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.

Comments

Re:Nanotech != Good.

[Kintanon]

Fuck that! I want nanobots in my bloodstream that automatically repair wounds, keep my arteries clean, and generally upkeep my body. Prefereably extending my lifespan to 200 or so years. Which should be long enough to implant my brain in an immortal robotic body that is indistinguishable from human in all the important ways. If the government wants to make Nano-bombs, fine... As Long as I get mine.>:)

Kintanon

the twilight of scientific openness

[ezekeze]

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!

Comment on Foresight.org...

[Byteme]

...from the Engines of Creation author makes this interesting statement. QUOTE: The basic concepts have also been more controversial than I had expected. Even now, after (for example) the US Science Advisor has called for the development of molecular manufacturing, segments of the science establishment are still having difficulties with some quite simple ideas. I know it is a little old (1996), but the US has had this in the bag for a while I assume. Then again, I am sucker for a conspiracy.