/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15136745

What kind of cells? Do you properly trypsinize them from your flask? Do the cells adhere to the plastic of the well or are the wells coated?

>>15138311

>/sci/ humor

>>15138267

>t.

No thanks, I'm full. :)

>>15138257

Oh, did the little one run out of arguments ALREADY? Limitations, huh ... ^^

>>15138249

>worst in those with those of

Aw hell, shouldn't start doing some other task mid sentence ... :D

>>15138245

Capacity? I'd rather call it potentiality. It is not entirely wrong even, only that said potentiality in most is so miniscule that any mild to strong irrational impulse will immediately override it. Which is actually worst in those with those of sufficient potentiality to MOSTLY maintain a rational form of cognition ... as these fools then tend to live under the delusion of being rational, not realizing when their own limitations do catch up to them.

>>15138078

>that we are all capable of rational thought?

>>15136280

>This solves the issues outlined in the paper.

Have we been drinking hand sanitizer again today? Bloody retard ...

>>15135624

Very little.

>>15134229

>most of my colleagues ...

No need to tell me, been such a weirdo once myself. ;)

>with this new epigenetic marker we prouved exists
>PIWI piRNA pathway
>possible global activator

Oh! Even without knowing any details this does sound interesting. Global activator for a certain class of transposable elements (plus the ability to suppress it specifically) could indeed achieve results there. And even if it should not be able to affect aging itself that much in the end, this might still be very promising in dealing with cancer (given that I personally see transposon reactivation with the resulting progressive genome destabilization and expression of fusogenic proteins as a core driver of malign tumors).

>Right now what i'm about to start doing is predicting cancer/death based on levels of this marker.

All the best with this then for now! Would love to get some update on this in the future ... ^^

>I prefere to keep my /pol/ shit in /pol/.

Fair enough and mostly same. Been getting rather retarded over there the past few years (not that it is that much better over here).

>>15134101

The "fusion power" of biology ... :DD

>>15131156

>Nope, not always.

Aware of that, but you usually never hear anything about this in all those fancy press releases. Say it would require some rather intricate finetuning as one cannot simply inhibit transposon site activity completely. And playing whack-a-mole with whatever abberantly activated sequence does not exactly appear practical either ...

>David just throws shit at the wall and hopes it sticks. He is a retard.

That much is evident. Damn snek oil salesman ...

>Back to /pol/

Sorry, not right now. I'm on vacation. ;)

>>15133625

Yes. A slight tan aside I do however not look like a nigger. :)

>>15131281

>because journalists are pressured to capitalize on trends

Only thing for the most part that you got wrong. It is very much coordinated by interest groups with the goal to implement a controlled economy ready to "buffer off" the collapse of the bloated US Dollar (with all the resulting collateral on the global scale).

>>15129340

Heh, I would not expect actual "reversal" here yet but I got a rough idea what they achieved there. The "key" here likely lies in all the endogenous retroviruses (and other assorted transposable elements) in the genome of the mice (which also applies to humans). Can "blame evolution" for that, these parasitic genetic elements have acted like an accelerator for adaption due to two core features: being highly mobile within the genome once activated (and if still intact enough to reintegrate) and usually carrying strong gene promoters (usually controlled by cellular stress). Problem being, these sequences are still in most cases "parasitic junk" and get epigenetically silenced by default. Now some of them however carry a feature which in the case of a DNA double strand break (so DNA stress roughly speaking) prevents the silencing of their sequence after the chromatin has been "opened" for repair (this btw does play an active role in the terminal differentiation of some cell types) ... keeping them perpetually active and potentially disrupting, triggering further "control mechanisms" within the cell like senescence or apoptosis which contribute to aging. Or they trigger progressive genomic instability within the cell with similar outcome.

>>15129357

>"doesn't such manipulation provoke cancer?"

That is an issue, it usually does. Intrinsically interlinked.

>>15129256

>by causing the loss of epigenetic information

The bloody retards don't even know about the actual mechanism here ... gods, WHAT genetic element reactivates in mice (and men) due to repair flags on the histones and prevents restoration of the original epigenetic code, huh? Bloody mentally handicapped wastes of meat.

>>15124669

>(Not an approximation, a real circle)

:}~<

>>15126896

>I eat and enjoy both.

'xactly, why not both. Same applies for the veggies with your meat.

>>15125912

>soft eugenics
>chinks

Can only have two outcomes ... either a mindless insect hive or the bloody slanteyes breeding out the small shred of European they still carry. My bet is on the former. Gods, we don't have enough napalm for this ...

>>15125225

>We already figured out the "easy" science.

No, "we" didn't. We simply lost our manifest destiny as a society and allowed retards into every bloody field of science, under the oh so clever delusion that all monkeys are equal. Equally retarded they are, that much is sure!

>>15120569

>wants to be absorbed by the machine

Thinking actually the exact other way around ... :3

>>15120270

Nah, not really. If we assume some de novo mutation either in the X or Y of a male which makes offspring non-viable (e.g. by early failure of pregnancy) then it is entirely possible.

>>15119856

>“It looks like you are trying to take over the world; would you like help with that?”

I'd actually be much more worried about these recent art AIs here ... :DD

>>15119882

>i.e. doesn't necessarily mean the "lights are on" inside the brain simulation

Bingo. But emphasis would here likely be on the word "simulate". One could likely simulate a current steady state of a wetware, the synaptic connections, the activation thresholds of each neuron, perhaps even sensory input ... but that might in the end just simulate what amounts to a piece of "dead" brain matter. Talking purely biological this alone does not faithfully simulate what a brain does, every single signaling event at a synapse triggers a cascade of protein shuttling, cytoskeletal rearrangement, changes in gene expression pattern, etc ... as said previously, every single neuron is a very complex microprocessor of its own. Talking a bit beyond biology, the consciousness isn't really the physical structure this process is running on (the arrangement of neurons) but the continuously changing and adapting pattern of both electrical signaling events and rearrangements of the very internal structure (the complex interlinked semi-stable equilibria of chemical signaling events) of each and every neuron involved. Yes, especially the latter effect might be comparably miniscule overall but then it could juuust be more-than-the-sum-of-its-parts element we miss (or do not simulate faithfully enough).

>>15119775

>You could do a mix with say 1% origional copies all redundant distributed strategicly thoughout the world, and the rest just task oriented sub-agents

If I were a very clever AI then yes ... that might just keep me going. ;)

>it being smarter than us. I think if we assume it's smarter than us we should conclude that we can't outsmart it.

Here I got some doubts. I could have lots of advantages in accessing and processing information. It would be rather "fast" so to speak at performing such tasks. Could it outwit us in strategic planning and pattern recognition? Oh well, it can only cook with the waters of this reality here same as we do so to speak ...