"Machine Learning" is a misnomer. Computers don't actually "learn", it records data. It is a written program that instructs it on how to process that data. These algorithms (programming) are linear. In other words, you require having at least two known variables in order to solve for the unknown. The problem always amounts to the information inputted is what is outputted. An erroneous input equals an erroneous output. The lack of known variables will also lead to an erroneous result. For example, if only the variables of four legs, long nose, large ears, and thick skin is inputted, the algorithm for producing the solution doesn't necessarily mean the answer is "elephant". We know there isn't enough known variables to make this determination. Computer algorithms have the same inherent problem as well. In addition, even the 'known' variables may be erroneous themselves. >>"A biologist by training, Roten switched fields after realising the same principles used to identify genetic codes could help spot the singular characteristics of a person’s writing style." So, if biologists openly admit that science understands less than one percent of how the human immune system works, then why are we injecting toxic adjuvants in the human body, when so little is understood about it? Would you jump off a building with a less than 1 percent chance of surviving? It's absolutely mind boggling. In addition, the principles for identifying genetic codes is based on the same criteria. It is based on hypothesis and educated guesses. Don't buy into this person's snake oil product.