Donate
Donate

Gaming the Future: The Book!

Month: December 2003

Brad DeLong on economics and nanotechnology

Berkeley economist Brad DeLong has A Framework for the Economic Analysis of Technological Revolutions, with an Application to Nanotechnology up on his blog. While slightly confused on MNT ("if engines of creation are possible, hasn't evolution had enough time to build them yet?"), his conclusions about the need for the U.S. to encourage immigration in order to continue to play a key role in technology sound exactly right.

Reynolds on EPA nanotech meeting

In addition to the CRN presentation already reported here, Foresight director and law prof Glenn Reynolds presented at the recent EPA meeting and gives his report on Tech Central Station: "I noted that only in the final category ['true Molecular Nanotechnology'] did serious ethical or regulatory issues appear, and also noted that the recent flood of 'it's impossible' claims relating to 'spooky' nanotechnology seems to have more to do with fear of ethical or regulatory scrutiny than anything else. I won't waste too many pixels on my own views here, because you can read the article in draft here." The article will be published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Technology.

CRN Makes Presentation to EPA

Mike Treder writes "CRN's Director of Research, Chris Phoenix, was in Washington DC yesterday (Dec. 11) for an appearance before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science Advisory Board. The EPA is assessing potential environmental impacts of nanotechnology, and they invited Chris to participate on a panel along with other experts. We've posted a new web page that outlines the information Chris presented, and goes into greater depth on selected subjects. It's at http://www.crnano.org/EPAhandout.htm"

Let the Nanotech Wars Begin!

David B. Hughes writes "The debate over whether molecular manufacturing and nanoassemblers are feasible has turned into a PR war. With billions of dollars of research funding and industrial profits at stake, both sides are taking their ideological clash to the public. So far, Eric Drexler and the Foresight Institute own the moral and scientific high ground. But his critics at the National Nanotechnology Initiative hold the purse strings. And they don't play by the same rules."

IBM hails nano chip-making method

AndreasLigtvoet writes "IBM has trumpeted a nanotech method for making microchip components which it says should enable electronic devices to continue to get smaller and faster. See the story at BBC."

Self-Assembling DNA/CNT transistors in Israel

Patrick writes " A functional electronic nano-device has been manufactured using biological self-assembly for the first time"

Nanofibers Evolving From Drop Break-up?

Roland Piquepaille writes "Engineers and physicists working together have discovered that under certain conditions liquid drops and gas bubbles were breaking at two separate points instead of one, leaving an extremely thin thread in between. This could lead to the creation of nanofibers and nanowires and to numerous applications, such as new kinds of composite materials, electronic circuits and pharmaceutical products. Nanotechweb.org reports on this discovery in "Nanowires drop out of fluid research." I'm not totally convinced that this discovery can lead to solid industrial processes, but it sure looks promising. You'll find more details and references in this overview which also includes an image of the break-up of a water drop in oil."

Royal Society report

qftconnor writes: Readers might be interested in skimming through the recent Royal Society report Nanotechnology: views of Scientists and Engineers. I found the parts labeled 'Science Fiction' to be particularly entertaining. A typical remark: "Nanorobots ñ the biocomplexity of putting a nanorobot in the body to enter and repair cells has been massively overestimated [sic]. ëWeíll never know enough to go in and cure a cellí. This scenario also fails to recognise that the emphasis in health care is on developing non-invasive techniques and essentially persuading the body to heal itself." Sure."

Drawing a nano-sized line in the sand

HLovy writes "I can tell from my Web stats that I do have some readers in Iran, which has nanotechnological goals of its own. To them, I'd like to extend an invitation to contact me and see how we can get a battle plan together for an all-out war on inequitable distribution of resources such as fresh water and arable land, brandishing nanotech-enhanced weapons. Having spent much of my journalism career writing about the Mideast conflict, I'm certainly not blundering into this subject under the influence of any kind of naive daydream that historical, cultural, religious and political barriers will simply melt into the desert. But it couldn't hurt to set up a tent.

For the complete commentary, please see Howard Lovy's NanoBot."

TNT Weekly: do the study of MNT

TNT Weekly summarizes the MNT debate: "We have had contact with other scientists too and our impression is that opinions in the scientific community vary between Smalley-style dismissal and open acceptance of the feasibility in principle of molecular manufacturing with only an urge to steer clear of some of the wilder claims. Unequivocal dismissal seems to be rare even if high levels of scepticism dominate. Familiarity with the subject matter seems to be pretty superficial in general…So why not have the independent scientific review that Drexler requests?"

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

      Search Foresight Institute