Donate
Donate

Gaming the Future: The Book!

Month: August 2000

Military looks at nanotech & health in year 2020

from the here-comes-SuperSoldier dept.
Jonathan Desp points out the Focused Study of Biotechnology & Nanotechnology from the Military Health Services System (MHSS 2020). Senior Associate Richard Smith, who participated in the study, gives a behind-the-scenes report on the process. From the MHSS 2020 report: If a breakthrough to a universal assembler occurs within ten to fifteen years, an entirely new field of 'nanomedicine' will emerge by 2020. Initial applications will be focused outside the body in areas such as diagnostics and pharmaceutical manufacturing. The most powerful uses would eventually be within the body. Possible applications include programmable immune machines that travel through the bloodstream, supplementing the natural immune system; cell herding machines to stimulate rapid healing and tissue reconstruction; and cell repair machines to perform genetic surgery. CP: My favorite section title is "3.1.3 Benefits to Health Operations Other Than War".

Nanotech symposium calls for new tools

from the wonderful-discoveries-promised dept.
An article in Chemical & Engineering News (subscription req'd) reports "The [US] National Institutes of Health is getting ready to jump into the field of nanotechnology…The need for tool development, such as single-molecule detection and nanofabrication methods, was a theme that was sounded repeatedly…" at the NIH Symposium "Nanoscience & Nanotechnology: Shaping Biomedical Research". Harvard chemist George Whitesides called for a separate funding group within NIH: "Tools for nanofabrication are not going to be easily evaluated in the same study section that studies more conventional subjects." Symposium co-chair Lynn Jelinski: "We're saying, 'Here is a small set of scientific priorities, and here is where the investments should go.' With that, I can guarantee you that if you sic really smart people on things, wonderful discoveries will emerge."

Opposition to transgenic plants: lessons for nanotech

from the don't-ignore-scared-folks dept.
BryanBruns writes "The Washington Post has a good story on biotechnology for trees. We talk about how long it may be until nanotech appears, but here is an industry investing in advances that won't pay off for decades. As with other transgenic plants, there is some fierce opposition, scaring off some scientists and companies, and some direct action to destroy test plots.

All this again raises the question of how to improve the quality of public discussion about new technologies. In terms of public relations strategy, focusing on the benefits from nanomedicine and taking safety very seriously may be the best way to go. However, there ought to be ways to improve the whole process of considering new technologies. Science courts don't seem to have taken off, and there is a need for policy recommendations, not just agreement on facts. Maybe deliberative democracy approaches such as citizen's juries are worth trying, for nano and other technologies."

Risk and Reason: sensible risk assessment

from the early-fact-forum? dept.
MarkGubrud writes "The Sunday Washington Post carried a very thoughtful and balanced article on the problem of risk assessment by David Ropeik of the Harvard Center for Risk Assessment.

Most of us are probably aware that public perception of risk is often wildly out of proportion to the actual magnitudes of various hazards, resulting in sometimes hysterical overreation to minor or non-existent threats (electromagnetic fields, genetic engineering of foods) while other very serious dangers are downgraded or overlooked (workplace hazards, the AIDS pandemic).

Unfortunately, this issue has been politicized almost beyond the pale of reason, with certain ideologues regularly denouncing any research whose conclusions they dislike as "junk science," and certain public interest organizations acting as if they are mostly interested in publicity." Read More for a hopeful scenario.

Technologists held responsible for tech abuse?

from the let's-sue-somebody dept.
A Salon article looks at the disturbing possibility that software programmers, and by extension possibly other technologists, could be held legally responsible for the abusive purposes to which their creations could be put, including open source software:
"People have always said that the law doesn't matter because technology will outpace it," [lawyer] Granick says. "The idea is that you'll never be able to stop things like Napster or its new iterations — the horse is out of the barn. But the law is a lot more powerful than people realize. It has the ability to severely retard or stop these things entirely."
Gee, maybe we should hold everyone legally liable for everything that happens which has any connection to something they ever did. Or talked about doing. Or thought about doing.

Nanotechnologists inspired by … science fiction

from the okay-who-talked dept.
Our secret is out: what some of us knew but didn't talk much about, except quietly among ourselves. German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung reveals the influence science fiction has had on nanotechnologists and other high-tech researchers: "I was a dyed-in-the-wool Trekkie," says Freitas. And those who want to get an idea of what is currently going on in the twilight zone between science, fantasy and politics must take such confessions seriously. Just as the German archeologist Heinrich Schliemann's generation was obsessed with Homer, so all the great sci-fi epics, especially those on celluloid, have left their mark on these 40-something scientists. And they now have the education and — thanks to the new economy — the enormous financial resources they need to pursue their version of reality. Er, some of us have the financial resources.

EoC 2000: Most important changes since 1986?

from the trying-to-figure-out-what's-going-on dept.
BryanBruns writes "In connection with the Engines of Creation 2000 project, it would be interesting to discuss what seem to be the most important changes to consider for revising Engines of Creation, and more generally for formulating scenarios and strategies to "prepare society for advanced technologies." Below is a short list, which might stimulate discussion about the most important changes to consider, and their implications:
End of the cold war: democratization, capitalist globalization, China joining WTO…
Weak and poorly deliberated policies for science and technology: OTA abolished. No science courts. Media focus on risks frames discussion of environment, nuclear, biotech and other technologies.
Silicon Valley rules: network economy, web, internet time, open source, etc.
No big breakthroughs yet in AI: IT industry investing heavily in nanoscale technologies to follow Moore's law, biotech advancing rapidly, suggesting nanotech likely before artificial intelligence".
Read More for implications.

Nanotechnology Industries newsletter #2 now out

from the nanointerviews-galore dept.
Senior Associate GinaMiller announces that issue 2 of her Nanotechnology Industries Newsletter (paper format, $7 per issue) is now available: "This issue features an inside view on what is happening in Zyvex, the first company founded to develop molecular manufacturing technology (interview with George Skidmore). Also read the thoughts of Robert Freitas, author of Nanomedicine, on what we might be spending after nanotechnology is developed. Will Ware (author of NanoCAD) provides a perspective on a simple approach to modeling some nanoscale devices. Charles Ostman (senior fellow, Institute for Global Futures) explores the convergence of breakthroughs in biotechnology as a progenitor to transformation of the world by nanotechnology."

Finally, Anonymous E-Cash?

from the can-I-pay-my-Foresight-dues-this-way? dept.
Paul Hughes brings to our attention a new startup (founded by Senior Associate Jim McCoy): "A new file-sharing system could best rivals like Napster and Gnutella through more anonymous and efficient transfers. The new open-source software is called Mojo Nation. The service has an innovative feature that rewards users for uploading and distributing files: payment in a form of digital currency called "Mojo." See also the Wired article on Mojo Nation.

If knowledge is power, we'll be weak

from the better-buy-some-stock dept.
Senior Associate ChrisPhoenix looks at trends in data mining and analysis: "I got to thinking about Netscape's SmartDownload reporting on all the files we download (and their Search button does the same thing). http://www.computeruser.com/n ews/00/07/17/news10.html

I've been told that IBM's patent server keeps track of queries, and IBM uses that information (surely among the most valuable IP in the world). At least one company has told its employees not to use the server for this reason.

Now think of a transparent society… it's nice to be able to spy on the government spying on you, but that's really beside the point. The point is that the _data miners_ will be the ones with the real power. As more information is gathered, it will be harder to sort through, meaning that only those with access to huge bandwidth and crunch resources will be able to get anything useful from it. As sensors become cheaper, and fiber advances faster than CPUs, the gap will only widen. Read More for further thoughts.

Facebook Twitter Youtube Linkedin Podcast Spotify
0
    0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop
    Continue Shopping

      Search Foresight Institute