×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientists Store Entire Textbook In DNA

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the ok-but-where-are-the-tiny-spectacles? dept.

Biotech 160

sciencehabit writes with this mind-boggling bit from Science Magazine: "When it comes to storing information, hard drives don't hold a candle to DNA. Our genetic code packs billions of gigabytes into a single gram. A mere milligram of the molecule could encode the complete text of every book in the Library of Congress and have plenty of room to spare. All of this has been mostly theoretical—until now. In a new study, researchers stored an entire genetics textbook in less than a picogram of DNA — one trillionth of a gram — an advance that could revolutionize our ability to save data."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

160 comments

HOSTS file would have prevented this. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015303)

nummynuts

Brewster you've screwed us all! (1)

DnaK (1306859) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015307)

I am sorry. I opened Pandora's Box.

Re:Brewster you've screwed us all! (3, Funny)

butalearner (1235200) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016761)

I am disappointed that nobody has pointed out that we can now measure human mass in terms of Libraries of Congress. For example: Americans can now proudly proclaim that we carry, on average, at least ten million more Libraries of Congress than citizens of any other country. Or: I really shouldn't have eaten those atomic wings, I just dropped two million Libraries of Congress from spending so much time in the bathroom.

Take it one step further (5, Interesting)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015319)

Store data in DNA, then figure out a way for our brains to interpret it as knowledge. Imagine being born with the combined understanding of all of the major fields of science, history, languages, crafts, trades, from day one.

Re:Take it one step further (5, Insightful)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015349)

Knowledge but not understanding. I think it is important to remember that those are two different things. Still it would be pretty neat.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015487)

If you could do it with knowledge, you could also do it with understanding.

Re:Take it one step further (3, Interesting)

DigiShaman (671371) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015551)

At what point would individuality be replaced with fabrication?

Re:Take it one step further (1)

icebike (68054) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015701)

At what point would individuality be replaced with fabrication?

At what point would our library of congress stored in DNA mutate into something totally different?

When the Gettysburg Address starts sounding lib Bob Dylan or worse yet, mutates into a hand with 7 fingers?
Or would you simply call that evolution of knowledge, and line up for your smart-shots at the local library?

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015755)

At what point would individuality be replaced with fabrication?

At what point would our library of congress stored in DNA mutate into something totally different?

When the Gettysburg Address starts sounding lib Bob Dylan or worse yet, mutates into a hand with 7 fingers?
Or would you simply call that evolution of knowledge, and line up for your smart-shots at the local library?

Never. At least if you were a Klingon. They have redundant everything! (presumably redundant DNA as well as cardiovascular and CNS) :P

Re:Take it one step further (1)

Antipater (2053064) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016281)

At what point would individuality be replaced with fabrication?

At what point would our library of congress stored in DNA mutate into something totally different?

What evolutionary benefit would a mutation of encoded history serve? Any distortion would simply be part of random noise and wouldn't take over the general population. Moreover, I have a feeling someone would consciously notice if they thought the Gettysburg Address started "Three score and..." when everyone else said otherwise. Encoded knowledge wouldn't preclude the ability to obtain knowledge during your lifetime.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015873)

good point. anyone with enough money to make this happen is going to give you the version of history that they wrote.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

Kismet (13199) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016469)

At what point would individuality be replaced with fabrication?

Isn't that what our mass-production consumer society does already? The question is, how much of who we think we are is due to some sort of fabrication?

Re:Take it one step further (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016579)

How? We have yet to manage such a task in any form. We know how to lead a person to understanding with varying degrees of success but it has never been directly transmitted before.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

thmsdrew (2608605) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015507)

What's it like to have knowledge that you don't understand? That concept doesn't make sense to me.

Re:Take it one step further (3, Insightful)

Loughla (2531696) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015573)

Knowledge with no understanding = Memorization. I can memorize the parts of the brain with no understanding of how they work. To do anything useful with the information you have to be able to apply it.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

xevioso (598654) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015671)

Perhaps one of the things that can be encoded into the DNA is information on how to apply it. This would "interface" with our own experiences and our background would allow us to make use of some of this information, but contained within the information could be information on how to make use of it.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015843)

Assuming you can encode, "part of brain \ amygdala", I'd think you can encode, "part of brain \ amygdalae \ process memories and emotional reactions".

Re:Take it one step further (2)

SomePgmr (2021234) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016061)

Best I can figure, the old "knowledge" vs "understanding" is just a discussion of completeness. We like to think there's some kind of magic between the two, but I don't think there is.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016667)

In many instances, early education is nothing more than memorization. Countries that kick ass in math have curriculum based mostly around rote memorization of math facts and processes in the early grades which then are only understood once the child has developed to a certain point.

Add a nice fun angle on it though. Those who control the education control the facts. Heck, we were all born knowing that the south really won the civil war....right? right?

Re:Take it one step further (2)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015585)

What's it like to have knowledge that you don't understand? That concept doesn't make sense to me.

For example, I know that some people hate math, but I don't understand it.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015675)

Knowlege is knowing that 5*8=40
Understanding is knowing that 5*8 is the same as 5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5 which is the same as 8+8+8+8+8.

Here's a personal anecdote. In second or third grade, when I was first taught multiplication, I struggled with it because I couldn't memorize anything if my life depended on it. I HATED math as a result, and was almost held back a grade because I was doing so poorly. Two years later, someone told me that multiplication is just a way to describe repetitive addition, that 2*3 is three twos added together, or two threes added together. After that, I was always top in my class when it came to math.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016963)

Knowlege is knowing that 5*8=40
Understanding is knowing that 5*8 is the same as 5+5+5+5+5+5+5+5 which is the same as 8+8+8+8+8.

Then "understanding" is simply a greater degree of knowledge.

Re:Take it one step further (3, Insightful)

Urban Garlic (447282) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015739)

> What's it like to have knowledge that you don't understand? That concept doesn't make sense to me.

That would be like if someone told you about a concept, so you knew it existed, but it didn't make sense to you.

Here's an example (2)

Okian Warrior (537106) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015907)

I can't think of an example from something that everyone should know, but I'll attempt to answer this.

1) There are two tides each day, one when the moon is directly overhead, and one when the moon is directly underneath. Since the gravitational attraction of the moon causes tides, can you explain why there is a tide when the moon is directly underneath?

2) The fourier transform converts from time domain to frequency domain; ie - it takes an audio WAV file of amplitudes over time and converts it to a list of frequencies over time. To do this you multiply by a complex exponential and integrate. Can you explain why this works? In other words, why does multiplying by the exponential and integrating convert from time domain to frequency domain? (Don't look at the answer [mit.edu] until you can explain it yourself.)

3) In economics it is well known that a little inflation is good, a lot of inflation is bad, and negative inflation is very bad. Can you tell me what the correct value is? Can you tell me how important it is to hit the correct value exactly (ie - is the good/bad measure relatively flat or sharply peaked)? Can you tell me how to measure inflation in such a way that all economists would agree?

Re:Take it one step further (1)

xaotikdesigns (2662531) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016269)

You can memorize the multiplication tables up to 10*10, but if you don't understand why 10*10=100, you probably won't be able to do 15*34 or any higher numbers.

You can memorize a few words so you can fill out a resume, but unless you know how to read, the you'll never be able to enjoy a good book.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

markjhood2003 (779923) | about a year and a half ago | (#41017061)

Information is not knowledge. Knowledge is not wisdom. Wisdom is not truth. Truth is not beauty. Beauty is not love. Love is not music. Music is the best.

-- Frank Zappa

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016549)

Understanding comes a lot easier when you aren't struggling to remember a fact. Memorization is the time consuming part, understanding comes with working with facts.

Re:Take it one step further (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015495)

Knowing mankind, they would use it so we're born with knowledge about who's in charge, the limits of our freedoms and the religion appropriate for your country.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015583)

yeah.... right.... i don't see any possible downside to that at all..... messing around with perfectly good DNA and inputting all the knowledge that a bunch of rich corporations want you to know..... and certainly it will be availalbe to all of humanity for free... and certanly never... ever... performed on an individual against their consent..... right...

what a smart... clever.... and MORALLY ETHICAL person you must be.... you should be so proud of yourself 'Intrepid imaginaut...

you're right... no... possible... unintended consequences...

Re:Take it one step further (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015641)

...Kirk...out...

Re:Take it one step further (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015661)

Knowledge encoded in DNA would be cool, but it's not a very reliable method. DNA has a bad habit of denaturing if it gets too hold, or produces errors if not cloned properly (leading to a runaway cancer cell in some cases). DNA works "well enough" to get an organism to 15 years old & procreate itself to the next generation, but is far from perfect.

Re:Take it one step further (4, Insightful)

jader3rd (2222716) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015691)

Imagine being born with the combined understanding of all of the major fields of science, history, languages, crafts, trades, from day one.

Isn't that what made the goa'uld so evil?

Re:Take it one step further (2)

Millennium (2451) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015693)

Until we figure out the means to update DNA remotely, this wouldn't be as awesome as it sounds. Your knowledge of history could be outdated as soon as day two. Science and languages would fall out of date only slightly less quickly. Crafts and trades would take longer, but would almost certainly be at least a little outdated by the time you were mature enough to enter the workforce. And all of this would be hard-coded into a person's knowledge, so overcoming that hurdle would likely be very difficult.

Finally! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015695)

My dream of becoming Lt. Commander Data has never been closer!

Re:Take it one step further (1)

Gotung (571984) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015779)

How do you overcome knowledge that is hard coded in your DNA? When you go beyond indoctrination, and start implanting knowledge as base instinct it would likely be near impossible for that being to believe anything that was contrary to that implanted knowledge, much of which would be contradictory or turn out to be just plain wrong. I think your being would be mentally crippled and tragic instead of the glorious super genius you imply they would be. Probably more of a super-rainman then a fully functional member of society capable of any kind of advances.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

starsky51 (959750) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015785)

This would be the equivalent of adding comments into some source code and expecting the compiled program to impart the knowledge. Cool idea, but we won't be programming genius babies this way.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016453)

Not even that, it is the equivalent of populating a database table and expect it will carry the bussines logic.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

infodragon (38608) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015787)

Then something happens, random mutation, chemical poisoning, radiation, ... and then cancer starts. A cell containing some obscure text about homicidal geniuses becomes cancerous and spreads to the reproductive organs, and then happens to reproduce before they die. This passes on an overwhelming amount of information to an impressionable brain which then becomes an homicidal genius. Not to tip their hand too soon, they wait to unleash the homicidal nature of their being until they reproduce. Their offspring do the same and before you know it skynet is developed. Earth becomes a planet of homicidal geniuses bent on... Skynet becomes self aware and then the homicidal geniuses have a new target.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

jellomizer (103300) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015799)

How much unlearning will you have to do. Will it be worse then learning.

Just compare our culture and understanding with life 30 years ago. We will be programmed with the latest and greatest Disco Dance moves, The threat ingrained in your system from the USSR. The process of learning is the process of change. Our Text books from a generation ago is rather different then todays text. Things have changed.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015995)

Simply it won't work, DNA codes proteins and cell behavior, several layers below even the most instictive knowledge. The reason DNA encodes some high level functionality is because it stores the recipe to make the functional parts of the brain that implement such functionality.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

getSalled (1331585) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015997)

Or take it only a half step further, breed it, and see the finished product.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

xaotikdesigns (2662531) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016317)

We just mated the complete Twilight saga with 1000 pages of Harry Potter Fan Fiction...

There are some things that science should just leave alone.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016041)

Didn't i see this on Stargate. It didn't end well.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016187)

No more waiting around for an upload. TRINITY: "Tank, I need a pilot program for a military M-109 helicopter."

Human engineering is bad (1)

JOrgePeixoto (853808) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016307)

Human engineering is bad not only because of intrinsic moral problems, but also because it would lead to societal catastrophe. Imagine multiple countries engaging in supersoldier arms race.

Re:Take it one step further (1)

houghi (78078) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016601)

And finally we can make people think how we want it. Who will decide on what to think. I don't know, but I know it won't be the public.

Re:Take it one step further (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016751)

The invention consists of three claims:

1: A method for storing information in the form of Deoxyribonucleic Acid strands,
2: An apparatus which interprets the data in claim 1 and transforms it into knowledge, and
3: An apparatus that interfaces to the human brain and comports the knowledge referenced in claim 2.

You saw it here first, kids. I expect to be launching my first lawsuits within 2 years, and purchasing my new yacht about 3 months after that.

backups? (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015329)

But could we make backups? Oh, wait, never mind.

Re:backups? (1)

quantumghost (1052586) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015743)

But could we make backups? Oh, wait, never mind.

A guy with a PCR machine could make a few billion copies in a few hours....RIAA would have a fit.

But on the other hand....

Just hope a retrovirus doesn't get into your library....

How fast? (2)

cyberjock1980 (1131059) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015337)

It appears on the surface that the data isn't quickly(sub-ms speeds) stored or recovered. This technology could be very useful for backing up large quantities of data. The real question is how many MB/GB/whatever per second can be read/written to this new "media"?

Re:How fast? (5, Informative)

coldandcalculating (1311907) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015699)

The fastest DNA polymerases can copy a template at around 250 bases/sec. Chemical DNA synthesis is much slower.

As for read speeds, DNA sequencing can be done serially (500-800 bases in a matter of hours - 1 cent per base) or massively parallel (100-200 bases per read; 100 million reads; overnight - $1000 per chip by year's end?)

Tools allowing for rapid synthesis (write) and sequencing (read) of DNA would enable a biotech revolution similar in scope and impact to the computing revolution of the last century. As far as I know, this technology is still incredibly far away, but definitely merits relentless R&D.

Re:How fast? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015989)

To clarify the meaning of the speed unit "bases/sec": We're not talking about base 2 here ...

Re:How fast? (2)

rnaiguy (1304181) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016299)

Given the machine they used in the paper to read the data back, it would take about 10 DAYS to read out the data they encoded. The problem is that it takes that time to get any data at all. So they could parrallelize it to get better MB/sec (or realistically MB/hr), but with current tech, the latency is 10 days, with a theoretical maximum of 100gigabits of uncompressed data read out in that time, (but realistically much less since they rely on redundancy to reduce error, and have overhead for their encoding system).

Storing data in DNA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015341)

This sounds familiar... arnt we already doing something similar to this?

In other news ... (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015385)

In other news, they are now sued for copyright infringment. :-)

Re:In other news ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015595)

In other news, they are now sued for copyright infringment. :-)

Gah! When will Apple stop with the freaking lawsuits!

Steganography (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015387)

Holy cow. Steganography thing is going serious uh? :)

Leeloo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015401)

Let me know when we create the perfect being.

Genetically-Modified Schoolbooks? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015437)

Soon, students will be able to claim that their homework ate them!

Re:Genetically-Modified Schoolbooks? (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016043)

Soon, students will be able to claim that their homework ate them!

The assignment was about Soviet Russia, no doubt.
   

Put the DNA in a cell already (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015459)

I wanna see what sorta hideous monster grows out of it!

Skip the Library of Congress, go for Wales (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015523)

Skip the Library of Congress for once. Why not go for a small country, like Wales (no, not Jimmy or his deed). That would be an effort worth bragging about!

In the Year 3535 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015577)

... DNA researchers read the DNA and laugh at the primitive textbook

I hope that they have good error correction... (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015591)

I would think that copying errors and degradation would be a serious issue if attempting to use DNA for arbitrary data storage. In organisms, we can even observe some segments of DNA(like those that code for elements of vital metabolic processes) are highly similar across a broad range of organisms, while non-coding or minimally important regions can vary wildly from individual to individual or even cell to cell; because the penalty for getting them wrong is so low...

Unless the data you are interested in also have, by some impressive coincidence, vital biological importance cruft buildup(or even substantial deletion) could be quite rapid. DNA isn't without self repair mechanisms; but one of the big ones is 'mutants dying' rather than something more elegant.

Just in time (3, Funny)

arielCo (995647) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015629)

The answer to the last Ask Slashdot: Protecting Data From a Carrington Event? [slashdot.org] :

I've been wondering: is it actually possible to store or protect data in such a way that if such an event occurred, data survives and is recoverable in a useful form? Optical and magnetic media would probably be rendered useless by a large enough solar flare, and storing source code/graphics in paper format would be impractical to recover, so Slashdot, short of building a Faraday cage 100 km below the surface of the Moon, how could you protect data to survive a modern day Carrington event?"

So, kactusotp, there you have it: splice it into as many mice / E. coli as needed, release into the wild.

Re:Just in time (1)

Hatta (162192) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016943)

The real question is how you guarantee data integrity. If there's no selective pressure maintaining the data, mutations, insertions, deletions, etc, *will* occur. How do you checksum DNA?

Meh (1)

Artraze (600366) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015677)

Cool achievement, to be sure, but for data storage? There are a great many ways of achieving ultra high density data storage that have been performed in the lab and are 'only 10 years away'. The trouble always is the engineering: how expensive, how fast, how much, how reliable? One strand isn't too big a deal, but it'll only store maybe 1GB. Now you need thousands of strands and a way to page through them. And maybe a way to seek within them. Etc.
Again, really cool accomplishment, but I can't see it being practical for anything but an organic computer as I have to think organic tech will outpace organic at pretty much every step. (For example, see racetrack memory as a sort of alternative that is already much more viable.)

At a gaga act. (1)

Hatta (162192) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015733)

What sort of textbook can you write with nothing but G, A, T, and C?

Re:At a gaga act. (3, Informative)

bmo (77928) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015803)

What sort of textbook can you write with nothing but G, A, T, and C?

The same sort of textbook you can write in zeroes and ones, but in base 4 instead of base 2.

Happy now?

--
BMO

Re:At a gaga act. (1)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015963)

What sort of textbook can you write with nothing but G, A, T, and C?

Something about choking cats
   

Random (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015757)

And just think, all that information that DNA carries on how to grow a human being was created through random chance... O_o
</sarcasm>

They then encoded the Bible and the Koran (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015813)

The scientists then encoded the Bible in DNA and it produced a cocktail of proteins which had the miraculous effect of curing every organism of all diseases. They then encoded the Koran in DNA, and it produced an abhorrent cocktail of proteins which killed every organism they contacted. When the two were mixed together, they produced an explosion that turned the facility into a crater.

took long enough (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015859)

As a biologist, I have thought about this for several years. Seems to me it would also be a great way to send impossible to detect messages. Store your message in DNA form, could even be "encrypted" by using X positions to mean one letter, etc. DNA is very stable, so soak a portion of a piece of clothing or filter or something in the DNA and have your man go about his business. He gets to his end point, tells people where teh DNA is, the do an extraction and sequence it. Rather expensive, but hard to detect.

Fundies (2)

Tablizer (95088) | about a year and a half ago | (#41015909)

encoded an entire genetics textbook in DNA...

Fundamentalists did the same thing. Here is the decoded version:

G O D . D I D . I T

Re:Fundies (1)

Empiric (675968) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016541)

Nah, anything that has specifically 23 pairs of chromosomes is expected to be able to infer it.

What if we wanted to store a creature's genome? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41015965)

What if we wanted to store a creature's genome? Could we store it in DNA? Will it be big enough? How many species' genomes can we store? Oh, wait...

So much for "I forgot my book at home!" (1)

Picass0 (147474) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016101)

Another great high school excuse bites the dust.

Re:So much for "I forgot my book at home!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016689)

Mr. Teacher, I think my textbook has mutated!

Mutation (1)

dskoll (99328) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016107)

Fovr sc9re+and sexen ypars agz ovr f{theRs bromght fprth *n th2s cont&nent a ne= natin, congeived in lkbprty, and dWdicmted tx the pr;pos|tion thqt alll mvn are creyted equap.

ST:NG Creator Video (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016277)

All I can think about is the ST:NG with the creator hologram The Chase [startrek.com]

use for spy messages? (1)

peter303 (12292) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016455)

You code inject secret message into pigeon DNA ...

I think this was a plot of Star Trek TNG episode: some ancient part of our DNA had a message from our long, lost Creators.

Inadvertently killing the human race (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016583)

Imagine if a page from, say, Going Rogue [amazon.com] ended up encoding a protein that was highly toxic to humans and a DNA library containing it accidentally shared some of its corpus with, say, an influenza strain.

Can we use something orthogonal to DNA [wikipedia.org] , please? Something incompatible with our biology.

I'm so glad (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41016597)

I'm so glad they didn't store the friggin' bible.

Near perfect backup (1)

joe_frisch (1366229) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016651)

Encode the data into DNA, then splice the DNA fragment into a self reproducing organism and release into the environment. You end up with trillions of copies of the original data distributed all over the world. (error correction codes would deal with transcription mistakes)

Future generations, even future sentient life forms millions of years later would the be able to decode the data. It would be very obvious as soon as they had sequencing technology: organisms with large parts of their DNA that don't code for anything useful...........

Library of Congress outdated? (1)

IgnitusBoyone (840214) | about a year and a half ago | (#41016757)

If a gram of DNA can hold a Library of Congress we are going to need a new unit of measure here at database when having storage debates.

**AA angle (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41017021)

The **AA execs must be giddy with excitement right now - they can collect royalties every single time a cell divides!

Oh Great now I can't claim to be an expert anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41017173)

Oh Great....
Now I can't claim to be an expert anymore because all that knowledge, experience and problem solving ability wasn't programmed into my DNA prior to my birth...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...