dna computers in the distant future

[mikekazik1]

Just the other day, I was reading a thread about the supposed prices for nehalem processors. Many people suggested that nehalem will only be a slight improvement (party due to the fact that silicon based hardware is starting to reach its fullest potential). Today, I read an article (on an site that promotes environmentally friendly ideas) about the personal computers of the future. Check out the article (YOU WON'T BE DISAPPOINTED).

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1913/71/

If all goes as planned, these computers will run on little or no external power. What do you guys think of this? If this does occur, (and all of the major companies invest in this technology) do you think that we will finally have some more fearsome competition in the world of computers?

 

[grieve]

Amazing!
Sometimes I just can't believe what people can achieve...as nerdy as I am, using DNA to act like "software" is just incomprehensible. Ill have to watch that on "how it's made"

do you think that we will finally have some more fearsome competition in the world of computers?

They have a long way to go to catch the big blue machine, Intel.

 

[mikekazik1]

Amazing!
Sometimes I just can't believe what people can achieve...as nerdy as I am, using DNA to act like "software" is just incomprehensible. Ill have to watch that on "how it's made"


They have a long way to go to catch the big blue machine, Intel.

True, but it will be really sweet when they are available to consumers. Then perhaps intel won't be the invincible giant that everyone thought. I found a more detailed article about it too.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/02/0224_030224_DNAcomputer.html

 

[jimmysmitty]

^There is one thing holding this back. Software. The reason why IA-64 never took off is because of software and the change it would have required to move everything to IA-64. This will face the same resistance if they are not able to utilize x86 which then they will need a licsense from Intel. That or Intel will buy the patent and make them on their own.

This is also why, if its a good performer, Larrabee will probably do very well vs CUDA. Larrabee is x86 and easy to write for. CUDA is not.

As for enviromentaly friendly, silicon is not bad. And Intel has stopped using lead in all of its chips so thats a good step.

I say forget DNA or Organic computers. There is a Japanese company called Cyberdyne (yes like in Terminator) and you know they will just have to create AI using this or organics and we will be screwed.

 

[ovaltineplease]

ya know, I was very much thinking "skynet" and organic computers evolving and kicking the crap out of us.

When you start messing with the building blocks of life, "simulated" or not, you're asking for trouble.

 

[jimmysmitty]

^What freaks me out the most is that Cyberdyne is a real company that is currently making exoskeletons for nurses in Japan to help them lift people....

It is the start of evil I tell ya.....

 

[aznguy0028]

lol wouldn't want those crazy nurses running around.

 

[JDocs]

Reminds me of the "nurses" from System Shock 2...

 

[zipz0p]

I think you guys are getting a little more than slightly ahead of yourselves. If you read the articles, you'll see that the limitations of this are immense when trying to do the types of tasks that traditional binary computers perform. None of those "trillions of operations" performed by enzymes on a DNA molecule are binary operations of any sort. They likely just create proteins, or in the case of the DNA computer which outputs results in terms of different sized DNA bits, it only solves extremely specific problems, by using enzymes that cut the DNA at specific markers. So for now, the problem of putting the correct information into DNA format for the enzymes to rip apart and then run a gel to see what sized pieces come out, is a much more complicated and difficult problem and requires the solution essentially to create the problem! It's not at a stage where the output of these so-called computers is even really very useful or easy to detect. You'd have to have complex optical or chemical sensors that responded either to the protein output from the DNA template, or optical sensors to read the base construction of the DNA... at which point it's probably simpler to just read the base-pair information and solve the problem with a traditional computer.

At least that's how it is now... these are not even close to being useful. In fact, they're further from being useful at solving important or difficult problems than quantum computers.

 

[night_wolf_in]

^ true. but never the less let them do it.

 

[szwaba67]

My DNA is running at 5Ghz but I have a cooling problem. Do they have little DNA heatsinks I can get?

 

[sorce7200]

Can you say "nanite"? This is one possible application
for limited program ability organic computing....either
for health, science, or control.

 

[jimmysmitty]

^Agreed.

Messing with Gods work/nature (dependant on your beliefs) never will result in 100% good. Especially the building blocks of all life.

Of course it may not be anything but I think messing with stuff like that can only lead to worse things like genetic altercations that will really screw with things.

 

[cjl]

this is messing with god's creation and is the work of the devil, you will all burn in hell for this.

I'm terrified.

 

[perez8434]

Last time they messed with the atom the atomic bomb was created soo i dont like the idea of messing with the DNA, i mean something that may need little to no power must have an immense amount of potential energy which can be used to "destroy the world". I wouldn't want to see one of those chips over heat thats all i know. Either way when you change nature, nothign good comes out of it so prepare for the worst guys.

 

[sportsfanboy]

Just wait untill some crackhead scientist really gets the hang of nano robots and lets them out of the lab. All kinds of crazy stuff could happen, mmm crazy stuff.

 

[jimmysmitty]

I wouldn't see a nuclear like DNA bomb. Now I could see a DNA weapon that can be used to regress or destroy people.

At least we don't have the "Atom" powered car like people were talking about in the 50s. Imagin a movie scene with a car going boom like that. Or just a normal freeway accident :"This just in. Massive 20 car pileup takes out half of the city. More when the cars stop going boom."

 

[unreal_havoc]

I think you guys are getting a little more than slightly ahead of yourselves. If you read the articles, you'll see that the limitations of this are immense when trying to do the types of tasks that traditional binary computers perform. None of those "trillions of operations" performed by enzymes on a DNA molecule are binary operations of any sort. They likely just create proteins, or in the case of the DNA computer which outputs results in terms of different sized DNA bits, it only solves extremely specific problems, by using enzymes that cut the DNA at specific markers. So for now, the problem of putting the correct information into DNA format for the enzymes to rip apart and then run a gel to see what sized pieces come out, is a much more complicated and difficult problem and requires the solution essentially to create the problem! It's not at a stage where the output of these so-called computers is even really very useful or easy to detect. You'd have to have complex optical or chemical sensors that responded either to the protein output from the DNA template, or optical sensors to read the base construction of the DNA... at which point it's probably simpler to just read the base-pair information and solve the problem with a traditional computer.

At least that's how it is now... these are not even close to being useful. In fact, they're further from being useful at solving important or difficult problems than quantum computers.

Actually, because DNA is based on only 4 bases, you can very easily convert those 4 bases into binary (ie A=00, T=01, G=10, C=11) or something like that. It is indeed true that creating enzymes is a pain, thus alot of work on how to read off DNA computing is actually using optical methods rather than tradition electrophoresis methods.

Also, scientists aren't really messing with the building blocks of life. They are simply arranging a chemical compound into a specific sequence. Its not like they are trying to splice DNA into living organisms.

 

[Hellboy]

Just the other day, I was reading a thread about the supposed prices for nehalem processors. Many people suggested that nehalem will only be a slight improvement (party due to the fact that silicon based hardware is starting to reach its fullest potential). Today, I read an article (on an site that promotes environmentally friendly ideas) about the personal computers of the future. Check out the article (YOU WON'T BE DISAPPOINTED).

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/1913/71/

If all goes as planned, these computers will run on little or no external power. What do you guys think of this? If this does occur, (and all of the major companies invest in this technology) do you think that we will finally have some more fearsome competition in the world of computers?

They have a dna computer working on Thundermans DNA...

The only problem is it that it keeps going round in circles with out much progress and spurts rubbish at intervals...

Lets hope the next generation actually produces some thing worth while as apposed to computational errors..

 

[zipz0p]

Uh... this thread is displaying some wildly inaccurate ideas and some fantastical imagination. While nuclear-powered personal vehicles would be impractical, they would hardly "go boom". The critical mass for most radioactive materials is FAR greater than what would be used in small nuclear generators.

Also, all of this "messing with nature" garbage. People, get a grip. The chips you use now are "messing with nature". Sure it's not changing any living thing (but neither is using DNA in a test tube to solve simple problems), but all of the elements in use are very certainly natural. It's not like they create Ununpentium (yes, it's an actual element, although artificially created and quite unstable, atomic nr 115) to power your Pentiums. Isn't silicon god's creation too? I'm sure glad he gave it a band-gap like he did, it's extremely useful for your computer that humans made from it.

DNA, while a code-base for proteins, is not anything more than a very large molecule built of many very simple monomers (the bases). As unreal_havoc points out, it's not like this DNA must be put into living organisms - the molecule simply has useful electrical properties and is already a natural way to store data. In fact, if you were to express a problem in DNA, and parse it with various enzymes, I doubt very highly that the DNA molecule problem, or the result would have any use whatsoever. It's extremely unlikely that it would even code for anything! Much less a harmful protein.

Oh, and unreal_havoc, that's not binary... that's a base-four number system. Still could be interesting, I just don't see how it would be used... how do you express a problem, and how do you parse it? What's the input, and what's the output?

 

[jimmysmitty]

^Um it wasn't "Nuclear" powered. It was driven by a atom. A atom that would have been unstable if the core cracked. Seriously where did I say Nuclear?

 

[zipz0p]

^Hehe, I just figured you must have meant that, since an atom driving a car is an even more ridiculous idea. An a single unstable atom wouldn't put off enough energy to... well, to do much of anything. It'd throw some neutrons, protons and gamma rays about and then it'd be over with and you'd still be sitting in your driveway.

 

[mikekazik1]

I think you guys are getting a little more than slightly ahead of yourselves. If you read the articles, you'll see that the limitations of this are immense when trying to do the types of tasks that traditional binary computers perform. None of those "trillions of operations" performed by enzymes on a DNA molecule are binary operations of any sort. They likely just create proteins, or in the case of the DNA computer which outputs results in terms of different sized DNA bits, it only solves extremely specific problems, by using enzymes that cut the DNA at specific markers. So for now, the problem of putting the correct information into DNA format for the enzymes to rip apart and then run a gel to see what sized pieces come out, is a much more complicated and difficult problem and requires the solution essentially to create the problem! It's not at a stage where the output of these so-called computers is even really very useful or easy to detect. You'd have to have complex optical or chemical sensors that responded either to the protein output from the DNA template, or optical sensors to read the base construction of the DNA... at which point it's probably simpler to just read the base-pair information and solve the problem with a traditional computer.

At least that's how it is now... these are not even close to being useful. In fact, they're further from being useful at solving important or difficult problems than quantum computers.

True, but that is simply because people don't fully understand the mechanics of dna. Just remember that the dna in our bodies is doing a lot more work than the silicon in our processors. They have enormous potential, engineers just have to figure out how to use them properly. Once that happens, the world of computers will be changed forever. Also take into consideration that the earliest computers were were as big as 15 washing machines, and they couldn't do a whole lot.

 

[mikekazik1]

this is messing with god's creation and is the work of the devil, you will all burn in hell for this.

But they are just using chemicals to make machines. I understand that if they used DNA to clone people then it would be really bad. Don't get the wrong idea, I am a devout church-going catholic. I think that it is ok to make these types of computers AS LONG AS the research isn't also used to recreate life. You have to remember that all knowledge can be used to do good and evil (ex. nuclear research---->atomic bomb + nuclear power plants). Also, what makes dna computers worse than regular computer? Regular computers can be used to do everything from meeting people online to buying things to getting child porn. It all depends on what humans choose to use them for.

 

[mikekazik1]

^Agreed.

Messing with Gods work/nature (dependant on your beliefs) never will result in 100% good. Especially the building blocks of all life.

Of course it may not be anything but I think messing with stuff like that can only lead to worse things like genetic altercations that will really screw with things.

But they are just chemicals. There is nothing wrong with using chemicals (like adenine, guanine thymine, and cytosine). It's no different than using silicon to make a chip. God gave us dominion over the Earth. As long as people don't work on recreating life, it's ok. As for the genetic alterations, we are already there. I remember seeing this special edition of 20/20 in which they talked about the ways in which the world could end. One of the ways in which humanity would end would be if a person spread a modified strain of a virus. They said that the Russians (and us Americans made this deadly strain of a disease which could wipe out virtually all life on Earth-if I remember correctly it was either smallpox of e. coli). Biotech labs all over the world already have the potential to make those things. I don't think we need to work about the dna pc (unless they make the terminator 😱 .