern humans.

I was going to say something to Dolos, then I remembered that Dolos is Dolos.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Dolos is Dolos.

😎

Originally posted by Dolos
Humans can't govern humans.

Its amazing how in agreement we are on this point, yet how much we disagree on what that means for society...

Originally posted by Oliver North
Its amazing how in agreement we are on this point, yet how much we disagree on what that means for society...

I'm blissfully optimistic.

In my experience, being optimistic has resulted in better decisions, and more concern with other's problems than my own. It seems fitting that when one is happy, focus is no longer inward.

Originally posted by Dolos

The founders of our republic-democracy wanted to avoid both fascism AND communism, what they resulted in was chaotic fascism. Humans can't govern humans.

The founding fathers had no concept of fascism or communism as they hadn't been created yet. They feared despotism, monarchism, and "mob rule" (populism, more or less).

Originally posted by Dolos
I'm blissfully optimistic.

In my experience, being optimistic has resulted in better decisions, and more concern with other's problems than my own. It seems fitting that when one is happy, focus is no longer inward.

Its not that I'm not optimistic, its just that to me, the inability of humans to deal responsibly with authority means that we need to eliminate centralized authority over people's lives, whereas my impression is that you think a strong central authority is good, just that it should be technology rather than human.

Originally posted by Oliver North
Its not that I'm not optimistic, its just that to me, the inability of humans to deal responsibly with authority means that we need to eliminate centralized authority over people's lives, whereas my impression is that you think a strong central authority is good, just that it should be technology rather than human.

Technology has no aim, no self-related goals. It performs tasks, functions. See; internet technology.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Well, I know what I just said, but I can't leave this one alone.

The founding fathers had no concept of fascism or communism as they hadn't been created yet. They feared despotism, monarchism, and "mob rule" (populism, more or less).

Those terms are different than a communism or a dictatorship in technicality. Ultimately, our government is money driven, to avoid things like these.

Ergo, chaos. Cybernated resource management differs from current monetary systems as it's sooo much more efficient and pragmatic. Apropos, more orderly - or less chaotic, if you will.

Originally posted by Dolos
Those terms are different than a communism or a dictatorship in technicality. Ultimately, our government is money driven, to avoid things like these.

Ergo, chaos. Cybernated resource management differs from current monetary systems as it's sooo much more efficient and pragmatic. Apropos, order.

I'm not touching the rest of your post because it's irrelevant.

Originally posted by Dolos
Technology has no aim, no self-related goals. It performs tasks, functions. See; internet technology.

sure, I still don't think it should have authority over people's lives

Originally posted by Omega Vision
There's no such thing as "a communism."

I'm not touching the rest of your post because it's irrelevant.

There are communist nations, and that is what I meant. I am not as inclined with you in terminology, obviously.

You mean off-topic?

I think our monetary institution gives incentive for political decisions like these. Id est, replacing planes and airports with subterranean transcontinental and sub/urban transit maglev vac train - after the technology is invented of course. Or maglev highways and maglev electric powered vehicles. This would remove the need for fossil fuels like gasoline by a great deal as well as save money while simultaneously being safer and more efficient for everybody. Our court will never reach such a technoprogressive decision. Ever. Obviously for monetary related motives in the 'myriad'.

Another example being the Super Collider, proposed in the 60's IIRC. It was rejected.

Originally posted by Dolos
You mean off-topic?

There are communist nations.

Yes, but you don't call them "communisms."

Originally posted by Omega Vision
That too.

Yes, but you don't call them "communisms."

My mistake.

To clarify, communism isn't a political ideology, it's an economic one. The fact that all communist nations have been dictatorships is probably due to all communist nations being inspired by or modeled after the Soviet Union.

Originally posted by Oliver North
sure, I still don't think it should have authority over people's lives

Would you rather it be survival of the fittest. Anarchism?

I think it's far better than what we have now. It's pure, motiveless logic. Quantum politics, if you will. 😂