News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The transgenic petunia carnage of 2017 by DarkKomunalec on Thursday June 08, 2017 @05:58AM (#14513052)
'insects have developed resistances'

Some insects. And you're very correct that the insect-insecticide battle has been going on for a while - that doesn't mean giving one side a huge leg-up won't have consequences. Genetic engineering can accomplish millennia of evolution in a single generation - the two are not the same.

Re:The transgenic petunia carnage of 2017 by funnyfacts365 on Thursday June 08, 2017 @10:41AM (#14514488)
Some insects? What about nicotine? That insecticid kills them all, humans included
Re:The transgenic petunia carnage of 2017 by undersuit on Thursday June 08, 2017 @03:57PM (#14516750)
>In 1997, the last year for which global data was available, over 5.5 million pounds of the pesticide fumigant methyl bromide were applied to tobacco fields worldwide.

A few tobacco plants in isolation are going to be protected from insects easily developing a resistance to their natural defenses. We've been growing tobacco plants in massively concentrated fields for 400 years in this country. Nicotine is still a useful insecticide, just as Penicillin is still useful antibiotic.

Re:The transgenic petunia carnage of 2017 by _0ffh on Thursday June 08, 2017 @03:38PM (#14516602)
Bar the tobacco beetle, I presume.
Re:The transgenic petunia carnage of 2017 by Baeocystin on Thursday June 08, 2017 @06:48AM (#14513221)
I don't disagree that there are risks.

But genetic reshuffling, recombination, and horizontal gene transfer has been going on en masse in the microbiota we are surround by for billions of years. I think once we start considering introducing truly novel genes, we will have a case for greater caution and reserve. But so far, all projects are of the 'transfer this already existent gene to this other organism', and I think that is a less risky proposition overall.

Re:The transgenic petunia carnage of 2017 by unknown_apostle on Thursday June 08, 2017 @12:39PM (#14515319)
In this matter of extreme complexity and nonlinearity, how can you ever tell the point where being paranoid is the right thing to do?

E.g. how can you know that transferring a gene from maize to petunias is still "sufficiently close" to the level of variation seen in ancient natural processes and evolution?

(Genuine question but also genuine worry about this.)