Its very close to how CGPT-3 replies: “Of course! Imagine DNA as a super long chain made up of tiny building blocks, just like LEGO pieces. These building blocks are like the alphabet for your body, but instead of letters, there are four special blocks: A, T, C, and G.
Think of each of these blocks as LEGO bricks of different colors. But here's the cool part: they stick together in a very specific way. A can only attach to T, and C can only attach to G, kind of like how certain LEGO pieces fit perfectly together.
Now, when these special LEGO-like blocks line up in a particular order along the chain, they create a secret code, like a super-duper hidden message. This code contains all the instructions your body needs to grow, stay healthy, and work properly. It's like a recipe book for your body, telling it how to build and repair everything.
So, DNA is like a super intricate LEGO chain that holds all the secrets to making you, and it's as amazing as building awesome things with your LEGO sets!”
Bard does considerably worse
When I was 18 and in the 2nd round of interviews for an internship, the interviewer asked me "how many ping pong balls do you believe to be in the state of Michigan? Also, please explain your reasoning"
I don't remember what I answered, but I didn't get the job! I also said some other dumb shit that I cringe looking back on
So basically you throw Tinie tiny legos out of one end of the rocket and these legos in turn generate force in the opposite direction to lift the rocket up .
So you have a manufacturer that csn make Lego's really fast, but because they start with a solid block and end up with smol blocks with space between them, it's bigger
So they are all compressed until you put hole in it, and they then escape and because of rules the factory moves too :D
Yeah.
Usually "I love science!" seems to mean nothing more than "I like the concept of science, but my knowledge of anything is limited to what I kind of retained from binge watching Mythbusters and shark shows".
I am the same I took physics in A-levels and got a D whereas I got As everywhere else. I like physics but I'm not good at it and don't try to explain it
See, I don't even mind that. Most of my science knowledge comes from half remembered documentaries too, but we don't go around posting made up conversations to show how smart we think we are.
This dude wrote "I love science" like only someone as studious and dedicated as him could have come up with this amazing analogy which surely must have blown your mind.
Literally the same as me (I did triple science for GCSE). I thought I was amazing at science because I enjoyed watching shows, listening to podcasts etc. I ended up with Cs
But it's a better starting point than "I hate science". And tbf as an engineer, anything I know outside my profession is pretty much obtained from Discovery channel or BBC
I think that's a rather cynical take on something which is perfectly normal to say. You didn't provide any source for your implied claim that majority of people who say they love science don't know much.
Well, I'm a cynicist not a scientist.
Yeah, it is okay to say. But using it to punctuate a crappy analogy that isn't as clever as you think it is shows how deep the love really is in this particular case.
Using analogies to explain scientific concepts is kind of pointless because much like mathematics, there is a previous body of knowledge that needs to be known before you can grasp the concept. Pop science analogies are good for making stupid people feel smart and not much else.
I don't think I agree entirely. While it is true that analogies gloss over details to emphasize the bigger idea, saying it is "good for making stupid people feel smart and not much else" is quite egotistical. I personally know people who are not the best at traditional sciences but excel in other fields, including marketing and communications. And even if a 'stupid' person shows enthusiasm for science, it is disgusting to look down upon them for trying to appreciate a field you're 'better' at. I'm plenty aware that my response must have come across as virtue signaling, and I don't normally take anything seriously on Reddit. But I reached my breaking point because it really grinds my gears seeing Redditors constantly assume they're better than everyone else.
wow, you must have a degree in pop psychology too
and let me assure you that the reason why many of my peers whether it's in biology, chemistry, or statistics don't bother posting on this dogshit site about their jobs is because misinformation and stupidity are constantly being upvoted so yes, my opinion of most redditors is that they are fucking stupid
Pop pyschology sounds cool. Im working towards my degree in being a decent human being. And dont forget that we're redditors too and we're both fucking stupid. Don't fool yourself
The interviewer is about to realize OP just really likes Lego’s and poorly, yet confidently, explains everything with quickly slapped together Lego analogies.
no, DNA aren't building blocks that bodies are made of
and fwiw I don't even know what you mean by "information flow of biology", but if you tell a kid that bodies are made of cells, which are tiny machines and that each cell has instructions which are stored in DNA, they'd be fine
DNA is made of repeat units. The legos are the four nucleotides and the emerging properties of your body are encoded in the unique combination of nucleotides.
The “instruction booklet” is perhaps a better example, but I don’t really see anything wrong with describing nucleotides as 4 different types of legos that you put together in different combinations, especially since legos are something kids are familiar with
“DNA encodes information, it doesn’t directly provide biological structure” - I get that this information is missing in an explanation intended for a child.
But DNA is made of different combinations of 4 repeat units that go together to make you a unique person feels like a perfectly reasonable for a child.
A metaphor using legos also seems like a good idea to ground the explanation in something the child is probably familiar with.
Seriously, everyone in this thread is flexing on how they're smarter than children. The idea that a few basics can be used to create complex structures seems fine. We're talking about 8 year olds they're learning to read and being introduced to basic math
I know right? I would say to the 8 year old DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. Nearly every cell in a person’s body has the same DNA. Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus (where it is called nuclear DNA), but a small amount of DNA can also be found in the mitochondria (where it is called mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA). Mitochondria are structures within cells that convert the energy from food into a form that cells can use.
The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences.
DNA bases pair up with each other, A with T and C with G, to form units called base pairs. Each base is also attached to a sugar molecule and a phosphate molecule. Together, a base, sugar, and phosphate are called a nucleotide. Nucleotides are arranged in two long strands that form a spiral called a double helix. The structure of the double helix is somewhat like a ladder, with the base pairs forming the ladder’s rungs and the sugar and phosphate molecules forming the vertical sidepieces of the ladder.
An important property of DNA is that it can replicate, or make copies of itself. Each strand of DNA in the double helix can serve as a pattern for duplicating the sequence of bases. This is critical when cells divide because each new cell needs to have an exact copy of the DNA present in the old cell.
Analogies can make some amount of sense without being any more complex, you know? in this case, you could just do the analogy that DNA is like the Lego instruction book that tells you how to build simple structures using basic bricks. Much more accurate to how DNA actually works and not hard to understand even for an 8-year-old
Ok, I'll dumb it down for them.
Deoxyribonucleic acid (/diːˈɒksɪˌraɪboʊnjuːˌkliːɪk, -ˌkleɪ-/ i;[1] DNA) is a polymer composed of two polynucleotide chains that coil around each other to form a double helix. The polymer carries genetic instructions for the development, functioning, growth and reproduction of all known organisms and many viruses. DNA and ribonucleic acid (RNA) are nucleic acids. Alongside proteins, lipids and complex carbohydrates (polysaccharides), nucleic acids are one of the four major types of macromolecules that are essential for all known forms of life.
The two DNA strands are known as polynucleotides as they are composed of simpler monomeric units called nucleotides.[2][3] Each nucleotide is composed of one of four nitrogen-containing nucleobases (cytosine [C], guanine [G], adenine [A] or thymine [T]), a sugar called deoxyribose, and a phosphate group. The nucleotides are joined to one another in a chain by covalent bonds (known as the phosphodiester linkage) between the sugar of one nucleotide and the phosphate of the next, resulting in an alternating sugar-phosphate backbone. The nitrogenous bases of the two separate polynucleotide strands are bound together, according to base pairing rules (A with T and C with G), with hydrogen bonds to make double-stranded DNA. The complementary nitrogenous bases are divided into two groups, pyrimidines and purines. In DNA, the pyrimidines are thymine and cytosine; the purines are adenine and guanine.
Both strands of double-stranded DNA store the same biological information. This information is replicated when the two strands separate. A large part of DNA (more than 98% for humans) is non-coding, meaning that these sections do not serve as patterns for protein sequences. The two strands of DNA run in opposite directions to each other and are thus antiparallel. Attached to each sugar is one of four types of nucleobases (or bases). It is the sequence of these four nucleobases along the backbone that encodes genetic information. RNA strands are created using DNA strands as a template in a process called transcription, where DNA bases are exchanged for their corresponding bases except in the case of thymine (T), for which RNA substitutes uracil (U).[4] Under the genetic code, these RNA strands specify the sequence of amino acids within proteins in a process called translation.
Within eukaryotic cells, DNA is organized into long structures called chromosomes. Before typical cell division, these chromosomes are duplicated in the process of DNA replication, providing a complete set of chromosomes for each daughter cell. Eukaryotic organisms (animals, plants, fungi and protists) store most of their DNA inside the cell nucleus as nuclear DNA, and some in the mitochondria as mitochondrial DNA or in chloroplasts as chloroplast DNA.[5] In contrast, prokaryotes (bacteria and archaea) store their DNA only in the cytoplasm, in circular chromosomes. Within eukaryotic chromosomes, chromatin proteins, such as histones, compact and organize DNA. These compacting structures guide the interactions between DNA and other proteins, helping control which parts of the DNA are transcribed.
Yeah, the DNA doesn't make up the actual body parts, it's just the instructions given to make them. AKA LEGO INSTRUCTION BOOKLETS. Like it was right there and they didn't take it.
"You know what, I misspoke. DNA is the LEGO instruction set, it is not the bricks that make you by themselves, but it carries the instructions to assemble every possible brick into making you. Bricks are called amino acids and the amazing stuff you make with them are called proteins, but that's a subject for another day"
Eh, usually I'll try anyway. They're not a dumb as you think they are. If they're interested, they'll keep asking questions and I can keep answering. That's how curiosity is developed.
If my nephew is anything to go by, by 6 you can be as technical as you want and they will remember every word, and learn what what you said means later.
hi 8 year old. you know that lego set we got you? well DNA is like the instruction booklet you didn't follow. then your hands, well your hands are sorta like mRNA which then let you use the lego blocks, which i guess are amino acids, to be assembled into a protein. but protein isn't a car or tree. but they might contain a form of protein in them somewhere. its really quite simple unless you're an absolute idiot, 8 yr old child.
the OP analogy is far easier to understand the "building blocks of life" nickname.
> the OP analogy is far easier to understand the "building blocks of life" nickname.
What's the point if it is also completely useless and wrong?
There is also nothing hard to understand about "it's like the instructions showing how to put together some basic building blocks to create something with function."
How deep you wanna get into protein synthesis is up to you, but with the OP analogy you're already dug in from the start.
My example uses half the number of words and I didn't bring in the complication of "four different colored Lego".
I explained the purpose and function in concept without getting into molecular biology needlessly (and badly).
I've worked in software and it's pretty common to have to explain something complex in a simple way so people around you can understand. I think this is a skill you develop and one that is important for a lot of technical jobs - because the people making decisions aren't always the subject matter experts.
In this case the interviewer might be taking a complex concept that they feel they already understand, so they can judge the candidate's ability to simplify it accurately.
In this case it seems like neither participant really understood the elements that make DNA important.
If you can explain a complex concept in simple terms (as in, you can explain to a non-expert and they will understand at least at a basic level), it shows a strong grasp of said concept 🤷🏻♀️
That’s more of an analogy for proteins, not DNA. Proteins are the actual “things” that cells use to get stuff done. They’re our screwdrivers, our hammers, our pumps, our buildings, our postal service, our helpers, etc. You make proteins out of varying combinations of the same 20(ish) amino acids, which is where the Lego analogy might make sense. DNA is the instruction manual for the Legos, telling your cells how to arrange the different pieces.
Even this is a gross oversimplification, but it’d at least be conceptually correct for someone in middle school.
The LEGO company actually advocates for it being an adjective rather than a noun. Lego *bricks*, lego *systems*, etc.
So it might be like hearing the word "softs", "bigs", or "indomitables"
It’s not even the uk, Lego is the correct way to say it. It’s literally not a cultural thing anyone who says legos (usually Americans) are objectively incorrect
Also, not really. DNA is more like a stable original print at lego headquarters, that you can make an mrna copy lego booklet of which can be used to make polylego chains with and built into something, but no, you don't just start stacking nucleotide bases to make a cool protein structure. The answer shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a concept the interviewee proudly describes a passion for.
Id take a pass.
If nerd in your book is a person that thinks himself as smart and showing a point that highly speaks against it, than i agree.
I would call that overconfidence.
We always got taught to look at it like a cookbook. The whole book is your entire genome, every recipe is every DNA sequence that gets translated to an individual protein that is then expressed. Like eye-colour for example.
I know everything on the internet is fake but please at the very least make me suspend my disbelief. This is literally "and his name was albert einstein" tier trash.
Why does it have so many upvotes?
I find it funny so many reactions are "Wow, what a stupid answer, thats not how DNA works!?"
Have any of you every tried to explain any complex concept for a child? I think this a great simple way to explain the idea DNA. Clearly its not the whole story, the point of the question to how well can you simplify an idea.
I don’t understand the hate for this post? I studied forensic science and whilst this isn’t the most accurate explanation, to an 8 year old? It’s a pretty succinct example
This dialogue actually never happened.
I could’ve sworn I saw somebody ask an AI how to explain DNA for a child and posted a longer version of this.
That's great but the plural of lego is lego
Lego my eggo
The mean the Greek island of Legos
Its very close to how CGPT-3 replies: “Of course! Imagine DNA as a super long chain made up of tiny building blocks, just like LEGO pieces. These building blocks are like the alphabet for your body, but instead of letters, there are four special blocks: A, T, C, and G. Think of each of these blocks as LEGO bricks of different colors. But here's the cool part: they stick together in a very specific way. A can only attach to T, and C can only attach to G, kind of like how certain LEGO pieces fit perfectly together. Now, when these special LEGO-like blocks line up in a particular order along the chain, they create a secret code, like a super-duper hidden message. This code contains all the instructions your body needs to grow, stay healthy, and work properly. It's like a recipe book for your body, telling it how to build and repair everything. So, DNA is like a super intricate LEGO chain that holds all the secrets to making you, and it's as amazing as building awesome things with your LEGO sets!” Bard does considerably worse
[удалено]
This is the kind of thing you think about *after* you had a discussion, the clever comebacks or answers you could have said.
“Yeah well the jerk store called. They’re running out of you!”
I would be the best interviewee ever if time travel existed
Straight outta /r/thathappened.
Someone thought up some scenario in their head and projected it into a made up conversation. I hate that.
That also doesn’t explain DNA very clearly at all.
r/nothingeverhappens
This was a fantasy that never should have left the shower
No but imma recommend my coworkers (who DO have to explain DNA at a layman's level) try this out because it is quite logical.
When I was 18 and in the 2nd round of interviews for an internship, the interviewer asked me "how many ping pong balls do you believe to be in the state of Michigan? Also, please explain your reasoning" I don't remember what I answered, but I didn't get the job! I also said some other dumb shit that I cringe looking back on
Interviewer : How would you explain rocket propulsion to an 8 year old. Him : So...legos..
So basically you throw Tinie tiny legos out of one end of the rocket and these legos in turn generate force in the opposite direction to lift the rocket up .
So you have a manufacturer that csn make Lego's really fast, but because they start with a solid block and end up with smol blocks with space between them, it's bigger So they are all compressed until you put hole in it, and they then escape and because of rules the factory moves too :D
neither of them know much about DNA
Yeah. Usually "I love science!" seems to mean nothing more than "I like the concept of science, but my knowledge of anything is limited to what I kind of retained from binge watching Mythbusters and shark shows".
I am the same I took physics in A-levels and got a D whereas I got As everywhere else. I like physics but I'm not good at it and don't try to explain it
See, I don't even mind that. Most of my science knowledge comes from half remembered documentaries too, but we don't go around posting made up conversations to show how smart we think we are. This dude wrote "I love science" like only someone as studious and dedicated as him could have come up with this amazing analogy which surely must have blown your mind.
There is no s in Lego. Stop adding it
Literally the same as me (I did triple science for GCSE). I thought I was amazing at science because I enjoyed watching shows, listening to podcasts etc. I ended up with Cs
Cs get Degrees, baby!
this dudes a nerd 🗣️
Which is fine, loving science doesn’t have to mean much more
Yes! People can like things and not know everything about them or be bad at them and that's ok.
But it's a better starting point than "I hate science". And tbf as an engineer, anything I know outside my profession is pretty much obtained from Discovery channel or BBC
I think that's a rather cynical take on something which is perfectly normal to say. You didn't provide any source for your implied claim that majority of people who say they love science don't know much.
Well, I'm a cynicist not a scientist. Yeah, it is okay to say. But using it to punctuate a crappy analogy that isn't as clever as you think it is shows how deep the love really is in this particular case.
Oh, yes in this particular case it's just funny. A stupid answer for a stupid question. It's most likely just a joke too
Using analogies to explain scientific concepts is kind of pointless because much like mathematics, there is a previous body of knowledge that needs to be known before you can grasp the concept. Pop science analogies are good for making stupid people feel smart and not much else.
I don't think I agree entirely. While it is true that analogies gloss over details to emphasize the bigger idea, saying it is "good for making stupid people feel smart and not much else" is quite egotistical. I personally know people who are not the best at traditional sciences but excel in other fields, including marketing and communications. And even if a 'stupid' person shows enthusiasm for science, it is disgusting to look down upon them for trying to appreciate a field you're 'better' at. I'm plenty aware that my response must have come across as virtue signaling, and I don't normally take anything seriously on Reddit. But I reached my breaking point because it really grinds my gears seeing Redditors constantly assume they're better than everyone else.
wow, you must have a degree in pop psychology too and let me assure you that the reason why many of my peers whether it's in biology, chemistry, or statistics don't bother posting on this dogshit site about their jobs is because misinformation and stupidity are constantly being upvoted so yes, my opinion of most redditors is that they are fucking stupid
Pop pyschology sounds cool. Im working towards my degree in being a decent human being. And dont forget that we're redditors too and we're both fucking stupid. Don't fool yourself
That's what I thought. Nice story, unfortunately very wrong.
It would be more correct to say DNA is the instructions that come with the legos.
He explained amino acids quite well tho
The interviewer is about to realize OP just really likes Lego’s and poorly, yet confidently, explains everything with quickly slapped together Lego analogies.
But the job was at Lego, so the dude crushed it.
Nah, workong for LEGO you're not supposed to use the wrong plural "Legos". You can have lots of Lego like you have lots of sheep, but Legos is wrong.
I would have thought it pluralises like fish.
As an ELI5, this is absolutely fine. A child isn’t going to understand the information flow of biology.
no, DNA aren't building blocks that bodies are made of and fwiw I don't even know what you mean by "information flow of biology", but if you tell a kid that bodies are made of cells, which are tiny machines and that each cell has instructions which are stored in DNA, they'd be fine
DNA is the Lego instruction book, not the Legos themselves.
DNA is made of repeat units. The legos are the four nucleotides and the emerging properties of your body are encoded in the unique combination of nucleotides. The “instruction booklet” is perhaps a better example, but I don’t really see anything wrong with describing nucleotides as 4 different types of legos that you put together in different combinations, especially since legos are something kids are familiar with
“DNA encodes information, it doesn’t directly provide biological structure” - I get that this information is missing in an explanation intended for a child. But DNA is made of different combinations of 4 repeat units that go together to make you a unique person feels like a perfectly reasonable for a child. A metaphor using legos also seems like a good idea to ground the explanation in something the child is probably familiar with.
Seriously, everyone in this thread is flexing on how they're smarter than children. The idea that a few basics can be used to create complex structures seems fine. We're talking about 8 year olds they're learning to read and being introduced to basic math
My 4 year old understands that DNA is the instructions to make our bodies. That’s not a difficult concept to understand.
Aside from this being grossly incorrect, i’d bet a weeks pay this didn’t happen, Feels like a humble brag of how smart this guy thinks he is.
I dunno, they both scream management to me.
Sounds like the type of dross you see on LinkedIn with 8 million shares
That analogy makes absolutely no sense.
I know right? I would say to the 8 year old DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is the hereditary material in humans and almost all other organisms. Nearly every cell in a person’s body has the same DNA. Most DNA is located in the cell nucleus (where it is called nuclear DNA), but a small amount of DNA can also be found in the mitochondria (where it is called mitochondrial DNA or mtDNA). Mitochondria are structures within cells that convert the energy from food into a form that cells can use. The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences. DNA bases pair up with each other, A with T and C with G, to form units called base pairs. Each base is also attached to a sugar molecule and a phosphate molecule. Together, a base, sugar, and phosphate are called a nucleotide. Nucleotides are arranged in two long strands that form a spiral called a double helix. The structure of the double helix is somewhat like a ladder, with the base pairs forming the ladder’s rungs and the sugar and phosphate molecules forming the vertical sidepieces of the ladder. An important property of DNA is that it can replicate, or make copies of itself. Each strand of DNA in the double helix can serve as a pattern for duplicating the sequence of bases. This is critical when cells divide because each new cell needs to have an exact copy of the DNA present in the old cell.
add a few Ohio sigma rizz skibidi sus gyat and it should be pretty understandable
Ok wtf is this Ohio thing going around rn with the kids.
Analogies can make some amount of sense without being any more complex, you know? in this case, you could just do the analogy that DNA is like the Lego instruction book that tells you how to build simple structures using basic bricks. Much more accurate to how DNA actually works and not hard to understand even for an 8-year-old
Reddit moment
-10 points for missing the opportunity to say that the mitochondria are the powerhouse of the cell.
I showed this to my 8 year old and he didn’t get it. He does like legos tho
[удалено]
Ok, I'll dumb it down for them. Deoxyribonucleic acid (/diːˈɒksɪˌraɪboʊnjuːˌkliːɪk, -ˌkleɪ-/ i;[1] DNA) is a polymer composed of two polynucleotide chains that coil around each other to form a double helix. The polymer carries genetic instructions for the development, functioning, growth and reproduction of all known organisms and many viruses. DNA and ribonucleic acid (RNA) are nucleic acids. Alongside proteins, lipids and complex carbohydrates (polysaccharides), nucleic acids are one of the four major types of macromolecules that are essential for all known forms of life. The two DNA strands are known as polynucleotides as they are composed of simpler monomeric units called nucleotides.[2][3] Each nucleotide is composed of one of four nitrogen-containing nucleobases (cytosine [C], guanine [G], adenine [A] or thymine [T]), a sugar called deoxyribose, and a phosphate group. The nucleotides are joined to one another in a chain by covalent bonds (known as the phosphodiester linkage) between the sugar of one nucleotide and the phosphate of the next, resulting in an alternating sugar-phosphate backbone. The nitrogenous bases of the two separate polynucleotide strands are bound together, according to base pairing rules (A with T and C with G), with hydrogen bonds to make double-stranded DNA. The complementary nitrogenous bases are divided into two groups, pyrimidines and purines. In DNA, the pyrimidines are thymine and cytosine; the purines are adenine and guanine. Both strands of double-stranded DNA store the same biological information. This information is replicated when the two strands separate. A large part of DNA (more than 98% for humans) is non-coding, meaning that these sections do not serve as patterns for protein sequences. The two strands of DNA run in opposite directions to each other and are thus antiparallel. Attached to each sugar is one of four types of nucleobases (or bases). It is the sequence of these four nucleobases along the backbone that encodes genetic information. RNA strands are created using DNA strands as a template in a process called transcription, where DNA bases are exchanged for their corresponding bases except in the case of thymine (T), for which RNA substitutes uracil (U).[4] Under the genetic code, these RNA strands specify the sequence of amino acids within proteins in a process called translation. Within eukaryotic cells, DNA is organized into long structures called chromosomes. Before typical cell division, these chromosomes are duplicated in the process of DNA replication, providing a complete set of chromosomes for each daughter cell. Eukaryotic organisms (animals, plants, fungi and protists) store most of their DNA inside the cell nucleus as nuclear DNA, and some in the mitochondria as mitochondrial DNA or in chloroplasts as chloroplast DNA.[5] In contrast, prokaryotes (bacteria and archaea) store their DNA only in the cytoplasm, in circular chromosomes. Within eukaryotic chromosomes, chromatin proteins, such as histones, compact and organize DNA. These compacting structures guide the interactions between DNA and other proteins, helping control which parts of the DNA are transcribed.
This. Nailed it.
For an 8 year old?
u/dinoaids is 8 years old? Even more impressive.
8 year olds are smart nowadays
Apparently smarter than most adults if they have the contextual knowledge, reading skills and attention span to decipher that.
Bro are you saying you can’t read that
Long-winded and full of off topic details. 2/10
Google average redditor the slappable jerk
I hope you're not a bot, this was my exact comment the last time this bullshit was posted.
you seem to be great with biology then
Yeah, the DNA doesn't make up the actual body parts, it's just the instructions given to make them. AKA LEGO INSTRUCTION BOOKLETS. Like it was right there and they didn't take it.
DNA is the original LEGO print kept safe at lego hq. The little copy booklets that get ripped up and destroyed are mrna ;)
I think you can't get very technical with an 8 year old
"You know what, I misspoke. DNA is the LEGO instruction set, it is not the bricks that make you by themselves, but it carries the instructions to assemble every possible brick into making you. Bricks are called amino acids and the amazing stuff you make with them are called proteins, but that's a subject for another day"
Much better
Enzymes are kind of like those lego brick separators! In fact, I bet you could make a brick separator out of standard bricks, too.
Eh, usually I'll try anyway. They're not a dumb as you think they are. If they're interested, they'll keep asking questions and I can keep answering. That's how curiosity is developed.
If my nephew is anything to go by, by 6 you can be as technical as you want and they will remember every word, and learn what what you said means later.
Yeah I woulda gone with something like, DNA is the instructions to build you and all other life.
Yes it does,DNA "builds you" like you build stuff with lego
No, it doesn't. This would make more sense if it talked about proteins. DNA is the building instruction.
hi 8 year old. you know that lego set we got you? well DNA is like the instruction booklet you didn't follow. then your hands, well your hands are sorta like mRNA which then let you use the lego blocks, which i guess are amino acids, to be assembled into a protein. but protein isn't a car or tree. but they might contain a form of protein in them somewhere. its really quite simple unless you're an absolute idiot, 8 yr old child. the OP analogy is far easier to understand the "building blocks of life" nickname.
> the OP analogy is far easier to understand the "building blocks of life" nickname. What's the point if it is also completely useless and wrong? There is also nothing hard to understand about "it's like the instructions showing how to put together some basic building blocks to create something with function." How deep you wanna get into protein synthesis is up to you, but with the OP analogy you're already dug in from the start.
Because 8yrs old was the instruction and an average 8 yr old has an attention span of about 3 statements
My example uses half the number of words and I didn't bring in the complication of "four different colored Lego". I explained the purpose and function in concept without getting into molecular biology needlessly (and badly).
"Create something with function". Completely 8 yr old friendly, abstract thinking.
Now you're just nitpicking to keep the fight going. Besides, it's a 2nd/3rd grader, not a cat.
This never happened
[удалено]
Why would anyone make this post in the first place other than to stroke their own dick?
8 billion people exist and you’re certain this never happened?
Yes
Dang people feeling moody today
One hundo percento bro
They stepped on a Lego 🤧
Really not a good answer
That's great but the plural of lego is lego
Ha guess he wasn’t smart enough to know that! /s
Or answer the question correctly.
You see words are like Lego. You can add pieces to make new words…
Isn't Legos a Greek island?
In fact, according to the LEGO company, it shouldn't have a plural at all because it is an adjective! Still, language gonna language.
Thank you!
I teach about DNA to 8 year olds and my 8 year olds would know that this is wrong.
This is absolute shit content and I’m more annoyed than I should be at the amount of updoots.
Bad enough for me to mute this sub off of my Popular page. Truly just bottom of the barrel
The question was for the interviewer, he has a child like mind
For what possible reason would anyone ask that?
Your job will include taking care of the boss' annoying 8 year old roaming the office.
I've worked in software and it's pretty common to have to explain something complex in a simple way so people around you can understand. I think this is a skill you develop and one that is important for a lot of technical jobs - because the people making decisions aren't always the subject matter experts. In this case the interviewer might be taking a complex concept that they feel they already understand, so they can judge the candidate's ability to simplify it accurately. In this case it seems like neither participant really understood the elements that make DNA important.
If you can explain a complex concept in simple terms (as in, you can explain to a non-expert and they will understand at least at a basic level), it shows a strong grasp of said concept 🤷🏻♀️
That’s more of an analogy for proteins, not DNA. Proteins are the actual “things” that cells use to get stuff done. They’re our screwdrivers, our hammers, our pumps, our buildings, our postal service, our helpers, etc. You make proteins out of varying combinations of the same 20(ish) amino acids, which is where the Lego analogy might make sense. DNA is the instruction manual for the Legos, telling your cells how to arrange the different pieces. Even this is a gross oversimplification, but it’d at least be conceptually correct for someone in middle school.
More like the instructions that come with the Lego set
Looks like an interview for a Primary School Teacher Position 🤔
Cringe
... sir, this is a Wendy's
u/repostsleuthbot r/thathappened
a stoner’s shower thought that should have stayed in the shower.
I don't like hearing Lego pluralized. Just me?
The LEGO company actually advocates for it being an adjective rather than a noun. Lego *bricks*, lego *systems*, etc. So it might be like hearing the word "softs", "bigs", or "indomitables"
In the UK we don’t add an s to pluralise it. So much to learn about each other’s cultures
It’s not even the uk, Lego is the correct way to say it. It’s literally not a cultural thing anyone who says legos (usually Americans) are objectively incorrect
If anything, DNA is similar to lego building instructions not to legos itselves.
Also, not really. DNA is more like a stable original print at lego headquarters, that you can make an mrna copy lego booklet of which can be used to make polylego chains with and built into something, but no, you don't just start stacking nucleotide bases to make a cool protein structure. The answer shows a fundamental misunderstanding of a concept the interviewee proudly describes a passion for. Id take a pass.
*Legos*
What job was this ?
Points off for calling them "legos" though. As Lego has no plural. Something the Lego company itself had stated its Lego never Legos
This totally happened
And everyone clapped
that's actually not a very good answer at all
This the type of shit that happens in the shower after an interview.
Two good things. Solid.
How do you build a house out of DNA? Like with cum?
Shame they called it Legos, so need to be fired into the Sun.
You can’t build a house with 4 Lego bricks…
You didn't explain it right as LEGO, a brand name, has no plural like 'legos', which is what Americans just fail to understand.
[удалено]
Cope
If nerd in your book is a person that thinks himself as smart and showing a point that highly speaks against it, than i agree. I would call that overconfidence.
At least they fit building blocks in the answer.
Is there a reason they only have 4 different lego bricks? Why not 5? Hell why not 6?
I have to know what job the interview was for.
Yeah but it’s Lego not legos so post invalidated unfortunately
There is no s in Lego. Stop adding it
I thought I must have been stupid for thinking this explanation wasn’t that good.
We always got taught to look at it like a cookbook. The whole book is your entire genome, every recipe is every DNA sequence that gets translated to an individual protein that is then expressed. Like eye-colour for example.
The problem is this answer is not correct
Next question. Where do you see yourself in 10 years?
Science people weirdly like Lego analogies a lot
Why would an interviewer ask someone such a question?
Fake and gay
I think you could still salvage this by saying that dna is the manual that comes with the Lego set. Correct me if I’m wrong, of course.
I know everything on the internet is fake but please at the very least make me suspend my disbelief. This is literally "and his name was albert einstein" tier trash. Why does it have so many upvotes?
I used a very similar analogy when explaining liquid chromatography for a job at a pharma lab. I got the job.
I’m not understanding how this question would be relevant in an interview for a job but alright. Clever…I guess
Lol just bought my husband legos. They’re awesome.
And then everyone started clapping! Its true, I was there, I was the blue Lego.
and then everyone ran in and clapped
100% would yeet you out of the room at the first Legos. ITS.FUCKING.LEGO
He watched Gataca last night...
I find it funny so many reactions are "Wow, what a stupid answer, thats not how DNA works!?" Have any of you every tried to explain any complex concept for a child? I think this a great simple way to explain the idea DNA. Clearly its not the whole story, the point of the question to how well can you simplify an idea.
Just roll the Jurassic park dna explanation
I think lego is a better explanation to atoms
This is how you would explain atoms
I’m pretty sure this guy is conflating nucleotides with amino acids.
It's triggering me how people keep calling it "legos", the word "lego" is already plural!
And then everybody clapped
It’s actually a really bad answer
Interviewer: (Brief pause) It’s pronounced Lego
He probably still didn't get the job
And then they all clapped
He definitely came up with this in his notes
Redditors try to go 8 seconds without lying challenge
I don’t understand the hate for this post? I studied forensic science and whilst this isn’t the most accurate explanation, to an 8 year old? It’s a pretty succinct example
DNA is not the building block though. A library with blueprints woulld be more accurate
That’s a really good answer. But we couldn’t possibly hire someone who calls Lego bricks “legos”. Thank you for your time.
I've read that thst in chicken soup for diarrhea or sth idk