> ( ... ) researchers from the Salk Institute and Kunming University of Science and Technology ( ... )
> In lab tests in culture, the team started with monkey blastocysts. Six days after fertilization they were injected with 25 human extended pluripotent stem (hEPS) cells, which contribute to the tissue as the embryo develops.
> And sure enough, when the researchers examined the batch of embryos 24 hours later, they detected human cells in 132 of them. After 10 days, there were 103 of these chimeric embryos remaining, but by day 19 only three still survived. After that, the embryos were terminated before they developed any further.
Saved you a click.
I'm guessing that the reason why this is called a chimera and not just a blob of cells from two different species is that the number of human cells increased from 25 to 132. But this seems like a very low bar to me...? I'm guessing that if you keep cells which you just extracted from a living organism and keep them in a comfortable bath, division might occur before they quickly die out.
I think the point is that it's not "supernatural". Conceptually you could implement it. The opening and closing involves zero work. In reality the work won't be zero due to friction, but you can in principle at least approximate it really well.
The manufacturing process is a matter of precision engineering. "Remaining stuck" is just... psychologically difficult? How do you compare which one is "more difficult"?
Understanding doesn't come into this. Most people don't understand money any farther than $5 + $5 = $10, and it still works really well. Unlike bitcoin.
Again, the limitations with funding with money aren't a tech problem. The limitation aren't "regulations", or how "fast" you can send money. They're a legal one. There's literally no obstacle in wiring some startup some money. Where an obstacle DOES exist, is in you being able to credibly defend a claim on that equity in a court.
Imagine the following situation:
You: "I own 10% of the startup"
Judge: "You have no contract that proves that...."
You: "But I sent crypto instead of money!!"
Judge: "Oh in that case...!"
It's like when the word "crypto" is involved, people immediately surrender any critical thinking :-|
Could you clarify how this has anything to do with crypto?
It seems to me that you're acting as a fundraising platform: people give you money, you pass it on to startups, and you guarantee these people that they own some equity in the startup.
The concept of "own some equity" is a legal concept, and this is what you have to nail down. Crypto is irrelevant to this conversation.
> But at the moment at least, there is definitely something they share in common that distinguishes them. What retailer starts AWS? What car maker is run by someone who also has a rocket company?
So your justification for how you're classify Amazon is something the company does (good) but your justification for how you're classifying Tesla is other things the CEO owns? Very sloppy, Paul. Very lazy.
> ( ... ) researchers from the Salk Institute and Kunming University of Science and Technology ( ... )
> In lab tests in culture, the team started with monkey blastocysts. Six days after fertilization they were injected with 25 human extended pluripotent stem (hEPS) cells, which contribute to the tissue as the embryo develops.
> And sure enough, when the researchers examined the batch of embryos 24 hours later, they detected human cells in 132 of them. After 10 days, there were 103 of these chimeric embryos remaining, but by day 19 only three still survived. After that, the embryos were terminated before they developed any further.
Saved you a click.
I'm guessing that the reason why this is called a chimera and not just a blob of cells from two different species is that the number of human cells increased from 25 to 132. But this seems like a very low bar to me...? I'm guessing that if you keep cells which you just extracted from a living organism and keep them in a comfortable bath, division might occur before they quickly die out.