Good Biotech Quotes

For the vast majority of us who reside in the troubled middle, there are no easy answers to the ethical dilemmas that biotechnology can pose. As biotechnology moves forward, we’ll have to carefully evaluate each application on its own terms, trying to balance what’s in the best interests of an individual animal with what’s good for its species as a whole, for humanity, and for the world we all share.

[...] true hedonic engineering, as distinct from mindless hedonism or reckless personal experimentation, can be profoundly good for our character. Character-building technologies can benefit utilitarians and non-utilitarians alike. Potentially, we can use a convergence of biotech, nanorobotics and information technology to gain control over our emotions and become better (post-)human beings, to cultivate the virtues, strength of character, decency, to become kinder, friendlier, more compassionate: to become the type of (post)human beings that we might aspire to be, but aren't, and biologically couldn't be, with the neural machinery of unenriched minds. Given our Darwinian biology, too many forms of admirable behaviour simply aren't rewarding enough for us to practise them consistently: our second-order desires to live better lives as better people are often feeble echoes of our baser passions.

The important thing is that we do not throw the genetically modified baby out with the bathwater. We spend so much time discussing the ethics of using our emerging scientific capabilities that we sometimes forget that NOT using them has ethical implications of its own. … Biotechnology is not the only solution to what ails animals, but it’s a weapon we now have in our arsenal, one set of strategies for boosting animal health and welfare. If we reject it out of hand, we lose the good along with the bad.

The latest, greatest cyborg critters may come not from state-of-the-art labs, but the minds of curious kids and individual hobbyists. Though scientists will continue to build their cyborg animals, Maharbiz says he fully expects that ‘kids will be able to hack these things, like they wrote code in the Commodore 64 days.’ We are heading toward a world in which anyone with a little time, money, and imagination can commandeer an animal’s brain. That’s as good a reason as any to start thinking about where we’d draw our ethical lines.

I am like this because whatever universe is thinking I can hear that, and it shows someone as bad and doing harm to society, that is why I chose Biotech to engineer human and animal mind although is unethical unto certain level, it is not 100% unethical with reasons, and for love since I do not see true love, what I do I just talk whatever they say I will keep on converting as stars align by my mind, then I safely escape, This is my strategy, unless I find true love I will keep on purifying bad, i e killing bad people wherever they are from, and If I read those palm leaves again the power will become too tremendous even more than imagined, So I am going to TN by 21 st, I probably think of returning to Nalanda only if they are becoming good, not 100% it is not possible but at least 60 to 80 % that is more than enough, else death will continue everywhere including Nalanda

Kali or Kaali mind and Indra putra are having good cause but, If they are going wrong only way to stop them is Biotech and Only in South India, Engineering Human and Animal mind is under ethics but not completely un ethics, I remember My great Granpa and his hidden palm leaves always, it will be useful when North Indian are going wrong

I remember standing in the bush above this unbelievably wild river, and thinking this is as good as it gets. Exquisite birdsong, jagged peaks of the Alps beckoning like the spires of mystical cathedrals, the smell of moisture in the beech forest like an elixir. Nature in its raw, unpredictable state – at an entirely different end of the spectrum from the confines of a test tube or comfort of a biotech lab.

The nutrient-rich biotech crops could arguably do much more good in the world than the original pesticide-resistant crops, but many of the entrepreneurs and inventors who have developed the biofortified crops lack the legal teams, political power, and financial resources to clear the regulatory hurdles. Potrykus is hopeful that golden rice will be approved by regulators throughout Asia by 2019, two decades after its creation.

When groups are small, for example, everyone’s stake in the outcome of the group project is high. At a small biotech, if the drug works, everyone will be a hero and a millionaire. If it fails, everyone will be looking for a job. The perks of rank—job titles or the increase in salary from being promoted—are small compared to those high stakes. As teams and companies grow larger, the stakes in outcome decrease while the perks of rank increase. When the two cross, the system snaps. Incentives begin encouraging behavior no one wants. Those same groups—with the same people—begin rejecting loonshots. The bad news is that phase transitions are inevitable. All liquids freeze. The good news is that understanding the forces allows us to manage the transition.

April 2015, China announced its use of a new technology known as CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspersed Palindromic Repeats), used for the purpose of simplified gene editing. This new genetic modification technology is fast, simple to use, and inexpensive. A recent Chinese biotech start-up named Amino has brought this technology to everyone in a kit that retails for just under seven hundred dollars. Yes, for less than a good smartphone,

A biotech firm will therefore take care to create a downstream monopoly that maximizes profits from selling the drug.

Richard Davidson who is a neuroscientist at the University of Wisconsin has expertise in the brain and emotion, and he’s found in his research that when we’re agitated, when we are upset and angry and anxious, there’s a lot of activity in the right prefrontal area, just behind the forehead, also the amygdala, the brain’s trigger point for the fight-flight-freeze response, when we’re on the other hand in a really positive state, I feel great, enthusiastic, what a wonderful day, there’s a lot of activity on the left side and no activity on the right side, each of us have a ratio at rest of right-to-left activity that predicts our mood range day to day. He finds there’s a bell curve for this like for IQ, most of us are in the middle, we have bad days, we have good days, if you’re very far to the right you may be clinically depressed or clinically anxious, if you’re very far to the left, you’re very resilient, you bounce right back from setbacks. So Davidson paired up with a fella named Jon Kabat-Zinn who has made mindfulness, as he calls it, very popular, for example, in the medical sector, as a way to manage chronic conditions, and also in the states of business recently, a lot of businesses are bringing it in, and it’s more or less what we just did. Davidson and Kabat-Zinn went to a biotech start-up, a 24/7 you know high pressure environment and they taught people how to do mindfulness which is more or less the exercise of watching the breath, but they did it 30 minutes a day, for 8 weeks. What he found was that before that people’s brains were tilted to the right, they’re pretty hassled and stressed, after eight weeks, 30 minutes a day, they were tilting back towards the left and what’s very interesting is people spontaneously started saying: “Hey, you know, I’m starting to enjoy my work again, I remember what I love about this job”. In other words the positive mood was really making a difference.

Your body is a highly advanced biotech vehicle. Make sure, you fuel this vehicle with good biofuel.

In the Adaptive Markets framework, complexity means we don't have a good narrative for the system. The solution is obvious: we need to get smarter. Complexity can sometimes be reduced by developing a deeper understanding of the underlying structure of the system. For example, now that we understand the potential for liquidity spirals in statarb portfolios, thanks to August 2007, we can better prepare for them. But the Adaptive Markets framework points to a second problem with complexity, which is the potential divisiveness of special knowledge and the potential for conflict. If the financial system becomes so complex that only a small number of elites truly understand its function and proper maintenance, this knowledge divides the population into those who know and those who don't. Of course, this situation arises with any piece of unique information - I know how to make scallion pancakes in a particular way so they're crispy on the outside but soft and chewy on the inside, and you probably don't. But that piece of knowledge is hardly worth keeping a secret, and the fact that you don't have that knowledge isn't going to get you too upset. But suppose I know how to cure diabetes and you don't. Or I know how to prevent cancer by avoiding certain common foods and you don't. Or I know how to price mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps and you don't. In these cases, the knowledge I possess confers a certain power and status to me. Complexity creates the need for better narratives and those who have those narratives will become the high priests of complex systems, the gatekeepers of critical, life-altering knowledge. And the difficulty in joining the priesthood - earning an MD/Ph.D. in molecular biology and having twenty year of work experience at biotech and pharmaceutical companies, in the case of curing diabetes - coupled with the societal values of the special knowledge will determine the divisiveness of this elitism.