Sorry for the lack of posts. I just returned from the US and I'm recovering from jetlag in Taipei.
On my last day at Caltech, just for fun, I gave a lunch talk on my genomics work with BGI. I'll give a similar talk next week at the Taiwan National Center for Theoretical Science to an audience of mathematicians and physicists.
During the talk last week I joked that if we discover some genes affecting cognition, it might be more significant than all my work in theoretical physics. I also mentioned that, because sequencing costs are going down exponentially, I occasionally get the feeling that our work is unnecessary: the explosion of genomic data will produce much more powerful results almost by accident in the next decade or two. So why should we kill ourselves today? People in the audience immediately pointed out that this is always the case in science -- you do what you can with current technology, even though your efforts will seem puny when viewed in retrospect by future experimenters with vastly superior capabilities. However, most areas of science aren't moving quite as fast as genomics, so the feeling is especially strong from my vantage point.
Pessimism of the Intellect, Optimism of the Will Favorite posts | Manifold podcast | Twitter: @hsu_steve
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2011
(266)
-
▼
05
(22)
- BGI Cognitive Genomics Unit
- Macau photos
- Breakin' ankles
- What it takes to be a startup founder
- MacKenzie on high frequency trading
- Taiwan photos 14
- Smile!
- Taiwan photos 13: Taipei science museum
- Expert predictions: Mark Zandi edition
- Jersey Shore meets Korea town
- Startups, back in the day
- Kasparov on Fischer
- Scraping by on $250k a year?
- Height, breeding values and selection
- One hundred thousand brains
- Paper Tigers
- Forbidden thoughts
- g and genomics
- What use is game theory?
- My Navy SEAL story
- Obama got Osama
- Crossing the Pacific
-
▼
05
(22)

Labels
- physics (377)
- genetics (302)
- globalization (281)
- finance (268)
- brainpower (265)
- genomics (251)
- technology (237)
- american society (230)
- China (210)
- innovation (193)
- economics (183)
- ai (181)
- psychometrics (172)
- science (166)
- photos (162)
- psychology (158)
- machine learning (145)
- biology (142)
- travel (142)
- genetic engineering (130)
- universities (129)
- higher education (124)
- human capital (119)
- credit crisis (115)
- startups (113)
- iq (106)
- cognitive science (99)
- podcasts (98)
- autobiographical (88)
- political correctness (85)
- politics (85)
- careers (84)
- geopolitics (82)
- statistics (80)
- credit crunch (78)
- elitism (76)
- evolution (75)
- bounded rationality (74)
- quantum mechanics (74)
- gilded age (73)
- talks (72)
- income inequality (71)
- social science (71)
- genius (70)
- history of science (66)
- caltech (64)
- realpolitik (63)
- books (62)
- MSU (59)
- mma (57)
- sci fi (57)
- harvard (54)
- biotech (53)
- silicon valley (53)
- academia (51)
- mathematics (51)
- kids (50)
- education (49)
- bgi (48)
- history (48)
- intellectual history (48)
- cdo (45)
- derivatives (43)
- neuroscience (43)
- behavioral economics (41)
- jiujitsu (41)
- literature (41)
- physical training (39)
- video (38)
- computing (37)
- ufc (37)
- bjj (36)
- bubbles (36)
- film (36)
- mortgages (36)
- google (35)
- expert prediction (34)
- many worlds (34)
- affirmative action (33)
- hedge funds (33)
- economic history (32)
- nuclear weapons (31)
- race relations (31)
- security (31)
- black holes (30)
- quants (30)
- von Neumann (30)
- efficient markets (29)
- feynman (29)
- foo camp (29)
- movies (29)
- sports (29)
- music (28)
- singularity (26)
- entrepreneurs (25)
- housing (25)
- obama (25)
- subprime (25)
- berkeley (24)
- taiwan (24)
- conferences (23)
- epidemics (23)
- venture capital (23)
- athletics (22)
- meritocracy (22)
- quantum field theory (22)
- ultimate fighting (22)
- wall street (22)
- cds (20)
- internet (20)
- blogging (19)
- scifoo (19)
- gender (18)
- goldman sachs (18)
- new yorker (18)
- cryptography (17)
- dna (17)
- freeman dyson (17)
- smpy (17)
- treasury bailout (17)
- university of oregon (17)
- algorithms (16)
- japan (16)
- personality (16)
- privacy (16)
- autism (15)
- christmas (15)
- cosmology (15)
- happiness (15)
- height (15)
- oppenheimer (15)
- Fermi problems (14)
- fitness (14)
- les grandes ecoles (14)
- social networks (14)
- wwii (14)
- chess (13)
- government (13)
- hedonic treadmill (13)
- india (13)
- neanderthals (13)
- probability (13)
- russia (13)
- war (13)
- aspergers (12)
- blade runner (12)
- malcolm gladwell (12)
- net worth (12)
- nobel prize (12)
- nsa (12)
- philosophy of mind (12)
- research (12)
- Einstein (11)
- entropy (11)
- geeks (11)
- harvard society of fellows (11)
- string theory (11)
- television (11)
- Go (10)
- ability (10)
- art (10)
- climate change (10)
- cold war (10)
- football (10)
- italy (10)
- mutants (10)
- nerds (10)
- olympics (10)
- pseudoscience (10)
- complexity (9)
- crossfit (9)
- democracy (9)
- encryption (9)
- energy (9)
- eugene (9)
- flynn effect (9)
- france (9)
- james salter (9)
- pop culture (9)
- turing test (9)
- alan turing (8)
- alpha (8)
- data mining (8)
- dating (8)
- determinism (8)
- games (8)
- keynes (8)
- manhattan (8)
- pca (8)
- philip k. dick (8)
- qcd (8)
- quantum computers (8)
- real estate (8)
- robot genius (8)
- success (8)
- usain bolt (8)
- Iran (7)
- aig (7)
- ashkenazim (7)
- basketball (7)
- environmentalism (7)
- free will (7)
- fx (7)
- game theory (7)
- hugh everett (7)
- new york times (7)
- paris (7)
- patents (7)
- poker (7)
- simulation (7)
- tail risk (7)
- teaching (7)
- volatility (7)
- anthropic principle (6)
- bayes (6)
- class (6)
- drones (6)
- godel (6)
- intellectual property (6)
- markets (6)
- nassim taleb (6)
- noam chomsky (6)
- prostitution (6)
- rationality (6)
- academia sinica (5)
- bobby fischer (5)
- econtalk (5)
- fake alpha (5)
- global warming (5)
- information theory (5)
- iraq war (5)
- kasparov (5)
- luck (5)
- nonlinearity (5)
- perimeter institute (5)
- renaissance technologies (5)
- sad but true (5)
- software development (5)
- vietnam war (5)
- warren buffet (5)
- 100m (4)
- Poincare (4)
- bill gates (4)
- borges (4)
- cambridge uk (4)
- censorship (4)
- charles darwin (4)
- creativity (4)
- demographics (4)
- hormones (4)
- humor (4)
- inequality (4)
- judo (4)
- kerviel (4)
- microsoft (4)
- mixed martial arts (4)
- monsters (4)
- moore's law (4)
- solar energy (4)
- soros (4)
- trento (4)
- 200m (3)
- babies (3)
- brain drain (3)
- charlie munger (3)
- cheng ting hsu (3)
- chet baker (3)
- correlation (3)
- ecosystems (3)
- equity risk premium (3)
- facebook (3)
- fannie (3)
- feminism (3)
- fst (3)
- intellectual ventures (3)
- jim simons (3)
- language (3)
- lee kwan yew (3)
- lewontin fallacy (3)
- lhc (3)
- magic (3)
- michael lewis (3)
- nathan myhrvold (3)
- neal stephenson (3)
- olympiads (3)
- path integrals (3)
- risk preference (3)
- search (3)
- sec (3)
- sivs (3)
- society generale (3)
- supercomputers (3)
- systemic risk (3)
- thailand (3)
- alibaba (2)
- assortative mating (2)
- bear stearns (2)
- bruce springsteen (2)
- charles babbage (2)
- cloning (2)
- computers (2)
- david mamet (2)
- digital books (2)
- donald mackenzie (2)
- drugs (2)
- eliot spitzer (2)
- empire (2)
- exchange rates (2)
- frauds (2)
- freddie (2)
- gaussian copula (2)
- heinlein (2)
- industrial revolution (2)
- james watson (2)
- ltcm (2)
- mating (2)
- mba (2)
- mccain (2)
- mit (2)
- monkeys (2)
- national character (2)
- nicholas metropolis (2)
- no holds barred (2)
- offices (2)
- oligarchs (2)
- palin (2)
- population structure (2)
- prisoner's dilemma (2)
- skidelsky (2)
- socgen (2)
- sprints (2)
- twitter (2)
- ussr (2)
- variance (2)
- virtual reality (2)
- abx (1)
- anathem (1)
- andrew lo (1)
- antikythera mechanism (1)
- athens (1)
- atlas shrugged (1)
- ayn rand (1)
- bay area (1)
- beats (1)
- book search (1)
- bunnie huang (1)
- car dealers (1)
- carlos slim (1)
- catastrophe bonds (1)
- cdos (1)
- ces 2008 (1)
- chance (1)
- children (1)
- cochran-harpending (1)
- cpi (1)
- david x. li (1)
- dick cavett (1)
- dolomites (1)
- dune (1)
- eharmony (1)
- escorts (1)
- faces (1)
- fads (1)
- favorite posts (1)
- fiber optic cable (1)
- francis crick (1)
- gary brecher (1)
- gizmos (1)
- greece (1)
- greenspan (1)
- hypocrisy (1)
- igon value (1)
- iit (1)
- inflation (1)
- information asymmetry (1)
- iphone (1)
- jack kerouac (1)
- jaynes (1)
- jazz (1)
- jfk (1)
- john dolan (1)
- john kerry (1)
- john paulson (1)
- john searle (1)
- john tierney (1)
- jonathan littell (1)
- las vegas (1)
- lawyers (1)
- lehman auction (1)
- les bienveillantes (1)
- lowell wood (1)
- lse (1)
- machine (1)
- mcgeorge bundy (1)
- mexico (1)
- michael jackson (1)
- mickey rourke (1)
- migration (1)
- money:tech (1)
- myron scholes (1)
- netwon institute (1)
- networks (1)
- newton institute (1)
- nfl (1)
- oliver stone (1)
- phil gramm (1)
- philanthropy (1)
- philip greenspun (1)
- portfolio theory (1)
- power laws (1)
- pyschology (1)
- randomness (1)
- recession (1)
- sales (1)
- singapore (1)
- skype (1)
- standard deviation (1)
- star wars (1)
- starship troopers (1)
- students today (1)
- teleportation (1)
- tierney lab blog (1)
- tomonaga (1)
- tyler cowen (1)
- venice (1)
- violence (1)
- virtual meetings (1)
- war nerd (1)
- wealth effect (1)

9 comments:
Seems to be a problem with the PDF (using most up to date reader).
It was prepared using latex on OS X so there might be issues. I notice occasional non-portability but it's rare. You might try google docs.
Steve, thanks for posting that PDF. A few questions:
-Is heritability/validity/reliability the same in china as in US? Even in rural areas?
-How are you controlling for population stratification at BGI?
-What are the advantages/disadvantages of doing this in a monoethnic sample?
Data on h/v/r are sparse for China, although there is probably some literature in Mandarin I do not have access to.
We are going to do the usual things to control pop strat (correct for largest PCA vectors). Things are a bit easier in a Han sample than in a multi-ethnic sample.
I would guess that heritability and validity are lower in China in the US.. It seems like a lower in h2 in china might cause problems for the study
A few pages didn't (completely) show when I downloaded it.. Google Docs lets you see everything though
No problem for our design unless you can think of an environmental mechanism that boosts genetically ordinary kids up to > +3 SD. Decreased h2 in China would be due to kids growing up in crappy environments, so it doesn't really affect our high group.
For a big brute force GWAS there is a problem because the measured g is more loosely related to the genetic component.
Do you ever worry about the ethics of it? I find it hard to imagine consequences that will be good for society of this type of work. If someone asked you what the top 5 pros and cons of working on this stuff is what would your answers be?
Obviously you can hide behind scientific impartiality, but IMHO that only streches so far. There are some things we shouldn't do even if we can. Maybe someone has already mapped out the ethical minefield, but if they have I'm unaware of it.
I laid out the up side in the talk. Humans should take control of their own evolution eventually, and this is a crucial step.
Cognitive genomics can hardly be compared to nuclear weapons technology which easily could have (and possibly still will) lead to the extinction of the human race. Yet many (most) physicists were OK doing that kind of work.
Post a Comment