From: Kathryn Aegis (k_aegis@mindspring.com)
Date: Mon Sep 27 1999 - 19:50:33 MDT
Robert Bradbury writes:
>The actual URL is:
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1999-09/27/031l-092799-idx.html
Y'know why I don't post the full URLs anymore? Because they shifted to
afternoon and evening editions, and if you don't access it by late
afternoon, the index prefixes change.
>Clearly the government scientists and strategies have been
>scooped in this affair.
Only on the basic components. Celera deliberately choose the 'fast and
dirty' method, whereas the government-sponsored projects chose to focus on
the full detailed information. Both should turn out to be useful for
different kinds of applications.
>The *fundamental* problem that Celera faces is harvesting
>enough information from the project that they can come up
>with a few hundred unique patents to justify the investment.
>Can they do this? Probably.
It's not mentioned in the article, but Venter is banking on marketing a
software library system, one that would allow Celera to sell subscriptions
to a certain method of accessing and utilizing genome data. (Hence the
little profile of the software developers at the bottom of the article.)
His argument is that the government data will be free of charge, but it
will be in raw form and difficult to sort through for specific purposes.
Persons hoping to obtain patents using that data could use his library
system for research and development in specialized areas.
Kathryn Aegis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:18 MST