DNA and Biological Computing

[greedostick]

Anyone been keeping up with this?

It's probably just a matter of time before programs are written to recode our DNA so people never have to worry about stuff like cancer, or any other diseases really.

The outlook on this technology looks promising, but I fear we are a few generations early to be able to benefit from it.

Seems with this and quantum computing, and 3D printing being heavily researched right now, the possibilities are almost limitless. I would love to see where things are in about 100-200 years from now.

http://news.mit.edu/2016/programming-language-living-cells-bacteria-0331

http://phys.org/news/2015-09-dna-bodies.html

http://www.computerworld.com/articl...cal-supercomputer-uses-the-juice-of-life.html

 

[ki_atsushi]

Humanity won't last long enough to take advantage of it.

 

[mr_b]

We stay alive too long as it is. The world would greatly benefit if our avg life span was 55-60. While from a pure scientific perspective, this kind of ability is incredible.

 

[ballzdeepx]

We stay alive too long as it is. The world would greatly benefit if our avg life span was 55-60. While from a pure scientific perspective, this kind of ability is incredible.

If this tech got into certain dictators hands you can bet the avg life span would be that overnight.

 

[DNSDies]

I eagerly await the next hacker that makes a virus that causes humans to exhale argon and diffuse all environmental nitrogen into our sweat or something retarded like that.

Sometimes its best to keep the genie in the bottle.

 

[DevilRedeemed]

I eagerly await the next hacker that makes a virus that causes humans to exhale argon and diffuse all environmental nitrogen into our sweat or something retarded like that.

Sometimes its best to keep the genie in the bottle.

Sounds like fun.

All this will aid eventual space travel no doubt. Fuckerz of the Universe here we come

 

[NeoSneth]

Designer viruses are more plausible than biological computers.
DNA replication and production is far too error prone.

 

[greedostick]

Sounds like fun.

All this will aid eventual space travel no doubt. Fuckerz of the Universe here we come

Exactly. When we combine 3D printing, with biological computing, i think self sustained space stations would be much more realistic.

Yeah it could get in the hands of bad people, but thats the risk you have to take to further secure the longevity of the human race. Either we take risks, or we sit here and rot until a meteor destroys us, or the sun gets so hot we all die.

Its a necessary risk. People say the same thing about nuclear and biological weapons.

 

[mr_b]

Exactly. When we combine 3D printing, with biological computing, i think self sustained space stations would be much more realistic.

Yeah it could get in the hands of bad people, but thats the risk you have to take to further secure the longevity of the human race. Either we take risks, or we sit here and rot until a meteor destroys us, or the sun gets so hot we all die.

Its a necessary risk. People say the same thing about nuclear and biological weapons.

We can't peacefully live where we are now. The universe doesn't need man to spread its plague all over the universe.

 

[DNSDies]

Yes it does.
The universe is large enough to not care.

Besides, as far as we know, we're the only intelligent life in the universe capable of space travel. We have a duty to colonize a few worlds to prevent extinction.

One medium sized comet, a Yosemite eruption, or random other disaster could wipe us out.
We're not perfect, but we're still capable of enough that we don't deserve to die out yet.

 

[mr_b]

The hell we don't. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

 

[DevilRedeemed]

The hell we don't. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

That's the thing though. Should or shouldn't aren't valid arguments unfortunately. I personally think we should die with this planet on this planet. But that's just me. I'm sure in 100 years what we consider life and humanity itself will be far removed from what it is now. And I don't want to lose what makes me analogical and animal. So I'm fine not seeing what I consider the degradation of our species more so.
But still, ethics I don't think can make you attain some universal truth about the way mankind should or should not act.
We are forsaken and doomed by definition might as well make the best of it

 

[greedostick]

Who knows, the reason we are here could be to see if we can figure this shit out. We're not doing well on earth thats for sure, but we are still pretty primative in nature. One of mans major hurdles wil be uniting religion and science. Once we figure out a link that can be accepted by religious folk, and scientists, then that will eleviate a lot of the stupid stuff people do. To think we will always be this way may not be correct.

Theres no way, in a trillion trillion years we would destroy the universe "as we know it". As far as we know it the universe is expanding, and evolving. Planets die, and planets are born, probably every day

For all we know there could be other advanced civilizations out there bucking it out, and doing a lot more damage than we are.

 

[DNSDies]

I don't think you motherfuckers realize how huge the Universe is and how little of an effect we have on it.
Humans spreading through the galaxy wouldn't change anything on a universal scale.
There are more habitable earthlike planets in our Galaxy than humans on earth (8.8 Billion, +/-8%). This is only for solar systems with Sol-Like stars. If you include Red Dwarfs, that number balloons to over 40 Billion, as Red Dwarf Stars are more common in the Milk Way.
This doesn't count the number of planets we could colonize and/or terraform, either. No idea how many billions of terrestrial bodies that adds.

I don't think anyone will give a shit if we take a handful to ensure we survive the next extinction event.

 

[mr_b]

Yes the universe, as we know it currently, is huge. That's not the argument. That mentality of "oh there's enough to go around" it doesn't hurt anything in the grand scheme of things if we destroy this.

We've had that mentality while here and what's it gotten us. Depleted resources and uninhabitable land. We can't live peacefully here. If we expand. We will have space wars because one group will take a planet. The others will take another and guess what will happen. Mankind will continue to shit where it eats and try to take over the closest neighbouring planet.

We are no greater than a swarm of locusts. We should stay put until we can make it work here.

 

[NeoSneth]

Universe scale discussions are not for our generation.... Or the generation of the next millennium.

 

[DNSDies]

Sorry, but entropy is a thing.
Earth is essentially a closed system, with the sun providing the only extra energy into it, and even that is finite.

Additionally, due to universal expansion, the longer we wait to colonize new worlds, the harder it will be as the distance increases at an exponential rate.

We're NEVER all going to get along. That's a hippy pipe dream. It's more important we colonize another planet before a stray meteor kills us all.

The Sauropod Dinosaurs got along with nature just fine, never depleted resources, and didn't make any land "uninhabitable" (Humans have never done this, by the way. Even Chernobyl is teeming with life these days).
That didn't stop a comet from crashing into the planet and fucking killing them all.

You think nukes are powerful?
Earth has had HUNDREDS of Impact Events that make Tsar Bomba look like a firecracker.

If a Chicxulub sized comet or meteor was headed toward earth, we'd have literally no defense against it. All of humanity's culture and art, science, math, and history would be erased.

That's unacceptable.

 

[DevilRedeemed]

I don't think you motherfuckers realize how huge the Universe is and how little of an effect we have on it.
Humans spreading through the galaxy wouldn't change anything on a universal scale.
There are more habitable earthlike planets in our Galaxy than humans on earth (8.8 Billion, +/-8%). This is only for solar systems with Sol-Like stars. If you include Red Dwarfs, that number balloons to over 40 Billion, as Red Dwarf Stars are more common in the Milk Way.
This doesn't count the number of planets we could colonize and/or terraform, either. No idea how many billions of terrestrial bodies that adds.

I don't think anyone will give a shit if we take a handful to ensure we survive the next extinction event.

You give too much importance to human extinction. I'm not one of those who thinks mankind is shit and should vanish. But at the same time I don't think our worth demands that we survive under any circumstance. Humans become extinct everyday, what does it really mean for our species to live on beyond the allotted time? Who and under which circumstances? Is it even worth it? How much of it is it an ego thing?
Also but slightly different matter, I think that technology will eventually allow 'man' to penetrate the universe far more thoroughly at a quicker rate by means other than physical exploration. If somehow the projection of the mind can one day be used to manipulate objects remotely then it could be used in some way to reach out far. When the expansion of the mind by means of technology becomes a focal point for science, could we not one day fathom godlike consciousness?

 

[DevilRedeemed]

All of humanity's culture and art, science, math, and history would be erased.

That's unacceptable.

My question is, why is it unacceptable?
Also nothing really is a closed system. Energy is always transfered. Can't you envision the beauty of just disappearing into nothingness?

 

[DNSDies]

My question is, why is it unacceptable?

Until we have proof of other intelligent life in the universe, we have to behave under the assumption that:

1) We are the first intelligent life to achieve interstellar communication
2) We are the only intelligent life in the universe
3) Intelligent life does not exist in this quadrant of the Galaxy

The preservation of the only known example of intelligent, space-faring life is a noble enough cause.

Allowing ourselves to die out would be a crime.
It would be like discovering a box the negatives of the original Star Wars films and destroying them. Like discovering a unicorn and killing it.

Humanity is too weird to live, and too rare to die.

 

[greedostick]

Man's worth to populate the rest of the universe will be proven IF man succeeds before he becomes extinct here on earth. It is human instinct to survive as long as possible, and thats what we will try to do. So it really doesnt matter if we are, or are not worthy, because our actions over the course of time will decide.

 

[DevilRedeemed]

I disagree. There is nothing intrinsically essential about us that we should do whatever possible to preserve both remnants of our culture and human life. It's a crime only if you are somehow bound to the notion that there is real objective value in "progress", and I don't fully adhere to this. It would be a shame if all trace of man where to be lost, but that's about it. In my opinion. Just like discovering said box. We are part of the universe, all that is and has to be, is. Our own advancement maybe driven by our biological makeup but it fuels chronic dissatisfaction and malcontent.
The argument that we instinctively seek to survive may be true to an extent but it is a copout in regards to what we are discussing. The mind can tell us what our bodies can't, namely that there is a limit to how far we should want to advance in our quest for immortality, a word which coincidentally sounds very much like another, immorality.
Sorry for maybe coming off as pompous. I may be a little pompous.

 

[DevilRedeemed]

By immoral I am mostly reffering to the fact that only the very rich and very white will ever get a shot at immortality