Thread replies: 11
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
I don't normally post on this board, but I'm an Econ/Math double major in college that does a lot of investing in his free time. I don't want to get into the economics of this and mostly focus on the science, but I was looking at grain prices (corn, soybeans, wheat) and they've pretty much gone universally down. I don't know much about the technology behind this, but it seems to be the cause of GMOs and similar genetic engineering techniques that have boosted yields.
Now, given that prices are so low, I was wondering if any situations that could boost prices that are science-related had a probability of happening. What i mean by this is, do scientists forecast droughts in the Midwest/Great Plains that would restrict supply or are we steadily approaching a water crisis that can't be solved with desalination?
Additionally, are there more technological advancements to come? I've read about CRISPR and it seems like you can use it to do precise gene-editing in plants (https://ensia.com/voices/crispr-is-coming-to-agriculture-with-big-implications-for-food-farmers-consumers-and-nature/) so I'm under the impression the increased development of CRISPR should be groundbreaking. Is it really groundbreaking for plants or is it not really that big of a deal given that we're already doing GMOs? How much more can CRISPR do than our existing capabilities can?
>>
>>8870383
Sorry m8, this is basically a new /pol/ about IQ differences between races and social classes, gender, gravity, shape of the earth and blaming atheist for Dark Ages.
Also bump, but don't be so optimist.
>>
>>8870623
Anyway thanks for the subject, I'm not biologist but I'll check it out
Hope other can be more constructive than me
>>
>>8870383
>the increased development of CRISPR should be groundbreaking
Bear in mind genome editing via CRISPR
has been done only a few years, and only
with a few organisms, and is not heavily
funded for research.
>>
>>8870623
>go through frontpage of the board hours after posting my thread, thinking it's dead
>realize my post is on the first page
>33% /pol/shitposting about gender and global warming
>33% asking for career advice
>33% actual math or science
fuck
>>
>>8870808
I meant more so like what would it actually be used for and how impactful would that be? I don't mean to be too economic, but GMOs have hugely depressed prices for food and reduced the amount of labor that goes into producing an equivalent amount of food. I read a book by a hedge fund manager who said that we should all be farmers because the population of farmers is declining, in spite of the fact that in agriculture, we are doing more with less. From what the article i linked says, CRISPR sounds like GMOs on steroids, with Chinese scientists making wheat immune to powdery mildew and also RTDS being used on rapeseed. I was curious if anyone on this board had experience with these tech and whether development would come in the next 10-15 years.
>>
>>8870383
Can you give some tips, OP? I'm interested in starting to do some investing in my free time.
What do you think about automatizing this with algorithms or maybe creating a mathematical model that is based on statistics / extracting data from news, possibly using machine learning as well.
Do you think this is feasible?
What do you exactly do at this moment? Curious.
>>
File: 04293956.png (440KB, 1601x1339px) Image search:
[Google]
440KB, 1601x1339px
>>8870383
You guys sure it is not going down due to deflation? Here is a comparison of weekly nearest contract for GC, ZW, ZS, and ZC.
Also are you guys sure it's GMO when it's not accepted in other countries as much as it is in the US?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_genetic_engineering
>The approaches taken by governments to assess and manage the risks associated with the use of genetic engineering technology and the development and release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) vary from country to country, with some of the most marked differences occurring between the United States and Europe.
>European Union by contrast enacted regulatory laws in 2003 that provided possibly the most stringent GMO regulations in the world.[16] All GMOs, along with irradiated food, are considered "new food" and subject to extensive, case-by-case, science-based food evaluation by the European Food Safety Authority
>The European Union has heavily contrasted its regulations and restrictions regarding genetic engineering compared to those of the United States.
> and adopted a "safety first" principle regarding the case of GMOs, calling for any negative health consequences from GMOs to be held liable. On the other hand, the United States still takes on a less hands-on approach to the regulation of GMOs
>Despite the overall global increase in the production in GMOs, the European Union has still stalled GMOs fully integrating into its food supply.[19] This has definitely affected various countries, including the United States, when trading with the EU.
>>
First sorry for the bad english, the crisp technology is a big advance. You can't trace a crisp modified organism like you do with gmo. Thats the reason why the europeans now are interested in crisp. They don't want to let the train pass again. The economy behind the gaims i think is more like now we produce more not only because the gmo. The nutrition the acces to water and the gene selection plus new twchnology like drons or new machinery impacts the production of a crop.
>>
smelly, fellative, geriatric, spawn-of-satan bump
>>
boomp
Thread posts: 11
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2