PCR would really not apply because as you said 'it involves make each strand duplicate themselves'. So if you have 2^64 duplicate strands you would have 2^64 copies of 1 answer. You would need to create 2^64 unique strands to get that many answers.
Each of the possible 1 048 576 solutions were then represented by much longer strands of specially encoded DNA, which Adleman's team added to the first cell
So they had to go through and find all the possible answers and put them in the mix? I don't think this will every be a viable solution when to find the correct answer you have to know all the wrong ones as well. Part of problem solving is starting out with 0 answers. I bet they couldn't use the DNA computer to figure out all those 1048576 wrong solutions. Although I think it would be an interesting concept, until they can figure out a way to solve problems without knowing all the answers, I do not see how it could be used for serious calculations. I think it could possibly be the next great search engine, or maybe an RC5 engine. But how long would it take to encode 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 strands of DNA?
Let's say I buy the CD, open it, then return it. The company will just re-shrinkwrap it and re-sell it. They've lost what probably $.03 for the cost of printing the receipt, the cost of the plastic, and associated maintenance on those machines. Since the cost of CDs are marked way up, for arguments sake let's say $3.00 per CD. You would have to buy and return 100 CDs for them to even come close to considering that they may lose money. In my opinion most peoples time is worth more than that. (Of course I'm a little optimistic)
I think the previous posts about calling the FTC and issuing a complaint, that this is a deceptive practice, is far more productive.
Don't get me wrong, I think what they're doing is stupid and it should cost them, but spending 30 minutes to make someone lose $.03 seems futile.
Doing and building, which require resources and money is not the same as thinking, which requires a brain. My point is, that just because the goverment may have thought of it first, doesn't mean that someone else wouldn't have eventually come up with the same idea. Did the government declassify those documents or did it become public knowledge without government intervention?
Like I said, actually building something and possessing knowledge are two different things. Sure the government may come up with an idea and keep it secret, but that doesn't mean that out of the 6 billion people on this planet, that no one else will think of the same thing.
Do you think that keeping secrets stops people from trying to figure out how to do things?
<sarcasm> I've almost got the cure common cold, but damnit the government classified it (highly classified that is), so I guess I'll never know it. I'll just go on believing that what the government lets me know is all there is to know. It's a good thing the goverment is the only one with new ideas</sarcasm>
Like I said originally, you cannot stop thought. You can keep thoughts secret, you can share thoughts, or you can choose not to think, but you cannot stop someone else from thinking.
High-resolution color copying IS available, and yet the reason that massive counterfeiting hasn't destroyed the economy is because the materials (such as the rag it's printed on), as opposed to the processes, are not available. (This is why I hate analogies, especially bad ones)
I did think about it, as apparantly you did not. Possesing technology and having the knowledge of that technology are two completely different concepts. I can look on the web or science journals to figure out how to build a nuclear device, but I don't have the resources (nor would I ever want) to build one.
The computer is the resource that allows people to do fast complex cryptography (Although it can also be done with pen and paper). There are already export restrictions on powerful computers as well as cryptography, but that did not stop the rest of the world from having or using them. (BTW, most reports indicate that the terrorists did NOT use encryption).
You should read more carefully before posting. Possessing resources, and having knowledge are different. If you need help, there are many dictionaries on line.
If you really beleive what you say, and believe that you are right, there's no reason to post "Anonymous Coward"
Cryptography is based on math formulas. Last time I checked, knowledge of math was not confined to the US. Basic cryptography can be done with very large prime numbers, not a difficult math concept, but hard as hell to factor.
Besides, any idea, over our entire history, was probably not thought up by only one person, even though usually only one person gets the credit for it.
Preventing someone from advancing in ANY technology, only puts them behind. If a US mathematician doesn't think of it and publish it, someone else will. To protect against something, you have to understand how it works first. You have to have guns with bullets to make bullet proof vests. You have to have a virus to find the cure. (I hate bad analogies, but since they're all the rage).
I think the farther cryptographers and mathematicians advance, the more useless the old technology becomes. Remember RSA Labs 56 bit key?
I'm not an expert on legal matters, but if prior art means that if someone has done it before, and has it documented, you can't patent it, then let's continue cranking out ideas for OSDN.
I figure they don't have to be well implemented, just thught up and documented. That way the OSDN sites can (if not already) be a source for prior art searches.
Actually, we could just have a Open Ideas Network that would allow other people (who maybe can't program well) just describe their ideas and have people volunteer to start or continue on software for that idea......just dreaming.
Slashdot Mirror
'Vacuum' ~ 'F**k you'
I'd hate to get those mixed up. But really, how much to people really talk about vacuums?
Wow. Could you image transparant conducting concrete. I think it could lead to some very interesting lighting effects.
PCR would really not apply because as you said 'it involves make each strand duplicate themselves'. So if you have 2^64 duplicate strands you would have 2^64 copies of 1 answer. You would need to create 2^64 unique strands to get that many answers.
So they had to go through and find all the possible answers and put them in the mix? I don't think this will every be a viable solution when to find the correct answer you have to know all the wrong ones as well. Part of problem solving is starting out with 0 answers. I bet they couldn't use the DNA computer to figure out all those 1048576 wrong solutions. Although I think it would be an interesting concept, until they can figure out a way to solve problems without knowing all the answers, I do not see how it could be used for serious calculations. I think it could possibly be the next great search engine, or maybe an RC5 engine. But how long would it take to encode 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 strands of DNA?
Let's say I buy the CD, open it, then return it. The company will just re-shrinkwrap it and re-sell it. They've lost what probably $.03 for the cost of printing the receipt, the cost of the plastic, and associated maintenance on those machines. Since the cost of CDs are marked way up, for arguments sake let's say $3.00 per CD. You would have to buy and return 100 CDs for them to even come close to considering that they may lose money. In my opinion most peoples time is worth more than that. (Of course I'm a little optimistic)
I think the previous posts about calling the FTC and issuing a complaint, that this is a deceptive practice, is far more productive.
Don't get me wrong, I think what they're doing is stupid and it should cost them, but spending 30 minutes to make someone lose $.03 seems futile.
9310 Fart Fone
Doing and building, which require resources and money is not the same as thinking, which requires a brain. My point is, that just because the goverment may have thought of it first, doesn't mean that someone else wouldn't have eventually come up with the same idea. Did the government declassify those documents or did it become public knowledge without government intervention?
Like I said, actually building something and possessing knowledge are two different things. Sure the government may come up with an idea and keep it secret, but that doesn't mean that out of the 6 billion people on this planet, that no one else will think of the same thing.
Do you think that keeping secrets stops people from trying to figure out how to do things?
<sarcasm> I've almost got the cure common cold, but damnit the government classified it (highly classified that is), so I guess I'll never know it. I'll just go on believing that what the government lets me know is all there is to know. It's a good thing the goverment is the only one with new ideas</sarcasm>
Like I said originally, you cannot stop thought. You can keep thoughts secret, you can share thoughts, or you can choose not to think, but you cannot stop someone else from thinking.
High-resolution color copying IS available, and yet the reason that massive counterfeiting hasn't destroyed the economy is because the materials (such as the rag it's printed on), as opposed to the processes, are not available. (This is why I hate analogies, especially bad ones)
I did think about it, as apparantly you did not. Possesing technology and having the knowledge of that technology are two completely different concepts. I can look on the web or science journals to figure out how to build a nuclear device, but I don't have the resources (nor would I ever want) to build one.
The computer is the resource that allows people to do fast complex cryptography (Although it can also be done with pen and paper). There are already export restrictions on powerful computers as well as cryptography, but that did not stop the rest of the world from having or using them. (BTW, most reports indicate that the terrorists did NOT use encryption).
You should read more carefully before posting. Possessing resources, and having knowledge are different. If you need help, there are many dictionaries on line.
If you really beleive what you say, and believe that you are right, there's no reason to post "Anonymous Coward"
Cryptography is based on math formulas. Last time I checked, knowledge of math was not confined to the US. Basic cryptography can be done with very large prime numbers, not a difficult math concept, but hard as hell to factor.
Besides, any idea, over our entire history, was probably not thought up by only one person, even though usually only one person gets the credit for it.
Preventing someone from advancing in ANY technology, only puts them behind. If a US mathematician doesn't think of it and publish it, someone else will. To protect against something, you have to understand how it works first. You have to have guns with bullets to make bullet proof vests. You have to have a virus to find the cure. (I hate bad analogies, but since they're all the rage).
I think the farther cryptographers and mathematicians advance, the more useless the old technology becomes. Remember RSA Labs 56 bit key?
Thoughts and ideas should never be outlawed.
Reinstalled after crash...
I'm not an expert on legal matters, but if prior art means that if someone has done it before, and has it documented, you can't patent it, then let's continue cranking out ideas for OSDN.
I figure they don't have to be well implemented, just thught up and documented. That way the OSDN sites can (if not already) be a source for prior art searches.
Actually, we could just have a Open Ideas Network that would allow other people (who maybe can't program well) just describe their ideas and have people volunteer to start or continue on software for that idea......just dreaming.
- - This space intentionally left blank.