<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>2020 Science &#187; Esquire</title>
	<atom:link href="http://2020science.org/tag/esquire/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://2020science.org</link>
	<description>Providing a clear perspective on developing science and technology responsibly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 21:47:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Small particles are sexy; Synthetic biologists are sexier!</title>
		<link>http://2020science.org/2008/09/30/small-particles-are-sexy-synthetic-biologists-are-sexier/</link>
		<comments>http://2020science.org/2008/09/30/small-particles-are-sexy-synthetic-biologists-are-sexier/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Oct 2008 00:00:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Maynard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Communication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Perception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Synthetic Biology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Drew Endy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Esquire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[J Craig Venter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jay Keasling]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://2020science.wordpress.com/?p=324</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The October issue of Esquire magazine is remarkable.  Not for the world’s first e-ink cover (appearing on limited special editions of the magazine).  But because three of the five scientists featured amongst the seventy-five most influential people of the twenty first century are synthetic biologists&#8230; Forget the recent poll suggesting most people don’t know their [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p><a title="Esquire Magazine" href="http://www.esquire.com/features/75-most-influential/drew-endy-1008"><img class="size-medium wp-image-325 alignleft" style="margin:8px;" title="Esquire Magazine" src="http://2020science.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/endy_esquire.jpg?w=230" alt="Esquire" width="136" height="176" /></a></p>
<p>The October issue of <em>Esquire</em> magazine is remarkable.  Not for the world’s first e-ink cover (appearing on limited special editions of the magazine).  But because three of the five scientists featured amongst the seventy-five most influential people of the twenty first century are <em>synthetic biologists</em>&#8230;<span id="more-324"></span></p>
<p>Forget the <a href="http://www.nanotechproject.org/news/archive/synbio_poll/" target="_blank">recent poll</a> suggesting most people don’t know their synbio from their streptococcus.  <em>Esquire</em> has seen the future, and the future is, well, synthetic!</p>
<p>Let me explain.  I don’t often purchase Esquire magazine—in fact this may be the first time I have picked up a copy.  But what caught my eye in Barnes and Noble this evening was the use of electronic ink (e-ink) on the cover—apparently a world first&#8230;</p>
<p>Now, I have a soft spot for e-ink.  If you’ve seen the movie <em>“Children of Men”</em> or read Neal Stephenson’s <em>“The Diamond Age,”</em> you will be familiar with the concept—print on paper that changes at the flick of a switch.  The concept is beguiling; the elegance of the printed page, with the convenience of a digital display.</p>
<p>Today’s e-ink still has some way to go before it matches the sci-fi dream.  But by using microscopically small black and white charged particles, the company <a href="http://www.eink.com/" target="_blank"><em>E Ink</em></a> is revolutionizing low power print-realistic displays that give traditional paper and ink a run for its money.  <em>Sony Reader®</em> and <em>Amazon Kindle</em> digital books already use the technology, which thanks to micro-engineering is improving all the time.  And now we have the first magazine cover that matches what could preciously only be achieved using digital special effects in movies.</p>
<p>Taken to its limits, this is a truly cool technology that could well transform the way information is displayed over the next decade, while slashing the power drain normally associated with digital displays—clean, green, and very sexy!</p>
<p>But not as sexy as synthetic biology.</p>
<p>Having purchased the magazine (the e-ink marketing ploy worked a dream on me), I started browsing through the seventy-five people featured as being the most influential of the twenty first century.  Despite a paucity of scientists in the list, each one I stumbled on seemed to be a synthetic biologist—Jay Keasling, <a href="http://www.esquire.com/features/75-most-influential/drew-endy-1008" target="_blank">Drew Endy</a>, Craig Venter.  And of the two remaining scientists, Anthony Atalia—renowned for his work in regenerative medicine—is up to his elbows in biological manipulation.  (The fifth scientist listed was <a href="http://www.esquire.com/features/75-most-influential/lisa-randall-1008" target="_blank">Lisa Randall</a>—flying the flag for physics).</p>
<p>This is really quite incredible.  Despite <a href="http://www.nanotechproject.org/news/archive/synbio_poll/" target="_blank">low public awareness of synthetic biology</a>, the folks at <em>Esquire</em> clearly see this convergence between biology and engineering as the wave of the future.</p>
<p>What we are quite possibly seeing is the synthetic biologist emerging as the new physicist in the popular role of science-personified:  Step aside Einstein and Hawking; big physics is so twentieth century (with all due respect to the <a href="http://lhc.web.cern.ch/lhc/" target="_blank">Large Hadron Collider</a>).  The twenty first century belongs to the likes of Keasling, Endy and Venter—brave new biologists for a brave new world.</p>
<p>Physics clearly still has a part to play—the small particles that make e-ink work for instance definitely have sex-appeal.  But let’s face it—in the twenty first century, synthetic biologists are sexier!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://2020science.org/2008/09/30/small-particles-are-sexy-synthetic-biologists-are-sexier/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

