New arrangements emerging to a new production chain based on applied science. But for that, there is still a need for the greater popularization of the sciences. How much the biosciences profits Loses annually by lack of popularization? Questions like: how much do biosciences lose annually in knowledge, advancement and income because of the lack of popularity? These issues point to the complexity of the production chain that is being aggravated as we move forward in time. An example of the results of the popularization of science is the increase in the action of biohackers and the potential for innovation in this alternative movement. There are already people through DIY Biohackers editing genes through CRISPR and other techniques at alternative sites. Even carrying out high-level research with this popularization of high-level science. We are still in the generation of this movement, with its own methods, concepts and forms of action in a worldwide network, but with actions already well advanced.
In cities, the world outside we see more and more residences and fewer industries, something that is becoming rare to find. Something worrisome in a way, especially for those who need to work. In many cases a phenomenon occurred by real estate speculation, which expels industrial parks to give rise to new models, sometimes sustainable and sometimes not. However, something more trivial and like a bacterium that destroys the inside is ending with more industries than the competition for space. It is the digital issue, which is slowly engulfing industries to new models, a fact that will not be broken down in this article but is already occurring since an ERP to a digital production system present new forms of work that deprived the old ways of working. Making human thinking and reasoning into a chimaera of a deprived craft. And there’s no turning back! Industrial models are languishing to an absurdly incomprehensible efficiency within reach of human capabilities. The question of that automation seen in Japan by microtechnology in the 1970s, 80s, 90s is already obsolete. We are already in a model far beyond that, a model that completely rules out the human being, both in production and in projects. This is a completely aggressive model of production, following the digital and no longer the human question. So, the question of ending industry jobs is a matter of time. And since there are no jobs in industries, things are going to get complicated in the world.
To do so, the only way out is to invest more in complex science, through new arrangements and low-cost methods, in addition to the possibility of outsourcing and renting high-cost methods. That is, relocating the old high-level industry workers to these new arrangements would be a possibility. With the intention of questioning a greater interdisciplinarity in tissue engineering, including bringing this knowledge, its bases, terms and methods to mechanical engineering and chemical grids.
So, everyone must have a high-capacity laboratory with high-cost equipment, instruments and supplies if all of this can go from passive to active, and at a profit. If there is the greater popularization of the sciences, and open access for rent, outsourcing or other business arrangements, that laboratory that only generated costs could be paid. Outsourcing analytical services, partnering with schools, universities, companies and even with researchers, can present new arrangements for a new production matrix that is settling in the world.
In this same line of reasoning was issued an article on the popularization of Biosciences by means of an initial basic method, for people in general interested to start in this branch. The question that was raised would be: Where is Hello World for biosciences? It is also necessary a return to the beginnings of advanced research. In particular the high-efficiency industrialized research ways. As we can see in the brilliant work of Thomas Hager – The Demon Under the Microscope. The remedies since the famous Salvarsan until the highest efficiency of the pharma-chemicals today, there are a lot of details that can be noted in the book. The way those doctors and doctors conducted their research. Like Mr Gerhard Domagk and others.
In most countries, there is a restriction on gene manipulation, however, as there will be progress in this environment if this knowledge is kept indoors and out of reach. Regenerative engineering as a means of taking the world to a new technological level is a historical landmark. The hacker feat in computing is just one example to the extent that we can achieve with the popularization of biosciences. Deregulation and freedom are what brings progress. Securitized environments have proven to be less efficient overall, making it a highly knowledgeable block environment.
How far can we get with the popularization of genetics techniques, biosciences in general, and the cost savings of the necessary materials? This is an issue being exposed by the biohacking movement. We talk about a new oxygenation of old applications, a new brainstorm, much more than applications with PCR, chromatography, physical and chemical techniques in general, and even CRISPR. We talk about the involvement of creativity, logic, computing in this environment, and even other disciplines. In general, generating what does not exist, creating more efficient means to perform tests, apparatus, characterizations and specifications. More efficient and more productive means, things that do not even exist.
One of the themes raised by the author on the issue of the importance of popularizing biosciences involves the issue of the notorious biohacking movement. Although for some it is an “amateur” movement, what could these say about “hackers”, those who have already dismantled highly professional structures in computing? Therefore, the question that the author raises for the popularization of biosciences involves the generation of an initial step, such as Hello World in programming logic. So where is Hello World for biosciences? It would be by popularizing alternative methods, inputs or equipment with KITs, or popularizing PCR, making CRISPR clearer and more accessible, and providing easy access to complete KITs. In addition to providing open access to large laboratories for students and enthusiasts, for high-level equipment. In addition to other possibilities, only the brainstorm gain that will come from this popularization is undeniable. To include, the possibilities of the biohacking movement to gain potential and growth at the level of being compared with the hacker movement of computing. Anyone who doubts, just study what computers were like in the 40s, 50s, 60s, and see real, closed, billions of closed-end laboratories. However, with the popularization, customization and free access to hardware and other advances, the benefits achieved are notorious. The question of DNA and the cataloguing of what each protein performs, in particular by the control of CRISPR are indications that in some decades, biological structures will be highly controlled, and artificial tissues will be mere spare parts. Without a doubt, the advance in the field of biosciences only tends to lose without more popularization.
Jobs with complex and even dangerous means like biology, for the biohacker will be both a challenge and a means of perfecting the skills. Select an agent, a middle and a system, consider the safe means of work with enclosed area. Something like a return to the beginnings of the research, sometimes blind, but with the advantage of having models in the actuality. For this reason, it is recommended to every biohacker to read two primordial works. One Lehninger – principles of biochemistry and the other Thomas Hager – The Demon Under the Microscope. With this initial basis, along with the hacker concepts of action, there is no way that there is not much progress in this environment, in the formation of the first platforms of action for biohacking movements.
This popularization of science will result in new production arrangements for the new economy. They are new concepts of work, including to leverage innovation by alternative means. These new actions of agents outside the official status quo can generate new openings for new economic arrangements, including. One case is the possibility of improvement of new technologies for micro/nanomanufacturing, which may complement the actions by biohacking with nanotechnologies. These new arrangements can bring great potential in a global collaborative network to solve complex problems, with bureaucracies, and especially to circumvent local restrictions on research. The new economy has begun, whether governments want their bureaucracies or not, progress is marching.