Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Japanese researchers develop see-through goldfish (yahoo.com)
15 points by Flemlord on Jan 1, 2010 | hide | past | favorite | 7 comments



Even if you make the animal see through you can't see behind organs that block other organs. What would have to occur is to change the pigmentation of all of the organs also.


You view breeding an animal to have certain traits and then selling it for personal profit more moral than dissecting a frog to help children understand more about life?

Disgusting in my opinion. You are clearly willing to put a price on life (selling the animal) but you care whether the animal stays alive or not?

The "You" refers the the animal right activists who are happy with this solution. Also to the "breeders"


Cutting up a goldfish or breeding in transparency are amoral. Whether you find it disgusting or not is a personal matter.

Unless of course I wanted to sell you something. At which point it would take prime importance, as it clearly did to these scientists.

(If they made a goldfish that glowed (like a night light) they would also have me in their market.)


"Prolume" is a biotechnology company whose core business is based upon newly discovered genes from deep water marine bioluminescent organisms.  This has broad applications for biomedical research, drug discovery, and entertainment.

http://prolume.com

Not glowing goldfish but their BioToy division has some wickedly-cool science gifts.


Of course it is a personally matter- and I thought I made that clear. You view it as amoral, but the "animal rights" activists view it as immoral, so my argument is that if it is immoral, how is breeding fish, a life, to have certain genes which make it profitable to sell any more moral than cutting up an animal for education. I view that as hypocrisy which I view as disgusting.

(Maybe doesn't apply to you) Secondly- I'm shocked I got down voted for expressing a negative opinion. I doubt I would have been down voted if my opinion was positive. But no matter. It wont stop me from saying my mind.


Welcome to the history of domestication. What species did you think you were again?

BTW, although humans routinely edit and use other species, we're far from the most merciless. Study the biology of parasitic wasps, some time.


I think you are taking my posts the wrong way. I am not an animal activist, and I am fine with the idea of selective breeding (and of course dissection). We humans as a race probably not have survived (or gotten to our current) without domesticating plants and animals. (I'm not talking out of my ass -I've had to research this topic extensively in the past for school.) It's a process well worth doing and I would be happy to buy a fish that glowed in the dark while in a tank of bioluminescent dinoflagellates ect. ect.

The problem I have is with the civil rights activists, so if you get a chance to re-read my posts, please consider that.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: