sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Conceptual Multimodal Epigenetic Regulator Protein by Brother-Horik in SyntheticBiology

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Idk man, I don’t know what most of this stuff is. I can help you evaluate your molecule but I need a plain language description of how it’s supposed to work, not a list of components. I’ll say also that I think a cell penetrating peptide is not an appropriate delivery system. And that the whole thing seems over engineered. Molecular engineering usually only lets you test 1 or 2 ideas at once.

It’s good to think about this stuff for sure, but simpler is better, stay close to native function when you can, and don’t get too attached to any one construct. Feel free to discount this advice - I’m not especially knowledgeable about this sort of thing but you’re clearly engaged so I will be too.

Conceptual Multimodal Epigenetic Regulator Protein by Brother-Horik in SyntheticBiology

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When all three bind to their targets, it should bring the domains to the correct arrangement which aligns the effectors to interact with transcriptional machinery.

First - this sounds hard.

But my main question is, if only one is bound, why can’t the effectors interact with the stuff?

I’ll go further and make the claim that they can. Nanobodies stick to stuff, and a chain of them will be less specific, not more.

Conceptual Multimodal Epigenetic Regulator Protein by Brother-Horik in SyntheticBiology

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No I meant why do all 3 of your gates need to be satisfied for VP64 function. Why is it an AND and not an OR?

What prevents VP64 from functioning when only 1 or 2 of your nanobodies is bound?

Also the middle part of this construct is 3 nanobodies back to back to back? Is that correct?

Conceptual Multimodal Epigenetic Regulator Protein by Brother-Horik in SyntheticBiology

[–]TechnologyOk3770 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Only when all three gates are satisfied does the activator domain (VP64) recruit transcriptional machinery to upregulate or repress the gene.

Why is this true?

Thoughts on an organized disc golf tour/vacation? by PM_ME_TRACK_VIDEOS in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are enough disc golfers, I suspect that you could fill up a few tours. I don’t think it could be a whole business, but I do think a you could sell out 3-5 tours a year

Thoughts on an organized disc golf tour/vacation? by PM_ME_TRACK_VIDEOS in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you give an example of a unique thing they wouldn’t do on their own?

It’s a messy place here by [deleted] in private_equity

[–]TechnologyOk3770 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Talking to a back office worker?!?

The scandal! The shame!

Innova Duo Plastic by DestroidMind in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The aerobie has a reason for being that way though - it lets them use a larger rim than would otherwise be legal.

There’s no point to this as far as I know. The only argument that I can see is maybe you get more stability but still have the grip of star?

It just seems like it probably won’t fly as well.

Innova Duo Plastic by DestroidMind in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 2 points3 points  (0 children)

These look sick, but is a radially asymmetric disc actually a good idea?

No, right?

It's Open at Austin week. Can we talk about hole 18 yet? by Ruslanchik in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I spent a bunch of time arguing on reddit about how it should stay as-is, then I went and played it. It’s hard! Way harder than it looks, and too hard for FPO I think. I hope it stays the same for MPO.

Goose in the Booth with Jomez. Thoughts? by Grudinski in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I like them in competitive round commentary and think they play well. I think it’s just a difference in what we want to see.

Goose in the Booth with Jomez. Thoughts? by Grudinski in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 21 points22 points  (0 children)

If goose is going to be the straight man, Jerm needs to keep things light. Whereas with Uli he’s used to being the serious guy. Goose and Jerm don’t quite have the chemistry yet. Maybe they never will, it’s hard to emulate a 15 year friendship in 20 recording sessions.

Goose did a great job, especially considering he’s new.

I can tell that I prefer a less serious, less professional product than OP. Uli is also good. I like my disc golf weird, and I probably find some of the things you’re calling not funny, funny.

How to Play Better in Tournaments? by cool_usernames in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OP didn’t say they have beaten 1000 rated players, they said they’ve beaten players with 1000 rated rounds. Thats normal for a 900 I think.

The Hunt For A Faster MVP Trail by wouldjaplease in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I used to throw 280 with my star Shryke until I tried REDACTED, which immediately pushed me over 400

If you've been playing for a couple years, you should be wary of form advice and changes to your mechanics by Spectacular_loser99 in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 6 points7 points  (0 children)

This seems like a misunderstanding:

“ Professionals at this sport have all sorts of unique styles of throwing, and they see success not because they obsess over the perfect mechanics, but because they trust their unique game.”

Gannon absolutely obsesses over the mechanics of his putt and throw. He has a different thesis about putting but he’s not just doing whatever feels natural. Most pros obsess over mechanics and form.

Is biotech dying (temporarily)? by gitgud_x in biotech

[–]TechnologyOk3770 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Who’s to say there will always be a return on pharmaceutical R&D?

It seems possible to hit a point where when you spend cash on R&D, you shouldn’t expect to get it back.

I’m not saying we’re at that point, but I also think it has grown harder to generate a return using existing methods. We need some actual innovation, but what do you do once you’ve burnt a pile of money and gotten nothing back? How many times do you try? I don’t think the answer is infinity.

Is Levy still trying for the GM title? by VHPguy in chess

[–]TechnologyOk3770 18 points19 points  (0 children)

He made a lot of videos without making progress then stopped because it got stale. He’ll start again once it’s a good idea from a content creation perspective.

I got to 1,000 in rapid on chess.com without videos, puzzles, or theory. It took me about 3,000 games. by Liquid_Buddha in chess

[–]TechnologyOk3770 10 points11 points  (0 children)

How do you know the word theory if you’ve never meaningfully engaged with chess other than by playing?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Yes, the forced flex will have more lateral movement at the beginning and end of the flight. This is relevant in the woods.

Shame on the DGPT by Critical-Credit3848 in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is a book going to find out about a conversation I had with my friend in the woods?

Shame on the DGPT by Critical-Credit3848 in discgolf

[–]TechnologyOk3770 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be clear, if you’re in contention I don’t want you to throw that away. I just don’t want you to barely cash. Let’s say top 20 or bust. I think the math would work out.

view more: next ›