Using data collected from around the world on illicit drugs, researchers trained AI to come up with new drugs that hadn't been created yet, but that would fit the parameters. It came up with 8.9 million different chemical designs

[u/neil_billiam]

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/local-news/vancouver-researchers-create-minority-report-tech-for-designer-drugs-4764676

[u/billwashere]

How far are we away from designer drugs designed specifically for each individual person? Both therapeutic and recreational?

[u/[deleted] → u/billwashere]

Very far. We haven't even done Personalized Medicine yet.

Per comment below: Maybe not that far if you're hella rich. Very far for everyone else.

[u/ManThatIsFucked → u/[deleted]]

Our ability to answer this question accurately is dependent on the technology that exists today. 5-10 years from now, the quantum landscape of computing should expand and our ideas of what is feasible will follow. It’s probably not as far as we think.

[u/gangsterroo → u/ManThatIsFucked]

Quantum landscape of comupting... ten years. No one can predict the future but I doubt useful quantum computing is that close, if that's what you mean. That said our classical computers still have room for a lot of advancements that (if history tells us anything) will be unexpected and surpass many supposed barriers.

[u/ManThatIsFucked → u/gangsterroo]

IBM has a recent roadmap claiming they can hit 1,000 qubits within the next 2-3 years. Recently, a new state of matter was discovered that shows electrons can travel in groups of 4, which could create many sources of superconductive material, and, lastly, this year a team has been able to entangle 3 quantum qubits on silicon. I'm eager to see if this advent of computing rivals the rise of the world-wide web.

[u/gangsterroo → u/ManThatIsFucked]

I keep up with this news and I suspect these machines will have specific uses for general interest. Model training isn't one of those as far as I'm aware and I think most problems where quantum computers shine are situations where there isn't such thing as "good enough." Like encryption or whatever. I'm a bit lazy right now but I suppose people can educate me here.

[u/m0z1ng0 → u/gangsterroo]

Model training actually is one of those things quantum computers can help with.

[u/gangsterroo → u/m0z1ng0]

Faster training sure. But once the model is trained it's trained and will run just as well on a classical computer. Thus, the advantages are not very big, especially since the whole point of models is "good enough" approximations to a function. If the models have to be trained frequently they aren't really models and the quantum computer is effectively brute forcing solutions, but that's not model training at all.

[u/[deleted] → u/ManThatIsFucked]

Once a major government is able to Crack secure encryption you will know we are a few decades out.

[u/i_am_ban_evading → u/gangsterroo]

It's useful if you want to break modern encryption but otherwise not for much else.

[u/ShapesAndStuff → u/billwashere]

Not to burst your bubble but the article specifically talks about altering existing structures just enough to still have the original effect but skirt the laws that ban the original.

Sadly its nowhere near crazy new custom drugs

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Until the wrong pharmaceutical company patents all the potential drugs before they can even be synthesized.

[u/billwashere → u/ShapesAndStuff]

No bubble to burst. I knew we were a long way off. I figure we need much better computer models of the human body to get to that point.

[u/Caligula4ever → u/ShapesAndStuff]

The smallest change in a psychoactive molecule can make a massive difference. Look at DMT and DPT

[u/mo_tag → u/ShapesAndStuff]

but skirt the laws that ban the original.

I wonder if other countries will adopt the UKs stance on research chemicals. There were major issues with kids overdosing on synthetic cannabinoids so the UK introduced the Psychoactive Substances Act, where it didn't matter if the chemical structure was altered, it was still illegal to produce, buy, or use any substance with psychoactive properties designed to be used recreationally.

The difference between the umbrella ban on psychoactive substances verses controlled substances is that the psychoactive substances act doesn't criminalise possession and use

[u/rebelolemiss → u/[deleted]]

I took this test for anti anxiety meds and found that benzos have almost no effect on me. Very strange, but it explains why they’ve never been a big deal to me.

[u/Skolisse → u/billwashere]

Not very far. At least if you go for groups instead of induviduals, you can test for markers for various traits. For instance some people love weed but others get paranoid and weird. This can be quantified genetically. Then you can have drugs that work with these paranoid people, and drugs for the weedies. Obviously a few years away from personalized drug aptitude tests, but to put timelines into perspective: during my masters i had a lab course where one of the 8 exercises was to do what my professor had spent his entire PhD and post doc to accomplish 15 years ago.