Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

lt_dan_zsu t1_j0zu3jx wrote

Reply to comment by SpielbrecherXS in How realistic is “The future of” on Netflix? by alakeya

Storing data in plants might make some sense when I think about it. To "read" the data encoded in DNA would require you to consume some of the DNA, which means you only have a limited number of reads of that data before you run out. Putting that DNA into the genome of a plant would allow you to cheaply generate a bunch of copies of that data, and this data could then be stored indefinitely as seeds that could be planted again if more copies are needed.

I'm not sure how the show depicted it, but I think the idea of having a plant flash drive or something sounds unrealistic. However, I could see it being used as a form of cold storage in the future, but it's probably not even close to being a practical solution. There's also the issue of how much data could be crammed into a plant's genome before it starts effecting the plant's ability to be a plant.

2

Lidjungle t1_j103nlk wrote

SO... We could potentially encode data in plant DNA for future generations. They would just have to A) Figure out it's there, B) decode it, and C) speak the language it's encoded in.

Might as well put a message in a bottle and fling it around Jupiter.

2

lt_dan_zsu t1_j1077bc wrote

Cold storage is for cheaply and compactly storing large quantities of information that doesn't need to be accessed often. Yes, in order for DNA data storage to work, we have to have a means of decoding it. I'm not sure how this is a criticism of this specific technology as this would apply to literally anything that we use to store information.

1

Lidjungle t1_j10a8ih wrote

We can store data on anything. Even plant DNA. And every few years someone goes "OMG, what if we stored data in Ocean Waves!!! It's incredibly impractical and almost totally useless, but it's theoretically possible!" And then some BBC talking head runs a special on "Are Ocean Waves the future of data??" And says that within ten years you'll be loading GTA from the nearest beach and talking about data access for poorer landlocked countries.

Since we can store data on anything, the next question to ask is "Is it practical? Is it useful? Should I encode it on a giant gold disk with a huge sign, or embed it in the DNA of plants like a puzzle from a 90's adventure game?" So, what data would we encode this way, and what would we need it for? I'm just pointing out that while it's theoretically possible, it's not really useful.

2

lt_dan_zsu t1_j11de3t wrote

The difference here being that DNA, unlike ocean waves, is a naturally occuring molecule that evolved to store information that is encoded and decoded. How then is it a stretch that this molecule could be harnessed to store digital information? Furthermore, you ask what applications it might be useful for, and I already said in my original comment that cold data storage seems like a possible application. I also stated that there could be issues with the technology that either make it impractical now, and may even make it an inviable technology.

​

You said that encoding information in plant DNA is "like a puzzled from a 90's adventure game" which seems to be a continuation on your idea from your original comment. I'm not sure why this needs to be said again, but yes, for an information storage medium to be useful, you need to know how to decode it. Once again, this is true for any storage medium, be it a vinyl record, a magnetic tape, a CD, or a solid state drive.

​

I'm honestly not sure what you're attempting to criticize about anything I've said. It feels like you read the first sentence of my comment and decided that it needed to be attacked because it showed the slightest hint of optimism about an emerging technology. Would it have been more interesting if I had just said "it wont work?"

2

SpielbrecherXS t1_j100toc wrote

As cold storage, maybe. But I can't imagine it being viable for any immediate use, aside from exchanging secret spy messages.

1

GorillaP1mp t1_j1178c4 wrote

Kind of makes you wonder if that isn’t what all the “useless” sequences in our dna are because this has all happened before

1

lt_dan_zsu t1_j11f33t wrote

It's now thought to be mostly remnants of ancient parasites like viruses and transposons.

1

GorillaP1mp t1_j11gm3x wrote

Oh I’m sure it’s something like that. I just like saying “this has happened before” for dramatic effort.

1