Trumpet is an operating system for simple and robust cell-free biocomputing
nature.com
nature.com
This prediction has a bunch of fun implications for security:
* Viruses and malware for such computers will also have a physical virus stage
* Tradeoffs between DNA and traditional methods for data storage
* A possible arms race between obfuscating and detecting unusual retrotranscriptases
Wonder how badly it could go if the data storage container is ruptured while against someone's body?
DNA cross contamination could be interesting, unlikely to be in any kind of good way.
Nothing, really. Your body is good at fighting that sort of thing, because it's literally happening every second of every day with billions of bacteria and environmental DNA. Even specialized organisms have a rather tough time getting by all the defenses.
For example, there are zero human-infecting raw-DNA pathogens.
If the goal is to use a bio computer to compromise a biological system, a more likely pathway would be to get the programmable system to construct something more like a prion (an auto-catalyzing protein complex) rather than faffing about with all the extra complexity and layers of indirection of an infectious virus.
If your target bio system is a plant rather than an animal, constructing a viroid might be worth the effort.
The biocomputing platform needs to not only assemble the sequence but also assemble the (or at least "a") protein encapsulation for initial delivery to an organism.
Hmmmm. If we're talking about actually wanting to infect someone with an engineered virus, then using something with sequences widely attributed to some other group could be used as cover.
Along the lines of "they were infected by a Russian variant of ebola". Or any other group, false flag operation type of thing.
Hopefully this doesn't become an actual thing. :(
TL;DR: pretty much zero unless you're immunocompromised
The price tag of the broken equipment and bacterial infections are probably the biggest concerns.
Genetic information is like software. It doesn't do anything unless it's in a compatible environment. Eukaryotic cells like those in plants, animals, fungi are delicate. Viruses which can write DNA into them without killing them have to be complicated, which makes the viruses delicate. Being this delicate means work with these cells and viruses can be very expensive.
Why try to use a multi-Xeon server rack with fiber links when all you need is a cluster of 5 Raspberry Pis and a bare bones router? The latter is way cheaper.
For the same reasons, well-understood bacterial models like tame E. Coli strains are popular in biocomputing [1]. Slime molds [2][3] are also popular, and they're even famously good at pathfinding.
Your coworkers, however, might be annoyed that you broke the biocomputer again.
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6421265/
[2] https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-6...
[3] https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsta.2014.021...
Why, exactly?
The incentives and goals for malware are what matter here. The first steps for satisfying those are always achieving undetected write and execution. In this context, RTs and everything else are just means to that end.
More broadly, in biology, there isn't really a thing as undetectable execution, because there are physical molecules floating around, and furthermore there are trillions of natural self-executing blobs in an arms race with the ribosomal world. Detecting execution, as technology gets better, is more of a problem of privacy than technology.
Undetected write is more important, but it is also important to identify the particular technologies that actually matter. It's not RTs, nor is it Cas9, nor is a lot of the things that people typically point out on hackernews, either.
To me, Trumpet sounds more like a compiler or circuit/program synthesizer than an operating system, since my understanding is you have some circuit in mind and the goal is to find a good genome (and/or the enzymes, not super sure yet) that can implement it. This means finding enzymes that will accurately promote or block transcription at a target location. And also checking against potential problems as the computation/reaction progresses since in a deep circuit depth you would presumably have many more kinds of things floating around that could interfere. I didn't see any mention on the circuit efficiency here, like how many base pairs per gate as # of gates increases, which I would guess would get larger faster than linear.
They mention the signal amplification of many genomes being transcribed which is really neat (like error correction). Though makes me wonder if the output signal has a defined or expected duration of stability. If it is stable forever, it is like a fixed point or attractor, but I suspect unless under much greater design or control, things would change. And what is the latency of these gates?
With cell-free, it seems plausible to design from-scratch genomes using a database of known proteins and that could be really cool. And funny to think about applying evolutionary search to determine the fittest genome for the job. From there we go to unicellular and then up to multicellular!
If your software speaks boolean logic and TRUMPET provides the layer between that and the underlying proteins then I'm happy to bless it with the title "Operating System".
In either case, some cool stuff. Can't wait to install Linux on the mold in my forgotten coffee cups!
Sounds super cool. The website doesn't seem to be hosted on the web but they provide a ZIP download in the supplemental information section: https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs414...
It's a bunch of Python files. No docs on how to get started but the filenames are reasonably semantic.
Edit: the paper says it's supposed to be hosted at https://trumpet.bio/ but that's not working for me
Edit again: http://trumpet.bio/ works (just not https)