Ana Viseu on Wed, 3 Apr 2002 11:37:19 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> Re: biology and technology |
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 [ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ] # 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