The bio science was averaging success. Not their fault that the IT dept fumbled the ball.
Science Memes
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
I've long found the notion that the lesson of Jurassic Park, if a fictional story like that must be taken to have one, should be something like "science/genetic engineering is bad" or "you can't control nature" to be a bit silly, given that, well, it's a zoo. With pretty big animals, to be sure, but dinosaurs were animals still, not kaiju or dragons or whatever other fantasy monster, and some genetically modified to be somewhat bigger and lack feathers would still be such. It's a story about some people building a zoo badly because they didn't do their due diligence about the animals they had and cheaped out on staff and the systems they had for containing the animals, and somehow people get the take away that "these animals are special and can't be safely contained" rather than "letting rich people cheap out on safety is a bad idea".
Were one to write a broadly similar story where someone cheaps out on a park containing elephants and tigers, and they get out and maul some people, it'd be obvious, but give the tigers scales and make them born in a lab and suddenly it's a monster movie.
That was the thing that always broke the immersion for me. Our ancestors hunted the mammoths with just spears and a hole in the ground. And you're telling me that modern technology can't come up with a way to properly neutralize or contain a dinosaur?
But it’s not a zoo, like even in the slightest. It’s a theme park.
They don’t have a full dinosaur genome so they literally make stuff up. Not only that, but just like with the Colossal Bioscience stuff that’s literally happening right now, there’s no learning for these brought-back-to-life creatures so they will not behave anything like their actual prehistoric counterparts. It is bad science because there’s no reason to be doing the science at all. It won’t replicate anything from the past (for so so so many reasons) and it has so many unethical things to get past before it’s even slightly in -eh- territory.
It is bad science because there’s no reason to be doing the science at all
This just rounds itself back to capitalism being the problem because the science was being done for a reason: to generate profit for Hammond.
Bad science is usually always conducted to suit the ends of someone trying to use the results for manipulative/exploitative purposes.
That’s just a dumb way to act like those scientists don’t have a will of their own. Those scientists have ethics (or a lack thereof). They have their own will. They are not forced to work on the project that has no scientific outcome. They’re either working on it because they’re bad scientists, because they’re evil, or because they think it’s cool. All of which is bad science. It’s not capitalism’s fault. It’s unethical scientists.
It is 100% capitalism's fault. Those scientists are doing a job because we live in a society that necessitates having one to meet our basic needs.
We don't know their individual lives or circumstances that could be forcing them to take on that position, but we do know that those circumstances only exist due to the overarching system, i.e. the capitalist economy, they live under.
Your take is grade-school level simplistic that just assumes they simply have to be bad people instead of understanding the complexities of systemic forces that dictate our society.
Please, for the love of God, learn to look beyond the surface of something and learn why things are the way they are instead of just assuming nonsense.
It is 100% capitalism’s fault. Those scientists are doing a job because we live in a society that necessitates having one to meet our basic needs.
absolutely not...
Your take is grade-school level simplistic that just assumes they simply have to be bad people instead of understanding the complexities of systemic forces that dictate our society.
no. My take is that if you remove capitalism, can the bad science still occur? Is it possible at all for it to occur? Yes. Since the scientists are the ones doing the science. It's not business doing the science, it's not capitalists doing the science. It's the scientists doing the science.
And they don't have to be bad people at all. They just have to not think about the consequences of their actions. Inattentive, ignorant, unable to think more than a few minutes into the future. None of these things make them bad people. But it does make them bad scientists. And it does make the science bad.
Please, for the love of God, learn to look beyond the surface of something and learn why things are the way they are instead of just assuming nonsense.
holy shit, you're the one not looking beyond the surface of something. Capitalism is always the boogie man for people like you. Like for fucks sake dude, scientists can be bad. Science can be bad! We literally have bad scientists in the white house right now claiming all sorts of shit that is going to get people killed! And it has nothing to do with capitalism. RFK Jr literally believes the bullshit he says, and it's because of bad science, not because he's being paid to say it.
Think about Jurassic Park like this: if those scientists were given those tools and told to build a park and told they weren't going to be paid for it, but all the tools they needed would be given to them, could the park be built? Now ask the exact same question but replace scientists with "capitalist": "if capitalists were given science tools and told to build a park and told they weren't going to be paid for it, but all the tools they needed would be given to them, could the park be built."
The answer is incredibly clear. Without the scientists, the park would never be built. It doesn't matter how much money exists on the planet. It doesn't matter if it's capitalism, communism, anarchism, whatever-fucking-system, the park isn't being built without the bad science. It doesn't matter how many other employees you put on that island, the park isn't getting built without the bad science.
I never said science can't be bad, Again, your myopic take is so fucking simplistic and surface level. You even admit to intentionally ignoring systemic reality as if it is inconsequential, which is fucking stupidity at its finest. Like, congratulations for stating the obvious: you need people to perform labor for something to happen. No fucking shit, Sherlock. Now that we have the obvious out of the way, maybe ask yourself why they are performing that labor and what are the system forces that drive thar labor to he performed in the first place?
It isn't about could the park be built, but would it have been built. The answer to that is no, it wouldn't have been built in the first place if not for the driving forces of capitalism (represented by Hammond, the capitalist owner who had controlling authority over the park's production) dictating the actions of those who actually labored in the production of the park. The park also couldn't have been built without the engineers who constructed the subpar infrastructure or an IT tech to create and install the park's faulty security system.
Those engineers built the park the way they did because Hammond didn't want to pay extra for fail-safes as noted in the book (i.e. the capitalist owner was driven by the profit incentive to neglect material conditions of the park) And the IT systems failed because Hammond decided to neglect staff pay, specifically Nedry, in favor of chasing the capitalist profit incentive. This same logic applies to the scientists who only conducted the research they were conducting because they were hired by Hammond to specifically do so.
Again, please fucking learn to look beyond the surface and critically examine things. I know it's difficult but you can do it if you actually try.
And yes, bad science is being spouted from the white house. Did you never stop to think why RFK Jr was put in that position of authority to spout his bullshit from? Did it never occur that some people would be set to benefit from the spreading of misinformation? It's explicitly so they can manipulate people into being okay with dismantling government functions so the oligarchy can pocket the savings from not having to spend government money on welfare.
Hard agree. My takeaway is the moral of the story is always do quality engineering. There have been like 10 movies and they still don't know how to construct an enclosure.
Why do they always only have one massive entrance to each enclosure? Why is it large enough for the Dinosaur to walk out of? Why don't they have two doors in series, airlock style?
They do it for butterflies at museums...
Well you can't have butterflies escaping into nature. They'll wreak havoc by pollinating everything.
Where I'm from, when engineers complete their certification they get an iron ring made from the material of a collapsed bridge. This is remind them to not become arrogant and think about everything that could go wrong.
You wouldn't be able to find a good engineer to design a park for animals no one really knows the behaviour of. Hammond would have to hire the people in this thread who think "yeah we could design something that will contain these animals, no problem at all!"
So... in the actual book(s), the problem is a bit of both.
The 'science' goes wrong because... well, they do not have complete dinosaur genome sequences.
And they fill in the gaps with a lot of DNA from a certain kind of frog.
A frog, that is later discovered to change its sex, transform from female into male, in environments/situations that are not sufficiently male/female balanced.
The explanation as to why the dinosaurs will not be a problem is that they only make female ones, so the population will remain exactly as they engineer.
... this does not work, because some of the dinos transform their sex, and begin breeding, which they essentially entirely did not account for.
So... 'the science' absolutely fucked up there.
...
Also in the book(s)... Hammond is much, much more clearly an unscrupulous capitalist... think roughly somebody that would have their accounts managed by Patrick Bateman, or maybe like a modern techbro, but his tech isn't crypto or ai or hyperscaling whatever bs app... its genetic engineering.
(cough 23andMe cough)
The original movie makes him into... much more of a genuinely enthusiastic, but more innocently naive, and sympathetic character... he is much more straightforwardly a thinly veiled corpo asshole in the book.
And because of this, the book punishes him, where the movie basically does not.
In the book, near the end, as it looks like the surviving cast have escaped imminent danger, and is reasonably safe and secure, awaiting rescue...
... Hammond is very directly killed by his own hubris.
He decides he has some better idea about what to do, wanders off from the group, gets lost, and is torn to shreds by a pack of compies, compthagnasus, basically 10 or 20 or so of fairly small, maybe 1.5 foot ish tall tiny versions of velociraptors.
He makes a final, direct, hubristic act, and is literally torn to shreds by thousands of tiny cuts, but all at one time, the figurative recompense for his lifetime of shitty, reckless, self serving decisions.
Critchton was a damn good writer, RIP.
Anyway, the second movie, Lost World... is very, very loosely based on the second book, but it features a compy attack event as an inciting incident, the initial event...
...but they swap it to occuring to basically a completely innocent family who is vacationing on a nearby island, just a totally different and made up set of characters, where its now just some random assholeish wealthy corpo father who is being hubristic, and iirc, a little girl is seriously injured, but not killed...
Its much less hubristic of a bad decision from the father, as he legitimately had no idea this random island was infested with fucking dinosaurs.
Also, iirc, the Lost World movie just throws away these characters, this family, after this gets the plot rolling, I don't think they are ever on screen again.
Its not a well written intro.
...
So the books feature capitalism, capitalists, as another majorly bad thing that fucks up.
The idea as I see is that... these two things, when both unrestrained and pursued recklessly, well one of them would be bad enough on their own, but when you combine both of them, shit gets real bad, real fast, high likelihood of catastrophic co sequences.
Its the 'tech is not inherently good nor evil, it all depends on how a society uses it' line of thinking.
It just says hey, here's a worst case scenario for you to chew on, how seriously you should consider this.
Like maybe a modern version of this would be LLMs.
Theoretically, an LLM on its own, used reasonably, responsibly, can be a tool for arguably mostly good. You could theoretically power one of these things with wind, solar, geothermal, have a societal structure where its provided as a controlled and regulated public good, not a private for profit business.
But when you couple this with the ravenous nature of capitalism, well, a whole fuckton of shit starts cascading out of control into negative consequences... vital processes and info get fucked up by LLMs hallucinating shit and make heuristic decisions en masse that lead to say, millions of people being denied or charged out the ass for healthcare...
Major corporations massively downsize their work forces and replace them with 'good enough' (but not really, actually) LLMs... which then craters demand in a consumption based economy, so now we have a Great Depression 2.0...
And the widespread usage of these things to answer anyones questions and do everyone's home or coursework, means that now humans are net stupifying themselves, as they no longer need to learn how to do critical analysis, research and source verification, etc.
...
Its been a while since I've seen the original movie, fhe first sequel... and then yeah, never saw anything after that, because they just look immensely, increasingly stupid and nonsensical, not even having internal logic that is coherent or consistent... so I can't well comment on how the movie universe has evolved.
if you build a perpetual motion machine and it eats the postman from seinfeld... you still made a perpetual motion machine
Hammond literally goes around gaslighting the entire group by saying “spared no expense” when in reality he cheaped out and cut every corner. His undoing was Dennis, who was the lowest bidder in a security contract. Instead of picking the absolute best, Hammond went with the lowest bidders. Even the T. rex fence should not have been so easy to break down, power or not. The entire park was built cheap and fast. Hammond was a capitalist playing conservationist.
If anything Jurassic park is basically a lesson in properly vetting your staff.
Everything that happened happened because Dennis was the only IT guy and basically could do whatever he wanted with zero oversight. It's not like the dinosaurs were going to break out on their own, even the raptors only got out because the fences were turned off.
He was getting paid peanuts for designing and building an essential system for the running of the park all on his own, working for a guy that constantly bragged about sparing no expense.
IIRC the only interaction between Hammond and Nerdy went something like "you should have negotiated a better contract! Stfu gbtw", which can pretty much sum up the whole wealth divide between the owners who gain most of the benefit and the workers who actually do the things under capitalism. Except if they aren't getting the better of everyone on average, they just shut the whole thing down or find others that they do get the better of.
No no no, it's all about paying your IT people well and being nice to them. If John had been nice to Needry, then Needry wouldn't have needed to betray him. Pay your IT people, be nice to them and everything would have been fine.
Stories about "science gone awry" are almost always about non-scientists screwing up.
https://jurassicpark.fandom.com/wiki/Dennis_Nedry
Dennis Theodore[1] Nedry was the main antagonist during the first half of the original Jurassic Park film. He was a computer programmer at Jurassic Park. Due to his financial problems and low salary, he accepted a bribe from Biosyn to smuggle dinosaur embryos off the island.
In both the film and the novel, he is slain by a Dilophosaurus. He was directly responsible for the events that happened in both the novel and film. A combination of factors led to his demise: despite working in a career around dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures, he had a limited knowledge of them, and greed, which was intertwined by desperation to pay off his debt collectors and make himself rich after that.
The new movies suck ass because they try to make science the bad guy, but not only is that a shit story we all see through, but it still reads as capitalistic greed and hubris, but now the movie feels like it doesn’t know what it’s talking about.
I mean, even the first movie reads that way.
Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.
Meanwhile, the only reason the entire movie happened is because you idiots opened a money generating theme park.
Would be nice to have an pet velociraptor. Never shown correctly in the Jurasic Park movies. They are not bigger than a turkey
Looks like he has the perfect size to bite your balls. Not so sure about the pet suggestion
Hey, so are plenty of dogs. Doesn't stop my ball headbashers from being good boys.
We're not talking dogs here.
We're taking something much closer to birds. I.e., utter evil bastards. Probably smart, too.
No one in their right mind keeps cassowaries as pets, with very good reason.
The science also went wrong a lil bit. The Dinos weren't supposed to be able to breed being all females; but they used frog DNA so some the dinos ended up turning into males and began breeding.
Seems like the "dire wolf" and "wooly mammoth" thing happened even in fiction; they weren't actually dinosaurs. They were frogs that looked like dinosaurs.
strange they dint use bird eggs, or reptiles, as amphibians are pretty far removed from a dinosaur , distantly related.
In the books, and movie iirc, they used DNA from all three, not just frogs, to replace missing segments of the dino DNA.
It was just that Dr.Grant guessed at it being amphibian DNA that had the unintentional side effect of allowing some of the dinos to change sex (which is a thing called sequential hermaphroditism) when he finds the velociraptor eggs.
It never would have happened if they just had stronger laws preventing the dinos from having easy access to gender affirming care.
Jurassic Park is about capitalist hubris.
Jurassic World is about why we should not allow BD Wong to create the reptilian equivalent of the torment nexus.
gloriously right
Not really. The dinos were half-baked imitations, not exact replicas. And they evolved in ways the scientists didn’t anticipate, because their reach exceeded their grasp.
There’s definitely an anti-capitalist message, but don’t dismiss the warning about prematurely greenlighting high-stakes scientific initiatives. That’s relevant to the modern world, no matter what our economic model is.
LLMs come to mind. There’s a section of the AI-skeptic folks that say the only problem with AI is the profit motive. I’m not so sure. People will use tech to do all kinds of horrible shit even if they don’t stand to materially benefit. Just look at 4chan.
It's much more clear, especially if you read the book, that JP is about accountability. All throughout the book, as shit's going sideways and people are dying, everyone's playing hot potato with accountability. At the end, Grant forces Genero into investigating a wild raptor nest with him, in spite of Genero's protests that he's "just the lawyer" because somebody has to take some accountability.
I mean, it's about both, but... do people really not catch the whole angle about capitalism and greed? Newman straight up gets everyone killed for a pay day, and doesn't even make it out himself. The only way it could be more obvious is if it had giant flash red text.
Majority of people rarely engage with any media beyond the surface to actually analyze it and come to those conclusions about the deeper themes. Most just think "well, that's just people being people" and fail to see the social commentary.
I saw one of the more recent-ish movies. One of the dinosaurs removed its subdermal tracking device and the humans find it because it has a big blinking light bulb on it. A big blinking light bulb on a subdermal tracker. Are these movies self aware? Was that supposed to be a joke?
The tracker must have been made by the same manufacturer that makes all those bombs you see in movies, too. You can tell because they have beepers, digital countdown displays, and sometimes also blinking lights.
I mean, the science did go wrong too. They tried making dinosaurs all one gender but used DNA from an animal that can spontaneously switch genders. Sounds like they fucked up to me.
Anyone that thinks that dinosaurs are amphibians shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a DNA sequencer.
None of it was because the scientists thought that dinosaurs were amphibians. In the lore of the books, DNA from reptiles, avians, and amphibians were used to fill in gaps in the dino DNA.
The book explains that the DNA used to fill those gap was chosen specifically for certain traits that would make for more attractive or durable creatures for the theme park, highlighting how what was being done "in the name of science" actually had nothing to do with any real scientific progress or discovery.
Well... As they point out in the World movies the creatures were never dinosaurs. They were generic chimeras that looked like dinosaurs.
I never understood the whole "They're making a weapon" plotline though. Unless the weapon makers are either nihilists or libertarians. Oh!
Edit: caveat, I've only seen one of the world movies and then a trailer for one of the others.