Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Thursday September 22 2016, @11:31AM   Printer-friendly
from the giving-BSOD-a-whole-new-meaning dept.

Microsoft has vowed to "solve the problem of cancer" within a decade by using ground-breaking computer science to crack the code of diseased cells so they can be reprogrammed back to a healthy state.

[...] The researchers are even working on a computer made from DNA which could live inside cells and look for faults in bodily networks, like cancer. If it spotted cancerous chances it would reboot the system and clear out the diseased cells.

Chris Bishop, laboratory director at Microsoft Research, said: "I think it's a very natural thing for Microsoft to be looking at because we have tremendous expertise in computer science and what is going on in cancer is a computational problem.

[Continues...]

Dr. Lowe, from In the Pipeline, is not convinced that Microsoft is being realistic with their "molecular computer" that will cure cancer:

We're not even near understanding what's going on in normal cells or cancerous ones, so giving people the impression that you've already simulated everything important and you're busy "debugging" it is not only arrogant, it's close to irresponsible.

[...] If you remove the hubris from the Microsoft announcement, though, which takes sandblasters and water cannons, you get to something that could be interesting. It's another machine learning approach to biology, from what I can make out, and I'm not opposed in principle to that sort of thing at all. It has to be approached with caution, though, because any application of machine learning to the biology literature has to take into account that a good percentage of that literature is crap, and that negative results (which have great value for these systems) are grievously underrepresented in it as well.

[...] So if Microsoft wants to apply machine learning to cancer biology, I'm all for it. But they should just go and try it and report back when something interesting comes out of it, rather than beginning by making a big noise in the newspapers. You want to cure cancer? Go do it; don't sit around giving interviews about how you're going to cure cancer real soon now.

Note: Bold added by submitter.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/09/20/microsoft-will-solve-cancer-within-10-years-by-reprogramming-dis/
http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2016/09/21/better-faster-more-comprehensive-manure-distribution


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Thursday September 22 2016, @07:12PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday September 22 2016, @07:12PM (#405234)

    Sure, there are more instances of Linux running, but which OS is "providing more value" (i.e. getting paid more) for being there?

    Microsoft is a for-profit corporation, they can't compete with free, they can just hope to hang on to some income streams, which they are doing.

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday September 22 2016, @08:22PM

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 22 2016, @08:22PM (#405256) Journal

    Getting Paid More and Providing More Value are two different things. In fact the opposite. Value Provided is to the end user. Getting Paid is to the vendor of the software.

    An even better metric is value provided per dollar paid. Open Source comes out way ahead.

    I never would have minded if Microsoft were just minding its business and hanging on to income streams by improving its product. I mind very much when it tries to destroy competitors -- especially open source. Microsoft has a track record here that will take a long time to forget, or at least a lot more convincing than I've seen.

    --
    The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 23 2016, @12:33PM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday September 23 2016, @12:33PM (#405502)

      even better metric is value provided per dollar paid. Open Source comes out way ahead.

      I, and the open market - obviously, agree.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]