He wrote also negatively about the hackers who do homemade meds thing.
i’ve heard about them before and got reminded of their existence against my will recently. (do you know that somebody made a recommendation engine for peertube? can you guess which CCC talk from last winter was on top of pile in their example?)
you know, i think they have a bit of that techbro urge to turn every human activity into series of marketable ESP32 IOT-enabled widgets, except that they don’t do that to woo VCs, they say they do that for betterment of humanity, but i think they’re doing it for clout. because lemmy has only communist programmers and no one else, not much later i stumbled upon an essay on how trying to make programming languages easier in some ways is doomed to fail, because the task of programming itself is complex and much more than just writing code, and if you try, you get monstrosities like COBOL. i’m not in IT but it seems to me that this take is more common among fans of C and has little overlap with type of techbros from above.
so in some way, they are trying to cobolify backyard chemistry. the thing that is stupid about it is that it has been done before, and it’s a very useful tool, and also it does something completely opposite than what they wanted to do. it’s called solid phase peptide synthesis, and it replaces synthetic process that previously has been used in liquid phase (that is, like you do usually in normal solutions in normal flasks). (there’s also a way to make synthetic DNA/RNA in similar way. both have a limitation that only a certain number of aminoacids/bases is actually practical). the thing about SPPS is that it can be automated, and you can just type in sequence of a peptide you want to get, and machine handles part of the rest.
what you gotta give it to them is that automated synthesis allows for a rapid output of many compounds. but it’s also hideously expensive, uses equally expensive reagents, and requires constant attention and maintenance from two, ideally more, highly trained professionals in order to keep it running, and even then syntheses still can fail. in order to figure out what got wrong you need to use analytical equipment that costs about as much as that first machine, and then you have to unfuck up that failed synthesis in the first place, which is something that non-chemist won’t be able to do. and even when everything goes right, product is still dirty and has to be purified using some other equipment. and even when it works, scaleup requires completely different approach (the older one) because it just doesn’t scale well above early phase research amounts.
what i meant to say is that while automation of this kind is good because it allows humans to skip mind-numbingly repetitive steps (and allows to focus on “the everything else” aspect of research, like experiment planning, or parts of synthesis that machine can’t do - which tend to be harder and so more rewarding problems) this all absolutely does not lead to deskilling of synthesis like this bozo in camo vest wanted to, i’d say it’s exactly the opposite. there’s also the entire aspect of how they don’t do analysis or purification of anything, and this alone i guess will kill people at some point
i can’t find that essay now, but i think it was written in latex, and also complained on top of cobol about java, ada (in military context) and a kind of non-programming where block diagram made by non-programmers was turned into executable