[DIYbio] Fwd: [diybio-eu] Draft response to nature editorial

Dear all,

nature published an editorial text calling out to biohackers, asking about if we are willed to take on

regulation in trade for funding. http://www.nature.com/news/the-diy-dilemma-1.14240

It is a response to the Woodrow Wilson Foundation paper about Myths around the DIYbio community.

The paper is factual and generally agreeable in my eyes, but the societal frame in which these

facts are put and in which the actors appear should be debated equivalently.

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/myths-realities-the-diybio-movement

This is a very fundamental question, as it touches upon the idea of what a state and society is,

its relationship to the individual, the idea of freedom and the scientific endeavor itself – which is always a personal longing for an understanding of the world

and is impossibly an institutional thing.

I find the notion in the nature article somewhat patronizing, hiding some sort of ignorant arrogance behind.

Anyway, they call out to us, so in my eyes, as we said we will be transparent, should not hide away.

I talked to Malthe and we agreed to write an answer together as a statement of communal sense and responsibility.

Please feel free to add/edit it here https://piratenpad.de/1jQTH1Fnsu

Here is my draft text to kickstart the debate:

Dear Nature / THE scientific community, as it seems that Nature aspires to be a representative of it,

why should we not work with other scientists and take some government funding? 

In Germany, there is a lively public and internal political discussion ongoing.

Generally  speaking, there are already enough rules and regulations in place  throughout Europe to encompass this development. Maybe they need some  adjustment to be fit to individual researchers and hobbyists, but the  baseline seems clear. Just recently an interesting direction was pointed  out from EU officials: "Responsible Research and Innovation". This  indicates, responsibility for action lies on the individual and not on  the system. This idea seems very well suited to the DIYbio movement and  free and open societies in general.

International regulation is a  more delicate matter, but seems probable - sometime in the not too distant future. Institution-based scientist, however, should also think this  through soberly, as it could have a boomerang effect on them, too.

The  whole debate appears very interesting from a wider perspective. Who is  asking here? Why are these questions asked? Are institutional labs  really safer / more responsible in their actions? Who wants to control whom with what legitimation? Does  anyone's freedom need to be cut? And if - to what cause and to what  end? 

In the beginning of the DIYbio movement, there was a lot debate  about democratizing science. But now it is all about controlling  individuals. Strange shift, no?

"DIY biologists can do what they  like, as long as it's legal. " Of course, what else? The freedom of research is even written  down in the German constitution (together with such funny things as "freedom of speech" and the like…). To my knowledge, there is no paragraph  limiting this to institutional science. 

Artikel 5 Grundgesetz http://www.bundestag.de/bundestag/aufgaben/rechtsgrundlagen/grundgesetz/gg_01.html 

Please  also have a look at the Code of Conduct that was worked out by the  community 3.5 years ago. I think it answers all these questions and  concerns sufficiently. http://diybio.org/codes/draft-diybio-code-of-ethics-from-european-congress/

And, to everyone suspecting resistance in the community, here is a practical example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVlOlL3BmgQ ;)

Best,

Rüdiger Trojok,… [please subscribe here, too]