[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> Open Source DNA?

["clement Thomas - pavu.com" <ctgr@free.fr>]

Complements :

open-boucle and DNA
--
the pavu.com point of view through an interview with Lucy, summer 2001.
"Ginoically Upgraded Datas"
http://www.pavu.com/lucy/lucy-interview.htm

--
pavu.com
-/ the tail moves the dog ! /-

Eugene Thacker a *crit :

> [This text appears as part of the Wizards of OS 2 conference:
> http://wizards-of-os.org]
>
> Open Source DNA?
>
> Eugene Thacker
>
>
> Opening the Biomolecular Black Box
>
> What follows here is a series of observations, comments, and reflections on
> the current intersections between computer science and molecular biology. In
> conjunction with issues pertaining to open source initiatives, this aim of
> this paper is to raise similar questions in the domain of biotechnology.
>
> All of us have witnessed the media-hype generated by such biotech issues as
> the human genome, human cloning, and debates over the use of embryonic stem
> cells. But what often goes unmentioned is that the real generator of radical
> change in fields like biotech is not genome mapping, cloning, or genetic
> engineering ? it is 3bioinformatics.2 Put simply, bioinformatics is a
> growing discipline which straddles computer science and molecular biology
> (here at Georgia Tech, where I teach, the first bioinformatics degree
> program was established in 1999). Currently, bioinformatics mostly means the
> use of computer technology to aid in the study of life (that is, new tools
> for molecular genetics and biomedicine). Already, over the past decade or
> so, numerous companies have formed which specialize in the application of
> computer science to solve problems in biotech research. The recent race to
> map the human genome is one such example: both the public and private teams
> made use of automated genome sequencing computers built by Perkin-Elmer.
> Without the aid of specialized software and hardware, research on the human
> genome would not have made the progress it claims to have made thus far.
> Last year, the investment firm Oscar Gruss & Co. released a study of the
> field, suggesting that bioinformatics may generate some $2 billion over the
> next five years. As the New York Times put it, the human genome has, for
> better or worse, been 3a technology-driven quest.2
>
> But is that all that bioinformatics is? In other words, what other kinds of
> developments can emerge out of this intersection between computer science
> and molecular biology, between computer code and genetic code, between data
> and flesh? Could it be that approaches from computing (network theories,
> systems theories, parallel processing, a-life) might have something to teach
> us about the complexity of the organism? Could such approaches even
> transform the way in which molecular genetics and biotech has traditionally
> thought of the organism, the body, and biological 3life2?
>
> [text continued at:
> http://www.mikro.org/Events/OS/text/Eugene-Thacker_OSDNA.htm]
>
> ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
> Eugene Thacker, Assistant Prof
> e: eugene.thacker@lcc.gatech.edu
> School of Literature, Communication & Culture
> Georgia Institute of Technology
> ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬
>
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net


_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold