CRISPR is the tool that lets us precisely edit genes in DNA, which contain the instructions for making proteins. AlphaFold is the AI tool that helped us understand what those edits actually do. It’s the 3D shape of the protein that determines its function - without understanding protein folding, gene editing would be like changing code in a language you don’t fully understand and just hoping it works.
so while not the same, it’s a fairly similar field, it is a safe to assume that similar tools can be used. not yet though, the tool is not ready.
why is there a study for this? other than hype - for “ai”, which this arguably isn’t
The problem is the term AI has become so broadly used that it’s become meaningless. There is a popular quote about how the quota doesn’t want AI to replace artistic jobs, as if it will. As if generative AI and large language models and projects like this are the same.
When the bubble bursts, (please let it be soon) we’re still going to have all of the science AIs because those are actually useful. What we don’t need is AI girlfriends.
Just read the actual quote it doesn’t say what he says it says and you’ll notice that no point have I ever edited it.
They misquoted me because they didn’t read the quote properly and then doubled down on it. Meanwhile you are now arguing about it despite the fact that it is demonstrably evident that you are wrong
Lol… people downvoting stanford university
Lemmy is a wild place… left wing maga, i guess
it’s useless hype, “ai could do x one day” is speculation at best
DeepMind’s AlphaFold solved the decades-old protein folding problem, and its results are already being used in drug and vaccine development.
is this what the article talks about?
CRISPR is the tool that lets us precisely edit genes in DNA, which contain the instructions for making proteins. AlphaFold is the AI tool that helped us understand what those edits actually do. It’s the 3D shape of the protein that determines its function - without understanding protein folding, gene editing would be like changing code in a language you don’t fully understand and just hoping it works.
so while not the same, it’s a fairly similar field, it is a safe to assume that similar tools can be used. not yet though, the tool is not ready.
why is there a study for this? other than hype - for “ai”, which this arguably isn’t
AI can do, and has done X already. That’s my point.
It says AI in the title. That’s all information they need. Most people on social media don’t think - they react.
No I doesn’t.
The problem is the term AI has become so broadly used that it’s become meaningless. There is a popular quote about how the quota doesn’t want AI to replace artistic jobs, as if it will. As if generative AI and large language models and projects like this are the same.
When the bubble bursts, (please let it be soon) we’re still going to have all of the science AIs because those are actually useful. What we don’t need is AI girlfriends.
Yes it does.
Yes I know the title has the word AI powered in it. I never claimed otherwise.
I make three claims and your response only fits one of them.
No it doesn’t.
No it doesn’t.
No it doesn’t.
Removed by mod
Yes you did
If you’re going to quote some text quote the actual text because you’ll notice that you’re changing it.
I didn’t say “no it doesn’t” I said “no I doesn’t” which is a different sentence.
Yeees, your obvious typo is totally invalidating my previous statement…
It wasn’t a typo it’s a quote from Futurama. Fry says it when the professor says he’s dumb.
Now that is some bullshit if I’ve ever seen it. Take the loss bro.
Just read the actual quote it doesn’t say what he says it says and you’ll notice that no point have I ever edited it.
They misquoted me because they didn’t read the quote properly and then doubled down on it. Meanwhile you are now arguing about it despite the fact that it is demonstrably evident that you are wrong