63 thoughts on “yay!”

  1. However, they may be surveilled and Google can run advertising on them as a way of reaching prying eyeballs.
    Also, the location of your genome may be monitored if your cellphone is on.

    Reply
  2. However, they may be surveilled and Google can run advertising on them as a way of reaching prying eyeballs.
    Also, the location of your genome may be monitored if your cellphone is on.

    Reply
  3. However, they may be surveilled and Google can run advertising on them as a way of reaching prying eyeballs.
    Also, the location of your genome may be monitored if your cellphone is on.

    Reply
  4. the location of your genome may be monitored if your cellphone is on
    I knew there was a reason they only sell belt-level cell-phone holders!

    Reply
  5. the location of your genome may be monitored if your cellphone is on
    I knew there was a reason they only sell belt-level cell-phone holders!

    Reply
  6. the location of your genome may be monitored if your cellphone is on
    I knew there was a reason they only sell belt-level cell-phone holders!

    Reply
  7. Yes, there was always the problem of having to pay royalties for using your own genome.
    Partially kidding. But that’s kind of the implication of having a patentable genome.

    Reply
  8. Yes, there was always the problem of having to pay royalties for using your own genome.
    Partially kidding. But that’s kind of the implication of having a patentable genome.

    Reply
  9. Yes, there was always the problem of having to pay royalties for using your own genome.
    Partially kidding. But that’s kind of the implication of having a patentable genome.

    Reply
  10. …and by “using your own genome”, I meant just being alive. But there’s always the commingling of genomes activities to consider, too. When that happens, do you both have to pay royalties?

    Reply
  11. …and by “using your own genome”, I meant just being alive. But there’s always the commingling of genomes activities to consider, too. When that happens, do you both have to pay royalties?

    Reply
  12. …and by “using your own genome”, I meant just being alive. But there’s always the commingling of genomes activities to consider, too. When that happens, do you both have to pay royalties?

    Reply
  13. Wisconsin Republicans today mandated that cellphones be inserted in every woman’s womb so that the location of fertilized eggs and fetuses may be monitored by the NSA.
    Drone attacks could be ordered on the mother to save the fetus’ life or if the fetus indicates Sharia-like propensities via intrauterine sign language.
    Once birth occurs, the NSA and Medicaid will be prohibited from tracking the person or giving a sh*t one way or another.

    Reply
  14. Wisconsin Republicans today mandated that cellphones be inserted in every woman’s womb so that the location of fertilized eggs and fetuses may be monitored by the NSA.
    Drone attacks could be ordered on the mother to save the fetus’ life or if the fetus indicates Sharia-like propensities via intrauterine sign language.
    Once birth occurs, the NSA and Medicaid will be prohibited from tracking the person or giving a sh*t one way or another.

    Reply
  15. Wisconsin Republicans today mandated that cellphones be inserted in every woman’s womb so that the location of fertilized eggs and fetuses may be monitored by the NSA.
    Drone attacks could be ordered on the mother to save the fetus’ life or if the fetus indicates Sharia-like propensities via intrauterine sign language.
    Once birth occurs, the NSA and Medicaid will be prohibited from tracking the person or giving a sh*t one way or another.

    Reply
  16. Fresh from Dorothy Rabinowitz’ Wall Street Journal tirade against the totalitarian imposition of rental bicycles and the racks to hold them in various locations throughout Manhatten, I was chilled to behold on my recent forays the past two days around my city, Denver, that overnight (literally — not literally as in “his head literally blew off” –but as in “they weren’t there yesterday”) several of these same installations had mysteriously appeared without warning, as if they had sprouted, fully formed with all of the attributes of real bicycles and bicycle racks, from the concrete after having perhaps been sown by seedpods that had drifted across the universe from whereabouts unknown.
    I noticed too that the bicycles were being used and, I know this is creepy, bicycle riders had replaced car drivers, I mean, not replaced exactly, they were the same people, but different, oddly serene and unemotional, human but missing the normal personality traits you would expect from humans who had been sitting in traffic in 100 degree temperatures.
    No, these “people” using the bicycles were not easily ruffled.
    Another odd thing, too, I understand Rabinowitz, questioned yesterday, was completely different from the ranting person of a few days ago.
    When asked about the changes she had observed in her fellow New Yorkers who were now riding bicycles instead of driving cars — I mean she actually thought these people weren’t who they had been, as if they had been kidnapped or replaced — she blinked calmly and shrugged and said, no, nothing is going on, I was just being a silly goose the other day, there’s nothing here, move along.
    Her preternatural calm reminded me of the “patients” who complained to the doctor played by Kevin McCarthy in “The Invasion of the Body Snatchers” that their relatives were not the people they had known, and then days later the complainers themselves acted as if absolutely nothing was amiss, as if, as if they had been gotten too.
    But here’s the kicker that makes me think something is going on of lethal importance to Americans and the human race, something not of this world, as I was gazing at one these bicycle installations, I looked up and on the wall behind was an ad for the opening of a new coffee shop in blazing red letters that spelled out — “Bolshevik”.
    You’ve got to believe me, please, they are coming.
    The people you know, the drivers now riders, they aren’t who you think they are.
    For the love of God, what do I have to do to make you believe me?

    Reply
  17. Fresh from Dorothy Rabinowitz’ Wall Street Journal tirade against the totalitarian imposition of rental bicycles and the racks to hold them in various locations throughout Manhatten, I was chilled to behold on my recent forays the past two days around my city, Denver, that overnight (literally — not literally as in “his head literally blew off” –but as in “they weren’t there yesterday”) several of these same installations had mysteriously appeared without warning, as if they had sprouted, fully formed with all of the attributes of real bicycles and bicycle racks, from the concrete after having perhaps been sown by seedpods that had drifted across the universe from whereabouts unknown.
    I noticed too that the bicycles were being used and, I know this is creepy, bicycle riders had replaced car drivers, I mean, not replaced exactly, they were the same people, but different, oddly serene and unemotional, human but missing the normal personality traits you would expect from humans who had been sitting in traffic in 100 degree temperatures.
    No, these “people” using the bicycles were not easily ruffled.
    Another odd thing, too, I understand Rabinowitz, questioned yesterday, was completely different from the ranting person of a few days ago.
    When asked about the changes she had observed in her fellow New Yorkers who were now riding bicycles instead of driving cars — I mean she actually thought these people weren’t who they had been, as if they had been kidnapped or replaced — she blinked calmly and shrugged and said, no, nothing is going on, I was just being a silly goose the other day, there’s nothing here, move along.
    Her preternatural calm reminded me of the “patients” who complained to the doctor played by Kevin McCarthy in “The Invasion of the Body Snatchers” that their relatives were not the people they had known, and then days later the complainers themselves acted as if absolutely nothing was amiss, as if, as if they had been gotten too.
    But here’s the kicker that makes me think something is going on of lethal importance to Americans and the human race, something not of this world, as I was gazing at one these bicycle installations, I looked up and on the wall behind was an ad for the opening of a new coffee shop in blazing red letters that spelled out — “Bolshevik”.
    You’ve got to believe me, please, they are coming.
    The people you know, the drivers now riders, they aren’t who you think they are.
    For the love of God, what do I have to do to make you believe me?

    Reply
  18. Fresh from Dorothy Rabinowitz’ Wall Street Journal tirade against the totalitarian imposition of rental bicycles and the racks to hold them in various locations throughout Manhatten, I was chilled to behold on my recent forays the past two days around my city, Denver, that overnight (literally — not literally as in “his head literally blew off” –but as in “they weren’t there yesterday”) several of these same installations had mysteriously appeared without warning, as if they had sprouted, fully formed with all of the attributes of real bicycles and bicycle racks, from the concrete after having perhaps been sown by seedpods that had drifted across the universe from whereabouts unknown.
    I noticed too that the bicycles were being used and, I know this is creepy, bicycle riders had replaced car drivers, I mean, not replaced exactly, they were the same people, but different, oddly serene and unemotional, human but missing the normal personality traits you would expect from humans who had been sitting in traffic in 100 degree temperatures.
    No, these “people” using the bicycles were not easily ruffled.
    Another odd thing, too, I understand Rabinowitz, questioned yesterday, was completely different from the ranting person of a few days ago.
    When asked about the changes she had observed in her fellow New Yorkers who were now riding bicycles instead of driving cars — I mean she actually thought these people weren’t who they had been, as if they had been kidnapped or replaced — she blinked calmly and shrugged and said, no, nothing is going on, I was just being a silly goose the other day, there’s nothing here, move along.
    Her preternatural calm reminded me of the “patients” who complained to the doctor played by Kevin McCarthy in “The Invasion of the Body Snatchers” that their relatives were not the people they had known, and then days later the complainers themselves acted as if absolutely nothing was amiss, as if, as if they had been gotten too.
    But here’s the kicker that makes me think something is going on of lethal importance to Americans and the human race, something not of this world, as I was gazing at one these bicycle installations, I looked up and on the wall behind was an ad for the opening of a new coffee shop in blazing red letters that spelled out — “Bolshevik”.
    You’ve got to believe me, please, they are coming.
    The people you know, the drivers now riders, they aren’t who you think they are.
    For the love of God, what do I have to do to make you believe me?

    Reply
  19. After Rabinowitz’s most recent remarks, off she tootled on her City Bike, not even ringing the bell on the handlebar, without a care in the world.

    Reply
  20. After Rabinowitz’s most recent remarks, off she tootled on her City Bike, not even ringing the bell on the handlebar, without a care in the world.

    Reply
  21. After Rabinowitz’s most recent remarks, off she tootled on her City Bike, not even ringing the bell on the handlebar, without a care in the world.

    Reply
  22. If you own a bull, then you’re responsible for it, and have to pay for any damage it does if it for some reason gets into a china shop.
    I’ve argued that if people really want ideas and intangible things to be treated like property, they should follow the logic in that regard, too. Your business method patent turned out to be not so good business after all? Let the licensees sue you, they clearly rented a defective product. You patent a cancer gene? Hey, your property is running amok, killing lots of people! Stop that!

    Reply
  23. If you own a bull, then you’re responsible for it, and have to pay for any damage it does if it for some reason gets into a china shop.
    I’ve argued that if people really want ideas and intangible things to be treated like property, they should follow the logic in that regard, too. Your business method patent turned out to be not so good business after all? Let the licensees sue you, they clearly rented a defective product. You patent a cancer gene? Hey, your property is running amok, killing lots of people! Stop that!

    Reply
  24. If you own a bull, then you’re responsible for it, and have to pay for any damage it does if it for some reason gets into a china shop.
    I’ve argued that if people really want ideas and intangible things to be treated like property, they should follow the logic in that regard, too. Your business method patent turned out to be not so good business after all? Let the licensees sue you, they clearly rented a defective product. You patent a cancer gene? Hey, your property is running amok, killing lots of people! Stop that!

    Reply
  25. The question in my mind is, if the law is so blazingly obvious as to get a unanimous Supreme Court decision (and I certainly agree it is, for whatever that is worth), then doesn’t it seem like the Patent Office should have been able to figure it out, too? After all, the “occurring in nature” characteristic of the genes in question isn’t really debatable. And that is supposed to be a bar to patentability….

    Reply
  26. The question in my mind is, if the law is so blazingly obvious as to get a unanimous Supreme Court decision (and I certainly agree it is, for whatever that is worth), then doesn’t it seem like the Patent Office should have been able to figure it out, too? After all, the “occurring in nature” characteristic of the genes in question isn’t really debatable. And that is supposed to be a bar to patentability….

    Reply
  27. The question in my mind is, if the law is so blazingly obvious as to get a unanimous Supreme Court decision (and I certainly agree it is, for whatever that is worth), then doesn’t it seem like the Patent Office should have been able to figure it out, too? After all, the “occurring in nature” characteristic of the genes in question isn’t really debatable. And that is supposed to be a bar to patentability….

    Reply
  28. Not debatable? The Disease of Conservatism Himself cannot personally affirm issues of molecular biology from his own knowledge or belief, so the science is doubtful: (from Huffpo)
    “The Court didn’t see things Myriad’s way, however, and ultimately ruled that “companies cannot patent parts of naturally-occurring human genes.” Their decision was unanimous, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion, and it was all pretty much easy-peasy lemon-squeezy. That is, it would have been, but Justice Antonin Scalia just had to make things wheezy-queasy lemon-WTF:
    I join the judgment of the Court, and all of its opinion except Part I–A and some portions of the rest of the opinion going into fine details of molecular biology. I am unable to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even my own belief. It suffices for me to affirm, having studied the opinions below and the expert briefs presented here, that the portion of DNA isolated from its natural state sought to be patented is identical to that portion of the DNA in its natural state; and that complementary DNA (cDNA) is a synthetic creation not normally present in nature.”
    Christ, the ego on that man.

    Reply
  29. Not debatable? The Disease of Conservatism Himself cannot personally affirm issues of molecular biology from his own knowledge or belief, so the science is doubtful: (from Huffpo)
    “The Court didn’t see things Myriad’s way, however, and ultimately ruled that “companies cannot patent parts of naturally-occurring human genes.” Their decision was unanimous, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion, and it was all pretty much easy-peasy lemon-squeezy. That is, it would have been, but Justice Antonin Scalia just had to make things wheezy-queasy lemon-WTF:
    I join the judgment of the Court, and all of its opinion except Part I–A and some portions of the rest of the opinion going into fine details of molecular biology. I am unable to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even my own belief. It suffices for me to affirm, having studied the opinions below and the expert briefs presented here, that the portion of DNA isolated from its natural state sought to be patented is identical to that portion of the DNA in its natural state; and that complementary DNA (cDNA) is a synthetic creation not normally present in nature.”
    Christ, the ego on that man.

    Reply
  30. Not debatable? The Disease of Conservatism Himself cannot personally affirm issues of molecular biology from his own knowledge or belief, so the science is doubtful: (from Huffpo)
    “The Court didn’t see things Myriad’s way, however, and ultimately ruled that “companies cannot patent parts of naturally-occurring human genes.” Their decision was unanimous, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the opinion, and it was all pretty much easy-peasy lemon-squeezy. That is, it would have been, but Justice Antonin Scalia just had to make things wheezy-queasy lemon-WTF:
    I join the judgment of the Court, and all of its opinion except Part I–A and some portions of the rest of the opinion going into fine details of molecular biology. I am unable to affirm those details on my own knowledge or even my own belief. It suffices for me to affirm, having studied the opinions below and the expert briefs presented here, that the portion of DNA isolated from its natural state sought to be patented is identical to that portion of the DNA in its natural state; and that complementary DNA (cDNA) is a synthetic creation not normally present in nature.”
    Christ, the ego on that man.

    Reply
  31. Laura, some day there will be a case which turns on whether or not the world is round. And he will say that, not having been to the moon (LEO being insufficient), he can’t say of his own knowledge that the world is round.

    Reply
  32. Laura, some day there will be a case which turns on whether or not the world is round. And he will say that, not having been to the moon (LEO being insufficient), he can’t say of his own knowledge that the world is round.

    Reply
  33. Laura, some day there will be a case which turns on whether or not the world is round. And he will say that, not having been to the moon (LEO being insufficient), he can’t say of his own knowledge that the world is round.

    Reply
  34. Riffing on responsibility for products, the sins of the fathers thing…shouldn’t it go the other way, as well?

    Reply
  35. Riffing on responsibility for products, the sins of the fathers thing…shouldn’t it go the other way, as well?

    Reply
  36. Riffing on responsibility for products, the sins of the fathers thing…shouldn’t it go the other way, as well?

    Reply
  37. Every American needs a mobile death ray for self defense:
    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/alleged-ny-kkk-member-accused-of-creating-truck?ref=fpb
    I want one. Now that it exists, it’s my God-given right to own one.
    Why isn’t Wayne Lapierre all over this?
    If you read the link, you’ll notice the KKK inventor, now arrestee, entered a synagogue to inquire if Israel (thinking maybe synagogues were Israeli consulates, no doubt) might be interested in purchasing his weapon to kill their enemies “in their sleep”, which, by the way, is the first time a KKK member has darkened the door of a synagogue without a lit molotov cocktail in hand.
    I’m gratified to see that the KKK has reformed its Jew-lasering ways as markets for genocide have changed.
    Israel sent out feelers for a powwow with the inventor, but when they found out Paula Dean would be catering the event, they demurred, citing bad optics.

    Reply
  38. Every American needs a mobile death ray for self defense:
    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/alleged-ny-kkk-member-accused-of-creating-truck?ref=fpb
    I want one. Now that it exists, it’s my God-given right to own one.
    Why isn’t Wayne Lapierre all over this?
    If you read the link, you’ll notice the KKK inventor, now arrestee, entered a synagogue to inquire if Israel (thinking maybe synagogues were Israeli consulates, no doubt) might be interested in purchasing his weapon to kill their enemies “in their sleep”, which, by the way, is the first time a KKK member has darkened the door of a synagogue without a lit molotov cocktail in hand.
    I’m gratified to see that the KKK has reformed its Jew-lasering ways as markets for genocide have changed.
    Israel sent out feelers for a powwow with the inventor, but when they found out Paula Dean would be catering the event, they demurred, citing bad optics.

    Reply
  39. Every American needs a mobile death ray for self defense:
    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/alleged-ny-kkk-member-accused-of-creating-truck?ref=fpb
    I want one. Now that it exists, it’s my God-given right to own one.
    Why isn’t Wayne Lapierre all over this?
    If you read the link, you’ll notice the KKK inventor, now arrestee, entered a synagogue to inquire if Israel (thinking maybe synagogues were Israeli consulates, no doubt) might be interested in purchasing his weapon to kill their enemies “in their sleep”, which, by the way, is the first time a KKK member has darkened the door of a synagogue without a lit molotov cocktail in hand.
    I’m gratified to see that the KKK has reformed its Jew-lasering ways as markets for genocide have changed.
    Israel sent out feelers for a powwow with the inventor, but when they found out Paula Dean would be catering the event, they demurred, citing bad optics.

    Reply

Leave a Comment