-
4 votes
-
NOAA plans ‘outside the box’ response to save J pod orca, which may have just days to live
2 votes -
Plants can tell the time using sugars
5 votes -
Science’s search for a super banana
9 votes -
Entire yeast genome squeezed into one lone chromosome
6 votes -
Bioengineered lungs grown in a lab successfully transplanted into living pigs
8 votes -
Our attitude toward aliens proves we still think we’re special
11 votes -
Ethics questions arise as genetic testing of embryos increases
19 votes -
These mice have brains that are part human. So are they mice, or men?
7 votes -
IVF at forty: Revisiting the revolution in assisted reproduction
3 votes -
The origins of hummingbirds are still a major mystery
7 votes -
To remember, the brain must actively forget
4 votes -
Great Barrier Reef coral recovery slows significantly over eighteen-year period
9 votes -
Parrot's unique brain structure explains why they're so smart
4 votes -
New DNA animations by wehi.tv for science-art exhibition
5 votes -
Sleep science: In the era of screens, rest is crucial
8 votes -
Two fungal species—one pathogenic, one benign—are actually the same
10 votes -
Where to search for signs of life on Titan
4 votes -
Australian governments concede Great Barrier Reef headed for 'collapse'
13 votes -
Who's afraid of the big bad wolf scientist?
5 votes -
'Seahorse hotels' bring an endangered species back from the edge of extinction
6 votes -
What happens if someone catches the Loch Ness Monster?
9 votes -
Excitement and problematic developments in development
3 votes -
The wood wide web: The world of trees underneath the surface
6 votes -
The Great Barrier Reef could be hit with repeat coral bleaching events every two years by 2034 under current greenhouse gas pollution rates, the Climate Council’s new report shows.
8 votes -
Invasion of a river giant
4 votes -
Why do humans kiss each other when most animals don't?
10 votes -
Koala genome project reveals secrets about its toxic diet and disease
3 votes -
A mass colony of tent spiders have created a mesmerising display in a nature reserve on Australia's east coast, capturing the imagination of locals
15 votes -
Identifying criminals by the 'bacterial fingerprints' they leave behind
10 votes -
This mine threatens America’s largest wild salmon run
2 votes -
Deepwater Horizon disaster altered building blocks of ocean life
11 votes -
Bogong moths use the Earth's magnetic field to get their bearings on long distance migrations
4 votes -
Big fish are found deep not because of age, climate, or prey, but because of us
11 votes -
New technique could help scientists creat custom genes in twenty-four hours
11 votes -
Mammals are becoming more nocturnal to avoid humans, study finds
29 votes -
Bacteria that survive in dim, red light 'could help us colonise Mars'
4 votes -
Moderate exposure to sunlight improves motor learning and long-term memory in mice
5 votes -
How quantum biology might explain life's biggest questions
5 votes -
Organic matter found on Mars in 'significant breakthrough'
15 votes -
Dance of the Honeybees: By pairing the sun’s direction with the flow of gravity, honeybees explain the distant locations of food by dancing, essentially using 2D representations of 6D shapes as guides
7 votes -
How the brain performs flexible computations: New neural model reveals how the brain adapts to new information.
7 votes -
Columbia scientists identify the distinct mechanisms by which mammals discriminate a taste and assign a positive or negative valence
6 votes -
A better way to trace neuronal pathways: Moving forward by moving backward more effectively
8 votes -
Open scientific research is a foundation of our age, but do you think that we may be coming to a time where it may become an existential threat to humanity?
Openly published research makes science advance at a wonderful rate. In my experience scientists and researchers support open research in a nearly dogmatic fashion. Personally I am generally for...
Openly published research makes science advance at a wonderful rate. In my experience scientists and researchers support open research in a nearly dogmatic fashion. Personally I am generally for it. However here is my concern.
I believe that humanity is in a terrible race. One of the competitors is the advancement of science, which of course can sometimes be used in a dangerous ways. The other competitor is our society moving towards murder and war becoming obsolete. The science is obvious and needs no examples. Societies move towards the sanctity of life is shown here.
"Violence has been in decline over long stretches of time", says Harvard professor Steven Pinker, "and we may be living in the most peaceful time in our species' existence."
Now to get to my point. In the past scientific advancement has created some really scary things. Atomic weapons, bio and chemical warefare, etc. However, those weapons took a lot of people and capital to produce, and had relatively un-scalable effects. Now with open research on advancements like CRISPR, we are nearing a time where in the near future a smart high school biology student with a few thousand dollars and an internet connection will be able to create self-replicating custom viruses that could kill millions. The asymmetric threat has never been greater.
Do you agree with my assessment and concerns?
If so, do you believe that there should be limits on publication of research in certain areas?
Edit: I should have said CRISPR and gene drives. Here is a TED talk on how gene drives can change and entire species, forever.
7 votes -
How gut microbes are joining the fight against cancer
10 votes -
Apparently snow lepoards bite their tails more than you'd think
@payoletter: snow leopards biting their tails: a thread
20 votes -
Valley of the Ragdolls - They're floppy, relaxed, and they come when you call them. Is the Ragdoll a genetic miracle, or just one very cool cat?
6 votes -
3D scans reveal deep-sea anglerfish's huge final meal
7 votes -
So ... Sometimes fireflies eat other fireflies
5 votes