[Nettime-bold] Re: <nettime> Re: biology and technology

[Ana Viseu <ana.viseu@utoronto.ca>]

Hi,

I was half pleasantly surprised to see that so many people replied to my 
post on 'biology and technology'. I say half because although I think the 
interaction between both is a timely topic,  one that deserves to be 
discussed in its own right, the thread of emails that followed seemed to 
focus exclusively on attacks to Plant's research.

I think it necessary to clarify that the article I posted was NOT written 
by Sadie Plant. It was written by The Observer (as my post indicated). Thus 
the choice of words 'mutation', etc... were journalistic choices.

I am not too familiar with Plant's research and I have not read her study 
on cell phones. I also agree with Sean Smith in thinking that the fact that 
it is funded by Motorola doesn't take any credit away from it.

The point of my post was not to focus on Plant's research as such, not even 
to try to get to a conclusion on the accuracy of the results described in 
the article, but rather to call attention to the large amount of R&D that 
is currently being done both on the development of technologies that blur 
the distinctions between biology and technology, and on its possible 
impacts. This is the object of my own research (also corporately co-funded).

All the best. Ana Viseu



[ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ]
Tudo vale a pena se a alma não é pequena.
http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/~aviseu

http://privacy.openflows.org
[ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ]

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