People who think DNA-based storage is somehow perfect, and will last over 1000 years, have obviously never heard of cancer before.
-
-
Cancer is a genetic mutation, frequently caused by environmental issues like stray ionizing radiation, ambient chemicals, etc.
-
Over time, as with all organic molecules, DNA _will_ decompose, so data encoded _will_ become corrupted.
-
Given a long enough timeline even protons decay. 1000 years is perfectly reasonable for massively redundant DNA storage
-
Ditto for magnetic media and optical too. Anything can be preserved indefinitely if you have enough RAID elements. ;P
-
That's one copy + checksums. DNA storage is massively parallel, only cost is feedstock + time (not much of either)
-
RAID 1+0 is not checksums, it's striped duplicates of data. At large scales, RAID 5 becomes too computationally and power inefficient.
-
Yeah didn't catch RAID reference. Cost of spinning rust copies is linear, DNA copying has hyperbolic drop-off of cost. RAID 9000+
-
OTOH accessing the data is expensive. Not sure what the practical case is. But if the goal is to preserve info, DNA isn't a bad choice
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.