8 ms·
Indigenous Maize: Who Owns the Rights to Mexico’s ‘Wonder’ Plant?
- etaioinshrdlu 7y agoI'm quite against the private ownership of biological lifeforms, whether the owner is Monsanto or an indigenous village.
- amerine 7y agoA simple upvote is not enough of a show of agreement for this perspective. Genetics should not be own-able.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- colordrops 7y agoGenetics is information. Do you believe information should not be ownable? I think we should not be able to own any information. Information is like fire. It takes no space and costs nothing to replicate. Taking the concept ownership developed with physical objects and applying it to information is ridiculous. It's like owning clouds.
- msh 7y agoThere is a difference between information naturally occuring and created by someone.
- ciconia 7y agoInformation is always created by someone. Creation does not necessarily mean ownership.
- ijidak 7y agoWait... Who created the information in DNA? How does that tie to ownership?
- krageon 7y agoNobody created it, the argument makes no sense in the case of naturally occurring DNA.
- ijidak 7y ago> Nobody created it I don't think we can state that as a fact, can we? I was just watching this discussion here yesterday: https://youtu.be/noj4phMT9OE https://youtu.be/noj4phMT9OE. Very interesting points made.
- colordrops 7y agoPhysical objects are not the same as information. We create all information. Hard drives are just atoms arranged a particular way and how we interact and process those atoms adds the information layer on top. Same goes for DNA.
- tomc1985 7y ago> It's like owning clouds. Hah, tell that to FANG!
- taylorfinley 7y agoI agree with your sentiment, I do see some nuance here though. This phenotype is very valuable in how it could reduce inputs across industrial agriculture--and industrial agriculture is an extremely competitive and well-developed market. Entrenched interests are change-averse (unless they themselves are exploiting the change), so the very powerful industry will either squash this plant if it threatens their dominance, or squeeze every last penny out of it through patents. The net benefit will be best for everyone involved if the Nitrogen-fixing phenotype is hybridized into every corn cultivar around, which is only likely to happen if big-ag can exploit it for profit. That being the case, can we find a way to reward the farmers who genetically engineered this plant by selecting for the strongest individuals for the last several thousands years? Perhaps we can compensate them proportionately to the western seed companies who will close the last-mile gap getting this valuable trait to market.
- 13of40 7y ago> can we find a way to reward the farmers who genetically engineered this plant by selecting for the strongest individuals for the last several thousands years? In a very concrete sense we cannot, because the people who did it are dead. We're really talking about rewarding (the people we presume to be) their descendants. Is that something we would do in a completely European context? For example, if we found a strain of worm-resistant apple that had been growing in a particular suburb of Manchester since before anyone's grandma could remember, would you consider giving patent rights to anyone who had a tree in their back yard?
- harimau777 7y agoIsn't that basically what inheritance is? Rewarding descendants for what their ancestors did?
- cglace 7y agoI think you are missing most of their point.
- kop316 7y agoSo question based on this, is this a reason to be for non-GMOs? I would imagine that a lot of GMO crops have such patents, and as such, by purchasing them, you are supporting the patent holders. On the other hand, non-GMO craps would not have such patents, so you are not supporting them. I imagine there could be a flaw in this logic, but I welcome thoughts to it.
- mutt2016 7y agoEverything is GMO to a degree, and without GMO people starve as long as we all live in cities. So start a farm with a group of like minded people, or be dependent on corporate farms
- kop316 7y agoI understand everything is GMO to a degree, and I am honestly not sure of how the "non-GMO" label works. The question them becomes is the GMO from a patented modification or a non-patented modification? I am not against GMOs from a biological perspective, I agree they are necessary. The question is should one take a stand against patented GMOs.
- selimthegrim 7y agoPrevious post on the 'discovery' for reference: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17721741 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17721741
- Animats 7y agoDiscussion in Farm Progress.[1] The maize plant in Mexico requires a 9-month growing season, so it's only useful in near-tropical climates. Work is progressing to see if the trick that plant uses can be adapted to something that grows faster. For a plant to fix its own nitrogen carries an energy cost. So the plant grows slower. There's a tradeoff here. [1] https://www.farmprogress.com/biotechnology/nitrogen-fixing-corn-farming-s-holy-grail-when https://www.farmprogress.com/biotechnology/nitrogen-fixing-c...