Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

My first thought was, how long did it take to write and read this data? I don't expect exceptional speed, but I do wonder about throughput and seeking.


FTA: While it took years for the original Human Genome Project to analyze a single human genome (some 3 billion DNA base pairs), modern lab equipment with microfluidic chips can do it in hours.

OK, so assuming 1 hour for 3 billion bases, it's 1000 hours for 3 trillions bases (3 Terabits) or 1 million hours for ~3 petabits (or 400TBs of data). Yeah, that's a long time, roughly 100 years :)


It should be highly parallelizable though, so all hope is not lost.


I believe that also consumes the strands you're reading, so unless the source is copied many times, it is probably even slower than that.


Good thing cells have been copying DNA since life began.


Great, now my hard drive is going to get cancer!


At least you can remove/destroy the cells though. Aside from DNA storage & replication, there's no auxiliary purpose of the tissue.

http://xkcd.com/1217/


I'm not a biologist, wouldn't those cells would prefer to copy their own DNA?


Reading DNA is advancing fairly quickly. Illumina's HiSeq X Ten system produces 6Tbases per day. (Capex and opex/year are both in the 8 digit range.)

Seeking can be performed through entirely different means, as DNA is content-addressable. You can put in a magnetic bead attached to a strand complementary to what you're seeking, and pull that out of the mix. This is still a physical process that can take quite a bit of time.


Read and write were a couple of days each. Would be faster now. That said, we did 650kB; the article is misleading as they are talking about copies of the same information.


So in other words, this is not going to be usable for computers anytime soon.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: