DNA nanobots can exponentially self-replicate: Tiny machines made from strands of DNA can build copies of themselves, leading to exponential replication. Similar devices could one day be used to cr…::Tiny machines made from strands of DNA can build copies of themselves, leading to exponential replication. Similar devices could one day be used to create drugs inside the body

  • @uservoid1
    link
    English
    397 months ago

    Because of this the reaction will not work outside of carefully controlled laboratory conditions, ruling out apocalyptic scenarios where the process runs away and destroys all available DNA by building versions of itself with it.

    This isn’t something that’s taking over the world just yet

    So there’s always that kind of uncertainty; you think you can build safeguards in, but they’re not necessarily a guarantee that it will be safe

    Very reassuring, nothing to worry about

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      67 months ago

      You could also have a copycat funded by terrorists or whatever. Just because they build safeguards doesn’t mean the next person will. Fun.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        37 months ago

        It’s not that they built safeguards but probably more that replication is finicky and you need these specific conditions for it to work at all
        (but I don’t have access to the cited paper)

  • @Paragone
    link
    English
    107 months ago

    That’s a VIRUS.

    Duh…

    ( yes, I know they are implementation-orthogonal, but it’s the same concept. )

    _ /\ _

          • Bleeping Lobster
            link
            English
            27 months ago

            I saw a picture earlier of a baby hedgehog with its legs just like this. Probably not that though. Will OP ever release us from this mystery?

              • Bleeping Lobster
                link
                English
                27 months ago

                I found some of their comments quite interesting, they clearly think a lot. Don’t agree with everything they said but that’s life, people have different opinions.

                I’m going to go with it being an ascii equivalent of the ‘namaste’ hand gesture and stop thinking about it 😅

  • originalucifer
    link
    fedilink
    57 months ago

    nature hasnt reaally solved the replication problem (cancers). but we will? i guess its possible.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      37 months ago

      Natures answer to cancer is to let it happen. Just like every other disease.

      The way it eradicates it, is that we eventually all die of it, and the few that survive live on to have immunity. It takes an extremely long time. The major problem is, things like cancer usually happen well beyond the point that we start reproducing.

      Evolution doesn’t really care about things beyond the point of reproduction. I mean, it kinda does, but not in the same way that dropping dead in childhood does.

      Not to mention, humans are actively meddling in evolution. Diseases that would wipe us out are handled with technology now. Meaning we have taken control of a lot of what nature used to do.

      • originalucifer
        link
        fedilink
        07 months ago

        nature cared enough to put a lot of effort into error correction preventing it.but youre right, just enough to keep’em coming

        • @reddit_sux
          link
          English
          17 months ago

          Nature didn’t care, it was just an happy accident, a mutation that gave an advantage over others who couldn’t correct errors in replication. So they remained and others died away.

  • Lunatech
    link
    fedilink
    47 months ago

    @L4s Apparently no one remembers the “replicators” arc from the old “Stargate” TV series?