Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Researchers Store Computer OS, Short Movie On DNA (phys.org)

Posted by BeauHD on from the microscopic-level dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Phys.Org: In a new study published in the journal Science, a pair of researchers at Columbia University and the New York Genome Center (NYGC) show that an algorithm designed for streaming video on a cellphone can unlock DNA's nearly full storage potential by squeezing more information into its four base nucleotides. They demonstrate that this technology is also extremely reliable. Erlich and his colleague Dina Zielinski, an associate scientist at NYGC, chose six files to encode, or write, into DNA: a full computer operating system, an 1895 French film, "Arrival of a train at La Ciotat," a $50 Amazon gift card, a computer virus, a Pioneer plaque and a 1948 study by information theorist Claude Shannon. They compressed the files into a master file, and then split the data into short strings of binary code made up of ones and zeros. Using an erasure-correcting algorithm called fountain codes, they randomly packaged the strings into so-called droplets, and mapped the ones and zeros in each droplet to the four nucleotide bases in DNA: A, G, C and T. The algorithm deleted letter combinations known to create errors, and added a barcode to each droplet to help reassemble the files later. In all, they generated a digital list of 72,000 DNA strands, each 200 bases long, and sent it in a text file to a San Francisco DNA-synthesis startup, Twist Bioscience, that specializes in turning digital data into biological data. Two weeks later, they received a vial holding a speck of DNA molecules. To retrieve their files, they used modern sequencing technology to read the DNA strands, followed by software to translate the genetic code back into binary. They recovered their files with zero errors, the study reports. The study also notes that "a virtually unlimited number of copies of the files could be created with their coding technique by multiplying their DNA sample through polymerase chain reaction (PCR)." The researchers also "show that their coding strategy packs 215 petabytes of data on a single gram of DNA."

95 comments

  1. DMCA on ur DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    One step closer...

    1. Re:DMCA on ur DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The anti-circumvention clause makes PCR illegal!

    2. Re: DMCA on ur DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all fun and games until the court order comes for a swab of your backups

  2. one noob question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know much about DNA. Can we modify (or extend) our DNA to include some important files that we generally keep backed up in the cloud?

    1. Re:one noob question by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

      We call this "clod backup".

      --
      There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    2. Re:one noob question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      I'm using the "cloud-to-butt" chrome extension. This is how I saw your comment:
      "I don't know much about DNA. Can we modify (or extend) our DNA to include some important files that we generally keep backed up in my butt?"

    3. Re:one noob question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm using the "cloud-to-butt" chrome extension. This is how I saw your comment:

      "I don't know much about DNA. Can we modify (or extend) our DNA to include some important files that we generally keep backed up in my butt?"

      haha. you should use "chrome-to-IE" that is even more funnier

    4. Re:one noob question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not just carry it around inside a gel cap? It could be made to look like jewelry, or vitamin supplements, or even food.

      And if it gets eaten by accident.. well... women eat that stuff all the time without any problems :-)

  3. Can't imagine the weight of that DNA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My drives are much heavier since I backed up my movie collection, couldn't even pick one of them up. Now that I think about it, we could fill this DNA with data and throw it at strategic targets from the moon.

  4. How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Libraries Of Congress would fit on DNA?

    1. Re:How many... by coastwalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually that did hit me as being jaw-dropping amazing. Yes the technique is slow write and slow read but the information density is about as good as it is possible to get at a molecular level. Even better the stuff is self replicating so backups of your backup are trivial. I am scratching my head as to how this might be used in a practical way at the moment, a bit like a laser in 1970 but the concept itself is staggering. I had no idea that the genetic science had moved so quickly, it seems like only yesterday we sequenced the human genome for the first time. I know one thing, if I was 50 years younger it would be this field rather than semiconductor physics that would be the most interesting physics to get into. Also I have absolutely no doubt that in 50 years time some pretty amazing medicine will be available. Much like 50 years ago a computer was a room full of racks and today it is an Apple iPhone. Today we just cured one child of sickle cell anemia using gene therapy, where is that going to go in the next 50 years? Wow, just wow. (Always assuming we can get pass the current trend towards 0.001% of the population having all the wealth and the rest of us living in a ghetto of course).

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    2. Re:How many... by psycho12345 · · Score: 1

      In terms of practical use, the information density means it is excellent for archival purposes. Consider how much space is used to store backups offline (tape or otherwise). I'm thinking things like Amazon S3 Glacier. Now, I didn't read the article, but I'm going to assume it is a bit easier to store these vials then racks upon racks worth of hard drives or tapes. Also consider the cost of moving this stuff, its smaller, simpler, and lighter, which means cheaper in many ways.

      Furthermore, unless I'm hugely mistaken, this will survive an EMP with no ill effect, so that's an added bonus in terms of resiliency.

    3. Re:How many... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      Yes the technique is slow write and slow read but the information density is about as good as it is possible to get at a molecular level.

      There are molecules much smaller than nucleic acids that could be strung together. The difference is that sequencing DNA is an existing technology that is paid for by serious users, so is available for cheap for this kind of thing.

      Even better the stuff is self replicating

      Uhhh, no.

      where is that going to go in the next 50 years?

      "Fixing one child" is to "today" as ? is to "in 50 years"? This is a very scary question. In no more than 15 years we will probably be fixing genetic diseases. It won't be much longer than that before we "fix" other things. Eugenics ain't just for chickens, you know.

      But don't worry about your dystopian predictions. By then we'll have "fixed" our genetics so that the 0.001% are superhumans and the rest of you are the size of bacteria. You can fit a lot of "people" in a "ghetto" and feed them for pennies when the ghetto is a petri dish. "Oops, Professor, I put the wrong dish in the autoclave..."

    4. Re:How many... by Obfuscant · · Score: 0

      Furthermore, unless I'm hugely mistaken, this will survive an EMP with no ill effect, so that's an added bonus in terms of resiliency.

      The data might, but the gene sequencers will not. Just like I have a box of 9 track tapes with data on them. And the data won't survive ionizing radiation.

      What is fascinating is that TFS said they encoded the data and then deleted problematic pairs, which would seem to be a waste. Why not change the encoding so you don't create problem base pairs in the first place?

    5. Re:How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The gene sequencers will work fine, provided your "disaster recovery" machines are turned off and in a faraday cage before the EMP hits.

    6. Re:How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, I think the error rate may be higher than typical storage hardware. Enzymes will need to be designed and placed to repair the DNA strands.

    7. Re:How many... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I think the error rate may be higher than typical storage hardware. Enzymes will need to be designed and placed to repair the DNA strands.

      That is why they are using such short pieces of DNA. There are already enzymes that replicate short strands with exceptionally high fidelity; it would be much more difficult if we were duplicating very long pieces. There are even DNA polymerases that do their own error-checking that are especially good for this type of work.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    8. Re:How many... by raymorris · · Score: 1

      > a bit like a laser in 1970 but the concept itself is staggering.
      > a computer was a room full of racks and today it is an Apple iPhone

      And by 1985 I bought a CD player, which course contained a laser, and I was 10 years old. Even before that, we had a computer in the living room that was more powerful than the room-sized computers my mother programmed just a few years before.

      > assuming we can get pass the current trend towards 0.001% of the population having all the wealth and the rest of us living in a ghetto

      Might I suggest you re-read your own post? All that about lasers, computers, and semi-conductors. The rest of us today buy $20 versions of the things that mega-rich people paid $1000 for ten years ago. The early adopters (rich people) pay for the R&D and capital investment that makes cool stuff become cheap.

    9. Re:How many... by narcc · · Score: 1

      In no more than 15 years we will probably be fixing genetic diseases.

      That's rough... 20 years ago, that was only 10 years out.

      It won't be much longer than that before we "fix" other things.

      We're running out of time to find the dusty VHS tapes of the '700 Club' warning us about the horrors of "designer babies" before they degrade. They could save humanity!

      Seriously, this is like hearing about the imminent danger posed by AI from the Kurzweil nuts. It's science fiction, old science science fiction, that's got you worried. Relax. There are real monsters, like greed and lust for power, that are far more likely to cause you harm in the immediate future than imaginary doomsday scenarios ripped straight from the bargain rack at the local used bookstore.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    10. Re:How many... by coastwalker · · Score: 1

      I agree that 'progress' continues to increase the standard of living of the masses. However it is said that it is the public's distress at the status quo which has led to the election of a disruptive president. This suggests that their security is declining, their share of wealth has definitely declined dramatically since the 1970's. It is unlikely that eliminating all H1B and migrants alone will change this given that AI automation will likely devalue the workforce at a faster rate. So the question is what will fix it? The costs of education, land, housing and healthcare have not noticeably declined because of Moore's law, only 'really cool' toys and manufactured goods have become more affordable. Eventually I believe that a decline in population will fix it by increasing individual wealth, but that is at least a century away. So what happens next? Police states and the occasional riot? War to keep people distracted?

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    11. Re:How many... by coastwalker · · Score: 1

      PCR makes it self replicating. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a technique used in molecular biology to amplify a single copy or a few copies of a piece of DNA across several orders of magnitude, generating thousands to millions of copies of a particular DNA sequence.

      --
      Facts are history now plebs have politics for religion on social media.
    12. Re: How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then you need a generator in a faraday cage. Wouldn't it be easier to just turn the Earth into a faraday cage?

    13. Re: How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great, so we're all millionaires as far as technology goes but you forget that a bag of flour or a bottle of cooking oil costs pretty much the same for everyone, everywhere. While in the advanced world it takes 2 incomes to raise a family. It must be all the iPhones.

    14. Re:How many... by The_Noid · · Score: 1

      Using PCR to make copies is not self replication. You still need to add all the machinery, including the DNA Polymerase protein, to do the replication.

      To make this self replicating you'd have to add the sequences to a bacteria like E-Coli, and somehow ensure that the cell doesn't just kick the useless (for it) DNA out again.

    15. Re: How many... by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I don't know about where you work, but our generator (and every other one I've seen) sits in a giant sheetmetal enclosure.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    16. Re: How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Generators are easy to build. Greater effort/expense/precision is certainly required to obtain progressively higher power output and efficiency, but building a generator capable of pushing out a few kilowatts of power isn't particularly difficult, even under "less than optimal" conditions. This stands in stark contrast to the difficulty of assembling new gene sequencers, plus the rather large assortment of computing hardware and other instrumentation required to utilize them for data storage/retrieval per this story. Provided enough people are still around to care about this stuff following a continental scale catastrophe, there are definitely separate bins for "things that need doomsday protection" versus "things we could just build again without too much hassle." -PCP

    17. Re:How many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Always assuming we can get pass the current trend towards 0.001% of the population having all the wealth and the rest of us living in a ghetto of course).

      Haven't you heard? The 0.001% say all is well because as their wealth improves so to does the quality of life in the ghettos.

    18. Re:How many... by chihowa · · Score: 1

      To make this self replicating you'd have to add the sequences to a bacteria like E-Coli, and somehow ensure that the cell doesn't just kick the useless (for it) DNA out again.

      Tack it onto a gene for antibiotic resistance so that it's not useless. It'll be the typical movie piracy scenario played out on the microscale: not only does this version of Arrival of a train at La Ciotat not have any DRM, but it has kanamycin resistance thrown in too!

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    19. Re:How many... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      We're running out of time to find the dusty VHS tapes of the '700 Club' warning us about the horrors of "designer babies" before they degrade. They could save humanity!

      I'm sorry that you think that eugenics through direct genetic manipulation is not a bad thing. Are you as unconcerned about the current "eugenics through abortion" system, too?

      It's science fiction, old science science fiction, that's got you worried.

      Every technological advance is science fiction until it happens. Prior to the Manhattan Project, nukes were science fiction, too.

      that are far more likely to cause you harm in the immediate future

      Ahhh, got it. You are only concerned about things which will cause you immediate personal harm, and ignore anything that may be harmful to future generations of other people.

    20. Re:How many... by narcc · · Score: 1

      Not quite. I'm not generally afraid of imaginary things, nor am I concerned with their ethical implications.

      I'm also not worried about alien invasions, evil AI, or careless time travelers.

      When I see silly science fiction doomsday proclamations that call for my attention or action, I look at it the same way you might look at a Chick tract.

      You, in contrast, seem genuinely worried about these sorts of things. I wonder if you've called your insurance company to have 'mad robot damage' added to your homeowners policy, in anticipation of the telephone switching networking becoming self-aware and turning your appliances against you.

      I'm sorry that you think that eugenics through direct genetic manipulation is not a bad thing.

      This is something I feel I need to correct. I'm against eugenics in all forms. Though I'm not exactly worried about eugenics through direct genetic manipulation as it's a silly fiction, unlikely to be realized.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    21. Re:How many... by syntotic · · Score: 1

      Can it de-duplicate data cheaply? Making backups is trivial now, but de-duplicating them... and after self reproducing? I also want some of my pics and emails stored on my body, even old versions.

  5. Science Fiction Predicts Science by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    https://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/sftriple/gpic.html

    A Pioneer plaque? I was reading the above when this article pinged on my RSS feed. I'm still giggling.

  6. No surprise since DNA is digital by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's stores in individual units that are base 4. (AGCT instead of 01) Oh, living organisms read 3 units at a time called a codon which is 4^3 or 64 combinations.

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
  7. The most interesting part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real news in this story is that we now have companies that can create designer DNA from scratch.

    1. Re:The most interesting part by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      The real news in this story is that we now have companies that can create designer DNA from scratch.

      Where have you been the past decade or two? This technology is working with DNA strands that are ~200 nucleotides long. We've been able to generate sequences of that length on demand in commercial apparatuses for years already.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  8. Every once in a while by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    a story here makes me go WOW!

    If this is legit it would be one. Time will tell though.

    1. Re:Every once in a while by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      All that "Junk DNA", yeah, an ancient alien secret decoded message. ....cracked 1,000 years later using advanced quantum computing technology.... "Drink your Ovaltine"

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  9. But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Will it store Linux?

    1. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They packaged kolibrios, an 1.4MB os that is not based on linux.
      Linux can boot from a 1.4MB floppy though, so there's room enough in the 2.1MB file they used.
      They also packaged malware - a bit sad to see that computer viruses were so quick to spread to this new storage format.

  10. ummm... just curious but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are the odds that some strange combination of digital data stored via DNA comes 'alive' and starts replicating?

    Not a biologist, just curious.

    1. Re:ummm... just curious but... by cfalcon · · Score: 1

      Replication doesn't happen on its own. If it did, we wouldn't have cells, and hell, viruses wouldn't need them to replicate either.

      The question you are probably asking, that I don't know the answer to, is "what are the odds that a given one of these strands contains instructions that, when put in some kind of cell, would end up creating a virus". I'd imagine the odds would be really steep... but hey, you'd only need one part to behave like that, right?

    2. Re:ummm... just curious but... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'd imagine the odds would be really steep...

      I think the odds are very high that an existing virus or bacterium would incorporate bits of the DNA and start replicating it. Even the cell itself would probably do that.

      Imagine using this system to store a movie, and the MPAA comes after you for having pirated copies of their property in your genes.

    3. Re:ummm... just curious but... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      The question you are probably asking, that I don't know the answer to, is "what are the odds that a given one of these strands contains instructions that, when put in some kind of cell, would end up creating a virus". I'd imagine the odds would be really steep

      Rather astronomically steep, actually. Being as the DNA is being designed to carry a message in nucleic acid space, the sequences would likely be highly nonsenical when translated into amino acid (protein) space; meaning they would almost certainly be of no utility to living organisms. And being as they are dealing with very short strands of DNA, if these were transfected into a living cell the target cell would almost certainly see them as food and treat them as such.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    4. Re:ummm... just curious but... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      I'd imagine the odds would be really steep...

      I think the odds are very high that an existing virus or bacterium would incorporate bits of the DNA and start replicating it. Even the cell itself would probably do that.

      I can tell you that the odds are actually very, very, vanishingly small. The reason being that it is energetically costly for a cell or virus to pick up DNA from the environment and incorporate it into its own genome - hence there needs to be a good reason for this to happen in order for it to occur. The DNA strands on their own won't be bringing with them machinery to incorporate themselves into a genome, and they would not be long enough to present any advantage for the cell or virus to warrant incorporation.

      Much more likely is that the cell or virus would see the short strands of DNA as a food source and proceed to digest it.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    5. Re:ummm... just curious but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also was wondering about what kind of random organism this would make, but I wasn't thinking of a virus. I had the image of its encoding a monkey capable of typing. (You know, that random typing that would result somehow in reproducing those digitized works.)

  11. Immediate practical use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The obvious immediate practical use for this technology is for Monsanto to digitally sign their GM crop seeds, to prove without a doubt that those pesky organic farmers next door have stolen their IP.

    1. Re:Immediate practical use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is this modded -1? This is exactly what the first practical applications of this will be.

    2. Re:Immediate practical use by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

      You are correct, sir.

    3. Re:Immediate practical use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was modded -1 because of the all-too-common moderator cluelessness and the fact that Slashdot's moderation system makes it possible.

      I can see a similar application--in vivo steganography. If the secret message is written to unused parts of genes, the message would cause no harm to the organism yet still be replicated in the course of normal mitosis.

  12. Genetic science is getting better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Soon they may find a cure for transexuals, then we can stop wasting public money on transgender bathrooms and put it into more genetics research.

    1. Re: Genetic science is getting better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's only a few weirdos in the USA who care about such things - the rest of the world doesn't give it a second thought.

  13. OS on DNA? then a computer virus? insane! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh God, please don't let it be Windows. The last thing we need is Microsoft trying to trick us into installing it into our own DNA.

    Which pop-up nag-ware method do you think they'd use? Acne with a Windows logo shape? "Install Windows DNA now for 'security' and 'healthy skin'. Dermatologist approved!"

    Oh and you think the telemetry tracking is bad now? You better hope someone invents a better tinfoil hat, asap. You know at the very, very least they'll be selling that data to your health insurance provider.

    But wait, there's more!

    They included a virus to boot? Are they insane or is this the method to 'crash' the Windows DNA upgrade resistance and anti-government-tracking dissent?

    ( the number of puns, jokes, and conspiracy theory ranting you explore on this topic must be off the charts, too bad I suck at it. :P Come on folks, I know you all can do better! )

  14. 3.6MB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    72000 strands * 200 base pairs * 2 bits per base pair / 8 bits per byte = 3.6 MB

    Must have been a short film!

    1. Re:3.6MB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Runtime: 1 min, according to IMDB.

    2. Re:3.6MB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Arrivee d'un train"/"Arrival of a train" from 1895, a minute of 176x144 video. Short, and the title says it all.

  15. Scientists decode ancient virus DNA by cliffjumper222 · · Score: 1

    From Nature:

    The rich fossil record of virii in equine species has made them a model for evolutionary processes1. Here we present a 1.12-times coverage draft genome from a virus found in horse bone recovered from permafrost dated to approximately 560–780 thousand years before present (kyrBP)2,3. Using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) DNA decoding techniques described by Erlich1 et al, [DNA Fountain enables a robust and efficient storage architecture] we recovered a total of 2.14 × 106 bytes in DNA oligonucleotides and perfectly retrieved the information from a sequencing coverage equivalent to a single tile of Illumina sequencing. The process allowed retrieval and decoding the data, reference, https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ

    1. Re:Scientists decode ancient virus DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And in the future:

      Scientists have recently discovered an unexpected surprise when they attempted to analyze the DNA of a wild pig: A computer virus. Their computers which were working on the DNA sample suddenly stopped working, and then displayed an old (and previously unknown) video. All the while simultaneously encrypting everything on the computers with a long broken cipher and displaying an ancient script. The script was later translated to indicate it was a ransom demand for some objects called "bitcoins". One of the affected researchers gave our reporters this statement about the incident: "To think people wasted their time on crap like this... It's mind boggling. The consequences of their actions could have had untold affects on the living for generations. Given the ransom, it's also obvious why this got out into the wild. They [the people behind the virus' creation] valued personal gain over safety and proper containment procedures. It's irresponsible." The affected scientists have since updated their analyzing software to protect against such intrusions, and are recommending a full review of all DNA analysis equipment to guard against this menace in the future.

  16. amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So a load of jizz that I release could contain the data that forms the movie that caused me to release it? Crazy.

    1. Re:amazing by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

      Pretty obvious you have some bit flipping going on and hence data is worthless.

    2. Re:amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, yes. It was always like that, no new tech needed. The "data" you release basically contains the plans for constructing new humans from scratch. If you are reasonably normal, then the porn movie you watched would primarily show people. So your statement is very correct, and always was.

    3. Re: amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't people

  17. Unlimited funding! by binarybum · · Score: 3, Funny

    The $50 amazon gift card was a genius idea. With PCR they will become infinitely rich off of those alone!

    --
    ôó
  18. Don't need a cranial implant... by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 1

    To be a pnemonic courier with this tech.....could probably encode it into your bloodstream or implant a capsule under your skin...

    --
    You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
  19. Huh - by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably the most important story in a year and not much real interest.

  20. A message for future generations... by felixrising · · Score: 1

    I wonder how long before we are uploading a small biopic of our lives or journal of thoughts for passing on from generation to generation... all embedded in our childrens genes... Wild concept...

    1. Re:A message for future generations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder how long before we are able to decode the message built into our DNA by our creator?

    2. Re: A message for future generations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Came here to see if anyone raised this question. That is exactly what I wonder. Couple transpermia with DNA data encoding, and imagine the possibilities. When your seeded life evolves to the point that they can read the data left in their own DNA, they phone home to the creator.

    3. Re:A message for future generations... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The message: "The storage is for porn.", "You are a slave to your genes", "OBEY THE ARCHPRESIDENT!", "insert cat video here", "Hi I'm a Nigerien prince....", "FBI ANTI-PIRACY Ver. 2.3", and "It's DNA all the way down."

      Don't we have enough "junk" DNA as is?

  21. Ruminations by dcooper_db9 · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. Is this the first Sexually Transmittable Video?
    2. Someone should start a blood sharing network. Maybe call it Papster.
    3. This sounds like a really good way to hide your porn.
    4. The OS could not have been from Microsoft. It would have been too bloated. And they said it was fully functional.
    --
    I do not block ads. I do block third party scripts.
  22. Right, Lets store a computer Virus in living DNA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does anybody else find it disturbing that one of the files purposely chosen for this experiment was a computer virus. The Encoding is meant to be read by "Modern sequencing technology". So how long before someone figures out how to write a virus into DNA that infects the device used to read it?

  23. Someone ping Hollywood by broknstrngz · · Score: 2

    For an updated Johnny Mnemonic remake.

  24. Genetic Recombination by ShoulderOfOrion · · Score: 1

    If I fertilize a complete operating system with a french film, what will the offspring look like? Plan 9, or Windows Bob?

  25. stability issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Elephant in the room is nucleases. The half life of DNA offers stability for thousands of years, but all it takes is one bacterium (or a literal computer virus) getting in and secreting nucleases to wipe out the entire system . I'm sure it can be addressed with engineering or PTMs to keep it sterile and low temp but the issue wasn't even mentioned in the paper.

  26. Quick! Someone call the RIIAA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a virtually unlimited number of copies of the files could be created

    But... but... that's UNpossible!

  27. Encoding is not enough by dschiptsov · · Score: 1

    There is nothing special in encoding something with generic code. The real challenge is to make it transcribtable into something meaningful, so a cell could produce something. So far only viruses could do so after hundreds of millions years of trials and errors.

  28. That's the reason for life by allo · · Score: 1

    Some species stored their porn in DNA, which got dumped somewhere and was the basis for life as we know it today.

  29. the 6th extinction event will be an array failure? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Makes me wonder if aliens already did this; Redundant array of independent humans.....

  30. Pseudo-profound Bullshit by gweihir · · Score: 1

    It has all the hallmarks: It is written "in the code of life", it is an "OS" and a "movie". At the same time it is completely and utterly worthless, because DNA is not a digital storage medium by nature, but a blue-print storage that is limited in what it can store by the reading mechanism to very specific things. Most binary sequences on it are just completely meaningless. May as well put a movie into the pattern of stones used to pace a sidewalk. Possible, but utterly meaningless.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:Pseudo-profound Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you consider data storage densities exceeding 215 petabytes per gram to be meaningless? -PCP

    2. Re:Pseudo-profound Bullshit by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      May as well put a movie into the pattern of stones used to pace a sidewalk.

      That... is a really cool idea. When I have to repave my driveway, I'm doing that. Not a movie though. Not enough space, even with a fairly small particle size. Maybe a family photo, as a jpg. I'm thinking standard 512 byte sectors, complete with sector header, data section, and ECC section, but rectilinear rather than arcs.

      Possible, but utterly meaningless.

      Well sure, meaningless to you. But not to my family.

    3. Re:Pseudo-profound Bullshit by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Hey, in that scope it is a cool idea!

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  31. Perfect choice of words by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > However it is said that it is the public's distress at the status quo which has led to the election of a disruptive president.

    Perfect choice of words there. "A disruptive President", I like it. It'll be interesting to see what happens with Trump because he's certainly different - on the one hand he's not at all diplomatic or "politically correct" or whatever you want to call it, on the other hand he's not completely *dependent* on big donors like most politicians. I won't even try to predict, it'll just be interesting to watch and see.

    > their share of wealth has definitely declined dramatically since the 1970's.

    Perhaps, but their wealth has increases very significantly. The average American's house today is twice the size of what they could afford in the 1970s. We have far more cars amd other durable goods, plus with technology everybody has a computer in their pocket, etc. Also, the average American Slashdot reader is a "one percenter" - 99% of the world makes less than $22,000, so Americans are doing quite well. *If* people in the US had a sense of perspective, they'd be happy and thankful. Good luck with that, I guess.

    > automation will likely devalue the workforce at a faster rate.

    Many, many times automation has come to a country - India is a recent example. Over the past 400 years, we've seen hundreds of examples of disruptive automation changing an economy. In every case, people have been worried and in every case it's turned out to be very beneficial. They lose their job picking cotton and get a job packing clothing (made from cheaper cotton) for higher pay. Bookkeepers lose their job writing down numbers in pencil, then learn to use computers instead to become much more productive (and therefore higher paid). We've seen this movie hundreds of times, and we still forget the ending. Maybe this time it'll end differently, but the beginning and the middle are the same as always.

    1. Re:Perfect choice of words by sjames · · Score: 1

      We've seen this movie hundreds of times, and we still forget the ending.

      Others seem to keep forgetting that point in the middle of the movie where things get really bad for the masses until something is done to improve their lot before it boils over into a revolution (or sometimes nothing is done and heads roll).

      Perhaps if we could be a bit proactive this time (since we HAVE seen this movie before) we could avoid all of that and get on with the happy ending.

  32. And now we know by dhartshorn · · Score: 1

    how Jor-El implanted the codex in Kal-El.

    Not that I need a reason to rewatch a movie with Diane Lane and Ayelet Zurer in it.

  33. Data Smuggling by mchall · · Score: 0

    ...seems like the most obvious use. This is a Bond film waiting to be made.

    1. Re:Data Smuggling by Ted+Stoner · · Score: 2

      ...seems like the most obvious use. This is a Bond film waiting to be made.

      Exactly. The implications for data security could be high. The NSA can tap any wire or wireless transmission but how do you stop DNA? How can you detect DNA data? Pedophiles with kiddy porn stored in a fleck of skin under their fingernails beside Cheetos residue?

  34. Bit Rot by kackle · · Score: 1

    "They demonstrate that this technology is also extremely reliable."

    Ask anyone who has cancer.

  35. NOT at all self-replicating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NO, this is not self-replicating. The output is not a viable creatures' DNA thus not going to reproduce on its own, but rather just a wad of organic material that happens to have data encoded in it.

  36. DOOM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is the port done yet?

  37. whatcouldpossiblygowrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one is the least bit worried that one of these strands can get out and interact with natural DNA in some way? cancer, viruses, something far worse that we can't even conceive yet? no one?

  38. 2 megabytes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They said they stored "a full computer operating system, movie, and other files with a total of 2.14 × 10^6 bytes". What the heck kind of movie and OS could that be in 2 mb?

  39. If you save the wrong file... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Save the wrong file, and you get a virus. Literally.

  40. A computer virus? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone went evil overlord with this experiment.

  41. That is 100 tonnes of hard disks of data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    215 petabytes stored in 1 Terabyte HDDs (each weighing 450 gms) comes to approximately 100 tons of HDDs. So 100 tons worth of data is storable in 1 gm of DNA. That is a upgrade in weight by 8 orders of magnitude.