Scinetists create an artificial life

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

21-05-10, 11:04 PM
SirWagginston

traitor

TRAITOR
22-05-10, 12:39 AM
dewilliams2

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_robot [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Not personally, but I've been reading about his research before they actually did it.

Actually, if the computing power growth scale keeps at the pace it's been in the last 30 years, they'll have a computer with the same computer power of a human male by 2035, female by 2038. Now, quantum computers may change that... quickly.

On NBC they said it would be 9 years and that was about a year ago. I can't find a link cause it was so long ago but you should dig around if your interested. I know you find all the computer stuff interesting. Everything is moving so fast. I think its happening a little quicker than your expecting. but 9 years still makes it about 2020...so it is a ways off. They didn't specify male or female but your probably right, females do use more of their brain at one time then men do.
22-05-10, 12:44 AM
the_robot

Quote:

Originally Posted by dewilliams2 [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

On NBC they said it would be 9 years and that was about a year ago. I can't find a link cause it was so long ago but you should dig around if your interested. I know you find all the computer stuff interesting. Everything is moving so fast. I think its happening a little quicker than your expecting. but 9 years still makes it about 2020...so it is a ways off. They didn't specify male or female but your probably right, females do use more of their brain at one time then men do.

I don't know about the data NBC used, but if the "calculation power" the brain has is the one I saw, it's more than 9 years unless the NBC is counting on quantum computers, which for now I don't think are going to be ready in 10 years.
22-05-10, 01:10 AM
dewilliams2

Honestly I forget which they were talking about...it was like a year ago but they did say 9 years. You should look into it. They said the computer would take up the entire floor of this huge building.
22-05-10, 01:44 AM
IndiReloaded

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_robot [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Not personally, but I've been reading about his research before they actually did it.

Craig Venter is extremely good at grabbing PR for ideas that aren't even largely his. It was the same for the human genome project. A lot of ppl at the Whitehead don't like him for this reason.
22-05-10, 01:49 AM
the_robot

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndiReloaded [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Craig Venter is extremely good at grabbing PR for ideas that aren't even largely his. It was the same for the human genome project. A lot of ppl at the Whitehead don't like him for this reason.

In the Research world I've met a HUGE amount of people who are like that. I don't care about the person who gives the speech itself, but about the achievement, obviously the team who did it knows more about it than he does. :)
22-05-10, 01:59 AM
IndiReloaded

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_robot [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

In the Research world I've met a HUGE amount of people who are like that. I don't care about the person who gives the speech itself, but about the achievement, obviously the team who did it knows more about it than he does. :)

Its not his team who did most of the groundwork. That is what I am saying. There are several key researchers working in this area he neglects to cite. That's not cool in science. Anyway, its not really a breakthrough, he's just good at PR.

Plus he wants to patent these things. A lot of ppl have problems with this in the community. Don't believe the hype, he's done this before.
22-05-10, 05:59 AM
Junket

Quote:

Originally Posted by dewilliams2 [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

They didn't specify male or female but your probably right, females do use more of their brain at one time then men do.

That's because they're inefficient.
23-05-10, 02:43 AM
IndiReloaded

Anyway, it IS very cool what they have done. His group also did shotgun sequencing. I wonder if he will be given a Nobel Prize? The guy is a technical bulldozer.
23-05-10, 12:36 PM
Mish

The President of the national Catholic bioethics center said this is not real life. I wonder what qualifications this person has to make this statement.
23-05-10, 01:07 PM
IndiReloaded

Quote:

Originally Posted by DoesntMatter [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

The principle of what was done is very cool

But the real achievement here was the limit reached in oligonucleotide synthesis, I don't know if they made an entire genome by the standard method via brute force or if some more elegant synthesis was employed. But at least the resolve was there to synthesize the entire genome for the sake of it

A quote from Venter on choosing research over clinical practice. His ego beats any medicos, hands down:

A doctor can save maybe a few hundred lives in a lifetime. A researcher can save the whole world.
23-05-10, 01:10 PM
IndiReloaded

They make more if they start their own company and its successful.
23-05-10, 02:49 PM
doppelgaenger

I hope that computers, androids, and artificial humans take over the world, and make everything mathematically sound.
23-05-10, 09:13 PM
the_robot

Quote:

Originally Posted by doppelgaenger [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

I hope that computers, androids, and artificial humans take over the world, and make everything mathematically sound.

We are on it. :)
23-05-10, 11:13 PM
Junket

So I really should begin stock piling weapons.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page