Will data storage with DNA be in use by 2035?

Got a bit of interest in the 2031 market with a generally low probability estimate in the first few hours, so here's one with a longer timeframe.

DNA has a very high information density, and methods for random access have been improving.


Will this be in use by 12th February 2035? (Deliberately setting a random mid-month date to reduce end-of-year resolution spikes.)

By "in use" I mean either you can buy it for a not-completely-unaffordable price, or, more likely, there are credible reports that a company is using it for non-gimicky reasons. So I require not just that it's possible, but that it's moderately practical.

As both of these are somewhat subjective, I won't bet in this market. If anybody has an idea for making one of the above less subjective, I'd be interested to hear it. Early bettors, beware that I might add more specific criteria in line with the spirit of the question. I'll give a chance for objections if I do.

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:

12 February is Charles Darwin's birthday, a cute choice for a day to resolve a biology themed market.

@AgenticLondoner haha, nice. I wish that was intentional. Maybe I'll start doing things like that. :)

Some things that might be more objective:

  • Sales figures reported in a storage industry market report by a reputable 3rd-party source

  • Listed for sale in a product by a top-10 storage vendor, with at least one reported sale

  • Available as a consumer product from a reputable vendor, with price tag and listed as 'in stock'

  • You successfully buy one for a price < $x

Those would all need to be fleshed out a bit, but hopefully something along those lines is helpful.

@EvanDaniel thanks, I'll have a think

@EvanDaniel I've finally got around to actually thinking about this. My first problem is general ignorance. So I wouldn't know where to find a "storage industry market report", and wouldn't know how to assess the reputability of a 3rd-party source. I don't know how to find which storage vendors are top 10. (I've googled it and found some lists, but I don't know how to tell if these are what I'm looking for.)

I think my general approach is going to be "negative until proven positive". Come the close date, I'll do some research myself to see if these things are available and if I can't, I'll let bettors know that I'm drawing a blank and invite YES bettors (or anybody else) to find evidence if they're able where I'm not. I think the examples you listed sound like good types of evidence, but I'm hesitant to codify them in the description due to my aforementioned ignorance.

Out of interest, I notice you haven't bet in the market. Is that because you're not interested, or do you think the subjectivity is putting you off? Would you be more likely to bet if I adopted a version of the criteria you suggest?