$5,000 for your genome

From Technology Review

Starting next spring, a complete human-genome sequence can be ordered for just $5,000, thanks to a new sequencing service announced by Complete Genomics, a startup based in Mountain View, CA. The stunning price drop–sequencing currently costs approximately 20 times that amount–could completely change the way that human-genomics research is done and open up new possibilities in personalized medicine. Researchers say that a $5,000 genome would enable new studies to identify rare genetic variants linked to common diseases, and it could open up the sequencing market to diagnostic and pharmaceutical companies, making genome sequencing a routine part of clinical drug testing.

Complete Genomics, which has received $46 million in venture funding to date and has largely stayed under the radar, plans to launch with a bang and anticipates the capacity to sequence 1,000 genomes in 2009 and 20,000 in 2010. That would represent a massive jump: with a price tag of $100,000 to $1 million over the past two years, only a handful of human genomes have been sequenced to date.

Apart from anything else, this is an illustration of what Moore’s Law can do.

The incorporeal body politic in Merrion Street

Mark Hennessy has an enthralling account of the frantic 24 hours in which the Irish government came up with its dubious wheeze for bailing out the country’s banks.

IRELAND’S top bankers do not usually play a supplicant’s role.

Sitting, however, in Taoiseach Brian Cowen’s oak-lined office shortly before midnight on Monday underneath a portrait of Éamon de Valera there was little doubt about how much trouble they were in.

The bankers uneasily waiting there were Eugene Sheehy and Dermot Gleeson, chief executive and chairman of Allied Irish Bank (AIB) respectively, and their two counterparts from Bank of Ireland, Brian Goggin and Richard Burrows.

Four hours earlier, following a disastrous pounding for Irish bank shares on the stock markets, the four had hurriedly sought a meeting with Cowen and Minister for Finance Brian Lenihan.

Having arrived at Government Buildings at 9.30pm, they were taken to the Sycamore Room, once so beloved of Charles J. Haughey, and left to wait, and wait. Nearby, Cowen was chairing another meeting, involving Central Bank governor John Hurley and the chief executive of the Financial Regulator, Pat Neary.

Two hours elapsed before the bankers, who had been left on their own, were called in before Cowen and Lenihan, who asked some questions, but mostly listened. The bankers’ message was not that Anglo Irish Bank was about to collapse; or that Irish Nationwide was on the brink, though both had cash shortages to face on Tuesday and Wednesday. Instead, it was that they themselves were facing crisis…

Hennessy claims that the option eventually chosen – to guarantee “the deposits, loans and obligations” of the six Irish banks – had “been circulating within the Department of Finance, the Central Bank and Government Buildings for over two weeks”.

So the government knew what was likely to happen.

There’s a good deal of Yes, Minister comedy in the story. For example, it was decided that the decision would be made via a virtual Cabinet meeting conducted by telephone. Apparently this is known in Irish constitutional parlance as an “incorporeal” meeting.

While a number of senior Ministers had already been put on notice, the Cabinet secretariat contacted the remainder, telling them to be ready for the “incorporeal” meeting between 1am and 2am. Even then, most Ministers were not told exactly of the decision’s scope. Willie O’Dea was woken shortly after 1am by his ringing mobile, but it had gone to voicemail by the time he got to it. The landline by his bed rang seconds later.

Green Party leader John Gormley had more knowledge than most of an imminent banking crisis but, up until then, the secretariat had failed to make contact with him because his mobile had run out of power. In the end, Irishtown Garda station was called, and they sent a garda to his Ringsend home to wake him and ask him to ring the Taoiseach’s office.

It’s gets better. The banks left out of the deal were furious.

The statement entered the public arena at 6.45am, causing consternation among the banks not immediately included along with the six Irish institutions. And the consternation made itself heard very, very quickly – and directly to the man next in line for the throne of England.

Furious at the news, Sir Fred “The Shred” Godwin, chief executive of Ulster Bank’s parent, Royal Bank of Scotland, called Prince Charles, as well as the British prime minister Gordon Brown, sources say.

Brown’s chancellor of the exchequer, Alastair Darling, quickly called Lenihan. “He was very unhappy, let’s put it that way,” said one closely involved in the night’s events. Demanding a reversal of the decision, Darling warned that money would flood out of British banks. Lenihan listened, but gave no succour and said he had to protect Ireland’s interests. Later, he called again.

Brown rang Cowen later. Though he expressed concern, he did not ask for the guarantee to be stopped, but he did urge Cowen to do something for UK bank subsidiaries operating here. Replying, Cowen, no doubt conscious of the lack of warning by London when it nationalised Northern Rock 12 months ago, said Ireland had to look after its own banks.

Hennessy also says that

“One senior banker turned up at the Department of Finance offices in Merrion Street without an appointment, demanding to see Lenihan. Sources say he declared: “You’re trying to screw us.”

Well, it made a nice change. The banks have been screwing the Irish consumer for decades.

UPDATE: European Union Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes said today that the Irish Government’s plan to provide unlimited guarantees on deposits in Irish banks contravenes EU law.

Ms Kroes said there was a discriminatory element to unlimited guarantees on bank deposits and that she expected Ireland to modify its guarantee plans.

She also said she had received assurances from her contacts in Dublin that the Government intended to modify the proposal before presenting it to Cabinet early this week.

MEANWHILE… Frank McNally has been enthralled by the Second October Revolution. In the first one, you will recall, the workers took ownership of the means of production. In October 2008, Irish citizens took ownership of the means of losing money. “Certainly”, he writes,

“I find myself caught up in the new revolutionary fervour. As a taxpayer – and to use Bertie’s terminology – I now ‘have it in my mind’ that I own the AIB and Bank of Ireland. I don’t feel the need to buy a large public building with ATMs and cashiers and toxic loans on its books and all that, because I can go down the road 10 minutes, and there’s one I bought already.

Of course, unlike the Bots [Dublinese for the Botanical Gardens, which Bertin Ahearn famously said he felt, as a taxpayer, that he ‘owned’], the banks are not open on Sunday afternoon. And I don’t want to visit them on Sundays, necessarily. But now that I own them, I’d like the management to work all weekend anyway, just for the hell of it. All this power is intoxicating.”

The aphrodisiac effect of power

This morning’s Observer column

Once upon a time, the ultimate put-down to a bright spark was to say, ‘well, if you’re so smart, how come you’re not so rich?’. Wall Street Crash 2.0 has rather undermined this ploy, by making it clear that an awful lot of very rich folks were anything but smart. It turns out that we were unduly dazzled by the Masters of the Universe, but we had to wait until they had vaporised the US economy before getting wise to the fact.

Actually, this was just a special case of a more general human weakness – our tendency to lose all capacity for critical thought when confronted by great wealth or power. This ‘aphrodisiac effect’ seems to be ubiquitous. One saw it, for example, in the way leggy females used to throw themselves at Henry Kissinger, a stumpy troglodyte who just happened to be US Secretary of State. And we see it in the way even hardened hacks go weak when offered an audience with Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or even, God help us, Steve Ballmer, chief of Microsoft…

The coming October surprise

John McCain has pulled out of Michigan, which is big news because it signals that he has concluded he can’t win there. It looks as thought Obama is pulling ahead. So here’s a prediction: if Obama is still ahead in two weeks and the Republicans are facing defeat, Bush and Cheney will orchestrate a ‘national security’ emergency to, er, bring voters to their collective senses and reach for the Vietnam vet.

What sort of emergency? Well, how about bombing Iran after concocting some sort of Tonkin-type attack to ‘justify’ US action?

UPDATE: Turns out lots of people are thinking like this.

On this day…

… in 1957, the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the first man-made satellite, into orbit, thereby triggering a chain of events that led to the establishment of ARPA and the funding of the ARPANET, which in turn led to the Internet. Talk about unintended consequences. Full story in my book.

Robbery 2.0

Lovely story in Good Morning Silicon Valley

As a rule, most criminals are not particularly bright, a fact that gives law enforcement a fighting chance against lousy odds. But once in a while you see a little flash of cleverness that has to be abstractly appreciated despite the way that it was employed. Taking inspiration from similar ploys seen in the movies and adding a Web 2.0 twist, an armored-car robber in Monroe, Wash., escaped Tuesday with the unwitting help of a dozen or so decoys responding to a Craigslist job ad.

According to reports, the suspect — wearing a yellow vest, safety goggles, a blue shirt, and a respirator mask — approached the truck in a Bank of America parking lot, gave the guard a face full of pepper spray, grabbed the cash bag, sprinted about 100 yards to a creek, hopped into a waiting inner tube and floated off to freedom. The getaway vehicle was later found about 200 yards downstream, sans passenger. At the bank, meanwhile, there was no shortage of people matching the robber’s description. A dozen or so men dressed in identical gear were wandering around wondering if their potential employer had stood them up. Each had responded to a Craigslist ad purportedly seeking to hire road maintenance workers for $28.50 an hour, and each had gotten e-mail instructions to show up at 11 a.m. Tuesday near the bank wearing certain work clothing — “yellow vest, safety goggles, a respirator mask … and, if possible, a blue shirt,” said one. The FBI is on the case, hoping the offender was less clever in covering his digital tracks.

Blaming the voters

This is really interesting. It turns out that the mainstream media were rather too credulous about popular hostility to the US ‘bailout’ plan. Here’s what the Pew Research Center found out.

The American public is taking a bad rap for Congress’s failure to pass the bailout bill. Members who voted against the original House bill are said to be responding to strong opposition to the rescue plan from their constituents. While there is little doubt that Congressional representatives are hearing a lot of harsh words from voters back home, that clamor does not reflect broad American public opinion. It is a classic case of the squeaky wheels getting first attention at a time when Washington is in a quandary about what to do.

The most recent polls — those conducted through Monday night — show the public is at best divided over the plan. There is little indication of overwhelming public rejection of the bailout proposal. A new Pew Research Center survey conducted Sept. 27-29 found support for the bailout slipping, but still showed a narrow 45%-38% plurality of the public saying that a government plan to invest or commit billions of dollars to secure financial institutions is the right thing to do.

An ABC/Washington Post survey conducted on Sept 29 found the public evenly split with 45% favoring and 47% opposing a government proposal to use $700 billion to shore up failing financial institutions on Wall Street. The question asked in the survey also pointed out that critics of the plan say that the failing companies don’t deserve a bailout, while proponents say it is necessary to protect the economy…

I was a bit suspicious of the way TV and radio reporters were using random vox-pop interviews to support the excuses of Republican refuseniks in the House for voting down the Bill. I should have pursued the thought, but didn’t. It’s also a case, though, where professional journalism could have done better. Mainstream media have the resources to commission polls.