- A 162-page paper on micro-thermal actuators was judged to be “optical-tweezers-lite”; participants proposed etching the devices with standard PCB processes to create massively-parallel droplet manipulators, PCR chips, or even a 3-D wax/epoxy printer.  
- “Lab-on-a-chip” was dismissed as hype unless backed by real experiments; participants pointed to credible Nature Methods and RSC Lab-on-a-Chip papers on in-vitro protein expression and Dean-flow spiral separators as better exemplars.  
- A spiral-microfluidic nanoparticle separator was analyzed; the group debated whether Dean vortices or centrifugal forces dominate separation and whether custom G-code or parametric CAD is the superior way to generate the spiral geometry.  
- DIYbio culture was criticized for focusing on trivial GFP E. coli demos; circadian-rhythm and mood tattoos were mocked, while fluorescent-sugar labeling was highlighted as a more serious experimental direction.  
- Wearable-computing discussion compared Steve Mann’s $560 battery-heavy rig to BeagleBoard, Gumstix, and Pandora as head-mounted compute cores, emphasizing the need for discreet cameras and side-mounted micro-displays.  
- A Wired photo of Ed Boyden’s rTMS setup was dissected: 440 A IGBTs, breadboarded regulators, mystery coils, and Radio Shack parts provoked both skepticism and curiosity about reproducibility.  
- Fab-lab progress included hand-made plywood step-pulleys for a future CNC lathe, frustration with university machine-shop delays, and a Python spiral-G-code generator offered for download.  
- Shared resources included colloidal silica (5–405 nm) for shear-thickening fluids, fluorescent-sugar imaging protocols, an ARG-style “Skynet Research” site, and a literature list on bubble and droplet dynamics covering self-propulsion, wake formation, and transient pressure responses.