Austin might be one of the luckiest cities in the U.S., after getting AT&T’s 300Mbps and 1Gbps broadband option, Google Fiber will now be available as an alternative.
Not to awfully long ago it seemed that science could and would make our world a veritable utopia, and it isn’t too hard to understand why. For about 100 years, from 1850 to 1950 the advancement in pretty much everything happened in such a rapid pace to where there is no way you could fault anyone from thinking that utopia wasn’t too far off of the horizon. Think about it, in that relatively short period of time mankind went from riding horses to flying jets, and we went from living in in homes heated with fire and cooled by opening windows to central heat and air, and through the discovery of penicillin and other medicines, it seemed that we were on the course of eliminating all diseases that could afflict us. Yes, times were good and it seemed the future was limitless.
Well, fast forward to today, and there seems to be not so much a backlash, but at least a recognition that perhaps science’s meddling in something’s may not exactly yield the desired results, and in fact could actually introduce unintended consequences. Take for example a recent mass death of cows in Central Texas. According to early test results the mass die-off is being blamed on the grass that the cows were eating, and that would seem rather strange and disconcerting, considering the fact that cows eat grass. However the grass that is so far being blamed as the culprit is not your typical, au natural kind of grass, it is a genetically engineered grass call Tifton 85. To be fair this is not exactly a “new” strain of scientifically created grass, it has been in use, at least on this particular farm, for 15 years, but like a science experiment that goes wrong, al la Frankenstein’s monster, the grass appears to be emitting cyanide gas, thus poisoning the cattle. While no one could or should argue that science hasn’t made our lives better in many respects, I think there is a growing number of people who can argue that maybe science shouldn’t try and “build a better mousetrap” when it comes to things like food, and the food our food eats.