Synthetic Biology, Nanobots, oh my!

The Economist has great coverage of the creation of artificial life. With the sensational headlines on the various news sites and aggregators I couldn't help but recall this scene from Jurassic Park:

(Dr. Ian Malcolm) God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs...

(Dr. Ellie Sattler) Dinosaurs eat man. Woman inherits the earth...

This news on the heel of the rise of the nanobots, what amazing times we live in!

Nikki Haley and Will Folks' affair, another example of sex crazy SC Politics

Talk about a shot, literally, heard around the world. It was barely any time after Will Folks issued a statement this morning acknowledging an "inappropriate physical relationship" with Republican legislator and gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley before it was picked up by many outlets, first local, and then regional and finally national with various ideological commentary along the way from both the left and especially the right.

Of course, Will Folks being Will Folks -- his outfit is keeping track of it.

So far the most even keeled analysis is from Michael Dougherty writing for The American Conservative:

South Carolina gubernatorial candidate, Nikki Haley probably had an affair with political blogger, gadfly, and operative Will Folks – who is a one man clearinghouse for Palmetto state rumors. Folksposted this morning that he once had an “inappropriate physical relationship” with the very attractive, and recently-favored Haley. Haley denies it.

I’m told that the affair occurred in 2008 when Folks was working with Haley on her Congressional re-election campaign. Haley was married at the time.

Folks is a former spokesman for Gov. Mark Sanford who left after several personal fights and wild political scandals. (He was a useful source in my profile of Gov. Sanford last year.) His reputation since leaving the governor’s office has only increased. He has become South Carolina’s essential political blogger.

In fact, Folks is like the Anna Wintour of South Carolina politics, generally unknown to the larger public, but within the right circles, revered and feared. He is so plugged-in that most political stories in South Carolina appear on his blog before they make the daily papers. I believe he remains a confidential source of advice and comment for Governor Sanford.

At first, I thought that Folks may be pulling his largest stunt ever. Just knowing his character, I believed that he was parodying the style of “affair disclosures.” Also, there is the timing; the primary will be June 8. But I now believe, after speaking with a few South Carolina sources, that Folks had a lawyer go over these words and that he feels genuinely threatened.

After alleging that there is a conspiracy to take down Haley and himself through a by a thousand political cuts, Folks justifies the disclosure by saying, “I refuse to have someone hold the political equivalent of a switch-blade in front of my face and just sit there and watch as they cut me to pieces.” That sounds like Folks.

In judging the veracity of Folks’ admission, it should be noted that Columbia, South Carolina is one of the most treacherous, gossiping, and self-obsessed political capitals on earth. Everyone there talks, and whispers about an affair between Haley and Folks are nearly a year old at this point. Political consultants were wondering two years ago why Haley’s car was so often seen in front of Folks’ home.

Corey Hutchins, a whip-smart, and well-sourced reporter for the Columbia-based alt-weekly, Free Times, reports that Folks admitted to the affair almost a year ago. If true, this would put to rest the defense that these rumors are only coming out because the primary is in two weeks. The AP, the Free Press and other South Carolina sources have been working on this story for over a month, apparently badgering Folks.

Some have speculated that, despite his prior support and work for Haley, Folks is acting out against her social conservatism and her association with Jenny Sanford, whom Folks has battled with since the early days of Gov. Sanford’s first gubernatorial campaign.

That part is true. Folks isn’t exactly Palinesque on the social issues. He writes on his site: “On social issues, we are primarily libertarians but readily admit that Aaron Sorkin and Annie Savoy have corrupted our good girl, Calvinist upbringings.” But there are good reasons to believe his prior (and continuing) support of her candidacy isn’t fake.

Despite his differences with Jenny (and Mark) Sanford, if the Sanford’s are behind a candidate, Folks probably is too. He is a fiscally conservative, and libertarian leaning the type that is coming out to support Haley all cycle. He has worked with her before. And so it is hard not to take this morning’s admission as anything other than genuine.

If this turns out to be true, and I think it will, the affair will be a black mark not only on Haley’s promising campaign, but on Jenny Sanford who is about to launch a book-tour, and Sarah Palin who seems determined to go to the mat for Haley. Unless I’m mistaken it would also be one of the first great adultery scandals for a female politician in the United States.

Mr. Dougherty describes the nature of Columbia to a tee, and to really understand it you have to know how incredibly incestuous and internecine the political class is. When folks recognize and call this entire situation Byzantine, it's really an understatement. In South Carolina even an admission of "truth" by a person as deep in it as Folks has been met with further rumormongering and spin.

For example, by late afternoon a common trope in political circles, that was whispered at the onset this morning, is that Folks was paid off by one of his competitor consultants, Haley even said as much in an interview given this afternoon on WVOC - a right wing radio station in Columbia.

These allegations are just yet another in a string of embarrassments for South Carolina politicians.

It all started with the fall from grace of Governor Mark Sanford, from there it's spiraled out of control.

First we had the Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer proffering up a preemptive defense against the perennial rumors that he's gay, while not addressing the other rumors that he's generally just creepy when he's gawking over the bevy of extremely young women who keep him company in most non business public settings, although I suppose they go hand in hand.

Then there was the romantic imbroglio between Comptroller General Richard Eckstrom and Republican candidate for State Superintendent of Education Kelly Payne.

This was followed up by essentially an oppo-dump by Wes Wolfe on Republican candidate for State Treasurer Curtis Loftis that included storming public court records and accusations of homosexuality and herpes.

Then there was Lindsey Graham being told to "come out" by Tea Party activists rallying against his moderate position on Immigration Reform.

And flying under the radar, being overshadowed by the current scandal, are the rumors that Will Folks posted concerning Republican gubernatorial candidate, and Haley opponent, Gresham Barrett and alleged improprieties he had with a staffer.

And we're not even past the primaries yet....

Revitalizing Main Street, Innovista, and the perils of development

Former "The State" Editor Brad Warthen drew my attention to an article in the Columbia Regional Business Report where in an interview with Mike Fitts, Mayor Elect Steve Benjamin had a novel suggestion:

Columbia already has the right major tenant to go into the former SCANA Corp. space on Main Street, according to mayor-elect Steve Benjamin: He wants the building to be the new home of the University of South Carolina School of Law.

Benjamin hopes the school could work out a long-term lease with the Palmetto Center, the building that now has about 450,000 vacant square feet in the heart of downtown. A long-term tenant such as the law school should be appealing to the owners, Benjamin said, and would keep the building in private hands and on the tax rolls.

“I want the law school in that building. I really do,” Benjamin said.

If the school were there, it would be surrounded by the offices of many of the state’s biggest law firms and several courts, including the S.C. Supreme Court, Benjamin said.

“It’s a perfect place for law students,” he said.

Benjamin said he has met with the building’s owner and real estate agent to pitch the plan. The building could be bought by a new owner and renovated for substantially less than it would cost USC to build a new school, he said.

Moving it there “would mean giving Main Street a big old shot of adrenalin,” Benjamin said. He compares the potential impact on downtown to what the Savannah College of Art and Design has brought to that city.

Columbia has been supportive of USC, such as building new parking for the Innovista project, Benjamin said. This would be an opportunity for USC to boost the city’s downtown, he said.

USC officials have not responded to the idea, Benjamin said. Some have seen only the obstacles to the plan, he said, but business leaders have seen the possibilities and like them.

To which I say, what a great idea! This could be a great boost for the Main Street District. And it's not the first foray into down town for the university that will keep the property on the tax rolls. In April The State reported that Innovista partners will be moving into the Wilbur Smith Building down town.

Meanwhile Mike Fitts followed it up with a story a couple of days later about yet another issue facing the city and University, the continuing struggle with the innovista campus. This time an independent developer is upset with the slow movement of both the University and City on his plans for a new student tower. From SCBiz:

COLUMBIA -- The developer planning to build a set of student towers ranging up to 28 stories high near the University of South Carolina campus is looking at other locations, saying that USC and Columbia officials seem hesitant to agree to the $100 million project.

“It’s very frustrating,” said developer Robert Threatt of Charlotte. “We don’t seem to be able to get there.”

USC’s new Innovista executive, Don Herriott, said the university and the city, which jointly control the property, were performing due diligence in asking for details from Threatt that would assure them the major project would go forward.

The plans for the complex were first introduced as part of the agenda for April’s meeting of the city’s Design Development Review Commission, but they were pulled from consideration at that time. The plans sketch out a huge new development looming over Devine Street and filling the block directly across from the entrance to the Greek Village.

The towers could be almost as tall as the Capitol Center building at Assembly and Gervais streets. The top floors in the U-shaped complex would be several hundred apartments for students and others wanting to live in the Vista. The complex also would offer a swimming pool and other recreation areas, along with retail space.

According to Threatt, the city and USC have been asking him to provide so much documentation that it would take nine to 12 months to satisfy them. He already has been working on the project for 15 months, he said, and has designed it three different times to satisfy local concerns, including ensuring it would mesh with the Innovista master plan created by Sasaki Associates of Watertown, Mass.

That’s more design work than his firm ever has done for a parcel of land it did not yet own, Threatt said.

Now, Threatt said, “I’m looking at a lot of different options.” He did not specify whether those options include sites outside the Midlands.

USC and Columbia are just trying to be good custodians of public land before it is turned over to a private developer, Herriott said. The land belongs to the city, but USC holds a long-term lease to use it for parking.

The city, through Columbia Development Corp. executive director Fred Delk, and the university came together to ask Threatt to provide references and documentation of his financial backing for the project, Herriott said.

They also wanted a development agreement, Herriott said, to be sure that Threatt would build something close to what he had proposed.

Threatt said private money is all lined up for the project, sitting in a hedge fund. Some investors are leery about putting their names out in public, Threatt said, but some financial accommodation should be possible.

Threatt said he understands that Columbia and USC have had past frustrations with developers.

Just last week, USC settled with Kale K. Roscoe and R. Timothy Heath, the developers hired to construct a private building for the university’s research campus. The agreement calls for the university’s Research Campus Foundation to pay the developers $890,000 from the Development Foundation.

That said, Threatt believes Columbia should be more welcoming of a project that would add $1.2 million to the city’s annual tax rolls. The complex would be built to platinum-level standards for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, he said, and would be one of the most forward-thinking developments in the country.

“Most people would have met me at the airport with a limo,” he said.

That last line is almost LOL funny, the presumptuousness.

But anyway, a few years ago when the city and University were wrapped up in the smoke screen of 'if you build it they will come,' this idea probably would have flown. Heck it's not to say that other residential developments within the vicinity haven't been successful, but again only after a rethink in strategy. It was only last year that Aspyre was trying to market itself towards the 'new urban professional' and was tied to the success of Innovista, it's now purely a student housing facility. Several years after construction finished Addesso condos are finally filling up after many mark downs in price. According to their website they're over 60% sold!

I suppose one could say Threatt is going after the right market with students, but has USC expanded their acceptance of new and transfer students so much that even more apartments are needed? It seems like there's a glut of student housing around Columbia -- I'm speaking anecdotally here when one considers the number of rental properties that have popped up over the last decade from South Columbia around the Stadium to the places right across the river, not to mention the single unit homes around town.

The developer has cited augmenting his plans for Innovista, but has he lived in a cave the past several months? The University and City while still supporting Innovista have scaled back the project, and rightly so considering the economy. But beyond that, if the need is there for additional student housing, and it could very well be, why would you build a 28 story tower in an area where most buildings are only 3-4 stories tall, especially across from the Greek Village. While the amenities sound nice, from a design and aesthetics perspective the tower would look out of place and quickly become an eyesore.

Angels, Nanobots, and pin heads

We may not be able to know the answer to the derisive question How man angels can dance on the head of a pin? But the Wall Street Journal has an article on the advancements in nano technology and bioengineering.

 

According to the WSJ, scientist have for the first time created nanobots

 

"...called DNA walkers—mobile DNA molecules, about 100,000 times smaller than the diameter of a human hair, that have three or more legs made of a string of genetic enzymes. Each leg moves forward based on its chemical attraction to sequences of biochemicals laid down, like stepping stones, in front of it.

 

These robots are so small that the researchers program their actions by encoding commands in the world around them. They follow chemical cues programmed into the ground on which they walk.

 

This moves nanotechnology one step further towards advancing the concept of miniaturization, already, according to the article one group of scientists have made such nanobots assemble particles of gold in eight different ways, and yet another has utilized the walkers in delivering actions on demand creating a kind of nano-factory.

 

Scientist caution though that full application and use of these DNA walkers in mass production could be a decade away.

 

Nanotechnology, is not a new field with current applications in electronics, cosmetics, apparel(think of those pants that are "spill resistant) and textiles, medical technologies amongst many other disciplines.

 

As exciting as the prospects for nanotechnology are, the applications - especially many of the nanobiotech applications do raise many ethical questions that are only now being gleaned.

 

Here in Columbia, the University of South Carolina's NanoCenter is a leading institution into the study and application of this ever growing field.

 

Jesus and Mo

My partner sent me a link to the below archived image at a fun little site called jesusandmo.net

I thought it was funny and then with some clicking of my own discovered this little gem:

May 20th is the first international "Everybody Draw Mohammad" day. It, of course, was started in response to the response of South Park's satarizing the fact that in the current cultural climate it is forbidden to offend Muslims with images of their religious leaders when everyone else is fair game.

Already folks have noted that Islamic Iconoclasm, or the strict enforcement of, is only a modern notion. Believe it or not, in museums around the world their are paintings from around the islamic umma accross the centuries that variously depict the prophet. Even in modern states like Iran images of Mohammed being touted by children are not uncommon.

One could argue then it's a matter of tasteful or respectfulness that one not show an image of Mohammed with a bomb turban or as a dog, but it begs the question of muslims -- if you demand respect from us for your religion, how are you respecting people of other faiths, or no faith at all!... I'm thinking intimidation, forced conversions, familial estrangement and assasination plots when a muslim converts to another faith? Then there's the whole problem with religious extremism and terrorism - what is the average muslim on the streets of Cairo, Ramallah, or Damascus doing to combat the twisting of their faith by extremist preachers?

Transcendent of that though is an essential truth, there are elements of incompatability between modern western culture and the prevailing culture of the Umma. Central to this is that beyond matters of respect - the freedom to draw Mohammed as a dog or Jesus as a homosexual or any religious or secular figure in a light that is unbecoming and untoward, so long as it doesn't cause physical harm to the subject of the speech is an essential part of our notions of freedom of speech. You can be pissed, you can retaliate with vitriol or equanimity but it doesn't afford you the right to retaliate with violence within our western culture. This is true of anyone or any group, it's the beauty of the justice and equality of the freedom of speech.

conservative media, psuedo civil libertariansim and Kagan

It's begun.... well of course it's begun, but the "Conservatives" and their media outlets are pushing a new, and baffling, meme. Supreme court nominee Elana "Kagan argued for gov't 'redistribution of speech'" - so is the headline on The Drudge Report this morning. The link is to a CNSNews.com analysis of an a paper Kagan wrote entitled: "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine."

From the analysis we learn that:

 

Kagan said that examination of the motives of government is the proper approach for the Supreme Court when looking at whether a law violates the First Amendment. While not denying that other concerns, such as the impact of a law, can be taken into account, Kagan argued that governmental motive is "the most important" factor.
 
In doing so, Kagan constructed a complex framework that can be used by the Court to determine whether or not Congress has restricted First Amendment freedoms with improper intent. 
 
She defined improper intent as prohibiting or restricting speech merely because Congress or a public majority dislikes either the message or the messenger, or because the message or messenger may be harmful to elected officials or their political priorities.

 

Sounds good so far, we should be able to criticise and say things about government (hello Tea Partiers!) And the analysis cites as an example campaign finance laws:

 

The first part of this framework involves restrictions that appear neutral, such as campaign finance laws, but in practice amount to an unconstitutional restriction. Kagan wrote that the effect of such legislation can be taken as evidence of improper motive because such motives often play a part in bringing the legislation into being.

 

"The answer to this question involves viewing the Buckley principle [that government cannot balance between competing speakers] as an evidentiary tool designed to aid in the search for improper motive," Kagan wrote. "The Buckley principle emerges not from the view that redistribution of speech opportunities is itself an illegitimate end, but from the view that governmental actions justified as redistributive devices often (though not always) stem partly from hostility or sympathy toward ideas or, even more commonly, from self-interest."

 

Such a belief would put her with the court's majority in the recent Citizens United case where Justice Kenedy wrote for the majority, "it prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech."

 

So the first amendment is alive and well, yay. So where's the problem? I suppose it must be in the second part of the analysis which concerns with Kagans view of government restricting language that may cause harm to the public.

 

While Kagan does not offer an exhaustive definition of 'harm,' she does offer examples of speech that may be regulated, such as incitement to violence, hate-speech, threatening or "fighting" words.

It's interesting.  My gut tells me that the critics are narrowly focusing only on the "hate speech" aspect of Kagan's definition of harm. Socially conservative, and specifically religiously conservative folks would find reasons to "fear" (quotation marks are intentional to denote the irrationality and superciliousness of this fear) restrictions on speech if the debates regarding so called hate-speech tell us anything.

 

Perhaps though that expansive definition of harm in conjunction with what followed is what truly disturbs conservatives and makes them believe that Kagan is anything but a civil libertarian.

 

Kagan says that government is also prohibited from treating two identically harmful speakers differently. To do so, she argues, would be to violate what she views as the principle of equality -- making the unequal restriction unconstitutional.
 
"But the government may not treat differently two ideas causing identical harms on the ground that thereby conveying the view that one is less worthy, less valuable, less entitled to a hearing than the other," she wrote. "To take such action -- in effect, to violate a norm of ideological equality -- would be to load the restriction of speech with a meaning that transcends the restriction's material consequence."

Kagan argues rightly in terms of speech that harms - as defined above - that in penalty and force of law when speech is restricted, used and causes harm the penalty for one party should be equally as severe as the other - it doesn't matter if you're Osama Bin Ladin or the Rt Rev. Fred Phelps.

 

There is a proverb for this: your free speech ends where my safety begins.

 

The epistemic closure continues.

The Rise of Liberaltarianism

David Cameron and Nick Clegg (L) during a VE day ceremony in central London Photo: REUTERS

One only has to look across the Atlantic and at the coalition government rising from the ashes of last weeks British election to realize that there's something afoot. While the conservatives under Cameron won a plurality of seats in Parliament it wasn't enough to govern outright. For the first time since 1974 elections resulted in a "hung parliament."

Recognizing the Tories plurality, but noting their own strength - the intervening time has seen the Liberal Democrats flex their muscles in hashing out a coalition with the Tories. Already the details of the coalition emerging are promising for centrists and perhaps even liberaltarianism.

The face of politics in Britain and the soul of British conservatism is evolving.

QOTD: Genius

 I like simple experiments, and champagne. - Steven Hawking