Hacker News Reader

Comment by Barrin92 | Hacker News Reader

rather than just talking about the density of storage it would have been interesting to get some figures on the read and write speed. I figure that writing things to DNA and/or reading it is incredibly complicated and slow. What's the use case for something like this, putting information into DNA and then freezing it somewhere?

View on HN

I work for a commercial synthetic DNA producer in R&D. At the moment writing DNA is the slow part. There has been an almost Moore's law like reduction in price/increase in speed for sequencing, but so far synthesis has lagged. The state-of-the-art is phosphoramidite synthesis which has been around since the 80's. We have optimized and streamlined the process, but a single base addition (writing one 'bit') is still in the range of 100's of seconds. Also the length of DNA produced by phosphoramidite synth is limited to a couple hundred bases in most cases (although it's possible to extend that out to hundreds of bases at increased cost/reduced efficiency). So long DNA has to be stitched together from shorter strands. The other issue with synthetic DNA is quality so methods like microarrays are not necessarily the best (quality cannot be objectively measured on a per strand basis).

There are some interesting developments out there, like using enzymatic methods to synthesize long strands, but a lot of that technology is still in it's infancy.

I would be happy to discuss the field if anyone is working in it (or has interest)

I’d like to discuss! Email in my profile

Hi Dan, I've actually been meaning to reach out to you, your company is doing some really exciting things. I don't see your email in your profile, so I will send a quick email to your company info email. Otherwise feel free to send a quick message to sbearden at idtdna dot com

Seems like the ideal use case would be 1) massive amounts of data needing to be stored 2) data integrity is important but non-essential 3) data density is more important than data transfer.

Maybe sending data via rocket ship (since every ounce counts), when interception of signal is a concern (some reason to avoid using light)?

there isn't a use case (or an economic story) yet.

Yup. These ideas have been kicking around for 25 years.

In theory, you could use DNA-based reactions to solve problems. Since DNA is quite small and the reactions run in parallel (more or less), you should be able to brute-force some otherwise intractable problems. The classic example of this is Adleman (1994), which uses DNA to find a Hamiltonian path. (here: https://www2.cs.duke.edu/courses/cps296.4/spring04/papers/Ad...)

In practice, anything involving DNA is a bit fussy and error prone, and exponential growth means you'll eventually drown in DNA too.

When Adleman gave a seminar I was an undergrad at UCSC. We chatted with him afterwards and it was fun to calculate that, using his design, if we wanted to scale up to solve more interesting problems, you'd have to have a bathtub's worth of solvent and very good mixing (better algorithms aren't as wasteful).

I don't see any DNA-based computing or storage systems as being capable of outdoing a general purpose computing system that already exists off the shelf, for the foreseeable future, for any reasonable use case.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com