Category: Abuse of Advanced Technology

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has posted an audio file of remarks made by K. Eric Drexler, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Molecular Manufacturing and Foresight Board Chair, who spoke on a panel discussion during a symposium on "The War On Terrorism: What Does It Mean for Science?", held on 18 December 2001 in Washington, D.C. (See Nanodot post from 19 December 2001).

• The audio file of Dr. Drexlerís remarks can be accessed directly at http://audio.aaas.org/spp/shr/waronterror/track_12.ram. It requires the RealAudio Player. The file runs 18 minutes 30 seconds.
• More information about the symposium can be found on the AAAS website.
• Additional audio files of remarks by other speakers are linked from the symposium agenda web page.

from the pay-attention-to-reality dept.
Krees writes: "Foresight founder Eric Drexler addresed a terrorism symposium Tuesday [18 December], warning of the "extreme downsides" of nanotechnology and criticizing some nanotech researchers for their apparent failure to consider the negative applications of their technologies. Sandia's Gerard Yonas also spoke on the emerging field of cognotechnology (convergence of nanotech, biotech and IT) for remote brain sensing and mind control."

Dr. Drexler, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Molecular Manufacturing and Foresight Board Chair, spoke during a panel discussion "The War On Terrorism: What Does It Mean for Science?", held on 18 December 2001 in Washington, D.C.

An article on the Small Times website ("Drexler warns terror symposium: Nanotech has ëextreme downsidesí ", by Doug Brown, 19 December 2001) provides extensive coverage:
ìOne of my profound hopes is that the new spirit of seriousness about life and death issues that we see in the wake of Sept. 11 Ö will encourage people to pay a little less attention to politics and a little more attention to reality,î said Drexler. ìThis is a technology which can reasonably be described as extreme in all directions: extreme upsides, extreme downsides.î
Drexler also noted that many scientists who are eager to slapped the term "nanotechnology" on their research when it was viewed as ìsexy,î but became ìa little upset to find that they had a label on their work that was associated with outrageous, science-fictiony sounding claims about the future and scary scenarios and other thingsî, with the result that many members of the nanotechnology research community ìlike to distance themselves from the consequences of their own work.î

For some background, read the Foresight Position Statement on Avoiding High-Tech Terrorism, and an open letter from Dr. Drexler on "Nanotechnology: Six Lessons from Sept. 11".

The Small Times article also covers comments by Foresight Executive Director Chuck Piercey on the funding of long-term nanotechnology research, and Gerald Yonas, vice president and principal scientist at Sandia National Laboratories, who described an emerging field he calls ìcognotechnology,î a convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology and information technology. With nanotechnology, he said, itís feasible to use brain implants to moderate behavior or brain functioning; he also discussed a developing field that focuses on remote sensing of brain function, including the intention to commit deception [Progress toward such systems was reported here on 13 November 2001.]
ìThere are two sides to the sword of science and technology, and as we move forward there is no way we can stop any advance from happening, but we should be aware of the implications and the possibilities,î he said, ìand long before these things happen we ought to think about, 'What are the rules?' î

from the shadows-on-the-road-ahead dept.
An extensive article on the potential dangers and misuse of nanotechnology appears on the Small Times website ("Nanotech's dark side debated in the aftershock of Sept. 11", by John Carroll, 2 November 2001). The article quotes Foresight President Chris Peterson, as well as Foresight advisors Glenn Reynolds and Ralph Merkle. Foresightís voluntary guidelines for the safe development of molecular nanotechnology were mentioned as part of the articleís discussion of possible regulation or restriction of nanotech research and development.

Some of these issues were also presented in a New York Times article that appeared in September 2001.

from the worth-reading dept.
In the Sept 25, 2001 New York Times, Gina Kolata has an article entitled "When Science Inadvertently Aids an Enemy" in which she looks at both encryption and nanotechnology. Foresight Director Glenn Reynolds and Advisor Ralph Merkle are quoted. Also: "It is a technology whose consequences could be so terrifying that one scientist, Dr. K. Eric Drexler, who saw what it could do, at first thought that he should never tell anyone what he was imagining, for fear that those dreadful abuses might come to pass…With the Asilomar discussions as a model, a group of scientists and others who worried about nanotechnology formed a nonprofit institute, the Foresight Institute based in Los Altos, Calif. Its goal is to prepare society for the transforming powers of new technologies, and, in particular, of nanotechnology…The institute's chairman, Dr. Drexler, originally thought that the best thing to do would be never to disclose nanotechnology's darker possibilities for fear it might give terrorists ideas. But he soon realized that if he could think of these abuses, others could too. So he decided to try to help society prepare for the good uses of the technology and to protect itself against its evil use. Dr. Drexler, Dr. Merkle and others at the Foresight Institute argue that openness is critical toward developing nanotechnology safely." Thanks, Gina.