I read this meme as a satire on the nature of graduate school research projects, where you often spend inordinate amounts of time repeating the same type of experiment in a variety of ways. This lets you publish either on the sheer body of work or, ideally, one of the products is particularly interesting and you get a bigger paper from it alone.

The “substrates” in this meme are odd and difficult to react, which again reflects many thesis projects. Also there are no stated goals and success is hard to measure or define.

Despite the absurdity of the scientific work, the subject still chooses to perform it even though they are deprived of real world relationships formed at Susan’s baby shower and may also directly degrade their relationships with their Mom, brother’s girlfriend, and dog because of it while also putting their health in jeopardy via cell alkylation.

Interesting. This feels like a variant of EMDR which is a pretty well-known therapy but isn’t mentioned in the article

my.clevelandclinic.org/…/22641-emdr-therapy

The author’s credentials do not indicate any professional scientific training. Their only professional affiliation is the “institute” that they founded and has no other apparent membership. There are three manuscripts associated with their ORCID, all single-author with the same affiliation above. Two of those manuscripts have definitely not passed peer review, the third likely has not either but it’s not immediately clear. On the institute’s website the author is called a “revelation philosopher”. This PowerPoint graphic claims to explain their theory siel.global/assets/images/image01.jpg?v=6b7feba2

Any one of these things would be a red flag for scientific legitimacy. Together they are a recipe for pseudoscientific nonsense

I’ve been using bitwig on Linux for hobby production for about a year now. It works but it’s fairly buggy, with very sluggish controls and more frequent plugin crashes. I despise windows so won’t go back, but I’d also love to see continued improvement. One big step would be for more plugin developers to release CLAP versions.

I don’t know the full process for making these, but I can take a fairly educated guess.

First they are going to take the DNA sample and use a reaction called PCR to amplify it. This will copy a small section of DNA, not the whole sequence. For the PCR to work for all of their customers, this has to be a region* that nearly everyone has in their DNA.

They then take the PCR product and treat it with different enzymes that are like molecular scissors which will chop at specific sub-sequences. The personal nature of the art comes from small differences between people in the region amplified in the original PCR. Different sequence = different cuts = different lengths of pieces.

They then run the enzyme digests on a gel, which is like a slab of thick jello. The bigger the piece, the slower it moves so the pieces separate. The lanes on the sides are a standard “ladder” of known sized pieces. You can visualize these gels under a UV lamp.

They can either use molecular tags or, more likely, photoshop to make the art piece look more interesting.

There is not any actual sequencing of the DNA happening in this process, and the band patterns are pretty low-resolution so it’s unlikely that this could be used to identify someone.

If this is a legitimate operation, then there is not a situation where the art company has an unsecured disk with lots of DNA sequences on it.

All that said, the concern about sharing genetic material with random companies is valid because they could also sequence it if they wanted to, but that would be relatively expensive and actively malicious. I believe the risk is low but non-zero, and everyone will have a different comfort level with that.

If you want alternative options you might be able to find an open lab or local college that will work with you to run your own PCR and gel, then photoshop the result yourself.

Hope that helps you make a more informed decision.

*To be a little more pedantic, everyone has to have the same ends of the region where the copying starts and stops. The part in between, which is a small fraction of your total DNA, can still be different.

Popular Science/Mechanics have been clickbait since before the dawn of the internet. I wish I knew how to filter them out of my feed

More like 16,000 x g for a normal desktop centrifuge and 80,000 x g+ for an ultracentrifuge

Completely agree with your comment about “hitting a wall at running speed” . I switched my music production PC to Linux in a fit of pique at Microsoft. I have used Linux/unix for 25 years at this point, but this move and the resulting technical hurdles took my output to 0% and it hasn’t recovered in a couple of months.

I don’t want to switch back but I also really miss my hobby and main creative outlet

Isn’t that the same as “organizing a campaign”?

I feel like this is a phenomenon that should have a name, but I don’t know what it is…

As you get older and more experienced, you get better at driving. The average driver, though, generally does not get better because of turnover due to age on both ends. This means that from your relative perspective people seem to be getting steadily worse at driving.

Of course there is day to day fluctuation, and some factors (e.g. cell phone use) may have large impacts, but I’m convinced that most of what we feel is connected to the former effect.