DNA Supercomputers- freaky stuff

Mr. Incognito

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/vdunet/20080708/ttc-boffins-build-artificial-dna-6315470.html

Japanese scientists claim to have created the world's first artificial DNA, a development that brings DNA computing much closer.

In a paper in the 23 July issue of the Journal of the American Chemical Society Masahiko Inouye and colleagues at the University of Toyama claim to have successfully built a stable artificial DNA strand.

"The unique chemistry of these structures and their high stability offer unprecedented possibilities for developing new biotech materials and applications," the researchers said.

If correct the technology could be used in immensely powerful DNA computers. Biological computing has the potential to make silicon-based systems obsolete and allow the development of tiny supercomputers many times more powerful than todays systems.

DNA computers are constructed by using DNA as software and enzymes as hardware. By mixing the two and monitoring the resulting reactions, simple computer calculations can be performed.

The storage capacity of DNA is also far superior to that of silicon systems. Half a kilo of DNA would have a greater storage capability than all the hard drives in existence today. It is also much more power efficient.

In 2004 Israeli scientists at the Weizmann Institute of Science announced in a paper in Nature that they had successfully built a prototype DNA computer with input/output capabilities.

It was officially recognised by Guinness World Records as "the smallest biological computing device".

Then in 2006 scientists at Columbia University and the University of New Mexico built MAYA-II, a DNA computer that uses 128 organic logic gates and 32 input DNA molecules. It is capable of playing tic-tac-toe, albeit very slowly.

The new discovery in Japan of a system to build custom DNA would be vital as it would allow scientists to build custom DNA types optimised for computing.

This would bring forward the deployment of DNA computers to years in the future, as opposed to decades.

Steve_o

It'll backfire and those computers will rule the world in a few years... don't say i didn't warn ye!!

Adam

Steve_o wrote: »

It'll backfire and those computers will rule the world in a few years... don't say i didn't warn ye!!

+1

Fools. All of them.

Adam

Steve_o wrote: »

It'll backfire and those computers will rule the world in a few years... don't say i didn't warn ye!!

On the plus side though, spit on the thing, MORE RAM! \o/

TerrorFirmer

Mirror wrote: »

On the plus side though, spit on the thing, MORE RAM! \o/

Thrown a kidney into the mix and Crysis just might be playable at highest settings....finally.

Dave!

I for one welcome our new biological computer overlords.

kaimera

Mirror wrote: »

On the plus side though, spit on the thing, MORE RAM! \o/

jerk off tbh

Sherifu

Can we combine this with the lhc to make the ultimate super soldier?

Adam

kaimera wrote: »

jerk off tbh

I considered this option, and thought better of it. It's like oil and water, jism mixes with nothing!

I foresees many hardware issues. Not to mention it flaking off and blowing away.

Doctor DooM

kaimera wrote: »

jerk off tbh

Would bring a whole new meaning to a "lap top"

Duggy747

Oh well, better get used to running from these lads, then:

http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/2592/terminator307ww8.jpg

KTRIC

Don't get me started about the new "global positioning system" launched by the British called SKYNET !!!! :eek:


GPS my arse :rolleyes:

Steve_o

KTRIC wrote: »

Don't get me started about the new "global positioning system" launched by the British called SKYNET !!!! :eek:

Right, we're all doomed... pub anyone??

Tar.Aldarion

Meh everybody is doing work on this these days, where I graduated they are building neuron based systems..

manc

just finished reading Robert Ludlums book The Paris Option where the terrorists had a DNA computer....they nearly nuked the US with it using Russias missiles..:eek:

antodeco

Do you think these DNA computers will be good for any of the following:


Poker
Porn
Dateing me
Making the Dinner
Removing me of my spam (not an STD)
Giving me an STD

IvaBigWun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWrmosittYk

tbh

IvaBigWun

Between this and the Black Hole research in France I give us all 20 years tops.

beautiation

I've bought my computer a nice cushion to sit on in the hope it will remember this act of kindness when it enslaves me.

IvaBigWun

beautiation wrote: »

I've bought my computer a nice cushion to sit on in the hope it will remember this act of kindness when it enslaves me.

Ive started to treat mine like a plant, talking and singing to it at any given opportunity. Wont be watering it however.

Seriously though, I really can hear the start of a Sky News bulletin around 20 years from now ..... "Do you remember the SkyNet company from the Terminator films of the 80's and 90's? Well ..."

MayoForSam

Where the heck is that Sarah Connor chick when you need her?

Joe Cool

Steve_o wrote: »

It'll backfire and those computers will rule the world in a few years... don't say i didn't warn ye!!

Its grand, the science lads have it covered:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

kowloon

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Thrown a kidney into the mix and Crysis just might be playable at highest settings....finally.

You're a glass half full type so :pac:.

kowloon

Joe Cool wrote: »

Its grand, the science lads have it covered:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Reminds me of that "thou shalt not kill" law, that turned out well .

IvaBigWun

Joe Cool wrote: »

Its grand, the science lads have it covered:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Lies.

All lies.

Just ask the Fresh Prince.

thelordofcheese

Joe Cool wrote: »

Its grand, the science lads have it covered:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

I see what you did there.