7 ms·

Many people (including comments on hacker news!) have called farmers the original hackers. The amount of bespoke problem solving needed is tremendous. Uniformit

Many people (including comments on hacker news!) have called farmers the original hackers. The amount of bespoke problem solving needed is tremendous. Uniformity in farming is an extremely recent phenomenon. eg: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=626534 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=626534

dghughes 2y ago
Everyone was a farmer until not so long in the past.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  most of the named countries that are recognized today, were founded by hunting groups (defined by spoken language) that sought control over farmers and definitely over migrants.. oddly, farming itself is cited as a major driver of armed conflicts
spacecadet 2y ago
Yeah... I grew up on a multi-generational family farm and we hacked everything to repair or extend its functionality. Or just consider animal husbandry at its roots, OG bio hacking...
- cogman10 2y ago
  Not just animal husbandry. Modern corn is the result of centuries of genetic engineering. Farmers have long used bio engineering to make crops tastier or more resistant to disease or drought.
  - spacecadet 2y ago
    Oh I know, a relative was bio-chem at monsanto related to corn... but I normally avoid telling people that because of the stigma it carries (unfair considering the global impact to yield)... now he works tirelessly to reduce invasive species to reduce coastal erosion.
    - inanutshellus 2y ago
      > unfair considering the global impact to yield The Monsanto stigma is well-earned by its legal teams, much to the chagrin of its many Monsanto biochem employees that saw (and see) the company as a creator of good in the world.
      - spacecadet 2y ago
        Exactly, I dont deny this. He retired early.
  - mistrial9 2y ago
    this purposefully blurs the distinction between pairing natural breeding versus invasive engineering.. often repeated by people in favor of invasive engineering
    - spacecadet 2y ago
      What an assumption. We're just having a fun conversation.
    - cogman10 2y ago
      Because "invasive engineering" is just systematized "natural breeding". People that don't understand this think that the production of GMO crops is done by scientists gene splicing scary chemicals into food products. What is actually done is scientist get a genetic profile of crops, look for genes in crops that behave in a way they like, and bread crops with those genes. Exactly what "natural breeding" does, except for maybe the fact that it can be far more targeted with the genetic information. There is a downside to this, it often results in highly homogeneous genetics in plants. However, that's a problem we already have with "natural" processes (see: bananas and most citrus fruits).
      - mypalmike 2y ago
        You are describing selective breeding. GMO is different. It involves the laboratory isolation of genes, and techniques to introduce said genes into an organism such that its DNA is altered. These technique do include gene splicing. Golden rice is one well known example. It is a GMO plant which has been modified with genes taken from daffodils and a bacteria called erwinium uredovora. It's not just breeding existing species for good qualities.
    - aegypti 2y ago
      Yes this is why eg the French bombard seeds with extraordinary amounts of radiation to get desired sets of random mutations, it’s much more natural and less invasive.
culi 2y ago
OpenSourceEcology has the mission to create open source versions of 50 technologies they consider fundamental to "human civilization". One of the few technologies they've actually succeeded in open sourcing is a tractor https://www.opensourceecology.org/portfolio/tractor/ https://www.opensourceecology.org/portfolio/tractor/ They also have a 3d printer, a microhouse, a CEB press, and a power cube https://www.opensourceecology.org/gvcs/ https://www.opensourceecology.org/gvcs/

dghughes 2y ago

Everyone was a farmer until not so long in the past.

mistrial9 2y ago
most of the named countries that are recognized today, were founded by hunting groups (defined by spoken language) that sought control over farmers and definitely over migrants.. oddly, farming itself is cited as a major driver of armed conflicts

spacecadet 2y ago

Yeah... I grew up on a multi-generational family farm and we hacked everything to repair or extend its functionality. Or just consider animal husbandry at its roots, OG bio hacking...

cogman10 2y ago
Not just animal husbandry. Modern corn is the result of centuries of genetic engineering. Farmers have long used bio engineering to make crops tastier or more resistant to disease or drought.
- spacecadet 2y ago
  Oh I know, a relative was bio-chem at monsanto related to corn... but I normally avoid telling people that because of the stigma it carries (unfair considering the global impact to yield)... now he works tirelessly to reduce invasive species to reduce coastal erosion.
  - inanutshellus 2y ago
    > unfair considering the global impact to yield The Monsanto stigma is well-earned by its legal teams, much to the chagrin of its many Monsanto biochem employees that saw (and see) the company as a creator of good in the world.
    - spacecadet 2y ago
      Exactly, I dont deny this. He retired early.
- mistrial9 2y ago
  this purposefully blurs the distinction between pairing natural breeding versus invasive engineering.. often repeated by people in favor of invasive engineering
  - spacecadet 2y ago
    What an assumption. We're just having a fun conversation.
  - cogman10 2y ago
    Because "invasive engineering" is just systematized "natural breeding". People that don't understand this think that the production of GMO crops is done by scientists gene splicing scary chemicals into food products. What is actually done is scientist get a genetic profile of crops, look for genes in crops that behave in a way they like, and bread crops with those genes. Exactly what "natural breeding" does, except for maybe the fact that it can be far more targeted with the genetic information. There is a downside to this, it often results in highly homogeneous genetics in plants. However, that's a problem we already have with "natural" processes (see: bananas and most citrus fruits).
    - mypalmike 2y ago
      You are describing selective breeding. GMO is different. It involves the laboratory isolation of genes, and techniques to introduce said genes into an organism such that its DNA is altered. These technique do include gene splicing. Golden rice is one well known example. It is a GMO plant which has been modified with genes taken from daffodils and a bacteria called erwinium uredovora. It's not just breeding existing species for good qualities.
  - aegypti 2y ago
    Yes this is why eg the French bombard seeds with extraordinary amounts of radiation to get desired sets of random mutations, it’s much more natural and less invasive.

culi 2y ago

OpenSourceEcology has the mission to create open source versions of 50 technologies they consider fundamental to "human civilization". One of the few technologies they've actually succeeded in open sourcing is a tractor https://www.opensourceecology.org/portfolio/tractor/ https://www.opensourceecology.org/portfolio/tractor/ They also have a 3d printer, a microhouse, a CEB press, and a power cube https://www.opensourceecology.org/gvcs/ https://www.opensourceecology.org/gvcs/