biotechnical applications for a better society

[]2epo]v[an]

I listened to a delegate or some such for the proposed department of peace. He said it would take a big idea to correct the problems we face. I fully agree. This topic is for the discussion of big ideas to help the world. It’s become apparent that intellectual property is on the decline. We face sweeping surges in legal battles do to resent advancements in surveillance technology. So we all have to give these ideas. No patent should be forged on any idea in this thread. The very idea is contemptible to say the least. So I’ll start off.

The best way to fight poverty is to attack the characteristics of it.

-disease, hunger, homelessness, over population, crime (tho crime can be found in all levels of society), pollution, drugs (cant quite conjugate the root problem with this one but it begins with affluence), purposelessness.

I say we attack most of these with a genetically engineered, perfect, public fruit trees.

Problems.

1. Who wants to eat the same food each day? Sounds kind of communistic doesn’t it.
2. How would such an endeavor, with no immediate pay off, be sustained?
3. How would any one thing be able to, if necessary, meet the nutritional needs of the masses who all have a different genetic nutritional need. (I.e. allergies n such)
4. Would encourage the newly biotechnical enlightened dissidents to purposefully wipe out humanity. I admit this is a big one but we'll face that precipice sooner or later anyway right? That is as tho we weren’t already.
5. __________________________________
6. How would a tree that is burdened with the need of feeding the masses ever grow big, tall and magnificent.
7. What would you do about blight?
8. What would you do about rot or trash removal.
9. What would you do about population explosions do to lost limitations?

Fixes

1. Perhaps the same tree could yield multiple forms of fruit. and have diffrent sets nutritional componants based on an combanation algorithm. say 20 diffrent posable combanations.
2. it's necessary to find a way for the market or privet fund rasers to fund this work. As it stands the free market has no way to do such things. Sad, isn’t it.
3. Colorings and markings could identify flavor and nutrition combinations. The same tree could be made to make many combinations of the human diet. No one fruit having complete balanced dietary needs but a combination of different fruits would.
4. Something’s are answered in ways I can’t yet ID well we could all sacrifice privacy for a while. Oh wait we're already doing that. Well see, you're half way there
5. _______
6. This might hurt but it could be coded to not manufacture fruit till it turned a specific age. Or perhaps it only produced fruit based on external stimuli. I.e. button. That or some nice fellow could cut the blossoms for a while. If you've ever seen a 200 year old apple tree next to a 200 year old pine you'd see my point.
7. That could be a problem that would take more organized minds than mine to fully work. On the other hand it could take some time for blight to form for a newborn life form. On the other hand maybe not. Should put allot of research into it.
8. People or shared habitat with other species like monkeys. This seems a little like the little old lady who lived in a shoe. Be careful here.
9. Some fruits could manufacture birth control. Or perhaps the same endeavors could start with a birth control plant entirely separate.


Perhaps it would be best to start off with something simpler. I also propose a small fruit plant be devised.

This smaller plant would be to address a slightly more combatable issue, the issue of spiraling reproduction in our communities. Whether or not this is caused by poverty, gluttony, religion, is yet undefined and may remain as such if I have any say. I feel it's time to release some of the technologies the free market seems incapable of developing. Or perhaps we need to find a way for it to do so. Either way this is what I propose. It is not outside current technologies to produce a rather simple plant that would result in a perfectly engineered friend to womens reproductive cycle.

A plant that would produce a regulated dose of the necessary chemicals needed for a birth control pill. This, say, in the form of little berries. Some plants could yield different doses. I.e. an irresponsible plant for those who need immediate emergency control. There are several forms of pills.

Problems

1. little brothers/sisters. The misuse of a hormonal misbalancing fruit by little boy's and girls who are not knowledgeable of such things as poisons and health hazards could become concern.
2. How would you feasibly economically distribute such a plant when it could simply be planted in your neighbor’s back yard or accidentally released into the wild?
3. What about the damage to pharmaceutical companies?
4. Can we get it done before the rest of the world who seems a little more concerned with social freedoms and society than our own country and economic system?

Fixes

1. Saturday morning oaths. Never, never, never, touch, eat or drink anything from the bottles and boxes mom/moms/dad/dads/mom and dad/moms and dads/ keeps under the sink, that sh!t is poison damnit! This is a slightly edited version of the "snuggle bears" Saturday morning safety oath. Btw, for best results, don’t include that last bit on Saturday morning cartoon hour.
2. I would find it both poetic and prudent to insure a contraceptive plant be incapable of reproduction w/o the aid of labs and technicians. For the issue of cuttings, I would advise some form of male female parasitic symbiotic relationship within the plant. I.e. the portion of the plant that makes the fruit be female and lives only lives within the male part that provides it nurturance and hydration, two plants that live as one. That would make it more difficult to nurture in a cutting situation. On the other hand it seems rather contrary to then sell them. But hey do you have a better idea for repaying those who spent time developing nurturing and reproducing said plant?
3. Vast amounts of money are spent on researching new contraception methods and boner pills. These businesses would take a hit, tho freeing them for more practical research. (Except the boner pill business. I think they should foot some of the bill as per promise of future demand. I advise against a boner pill tree. but advocate a fertility tree?) government would save hundreds of thousands of dollars per year on contraceptive programs for the poor. I mean, why spend money when you can grow it.
4. while it wouldn't be something to race about, it would be a friendly world compitition and much more fruitful than space exploration.

Please pose problems fixes or other big ideas in this thread.

[jayreynolds]

2epo]v[an']
This smaller plant would be to address a slightly more combatable issue, the issue of spiraling reproduction in our communities. Whether or not this is caused by poverty, gluttony, religion, is yet undefined and may remain as such if I have any say. I feel it's time to release some of the technologies the free market seems incapable of developing. Or perhaps we need to find a way for it to do so. Either way this is what I propose. It is not outside current technologies to produce a rather simple plant that would result in a perfectly engineered friend to womens reproductive cycle.

A plant that would produce a regulated dose of the necessary chemicals needed for a birth control pill. This, say, in the form of little berries. Some plants could yield different doses. I.e. an irresponsible plant for those who need immediate emergency control. There are several forms of pills.
Actually, there are many many plants that can act as abortifacients, and have been used as such for ages. This isn't necessarily a new idea, in other words.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortifacient

[jayreynolds]

.

[jayreynolds]

It appears that bio-terrorism via destruction of valuable crops painstakingly grown by farmers has been found legal in France:
French court acquits anti-GMO protesters

A court in Orleans, France, has acquitted 49 people for having destroyed genetically modified crops in 2004 and 2005. The acquittal is the first of its kind, and although the plaintiff, American seeds giant Monsanto, is to appeal against the decision, the anti-GMO lobby is claiming the ruling is a great victory. Protestor Francois Dufour said: "There should be no GMO's in our fields, and the ruling confirms this. It encourages us to continue to influence the political debate and eliminate GMO's from agriculture," he said after the verdict.

The judges said the protesters "proved that they committed voluntary acts of damage on the goods of a third party in response to the needs of the situation ... a necessity driven by the uncontrolled release of modified genes that constitutes a real and present danger, and may be a source of undesired contamination and pollution". The protesters also claim France's position is illegal, as EU legislation has been incorrectly copied into French statutes, ignoring Brussels' demand that" detailed and accurate environmental risks" must be evaluated.
http://euronews.net/create_html.php?page=detail_info&article=325334&lng=1

[]2epo]v[an]

" good question. it's really only a matter of time till birds, insects, and other little bugs would figure out how nice it would be to eat. whats really important is that a plant made up of the genes of animals, insects, other plants, could may be accidently cross polonated by like say a buirch tree resulting in all the seeds turning poisonis? or perhaps it might cross polonate with a birch tree causing all manor kooky seeds. dunno. this falls under the things best concidered by people with a more organized mind than my hole like head."

hadnt left that out. even included initial insect warrnings.

here (http://www.nhbradio.com/Interact/Forums/tabid/58/forumid/4/threadid/925/threadpage/1/scope/posts/Default.aspx)

[]2epo]v[an]

I listened to a delegate or some such for the proposed department of peace. He said it would take a big idea to correct the problems we face. I fully agree. This topic is for the discussion of big ideas to help the world. It’s become apparent that intellectual property is on the decline.(NHB is proof ;) We face sweeping surges in legal battles do to resent advancements in surveillance technology.(what the hell does this have to do with solving the world's problems? Realie that mots of this surveillance tech shit is developing in eastern europe(outside of the liberal whores of netherland, denmark, sweeden..., which is not where poverty is a primary concern) So we all have to give these ideas. No patent should be forged on any idea in this thread. The very idea is contemptible to say the least. So I’ll start off.

The best way to fight poverty is to attack the characteristics of it.

disease, hunger, homelessness, over population, crime (tho crime can be found in all levels of society(note: statistically most of these "criminals" are under the poverty level), pollution, drugs (cant quite conjugate the root problem with this one but it begins with affluence), purposelessness. (I totally diasgree with this. the "attach the characteristics" approach is akin to trying to equalize society with welfare at the adult level. We should attack the causes of poverty not its effects. Trying to dismantle the latter is futile. It's being tried in sudan, was tried in rwanda, and all over thrid world africa. Results? War.)

I say we attack most of these with a genetically engineered, perfect, public fruit trees
Problems.

1. Who wants to eat the same food each day? Sounds kind of communistic doesn’t it.
When you're really poor you have more things to wrry about than a change of taste of the communistic aspects of food...

2. How would such an endeavor, with no immediate pay off, be sustained?

3. How would any one thing be able to, if necessary, meet the nutritional needs of the masses who all have a different genetic nutritional need. (I.e. allergies n such)

4. Would encourage the newly biotechnical enlightened dissidents to purposefully wipe out humanity. I admit this is a big one but we'll face that precipice sooner or later anyway right? That is as tho we weren’t already.

5. would piss off religios zellots

Don't try to mix anti gen-eng with religion.
6. How would a tree that is burdened with the need of feeding the masses ever grow big, tall and magnificent.

7. What would you do about blight?

8. What would you do about rot or trash removal.

9. What would you do about population explosions do to lost limitations?

10. Who would make somethign like this?
11. It would obviously be incredibly expesnive. who would pay for it.
12. Who would be respobsible in distributing it?
13. How would we protect it.
14. What effects would it have on already tenuous ecosystems?
15. We have a very basic understnding of ecosystems and geng eng. What if this becoemes another ddt or even worse MTBE?
16. Wouldn't it be more useful to spend the money that would be poured into this project in other, more sound ways to combat poverty?

Fixes

1. Perhaps the same tree could yield multiple forms of fruit. and have diffrent sets nutritional componants based on an combanation algorithm. say 20 diffrent posable combanations. (We don't have the capability to create such a tree yet. The few advances you do hear about on the news are the products of years of research and millions in funding)
2. it's necessary to find a way for the market or privet fund rasers to fund this work. As it stands the free market has no way to do such things. Sad, isn’t it. (This plan is not fesible. The government should not have to prop up anything that can't function on a commercial basist. And no, it's not sad. There is no way you would get private funding for this because its just too big. The Live 8 conference and concert bullshit proof of that. Unless this was delegated the UN and the governments of various countries got involved, the plan wouldn't have any backing.)

3. Colorings and markings could identify flavor and nutrition combinations. The same tree could be made to make many combinations of the human diet. No one fruit having complete balanced dietary needs but a combination of different fruits would. (Holy shit. This isn't Brave New World. We don't have the technology to do that yet. And I doubt we will get there anytime soon because of the public's fear of gen-eng)

4. Something’s are answered in ways I can’t yet ID well we could all sacrifice privacy for a while. Oh wait we're already doing that. Well see, you're half way there. (You can't answer this question because its based on fear of the unknown. We just don't know what's goign to happen because we havn't done somethign like this before. Do we really want to take the risk?)

5. fuckem(Again, its not religion. I agree that we should fukc the religious zealots but there is a strong of seclar anti geneng sentiment,especially in the US, that has to be adressed.)

6. This might hurt but it could be coded to not manufacture fruit till it turned a specific age. Or perhaps it only produced fruit based on external stimuli. I.e. button. That or some nice fellow could cut the blossoms for a while. If you've ever seen a 200 year old apple tree next to a 200 year old pine you'd see my point. (Holy shit again gen eng isn't like learning or working with java. We are not even close to creating something like that. This tree shit is ridiculous.)

7. That could be a problem that would take more organized minds than mine to fully work. On the other hand it could take some time for blight to form for a newborn life form. On the other hand maybe not. Should put allot of research into it. (What the hell is wrong with you?? This is a psychological issue not an engineering one. Again. Blight is the RESULT of poverty. Not the cause. Get your causes->effects straight and target the causes.)

8. People or shared habitat with other species like monkeys. This seems a little like the little old lady who lived in a shoe. Be careful here. (More stupidity. If we really ever had the technological capabilities to create such a plant we would be able to make it biodegradeable.)

9. Some fruits could manufacture birth control. Or perhaps the same endeavors could start with a birth control plant entirely separate. (POVERTY IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO POLULATION EXPLOSION. Stupid. Population explosion is of concern to the world because we're running out of resorces(both social and natural) to sustain a large population. That has nothign to do with poverty. Also, if we had the technology to created such a plant we wouldn't be worrying about genetic conservation and lots of problems relating to the J curve would be fixed.

Perhaps it would be best to start off with something simpler. I also propose a small fruit plant be devised.

This smaller plant would be to address a slightly more combatable issue, the issue of spiraling reproduction in our communities. Whether or not this is caused by poverty, gluttony, religion, is yet undefined and may remain as such if I have any say. I feel it's time to release some of the technologies the free market seems incapable of developing. Or perhaps we need to find a way for it to do so. Either way this is what I propose. It is not outside current technologies to produce a rather simple plant that would result in a perfectly engineered friend to womens reproductive cycle.

A plant that would produce a regulated dose of the necessary chemicals needed for a birth control pill. This, say, in the form of little berries. Some plants could yield different doses. I.e. an irresponsible plant for those who need immediate emergency control. There are several forms of pills.

Problems

1. little brothers/sisters. The misuse of a hormonal misbalancing fruit by little boy's and girls who are not knowledgeable of such things as poisons and health hazards could become concern.

2. How would you feasibly economically distribute such a plant when it could simply be planted in your neighbor’s back yard or accidentally released into the wild?

3. What about the damage to pharmaceutical companies?

4. Can we get it done before the rest of the world who seems a little more concerned with social freedoms and society than our own country and economic system?

Fixes

1. Saturday morning oaths. Never, never, never, touch, eat or drink anything from the bottles and boxes mom/moms/dad/dads/mom and dad/moms and dads/ keeps under the sink, that sh!t is poison damnit! This is a slightly edited version of the "snuggle bears" Saturday morning safety oath. Btw, for best results, don’t include that last bit on Saturday morning cartoon hour.

2. I would find it both poetic and prudent to insure a contraceptive plant be incapable of reproduction w/o the aid of labs and technicians. For the issue of cuttings, I would advise some form of male female parasitic symbiotic relationship within the plant. I.e. the portion of the plant that makes the fruit be female and lives only lives within the male part that provides it nurturance and hydration, two plants that live as one. That would make it more difficult to nurture in a cutting situation. On the other hand it seems rather contrary to then sell them. But hey do you have a better idea for repaying those who spent time developing nurturing and reproducing said plant?

[]2epo]v[an]

3. Vast amounts of money are spent on researching new contraception methods and boner pills. These businesses would take a hit, tho freeing them for more practical research. (Except the boner pill business. I think they should foot some of the bill as per promise of future demand. I advise against a boner pill tree. but advocate a fertility tree?) government would save hundreds of thousands of dollars per year on contraceptive programs for the poor. I mean, why spend money when you can grow it.

4. while it wouldn't be something to race about, it would be a friendly world compitition and much more fruitful than space exploration.

Holy crap. I'm not even going to take the time respond to the second part of this. What a waste of 5 minutes

[]2epo]v[an]

U) NHB is proof
ME) nhb?
U) what the hell does this have to do with solving the world's problems?
ME) it doesn't, it has to do with sevear lack secret keeping. patents grow wings and fly away under current conditions.
U)"attach the characteristics" approach is akin to trying to equalize society with welfare at the adult level.
ME) no actualy this statement is akin to wiping out welfare programs do to lack of need.
U) note: statistically most of these "criminals" are under the poverty level
ME) bull shit. wake up and look at the white house some time.
U) I totally diasgree with this. the We should attack the causes of poverty not its effects. Trying to dismantle the latter is futile. It's being tried in sudan, was tried in rwanda, and all over thrid world africa. Results? War.
ME) blah, that just a basless statment. firstly it completly misrepresents the statement it's disagring with. it definitly implyed atacking the effects. what you ment to say was root cause. secondly i thought rawanda had something to do with the murrder of an oposing ethnic groupe. please elaborate or sight relevant articals.
U) When you're really poor you have more things to wrry about than a change of taste of the communistic aspects of food...
ME) wasn't talking about the comunistic aspects of food (lol if ever such a thing.) had to do with the comunistic aspects of eating ONE food.
U) Don't try to mix anti gen-eng with religion.
ME) oh? so you're saying who the anti-geneticists are? you're just trying to say "look they might not all be religios." i dont remember sayng they were all religius. i just said you'd have to worrie about the religios zellot ones. especialy the ones that have been shooting them selves up with stemcells for the last 30 years. baby juices or whatever they were using. they're just false and scary. and againced anything that doesn't turn them a buck.
U)
10. Who would make somethign like this?
ME) genetisits... duh
U)
11. It would obviously be incredibly expesnive. who would pay for it.
ME) good question. it would likly pay for it's self, besides the fact that most of it is already done. you can get all kinds of information from all kinds of research. were you aware chemical weapons research resently devised the use of botox?
U)
12. Who would be respobsible in distributing it?
ME) johny fucking appleseed
U)
13. How would we protect it.
ME) from what?
U)
14. What effects would it have on already tenuous ecosystems?
ME) good question. it's really only a matter of time till birds, insects, and other little bugs would figure out how nice it would be to eat. whats really important is that a plant made up of the genes of animals, insects, other plants, could may be accidently cross polonated by like say a buirch tree resulting in all the seeds turning poisonis? or perhaps it might cross polonate with a birch tree causing all manor kooky seeds. dunno. this falls under the things best concidered by people with a more organized mind than my hole like head.
U)
15. We have a very basic understnding of ecosystems and geng eng. What if this becoemes another ddt or even worse MTBE?
ME) ddt was a pestacide not a fruit tree. wtf is mtbe?
U)
16. Wouldn't it be more useful to spend the money that would be poured into this project in other, more sound ways to combat poverty?
ME) more usefull than having no ability to starve to death or suffer mal health effects from improper nutrition? if there was a sound way to combat poverty then there wouldn't be any.
U) We don't have the capability to create such a tree yet. The few advances you do hear about on the news are the products of years of research and millions in funding
ME) yawn
U) This plan is not fesible. The government should not have to prop up anything that can't function on a commercial basist.
ME) right. i bet everyone made a fortune off sputnick
U) There is no way you would get private funding for this because its just too big.
ME) yawn
U) The Live 8 conference and concert bullshit proof of that. Unless this was delegated the UN and the governments of various countries got involved, the plan wouldn't have any backing.
ME) oh
U) Holy shit. This isn't Brave New World. We don't have the technology to do that yet.
ME) what you dont know... on the other hand if you knew we'd already be dead. dunno quit whining bitch.
U) And I doubt we will get there anytime soon because of the public's fear of gen-eng)
ME) no one has a legitamate fear of genetic enginearing. just a fear of genetic enginears. do guns kill people, or do people?
U) You can't answer this question because its based on fear of the unknown. We just don't know what's goign to happen because we havn't done somethign like this before. Do we really want to take the risk?
ME) sure, why not? what else do you have to lose you dont already?
U) Again, its not religion. I agree that we should fukc the religious zealots but there is a strong of seclar anti geneng sentiment,especially in the US, that has to be adressed.
ME) right, whatever you wanna think you are i guess
U) Holy shit again gen eng isn't like learning or working with java. We are not even close to creating something like that. This tree shit is ridiculous.
ME) meh, just because the goal looks far off doesnt mean you wont get to it. you can already do many of these things.
U) What the hell is wrong with you?? This is a psychological issue not an engineering one. Again. Blight is the RESULT of poverty. Not the cause. Get your causes->effects straight and target the causes.)
ME) ok i'll go tell a dutch elm that, thanks zergkiller2255. i had no idea why they were dieing off. but i guess it's from poverty in what ever part of bum fuck egyipt you're in.
U) More stupidity. If we really ever had the technological capabilities to create such a plant we would be able to make it biodegradeable.
ME) good point, something that would make it rot not only quicker but more safely and hopefully with no insects. now yer really talkin. lets talk about that again sometime.
U) POVERTY IS NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO POLULATION EXPLOSION.
ME) who said that besides you, stupid. i said population explosions are do to lost limitation on servivability. and if you want to argue againsed that i'll tell ya to go fuck yerself with yer tv remote controle.
U) Holy crap. I'm not even going to take the time respond to the second part of this. What a waste of 5 minutes.
ME) yeah most people turn chicken shit when it comes to examining the second half

[]2epo]v[an]

what do you think of a birth controle plant? jay

[jayreynolds]

Like I said,abortifacient plants already exist. here's another one. You can buy in asian groceries:
http://tropilab.com/momordica-cha.html

I used to live in the caribbean, where for centuries they have made a topical "boner" substance called "black stone". Toxic if ingested, it is a preparation from a toad skin. Never had a use for it though! Generally available from Trinidad.

(The above information does not constitue a recommendation, for information purposes only)

[]2epo]v[an]

abortifacation plants.... not what i was asking jay. these are usualy just some nasty poison.

ANSWER THE QUESTION JAY

[]2epo]v[an]

go ahead jay.

answer the question.

why are you afraid?

isnt this how you do?

whatever you need to tell your self.

just so you couldn't.

pick one.

answer.

or hide.

duh.

valueless value terms.

[jayreynolds]

2epo]v[an']what do you think of a birth controle plant? jay
momordica isn't necessarily a nasty poison. I grow it and sell to my asian customers. It is bitter, but in asia they believe in five tastes- sweet, sour, bitte,r hot, and salty, and believe that westerners don't get enough bitter.

As "what I think of a birth control plant"? I think they already exist and to invent another is unnecessary. That what I think of the idea.

[]2epo]v[an]

you think maybe we havn't already burned it for cheap mcdonalds burgers? you could find a way to refine an existing plant into pills but it'd never be as good. most of the hormone pills today are made by bacteria. it really only keeps the money in someones pocket who takes the time to do the whole proccess. they could be finding better ways of doing things. i'm not going to tell people what to do with thier time but this plant will happen. its just a matter how long you make humanity wait for it. it may never make anyone much money, but it would free people from social bondage. injecting some little pewny bug with your dna then slaugtering them by the millions seems a little off when you could be growing plants that give you the same thing for free. no matter how small bacterea are. plants are more than happy to make little fruits for ya. just dont eat the leaves please.

[]2epo]v[an]

bitter mellon? right, after aganising refinements that just make it more inaccesably priced. while that could teoreticly be more moral, the sad truth is, more people would look to toxic blood levels of jim beam first.

my idea is better.