And we would selectively reproduce it, it wouldn't do it itself.

Quote Originally Posted by Xei View Post
On a serious note I'm pretty sure nothing will come of this... in fact it sounds kinda gimmicky. Certainly it won't be used in the long run, anyway. DNA has multiple disadvantages as data storage. The main reason is that it wasn't consciously designed; it's just the best thing that can come around by incremental improvements of blind chemistry, whereas we can perform huge improvements which isn't limited by naturally occurring chemistry. It's like the difference between a cheetah and a jet plane. And the function it does perform isn't really suited for computing. It's not intended for superfast reading and writing, for instance... there's one protein which duplicates DNA and it does it at its own pace. Designing a significantly faster protein is way beyond our capability at the moment, and there's no reason to think it could be much improved anyway.

DNA is pretty dense but you can't just look at the molecule in isolation; there's no reason to think the problems of reading and writing are soluble. In fact we can already synthesise polymers with denser information content than DNA... it's just that again there's no reason to think we could use it efficiently.
Your issue with it is resting on us not being able to improve it. Which you really have no idea about.

I do think you're probably correct. But I know next to nothing about this as well.
One thing I've seen is they make electronic cars and spiders out of DNA. And they actually want to research further to see if they could get them to
delivery drugs in our body to cancer cells or whatever. Thing is, they need a track to go along, how do you get that track in your body? Only way I can think is
nanobots. However it's done, it requires getting to the site first to put the track in. So it's pointless.

I think it would be good to see electronics running from hearts, and basically being a brain but electronic. And we would just power it with sugar.