Biohacking Code of Conduct: Difference between revisions
From London Hackspace Wiki
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Discussion= | =Discussion= | ||
*GILDA: our representatives should be scientists and/or people who already have practical experience of biohacking. We shouldn't be represented by anyone who will talk about perceived or imagined problems. | *GILDA: our representatives should be scientists and/or people who already have practical experience of biohacking. We shouldn't be represented by anyone who will talk about perceived or imagined problems. | ||
*BUGS: as a science-type-person, I'd be very interested in going along. | |||
Revision as of 13:55, 7 April 2011
We have been invited to give our views on a possible DIYBio code of conduct. http://groups.google.com/group/london-hack-space/browse_thread/thread/e5f41cdda8b7146b/bbd26dcba4761a4b?lnk=gst&q=diybio#bbd26dcba4761a4b
This page is used to gather reading material and start a discussion.
Reading links
- Our own Biohacking Resources section: http://wiki.hackspace.org.uk/wiki/Biohacking#Resources
- Links from DIYbio http://diybio.org/codes (about the event itself) http://diybio.org/safety (about how to esablish guide lines)
- This is worth a look, too: a US "presidential commission" reports on DIYBio movement in the US http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101216/full/news.2010.680.html
- Some notes on the relationship between the AAAS, FBI and DIYBio: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/330/6012/1766.full#sec-3
Notes
- Cathy the Hackspace ethicist has offered her help.
Discussion
- GILDA: our representatives should be scientists and/or people who already have practical experience of biohacking. We shouldn't be represented by anyone who will talk about perceived or imagined problems.
- BUGS: as a science-type-person, I'd be very interested in going along.
