Short: Military Cloning Initiative (Part 6)

The following is an excerpt from classified document:

NMSC-1-7f-7d “MTALRES-188-34-11-C LOG”

RE: New network spew

Hey Althea,

The new network thinks the old idealized profile is 5% less optimized than the one it just came up with but I am not sure I agree with all of the predictions. I had to hand optimize _________ the first time with Dr. Moran and we already saw the previous network do the same thing as the new one.

Just to be sure I did some of the differentials by hand (again). I  still think the base pair at _________ is better suited with an _________ than the _________ that the network seems to love spitting out on this.

I know _________ is more common in the wild but I also think that the population prevalence of _________individuals skewed the study. (Reasoning is in this paper from two years back @ SRC-17G-2245)

As far as we talked about at last week’s meeting, I am still nervous about the idea. There is no guarantee any of that would work, and that’s ignoring the ethics of it. I trust the intention there from Durnist. but I think that might step out of the MTALRES Code of Conduct just slightly.

What Durnist is talking about essentially amounts to the proposal that the Civil Council rejected already the last time that topic came up back in the governing meetings. I trust that he is acting in good faith proposing it, but even so, I think we need to take a serious look at where we let our creativity go in this.

Ironically, it sounds like some half baked scheme from Sinter’s earlier work and MILRES already made sure she was not on this team. It would be kind of silly to import the worst ideas from someone who is not on our staff in my opinion.

Regardless, I think Team 2 has something they want to show you here in the lab. If you can get down here soon that would be great.


Dr. Junia Lent
MTALRES-188-34-11-C Cochair

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *