what's your favorite gene chip flavor?

[truth]

and it ain't a choice between jalapeno or barbeque.

One or two? Recombinant or genomic? ORF or expressed? Sense or not? Double or single? Sticky or blunt?

Not sure? Don't care? Frickin' scientists?

Here's a good read about the failure of the news media to cover the technological developments in the biosciences: Tech Under Wraps.

The article's claims as to the scope of the impact to our species: "This is a revolution that will transform our lives in ways we can't even imagine. It will likely redefine what it means to be human, and to be alive or dead. It will rewrite the meaning of beauty, health and intelligence, of parenthood, and even of self.", is not too overblown IMO.

[Administrator]

I'm sure I'm off-base here but I can't help wonder in awe about the future of the net.

A decade ago, when transmission speeds were still measured in thousands of bits per second, the Web was all words. Those of you readers who were online in those days remember how thrilling it was to even see a picture forming on the screen — and then how frustrating it was to wait while the damn thing froze up everything else for 10 minutes while it downloaded one pixel at a time.

Of course, that is no longer the case. As bandwidth increased, so did the graphic complexity of the content. These days, the Web is a panorama — some would say a wasteland — of images, from movie stills to porn to pictures of auction items and book covers to spam. As broadband has reached America's homes in the last two years, it has brought in its train simple video, from brief movie trailers to extended cartoons.

Looking ahead, you can already predict the future: full-length downloadable movies available in near real-time (killing the video and DVD industries), online television, and do-it-yourself FX, simulations and animation.

That's the predictable future, the usual extrapolation of technology from the present, paced by Moore's Law. More bandwidth equals prettier pictures and longer movies.