Skip to content

Archive

Tag: blogger
Stephanie Trouillard the French TV journalist and blogger has published an article on France24 titled ‘Can human DNA be patented?’ in which she states “The US Supreme Court is hearing a case against a US biotech company that wants to defend its exclusive rights over two human gene sequences that could be used to identify people at greater risk of developing ovarian and breast cancer. Myriad Genetics, based in Salt Lake City, Utah, developed a genetic diagnosis tool based on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes -- sequences that the company successfully patented -- in the late 1990s. …Myriad’s monopoly over the two genes is contested. Researchers, doctors and patients argue that the company’s patents prevent wider testing and research into cancer. The US-based Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) is one of several scientific bodies contesting Myriad’s patents at the Supreme Court, whose nine justices are expected to deliver their ruling in June. The AMP argues that the genetic sequences for which Myriad holds the patents, awarded in 1997 and 1998, unfairly block further and more extensive research into cancer treatments. … AMP lawyer Christopher Hansen argued to the court that a company could not have exclusive rights over DNA, it being a substance created by nature. “The question presented by this case is what exactly did Myriad invent?” Hansen said. “And the answer is nothing.” The groups opposing Myriad’s patents are supported by Nobel Prize-winning scientist James Watson, who discovered the double helix structure of DNA in 1953. He argued that the product of nature could not be monopolised by any entity. "Knowledge per se cannot be patented. Myriad should not own breast cancer genes," Watson said outside the Supreme Court. Myriad, meanwhile, wants to secure its rights on the genetic sequences and so safeguard the substantial investments it made in researching and developing its analysis tools.”  Inspired by Stephanie Trouillard, France24 ow.ly/kuIe9 Image source ow.ly/kuIci Can human DNA be patented? (May 25 2013)

Stephanie Trouillard the French TV journalist and blogger has published an article on France24 titled ‘Can human DNA be patented?’ in which she states “The US Supreme Court is hearing a case against a US biotech company that wants to defend its exclusive rights over two human gene sequences that could be used to identify people at greater risk of developing ovarian and breast cancer. Myriad Genetics, based in Salt Lake City, Utah, developed a genetic diagnosis tool based on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes — sequences that the company successfully patented — in the late 1990s. …Myriad’s monopoly over the two genes is contested. Researchers, doctors and patients argue that the company’s patents prevent wider testing and research into cancer. The US-based Association for Molecular Pathology (AMP) is one of several scientific bodies contesting Myriad’s patents at the Supreme Court, whose nine justices are expected to deliver their ruling in June. The AMP argues that the genetic sequences for which Myriad holds the patents, awarded in 1997 and 1998, unfairly block further and more extensive research into cancer treatments. … AMP lawyer Christopher Hansen argued to the court that a company could not have exclusive rights over DNA, it being a substance created by nature. “The question presented by this case is what exactly did Myriad invent?” Hansen said. “And the answer is nothing.” The groups opposing Myriad’s patents are supported by Nobel Prize-winning scientist James Watson, who discovered the double helix structure of DNA in 1953. He argued that the product of nature could not be monopolised by any entity. “Knowledge per se cannot be patented. Myriad should not own breast cancer genes,” Watson said outside the Supreme Court. Myriad, meanwhile, wants to secure its rights on the genetic sequences and so safeguard the substantial investments it made in researching and developing its analysis tools.”

 

Inspired by Stephanie Trouillard, France24 ow.ly/kuIe9 Image source ow.ly/kuIci

 

 

Lee Fang the American investigative reporter and blogger has published an article in The Nation Magazine titled ‘Does the NRA Represent Gun Manufacturers or Gun Owners?’ Fang states “Over the last four years, Congress and the Obama administration have only enacted laws that have deregulated gun use in America. It’s no secret why. As pundits love to note, the gun lobby is incredibly influential. But as we consider the potential for reform … one of the first questions we should ask this time is: who does the gun lobby really represent? The National Rifle Association portrays itself as an organization that represents “4 million members” who simply love the Second Amendment. The truth is much more murky. In reality, the NRA is composed of half a dozen legal entities; some designed to run undisclosed attack ads in political campaigns, others to lobby and collect tens of millions in undisclosed, tax-deductible sums. …Despite the grassroots façade, there is much evidence to suggest that corporations that profit from unregulated gun use are propping up the NRA’s activities, much like how the tobacco lobby secretly funded “Smokers Rights’” fronts and libertarian anti-tax groups, or how polluters currently finance much of the climate change skepticism movement. …The Violence Policy Center has estimated that since 2005, gun manufacturers have contributed up to $38.9 million to the NRA. Those numbers, however, are based on publicly listed “sponsorship” levels on NRA fundraising pamphlets. The real figures could be much bigger. Like Crossroads GPS or Americans for Prosperity, or the Sierra Club for that matter, the NRA does not disclose any donor information even though it spends millions on federal elections. And like other industry fronts, the NRA is quick to conceal its pro–gun industry policy positions as ideological commitments.” Inspired by The Nation ow.ly/gdIgD image source Verum Serum ow.ly/gdIc8 NRA Represent Gun Manufacturers (December 26 2012)

Lee Fang the American investigative reporter and blogger has published an article in The Nation Magazine titled ‘Does the NRA Represent Gun Manufacturers or Gun Owners?’ Fang states “Over the last four years, Congress and the Obama administration have only enacted laws that have deregulated gun use in America. It’s no secret why. As pundits love to note, the gun lobby is incredibly influential. But as we consider the potential for reform … one of the first questions we should ask this time is: who does the gun lobby really represent? The National Rifle Association portrays itself as an organization that represents “4 million members” who simply love the Second Amendment. The truth is much more murky. In reality, the NRA is composed of half a dozen legal entities; some designed to run undisclosed attack ads in political campaigns, others to lobby and collect tens of millions in undisclosed, tax-deductible sums. …Despite the grassroots façade, there is much evidence to suggest that corporations that profit from unregulated gun use are propping up the NRA’s activities, much like how the tobacco lobby secretly funded “Smokers Rights’” fronts and libertarian anti-tax groups, or how polluters currently finance much of the climate change skepticism movement. …The Violence Policy Center has estimated that since 2005, gun manufacturers have contributed up to $38.9 million to the NRA. Those numbers, however, are based on publicly listed “sponsorship” levels on NRA fundraising pamphlets. The real figures could be much bigger. Like Crossroads GPS or Americans for Prosperity, or the Sierra Club for that matter, the NRA does not disclose any donor information even though it spends millions on federal elections. And like other industry fronts, the NRA is quick to conceal its pro–gun industry policy positions as ideological commitments.”

 

Inspired by The Nation ow.ly/gdIgD image source Verum Serum ow.ly/gdIc8

The Internet of Things Is Finally Talking (December 23 2012) The Internet of Things Is Finally Talking (December 23 2012)

Clive Thompson the 44 year old Canadian freelance journalist, blogger and science technology writer has published an article on the Wired titled ‘No Longer Vaporware: The Internet of Things Is Finally Talking’. Thompson states “…The Internet of Things is the long-prophesied phenomenon of everyday devices talking to one another—and us—online, creating odd new behaviors and efficiencies. Fridges that order food when you’re almost out of butter! Houses that sense when you’re gone and power down! Back in the ’90s, big companies built systems to do tricks like this, but they were expensive, hard to use, and vendor-specific. The hype eventually boiled away. The Internet of Things turned out to be vaporware. Until the past few years, that is, when the landscape shifted from below. … After the Fukushima nuclear disaster, many Japanese worried that the government wasn’t providing adequate data on areas outside the evacuation zone. So some hackers designed customized Geiger counters that automatically updated radioactivity levels on an online map. Soon there were more than 300 jury-rigged all over the country, so the public could see real-time radiation levels. “It was the largest nongovernmental radiation-monitoring network in Japan,” says Chris “Akiba” Wang, one of the hackers. A similar example recently emerged in earthquake prone Chile, where a student modded a seismometer to tweet its readings. It quickly amassed more than 300,000 followers, who were grateful for the early alerts. In essence, the Internet of Things is happening because it has reached the “Apple II stage.” This is the moment when a new technology finally becomes easy enough to use that thousands of people start doing experiments to scratch a personal itch—like Sande with his fan. And the pace of experimentation is going to accelerate, as new gear arrives that makes it even cheaper and easier.”

 

Inspired by Wired ow.ly/g2h7N image source Twitter ow.ly/g2h1M

Critical portrayal of life in Cuba (November 1 2012) Critical portrayal of life in Cuba (November 1 2012)

Yoani María Sánchez Cordero the 37 year old Cuban blogger, who achieved international fame and awards for her critical portrayal of life in Cuba under its current government, has been arrested along with her husband held while en route to attend the trial of Spanish activist. An Aljazeera states “Sanchez could not be reached by telephone, but her Twitter account includes entries from Thursday in which she recounted scenes from a cross-country trip, including two stops by police to fumigate her car, apparently for mosquitoes. Sanchez, through her blog Generation Y and other writings, has become Cuba’s best-known dissident and has won various awards overseas, but is never allowed out of Cuba to collect them. She was reported last week to have filed a complaint against Cuba with the Inter-American Human Rights Commission for repeatedly refusing to grant her a travel visa. The newspaper El Pais in Madrid said on its website Sanchez was its freelance correspondent and that it had tried to reach her by phone without success. Sanchez, her husband and others apparently were on their way to Bayamo for the trial of Carromero, who is charged with two counts of vehicular manslaughter for the death of Paya and his colleague Harold Cepero. Carromero was driving a small rental car with Paya, Cepero and Jens Arons Modig, a Swedish political activist, aboard when he lost control on a section of road under repair and crashed into a tree near Bayamo. He and Modig, who were not seriously hurt, said they were driving the dissidents to meet supporters.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/eJ25Z image source Facebook ow.ly/eJ244

Never been against the communist state (October 8 2012) Never been against the communist state (October 8 2012)

Nguyen Van Hai known as Dieu Cay the Vietnamese blogger charged with producing anti-state propaganda against the one-party Vietnamese state under a “vague” section of the criminal code, has been sentenced to 12 years in prison. Nguyen has already been in detention since September 2008, when he was jailed for tax fraud. According to the Raw Story blog, “mobile phone signals had apparently been blocked inside the court compound as [Nguyen was] tried under Article 88 of the Criminal Code, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in jail. …posting political articles on the banned Vietnamese website “Free Journalists Club” as well as writing on [blogs] denouncing corruption and injustice and criticising Hanoi’s foreign policy. Communist Vietnam bans private media — all newspapers and television channels are state-run. …Rights groups including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have repeatedly called upon the government to drop the charges and release … immediately. Reporters Without Borders ranked Vietnam 172 out of 179 countries in its 2011-2012 press freedom index and identified the authoritarian state as an “Enemy of the Internet” because of systematic use of cyber-censorship.” Court President Nguyen Phi Long said, “crimes were especially serious with clear intention against the state … must be seriously punished. …abused the popularity of the Internet to post articles which undermined and blackened (Vietnam’s) leaders, criticising the (Communist) party (and) destroying people’s trust in the state” Nguyen in a speech that was cut off when the audio feed was terminated said that he had never been against the communist state.

 

Inspired by The Raw Story ow.ly/ebdmg image source Namviet Times ow.ly/ebd5i

Rebecca MacKinnon the US journalist blogger and co-founder of Global Voices Online, and former researcher for the George Soros funded Open Society Institute, believes the issues she raised in calling on internet users to “take back the Net” have “grown more obvious and urgent”. MacKinnon in a recent TEDTalk presentation highlighted that global information technology companies have become the new “sovereigns of cyberspace.” MacKinnon calls on the world’s Netizens to “…work to make sure that the Internet, the geopolitical system, and the international economy evolve in a way that serves everybody’s rights and interests, not just those of the most powerful one percent … The time has come to occupy the Net. Existing political and legal frameworks have so far proven incapable of preventing and constraining the abuse of digital power … political innovations [are] needed to ensure that government and technology really do serve the world’s people — and not the other way around.”

 

Inspired by Huffington Post http://ow.ly/7VmUJ image source Joi Ito http://ow.ly/7VmXG

Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Technorati button Reddit button Myspace button Linkedin button Delicious button Digg button Flickr button Stumbleupon button Newsvine button Youtube button