Photoshop for DNA 208
pafischer writes "Forbes is reporting on a Biotech startup company trying to make DNA manipulation as easy as Photoshop. From the article: 'The goal is to move from having to merely tweak the proteins that are used as biotech drugs to being able to design them, even taking material from multiple organisms and using them to create new, functional genes.'"
Oh No! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh No! (Score:3, Funny)
Although I can't say that was much different than the goals of my friends in high school bio class.
Re:Oh No! (Score:2)
So people who like to do this [worth1000.com], when they get their hands on the DNA version...
Eeek.
Re:Oh No! (Score:1)
Re:Oh No! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh No! (Score:2)
And with the clone tool I made... a monkey with four asses. Huh.
Re:Oh No! (Score:2)
Great Game.
whoa! (Score:2)
Plugin name: DNA (deoxyribose nucleic acid): "The genetic material of inheritance, undoubtedly has the most well-known molecular structure of all time. This tutorial describes how to make it."
http://www.nextdesigns.net/modules.php?name=Photo s hop_Tutorials&file=dna [nextdesigns.net]
Just an upgrade to the Clone tool (Score:2)
Re:Just an upgrade to the Clone tool (Score:1)
Plugins! (Score:4, Funny)
Ultra-Sharp-Teeth Plugin
Breathe Underwater Plugin
Bigger Breasts Plugin
Jolyon
Re:Plugins! (Score:2)
NOOOOOO! - Cock Tease (Score:1, Funny)
Re:NOOOOOO! - Cock Tease (Score:2)
Re:Plugins! (Score:2)
Begin the ex-wife jokes...
Re:Plugins! (Score:2)
We're going out for ice cream, do you want to go?
No thanks mom, I just installed a new plugin and I want to play with it for a while.
Re:Plugins! (Score:3, Interesting)
Screw that.
Imagine what happens when DNA manipulation gets in the realm of being cheap enough for interested parties.
No more hiding pot plants in the cornfield: The corn itself will be full of THC. Want some cocaine? Have a genetically manipulated carrot.
The drugwar should be rather interesting when this happens.
lets hope... (Score:3, Funny)
$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda Ga (Score:2)
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:2)
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, he has a motive. He's donating money to help develop a user-friendly gene manipulation tool in hopes that it will cut into the market of the Open Source gene manipulation. Then, when people become dependent on the new gene manipulation, Microsoft will buy the company and merge it with their next version of windows, leaving geeks as the only ones doing gene manipulation the old way (by hand
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:2)
Perhaps the best euphemism since "left-handed mousing." ROFLMAO.
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:1)
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:2)
It's been that way since the first super-super rich.
Ever heard of Carnagie Melon university? Or Carnagie hall? Vanderbilt? And yet these men were called robber barons.
The list of generous donations goes on and on for the super-rich.
It's still not as big a sacrifice as me donating $5 to a local charity.
Also, does the good they do outweigh the harm they do to society? Doubtful. It's equally doubtful for most super-rich men. I think it's
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:2)
I'd be interested to hear how you think Microsoft's antitrust violations are more significant than the hundreds of millions of dollars the B&M Gates foundation donates to AIDS research, education, health initiatives, and technology.
I mean, I'm sure you hate Bill with a passion, but the causes t
Re:$42.6 million grant from the Bill & Melinda (Score:2)
In the "real world", which you so kindly reminded me of, there is also such a concept as "pragmatism".
Re:Writing off business expenses as charity. (Score:2)
If the average Joe tried to "give" money to an organization that turned around and gave it back to him and then he wrote it off as charity, then he'd be in a federal "pound them in the ass" prison.
Yeah! And he gives millions of dollars to AIDS work so that the recipients will just turn around and give AIDS back to him! If the average Joe did that...
Hmm... I guess that logic can only be carried so far...
bad article summary from bad article title (Score:5, Informative)
They do compare the advance in genetic manipulation to the difference between editing with Wite-Out and editing with a word processor, but that's what we call an analogy. They're not claiming that producing genes would be something anyone with no training can do with their home computer.
Re:bad article summary from bad article title (Score:2)
I'll get you next time, Mister Spear!!!
*escapes in emergency hovercraft*
Re:bad article summary from bad article title (Score:3, Informative)
Currently, it's easy to 1) amplify large chunks of DNA verbatim and 2) change individual nucleotides. What is difficult is making large blocks of novel or heavily modified sequence, as it's expensive or impossible to synthesize them from nucleotides. Codon Devices seems to have a way to generate large chunks of customized sequence.
How important that turns out to be, we'll see, but the company does have some really smart people behind it. Anyway, that's how I understand
Re:bad article summary from bad article title (Score:3, Informative)
What the article lacks is one critical detail - how exactly they plan on doing all this.
Imagine I started a new company designed to revolutionize computing, pointing out
Re:bad article summary from bad article title (Score:2)
Good news for OJ (Score:1)
Re:Good news for OJ (Score:2)
Dislexia is such a drag (Score:2)
I thought, "what do multiple orgasms have to do with DNA research?"
Re:Dislexia is such a drag (Score:4, Funny)
Quite a bit, actually... : p
Re:Dislexia is such a drag (Score:2)
Yeah, I swung and missed that one. I should have said "I thought, 'surely one orgasm is enough to supply all the necessary material.'"
orgasms and DNA research (Score:3, Funny)
Oh that's easy.
Every woman will have not one G-spot but four, one of which will be at the back of the throat.
Every man will have a unit built from horse DNA.
And don't forget, everyone will be multi orgasmic!
Reinforced back muscles to support the standard DD chest. (That's the small model)
And of course, everyone will have a FANTASTIC rump.
And then King George W Bush will get wind of this and have everyone's DNA rewritten to be more m
Re:orgasms and DNA research (Score:2)
That cracks me up... I wish it would happen in my lifetime.
Re:orgasms and DNA research (Score:2)
Re:orgasms and DNA research (Score:2)
Of course it would create some positive aspects to having the flue. She's be throwing up all the time, but every so often while bent over the porcelain thrown...
Re:orgasms and DNA research (Score:2)
Then we will have to have 4 penis' to be able to pleasure each at the same time.
Gimp (Score:5, Funny)
*Ducks*
Re:Gimp (Score:3, Funny)
Open Source will respond! (Score:2)
Re:Open Source will respond! (Score:1)
Re:Open Source will respond! (Score:2)
multiple organisms (Score:2)
I almost had a blockbusters [ukgameshows.com] moment there...
What a suprise they removed the dumbass human-check. a-holes. Finished reading "Dumb ideas for dummies" have you?
Finally! (Score:1)
Easy? (Score:1)
Saw this in Star Trek Voyager (Score:2)
Photoshop? (Score:2)
If they pull this off, it has way more to do with biology and math than the interface they use. Not to mention that even if this application simulates gene manipulation, they will still have to do the same thing by hand to tes
Oh Fark (Score:2)
Re:Oh Fark (Score:1)
Photoshop for DNA gets released... (Score:1)
One Hell of a plugin.... (Score:2)
X-ray vision here I come!!!
OMG (Score:2)
"easy" as photoshop? (Score:2)
Re:"easy" as photoshop? (Score:2)
What we're waiting for now is for mortals to be able to do it.
Why does this sound like a very, very bad idea? (Score:1)
Re:Why does this sound like a very, very bad idea? (Score:1)
Or that they paid for it. Oh, wait, different thread.
This is the (relatively) easy part (Score:3, Interesting)
I'd be more impressed if someone created an accurate in silico system for testing new drugs, rather than just designing new DNA sequences that MIGHT make useful new proteins that MIGHT make a useful new drug.
Re:This is the (relatively) easy part (Score:3, Interesting)
could get freaking scary.
Re:This is the (relatively) easy part (Score:2)
If we have solved all of that, then we might think about interactions in the organism. Nearly no drug design is done by rational approaches today, it is all mass screening.
Surely Photoshop is the wrong analogy (Score:1)
A more appropriate pick would probably been from under the CAD umbrella, or string manipulation tools like lex.
Hell, maybe even:
vi dna.txt
Easy as Photoshop (Score:1)
Re:Easy as Photoshop (Score:2)
Better yet, modify human gut bacteria to turn human crap in
Grand Theft Auto for DNA (Score:1)
Gals, with GTA:DNA, you can walk up to a sexy celebrity starlet and, well, actually, all you can do is find out what they really look like under all that make up, plastic surgery, silicone, botox and advanced composite material
But that's proprietary (Score:1)
This is nothing - we design genes all the time (Score:1)
Just making it all pretty doesn't mean you know what it will do. It's more important to understand how it will work and how the whole chain will be impacted than it does being able to just visualize it.
Ain't gonna happen (Score:4, Insightful)
Well whoop-de-do. I'd like to make a computer that can generate wormholes. Doesn't mean it's going to happen.
Firstly, protein modelling is notoriously complex. Remember folding@home? http://folding.stanford.edu/ [stanford.edu]
That's right - hundreds of thousands of computers cracking the problem of 12 amino acid chains. That's an oligopeptide, sort of like a 'protein lite'. Real proteins are hundreds to thousands of amino acids long.
IBM's Blue Gene supercomputers were even specifically designed with protein folding simulations in mind - read http://www.research.ibm.com/bluegene/ [ibm.com].
So this company seems to be doing the following
1 Come up with nifty, but blindingly obvious, idea
2 Crack the age-old problem of accurately simulating protein folding
3 Profit!!!
It's just that step one is literally so obvious that you could ask a kid. And step 2 is so notoriously complex that I don't expect this company to amount to anything more than a plughole for research grants.
-Nano.
No photoshop but programming language (Score:1)
A better even better parallel could be with languages and toolkits.
Consider DNA as a binary code
Consider RNA memory access lines
Consider Ribosomes as the processing units.
Let"s add a DNA code assembler and a high level language to design the DNA code, access protocols and interactions vith chemicals input / output.
Use real cells as factory or use nanotechnology.
Old news (Score:2)
dreamgirl (Score:2)
Now I can photoshop my dreamgirl *for real*
Now instead of celebrity Photoshop'ed Pr0n (Score:2)
nobody sees the downside? (Score:2)
Um... NO (Score:2)
And one more thing... this is all expensive. Very, very expensive. Even a basic (and I mean BASIC, as in you could maybe do three experiments) molecular bio lab starts at many tens of thousands of dollars. That's with teaching grade supplies and equipment, no
Re:Um... NO (Score:2)
Could this affect DNA used in criminal cases? (Score:2)
Ob Strongbad ref (Score:2)
Undo (Score:2)
Great (Score:2)
DNAHack (Score:2)
Seems more like CAD than Photoshop... (Score:2)
Gives a whole new meaning.... (Score:2)
Re:Gives a whole new meaning.... (Score:2)
*For everyone who can't tell this is a joke*
Re:People made by Photoshop newbs... (Score:2)
Re:Oh, great. (Score:2)
Leave genes to the geneticists (Score:5, Interesting)
At least, I have fantasies about modifying vegetables, fruits, and bugs. I expect that wasps can be reengineered to produce complete reams of laser printer paper, even with a sealed paper wrapper. I expect that ants or cockroaches could be modified to clean your house, better than they do. I expect bacteria or other small folded shapes can be reengineered to spit-out carbon nanotubes, construct simple buildings, or eat trash and grow fuel-cell cartridges.
All this hinges on us being able to effectively "file/print" DNA molecules. It's fun to watch technology accelerate, I am one excited geek.
Re:Leave genes to the geneticists (Score:2)
Re:Leave genes to the geneticists (Score:2)
Translation: "I think it's impressive that I can type at all!"
The DARK SIDE of all this (Score:2)
Suppose somebody designs a breed of dog that can run twice as fast as a greyhound. Thousands of the cute critters are bred, but it turns out that this breed also invariably develops severe osteoarthritis at three years of age. A great deal of suffering has just resulted from somebody's "toying".
Things get worse when you start to mix in human genes. At what point should you start to accord hu
Re:Leave genes to the geneticists (Score:2)
Re:Leave genes to the geneticists (Score:2)
Your water is dangerous too (Score:2)
Hell, if I could find out which GM foods were, I'd like to try 'em. Who cares if it's a bigger tomato, and is perhaps jucier and more tasty? I do, and that's what I think I want in a tomato, not a dinky little spotted nasty rotted thing -- which is what I see alot as an excuse for a natural tomato.
Selective breeding has been going on for longer than I care to speculate. And how bad is that? A bigger, tasti
Re:Oh, great. (Score:2, Funny)
Drew Endy. [mit.edu]
If a professor of Biological Engineering from MIT isn't a genetic engineer, I'd like to know what is.
Re:Oh, great. (Score:2)
(Repeat after me: Genetists, are, not, programmers.)
Re:Photoshop NOT easy enough (Score:2)
I think it must have something to do with the suggested link between light autism and hard core geekery.
Re:Photoshop NOT easy enough (Score:3, Funny)
Then we'll have humans with an extra 30 useless chromosomes - so we'll have to wait until Dreamweaver DNA, DNA Tidy and DNA validator.
Re:At last! (Score:2)