DescentBB

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/he ... 5869465182

Whatever your view on the nature of life, this is a landmark event. All views welcome.

Nice let's take a bacterial species that causes lung disease in goats and cattle and make it immune to antibiotics. I'm sure nothing can go wrong here.

I agree with Heretic…Not Smart!

And how can they call it “artificial”? That’s like reverse engineering a car, building their own, and saying…look what “I” made.

Let them put together some DNA without a blueprint, place it in a created shell, let it reproduce…then I will agree, that they have something.

Sorry…not impressed. They are like children playing with fire…they can make it, but they don’t understand it.

I don't quite get it. Isn't this like extreme genetic engineering? \"Artifical life\" to me means you have a bunch of chemicals, you do stuff to them, and they start living. All these guys did was transplant their own custom DNA into an existing living creature... custom DNA that was built well enough that it didn't ruin the host organisms reproductivity.

Does the genome support Python or just its api?

snoopy wrote:"Artifical life" to me means you have a bunch of chemicals, you do stuff to them, and they start living. All these guys did was transplant their own custom DNA into an existing living creature...

I wouldn't downplay the significance of this experiment (assuming it's not fraudulent). To make working DNA out of a chemical mixture is completely amazing. But an entire cell is enormously complex. However, it's only a matter of time before scientists can build entire cells from scratch, not just the DNA. Then you'll have "true" artificial life (by your definition) - possibly within the next 30 years.

I predict humans will be exterminated by a designer life form.

Yeah, zombies could come from this!

vision wrote:But an entire cell is enormously complex. However, it's only a matter of time before scientists can build entire cells from scratch, not just the DNA. Then you'll have "true" artificial life (by your definition) - possibly within the next 30 years.

I think I have a knee-jerk reaction to disagree with that because of my beliefs. I'm finding myself asking this question: If and when they do manage "true" artificial life, will it stand in opposition to my belief system? I've always kinda assumed that the jump from inert chemicals to life was one that could only be achieved by the Divine. I'm going to have to process this for a while...

It also makes we think about robotic-based achievements vs biological-based achievements. Somehow a robot that is autonomous & can replicate itself seems like less of a threat than a cell that can do the same, when it comes to the creation of "life."

I do agree with the people saying that one of these days we're going to have a disease outbreak caused by man-made (modified) bugs getting loose.

I think to be \"artificial life\", it would have to simulate life without actually being alive.(organically or otherwise) From a symantic view point.

And while we might be able eventually to mimic that which already exists in nature, we will never be able to create life in a lab as such. Not uniquely in the sense that it's something has not been made. ... heck.. isn't that what happens when we have kids??? that's pretty cool in and of itself!

tinking with the \"gears\" never ends well. so yeah, I think I follow ya there Snoop.

\"Amen, amen, I say to you, whoever does not enter a sheepfold through the gate but climbs over elsewhere is a thief and a robber.
2
But whoever enters through the gate is the shepherd of the sheep.
3
The gatekeeper opens it for him, and the sheep hear his voice, as he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
4

I think it's going to be entirely possible. In this verse we hear Jesus saying he is the true Shepard because he came through by legal means. A woman's womb.

The antichrist is not called a beast for no reason.