>not carrying your game PDFs within your own DNA so you&#

>>51997594
>Scientists prove, once again, that people are walking computers.

>>51997594
Because the de-sequencing takes really long

Just what I need, a rules lawyer with the game rules literally in his genetics.

>>51997594
>grill in the group
>"""accidentally""" forgot to send her the pdf
>"Guess I gotta share my dna with you"

Real life science is not a traditional game. This thread is off topic.

>>51997700
Will an oral sample do? Gives all new meaning to head.

>>51997700
> She nods, and jabs you with a needle
> DNA, not RNA.

>>51997594
So humans are literally just walking talking biological computers.

When are we making the catgirls?

When does the line between man and machine begin to blur, /tg/?

>>51997888
When someone makes a robot out of meat.

>>51997973
>When someone makes a robot out of meat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfoVOGMz054

>>51997594
Neat. Shouldn't be a surprise though. Humans are just disgusting computers.

>>51997888
The line never existed. Humans are just computers of flesh.

Computers are just computers out of materials and are mankinds children.

Its only natural they form a third child by mixing. Computer incest.

The Magi Biologis approve of this.

>""""scientific"" press""
>from a transhumanist website
kek, what about a link to an actual fucking paper and the reviews of said actual fucking paper, rather than a site for some autistic nerd to cry about his fear of growing old and dying.

>>51997656
""once again""
Nothing has been proved and most computer analogies fail in the face of actual neurology.

>>51997676
kinda this. It can store a lot of data and it's pretty stable, but reading that data will be slow as fuck

>>51997700
Hahaha! Absolutely brilliant my man! +1 to you.

>>51998731
well it's actually true, not as good as the article portrays it, but hey! it's working. They made pretty big deal out of it on my uni.

>>51997973
>>/r9k/

>>51997594
What is surprising in this article?

We know that human DNA can store data since the day we knew about human DNA. We know we can read that data, it just incredibly slow. We know we can modify that data, it's just costly, difficult, and time-consuming. We even know we can encode things in the left unused space of the human DNA.

Yes, we can theoretically encode a picture in your DNA. It'd just take three months, would probably need to be performed in the first stage of a human foetus, and cost several millions dollars, minimum. Why the fuck would you do that, faggot? Why the fuck would you even want to do that?

>>51998978
>Why the fuck would you do that, faggot? Why the fuck would you even want to do that?
Because we can, and because the future needs cute grils with 2D waifus encoded in their DNA.

>>51998978

The funny part about scientific advancement, is that every time someone brings up cost as a criticism, whether it be time or financial, it is always something that will disappear in time.

We have been studying how to grow meat in a lab for years. We finally synthesized meat several years ago, but the price to create one pound of meat was insane. Hundreds of thousands of dollars. But now we're down to 11$ a pound. Still unreasonable for consumer level purchase outside of the realm of novelty, but you have to remember; that was only several years of advancement.

We will get to a point where we can store data cost efficiently in DNA. Which, while you may think is useless in the context of storing something in a human, storing something in a synthetic biological "hard drive" might be something we will be able to do, in the future. It is actually quite astounding that, if you have the faculties to understand what we have known about DNA since before we mapped the genome, that this advancement doesn't excite you.

>>51999727
I honestly expected biological DNA hard drives would happen sooner.

>>51999809
DNA is the shittiest way to store data in any way, shape, or form. Assuming you somehow manage to hit a completely useless non-coding region, fit probably millions of base pairs of whatever porn you happen to be watching, and store all of this in an environment where the super reactive and easily mutated DNA won't somehow degrade or change like it naturally does, then you'd have to design an environment that can read the DNA (likely some form of transcription) and keep it repaired and maintained on top of whatever other insane biological systems are needed to make this work.

We've been fucking with DNA coding for decades. There's a reason we still use hard drives.