Slashdot Mirror

The elimination of most material scarcity through molecular manufacturing will go a long way towards reducing conflict in the world, but you're right that there will still be the psycho element to contend with.

There can be no paradise on earth as long as the nastier bits of our evolutionary psychology are still holding us back. Egomaniacal, power-hungry, sociopaths (many of whom are now CEOs and politicians) may have been genetically successful in the past, but with increasing technological power, that mindset becomes a liability for net-positive happiness in the world. It's a good thing, then, that a biological solution, and a non-biological solution, will emerge parallel to the growing threat of exponentially more powerful tech in the hands of mostly static primate brains.

human society just needs Star Trek replicators. All problems solved.

Well, it wouldn't solve all problems, but it would be the biggest and most disruptive equalizer we've ever seen.

Besides just making possible the cheap reconfiguration of a pile of molecules in your garbage into any desired object (including food & shelter & diamond), democratized molecular manufacturing "printers" would mean the end of conflict based on trade of once-scarce resources. "Resources" could now be recycled at the molecular level given (stored solar) energy.

--

I could entertain the notion that a growing "globalism vs. tribalism" trend is to blame

Hey, we're wired for tribalism in our evolutionary psych, so "globalism" is a really tough sell compared to Us vs. Them nationalism. Even after nanotechnology has eliminated the source (scarce resources) of most conflicts, there will still be that innate desire to belong to one righteous (and arbitrary) cultural tribe or another.

I predict that nanotech will ... [BE A GODSEND]

Only for a relatively limited window of time, though. Shortly after we've mastered molecular manipulation, parallel advacing tech will mean that many of us will be transcending a limited physical existence for "virtual life".

I also predict nanotech will ... [BE THE DEVILS WORK]

There is certainly a dangerous mismatch between our still-primitive human brains and our exponentially advancing tech. Our only hope is 1) being extremely lucky, and/or 2) getting some eggs out of the Earth-basket so we don't lose the whole civilization in one go, and/or 3) give friendly AI control of critical systems such as the artificial nano-immune system (aka: "active shield") infesting every nook and cranny in the future...

--

So when this new opportunity comes along-- be it nanotech, biotech, whatever is next-- what insures that Americans won't lose it to foreigners?

Molecular manufacturing will completely change the world economy so profoundly that economic equality could conceivably be added to the list of human rights (but not likely, because of our inherently selfish genes).

A global economy of abundance, without any old fashioned manufacturing or distribution, will be massively disruptive, and powerful interests will fight hard to keep the status quo -- like the RIAA does now -- but eventually matter will flow like data, and the gap between the haves and have-nots will narrow to nothing.

The inevitability of molecular manufacturing is one of the only bright spots on the dark horizon I look forward to in the next 10 - 20 years.

--

Restriction of trade is one of the more humane ways of keeping [relative wealth]

And what happens to the one-sided trade of scarce resources when "magic desktop manufacturing" nanotechnology arrives in few decades? Global economic equality is only a matter of time (and technology), and the "free trade" debate will morph into the current debate about open/closed information to benefit many vs the few.

The fate of the world is determined by our actions and decisions, and many of the most profound decisions and actions are made by the largest of actors: states. The range of possible behaviors for states is partly delineated by the relations among them, as each state must always act in a world of other states. Kingdoms, republics and empires have risen and fallen over the millennia, their fortunes determined at all points by their store of power (1), and by their ability to use it in the world in which they acted. There are many sources of power, and the relative value of those sources to a nation has fluctuated historically. At one time, a nation's army may have been her most valuable asset. At other times, her store of gold, her population, her navy, her factories and technology and even her religion may have been determining factors in her relative standing in the world. - Tom McCarthy

--

Your doomsday analysis leaves out a huge development on the horizon: molecular manufacturing. This "desktop manufacturing" will mean the end of most international trade and conflict over resources. An economy of abundance means that all people can afford to be Basically Good, and share the commonwealth, instead of having to be greeding and fuck the next guy over in order put food on the table.

You're right that the short-term future doesn't look to bright though.

--

Thank goodness classified work will never be sent to body shops in the third world.

Don't be so sure. It's possible to spread the work out enough so that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing ... sort of like in the movie Cube. :)

Anyway, sorry to burst your privileged bubble, but globalization may hurt the disproportionately wealthy nations more in the short-term (*especially* when it comes to frictionless information tech), but in the long-run everybody wins since it's not zero-sum. (Oh, and I say this as a USian geek who doesn't think he DESERVES an overvalued job when the global market is more efficient).

Want your bubble deflated a little more? Consider how nanotech and AI will even the playing field even further. American doesn't have a monopoly on wealth (despite what G.W.Bush & Pals seem to think).

--

What is happening is that improved communication and transport infrastructures are removing more and more of the physical barriers that have kept rich and poor countries ... apart

It's great to be egalitarian (and I am), but the more common human trait evolved to want you and your tribe to maintain status above others (the evolution of cooperation notwithstanding).

Every single day I think about the near future where physical molecules will be manipulated as cheaply and easily as digital bits, and what this might mean for the world system. On the one hand, everyone will be wealthy beyond compare, and on the other hand, humans still have primitive instincts to contend with.

--