We need gzip encoding factors. That way with a single chromosome we’ll be able to store all required information. Just take DNA, transcribe it to gzRNA, decode it to mRNA and pipe it to the ribosomes. My setup can do all this in just one elegant line of code and transcription factors.
Rewrite it so that it compiles to RNA (via LLVM ofc)
To be honest, DNA is stupid anyway. Worst data format ever invented.
I mean, a single mutation to get sickle cell anemia? Use fucking error correction codes, dammit! No, having everything twice is not error correction. It’s only error detection and the detected error is just silently ignored and randomly passed on to your offspring.
Where are the damn backups? 3-2-1 should hold for every data format! How would an offsite backup be designed? I don’t know I’m not evolution incorporated.
Why are viruses even a thing??? There is no reason EVER to be able to insert new DNA into your genome. Make it read only! With checksums! Why is there no Denuvo DNA-DRM?
Slightly unrelated but even worse, your immune system is literally only controlled by the equivalent of HTTP. Deactivate completely? Attack everything on sight? No authorization required whatsoever! Just use the public API! Surely nothing could exploit this, right??
Small Edit as a response to everyone mentioning the need to change for evolution:
Maybe, just maybe use a test environment? You don’t just push to production the moment you make a change. Move fast and break things my ass. Since women already have the production environment just create a similar structure in men! They already have TESTicles after all.
DNA is not meant to be stable, it is meant to mutate and evolve, also it wasn’t invented, it manifested itself out of chaos. One reason why understanding it is so hard. It is not made like a machine, it doesn’t have neat parts with clear roles or categories. It’s sort of pure chaos all sort of working together in a giant orchestra without categories or bounds.
To be more precice the universe appears driven to expand and maximize its potential for representing or becoming new distinct states, using the least possible input. This is relates to complexity, microstate phase space, and computational cost to turn entropy into order.
This theme runs from the Big Bang and the formation of the first particles, to stars creating complex atoms, to our planet forming and RNA assembling from a primordial soup. Its the expansion of potential and possibility.
The universe’s ontology is one of maximizing the paths it can explore while minimizing the resources needed to make any specific outcome stable. This is the principle of least action, viewed through information theory and the expansion of phase space.
RNA and DNA are perfect examples. They require very little matter to form. They are just complex enough to bootstrap life and create endless variation through mutation, which preserves a vast space of possibility. Yet they are not so complex that they could not arise from random chance in a primordial soup. They are seeds for unique actualization and complexity stratification at relatively little energy and matter cost paid while also keeping the door open to further new stated of becoming in the next iteration. It is an information-theoretic optimization tradeoff on which order and entropy interact, where their meeting boundaries create novel complex phenomenon.
This made me laugh. I have a disease that is basically caused by the DNA repair machinery being unable to count when it attempts to repair a congenital mutation, adding an extra phrase to the DNA sometimes. I often wish I could just open up the damn source code and fix it.
Because the random alterations create variations that allow survival of the species, not the individual, in changing conditions. For an example of what happens without that, just look at bananas. Without any evolution through DNA alteration during procreation, a single disease van wipe them out across the globe. Happened once and the current strain is being wiped out by disease, though more slowly due to human intervention, as we speak.
It’s like this because it allows you to live enough to procreate. Who needs all that if it just needs to keep you alive for 30 odd years.
DNA is legacy code that does the job and no one dares touch it
I kind of suspect life wouldn’t exist today if it didn’t make the occasional error. Although I believe DNA does have rudimentary correction mechanisms: each strand is paired up with its negative and duplicated chromasomes will have 2 chromatids. In those cases there are kind of 4 copies. Sometimes errors are corrected by using the other chomatid as a template. However, not all that useful before the chromosome is duplicated.
At some point the data has to be copied for reproduction, so DNA must be writable at least for new copies, but that’s part of what makes the copying process so vulnerable. However, I do agree that it’s too easy to trigger a write, and while histones reduce writability, they also reduce readability.
Evolution doesn’t iterate for complete optimization, only to the minimum of what an organism needs in order to survive and procreate.
It sort of does, it’s just not what people think complete optimization looks like. It turns out that in all possible realities the most optimal path is free will, autonomy, agency, secrecy, and other things that people like to think of as flaws. The real purpose though is long term metastability. Revolutionaries increase adaptability and metastability. Individualism increases metastability and adaptability. A society which is completely united into one power structure with one mind dominating it will always trend towards apathy and death and instability.
The reason animals age and die and become weaker as they age is to give the young a chance to have some of the limited resources and to destroy power. This is a feature not a bug. People just don’t see it that way because they have a very self centered perspective on things and don’t see things in the totality of all things. Nature is old, probably existed before even the earth did. Nature has found mostly the optimal path for all things. People just don’t want to accept it.
Isn’t junk DNA an outdated concept?
It’s not clear apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junk_DNA.
Although OP seems to confuse non-coding DNA (the ~98%) and junk DNA. Some non-coding DNA has clearly identified roles, so it should be well below 98% of junk, and there’s a lot left to explore.My brother in Christ, the joke is life wouldn’t work without this “junk” DNA. And if Arch users were to get rid of this “bloat”, they would literally dissolve.
My cousin in Darwin, OP also means original post, I got the joke. The comment was about the science behind, so that’s what I replied about.
It’s more controversial at least now. The debate now focuses on whether “biochemical activity” is equivalent to a “useful function”.
Man science is “hard”
Its not 98%. But The DNA stays there because
- Little reason to get rid of it.
- Evolution is lazy. Its easier to just re-enable something already there. Its probably happened millions of times in our own evolution to the extent it became the most common genotype in the population
Please enjoy this copy pasta from another comment I made:
My brother in Christ, the joke is life wouldn’t work without this “junk” DNA. And if Arch users were to get rid of this “bloat”, they would literally dissolve.
I don’t understand anything but i laugh
spunchbob funny
The joke is too obscure for you.
😂😂😂
debs all the way down
I don’t even use Arch btw but feel like OpenBSD fanboys would relate more to this
Maybe it’s because I’m not an Arch user anymore, but I wouldn’t dream of cutting out “junk” DNA. It’s incredibly important.
