Fuck me, I don’t need DNA prices to spike too ;-;
Wikipedia is stored in the balls now.
Gives a whole new meaning to "data leak"
Along with the pee? Something's gotta go.
Something bear in mind is that this is EXTREMELY slow. It's not practical right now and may never be practical.
Not for home computers. But storing data in DNA could become feasible for archiving, as it is very dense and degrades very slowly.
BITCOIN
Imagine Androids having synthetic balls :)
Finally their brains are down there, too!
Where have I seen this before? Was it Star Trek TNG? Fringe? X-Files? Man, this is really familiar. I seem to remember it not turning out well for the courier.
Truth is, the game was rigged from the start.
Ring-a-ding-ding, baby.
So we have the Travelers timeline?
Humanity near extinct by the 2400s?
Is the Director gonna save us?
Cool, but how long does the data keep? DNA is rather fragile, only the most stable bio-compatible storage. Which is why it needs to be repaired now and then.
That's why you have millions of copies stored.
Yes, but this storage here too?
Nobody asked the real question? Why especially do they need to store data on DNA?
Human being wrote the data onto rocks, ceramics, papirus, paper, cd, harddisk... But what has happened? why now DNA? Is it the part of a transhuman project (evulotion circle : genesis - humanism - posthumanism - transhumanism)? Do we need to combine machines with organic parts?
Looking at the investments made in computer technology(ai, cloud etc.) , electronics(microchip industry, REEs etc. ), and biology(genom projects) over the last 40 years, I see that someone desperately wants transhumanism.
Scientific research doesn't need a reason, that's why.
Coming up with reasons is the job of other people, scientific research is about seeing what's possible, what's not, and how difficult it is.
But here too, it comes down to money and power. Funding for scientific research is provided by wealthy governments and mega-corporations like FAANG and Neuralink (founded by Elon Musk). This dictates the goals for scientific research. Studies are conducted in areas where it is desired that what is possible be achieved. Currently, billions of dollars are being invested in projects such as artificial intelligence systems, robotics, and genome projects involving cell and tissue regeneration. The claim that science is independent is completely unfounded.
OpenScience is a thing, it's been around for like 30 years
Yes, there are those who are trying to develop it independently, but they can't achieve the desired results quickly enough due to the scoring system.There are those developing vaccines independently, and those conducting genome projects independently, but ultimately, it all comes down to funding.
The Verge did a show on Netflix that covered something like this. I think the show was called The Future Of or something like that.
I only watched a couple episodes but one was about how it could be possible to save data in plants. Pretty cool.
I need the entirety of Shrek in my DNA
VLC has already started work on supporting the format
What could possibly go wrong.
Next to nothing? It's DNA. You have DNA and RNA lying around everywhere on the planet. On every square fucking mil or micrometre. The only thing that can go wrong, so to say, is microbial degradation of DNA.
is microbial degradation of DNA.
Or radiation. Or chemicals.
Radiation is easy to deal with. You have enclosures. With chemicals I'm quite unsure what you are talking about since technically DNA is a chemical. I'm going to do my original comment a disservice and point out that heat, anything above about 40°c needs to be managed. Though even with this latter issue there are ways to manage coming straight from already existing biological mechanisms.
What DNA currently out there is dynamically rewritable
All of it? That's pretty much what viruses do to whatever they manage to infect.
So a virus can rewrite a cat in to a dog or a giraffe? You're talking small changes over a long time. A 400TB drive that you can only change 800KB every century or so would be useless.
...no?
I said the mechanism exists. Dna is rewritable by it's very nature-which is what you had issue with: the DNA, not the the thing doing the writing.
At no point did I imply that there's something rewriting entire genomes.
OK buddy. I don't think you're being genuine here so I'm just going to block and move on.
It sounds like you are pulling ideas out of your ass then getting angry about them.
Better block everyone else on Lemmy, too.
You at the least for sure.
Block your mom for all I care.
And I don't think you can read very well.
I am unsure of the adjective's meaning in this context...
Am I to understand that DNA is more stable when it isn't used for life sustaining processes? Perhaps that is why this method of data archival is potentially feasible.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
