Slashdot Mirror
Getting Closer To DNA Computing
jwambach writes: "This brief article over at Yahoo! describes how scientists are attempting to create molecular electronic circuits using DNA. They say that they could potentially create circuits 10,000 times smaller than with current technology." The article says that "[r]esearchers have already created molecular wires, logic gates (a building block of computers) and switches, which could be hooked up to make a working computer a fraction of the size of ones based on silicon chips." The coolest part is that assembling the tiny components could be done with DNA-tagged components, shaken (or stirred) in a test tube.
Well DriveCar could probably use some alteration for a lot of people (random alteration's probably going to be an improvement for many), and who in their right mind even has TalkToManager installed?
Intolerant people should be shot.
Ewwww....I don't think I like the idea of a sweaty bio-computer burping and farting on my desk.
---------------------
%46%55%43%4B !
Six times 10^23, not 1023. 6 * 10^23 , number of molecules in 1 mol, Avogaddro's constant.
I may disagree with your opinion, but I will defend to death your right to speak it.
Plasma baby! :-)
"Humanoid detected.....
slashdot.org needs plasma badly...
Come here fat boy, time to feed me."
Damnit!
You *CAN NOT* make stuff 10000 times smaller than something else. Why? Let me explain.
1. You have 1 dollar and your uncle Bob has none. You feel sorry for him and you decide to give 1 time that amount to your uncle. So, how much do you give your uncle? 1 dollar, leaving you with nothing left.
2. You have 10 dollars and your uncle Bob has none (he's a gambling addict, you know). Once again you feel sorry for him (damnit you're soft!) and decide to give him 1 time that amount. How much do you give him? 10 dollars, once again leaving you with empty pockets, except for the gum you accidentally stuck there and get off the garment.
3. You have 10 dollars and your uncle Bob once again has nothing (he's an alcoholic, too) and you decide to give him two times that. In this case you'll give your 10 bucks to your dear, beloved uncle and - after that - still owe him another 10 bucks. In other words, you gave it all away and ended up with negative total.
Get it?
1 time smaller/slower/less leaves you with ZERO.
Thus, making something 10,000 times smaller than something else makes the end result's size 9,999 times the original size, ON A NEGATIVE SIZE-SCALE!
From books people learn to remember, from mistakes to understand.
The head of the pin is the end with the angels dancing on it......
I've build for myself an organic computer long time ago, it's called "brain" and I tend to use it everyday..... well mostly every day.
~~~Please pass the salt, I hate unsalted MD5s
What are using for food? If it replicates, it's a living form of DNA, if it's alive, it can die, which means I've got to feed it at least enough to replace what dies off...
Intolerant people should be shot.
You're unto something about that "denaturing" process, however. How would we keep DNA-based electronics from being torn apart by bacteria?
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
We're already there:
I don't think it's wrong to be a paranoid android, though, but you have to choose your phobias and aversions wisely.
--
Freeper Logic
This is really exciting. I wish I could get involved, but I don't have a degree in molecular stuff.
I wonder what kind of equipment you need to do this stuff. Not too long, I perused through an article that talked about how to do dna something or other in your kitchen.
When will we be at the point when we can start hacking this stuff, be it in the kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, or office?
--fred
Missile Command? I don't think I'd yield control of our nukes to an old Atari cartridge, but that's just me...
--
Freeper Logic
It sounds like this is more like they are trying to put a virus on every computer out there! Don't let them infest your computer with a virus. Save your computer.
I mean virii are just usually just DNA or RNA and some protective coating, right?
Norris/Palin 2012
Fact: We deserve leaders who can kick your ass and field dress your carcass.
DNA is the fundamental molecule of Life, it is capable of self-replication. Creating computers with DNA can lead to self-replicating computers !
So what happens when it mutates? It turns into Windows ME.
DrQu+xum: Proof that the lameness filter doesn't work.
maybe DNA computers wouldn't hook up to wires. what about the brain? perhaps you could install a math coprocessor in your head.
this is a left handed sig
And as we approach the dawning of the age of aquarious computers get smaller, and ludicrously faster. I want my 8088 back... long live text adventure games... oh well... at least monitors are getting bigger.....
And what would petrifying the device accomplish? All you'd end up with was a lump of rock shaped like a computer, incapable of processing anything.
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
New form of artificial intelligence. DNA evolves with useage. Computer refuses to run Windows and won't take input from user attached to keyboard.
So can I take these DNA circuits and introduce them to my body.. Can I overclock my brain? Can I change my mind? Johnny Mnemonic here we come!
air and light and time and space
Modern science has developed a pet that can check email.
"Hey, what kinda software you running on your dog?"
Apparently he's having a hard time getting funding for his research, since nobody A) believes that it works and B) he's stuck in a dinky university in the middle of nowhere.
. . . a scientist I know is on one of this guy's grant committees, which is how I heard of him . . .
I have no
It's not alive. It couldn't even BE alive -- life requires WAY more support infrastructure (yes, even viruses need more than these things have).
I have no
One word Bluetooth
given that we have bio-pcs.. will they sweat to disspiate heat??? and could you overclock them with caffeine?
Completely agree with the DriveCar()... TalkToManager() was installed and enabled by default on my RH system, but on my OpenBSD system they had performed an audit on it a year and a half ago and corrected the buffer overflow exploit, but it's not installed as a default. {:-)
----
----
Slán leat agus go n'eirí an bóthar leat
But then again, why believe in DNA when you can have Jerry Falwell tell you it doesn't exist?
Larry told me he fucked his momma in th' outhouse.
--
Freeper Logic
It does add a whole new dimension to computers, though, just to think about what technology you'd be using, particularly if/when it started talking to you...
-Glump!
This is about nanotech, something that is coming and will change everything. Just because this specific application uses DNA doesnt mean the DNA is yours or mine or Bob Sagets, its just how the technology works..
With that said, your point could be valid about nanotech and the possibility of nano-probes (star trek: voyager, anyone?) floating around in your blood, but please save your conspiracy theory possibilities for when those things actually exists!
When the world ends, we'll be burnin' one
-- Dave Matthews Band
I tend to replace it with NodAndGruntAtManager(). If they happen to be saying anything important, you can notice the facial expression shifting, and explain that you were considering a possible solution to the latest code problem that just came to you.
Intolerant people should be shot.
Could a circuit based on DNA tech create something random? Or will we have to rely on other types of components to do this? Think about it.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Like all things nano, we can laboriously put together a working subunit as a proof of concept--create a biochemical logic gate, write "IBM" on a pinhead--but mass production is still pie in the sky. We can all talk about shaking up a bottle and out comes a computer, but that's all day dreaming. The nano industry will probably have to be bootstrapped the hard way: build the first nano-factories laboriously by hand, atom by atom, molecule by molecule. Then have this factory build other factories, which build others, etc etc. Only once you have a critical mass of cooperating nano-factories in place can you actually build real things in finite amounts of time. Mass producing something like a full nano-scale computer will take shitloads of factory units and lots of production infrastructure that probably hasn't even been given much thought yet, like how to supply raw materials to the factories, how to mount all this stuff--you can't just bolt a nano-factory to the floor, etc, etc.
I think I'll be lucky to see nano-tech mature to industrial levels within my lifetime, and I'm 30. Still, along the way it can produce very interesting and useful evolutionary products, especially in the "near-nano" fields, such as the TI DLP chip, or the new accelerometers in airbags.
Uwe Wolfgang Radu
... it could actually be Beowulf!
-----
Go ahead, blame me... I voted for Nader!
Consider an intentionally designed and created virus. And biologically active viruses do go from species to species - most influenza in china comes from birds, particularly chickens.
enough is too much
Does this mean we are closer to quantum computers too? That would open up a whole other can of worms the government will fall behind in their knowledge of. I can see it now. Company A patents DNA sequence A and Company B patents the building blocks of DNA sequences. Think that won't happen? Look at the current patents granted. Doesn't somebody have patent on the . in .com?
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
I know! I just about cried myself. But I dried myself up and found the will power to watch Full House and the comedy stylings of Bob Saget and John Stamos. And all was better. =)
Help me through college please!
"Modern science has developed a pet that can check email"
:)
Why not just train your cat to check your e-mail? They seem to enjoy walking on keyboards
Therefore what is interesting are the implication of having a biological, that is alive, component in our computer.
The greatest risk is that of degradation overtime from simple aging of the DNA-based tissue, not to mention being able to become victim of biological diseases since it's alive, after all. ;)
I personnaly would shake in horror at the thought of my computer developping AIDS
This said, I doubt such an implementation would actually happen over time, there are just too many risks involving 'live' components in mechanized objects.
--
Kiro
Christ, I can just see it - overclocked DNA-based computers with piped antibiotics instead of liguid nitrogen... :-)
Wouldn't this give a new meaning to the concept of computer virus?
Phobos - Greek word for fear or flight
I've never really gotten this about molecular computing either. It seems like the capabilities of these technologies are fundamentally different from the standard math/memory model that underlies current computing. You could create a traditional computer using these technologies, of course, but they seem capable of so much more.
The brain, for instance, is massively parallel and has processing on numerous levels, with no separation between data and processing -- this simply can't be done on a conventional computer except in the most painstaking and roundabout way (even with Lisp!). Presumably these new technologies would be more suited to such a problem.
But I've never heard anyone describe how, even in the most general terms, a science of such a thing would look. What's the molecular/genetic equivalent of binary math?
I wouldn't be holding my breath for this to replace silicon in your laptop. While it is a wonderful concept, and a scientific tour-de-force, the reliability of these things will probably be miserable. I'm sure someone will eventually put together a molecular computer. But what happens when it gets too hot? What happens when a single chemical bond gets screwed up? The only ways I see to address this reliability issue is with either redundancy or self-repair. The first is easier, but the second is probably an long way off.
This may have shorter term applicability in composite/injectible medical devices. Imagine a million mini-machines injected into your bloodstream to remove the Sirloin-Steak-Cholesterol from your arteries. Hopefully no problems with overheating here, and who cares if 90% fail. That's what your kidneys are for.
So far so good, but imagine even later when one of these mini-machines somehow mutates and takes off to do its own thing. Bacteria commonly exchange DNA, so it it possible that these things will combine themselves with bacteria. Maybe this won't happen with the first generation of devices, but once these things are have self-repair chemistry (presumably using RNA) it becomes more likely. It is both awe inspiring and scary to realize that we are entering the era where human induced evolution will greatly outpace and overwelm natural evolution.
Huh? I don't see at all how DNA Computing "literally removes every advantage the human brain presently enjoys over silicon CPU's in the way of problem solving." All DNA computing introduces is massive parallelism. The human brain doesn't have much parallelism at all. Just try and add 2+2 and 3+3 at the same time in your head... The advantage of the human mind is intuition, a "feel" for problems. Knowing instinctively what solution just might work. And that's something that won't be able to be emulated for a long time (if ever).
Adds a whole new meaning to "my computer died" now doesn't it? Since resurrection is unheard of recently, I suppose if your computer catches a cold and dies, you're just out of luck and have to buy a new one.
And those computer viruses could now become *really* nasty. People might be more careful about hanging around in IRC and Usenet for fear of catching something. Worse yet, you might catch something from your computer!
You have to laugh at the futurists that push views like this - they're right up there with autopiloted atomic-powered flying cars. Seriously, folks, it would take a LOT of work to build an immune system to keep this thing running. We'll need them to guide the antigravity cars, though.
Oh, and make sure it's got plenty of antioxidants and all the complex machinery required to repair DNA, whih we are only barely starting to understand...
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Researchers today admitted that they're swimming upstream in their attempt to build a computer based on salmon sperm DNA, but vowed to spawn a working computer or die trying.
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
DNA based computers might be much more sensitive to the effects of radiation, or other mutagenic factors. I can just see the label on the computer, " Caution, the hacker general has determined that smoking causes crashes ".
/no/ way this could happen. As one other person who responded to you pointed out, who ironically had score 1 even tho' he raised better (more insightful?) points than yours, viruses can't even cross-infect from one /species/ to another. However, the danger of viruses spreading from computer to computer of this design would be heightened because they would operate on the molecular level rather than the code level. Of course because the computing components are just structures and not cells with any way of replicating the virus would rely on the code level for replication but could infect on the molecular level. Yeah, something like that; wait till the stuff actually comes out, then I'll design one, work this stuff out. For educational purposes only, of course.
Hmm, I don't know but I'm pretty sure this is only a problem during self-replication of DNA. People grow new cells a lot (and that's why we're so mutation/carcinogen prone) but your computer shouldn't be making any new DNA structures; any that are going to exist are going to be made at the factory, which is the only place they need to really worry about radiation/carcinogens/etc.
I would be concerned about the possibility of your computer infecting you with a biologically active virus....
There is
Ever get the impression that your life would make a good sitcom?
Ever follow this to its logical conclusion: that your life is a sitcom?
"I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
Yes, but how many people are going to sit through an explaination of how the bit analogy only works if the DNA is of a certain type, in the presensce of certain enzyme, in certain heat and pressure etc... What I said was a generality, thus true in most cases.
I saw an update on CNN. What they have done is take strands of DNA, bend then back on themselves (like a clothespin), then use a partial complementary strand and an enzyme to close the 'pin'. They can then use a different enzyme to open it. This discovery is the rough equivalent (in computer terms) to get the first few registars of the first processor to fire up.
====
Crudely Drawn Games
If DNA computers become fact, will we have to change how one would plea in our legal system?
Let's say I commit a murder. Could I then blame the deed on a "software" or "wetware" problem?
Would it be harder to prove intellectual property, when someone could "download" your mind while you sleep?
Also with the advent of Carnivore from the FBI, will they also demand access to what people are thinking or "computing"?
I know I don't want that to happen, I don't even tell my wife what I'm thinking!
And do we stop with people?
If my dog gets "wired", what then?
Do I really want to know that the reason he jumps up on the bed in the morning, stands on my balls, and breathes in my face is because I had him fixed?
Could he then SPAM me while I'm at work?
I for one think that this should be stopped NOW!!!
Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
I don't know if this would work, but IIRC, there are modified base-pairs for both purines and pyramidines that are more stable than the ones that normal organisms use?
Someone more up-to-date with this stuff help me out here?
If you think about it, both silicon computers and DNA record data in the same manner, binary. Computers use 0s and 1s, where as DNA uses 4 acids that can only be combined in two possibilities per 'space'. For this reason, DNA computing is very sutable for problems involving calculating a path between two points, if certain routes can only be chosen from certain starting places. I think I read an article in an old wired where they used it to solve a complex traveling salesman problem (go through all cities, but never repeat a city, you can only get to certain cities from certain other cities).The acids would align if you could travel from one city to another,thus creating one step solution. ex.
*LA**Atlanta
GT-CA*CT-AG*
***TG-TC****
**Phoenix***
It prolly won't show well, but that's just html for you.
====
Crudely Drawn Games
Now we'll have moody computers: "I'm sorry, I just don't feel like playing Unreal Tournament today, sorry!"
Grr.
One interesting tool used in DNA research is called PCR, which is a way of multiplying the amount of DNA in a sample. 24 cycles of PCR amplification would yield a 2 ^ 24 increase in the quantity of a DNA based circuit, and takes less than a day to do. For once, memory could grow faster than data!
...
Yes, but there are practical issues that must be resolved with mutations that slip through the cracks in the PCR process, and how they might affect the data being processed by the DNA circuits
towards the BOFH!
This is true in an organism, but in a laboratory setting things get close to that simple--part of the point to the "DNA tweezer" article was to show that the researchers could control the 3D structure of the molecules. Also, the researcher controls what enzymes (nucleases, methylases...) are included in the reaction.
The article suggests that we have all the molecular tools and that it is a straightforward matter of hooking them together to make molecular scale computers/robots....this is misleading. There have been a number of published papers that describe molecular logic gates (based on 'inputs' of ions, or particular DNA strands) and the 'output' is often flouresence...which doens't allow you to hook these components up into large arrays. I have tones of ref's if anyone cares to look them up. Even things like Adleman's approach, while actually quite brilliant in design, fail to provide either faster more efficient computers or application to control (bio) chemical systems. Winfree's stuff with Seaman's DNA cubes is again quite interesting, but it's difficult to see where it will go or what insight it will provide. Anyone remember bacteria rhodopsin based memories? I think work continues on them, but no one sees practical application. The stuff coming from UCLA and HP (rotaxanes) is actually quite interesting; and given the population of things that has to do with molecular computing; it probably has the greatest chance of actualy realization.
Most real nanotech you see today is just some real nice bio/organic/supramolecular chemistry that has been moving along since the inception of chemistry (a-hemolysin stuff, self replicating peptides, nanotubes etc.). Not to say that it isn't wonderful work or un-useful...but it is just renamed chemistry.
The other thing I have a problem with people like drexler is that suppose one does actually succeed in producing one of the molecular machines he describes through synthesis or AFM techniques...we don't have the technology to characterize such beasts. Ask an enzymoligst how many molecules of enzyme he needs and the things he neeeds to know before he can say what an enzyme is doing (or what it looks like). Enzymes are in many ways much simpler than the kinds of things Drexler proposes. In other words even if you could build a nano-bot; I don't know how you could know it was actually there or convince other scientists given the trouble we have with the molecules that nature has given us.
What is frusturating out the whole molecular computing field is that when you actually try to sit down and do it, it seems impossible to try to figure out a way to do computation on a molecular level....yet natural things like remarkably organized biological cell and the human brain show us that there is a way, but is it the only one?
It was not put there to save you from embarassment.
---
Despite rumors to the contrary, I am not a turnip.
Another interesting possibility for this is to make self-reassembling chips (ala Transmeta "code-morphing"). If the chips could be made malleable enough internally, it sure would be interesting to see chips evolve with time. Wouldn't that throw a wrench in compiler technology?
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." --Groucho Marx
PETA can suck my meat&cheese fed, animal tested shampoo using, D**K! Seriously, PETA is one of the few activist groups that annoy me. I actually do try to keep my diet towards vegan ideals, but only because I know all the meat and dairy are going to kill me, not because some cow died or suffered to feed me.
Intolerant people should be shot.
Thanks, nice description of the situation. I checked with a relative who's more knowledgable of such things, and it seems Los Alamos was working with an amino acid, probably proline, given it's unique structure. (It contains a 90 degree angle) Given this, we could grow quantum computers with DNA as well.
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
That's all we don't need. Smart, designer bacteria. This stuff recombines in a water medium? My brain is mostly water! Besides, how do you connect a keyboard and a monitor to a petrie dish full of algar?
"..don't you eat that yellow snow."
Cooling may be needed to decrease the bacteria supply, not cool the DNA in particular. More bacteria would destroy your "chip".
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.
It is tempting to believe that each base codes for a quatenary 'bit'; and that all the 'information' that the organism needs is stored in an long n bit string. But remember that sequences fold into a wide variety of structures which affect how they are read/what they mean, there are also regulatory systems that prevent/promote certain reigons of DNA being read, DNA in some organims is methylated to prevent digestion by nucleases etc. In short, DNA is a physical (complicated) thing, and the 'bit' analogy hides this...things just aren't that simple.
In my lab (MIT AI) there is a division working on computing with Ecoli. I had it explained to me, something about writing programs with climatids (sp?) and then the Ecoli will suck them up, and process the DNA in the climatid and execute a program. They have been able to do this, the problem is each ecoli takes about 30minutes to change state.... But neat research nonetheless.
The humorous side to all this, or so it seems to me from the report on cnn.com is that the genetic raw material they were using comes from sperm... not just any sperm, but salmon sperm in particular. The number of gags one can spin off from this combination in relation to computing should be worth a chuckle. Imagine what all the dotporn sites can do with this!
You don't know the half of it ....
-- the most controversial site on the Web
I don't think you need to worry about being infected by a DNA computer virus. Virii generally aren't contagious across species, let alone across a loose collection of self-organizing molecules and us.
:wq
What ever happened to quantam computing?
That seemed like a good idea, using the spin of atoms as bit counters.
One thing that scares me is,
Will this become a state that you can either be cloned, or made into a computer...
and what kind of prosessor would you get if you crossed salmon DNA with the DNA of say....
a cat?????
I demand answers to these questions damnit!
how does this compare with computers that we use today? Is it possible to apply this technology to quantum computing?
If they are, does it mean that you'll be able to upgrade to a dual (quad etc...) processor system just by providing more genetic material???
And would say human blood be a suitible source of genetic material??? because if it were I could forsee all sorts of paranoia about super intelligent genetic computer-vampires, out to drink blood in order to 'grow' or maintain all those processors...
But I rant...
A... last post (correct at time of posting)...
I knew I had read about a very similar set of experiments going on with DNA in Wired. I didn't realize how long ago it was. Anyhow, I did me a search over there on the mag and found the article in their archives called Gene Genie -Aug1995. This is a rather old article, and I honestly have no idea how far this guy got with his research.
To quickly summarize, this Adleman fella actually got DNA to do some simple calculations. What the biggest stumbling block at that time (and most likely still) was getting an interface between the user and the DNA setup. Sounds like that's what these folks in England are up to now.
I feel I should clarify one point that seems to be getting mixed up here on this thread. The promise of DNA based computers isn't specifically to replace CPU's that we know today. In fact, DNA is far slower at running the repititive kinds of tasks that silicon deals with. The exciting stuff is in it's ability to do massive parallel processing on a small scale.
For example, if you had a race between silicon and DNA to count to 1e24 the silicon would most likely be a clear winner. On the other hand, DNA based processors usher in the ability to solve problems that silicon based machines simply can't do, like calculate a perfect game of chess.
Most likely, what we'll eventually see out of all this is a new hybrid computer utilizing both silicon and DNA based on their individual strengths. The prospects for this are both very cool, and very scary. We're talking about a machine that literally removes every advantage the human brain presently enjoys over silicon CPU's in the way of problem solving. Imagine HAL, only one hell of a lot smarter.
The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
Not strictly the same thing I know... but there's a fairly interesting article on molecular electronics that was in July's Wired magazine... the article is archived here
,Tez
Wasn't Len Adelman, (The "A" in RSA,) working on DNA-based computers a while back? /. would do an interview with Len Adelman - One of the most fascinating minds around today, in my book.
From what little I remember, he had shown that the computers did not need to be electrical in nature, rather they could perform calculations chemically. (By observing how the DNA re-combined.)
Does anyone remember more of the details, or am I imagining this?
I wish
Cheers,
Jim in Tokyo
(PS: Found the reference: Here )
-- My Weblog.
What happens when the radiation from the computer causes the DNA to degenerate? "computer cancer" treatment will be a billion dollar industry :P
Entrope is a fool
...a year ago, and it was being done at Los Alamos, and I think it was also a quantum computer, as well. Sadly, I remember precious few details. Does anyone know what I'm talking about, or have I been paying too much attention to the little voices?
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
What is described here is really molecular computing, which is somewhat different than DNA computing. As other posts have pointed out, DNA computers evaluate NP-Complete problems (traveling salesman routing, chess, etc.). They do not have logic gates or any advanced functionality of that sort. The Wired article is a very good primer and an interesting read. Incidentally, quantum computing is related to DNA computing in that it is an effective way (theoretically) to solve NP-Complete problems, but of course is different in its implimentation.
DNA based computers might be much more sensitive to the effects of radiation, or other mutagenic factors. I can just see the label on the computer, " Caution, the hacker general has determined that smoking causes crashes ".
One interesting tool used in DNA research is called PCR, which is a way of multiplying the amount of DNA in a sample. 24 cycles of PCR amplification would yield a 2 ^ 24 increase in the quantity of a DNA based circuit, and takes less than a day to do. For once, memory could grow faster than data!
I would be concerned about the possibility of your computer infecting you with a biologically active virus....
enough is too much
I just took a break from reading engines of creations and decided to go on /.
what pops up but this.. nanotech is coming are we
ready?
Can we use anybody's DNA to make a computer? If so, how many people do you think will by a CmdrTaco PC?
Looking at the hullabaloo surrounding easy-to-copy software, I can just imagine what it will be like when you have easy-to-copy hardware. Will they make test tubes illegal?
-Eldurbarn
News: In 2022, AMD releases a new cpu wafer codenamed "Green" that uses the new DNA technology. Charlton Heston runs off and shouts "AMD Green is made of people! People!!!!!!!!!!"
---
I see a major disadvantage in DNA computing. If somehow a hacker managed to get control to damage the components in a computer (similiar to today's BIOS virii) he could modify it such that it broke the casing on the DNA "processor." If well programmed, it could release airborne deadly diseases (both to humans AND computers) into the air. We must be careful as to the control we give the computers over their own hardware.
-=Lothsahn=-
So did I, they were amusing, and were aimed at my fear of stuff that's going to kill me, instead of telling me I'm evil if I do eat animals.
Intolerant people should be shot.
Oh, well I guess that's why they use hot water to sterilize equipment in hospitals.
What they need is a process that would "petrify"(as in petrified wood) the dna so that it kept its form but was no longer organic.
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
I have far more karma than a turnip should have.
---
Despite rumors to the contrary, I am not a turnip.
Cool != useful. I would be more interested in what problem domains they wou;d have superior characteristics than deterministic silicon stuff. I believe the original claims of it being used to solve combinatorical problems (e.g. travelling salesman) were retracted when they calculated the volume of DNA required to encode all the possibilities. If smaller but slower than RAM, then they might have a role as massive solid state memory devices. If they can duplicate the incredible self-repair mechanisms of cells, then they might be useful in hostile environments.
However, it would still be useful if someone could point out papers describing their theoretical computing properties. All of classical computing (ie Turing) can be derived from binary logic and NAND gates, and a similar theoretical basis exists for quatum computing (but they're having problems with the engineering aspects). Has anyone developed the equivalent for biocomputing? I know a lot of work has gone into string, tree and sequence algorithms (a la computational molecular biology) but can they be adapted for other uses?
In some ways the fun part is the reverse-engineering of the genome. Imagine that you're given the compressed core dump of a Linux kernel, and are asked to recreate the instruction set, systems architecture and application source code from first principles. If those gene jocks ever succeed, maybe we'll be hacking/designing complete biostructures in a few decades.
LL
Considering cooling: reaction speed raises with temperature: Speed = konst2 * exp ( -konst2 / T ). So if you want to overclock your DNA computer you should add heat instead of cooling
As I see it the real problem is to find a way to clear the memory. A computer will always work in the direction of maximum entropy. It may be possible to make a oneshot wonder, but it is extremely difficult to make a reusable machine
It's a pity there's a lack of details about, say, Powerage.
Because, if it's only molecular, the signal it will generate will need to be amplified to be processed by another peripheral, should it be a monitor.
If an external signal as to be absorbed, there is also a risk that it has to be lowered not to "break" the moleculs (Overflow ?).
So, yes, it *is* cool, but we will need a complete range of devices to connect it to before it is usable...
At this moement, I can only imagine a single multiusages interface for these chips : living organisms.
And then, it will have to reach the "mass-production" level. Maybe in fields, as "transgenic corn" ?
OR it'll maybe look like "human powered" like in "The Matrix" ?
--
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Not combinatorial DNA-in-a-vat survival-of-the-correctest computing, DNA framework construction of molecular computers that work like silicon ones.
THWAPP!!
---
Despite rumors to the contrary, I am not a turnip.
imagine a beowulf cluster of these ?
err.. does that make sense.. i thought it would fit with anything..
"Eighteen milliliters of water - one swallow - contain six times 1023 molecules," Tour says, pausing for a moment to allow the number to sink in. "If you could stack up that many sheets of paper, they would reach the sun 400 million times. I can make that many molecules in a flask in three days."
So 6138 sheets of paper will reach the sun 400 million times, if you could stack up that many?
For a molecular scientist, he sure uses some thick paper sheets.
--
Pokéthulhu
Gotta catch you all!
What kind of new cooling device are they going to create/use that will keep the DNA from degrading or just plain denaturing?
Well, presumably the final product would be a solid. If the surrounding environment is just right it could be very stable. It's ability to denature would be much different from that of DNA in solution. They wouldn't necessarily use the exact derivatives of nucleotides found in nature either. In fact it's likely they would not. There would be ligands(fragments hanging off) that would stabilize it. Perhaps into a crystalline substance. Crystalline substances that are held together with ionic bonds are very strong. I'm no expert but I did take a biochem class called "DNA Protein Interactions". Pretty sweet class.
KidSock
Woohoo! As opposed to the dna-based, meat-powered computers currently controlling the missile command computers?
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
So I read a few days ago that they have computers or robots powered on meat. Then I read that they're getting DNA implanted in them.... Note to future generations...when the dna-based meat-powered compu-robots start asking to take control of the missle command computers, please don't let them.
Yeah, just wait until there's a DNA version of Melissa/ILoveYou/(insert the latest virus craze here) that can get introduced through tap water. This time, instead of spamming your inbox, it alters the DNA-based DriveCar() and TalkToManager() functions. Ack!
Take the idea of dna computing and the solar powered co-loc that was an article earlier and we might just have something...think of it, a computer thats biodegradeable and powered by (almost) green energy (there's pollution created by the manufacture of the panels). Now all me need are lead-less crts....
DNA is the fundamental molecule of Life, it is capable of self-replication. Creating computers with DNA can lead to self-replicating computers ! Amazing ! You buy only one, and you can install the whole range of computers of a big company ! It's like GNU/Linux : you download once, and install as many times as you want... Let's dream !
-- javaDragon is an instance of JavaDragon.
We all consider cooling to be of vital importance in our silicon based machines, don't we? What kind of new cooling device are they going to create/use that will keep the DNA from degrading or just plain denaturing? Not that this isn't an interesting experiment, but the actual implementation seems rather difficult and/or unstable.
Unfortunately there seem to be a few other issues which could stand in the way of computers based on DNA.
I'm no expert, but it seems like there could be serious issues connecting the 'wires' to conventional wires.
In addition to this there may also be issues with the voltage these can handle, compared to the voltage required to operate the conventional circuit..
Then we have the issue of laying them out on some form of small chip, a test tube is obviously not the optimal form to have on motherboards...
The last issue I see is that of lifespan, how long are these DNA based circuit expected to last? And what sort of maintance might be required?
Again, I'm no expert, however..
Of course you can't, but... With any luck these new computer chips will be so advanced that you could have a watch powered by a 1GHz Athilon Thunderbird. Think of all the cool things you could do with it: Take notes, calulate stuff, get the wheather, [remind yourself to buy an umbrella]... Mabe It'll run TurboLinux ;-+
-----------------------------------------
Perversely greped and groped by PowerPenguin
1. The article does not talk about computing by DNA, it's about using DNA to build smaller conventional electronical circuits. So the logic would not change.
2. As devices get smaller, required amount of electricity drops. Future pc's/appliances should be able to run on bare light/movement energy. "Cool."
3. Imagine tools for DNA design. Anyone could design their own special component/appliance and start a farm. Back to the nature!-)
I think, therefore thoughts exist. Ego is just an impression.
1) This will not let Bill Gates pull your Natalie Portman fantasies from your brain while you sleep. /. signature! Hurry or your copy of 1984 will come to life and kill you!
2) I will not imagine a beowulf cluster of these and anyone who does will be shot.
3a) This will not let you hack your brain.
3b) Hacking your brain is dangerous, and should only be attempted by very skilled mad scientists. It has also been declared illeagal to help others to hack their brains under the ADWA (Assault with a Deadly Weapon Act)! Put a protest against this injustice in your
4) This will not make your computer become sentient.
5) This will not let you install Linux on your body, unless you install 64 cc's of halucenogens first.
6) Do not mention "computer virus" in your post under threat of slow torture.
For more information buy my book: "Get Rich Quick by Giving Your Money to Me"
I think there's a basic misunderstanding going on here. It might be too late to get it moderated up, but here goes:
;] ). These DNA-based computer's don't have all the cruft we usually associate with DNA. For example, these things won't reside in cells. The individual gates, transistors, etc., are just carefully ordered atoms. There's no basic difference, other than the fact that we can control, very carefully, how these atoms are ordered. We can't do that with silicon. At least, not to this degree. We're using nature's own techniques to control how these DNA-based(not actually the life-deciding chemicals, just based on them) chemicals to an incredible degree. That's how come they'll be so small.
Most people here seem to have the idea in their head that these DNA-based chips will degrade and/or mutate. Don't think of these as life forms, but think of them as life-inspired. Your silicone chips are nothing more than carefully ordered atoms, which are called "chemicals"(
As for the degradation worries, there's really relatively little to worry about. I'm not a biologist, but these people won't be building these things using unstable molecule chains. They can't, really. They'll have to make them fairly stable. As for the "mutation", it's no different than in silicon. Sure, a stray neutrino isn't going to affect a relatively MASSIVE silicon-based gate, but if you made that gate REALLY small, then yeah, something really small could permanently damage it. It isn't that DNA-based computers are more vulnerable because they're DNA-based. They're more vulnerable because the individual parts are smaller. If you shrunk your processor to the point where the transistors were as small(and had as few atoms) as a DNA-based transistor, then you'd have the same problem. Very little upsets would completely destroy such a silicon transistor.
Just to recap:
These computer's won't be using the same stuff in our cells. They'll just be using strings of atoms, carefully ordered(much like silicon is carefully ordered, only in this case we can be very precise).
The worries expressed here often(that of mutation and degredation) are really besides the point. They won't build these things with unstable molecules that "melt" at room temperature(well, maybe in the beginning, but that'll have to change), so a chip decaying is not really likely. And the problem with mutation(where something happens to an individual component) is a risk involved in any device which uses extremely small parts.
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
I made a small abacus out of Hot Grits, some hairs from Miss Portman and a w00d frame.
C-Net Article
MSNBC Article
CNN
NY Times Article
But then again, why believe in DNA when you can have Jerry Falwell tell you it doesn't exist?
Help me through college please!
Why would we try to do logic gates with DNA when we're already completing work on molecular computing? It's crystal based so it assembles on its own, works on the atomic level (electrons moving from orbit to orbit register as bit changes), and doesn't have that nasty ethics aftertaste.
- I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.