This is getting silly
Simon Quellen Field
expecting rock stars to attend a conference called "Rock Star Biology".
(Which is what I will be calling my next conference, to which I will be
inviting top biologists (i.e. Rock Stars) to be speakers.)
The 'outlaw' conference is at the end of January. I will ask attendees
to look around for outlaws and FBI agents. I will bet Jake $100 that both
categories have better things to do. ;-)
And trying to prove conspiracy in court is so hard to do that unless they have
other evidence on which to base other charges, law enforcement does not
bother, and judges do not issue warrants.
None of us are doing anything illegal or even newsworthy. Don't worry
about law enforcement or negative press -- it isn't worth your time (or
theirs).
There is noting "legitimate" about inviting outlaws and would-be
On Oct 23, 10:44 am, Christopher Kelty <cke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> making them think about what counts as "legitimate" biological
> research, opening their minds to other ways of participating in
> science besides either watching Nova or majoring in biology, and
> discussing whether this kind of "outlaw" biology might conceivably
> generate solutions to problems or new techniques not forthcoming from
> "legitimate" science.
killers (ninjas, pirates, etc.) to a biology event. In fact, it's
probably illegal. Conspiracy cases are pretty easy to prosecute.
There's only three elements to a conspiracy, and you've already
satisfied the easiest one.
Perhaps you should read up on the law or consult a lawyer. IMHO it
won't take much going wrong for you to end up criminally liable.
"Conspiracy is an inchoate, or preparatory, crime. It is similar to
solicitation in that both crimes are committed by manifesting an
intent to engage in a criminal act."
People interested in doing "legitimate" biology don't want to be
associated with outlaws. The only people you will attract are kids
wrapped up in their fantasy worlds that are too stupid to realize they
don't want to be associated with outlaws.
If you suspect someone of being an outlaw (biological or otherwise)...
"Please use this website to report suspected terrorism or criminal
activity. Your information will be reviewed promptly by an FBI
special agent or a professional staff member."
https://tips.fbi.gov/
Jake
> Saying that having 'outlaw' in the title is inviting outlaws is as silly as
> expecting rock stars to attend a conference called "Rock Star Biology".
organizer specifically invited "outlaws, pirates, ninjas, and
cowboys". The only category that isn't explicitly criminal are
cowboys, and the use of that term usually implies criminality. It's
not just a title those people were specifically invited to a
conference.
> And trying to prove conspiracy in court is so hard to do that unless...
Conspiracy is one of the easist of crimes to prove. The legal
standard is absurdly low. All you need is three elements: Knowledge
of / agreement to commit the conspiracy, willing participation, and
one act in furtherance. The last two are a given, the one act can
usually be just about anything and unless you were kidnapped the 2nd
will stick.
That's it! The crime doesn't have to be comitted and you don't even
actally have to intend to commit the crime. That's right, mens rea or
intent is not an element. You can jokingly say "Sure let's rob the
bank", casually mention the bank's hours, and you're guilty of
consipiracy. That's all it takes, you don't have to prove intent and
supplying information to the conspiracy is your one act in furtherance
of the conspiracy. Now the chances of getting busted for this are
near zero, but if your "outlaw friend" turned around and robbed the
bank a week later you WOULD be guilty of conspiracy to commit bank
robbery. And it would stick.
The point of this is that if you do something unpopular or something
that upsets people you can be thrown in prison for it if you're not
careful. Saying the wrong two sentences actually makes you guilty of
a crime for which you could be sent to prison for. It's rare for that
to happen, but you already know what can happen when the wrong things
are said. If you were in a minor bank dispute that pissed off the
wrong bank manager and somehow they could prove what you said you
would go to jail if they pressed the issue.
Here is a little further explanation...
"The law seeks to punish conspiracy as a substantive crime separate
from the intended crime because when two or more persons agree to
commit a crime, the potential for criminal activity increases, and as
a result, the danger to the public increases. Therefore, the very act
of an agreement with criminal intent (along with an overt act, where
required) is considered sufficiently dangerous to warrant charging
conspiracy as an offense separate from the intended crime."
So we already have the overt act (providing an outlaw conference) and
they're dangerously close to "agreement with criminal intent" by
inviting criminals to the conference. Since the basis of being an
outlaw is criminal activities you've really already got your
"agreement with criminal intent". Fortunately "agreement with
criminal intent" is not exactly how the law is worded.
Just remember intent is not an element and your joking and attempts to
sensationalize could end up being criminal conspiracy very easily.
-Jake
Forrest Flanagan
Jake
> So what? Pulling those cops onstage at a rave or outing an undercover Fed is
> part of the experience. If you just called your con a biohacking convention,
> you'd see what I was talking about and probably pull in some of the hacker
> crowd that knows how to manage confused authority figures.
event and we have nothing to protest. We're not fighting for our
right to party or anything like that.
Right now there's not much in the way of regulation burdening us. If
we start pretending like we're "outlaws" it will attract the wrong
kind of attention and people will start thinking of us as outlaws and
criminals.
This idea of pretending to be outlaws to generate interest, then
explaining how legal and benign it is will cause much damage. People
who realize we're talking about legal things will think us to be
childish posers looking for attention, others will think it *should*
be illegal. Flaunting the lack of regulation is going to piss people
off who would have no clue otherwise.
All it will take to screw us over is for some ignorant asshole
politician (about 94% of them at last count) is to see "outlaw
biology" in any context. They'll either think they need to
investigate, and then be shocked that everything isn't already
illegal, or they'll simply see it as a political tool. And it's
exceptionally easy, and politically expedient, to fearmonger and crack
down on something that doesn't exist in the first place. The fallout
will be another dozen rights and liberties taken away from everyone.
Something like that could eliminate DIYbiology all together and/or
make regular legitimate research that much more difficult.
There's just no positive way to look at people pretending to be
criminals.
-Jake
Julie
it's fairly innocuous name) read the comments following any media
article describing DIYbio.
While it might be alot of fun in the short term to attract media
attention by being deliberately provocative, in the long term if
DIYbio is defined as a "white hat" organization then the innovations
of the members have the potential to attract positive media attention
and benefit the world.
Thus it is best for members to think long term and be an ambassador
for DIYbio on all fronts. Perhaps DIYbio should adopt Google's
philosophy of "don't be evil" (including ethically, morally, or in
designing any biological system.)
Sent from my iPhone
Simon Quellen Field
Look at the public records. Find out how many times someone has been
convicted of conspiracy without any other charges being proved.
It should be comforting that your inexperience with the legal system
shows how little you really have to fear. If it were as bad as you
make it out to be, you'd have at least been arrested once or twice.
I can invite all the criminals I can think of to a conference and still
not get any to attend. There just aren't any ninjas around, let alone
any who are doing genetic engineering.
Like I keep saying, wait until after the conference. Then we'll see how
many people have been arrested, investigated, convicted of conspiracy,
or had false accusations made against them by hostile media.
I would compare this conversation to those of conspiracy theorists,
were it not for the fact that you are actually theorizing about conspiracies.
Like the subject line says.
Perhaps you didn't read any of the thread that started this. The
On Oct 26, 5:46 pm, Simon Quellen Field <sfi...@scitoys.com> wrote:
> Saying that having 'outlaw' in the title is inviting outlaws is as silly as
> expecting rock stars to attend a conference called "Rock Star Biology".
organizer specifically invited "outlaws, pirates, ninjas, and
cowboys". The only category that isn't explicitly criminal are
cowboys, and the use of that term usually implies criminality. It's
not just a title those people were specifically invited to a
conference.
> And trying to prove conspiracy in court is so hard to do that unless...
Conspiracy is one of the easist of crimes to prove. The legal
standard is absurdly low. All you need is three elements: Knowledgmany e
Tito Jankowski
article describing DIYbio."
Tito
Bryan Bishop
> I can invite all the criminals I can think of to a conference and still
> not get any to attend. There just aren't any ninjas around, let alone
> any who are doing genetic engineering.
I don't mean to butt in on this, but I find this absolutely sickening
and want to rectify this situation immediately. All ninjas should be
genetic engineers, and all genetic engineers should be ninjas. Maybe I
should start a dojo. Patience young transcription factor, patience!
Simon Quellen Field
It is also detrimental to the hobby.
If you read the comments following any media article describing
politics, religion, traffic, or any other topic the media likes to cover,
you will find people saying how terrible those people are who are
doing that.
Quietly letting people trample on your rights is not a good idea.
Nothing you are doing is against the law, or even slightly shady.
People who would stop you from doing it out of ignorance need
to be educated. There is a long history of people getting themselves
arrested in order to show the world how wrong people are when they
trample on rights, from Rosa Parks to Nelson Mandela to Gandhi
and on and on. What would the world be like if they had just sat
quietly at home because they were afraid they might get on some
FBI list?
If you are doing nothing wrong, and some one wants to persecute you,
you should not give in to intimidation. Take them to court. Get justice.
Stamp out ignorance wherever you see it. That's what scientists are
supposed to be doing.
The fact that iGEM does not allow independent amateurs is a case in point.
They folded in fear, and that has cost us all.
If someone had stood up for our rights to do this kind of work, we would
have more access to the tools we need.
We need an ACLU for scientific freedom. An organization with funds and
a mission to defend in courts and in the press the free pursuit of science.
We might also need a Rosa Parks.
Nathan McCorkle
>
> For perspective on how the outside world currently views DIYbio (with
> it's fairly innocuous name) read the comments following any media
> article describing DIYbio.
Yep.
>
> While it might be alot of fun in the short term to attract media
> attention by being deliberately provocative, in the long term if
> DIYbio is defined as a "white hat" organization then the innovations
> of the members have the potential to attract positive media attention
> and benefit the world.
>
> Thus it is best for members to think long term and be an ambassador
> for DIYbio on all fronts. Perhaps DIYbio should adopt Google's
> philosophy of "don't be evil" (including ethically, morally, or in
> designing any biological system.)
I agree again.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 26, 2009, at 11:34 PM, Jake <jake...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 26, 7:52 pm, Forrest Flanagan <solenoidcl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> So what? Pulling those cops onstage at a rave or outing an
>>> undercover Fed is
>>> part of the experience. If you just called your con a biohacking
>>> convention,
>>> you'd see what I was talking about and probably pull in some of the
>>> hacker
>>> crowd that knows how to manage confused authority figures.
>>
>> Sure! I agree with you there. But this isn't a 'counterculture'
>> event and we have nothing to protest. We're not fighting for our
>> right to party or anything like that.
>>
Finally some things I can say I agree about. We don't have anything to
outcry about. We aren't trying to "stick it to the man".
>> Right now there's not much in the way of regulation burdening us. If
>> we start pretending like we're "outlaws" it will attract the wrong
>> kind of attention and people will start thinking of us as outlaws and
>> criminals.
>>
>> This idea of pretending to be outlaws to generate interest, then
>> explaining how legal and benign it is will cause much damage. People
>> who realize we're talking about legal things will think us to be
>> childish posers looking for attention, others will think it *should*
>> be illegal. Flaunting the lack of regulation is going to piss people
>> off who would have no clue otherwise.
>>
>> All it will take to screw us over is for some ignorant asshole
>> politician (about 94% of them at last count) is to see "outlaw
>> biology" in any context. They'll either think they need to
>> investigate, and then be shocked that everything isn't already
>> illegal, or they'll simply see it as a political tool. And it's
>> exceptionally easy, and politically expedient, to fearmonger and crack
>> down on something that doesn't exist in the first place. The fallout
>> will be another dozen rights and liberties taken away from everyone.
>> Something like that could eliminate DIYbiology all together and/or
>> make regular legitimate research that much more difficult.
>>
>> There's just no positive way to look at people pretending to be
>> criminals.
>>
>>
>> -Jake
>> >
>
>
I also think that it wouldn't be good to get kids interested in this
way. Cowboys and Indians isn't a game I want to teach children. And
yes it is just a title, but if people want this organization to go
beyond a community of what seems to be institution-related
scientists/engineers/programmer swapping protocols and aggregating
data and information, then I think reconsidering it is in the best
interest of the whole group.
I am a DIY person by heart, and am DIYing biological engineering my
own, which is helped along by going to school and conveniently getting
a degree allowing me to pursue grad school in something even more
concentrated and interesting... NOT WITHOUT HARD WORK THOUGH.
I am not going to be associated with this event, but I do finally feel
compelled to speak out. I don't particularly mind the title, but it
just isn't a totally neutral or even positive message. Plain and
simple, I am not trying to stir up attention, birds of a feather, like
minds think alike, let people come to us. We are still young, with no
clear direction or laurels to rest on that people in the public can
fall back to trust when they are unsure of how to react to such an
event. Even if just one author of some little news paper writes a bad
article about the event, it could be taken the wrong way and make a
mountain out of an anthill. Not that this will happen, or that I think
it will, but it is better to be safe now, than sorry later for not
being less misleading/bold/intriguing.
What has this community really got to show right now to withstand any
torrent of misunderstanding?
--
Nathan McCorkle
Rochester Institute of Technology
College of Science, Biotechnology/Bioinformatics
Eugen Leitl
> Perhaps you didn't read any of the thread that started this. The
> organizer specifically invited "outlaws, pirates, ninjas, and
> cowboys". The only category that isn't explicitly criminal are
> cowboys, and the use of that term usually implies criminality. It's
I am sorry, but as a card-carrying pirate I have to disagree.
> not just a title those people were specifically invited to a
> conference.
[...]
> Just remember intent is not an element and your joking and attempts to
> sensationalize could end up being criminal conspiracy very easily.
Puh-leeze. What malady has befallen the world so that views like
yours can be considered mainstream? Last time I've seen this in
a totalitarian state. Let's not go there, everybody knows how that
ends.
--
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
Meredith L. Patterson
> Finally some things I can say I agree about. We don't have anything to
> outcry about. We aren't trying to "stick it to the man".
You might not be, but I have every intention of sticking it to the man
before the man sticks it to me.
Why? Because in Texas it's a crime for a private citizen to own
unlicensed chemistry glassware. Because every time I order a reagent
from a supplier on eBay, I have to wonder whether this order of
magnesium chloride, or various amino acids, or bovine serum albumin
(ok, I didn't order BSA from eBay, I got it from a specialty supplier)
will be the one that lands a federal agent on my doorstep with a
warrant. Because the chemists have already had it stuck to them good,
hard, and without a reach-around, and I don't want the biologists to
be next.
Seriously, the longer the discussion on this list goes on, the more
y'all are making me want to title my talk at this conference "When
Biology Is Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Be Biologists."
You guys have known me long enough to know that I am a contrary
bastard, so I'm only going to say this once: the more you call for
self-censorship, the more flamboyant I'm going to get, because my
dissenting voice is going to have to get louder and louder in order to
be heard over your paranoia. YHBW.
--mlp
Forrest Flanagan
Aaron Hicks
Yay, I was worried that everyone was getting complacent.Also, If it's a felony to own an Erlenmeyer flask in Texas then I should be on death row.
It is. You probably know this, but:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/criminal_law_enforcement/narcotics/narcprecursor.htm
Fortunately, since they passed the law, Texas hasn't had any problems with drugs since.
-AJ
Simon Quellen Field
requiring driver's licenses to operate motor vehicles, and licenses for
people who do manicures and cut hair. The law as-written seems to
require licensing for coffee-making equipment, but there is no fee, and
you can download and print the application, mail it in, and get either
the one-time permit or the permit for your business. To be a 'legitimate
business' means next to nothing. If your business operates under
your name, you don't need to file a fictitious business name statement
(saving you $30). You can get a free business banking account at
many banks ("http://www.citizensbank.com/small-business/business-checking-accounts.aspx").
Look at the pride many teenagers take in getting their first driver's
license. Accountants proudly display their licenses to practice
their occupation on the wall. Wouldn't it be fun to have a license
to possess and sell chemical glassware?
My latest science fiction novel A Twisted Garden is now available in bookstores.
Forrest Flanagan
Tito Jankowski
Forrest Flanagan
Forrest, do you have a link/scanned copy of the form?Thanks,Tito
"Any member of the Texas Department of Public Safety or any peace officer has my consent to inspect any record concerning the purchase, sale, furnishing or transferring of any controlled precursor chemical or laboratory apparatus at any reasonable time during normal working hours. I will not interfere with the inspection or copying of records during the course of these duties."
The non-commercial version is only different in that they will inspect at any time that seems reasonable, and you have to be present.
Jake
business records at any time. They do this under the guise of
enforcing sales tax and the like. It's the same all over the US as
far as I know.
For everyone complaining about Texas and what a burden it is..
"Chemical laboratory apparatus" means any item of equipment designed,
made, or adapted to manufacture a controlled substance or a controlled
substance analogue, including:"
Basically if you aren't making a controlled substance you don't have
to worry about it. It's just another example of politicians looking
tough on crime by adding an additional charge onto something that's
already illegal.
> Find out how many times someone has been convicted of
> conspiracy without any other charges being proved.
over the proverbial barrel under the threat of a conspiracy charge.
Also who's to say that no crime will be committed. Somebody doesn't
fill out the right paperwork and you had a conversation with them at
this event and you could be looking at a conspiracy charge.
It's also entirely beside the point how frequently this occurs. It
can occur and it's the law. It's the job of law enforcement to
enforce the law. If you become unpopular, possibly by claiming to be
outlaws and flaunting the law, your chances of getting in trouble go
up a lot. Look at racial problems we had in the past (and still
today). It's the same law they just choose to enforce it on people
they don't like.
Simon said:
> It should be comforting that your inexperience with the
> legal system shows how little you really have to fear.
talking about.
> Self censorship in fear of public reaction is dangerous.
prefrontal cortex who's job it is to "censor" input from the rest of
your brain. This is what keeps you from punching the screen every
time you see something you don't like or running around hollering "I'm
special".
I'm not talking about censorship just common sense. You don't do
something that makes you look bad to others and you don't pretend to
be something you're not. When you speak to others outside your group
you don't use your fantasy role playing names or pretend to be an
outlaw.
All I'm asking is to not say "fire" in a theater or say "bomb" in a
school. It's common sense and if it causes public fear, distress, or
damage it's actually illegal. You can and will go to jail for
hollering "fire" in a theater. There's no reason to skirt the edges
of the law just because you think you can get away with it.
While I don't blame you for the school incident your failure to
understand why what the student said was wrong concerns me. You just
can't say "bomb" in a school or airport. It's not to restrict your
free speech, it's to prevent the damage that will occur as a result.
Your student saying "bomb" in a school caused distress to the
principal. It's the principal's job to protect the students and
hearing someone talk about making a bomb is something he should take
action on. It's not his job to know everything and it's not possible
to hear everything and know the context. He heard someone say a word
which, in the english language, usually means a chemical explosive.
There's no way he could have known "bomb" really meant "squirt gun"
and he took the appropriate action. You don't have time to check
everything out when there's a bomb involved just the same as you don't
have time to check around when you hear "fire" in a crowded theater.
You have to act immediately to protect yourself and others.
For all he knew the kid could have been holding the detonator in his
hand as he said that or had it on a timer somewhere else. It's not
the principal's fault, it's the kids fault for saying something he
should have known would cause distress to other people. If you say
"fire" in a theater you're both criminally and civilly liable for the
mental distress you cause and the damages resulting from that
statement. There's no free speech protection for that.
It's way beyond the scope of this group to go into the logic and legal
reasoning behind that, which is why I've put it in analogy form.
Hopefully you can understand that it's illegal to say "bomb" in an
airport or "fire" in a theater. Google "fire in a theater" and I'm
sure you can dig up thousands of pages explaining in painstaking
detail why it doesn't fall under the first amendment and the reasons
for it being illegal.
> The fact that iGEM does not allow independent amateurs is a case in point.
either. There are some things you just don't joke about and
bioterrorism is one of them.
This is a perfect example of us being excluded because of negative
press. Every DIYbio media piece I've seen includes some section on
the potential dangers. Many of them include quotes or pundits saying
they are concerned about the potential dangers.
That isn't our fault, it's just the nature of the media. But trying
to use scary or sensational terms is going to make it a lot worse and
is basically just handing them a very negative headline, which they
will pounce upon and use to make a very negative story.
You seem to have leaned nothing from the bomb incident and there is a
very real possibility that the same will happen to the "outlaw
biologist" conference.
-Jake
Simon Quellen Field
;-)
We have lots of businesses that are regulated, and subject to inspection
by health code officials and the like. This is just what civilized societies do.
When you build a house, you have inspectors all over the place. Try to start
a car company or a gas station and see what kind of regulations you are subject to.
This is actually one of the protections running a business gives you.
An inspector has come around and certified that you are doing things
properly, and this gives you lots of legal cover if some neighbor complains,
or some religious nut tries to make trouble.
Nathan McCorkle
> I see you have never owned a restaurant or a beauty salon.
> ;-)
> We have lots of businesses that are regulated, and subject to inspection
> by health code officials and the like. This is just what civilized
> societies do.
> When you build a house, you have inspectors all over the place. Try to
> start
> a car company or a gas station and see what kind of regulations you are
> subject to.
>
> This is actually one of the protections running a business gives you.
> An inspector has come around and certified that you are doing things
> properly, and this gives you lots of legal cover if some neighbor complains,
> or some religious nut tries to make trouble.
>
and forth supporting Jake, then criticizing him.
I don't
>
> My latest science fiction novel A Twisted Garden is now available in
> bookstores.
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Forrest Flanagan <soleno...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Forrest, do you have a link/scanned copy of the form?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Tito
>>
>>
>> ftp://ftp.txdps.state.tx.us/forms/nar-121a.pdf
>>
>> "Any member of the Texas Department of Public Safety or any peace officer
>> has my consent to inspect any record concerning the purchase, sale,
>> furnishing or transferring of any controlled precursor chemical or
>> laboratory apparatus at any reasonable time during normal working hours. I
>> will not interfere with the inspection or copying of records during the
>> course of these duties."
>>
>> The non-commercial version is only different in that they will inspect at
>> any time that seems reasonable, and you have to be present.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> >
>
Simon Quellen Field
;-)
Jake is great when he's discussing science.
Cathal Garvey
Life would be so much better if criminals and outlaws actually turned up at conferences when asked to.
Do any of us really expect outlaws to arrive, dressed up in their bandannas, with crowbars? If they do, we've discovered the next big-thing in lawkeeping, and can give ourselves a big pat on the back.
:)
Forrest Flanagan
Forrest, that's just standard business law. They can inspect your
business records at any time. They do this under the guise of
enforcing sales tax and the like. It's the same all over the US as
far as I know.
inspect the area of intended use of any controlled precursor chemical or laboratory apparatus
for which I am requesting a permit.."
For everyone complaining about Texas and what a burden it is..
"Chemical laboratory apparatus" means any item of equipment designed,
made, or adapted to manufacture a controlled substance or a controlled
substance analogue, including:"
Basically if you aren't making a controlled substance you don't have
to worry about it.
It's just another example of politicians looking
tough on crime by adding an additional charge onto something that's
already illegal.
It's also entirely beside the point how frequently this occurs. It
can occur and it's the law. It's the same law they just choose to enforce it on people
they don't like.
There's an area of your brain called theprefrontal cortex who's job it is to "censor" input from the rest of
your brain. This is what keeps you from punching the screen every
time you see something you don't like or running around hollering "I'm
special".
When they call themselves "outlaws" I wouldn't let them participate
either. There are some things you just don't joke about and
bioterrorism is one of them.
Nathan McCorkle
Man a Mr. Coffee /IS/ technically a chemical extraction device, and
coffee contains /caffeine/ which /is/ a drug.
Man, even that water glass /could/ be used as a culture flask. Shit.
C'mon, seriously, the law /is/ here to protect us. It is to protect us
from the people with wrong intention. If you are serious about biotech
and bioengi, get affiliated with an institute that is legitimate and
work your way up like everyone else. If you really have ideas and want
to do new and creative things with the scientific tools we have today,
then you have to work for that.
If I knew the community college in my home town had a biotech program
before I enrolled in and moved to RIT, I would not have come to RIT.
The two year degree they offer is just enough to really get anyone
that is interested in biotech off the ground. This is the process as
citizens that we need to go through.
Uhh, I think this is a smart legislative move:
http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192
The localisation of power on these issues enables the whole country to
have a more dynamic response to exactly those mal-intented
individuals/terrorist organizations that are harmful to the public.
Is that really hard to believe? Take a look at Singapore Drug laws then:
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?actno=REVED-185&doctitle=MISUSE%20OF%20DRUGS%20ACT%0A&date=latest&method=part
I think staying away from the out-of-the-law implied names like
"outlaw" should be kept away from the association of this group. That
is not why I am here. I am here to trade professional advice and have
collaborative discussions of or relating to engineering biological
systems and its related scientific processes.
Meredith L. Patterson
> If you are serious about biotech
> and bioengi, get affiliated with an institute that is legitimate and
> work your way up like everyone else.
No. I've got one PhD I'm working on already, and I'm thirty-two. I'd
also like to have kids at some point, not spend my entire adult life
in school -- I've spent enough of my adult life in school as it is. If
you attempt to tell me to go back to square one and get a goddamned
*associate's degree* just to satisfy some pundits' paperwork fetishes,
I will sternly but civilly describe a vast and colourful variety of
orifices into which you may cram said diploma.
For you, Nathan, biology is a career choice, and I totally respect
that. For me it's a hobby. The fact that it's a hobby, however,
doesn't make it any less serious than, say, electronics or amateur
radio (the latter of which got me interested in the former), or my
father's hobby of carpentry -- he's never taken a single class in it,
but over the course forty years of tinkering in his garage workshop,
he turns out cabinets that are on par with any master carpenter's. I'm
cool with the idea of spending the next forty years devoted to
bioengineering as a hobby; I don't need it to be a career to have that
level of interest in it.
I really want to see you tell Hugh McCallum that if he's serious about
biotech he should go back to school and work his way up like everyone
else. I would sell *tickets* for that.
--mlp
Meredith L. Patterson
<clon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I really want to see you tell Hugh McCallum
s/McCallum/Rienhoff. I forget when I last slept.
--mlp
Forrest Flanagan
coffee contains /caffeine/ which /is/ a drug.Man a Mr. Coffee /IS/ technically a chemical extraction device, and
Man, even that water glass /could/ be used as a culture flask. Shit.
C'mon, seriously, the law /is/ here to protect us. It is to protect us
from the people with wrong intention.
If you are serious about biotech
and bioengi, get affiliated with an institute that is legitimate and
work your way up like everyone else. If you really have ideas and want
to do new and creative things with the scientific tools we have today,
then you have to work for that.
If I knew the community college in my home town had a biotech program
before I enrolled in and moved to RIT, I would not have come to RIT.
The two year degree they offer is just enough to really get anyone
that is interested in biotech off the ground. This is the process as
citizens that we need to go through.
The localisation of power on these issues enables the whole country to
have a more dynamic response to exactly those mal-intented
individuals/terrorist organizations that are harmful to the public.
PYROcomp
coffee contains /caffeine/ which /is/ a drug.Man a Mr. Coffee /IS/ technically a chemical extraction device, and
Man, even that water glass /could/ be used as a culture flask. Shit.Caffine isn't really controlled. I can buy it for less than twelve dollars a pound. Reagent grade.
Simon Quellen Field
(with honors) from Williams College. Also a BA in English literature.
I don't think we need to join some school or organisation
to get credibility, access, or respect. We should start our
own organisation. Look what the ARRL has done for amateur
radio -- especially the lobbying part. For that matter, we
could also look at the NRA as a model. Those people
play with things that are designed to kill people, and we
are worried about getting flak for playing with yogurt?
Marshall Louis Reaves
> For that matter, we
> could also look at the NRA as a model. Those people
technological regulation given their history and connection to
militias referenced specifically in the 2nd Amendment in the Bill of
Rights in the US. I think that most anyone can agree that any
comparison to firearms is not productive and should be avoided.
> We should start our own organisation. Look what the ARRL has done for amateur
> radio -- especially the lobbying part.
this reason, the radio and the ARRL is much, much more productive
comparison, and one that I think any DIY'ers can learn a lot from.
Forrest Flanagan
Source?!Caffine isn't really controlled. I can buy it for less than twelve dollars a pound. Reagent grade.
Daniel C.
<soleno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, I've underestimated inflation.
> I found one site that will sell about 8/9 lb for 17.99 and I think it's a
> site that used to have it for under 14 dollars. It was cheaper at another
> website, if I could combine shipping with other stuff on the order, but now
> they only have powdered guarana for a buck an ounce.
So... how can I find out how caffeine is digested and absorbed into
the bloodstream? Because if I can get reagent grade caffeine, the old
joke about skipping the coffee and just hooking up a caffeine IV is
that much closer to realization. (Assuming the caffeine molecule
isn't altered during digestion somehow.)
-Dan
Cathal Garvey
When dealing with actual crystal caffeine, bear in mind there's a toxic dose.
Otherwise, it's not significantly changed by digestion, sublingual absorption should work too, and I think the absorption efficiency one way or the other is pretty goos
On Oct 31, 2009 7:09 PM, "Daniel C." <dcroo...@gmail.com> wrote:On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Forrest Flanagan <soleno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay, I've und...
So... how can I find out how caffeine is digested and absorbed into
the bloodstream? Because if I can get reagent grade caffeine, the old
joke about skipping the coffee and just hooking up a caffeine IV is
that much closer to realization. (Assuming the caffeine molecule
isn't altered during digestion somehow.)
-Dan
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are sub...
Cathal Garvey
Whoops early sent, was gonna add that caffeine has an average bodily halflife of 2 hours if memory serves. might be 4, and watch dosage: an overloaded liver won't clear it very quickly.
On Oct 31, 2009 7:09 PM, "Daniel C." <dcroo...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Forrest Flanagan <soleno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Okay, I've und...
So... how can I find out how caffeine is digested and absorbed into
the bloodstream? Because if I can get reagent grade caffeine, the old
joke about skipping the coffee and just hooking up a caffeine IV is
that much closer to realization. (Assuming the caffeine molecule
isn't altered during digestion somehow.)
-Dan
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are sub...
Cory Tobin
> the bloodstream? Because if I can get reagent grade caffeine, the old
> joke about skipping the coffee and just hooking up a caffeine IV is
> that much closer to realization. (Assuming the caffeine molecule
> isn't altered during digestion somehow.)
This page has a bunch of references:
http://www.biology-online.org/articles/actions_caffeine_brain_special/consumption_metabolism_caffeine.html
If you need help getting the articles, post on
http://groups.google.com/group/getarticles
-Cory
Doug Treadwell
Someone suggested earlier starting some sort of independent credential granting organization, and I'm all for that. There might be ways we can get support from other groups if that credential granting org were not specifically focused on biology though. The credentialism problem affects everyone.
- Doug
William Heath
Len Sassaman
program with no undergraduate degree, or any college at all?
Doug Treadwell
- Doug
Nathan McCorkle
<therealepi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tim, I think colleges are one way of learning how to learn and think, but
> again I don't think it's the only way. I'm not even sure it's the best
> way. It's one way and it has its advantages and disadvantages. I think we
> would be better off as a society if we acknowledged that. The idea that
> wisdom must be handed down from above and cannot be obtained by independent
> study and experience is not constructive.
through lectures and still pass through school, it comes down to how
motivated one is to learn.
Cory Tobin
> program with no undergraduate degree, or any college at all?
If you want to go through the front door, by sending an application in
the Fall, then yeah they require proof of a college degree, GRE
scores, college transcripts, letters of recommendation, essays, etc.
Although, if you can convince a professor to financially support you
and be your adviser then you can sometimes skip the whole application
process. That would probably require you to work in their lab as a
tech for a sufficiently long time to show that you have mastered the
topic and show that you have the desire and skills to pursue your own
research. So the question becomes, can you get a job as a lab tech
without a degree? I think it would be tough, but if you approached a
professor and said "I have mastered all the material in these
textbooks and I've set up my own molecular biology lab in my garage
and can do PCR, run gels, enzymatic reactions, western blots, etc" I'm
sure you could impress quite a few professors.
I know a few people who used the latter approach, although they all
had degrees. I don't know of any other phd students who don't have a
college degree but I'm sure they exist.
-Cory
Len Sassaman
> I know a few people who used the latter approach, although they all
> had degrees. I don't know of any other phd students who don't have a
> college degree but I'm sure they exist.
This question was more directed at Nathan, honestly. Here's a follow-up:
if someone with no degrees whatsoever is invited into a PhD program, have
they somehow not been "serious about biotech (or whatever field)" until
then? Have they not "worked their way up like everyone else" if they've
not worked their way up *the same way* as everyone else? Are they somehow
less "legitimate" prior to being invited into the PhD program than any
other biotech (or other field) researcher aspiring to join a PhD program?
(I'm quoting from Nathan's upthread email.)
--Len.
JonathanCline
> Here's a question for the group -- is it possible to get into a PhD
> program with no undergraduate degree, or any college at all?
the PhD as well. And proudly admits dropping out of high school (and
never going to college). Probably the Nature publication helped a
bit. His site is here: http://www.mine-control.com/zack . I have
also read of the rare students being accepted directly into well known
schools (ex. MIT, UCLA) without any credentials other than independent
project work -- not sure if these were grad programs or not, though
likely accelerated programs (academic dept's can be talked out of many
requirements with sufficient industry experience).
To add a separate data point, going to a full PhD program isn't
necessary, for an "old" industry hand. That's why there are
accelerated programs like the recent couple-week "Syn Bio Bootcamp",
to learn specific skills. Professionals may only need 20 units to get
running in a specific skillset to succeed in a project. A top-level
biz guy, for example, who is moving into a new business from outside
(such as some are doing with bio now), will go directly to the
university and get tutoring directly in the subject, which basically
amounts to an independent study version of a niche "bootcamp". Likely
they won't admit it, though.
By comparison, it's kind of like attempting to learn a subject from
the web, vs. going to the library to read a textbook. On the web,
nothing is edited and everything is adhoc, out of order, undistilled.
Takes forever, with a lot of tangents and missteps. Compare to a
textbook (esp. if it's a good one from O'Reilly for example) where the
entire subject can be picked up in 2-4 weeks. There's little
competition there. The editorialized-method wins by far. Meaning, by
analogy, that going thru a specific niche program, is a better bet
than going rogue.
## Jonathan Cline
## jcl...@ieee.org
## Mobile: +1-805-617-0223
########################
Nathan McCorkle
>If I knew the community college in my home town had a biotech program
>before I enrolled in and moved to RIT, I would not have come to RIT.
>The two year degree they offer is just enough to really get anyone
>that is interested in biotech off the ground. This is the process as
>citizens that we need to go through.
<Len.Sa...@esat.kuleuven.be> wrote:
>
> Here's a question for the group -- is it possible to get into a PhD
> program with no undergraduate degree, or any college at all?
>
legitimate or competent.
I was just saying that to get there, the degree system is a way of
doing it if one is serious. Self-study is also an option, but I think
it also depends on what your goals for proficiency and breadth in this
field are.
Meredith said, "For you, Nathan, biology is a career choice," and I
don't know if I completely agree actually. Its fun and all, but I like
science in general, I like tools and building things, I like
engineering and making new things. I think there are some great things
that can be done in the bioengineering field,
True self-study into biology began for me after I finished my 9th
grade biology course.I dropped out of high school after grade 11 and
really didn't want to go to college from the time I was 15 - 20. I
took a semester or two at the local community college (business and
horticulture) after dropping out but decided to move to California and
work outdoors instead of continuing. I didn't know what I wanted to
do, but I was always doing DIYbio.
I don't think I could be doing the research I am now in a
non-university setting, and I still have a hobbyists mindset. I get to
learn about new tools all the time, playing with deadly chemicals and
million dollar machines, using ion implanters that have mass
spectrometers in them! Its great. Biology is a life decision more than
a career one, it is what we're all made of. (heh heh)
All the while before I was in college, I felt illegitimate, working
with a shoestring budget yet having passion for the topic. I realized
I'm lucky to live in a country where banks will loan money to this
poor boy from a poor family with bad marks in school. College isn't
necessary to learn or be legitimate, but I think being extremely
clever or having money, basically good resources, is required. I'm at
school now because they have better toys than I do, and I can use them
to prototype and build new and cheaper toys/tools faster and easier
this way.
Was that a relevant response?
I would like to hear other DIYer-at-heart's story.
>
> (I'm quoting from Nathan's upthread email.)
>
>
> --Len.
>
> >
>
Len Sassaman
> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 2:50 AM, Nathan McCorkle <nmz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If I knew the community college in my home town had a biotech program
>> before I enrolled in and moved to RIT, I would not have come to RIT.
>> The two year degree they offer is just enough to really get anyone
>> that is interested in biotech off the ground. This is the process as
>> citizens that we need to go through.
Ah. I suppose I won't be getting my "good citizenship process" merit badge
when I get my PhD.
> I wasn't saying that people without degrees in biotech are less
> legitimate or competent.
Noted. You can see how it came off that way, though, right?
> I was just saying that to get there, the degree system is a way of
> doing it if one is serious. Self-study is also an option, but I think
> it also depends on what your goals for proficiency and breadth in this
> field are.
Personally, I think it comes down to how much time one is willing to
dedicate to mastering their chosen field, and the level of access they
have to the tools needed to master said field. I really wouldn't consider
enrollment in a degree program to be anything beyond an initial indicator
of seriousness in mastering one's chosen field.
I'm not saying that all fields can be equally mastered inside the ivory
tower as outside; obviously one can become a Fields Medal winner without
ever setting foot in a classroom far more easily than an astrophysicist
can win a Nobel prize without access to a National Laboratory; a
cryptographer can be invited to join a PhD program with no prior degrees
more easily than a chemist, since most governments don't restrict access
to tools of the trade for the former nearly as heavily as they do for the
latter. So, what field one chooses to aspire to master will have an impact
on how successful they will be if they avoid the degree approach,
independent of the inherent difficulty of the field.
Personally speaking, assuming lack of access to specialized equipment
isn't a handicap, I've rarely failed to be impressed by the talent and
ability of self-taught top-tier experts in scientific disciplines. Degree
programs themselves are quite often a handicap that one never recovers
from in certain fields.
*The* goal of DIYBIO, for me, is to reduce as much as possible the
specialized equipment handicap for those who choose not to take the degree
track / academic institution approach. I can become a professor of
electrical engineering, or computer science, or evolutionary biology,
without ever getting a degree or attending a course below the PhD level. I
can't currently say the same thing about biotechnology with much
confidence unless I'm lucky enough to have access to a lab.
> Meredith said, "For you, Nathan, biology is a career choice," and I
> don't know if I completely agree actually. Its fun and all, but I like
> science in general, I like tools and building things, I like engineering
> and making new things. I think there are some great things that can be
> done in the bioengineering field,
(So as you understand I'm not trying to pick on you, but on your earlier
statement, I'm quite glad to hear you say the above; you're the sort of
person who should be on this list, and the sort of person who will help
foster a community of non-degree-track experts, should you be willing to
share your knowledge and experience without bias to those with the drive
to learn.)
> True self-study into biology began for me after I finished my 9th
> grade biology course.I dropped out of high school after grade 11 and
> really didn't want to go to college from the time I was 15 - 20. I
> took a semester or two at the local community college (business and
> horticulture) after dropping out but decided to move to California and
> work outdoors instead of continuing. I didn't know what I wanted to
> do, but I was always doing DIYbio.
>
> I don't think I could be doing the research I am now in a
> non-university setting, and I still have a hobbyists mindset. I get to
> learn about new tools all the time, playing with deadly chemicals and
> million dollar machines, using ion implanters that have mass
> spectrometers in them! Its great. Biology is a life decision more than
> a career one, it is what we're all made of. (heh heh)
I understand why a radio telescope must be a million dollar machine. There
are many million dollar machines in biotech that I don't see an inherent
reason why they can't be thousand dollar machines -- or why a thousand
dollar equivalent can't teach the same things to an autodidactic scholar.
Now, it would be absurd to say that anyone with a garage will always be
able to have the same level of quality equipment as a well-funded
university. There is, however, the principle of "good enough."
(By this point, some might be thinking "So Len, if degree programs are so
irrelevant, why are you working on a PhD in an academic setting?" Two
reasons: one, unlike when I helped start the field I'm in, the largest
concentration of expert interaction in said field no longer occurs on
Internet mailing lists, but in the halls of a dozen or so research
universities and the conferences sponsored by those research groups, and
two, I get to use a lot more tools that would have been unaffordable to me
as an individual. There's a third reason, which makes me a little sad --
in order for the general public, the politicians and policy makers, and
increasingly, the influential industry players to put weight to what I
say, vs. the newcomer university-educated "expert" in the field, I need
not only the research history and experience, but the letters after my
name. I find this sad, because it's an arbitrary discriminating function,
but it's a fact of life.
> All the while before I was in college, I felt illegitimate, working
> with a shoestring budget yet having passion for the topic. I realized
> I'm lucky to live in a country where banks will loan money to this
> poor boy from a poor family with bad marks in school. College isn't
> necessary to learn or be legitimate, but I think being extremely
> clever or having money, basically good resources, is required. I'm at
> school now because they have better toys than I do, and I can use them
> to prototype and build new and cheaper toys/tools faster and easier
> this way.
>
> Was that a relevant response?
Ah, that last paragraph almost mirrors my previous one -- and brings me
back to my earlier statement. I think the most important thing that
Meredith is doing is not satisfying my obsession with glowing yogurt, or
working with Jonathan and I to think of ways to quickly test for melamine,
or even inventing new ways to rid the world of scurvy. I think the
important thing that she and Tito and the many other DIYbio'ers here are
doing is lowering the cost of entry for access to good resources. We will
succeed when it's as easy for a motivated innate scientist such as
yourself, regardless of marks or net worth, to get access to the good
toys, prototyping gear, and get started as a biotech researcher as quickly
as a similarly-minded but interested in vector math scientist can get to
work on his passion. It's far easier to buy a computer, some books, and
join a mailing list to bootstrap a career in matrix theory than it is to
spend the years necessary to get into a lab at a university where one
works on the same, though higher-powered, equipment.
DIYbio is a hardware hacking endeavor at its core, and it's the hardware
hackers working hand-in-hand with the protocol authors who are laying the
groundwork for making this a field open to anyone with the drive to become
great at it.
Best,
Len