> The structures were able to stick to soft cells for 16 hours even as the cells moved. I appreciate the imagery of a tatoo metaphor, but I feel like permananc

> The structures were able to stick to soft cells for 16 hours even as the cells moved. I appreciate the imagery of a tatoo metaphor, but I feel like permanance is a major component, and this is not quite that (yet?). The article also talks about applications for electronics, which makes this seem closer to a "nanochipping" experiment than a tatoo. Even if it were permanent, how useful would it be without some sort of nanobot swarm constantly tagging cells? Don't cells divide relatively frequently?