Won't be soldering these....

More like grow them in place with the hard part being keeping the "module" alive.

The first link has been moved, even Google gets a 404.

Unfortunately, unlike their electronic counterparts, biological transistors don't follow Moore's law of ever-decreasing size and ever-increasing efficiency — Endy warns that living circuits are unlikely ever to outperform a smartphone.

Edit: adding more links to same-news articles:

http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report_molecular-transistors-bring-bio-computers-closer-to-reality_1816861

GoForSmoke:

Unfortunately, unlike their electronic counterparts, biological transistors don't follow Moore's law of ever-decreasing size and ever-increasing efficiency — Endy warns that living circuits are unlikely ever to outperform a smartphone.

My smartphone is tons smarter than many of the "living circuits" commenting on tech blogs. :slight_smile:

Getting a 404 when clicking the link.

codlink:
Getting a 404 when clicking the link.

They probably forgot to water the transistors again.

codlink:
Getting a 404 when clicking the link.

Sorry, even Google gets that 404 now. 3 other links added to the 1st post.

Essentially usefully programmable cells are much closer now.
How long before they're "weaponized"? As in before or after they're used for anything good?

GoForSmoke:
How long before they're "weaponized"? As in before or after they're used for anything good?

Sure, one day we may just need to go to the bloodbank to learn a foreign language, I would install a good virus scanner and update it frequently before using p2p networks though :wink:

Jokes:

  • That means that hardware will also be affected by viruses (or viri, as the proper latin dictates).

  • You won't be buying NPN or PNP transistors, but rather ACA and TGT transistors (remember the letters in the RNA sequence, AT, CG)?

Seriously now, I honestly believe that is a few decades from becoming a reality in the market. Probably what follows is that Stanford applies for a patent for the idea or the proccess, so that noone can explore that possibility in the future without paying huge royalties to Stanford or the scientists.

IBM has done the above several times. I the 90's I was a subscriber of PC World and remember reading about the "new" technologies in data transmission that would change forever the way chips are built. Quantum and optical CPUs were the core of the idea. 20+ years after that and we still have none of those.

Patents are almost nothing. 17 years in the US while in Japan if a court agrees that a 5% improvement has been made the patent no longer applies.

IBM paid Bill Gates to develop DOS and he got away with selling it as his own on the technicality that for IBM it was 8088 code while his version was 8086 code. Never mind that they're the same, the idiot judge didn't know that.

IBM has put tons of patents into the public domain btw. It saves on court fees.

Why we don't have quantum chips on desktops has more to do with development, tech limits and economy. They're just not ready. Transistors and lasers and leds were known possible decades before they were made to work.

GoForSmoke:
Patents are almost nothing. (...)

I partially disagree. Patents are very relevant... just ask the Samsung and Apple lawyers!

I have been battling with that for the last 2 weeks: I didn't invent anything, but I found a use for something that no one had thought before, and I adapted that idea, improving it A LOT. The new use is eligible for a patent, and there is nothing in the market like it. It has become a really "marketable" (is there such word?) product, and now I need an investor. All the investors I've seeked require that I have a patent, so I am applying for one (with is gonna leave me US$ 2,000 poorer).

Well good luck not getting ripped off then. I hope you make it just for those who did not.