kaiusbrantlee

How much time per day dop you spend looking for something to post your disdain about, as compared to how much time you actually focus on solutions? Im just curious

You bring up a good point.

Additionally, just doesn't make sense to install a network that has long fragile potential points of failure (aka attack surface) like fiber cables to replace the network that is or may be shut down by bad actors.

re " how big the niche "technically literate to run their own e-commerce business, but selling on Amazon for other reasons" is,

As the platform matured, the level of technical literacy could decrease over time. e.g. the more technical aspects get abstracted away from the users.

Furthermore, users who are motivated enough would begin to extend their technical reach by means of self education, and/or collaboration with more technical party/(ies).

This is a common arc in technology.

Yeah I can understand google needing to do this. I mean, they aren't making nearly enough money already

Correlation does not equal causation

Its amazing how many supposed experts skip right over that. JFC.

IOW, the gene mutations could be a response, not a cause.

If it's new then it is irresponsible to call it safe, as there has not been a long enough period since it has been used in people to determine long term effects.

This will work on some spammers but not forever. This is an infinite cat and mouse game.

For better or for worse, "publicizing spammers pain for our pleasure" has a guaranteed effect of shortening the useful lifespan of this tool. Unless of course no spammers ever read that article, OR HN.

> This is the kind of GMO that's generally considered fairly benign

not by me. The rpecautionary principle is not followed in any GM process so invasive.

Even breeding, which is a far less invasive form of genetic manipulation, has caused serious issues. The vast majority of commercial produce has had a lot of its nutrition bred out of it, for example.

These kinds of long arc problems for the consumers of the food are not possible to track over anything but multiple generations (generations of the consumers of the food, not generations of the plants). They become all but impossible to track when the incentives of the systems at play essentially guarantee fuckery with regards to the gathering, interpretation, and dissemination of data that jepordizes profits.

Better than the algae system described is capturing the carbon in plants that are later used in such ways as to keep the carbon sequestered.

Trees whose wood is used as a building material, animal feed where the manure is then used as fertilizer, are 2 very accessible examples.

No need to make this more complicated than it has to be.