Windows 10: Why the future of storage is all about DNA

Read more: From digital to biological: Why the future of storage is all about DNA | ZDNet

:)

 

Want some information about the future of symbian ^3 devices

it obviously depends on the carriers, In Australia we buy data packs differently, they are more sold on what you need as opposed to buying a pack based on the phone. (with the exception of iphone, they tend to have special plans for them).



working with banks myself, we speak to many customers, where we have detected that their banking details having gotten in to the wrong hands. Many of these customers are only using their mobile phone these days because they felt that they are safer. But
unfortunately they are not using antivirus software, and in many cases they are using andriod based phones, with some using iphones. I cant recall having any customer with a nokia phone that have lost their information to criminals, but we still recommend
they have antivirus software regardless.

Even when you read the openning few pages of the E7 booklet, it says thanks you for buying your new Nokia mini pocket computer. It doesnt call it a phone, just a mini pocket computer.

 

Want some information about the future of symbian ^3 devices

I think it would be better to let them work for symbian coz they will develop it faster than nokia does and i just hope !

 

So who is now working on biological computer viruses to change / corrupt computer storage DNA?

 

I don't know who - but natural viruses which may change or corrupt natural DNA (and thus any DNA you could synthesise) have been around probably since DNA first assembled into self-reproducing pre-biotic units, over 2.5 billion years ago - and these natural viruses are very good at producing variants which attach to, attack and reproduce the natural sources of DNA they parasitise.

If in our wisdom, we produce a DNA variant that has computationally useful data encoded on it, some natural DNA modification process will probably eventually come along and change it to something more biologically useful (Darwinistic principle) thus corrupting the data.

It's not making the stuff that's hard, we've been doing that in the lab since the 1970s, it's protecting it from hungry little bugs who will use it as food. Oh, yes, and from radiation, and radioactive decay of the component biochemicals which zap and break the double helix.

Our bodies contain 2 copies of our DNA in each cell of our bodies, so that's a massive redundancy required - not for mission critical data - stick to physics rather than biology for permanency.

 

I think that you are wrong. I have studied microbiology and although we are talking a mere 2.5 billion years since the introduction of DNA into Earth's biosphere, many scientists and metaphysicians believe that there was actually a period of approx. 3 weeks in which DNA existed in a virus free environment. It wasn't instantaneously as you seem to suggest.

 

2.31 . 10-9 % of the time since the creation of DNA has been virus free - that's fairly instantaneous by my standards.

 

*Wink*Wink*Wink - so this post is not misunderstood:

"metaphysicians" - did I copy that right from your post, Rocky? (with the accompanying red squiggly line beneath it!) *Smile I would love to meet one in a pub for beer, crisps and long candle-lit discussions about metaphysiology, metaphysiotherapy, and other aspects of metaphysicing in general.

It's only an assumption that DNA has been around that long, and DNA wasn't "introduced into Earth's Biosphere" - the observation or definition of a "Biosphere" is dependent on... as far as any postulated "Metaphysician" or other pseudoscientific (or otherwise) professional could determine... is the presence of living organisms (Biota) that are based on a DNA hereditary mechanism - the only way we know to describe living things.

Finally I have no idea where your formulation of "instantaneously" came from - I suggested that "probably since DNA first assembled into self-reproducing pre-biotic units, over 2.5 billion years ago" - a weasel worded assumption of likelihood based on lack of alternative evidence, and the present evidence of the age of the earth and the current fundamental basis of biology - which neither suggests a great deal of certainty when the first viruses arrived, but I am perfectly willing to accept your solid approximation of 3 weeks, as it is a plausible timescale, given that the order of 2-4 weeks is a common incubation period for human, animal and vegetable virus infection timescales from exposure to onset of morbidity. In my further defence I said "probably eventually come along", more weaselly-worded stuff on my behalf, that covers me from any criticism, or refutation whatsoever!

As to the mathematical veracity of Steve C's calculation, who am I to say, as an aged molecular biologist sometime involved in phytoviral genetic analysis and later as a veterinary vaccine researcher and manufacturer?

*Wink*Wink*Wink

 

Thank you very much Fafhrd for catching that. Parody is my specialty, but sometimes it goes unnoticed.

 

@Rocky *Roflmao2

 

This elaboration is surely worthy of some kind of political nomination! *Shock*What

 

Wow, I am impressed!

Interesting topic.

 

Ok, Andre, I'm in the market for a globally recognised sinecure, what do you want to propose me for? I like the title, and am eminently qualified for the post of The Big MacGuffin with special responsibility for ludicrously irresponsible research into daft data storage methodologies.​ My rates are affordable, just.

 

You don't need to limit yourself in any way *Wink Let your options wide open *Smile
Admit, I don't understand everything you are saying *Smile, but it sounds like something important, doable a lot of research involving etc...

So...

 

Look, Andre, I need a reliable PA for the post - are you available? If we are going to make this work, we need to move fast, before the UK pulls out of Europe, or else it's a no-go. Whaddaya think?