What is Digg?54 Comments
- RealmDown, on 07/09/2008, -1/+10Forget Jurassic Park. Bring back Marilyn. I'll take TWO.
- uptwolait, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8DNA 2.0
- Pittance, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8"The unique chemistry of these structures and their high stability offer unprecedented possibilities for developing new biotech materials and applications, the researchers say. "
Or for creating our own race of atomic supermen! - inactive, on 07/09/2008, -0/+8Oh yes, I can see it now - DNA strip mines as far as the eye can see. Factories belching out clouds of waste proteins. Vast herds of ribosomes, grazing and stripping the land of all nutrients.
Seriously, WTF!? - themulf, on 07/09/2008, -3/+10Begin the clone wars has!
- marx2k, on 07/09/2008, -0/+7Kanele: Really? Are we using up all of our natural $ resources?
- veilrap, on 07/09/2008, -0/+6Kanele: That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
- Jenadae, on 07/09/2008, -1/+7One step closer...
- janetaSiri, on 07/08/2008, -2/+8This is interesting, but I don't quite understand the implications of it.
- twoboxen, on 07/09/2008, -0/+6spore FTW?
- GeorgeStone2, on 07/09/2008, -0/+5Kanele, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
- svensko, on 07/09/2008, -3/+8What's wrong with using natural parts? Am I missing something? Cytosine is cytosine is cytosine, right? We've been making (small) DNA molecules by hand for quite a while.
- radonaldson54, on 07/09/2008, -1/+5mickrussom
Arrogant comment.
I vote that you and you alone should dictate science. Oh science over-lord, can I research on X? Pleaaassseeee? Do I have your permission?
You are a single voice, thank god. - veilrap, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Interesting but don't expect any sort of revolution to come of it. (At least for a long time) All the researchers are doing is experimenting with using different bases than are found in normal dna inorder to create DNA-like structures. This is NOT DNA just a look a like. It could be useful at some point but as this is the first time creating it usage is quite a ways down the road.
- dominikkom, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4Instead of getting rust on your biological computer, you'd get mold!
Using unnatural parts helps prevent the DNA from being worked on by the same enzymes that work on natural DNA. Thus allowing us to create our own enzymes for the particular system. - orangefly, on 07/09/2008, -0/+4bring back george....i'll take seven....
- DanBoodro, on 07/09/2008, -1/+4Could you guys imagine what we could accomplish if we actually took all these new scientific discoveries and applied them to human experimentation? I mean seriously. Wasn't there an article a few days ago : http://digg.com/general_sciences/Scientists_Identi ...
I cant even begin to think of how the future of humanity could be if we all just put our top effort into technology like this and stopped with all the ***** race, religion, oil, economic, etc. wars. - veilrap, on 07/09/2008, -0/+3It's definitely the dream of immortality no nightmare. However this discovery is not really related to any of that.
- coyote1284, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2I beg to differ, the problem is they are exactly the same.
- sovietninja, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2X-files much?
- tribius, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2I think what this development means is that we don't even have to clone anymore, we can (at some far off point in the future) build lifeforms from scratch.
Like a real-life Spore creature creator - dominikkom, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2It's not being discounted at all; I don't think you realize how hard understanding epigenetics is for a 3 million BP genome.
- coyote1284, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2WHERE IS YOUR GOD NOW!?
*runs* - TheCatsPants, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2Yes, much of drug and medical research is business oriented - because these things are very, very expensive. You'll find few businesses that wish to do anything other than make money. Hence medication for ailments that aren't serious (create a market), medication that treats rather than cures (keep your customers coming back), and little research into conditions that are rare (no money to be made in a small market).
You want academic science to research something - contribute to a charity. Or let the government tax you more. - stephenhacking, on 07/08/2008, -4/+6If the process can be perfected, i suppose doctors could create artificial organs that are as goo d as the natural ones.
- nullifidian0, on 07/09/2008, -0/+2You also appear to relatively new to the web as a whole.
http://www.*****.com/ - GeorgeStone2, on 07/09/2008, -1/+3I would happily beta test mind into new body tech.
I want a canon in my chest please. - rahulkolasseri, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2hey people, I'm relatively new to digg so could like tell me what FTW means? digg me down but i want an answer
- jayemee, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1No, it is DNA. The fact that these aren't naturally occurring bases doesn't invalidate the fact that they still meet all the required criteria to be DNA. There are other bases than the typical four found in nature, it doesn't make them any less DNA. It's the sugars that define it DNA, not the bases.
- jayemee, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1There is work going on about making short regions of triple helix.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple-stranded_DNA
http://www.ijpsonline.com/article.asp?issn=0250-47 ... - mediatedthought, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1It's another key to understanding abiogenesis as well.
- radiantstorm, on 07/09/2008, -2/+3Scary stuff. This means artificial body parts, and eventually artificial bodies. The dream (nightmare?) of immortality is tantalizingly close.
- GeorgeStone2, on 07/09/2008, -1/+2She wasn't that hot..
- cdigioia, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1hot enough, plus there's the cool novelty factor!
- overkilpro, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1FTW = for the win
FTL = for the lose - dominikkom, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1It allows scientists to have MUCH more control over the DNA in a non cellular environment. Possibly even storing long sequences of information or splicing totally new genomes. This technology won't go far though without advances in other fields that coincide with it. For one I'm interested in how they store these artificial pieces of DNA.
- orcusabre, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1I REALLY hope that you are not a voting citizen.
- cdigioia, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1T-Rex vagina is too loose.
- GeorgeStone2, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1If you want the novelty factor then clone a t-rex or something.
Nothing says novelty like having sex with a real life t-rex. - nayongki, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0Genome soldiers, anyone?
and while we're at it.. nanomachines? - Overgrown, on 07/13/2008, -0/+0apparently you have no imagination and will just TRUST that this tech will stay out of the hands of the evils. ok then.. continue to live in denial
- herschman321, on 07/09/2008, -5/+4to the edge, and I'm about to break!
- DanBoodro, on 07/09/2008, -4/+3Linkin Park just isn't the same...
- Epistaxis, on 07/09/2008, -2/+1The blurb above is questionable, but it looks like the big deal is that their (pseudo-)DNA is made of unnatural nucleosides. It might be able to form triple strands in addition to plain old double (like the FEV in Fallout 2!). Apparently they plan to make DNA obsolete.
- inactive, on 07/09/2008, -2/+0Kanele: You Sir, are going on my refrigerator.
- skidzilla, on 07/09/2008, -3/+1The implications of this are huge. Mind boggling even.
The fact that this is happening in the same year as the discovery of the memristor...It's incredible.
History will remember 2008 as the year everything started to come together...
http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/jacsat/20 ... - alukaiser, on 07/09/2008, -2/+0you wouldn't want to kill babies and make jesus cry would you?
-
Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is