Slashdot Mirror
Nanotechnology, US Government, and Secrecy
Glenn Reynolds has written an interesting, albiet a bit speculative, in regards to the role of the US Government in the possible quieting of nanotechnology research. As Gleen points out, there's some good pre-existing guidelines to research as well, from the Foresight Institute.
Has anyone ever thought that nanotechnology can be used for a whollllle lot of evil. I mean, in theory, it could used as Syphon Filter or Fox-Die (anyone else notice those games had the same plot?). A programmable virus, effectively destroying whatever they want. The UN has mentioned that idealy 80% of the world's population would be killed.. This could be a means to do that.
With the responsibility that comes with areas of science like this, I'm very glad the Govt. has a hand in curbing and watching development that might release a cure, or weapon, so easily.
With some knowledge, I wouldn't even trust myself.
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
The government wants to quash this for a good reason.
We can't all be beautiful people walking around in skintight suits with Borg implants in our faces.
Tim
They're planting nanomechanical bugs all over the place, in people, around places, it's a total conspiracy, I swear to GOD! The resistance told me all about it when I stumbled onto some stuff onl...
Oops, my bad. That was just the two months of Majestic I played.
... Or was it?
My own pointless vanity vintage computing page
is that it's not^H^H^H easily noticed. But my bloodstream could NOT be chock full of nanoprobes right now, subtley altering me, possibly even changing my thoughts and what I'm NOT typing right now, without me even NOT realizing it. It could NOT lead to some kind of cognitive dissonance where people are being told one thing but they DON'T believe they heard something completely different.
The future of nanotech is a HAPPPY HAPPY scary world.
Yeah, a few years back they developed this little thing called atomic weapons that could eliminate 100% of the population. Mayber this is a bad idea?
You jackass, all technology has a downside.
See Stanislav Lem, "Invincible", "Fiasco"...
The evil in such technology is that after some time you can lose control after it...
Sad that defense is involved in it...
er hi how are you?
Burt "Out of my mind back in 5 minutes"
Glenn Reynolds has written an interesting, albiet a bit speculative, in regards to the role of the US Government in the possible quieting of nanotechnology research.
Um, is it just me, or is this sentence missing something, like what exactly was written?
Head down, go to sleep to the rhythm of the war drums...
This, just like any other technology CAN be used for evil. That didn't prevent us from cloning sheep (evil redneck farmers) or from developing nuclear weapons. The plain and simple fact is, we don't even know how it will affect us. Nanotech could lead us down avenues of thought we haven't even considered to develop all kinds of other technologies. That's not even considering the applications for nanotechnology, which I'm sure I don't have to list here. 200 years ago did someone say, "Guns can be used to hurt people, so we shouldn't make them, even though it helps us to feed our families"? Of course not. Now I do think a lot of times we jump in without thinking of the consequences, and if the government was trying to make sure we had thought things out pretty well first, then great (just don't over-do it.) If they're just trying to quash technology out of fear, then shame on them!
It's easy to stand out when the general level of competence is so low.
I'm just great.
Where exactly does he mention what are the indications that the govt is trying to take controll over nanotechnology? Sorry if im being naive or missing the obvious..
see above..
I had mod points. This is VERY funny. Thank you.
It's easy to stand out when the general level of competence is so low.
For more reading, his blog about politics and other musings is instapundit.com.
Now, I'd love to see that slashdotted!
This is another view of the world.
Economic incentives could be provided through discounts on insurance policies for MNT development organizations that certify Guidelines compliance. Willingness to provide self-regulation should be one condition for access to advanced forms of the technology.
This struck me as one of the better ideas; a sort of "ISO standard" for nanotech research could be created, not only on the national level, but hopefully on the international level, where an independent body can inspect and certify (and re-certify; complying only once is not enough).
My question is: Can an independent body be more trustworthy than the government?
If I weren't nailed to the penis, I'd be pushing up the daisies!
Reading this story takes a little more than a grain of salt.
/. community is all ready to jump on the government for anything they do that might be wrong and will gobble this up even with no facts.
I would have been kept interested if there was a single piece of factual evidence to this story instead of a thinly-veiled shot to convince those in the technology field that the govenment is hiding something.
I feel that this is yet another piece of non-news that will just get hyped up because the general
Please understand that when you read this article and come to your own conclusions, not ones that someone else is feeding you.
Tim
First of all its not like any slashdotters are hacking nano in their basements here, we talking about the majority being govt funded university projects in the first place, this is no different that a half a dozen other similar things the govt has done.
We slashdotters for the most part are tech-heads, the same guys that a couple of generations before came up with dynamite and made nuclear fission a possibility, neither in its inception was anything other than an experiment or theory, and YES it is the use that becomes evil no the technology, but thats our problem, we are blinded by our views and say but its just science.
Its science at a crossroads, where VERY easily it could be turned for purposes other than the utopian ones us slashdotters first envision, we see medical uses, technololgical uses, another may very well see a quicker undetectable way of killing as many people they can while inflicting the most pain and suffering.
In the end there is no difference between a quelch on this technology and nuclear science. It will go on, the same people will be doing it but under different guidlines of research and collaboration. Since the Govt. is footing the bill for the majority of this research (over 90% at this point) isnt it fair they decide how its disclosed ?
I do.....
Sig went tro...aahemmm.....fishing........
If the us gvt tries to thwart new technology, that wont prevent other countries, or even underground groups within the us from developing it and use it for evil (in gb's words) means. So if you want to prevent being beaten by some new weapon, dont impair research, take the lead dmt!!! If you seek peace, get ready for war Julius Caesar
It is the same with any emerging tech that has the potential to change the world (which I think we must acknowledge that nanotech would).
The greater the potential benefits of a technology the bigger the potential disaster and misuse.
It has always been this way. Fission, fusion (yeah one day!), biotech and now nanotech.
-- I am Jack's sig line.
If the government had nanotechnology, could they just spray those over a city to keep an eye on the population, instead of installing spyware on my computer? Is that why my skin's been itching lately?
It's easy to stand out when the general level of competence is so low.
The Matrix if you think about it from that angle, it's pretty scary.
Help! Someone please remove these evil nanobots from my bloodstream before they....achphbtptp....There are no such things as nanobots, it's all a conspiracy.
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
Maybe they can come up with nanobots for the Slashdot editors that automatically proofread all news submissions?
Eheheheheh, the smartass drive was running strong today....
Openness is a competitive tool, but now that the
U.S. is clearly by itself as the worlds only superpower,
its looking at errecting barriers to entry against
competitors aspiring to catch up and surpass. Forget
Europe here, think ahead a generation and look at
India & China. We are talking about technology as
a strategic asset, not just militarily but economically.
And I think it won't be just a nanotech thing.
Amazing how this trend runs counter to movements
(enabled by the internet!) for scientists to be
more open and abondon traditional publishers for
easily accessable electronic publishing!
They got started in the 1970 in Washington state.
As an student who will be entering grad school in materials engineering this fall with the intention of doing research in nanotech type things (opto electronics and molecular electronics) this is mostly horseshit. (also doing research on constructing photonic band gap materials currently)
The state of nanotech (a word that is surely to become a buzzword more overused any before) is such that no useful devices will come from current research for years. Compare it to the creation of the mechanical computer. The ideas are there certainly, but the execution in a useful mannar are long off. We just cannot control the exact placement of single atoms well enough, and possibly never will due to thermal energy (kT being larger than the intermolecular forces)
Certainly there are and will be uses for nanotech in the near future, but none will be NEMS (nano electro mechanical systems) or other machinations or devices. Also it will be years before any 'intelligent' device could be created that could do more than just move from one place to another.
Don't get me wrong, I'm excited about all that is in the field (comp sci, materials, bio, chem, physics) of nanotech, but it really is in an infancy. The current threat of anything being used harmfully is as far away as anything being use for good. There will be some things that will be 'censored' but those will be the monumental jumps in logic and technology that make the science become engineering, and useful products.
to email me: take my
Dick Cheney will live forever! George Bush's face markings and falling off the couch were side effects of his treatments! Colin Powel will change his name to Colon Bowel!
Nanotech has some great possibilities, but some of the biggest advances are also the biggest problems.
Like he mentioned - nanotech could "cure" old age. What, then, will we do with the rapid population increase? We don't have the resources to handle that many people. Move into space, perhaps. And what happens to our rights when an "old" person decides they now want to grow old and die? Suicide is illegal here, might that not also be? Can you imagine being imprisoned for life if life meant forever?
Also, electronics are succeptible to electromagnetic fields. No MRIs for the people with nanotech running around inside them. And if you stand too close to the microwave or have a cellphone? It's bad enough with a pacemaker. What happens when nanotech is used to compensate for brian deterioration? Lead hats?
Presumably the technology won't ever self-replicate. That would be a nightmare. Imagine the resources it would consume. We would need huge processing power in tiny spaces to prevent deaths from over-replication.
Don't get me wrong. Nanotechnology has some great potential benefits - going where no doctor could safely go, curing terminal diseases, destroying viruses, and much more. But at first, all those advances will come at a pretty high price.
It has been said that science and discovery is neither good nor evil, but scientists have to look at the potential consequences of their actions. Both Einstein and Oppenheimer were opponents of nuclear weapons after they had been created. A few quotes to close:
That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
seriously.
MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
Diamond Age. This is why the government does *not* want nanotech.
I thought the analogy with 1950s comptuers was interesting, but I think a more appropriate analogy would be 1930s computing -- we're still a long way off.
And did anyone else note that Reynolds of the article didn't cite any sources for these "rumors" of a "nanotechnology clampdown"? Bad journalism + ignorance = hysteria.
Some of us are trying to eat lunch...
Best Slashdot Co
I've been working with nanotech for 2 years now. I don't understand people like this, suspecting the government of quieting our technology. We are allowed to freely... KNOCK KNOCK KNOCK
Just a minute, let me get the door...
403 - forbidden
ACCOUNT DELETED
Most people, even a lot of the technically minded don't a grasp on just what this technology will be capable of. "Oh big deal, a bunch of Little robots!" some might say. It it MUCH more than that. I firmly believe that in the next five or six years, a small handful of new technologies are going to be refined and introduced , with nanotech being one of them. Imagine what this could do for materials research, developement and production. Nanotech could realistically allow us to custom make material with extreme precision at the atomic level. So you want an alloy that is lighter than aluminum, harder than diamond, more resiliant than titanium and a hidiously high melting point, all in one material? No problem, we've got ya' covered! How about a near room-temperature superconductor? No problem. Nanotech is a tool that will usher in a new age of technological developement, making things like quantum computers a reality. It's impact on medicine will be just as, if not more, profound than the discovery of anti-biotics. Imagine going to the doctor and having your DNA re-sequenced to eliminate any number of ilnesses. In short, imagine the entire microchip/microprocessor revolution happening, only twice as intense and occurring in the span of five or six years.
I'm fine too!
Like any other technology, it is not good or evil in and of itself. It just is. What people do with it is either good or evil.
I must admit, there certainly are some scary possibilities with nanotech. Programmable viruses (as mentioned), which could be used to target specific groups or people (program by DNA); imperceptible tracking devices; and any other whacked idea you can come up with.
But there are also some productive possibilities as well. That same DNA programming could be used to detect cancer cells. Or imagine nano-surgical bots, fixing organs without ever having to open up the body again. The possibilities are endless here too.
The point is, the technology is going to go forward anyway. It's not like the U.S. is the only nation on earth researching nanotech. The question is: What do we do with it? Does it remain secret? A potential government monopoly? That would, in my opinion, be worse. The best way to discover the constructive and destructive possibilities of nanotech is to openly explore them; not to let the government say, "Well, that's a potential weapon. No research down that route." As I mentioned before, the same techniques that could allow programmable viruses could also allow DNA-targeted therapies, attacking cancers, bacteria, and (natural) viruses. So what happens then? Does fear trump potential?
That's just what I think. But then again, I don't really know what I'm talking about. I'm just winging it (ten years and counting),
-- If any of the above made sense, I assure it was purely by accident.
Might just be my anti-social side, but Nano-tech has a lot more uses than just infecting the bloodstream to cure/kill someone. Think of nanotech in space, repairing satellites that have been damaged, or on your vehicle, repairing that brake line that just got severed...(yeah, that is extreme, i know) and on the other side, think of nanotech destroying a fleet of tanks, or even an embassy. It can create or repair just about anything, without anyone knowing about it. It is one thing to design a robot to assassinate a certain race, but on a larger scale, this could dismantle all the technology centres and vehicles in a country, leaving it's inhabitants to fend for themselves. Think Forcible Nuclear Dis-armament.
"If you cannot get rid of the family skeleton, you may as well make it dance." -George Bernard Shaw
Especially this early in the morning.
Moderation: Put your hand inside the puppet head!
The UN has mentioned that idealy 80% of the world's population would be killed.
Do you have some kind of reference for this statistic or are you just scare-mongering? When you post something far-fetched like that you should include a hyperlink to some corroborating evidence on the web.
From my perspective the entire article by Reynolds was largely hype and scare-mongering. He makes references to rumors and whispers of a military crackdown on nanotech but never mentions where he's getting this stuff from. For all I know, he could have overheard a bunch of tie-dye shirt wearing hippies down at the local coffee-shop/pseudo-intellectual-hangout.
That having been said, I ask is it even possible for the government to suppress something as big as nanotech? A recent issue of Scientific American had a multi-article feature on nanotech and the possible uses. It just seems that this is going to be too big and wide-ranging for even the Pentagon to be able to control. Yeah, he cites some examples in past history of how militaries have tried to suppress "essential" technologies but things are different now. It was easier in "the old days" for the government to control information. With the amount of free-flowing data that we have today I doubt that the government would be able to do a very good job of controlling any exciting new technology. Yes, I understand the important role the Pentagon plays in determining what research gets done. But these people aren't idiots. They realize the best way for the US to gain the lead in nanotech is to just let scientists run for awhile. Maybe in the future they'll try to steer the direction of research. But until I start seeing some evidence of this, I disregard Reynolds and all the rest as revving up the hype machine
GMD
watch this
Is not only possible, but is happening. Take a look at: The Disclosure Project to see what efforts are being made to have all potentially beneficial technologies that are currently being hidden from us, released, so that we can all prosper from them.
pronoblem
Quantum cryptography at other places:
Quantum Information at Los Alamos National Laboratory
Yup. "NNSA HQ has requested that LANL review all publicly accessible information".
17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
Why do nanobots have to be metallic and reliant upon the whims of EM?
Virii and bacterium have been doing fine for millions of years without caring about magnetics except where it was an advantage.
Cheese and yogurt, as an example, are produced by the action of special natural nanobots that react and process milk into portable storable food products. Beer and wine, as well.
Nothing says nanobots have to be metallic at all.
GPL Deconstructed
In my previous post i mentioned how our government spends very little on nano technology. The reason is most people arent ready for even computer technology. Look at our laws and how our government and copyright system refuses to change with the technology.
Old laws dont work anymore, its time to change.
This is exactly why we need to educate the people to a much higher standard.
Most of our money should be on building much better schools, we need a complete reform of the school system so school creates people who are free thinkers instead of bots who work in an office.
More and more, our mental abilities will matter.
Nano technology is good, we should put hundreds of billions of dollars into this, but if we are to accept these advances in technology we must advance socially as well..
No more wars.
No more creating terrorists (like bin laden)
We need to find a way to handle oppressed people in the third world, so they dont all become terrorists.
I'm personally ready for nano technology, I think alot of people on slashdot may be ready, but your average idiot is not ready.
I'm hoping, if we spend vast amounts of money on education, it will cause less people to be ignorant, In a society filled with nano technolgy we cannot tolerate ignorance anymore, a KKK member will be able to destroy all minorities in an instant, a Nazi will be able to destroy all jews in an instant.
The only thing we can do, is educate ignorant people in such a way that they are less likely to do stupid things.
Some people we wont be able to educate at all, but at least by building better schools we give it a shot.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Once a guy stood all day shaking bugs from his hair. The doctor told him there were no bugs in hair. After he had taken a shower for eight hours, standing under hot water hour after hour suffering the pain of the bugs, he got out and dried himself, and he still had bugs in his hair; in fact, he had bugs all over him. A month later he had bugs in his lungs.
...like "Aphids don't bite people."
Having nothing else to do or think about, he began to work out theoretically the life cycle of the bugs, and, with the aid of Britannica, try to determined specifically which bugs they were. They now filled his house. He read about many different kinds and finally noticed bugs outdoors, so he concluded they were aphids. After that decision came to his mind it nnever changed, no matter what other people told
Car manufacturers are researching ways to make cars drive more efficiently (increasing the likelihood of long-term rampant roadkilling sprees) and increase their top speed (maximizing the damage done when one of these murderous machines hits its target).
Did I mention that car ownership is on the rise? Did I ALSO mention that selling cars is a huge industry? I see conspiracies everywhere, trying to promote the pro-car lobbies!
Something must be done. Write your political representatives and notify them that -- along with this newfangled "nanotechnology" thing -- you want the car lobby stopped.
-----------------------
You are what you think.
Our government is obssessed with power.
Nano technology = the ultimate weapon
You and I see nano technology as a way to extend our lives and make our lives better.
Nano Technology is good, I support it, i think we should be spending hundreds of billions on nano technology and things like it.
We also should be spending hundreds of billions on reforming the school system.
Theres always ignorant people, the problem with public schools, the current system isnt built to create mature intelligent thinkers, its built to create good hard workers who respect authority.
Thats good for a labor based society where you can be dumb as hell as long as you obey orders. As society changes to a more intellectual society, we need to teach children to think for themselves. we need to redesign school in a way so that it teaches them to think for themselves.
College seems modern in this respect but highschool and middleschool need complete reform, kids are just doing work from text books and following scripts,
you dont learn by following the script, you learn by creating the script.
What we need to teach in schools now, responsibility, maturity, the ability to think for yourself, the ability to teach yourself and teach others, and the ability to learn from others.
Ways to do this, Set up the school system so that students teach other students, set up the school system so students are often required to learn about something on their own without being guided by any teacher, get rid of tests and exams and use the portfolio system which judges a student by the quality of the results of their work and not how many small facts they memorize, and last, give the children state of the art technology, let highschool kids learn and do experiments with nano technology, let them learn about bio tech in highschool if they choose.
By putting more money into the school system it will allow schools to buy the equipment needed to teach kids about these very important and dangerous technologies.
If we keep doing things the way we do it now, we will create a bunch of drones who cant think for themselves, and eventually some intelligent terrorist will decide to attack us with a nano virus and no one will be smart enough to defend themselves from it.
Instead by educated everyone about nano technology, everyone will be able to develop ways ot defend themselves from it, even if this means everyone creates various nano anti virii or develops a way to completely destroy nano bots such as EMP fields
Education and Research is the key, we should be spending the majority of our money on this.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Oh sure, they'd probaly run simulations with the code first, and stuff. But SOMETHING always makes it through QC, and when a minor mishap could destroy all life on the planet, you REALLY want to be sure.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I send you this file to have your advice.
Personally, I don't believe there is any evil government conspiration looking for massive nanotechnology withdrawal, neither on USA or anywhere else.
Please, use Occam's Razor : if you don't see any Drexlerian nanotechnology in every day life, is because THERE IS NOT any Drexlerian nanotechnology(yet).
Most researchers in this domain agree that Drexler's and fellows' hypothesis and assumptions are extremely optimistic, maybe naive. When we hear or read "nanotech" we associate it inmediately with the optimistic but far-fetched extropian ideals and not with down to Earth technologies like molecular-scale processors and new materials.
Maybe we are hoping so strongly to to see such technological miracles as dead people resurrection, perpetual youth, utility fog or unlimited wealth, that we forget that this technological marvels must be developed first in order to exist. I would love to see any of these things to happen, but I must admit that one thing is my desire, and another completely different is what is possible to do. And it's not me who says what is possible and what is not, it's mother nature and her unmerciful laws.
How long will it be before the real (certifiable) paranoids start claiming that it's nanobugs making their lives hell instead of radio waves?
Will the dust mask replace the tinfoil hat as a symbol of paranoia?
I think it will be interesting to see how quickly this disseminates into the insane. Florid schizophrenic (hallucinating) paranoiacs weren't talking about being manipulated by radio waves a hundred years ago.
Since schizophrenia often begins in adolescence, there are probably some like this already. On the other hand nanotech doesn't have the near universal recognition that radio does.
No, I'm not on the government payroll trying to discredit anyone. This respirator is for my allergies.
Assembly is the reverse of disassembly.
I can think of a great example, I think a new intravenous delivery device based on the MEMs blood sugar monitoring devices with the bloodless micro-needles could be the answer to the vast majority of problems associated with drug abuse.
Most of the clinically documentable physical health concerns associated with drug abuse have to do with damage to the organs through which the drugs are administered and with overdose. An internally regulated device that went directly into the blood stream without exposing the user, or those around the user to the user's blood would be a panacea in my book.
But to people morally against the use of drugs rather than strictly concerned with the health effects, such a device would be the devil's own tool. For the same reason that I see such a recreation device as a promising panacea that could make even hard drugs socially acceptable and thus much more manageable, others would say is was the mark of the beast etc etc.
So, in deciding what is abusive and what is not, you get into some rather grey areas. It's easy to say don't do bad things, but getting down to brass tacks on what's bad and what's good is not quite that simple when you're dealing with laege groups of people such as nations and planets.
Even the notion championed by foresight of universal prosperity could be hard for many die hard capitalists to come to terms with.
Texas Instruments has clearly shook up the projector world with it's Digital Video Processor MEMs chips. How long before Taiwan tools up to starts making those in mainland China. What will that do to projection TV makers and projector LCDs? Entire markets can be disrupted quickly by new technologies on a micro scale.
Who knows? And what's taking so damn long? All I really care about is, when can I get a six pack of six second release Cocaine dermal patches and a few joints for me and the wife at 7-11 so I can go home and watch big screen movies from the hot tub in full effect. Is that too much to ask?
We are educated commputer users here on slashdot, you dont see any of us getting infected by the computer virus, you see dumb people who dont understand computers getting infected.
The solution to this problem is to educate all computer users, and no one will get infected by virii.
The same solution works for Nano Technology, Kids should be learning about nano technology in highschool.
We need highschool reform badly, kids are still being taught einstiens theories, most kids dont even know about super string theory, neither do most adults,
You cant teach kids from text books that are 30 years old or older.
Kids shouldnt even be learning from text books, kids should learn to learn, and learn to teach, I didnt learn this in public school, however i went to an alternative school which taught in this manner and thats where i learned to think for myself.
Our schools create zombies who USE technology which they dont understand.
Schools must change big time, technology shouldnt be slowed down because the RIAA and copyright laws dont know how to handle it, laws must change, the RIAA must adapt or go out of business.
Its that simple, if people want to share music via napster, you cant hold back the technology, the best thing you can do is change the laws to adapt to it.
Old people running this country dont understand change, they dont know how to adapt, thats the problem with having all old people in the government.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Like any other technology, it is not good or evil in and of itself. It just is. What people do with it is either good or evil.
You've found the key to many problems within the world. As humans progress and gain new knowledge and tools, we must make fundamental choices in the use of that knowledge and those tools. Many of the topics in Slashdot such as violations of privacy via technology are judgement calls by those using that technology.
Unfortunately, some people make bad moral choices. Evil even.
God Loves You!
Turn from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.
Psalm 34:14
An earlier story on batteries stated that batteries are the limiting factor in miniaturization. How do we propose to power these tiny things, when my TV remote is still powered by AA batteries? Last time I checked, they did not fit inside my bloodstream too well.
Other methods of getting these little gizmos to work would be to run them on glucose, mimicing mitochondria, or powering them remotely with low-frequency EM radiation. Either method is hard to implement and maintain.
In my book nanotech is still under the heading of "pipe dream" along with zero-point-energy, FTL travel, and immortality.
Poop is good for you and me. Eat poop today and you will see!
Love,
AC
What I see as the real beauty of nanotechnology is this: if nanotechnology is able to scale-down well enough to allow for generalized molecular manipulation (which is definitely a controversial point), or further than that - generalized atomic m/subatomic manipulation, the rules which we use to govern information will have application to physical reality.
That's a pretty bold claim, let me explain. Let's presume that such molecular/atomic manipulators would be computer-guided, I don't think that this is in dispute. Furthermore, let us assume that such techniques will allow for the production of much more powerful computers, capable of storing and manipulating the vast amounts of data necessary to model physical objects in molecular or atomic detail. Given these points, all that will be needed to convert an idea into a physical manifestation will be software, energy, and raw materials.
Now, given that these things come to pass, we'll face a situation in which script-kiddies kill, DDoS is warfare, and P2P applications redefine the nature of culture (shared knowledge). If software can manipulate the physical dimension, the same rules which govern the Internet and digital technology will apply universally.
The preventative measures we come up with today will set precedent for the measures which will be used to avert disaster in this hypothetical future, it would be wise to treat computers as we would treat citizens when we define new security protocols - we may end up living under them ourselves.
Yep, there are biological benefits and consequences, but when you get nanotech down to an art, you have the ability for it to start reproducing themselves, in effect building a product from the ground up without any fabrication equipment. You think the MP3 revolution is hard on the record industry at large? Try thinking about the same effect on a global scale with nearly any product imaginable... Granted, this is the far furture, but the implications are staggering.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
"In a post-9/11 and post-Columbine era, nanotech is one of the most significant issues of our time, second only to globalism. Thanks to the myopic media, most Americans do not grasp the ways in which this new technology is changing the world, or the degree in which such technology is being subverted by opportunistic, short-sighted politicians."
Ah well, you guys can fill in the rest of this...
GMD
watch this
IF what the author is suggesting were true (and that's a big if) than this is neither unusual nor bad. The US military knows better than to think they can surpress a powerful technology forever. Ultimately any such policy would fail, while developing it can lead to great boons. The key for the military is to stay several steps ahead of everyone else. That means conducting their own development and classifying it until somebody else figures it out, extensive espionage to make sure no one else gets ahead of them, and the occasional suppression of the commercial sector.
The author mentions what a chilling effect it would have been if the military had suppressed computers - handily ignoring the fact that computers were originally developed by and for the military almost exclusively. The situation today is that most computers are quite harmless and consequently allowed to do their own thing - but when software or hardware gets too powerful (strong crypto and supercomputers, for instance) the regulations kick in.
The catch is that some technologies are so powerful that simply being ahead in the game is not enough - you have to restrict it entirely. Nuclear is the classic example, since even a small bomb can devestate at an enormous scale. Biological and Nanotechnological are potentially even worse, due to the small resources required for the former and the extreme precision of the latter. For all the shortcomings and violence of the US military, they know their place - serving the US government, not running it. And the US government isn't interested in ruling the world, just keeping it under control so we can do our thing. I'd rather they had the upper hand than I would China, Microsoft, Israel, Greenpeace, Switzerland, or Pfizer.
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
Either we keep this system and alot of people are out of a job, or no one has to work anymore
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
The evil in such technology is that after some time you can lose control after it... Sad that defense is involved in it...
No, essential that defense is involved in it.
I liken it to submarines (one of which I served on). You can say submarines are evil, cowardly, nasty, yadda, yadda. That isn't going to stop your enemies (current, future, potential) from building them, sinking your shipping, parking them off your coast with missles, etc.
Or you can build your own submarines, go down there, find them, and blow them apart. Works better than trying to ban them, or something.
So what is different about nanotech? If someone builds killer/spying microrobots, what are you going to do? Complain about it? Use mosquito repellant? No, you build your own little guys that eat the buggers.
This article is a bunch of crap. The government, oh yes, hiding their National Nanotech Initiative in plain site at http://www.nano.gov/ . Granted some of the 2003 700+ million US$ goes to DOD/etc, but a good chunk of it goes to NSF/NIH and other public, open, research driven funding organizations. Note the 300 US$ increase in funding from 2001-2003.
http://www.nano.gov/2003budget.html
Tinfoil hats are so 1985.
It seems the DARPA guys read a lot of SciFi too.
Topic include:
I'm posting anonymously because I am PI for two MEMS projects for the military.
If you outlaw nanotech, only outlaws would have nanotech... :-)
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html
I get a Ninja Android robot body just like Walt Disney's Brain will have one day. Then I can follow the Ninja Android Body's purpose, which is to flip out and kill people.
Then nobody would mess with me!
I could simply be walking down the street as a Ninja Android and people would look at me and say stuff like, "Damn, he is so cool."
Of course, I would have to flip out and kill them then, nobody would be allowed to say "damn" near me. I wouldn't get into any trouble either!
You know, because a Ninja's purpose is to flip out and kill people. Since I would do that, I would be fulfilling my purpose.
--
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
Looks like a lot of "nanotechnology" isnt about little cogwheels spinning and tiny processors humming, its very much more related to biotechnology, the folding of proteins and how our internal DNA/RNA sequencing works, it can accomplish construction and fabrication on a small scale without the wear and tear of anorganic materials. It'll be biotech on the nano schale coupled to electronics on the bigger scale.
We are right to be very worried about what people can do with such technology to control us or harm us. Whether a government is the best safeguard against that is debatable but democracy is only as good as we have made it.
Of those to whom much is given, much is required.
The RIAA killed napster because it threanted to change the system, change the laws, and advance technology.
You see, our government doesnt want the system to ever change, but a system has to adapt or it will become obsolete.
We are using a system thats thousands of years old, from back in the times of rome, its advanced very little sense then, we have been given freedom of speech and other freedoms however our laws dont fully follow, copyright for example is not even constitutional because its a form of censorship.
Face it, we have been moving backwards not forwards. Until we as a society advance, all the technology inn the world wont help us.
The gov and RIAA should have embraced napster, napster is what the people want, its the new technology, instead they tried to kill it.
Now nano technology is being threatened. The reason? It, like napster will change the system completely, but unlike napster which only changes the music system, nano technology would completely change the whole economic system of the world.
So, will governments do whats good for the people, or whats good for them?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Just a thought... I'd imagine they could easily be powered off of any EM field, either generated by the body itself or ambient energy passing through the body. Heck, standing under high voltage power lines is enough to independently ligh a florecent light bulb. Considering the amount of ambient energy our bodies are subjected to on a regular basis, I don't see a power shortage. All you need is the tech.
And the people have a right to be concerned about nanotech viruses, but they should keep in mind there will be options to defend against them as well- A anti-nanotech viral injection or just a pulsing EMP field to fry the little boogers.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
There's enough EM to power floating around in the world to power these guys. The body's electrical energy is also an option.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
True, there is the potential here for both constructive and destructive applications based on this technology. However, the mindset here might be similar to one involving Biological weapons.
The best situation is one in which war is so expensive, no one can afford it. Second best is if it is so expensive only *we* can afford it. A strong reason that chemical/biological weapons research was discontinued is that the *research* into how to create agents was the most expensive part. Given that, do we want to make it possible to simply let that expensive research fall into the wrong hands -- in which case, our economic advantage is simply lost.
If the bio/chem analogy holds, it might imply that the thinking is that the economic barrier is so high, only we (or our allies) could afford to carry out the research, in which case, there would be little incentive, and much dissinsentive in producing such a weapon.
Once a technology is actually developed, the genie is already out of the bottle. The risk needs to be weighed against the benefit. For instance, does the benefit of nuclear energy offset the risk of nuclear war?
All one has to do is hit the right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself. - Johann Sebastian Bach
Can we get off the subject of the RIAA for five minutes? Let's talk about science, girls or global warming.
My college (NDSU) just recieved a MultiMillion dollar grant from the DOD to do research into NanoTechnology. They told us all about it in class. They are going to work on little censors that could be scattered all over a battlefield to relay back things like temperature, motion, etc, they are going to incorporate the ability to detect chemical and biological weapons also.
Plus if you get any publications such as R&D by Cahners, all they talk about is nano technology and it's possibilites.
Technology is technology, it has good and evil.
The Manhattan project was one of the worst things to ever happen to us, but it also has given us almost unexuastable power sources, prevented major, world war level conflicts, for the last 60 years and given us further understanding of physics and chemistry. But it has also given the power to kill millions to way too many, just by pushing a button.
it's catch 22
It's not the OS it's the user that sucks. If it's user friendly, you get stupider people. - clinko
knowledge kills, we need to have equal knowledge.
If the common man knows about nano technology, defending against it will be easi, there may be a suit which can do it, maybe emp waves or static electricity
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Glenn Reynolds has written an interesting, albiet a bit speculative, in regards to the role of the US Government in the possible quieting of nanotechnology research.
Time for some sentence structure review. Take out the comma segment in the beginning of the sentence, and we get "Glenn Reynolds has written an interesting in regards to the role..." Has written an interesting what?
Come on, Slashdot! If you want people to pay for this damn site, you really ought to at least proof read your friggin' postings. Sheesh.
Mozilla's a nice operating system, but it needs a better browser.
I work on nano technology, and at a secret government lab no less. So maybe I can say something intelligent. First, its pretty scary how misinformed the commentary here. what is nanotech? actually there is no such thing. its a marketing buzzword I put in my proposals to get them funded. One of the main funding sources for NANOtech is going to be the department of energy and the National Institutes fo health. nobody got upset when we all were talking about "microtechology" for the last 20 years. And that was an amorphous term too. And why anyone would think the governement would want to supress this is beyond me. With NIH and SBIR funding for this at record levels the answer is quite the reverse. The problem is that many of the nano-tech fronteirs are not ready for commercialization. thus Much of the funding is going to be governmental till certain breakthroughs happen. Certainly where it is looking viable, such as carbon nano-tube applications industry is jumping all over it. as for nanobot viruses. go buy yourself a slurpee and rent another startrek video gomer. good old biological viruses will do just fine for now and the forseable future. No one with any sense takes nanoviruses seriously. In fact its by studying cells and genomes and, most importantly, protein complexes that we will learn how to make self assembling molecular machines. and were no where along that path. Want to read up on this. see the DOE web page on the Genomes-to-life program. that's what that is all about. what science is on the verge of is using self assembling compounds to make hyper sesnistive transducers. like noses and such. Someday we will be able to clear landmines by sniffing them out. and even that is not practical yet.
Current US-government research is becoming more heavily funded by the military. The near-term application seems to be sensors for various biological and chemical threats. That makes sense - one tiny nanotechnology unit is useful in that application. There's ongoing interest in a DNA reader, one of the obvious nanotechnology applications. Again, single units, perhaps assembled with a STM, work for that.
Self-replicating nanobots are still a long way off. That's the application that gets everybody excited, but it's hard to do.
Is that what it's called?
Anyway, scale aside, a machine doesn't have to be metallic or ceramic for it to work.
There are different problems and issues with biological machinery than with robotic machinery, on the cellular scale, and I'm not sure that either one can be claimed to be 'out of infancy', though perhaps in strict comparison with nanotech, biologics is more primitive...
I don't think we have a solution in either technology that can repair a genetic disorder yet, though we already have biologic agents that can kill people already.
GPL Deconstructed
Actually, the Japanese decided to do exactly that. As guns were not very honerable, they banned them country-wide, and lived quite happily until one day Admiral Perrie steemed into Tokyo harbor and reminded them that the rest of the world of course still had guns :)
When societies ban technologies they run the risk of being left behind.
the crackpot ideas of Alex Jones. They are good ideas, but only for a laugh.
Is it just me, or does reading Slashdot sometimes feel like a game of Madlibs?
Sorry, I can't keep my pants on. The nanobots keep dissolving them.
It can't be that most of what we claim to be able to do one day is, in fact, impossible, with a good body of theory demonstrating that truth. If we are going to keep getting grants (and, God willing, venture capital someday) we have to keep our buzzword hot.
The government is really interested in what we're doing, but wants us to keep real quiet about it. The government is suppressing us--yeah, that's the ticket. The government is suppressing us. Oops, I wasn't supposed to say that (wink, wink).
Now, how can we get the message out? Who has watched so much Star Trek that they'll believe any damn thing is possible? I've got it!
At the high-school level, I tend to agree with you. On the other hand, children at grade-school level are still in need of many basic skills that require lots of drill/practice/memorization.
It's great to be a "free thinker", but you also need a core set of knowledge to base your ideas on. Otherwise, you end up with utopian dreamers, and people who frustrate themselves with failed attempts at achieving their goals, simply because they don't have the basic science and math needed to do it properly.
I think it's best to get as much memorization and boring drill practice out of the way early in one's life. Until you reach a certain age, your mind isn't really ready to deal with more abstract concepts anyway. Use this to the best advantage by teaching handwriting, multiplication tables, phonics, spelling, etc. when the child is real young. (For that matter, parents of newborns should be reading to them and spelling to them. Sure, they're so young it seems pointless, but all those sounds they're hearing you speak aren't lost on them. Their brains are already hard at work, trying to process all of this to prepare them for speaking the language.)
Play DeusEx - has both the good (nano-augs) and bad (grey death) sides of the arguments right there, along with global conspiracies...
The risk is not in the technology, the risk is in the humans developing and using it. Technology has advanced, has the human also? Just a short scan through the daily newspaper or TV programms tells another story.
Nice technology in the hands of responsible persons. But where is a responsible, psychologically grown-up person? In the goverments, among the classified ones I wouldn't expect to find more emotionally stable individuals than among the average human on earth. How could it be anyway? They recruit from the same population and the selection process is in favor of power, need for attention and logical/linguistic talents (as opposed to emotional ones).
Given the experiences we allready had so far with all kinds of governments, the little hairs in my neck raise, when I hear that a goverment is investing high amount of money into a technology and at the same time keeping it's results secret.
Government does not equal to holiness, it's doesn't even equal to democracy or freedom in so called democratic and free countries.
Instead of letting the old killer apes called humans improve technology we should make the apes into humans first. Then there would be no longer a need for such powergreedy things like a goverment or anti-government. Let's not forget, they get their power, money, influence from us individuals, and let's face it, they use that very power, money, influence to take away our individuality.
The money would be better invested into global repression-free education (just for example). How high is the percentage of illiterate youngerst in the third world? Secret technology development will increase the gap between the rich and the poor and will thus be the root cause for wars and terrorism.
Too much technology - not enough brain to see the consequences (except for their own vantage).
...the federales want to make nanotechnology into no-no technology? Brilliant. Just how do they plan to keep a lid on this stuff internationally? Will they use the DMCA? Geez...
This
I have a computer.
Sure, until now a lot of the work was genetic engineering, where the goal was the end product; but with the research into DNA and genetic computing, and genetic chemical sensors, the line between organic and mechanic is growing thinner.
A virus that makes you ill vs a nanoprobe that makes you ill; which is simpler?
A virus that fixes your cancer vs a nanoprobe that fixes your cancer; which is simpler?
A bacterium that repairs a ruined liver, vs a nanoprobe that repairs a ruined liver; which is simpler?
A bacterium you switch on and off with adrenalin, or some artificially inserted compound (like caffeine) to enhance bloodflow to the muscles, vs a nanoprobe to do the same; which is simpler?
A bacterium you switch on and off to increase production of adrenaline, endorphines, and other fight/flight compounds, vs a nanoprobe to do the same; which is simpler?
A bacterium you switch on and off to generate pain killing compounds vs a nanoprobe to do the same; which is simpler?
A bacterium which generates clot enhancing compounds in some situations (careful of the heart, of course!) while producing clot reducing compounds in other situations (in the heart, near the brain, etc) vs a nanoprobe to do the same; which is simpler?
Not everything is easily done with biologics; nor is everything easily done with nanotech. Each have their own strengths.
GPL Deconstructed
How dare you modify your own body chemistry!
Will the "little censors" be blocking pornographic Web content too?
If so, has the EFF been notified yet?
Old people running this country dont understand change, they dont know how to adapt, thats the problem with having all old people in the government.
The problem with being young is that you turn to your peers for advice. Your peers are just as ignorant you are. There is much to be learned from "Old" people. The sooner you figure that out, the better off you will be.
--fatboy
This is exactly what happened in the UK after WWII. After building the world's first digital electronic computerw, the Colossi, they were destroyed and kept secret by the orders of Churchill. The result: the US took the lead in computing.
-- SIGFPE
Alot of Gibson's work talked about the potential evils in usage of nanotechnology
What's Reynolds talking about? Plenty of nanotechnology and nanobiotechnology research abstracts (and articles if you're blessed with site licenses) are available at Virtual Journal of Nanoscale Science and Technology and Virtual Journal of Biological Physics Research. Enjoy!
Put simply, this article is utter horseshit. This should be obvious to anyone to begin with, since the author repeatedly mentions the fact that he has no evidence to back up his claims, and the article turns into a polemic on "why it would have been bad for the government to restrict computers". In fact, the only content that I can see in this article is that he thinks it would be bad for scientists to ignore a new technology. Wow, that's a controversial opinion. Let me be a little more explicit: This article is simply muckraking, and has little to no evidence backing up any of its claims.
The facts are that the money flowing into nanotech is just unbelievable, and a good portion of this is from the U.S. government, through agences such as the NSF, etc. (I won't attempt to hide the fact that this is exactly why the group I am involved with is trying to find good mathematical problems in the field.) Several national agencies have specific nanotech initiatives, and, consequently, the number of good people working in this field is exploding. Of course it is impossible to know what is being done that is classified (that's the point), but the amount of open science being done is
Also (and this is somewhat tangential), I think most people have a bit of a misconception about what nanotech is, because I certainly did. The impression I had a few years ago was that engineers are building some really small robots to do stuff on small scales (like in that book by Neal Stephenson, I forget the title, but it might have been his second?). Anyway, this is very much what is not going on right now (since this is far in the future). Essentially, the successful research being done in this field is two major groups: material science and microbiology. People are finding ways to build structures at the nanometer scale (but very simple ones, like tubes and boxes... no machines as of yet). People are also studying "biological motors", for example very complex proteins in our cells which convert energy to complex mechanical operations. Long story short, the problems are not nearly as sexy as is portrayed in the media (which should be no surprise), although they are very interesting, IMHO, from a physical and chemical viewpoint. (Not to oversimplify, there is work that is being done that doesn't fall into either of these two categories, but these are the biggest two.) Anyway, what I'm saying is that even what the engineers are doing right now is building things which, for the most part, have no specific purpose, but are just simple building blocks for something we may one day build.
Disclaimer (if I need it): the above does not reflect the opinion of any organization with which I am affiliated, or the opinion of the university to which I am attached. It is simply the personal opinion of a working mathematician.
Come on, give it up, that's
Not everyones brains are designed for that.
I think up until middleschool, kids should learn the basics. Once they learn to read and write, they should learn to think.
memorizing multiplications are pointless when you have calculators
soon reading may be pointless too, our schools need to focus on whats important, alot of skills being developed are skills no one ever uses and will forget anyway, so it was a waste of time.
As technology advances, so should schools, we have calculators, why waste all these years in school teaching them to do math manually as if they'll ever need to do this?
All this time they could be learning things like computers, and logic based math, most math now you need a calculator to do, and besides the really basic stuff like how to add, and subtract, you dont really need to do the other stuff in your head.
How many people divide fractions in their head? if you have to do it on paper, then its no diffrent than doing it on a calculator, so why teach them to do it on paper at all?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
I know this thread is long dead, but just in case someone wants to happen across it later today, I'm going to post.
My dad works for one of the national laboratories and was part of not the nanotechnology, but the microtechnology initiative there (some say he founded it, but I don't really know...). Anyway, as his research has gotten smaller and smaller (think nanotechnology) so has his budget. He's one of the most respected people in the field, and he's been moved to a little bitty office, had his team taken away, and has started having a difficult time accounting for the hours that he's putting in. Such is true of everyone at that laboratory.
I have also heard that when people from NASA or other countries call and ask to get them to consult from him, the lab is jumping through all kinds of beaurocratic hoops explaining why he can't talk to them. He's too respected to be fired (or maybe he knows too much), but he's being screwed. My whole family is really worried about him because he is just working all the time and seemingly under a great deal of stress, but he won't talk about it. The only things that I can say for sure are what his old research partner, now retired, has heard. That information, is not very good.
Liora
Theres lots to be learned from the young people as well.,
As much as theres young ignorant people, there are old ignorant people.
Being ignorant has nothing to do with your age or how much knowledge you have, ignorant is a way of thinking, not a lack of knowledge.
Take the Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, he may be 50-60 years old, he may have went to school at Yale, he may be very successful in the world, but hes still an ignorant racist leader of the KKK.
Hitler, a military genius, was ignorant as hell.
Bin Laden, highly educated, a genius, but ignorant as hell.
Even some scientists are ignorant as hell, some of them dont believe theres life in space and make fun of people who search for it. These are scientists! And some of these scientists are old!
You can then find scientists on the other side of the spectrum, who believe everyone who tells them they were abducted by aliens often without the person having any proof, and these scientists are open minded to the point of accepting even lies as fact.
Ignorance has nothing to do with knowledge, nothing to do with age, and everything to do with your way of thinking. Ignorant people usually are easily influenced by others.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Theres no unlimited energy source so grey goo isnt as easy as you think. Also, you can EASILY make the nano machines malfunction assuming they use electricity, EMP would work. Shielding would work.
The elements like extreme cold and heat would work,
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
The article left me with a feeling that it was a lot of talk about nothing. With statements like:
."
" I don't swear that they're accurate, but..."
and "As I say, I can't be certain that this is happening -"
Makes me wonder why he's bringing the subject up at all. He lists no sources, or gives me any reason to believe that it's anything more than something he's made up for a story.
"It may be, of course, that the accounts I'm getting are distorted . .
So what "accounts" is he getting and from whom? He never says.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
For those who didn't read it, Bill Joy wrote a thoughtful article back in April 2000 in Wired Magazine, entitled Why the Future Doesn't need Us.
Joy argues that, with the advent of Genetic Engineering, Nanotechnology, and Robotics (GNR), normal (non-modified, non-cybernetic) humans will be outdated and perhaps unable to compete. He makes a good argument, and there have been a large number of responses to his article.
Here's another page with a lot of related info.
Bill Joy isn't a Luddite either. We can thank him for Java & vi (for better and for worse...) He's definitely well versed in technology and social interactions...
Or we will forcibly change it for you."
The "grey goo" scenario is not really the worst case scenario.
"You jackass, all technology has a downside."
I don't agree with this guy either but having an opinion that is different from your own is not a good reason for you to be rude.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
*smirks*
Don't worry, missing the thrust of the argument isn't necessarily a bad thing. Surely, the article speaks about nano-technology, and surely there is a debatable issue here: Is nanotechnology a "Good Thing(TM)"; however, a more important point is also made by the article.
Namely, that the US Government may be causing real and irreprable harm to the interests of the United States of America (and don't forget, the US Government is not the USA) by limiting the advancement, research, and free (as in speech damnit) discussion of a new and important area of research.
As the article points out, the US did not become a^H the world superpower by having a larger military, or government; rather, the US out-witted the competitors by being (in the words of the article) "a more vibrant, [and] faster-learning society...." This is, and should always be the key to success in a rational and grown-up world.
You are aware that PCR was originally developed by high school students, right?
You are also aware that there is already a functioning nanotechnology within your cells, right?
Finally, you are aware that the majoritty of the idiots passing themselves off as software negineers these days have absolutely no idea about the machine code that results from their source code, right?
There's really no need to fully understand how atmoic scale operations work in order to be able to use them productively.
in Oregon, today.
Mainstream cryonicists already intend to use this fact to permit them to enter cryogenic biostasis without an autopsy, and before incurable cancer destroys their brain.
Adenosine Tri Phosphate.
How can you simultaneously credit him with Java and claim he's not a luddite?
Java is 1970's technology from the University of California, San Diego.
Yep, that's what it is. And a big one too. The gov't has always had a penchant for burying crucial technologies that could not only benefit man, but thanks to our penchant for hate and violence, destroy us. Why is this different.
For every social and economic application you can put nano-technlogy with, I can think of two ways to create a destructive military or political tool for.
Nano drug deliver? I say nano-bio weapons deliver.
Nano surgery? I say nano tissue destructive systems that incapacitate and destroy the soldiers of an army.
Nano repair systems for crucial engineering? I say nano destructive systems for destroying economic and political targets.
Now, don't get me wrong... nano-technology is one of four holy grails within our grasp that will propel us to the stars and better mankind if applied correctly and fairly, but three of the four holy grail techs (nano, genetic, fusion, and quantum computing) can directly or indirectly lead to our destruction as a species.
I would love to invisage a world where in orbit we have a clean environment that is dotted with supersized colonies for manufacturer and research, as well as construction of various star and in-system spaceships. The construction and cleaning of the orbital belt is thanks to nano technology, backed by quantum computers designing, training, and guiding automated systems for humans and technology, powered by fusion power and with humans genetically enhanced to be free of disease and able to withstand high g forces and long periods of zero g without the current physiological impact we see now. We could terra form Mars and some of the jovian moons, mine the asteroid belt for precious materials and stop raping the earth of materials that can't be replaced. The earth would be clean, thanks to cheap and safe power, and people healthier and better for genetic manipulations that remove genetic diseases while bolstering our physiology to fight even the worst viruses and plagues. Massive and cheap power could also propel us out of our star system, allowing us to better understand the universe and learn the methods of manipulating the laws of physics, thus enabling long ranged trips at FTL speeds through out known space... yadda yadda ya.
Would be nice... but I can also envision a world where quantum computer powered cyborgs with nano defense and offense weapons, built by nano bot factories and powered by fusion wipe out the last vestiges of a genetically plagued mankind too. Or any of a dozen other horrible realities that could take place thanks to one or all of these technologies.
So can the gov't think tanks.
They can't keep it from happening since it is now known to science in the world community, but they can direct and subtly alter the directions that research take, keeping our country safe(r) and hopefully not arming the world with terrible weapons pointed at each other and us. I say let them, as long as disclosure is made to the people we elect and the reigns firmly in the peoples hands (yeah, right... thanks liberal politics, won't happen now will it).
Make mine Gina Gershon mixed with Jill Kelley and touch of Janet Jackson
Interesting reactions to the article.
Many people have commented that our ability to make tools and manipulate technology has far ourpaced our ability to make sound judgements.
"We spent so much effort asking how to do the thing that we never asked if we should do it."
I wish classes on ethics were mandatory. Instead, we effectively have classes on blindly following orders.
I learn a lot about our species by going to the zoo and watching the primates. Everything our organizations do, I see there, simplified, in minature: peer pressure, struggle for dominance, envy, aggression and so on. Are we really so far from them, so superior to them?
I would not trust anyone with the power to destroy everything, whether with nuclear weapons or nano tech or anything else. We are still primates.
=brian
Me not ape... me not take orders from nobody... me make sound judg...judge, er... deci.. um... thoughts for me self and do what I like. Me no help it that things me thinks are same things my boss, my people me vote for, and rich guys in shiny big buildings like...
I imagine that the FOX network's Glutton Bowl, once established as an international competition, will have a great deal of influence on the development of this technology.
: : :
Gatorade and Nike will be forced to find new ways into this (horizontally) growing field of competition, as traditional sports will become obsolete. Most potential athletes will grow morbidly obese with the rest of humanity, rendering competitive team sports infeasible. Olympic style solo competition will grow into a niche spectacle, a farce at best, until it is banned as to great a burden on EMT professionals who lack equipment for hundreds of simultaneous cases of congestive heart failure. The few remaining able-bodied athletes will be systematically mauled in the most gruesome incarnations of todays "extreme sports", until the last surviviors donate their bodies to volunteer in scientific experiments reminscient of medieval torture - to save themselves the horrors of hyperextreme sports. Over time, "gluttoral" sports edge out all archaic sports events, until the course of leads to a synergy between nanotech and sports, leading up to a frenzy of nanotechnology developments, garnering much public interest and corporate sponsership. Over the years Nike and Gatorade will both invest heavily in this technology, resulting in symbiotic gut-dwelling nanobots which can predigest massive quantities of otherwise inedible "food" (industrial waste) generously provided as sponsorship by Dow Chemical.
This will result in an arms race between Nike and Gatorade mirroring the effects of the various technology competitions that took place between the opponents of the Cold War. While MAD conditions tempered government military actions and kept our respective ways of life intact between the USSR and USA, no such geopolitical boundaries will be present or relevant in our current condition of multinational corporate rule. There are no "second strike" deterrents in a universal corporarchy plutocracy, so any accidental nanotechnological "first strike" will be global in consequence in a significant "grey goo" situation.
Despite these concerns, and their current unrelated fields of research, the respective images of both companies will seamlessly shift into their future roles. Gatorade's "Is it in you" campaign will morph into advocacy for biologically hosted nanobots performing medical service - orange sweat beads, neon green blood and luminous blue urine will be replaced by geometrically pleasing crystals and fractal configurations of liquid metal reminscient of Terminator 2. Gatorade will provide special edition formulas of their traditional beverage that supplement the electrolytes with their predigestive bioresident nanobots, allowing amature "gluttoral" competition, and hobbyist HGDs (Human Garbage Disposals) amongs those passing Gatorade's profiling tests.
Nike's "Just do it" meme, while subsumed into the "swish" logo, will still have subtle influence; it will take on new meaning as an amorphous representation of the capabilities embodied by the invisible nano-robots, which largely replace their current third-world labor market in manufacturing and production. Despite positive expectations from Human Rights Organizations, natives acclimated to western lifestyles suffer when the factories close. Desperate natives end up populating Nike's nano-labs, primarily as volunteers for their experiments. The survivors are among the world's first nan-droids, who end up devouring two-thirds of the contents of the Yucata Mountains before the accident involving an oil tanker full of nuclear waste. This unfortunate incident occurs not long after Nike bought out Exxon, which closes the promising waste disposal solution before it's completion. Various safety issues prevent the importation of Nike's nuclear core-crunching nandroid-people into the Northwestern Hemishpere, so the Nuclear waste disposal problem still doesn't have any end in sight.
I can't "speculate" any further as the Underground Secret Alliance is signaling me. Oh shit, it looks like Pepsi-Coca (subsidiary of Gatorade) agents have chewed through the barrier protecting the Organic Society, who had granted me asylum. I've got to get out of here, and I can't keep typing while I climb, so Romeo-OverOut...MMCXLIV-214410081626aagvdteng::::
Do you recall the organisation in some of Larry Niven's earlier books, called the ARM (no relation to a well-known processor...)? This had a mission to suppress weapons technology or any thing that could become such. And of course it was run by the UN...
If I recall, what the borg mostly have going for them is machine mediated telepathy. That power does not have to lead to evil. It was the Borg Queen who set herself up apart from the collective and made them evil. Like the kid used to say "It wasn't the Great Brain's superior brain that made him bad, it was his money lovin' heart"
Genomes-to-Life program is aimed at understanding and then harness self-assembling machines found in living organisms. funding this year is 18Million and expected to double or tripple over the next few years. Privates sector, universities, Government labs, and YOU, are invited to submit proposals. see
http://DOEGenomesToLife.org/primer.html
If you had bothered to do real research into our Gov's goals, you would know that the current long-term goal is to prevent the formation of any possible rival to the US's power. OF COURSE they are going to restrict research they think could give other countries an advantage. It's nothing new to them.
And to those that think that we can't handle it, that our knowledge is outstriping our judgement, I say nuts. What you really fear is the person who has nothing to lose, or who just doesn't care. What we should be focusing on are ways to ensure that everyone maintains a stake in society, that no one is ever pushed to the point of homicidal destruction. Because, you see, there can be quite logical and reasonable thought processes behind mass murder.
Here's a thought experiment for you: One day, someone discovers how to turn normal matter into anti-matter, for a small cost in energy. And they publish this. The process is not terribly difficult, and can be done with off the shelf or cannibalized components. What do you do? Do you slaughter anyone who might know how to do it? Do you prevent anyone from purchasing any electronic components?
It's an extreme case that might never occur, but it illustrates something important: The only way to be 'safe' is to be certain that no one harbors you ill will, and that no one ever will. Otherwise, you'll just have to deal with the notion that your neighboor may be cooking up a nuke. In such a world, thoughts themselves become lethal agents of destruction, because they could convince someone to go nuts and build the superbomb, couldn't they?
So, freedom, or Dark Ages? You can't really have it both ways, at some point our advancing knowledge will let anyone do heinous things.. or amazing things. I'd rather take steps to make sure nobody had a grudge against me, than try to supress/repress/oppress the whole world.
"Avast! Prepare for the rodgering!" THWACK! "Arrr.. me nards.."
YES! We have YAKISOYBA!!!
In different words, nanotechnology is a lot of hot air. It has utterly failed to deliver on its promises: universal replicators, and the like, and there is no light at the end of the tunnel. The successes attributed to nanotechnology have instead come from traditional fields like materials science, physics, VLSI, micromachines, and molecular biology.
It is interesting that whenever people say something along the lines of "Terrorist-of-the-day is going to make nanotech to reduce Washington DC to it's component atoms" or "Grey Goo will devour the Earth", remember that, like Ninjas fighting Ninjas, nanotech can fight nanotech. Little bug wars happening inside your body and in the air you breathe...
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
Has anyone ever thought that nanotechnology can be used for a wholllllle lot of good? I mean, in theory, it could be used to cure every possible disease and disorder in existence, and it could be used to effectively eradicate mass starvation from poverty.
You are right though, the possiblities for evil uses are as extreme as the possibilities for good uses. How to go forward and get the good, without the bad? Not an easy question. The next 200 years will be interesting, if nothing else.
Just remember: "75% of statistics are made up on the spot"
As this article actually has no proof of these 'rumours' I would like to provide some proof that he's actually wrong.
Why would the US Gov, recently release plans to vastly increase spending on nanotechnology?
A quick Google search shows some press releases from from 1999 and 2002.
I think even the ignorant in the white house realise that not assisting the nanotech businesses would be suicide for the economy. As a result they need to provide research money and keep everything in the open, not behind closed doors.
... other countries have R&D programs too.
But I'd still be careful about using "impossible", even if a few more are starting to realise that replicators are unlikely to provide a viable path forward, I still wouldn't be betting that we don't finish up with some strongly transformative nanotechnologies by 2050 or 2100.
It's just that our growing addiction to money and growth demands incredulous rationales to keep the pot boiling, so we talk about applications before we have demonstrated a working technology
-- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
Whiiz bang! Mod that up! That's a quality post.
Hey, nanites would be a great way to just eliminate the ova that are ejected from the ovaries in a woman's body, thereby removing the need for mood altering hormone pills, cancer causing IUD's, sensation stealing condoms, etc. They could even be used to eradicate virii, like HIV, Hepatitis, other STD's, or even things like the common cold and flu virii. the possibilities for good are almost limitless.
No "highly placed official"? No "usually reliable source"? No corroboration. This looks something off a conspiracy-theory website.
It sure looked liked an on-line newspaper, right down to the byline and the smiling mug of the author. But if this had appeared in a real newspaper, the editor would fear for his job.
No "highly placed official"? No "usually reliable source"? No corroboration. This looks something off a conspiracy-theory website.
It sure looked liked an on-line newspaper, right down to the byline and the smiling mug of the author. But if this had appeared in a real newspaper, the editor would fear for his job.
Admiral Perrie steemed into Tokyo harbor and reminded them that the rest of the world of course still had guns :)
To which the Japanese replied: "Muri da yo! Sono gaijin no sutimshippu arimasu nee!!"
Take the Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, he may be 50-60 years old, he may have went to school at Yale, he may be very successful in the world, but hes still an ignorant racist leader of the KKK.
Ignorant, no. Evil, yes.
Hitler, a military genius, was ignorant as hell.
Ignorant, no. Evil, yes.
Bin Laden, highly educated, a genius, but ignorant as hell.
Ignorant, no. Evil, yes.
Ignorance has nothing to do with knowledge, nothing to do with age, and everything to do with your way of thinking. Ignorant people usually are easily influenced by others.
I was not attempting to flame, I was using the word by it's Dictionary definition. I guess words have no meaning anymore, sigh.
--fatboy