Scientists Store an Operating System, a Movie and a Computer Virus on DNA

[Galdorf]

http://thehackernews.com/2017/03/dna-data-storage.html

Interesting there are companies working with this atm wonder if there will be any storage devices made for average consumer in next 5 years.

Related to this post Scientists Want to Build a Super-Fast, Self-Replicating Computer That "Grows as It Computes"

Even more interesting using a single atom acting as a 1 or 0: http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-have-turned-an-atom-into-the-world-s-smallest-hard-drive

 

[Krynn72]

wonder if there will be any consumers made into average storage devices in next 5 years.

Fixed that for you.

 

[alluseridsrejected]

Yes, science has now discovered the genome and epigenome are/is not just a computer, but is believed to be the computer of the future. Scientists say they can store all the data ever generated in the entire history of computing for the entire world in a storage device the size of a teaspoon and have working processors, memory and storage devices in the lab. One day we may possibly have a new Dell Laptop computer that needs no battery or electrical power, has an Intel Infinite Core Genome Processor with massive parallel processing capability, 512 Petabytes of memory or more and a Western Digital DNA Infinite Storage Device.

Also, Medical science is currently using the knowledge the genome/epigenome is a computer to cure diseases, and peer reviewed science in respected journals calls it the "genomic computer" and says it is evidence we were created and is irreducible to any natural origin, yet many still think the computer of the future just pooped itself out of the primordial mush with out a programmer/designer all on it's own.

 

[Moltuae]

peer reviewed science in respected journals calls it the "genomic computer" and says it is evidence we were created

haha, yeah. Incredible aint it ... gap fillers ... always looking for a gap in scientific understanding to attribute to creation theories. I think it's just human nature though. I mean, I've met people who don't understand how computers work who seem to think they're powered by magic.

I had a guy knock on my door last year to tell me about his beliefs. I don't know any religious people personally, so we had a long and fascinating debate. He was still using the old 'irreducible eye' example. I said "C'mon keep up, science explained that one a long time ago! You should be focusing on DNA, and more complex puzzles now, like the origins of life and the universe. You know, the stuff that science is still working on". To be fair, he took the whole Noah thing literally too and believed the earth was just a few thousand years old (4000 I think he said!). I was expecting him to try to convince me the world was flat too. Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking his beliefs. He seemed like a nice guy and clearly his beliefs gave him comfort, but it's fascinating nonetheless how we often choose to 'accept' rather than 'understand'. Not that I'm saying either way of living is right or wrong, it's just interesting from a psychological point of view the different ways we choose to get through life.

There are some interesting comparisons with our industry too. The tech industry is vast and it's difficult to keep up, let alone have a thorough and up-to-date understanding of every aspect of it. Some people concede to that fact and specialise in certain areas while others are driven by an insatiable appetite and passion to try to understand as much as possible. I fall into the latter group. I obsessively try to gain a deep understanding of everything I do, yet I know that specialising would be better for business (not to mention my sanity). So I completely understand why some people prefer to use a 'placeholder' for things they find mysterious, rather than dive into the ever-expanding chasm of understanding.

 

[kpk1]

Brings a whole new meaning to the expression 'personal computer'....☺

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[alluseridsrejected]

I mean, I've met people who don't understand how computers work who seem to think they're powered by magic.

Yes, magic would be thinking Microsoft created Windoze 10 by letting large numbers XP computer sit and run until one mutated itself into the latest operating system. Of course you could definitely argue there are no intelligent designers at Microsoft.

 

[Moltuae]

Yes, magic would be thinking Microsoft created Windoze 10 by letting large numbers XP computer sit and run until one mutated itself into the latest operating system. Of course you could definitely argue there are no intelligent designers at Microsoft.

haha true.

Actually, it's theoretically possible that an operating system could evolve too, without a creator, given enough time and the right environment (rather than a large number of XP machines). Of course just like human evolution, it would require some external forces to drive the necessary incremental and gradual steps (such as users and attackers) and it would take a lot of steps before it became anything recognisable as an operating system. In many ways software does evolve like that, but it presently takes a significant amount of human intervention. It's not unreasonable to predict that human intervention will likely become less and less as computers and AI advance. At the same time, technology is allowing us to peer deeper back into the history of the universe and allowing us to visualise our own evolution, using increasingly sophisticated software modelling. Exciting times

 

[alluseridsrejected]

it's theoretically possible that an operating system could evolve too, without a creator, given enough time and the right environment

I would be excited to see any peer reviewed scientific references that explains how computers create themselves, no programmer or designer involved. Seems extremely unlikely to me. AI doesn't seem like a very good example, seems a little too artifical.

In the same way we know paintings require painters/artists, because we have observed them being painted, we know computers require programmers/designers because we have observed them being programmed.

 

[Krynn72]

Computers making new computers is still just humans making computers. We just added another step so we could be more lazy.

 

[Moltuae]

Computers making new computers is still just humans making computers. We just added another step so we could be more lazy.

Sure, that's true now. They're still just our tools. But AI will of course change that, especially if it becomes sophisticated enough to make conscious decisions. But even without consciousness, a machine can be a creator, just as an animal devoid of consciousness can. The difference being, without consciousness such creations would be the result of instinctive behaviour rather than decisive behaviour. If a machine that you own has the ability to create/design something new, without any direct instruction from you, you are no more the creator of that work than you are the creator of the work your children do.