SciLogs
scilogs.com · Group blog · on HN since 2013
SciLogs is a network of science blogs by different authors, covering research, scientists, genetics and science culture.
What HN saysHN links it for individual science posts, such as Einstein versus Edison, Maria Popova's response to accusations, and 'junk DNA' discussion.
21HN people shared it
4linked it in comments
21stories submitted
71story points
10 years agolast shared
2013people per year2026
Most-shared posts
- 1Escaping the Confucian trap1 people · 10 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 2TLDR: Submerged continent found in the Indian ocean1 people · 10 points · first shared 2013 · 4 comments on HN
- 3We Have Become Exhausted Slaves in a Culture of Positivity1 people · 6 points · first shared 2016 · discussion on HN
- 4A Second Look at a wooden bench1 people · 6 points · first shared 2014 · discussion on HN
- 5CEOs and 'the Candle Problem'1 people · 5 points · first shared 2014 · 1 comments on HN
- 6The Talk That Wasn’t1 people · 5 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 7Blissful Ignorance: How Environmental Activists Shut Down HS Biology Labs1 people · 4 points · first shared 2015 · discussion on HN
- 8Writing for mathematical clarity1 people · 3 points · first shared 2015 · discussion on HN
- 9Mental cryptography and good passwords1 people · 3 points · first shared 2014 · discussion on HN
- 10Mycologists help solve crimes by investigating mushrooms that grow on skulls1 people · 3 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 11Students think research abstracts have greater quality when written by men1 people · 2 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 12Meet the (Research) Press Release Police1 people · 2 points · first shared 2015 · discussion on HN
- 13Is the Internet Good for Science?1 people · 2 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 14Greenland may actually become green because of climate change1 people · 2 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
- 15Dances, Billiards, and Pretzels1 people · 2 points · first shared 2013 · discussion on HN
What HN people wrote when they linked it
a_bonobo · 2014-02-17
Also see http://www.scilogs.com/from_the_lab_bench/why-the-call-to-uncloiser-ou…
and http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/doing-good-science/2014/02/16/prof…
moocowduckquack · 2013-09-21
Reminds me of the Einstein vs Edison story about Einstein not knowing the speed of sound when he tried the employee test that Edison had developed. I read a nice take on that here - http://www.scilogs.com/the_science_talent_project/einstein-vs-edison/
micahgoulart · 2013-02-18
Here's Maria's response to these accusations: http://www.scilogs.com/next_regeneration/internet-curator-maria-popova…
In particular, she states, "Regarding his Tumblr article – first of all, those numbers are ludicrous! If Amazon gave me even a tenth of that a year after Uncle Sam takes his fair share, I’d be delighted. Delighted!"
coriny · 2015-05-26
I think people get emotive over the term 'junk'. It was always just a phrase rather than a technical description. We know that ~80%, maybe a little more, of the genome does not show conservation. If the function was important to the survival of the organism it have been selected for and thus evolutionarily conserved - hence the 85% "junk" figure. This does not mean that it isn't entirely biochemically inactive, or that there are some longer range periodicities in the sequence that are not elucidated. And as another commenter has noted, about half of the genome is composed of remnants of the Alu element, which jump about occasionally, but mostly degrade into total inactivity (sometimes being reactivated by recombining broken parts together).
What has gained a lot of attention was the massive ENCODE project, which sought to provide a detailed atlas of biochemical function in the human genome. The headline figure from there has been that 80% of the human genome has some function. There's a lot of controversy (understatement hat on) on the basic experimentation done for ENCODE, the structure of the project, the usefulness of the data produced and how they define biological activity.
The debate possibly got a bit out of control - the most sarcastic peer reviewed article I have ever read stirred the pot a bit (for more info: http://www.scilogs.com/next_regeneration/the-encode-controversy-and-pr… I think most biologists (warning, personal opinion) would…