>2017 >DNA replication has error correcting >Error correcting

DNA error correction is also pretty shit, which is unsurprising because error correction is a costly process to begin with. Error resistance is far better, whether in DNA or RAM.

>>59766422
>DNA error correction is also pretty shit,

>t. clueless fag

>>59766546
No, a biotech fag. DNA repair is indeed pretty shit. One might not expect it given that each strand complements the error-corrected sequence of the other, but the problem lies with the enzymes which identify and repair the errors. Look into it a bit more. It's an important process for genetic manipulation but that doesn't make it great in its natural context.

Living things are not robust because we can fix errors. We're robust because we can tolerate them thanks to things like degeneracy, lots of less sensitive non-coding regions, the very structure of our proteins, etc.

>>59766400
That cosmic ray is going to flip a bit in your chinese cartoons, then you're doomed.

>>59766546
That's why we're eternally young. oh wait

>>59766699
Aging isn't a bug, it's a feature.

>>59766699
If the telomere theory of aging is really the dominant factor, then it's not the fault of DNA repair that we age. It's the "fault" of regular old DNA replication. That and not having a telomerase which builds them back up.

Since telomeres seem to be ablative in their nature, I wouldn't call it a failure of repair that they get chewed up. That's by design. We just don't replenish them.

>>59766699
>wanting to live forever
I can't imagine a worse nightmare

>>59766823
If you really wouldn't want to live forever then pick a time to die. Say "I want to die 200 years from now". If I asked you on the 6th of April 2217 whether or not you wanted to live another day I'd bet you'd say yes. It'll always be "Just one more month, then i'll be done".
Immortality is only a curse in theory, in practice very few would have the will to pass it up.

>>59766400
Yes but your post gave me cancer

>>59766546
he's right though

DNA repair comes in many flavors. sometimes it involves just popping a damaged base out and replacing it, which is fairly reliable. other times it involves observing a mismatch and randomly choosing which base was the correct one. sometimes it involves fixing a double strand break by just randomly sticking the two ends together and hoping it works (which is notoriously errorprone) or by looking at the other chromosome and copying whatever's there (better hope the other copy isn't already fucked up)

it's astonishing we live as long as we do

>>59766823
Not aging doesn't prevent you from killing yourself anytime you want.