Author: Foresight Editor

RobertBradbury writes "New Scientist is reporting here that using a very clever combination of biological and chemical methods a group from the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology has created self-assembling nanotransistors. Also discussed in Science 302:1310 if you have access."

The Foresight Institute welcomes Lawrence Lessig of Stanford University, Amory Lovins of Rocky Mountain Institute, and Christopher Hook of the Mayo Clinic to its Board of Advisors, adding experts in the environmental, bioethics, and legal areas.

November 21st, at 7:00 pm U.S. Central time, Dr. Paul Barbara, the Director of the University of Texas-Austin Center for Nano and Molecular Science and Technology, will give a public lecture on nanotechnology that can be viewed by anyone with an Internet connection.

brettl writes "Following a discussion with nanodot users last week, I have some specific questions about the creation of nanoscale components that would have to be synthesized to create a nanofactory. I would like to use the example of Drexler's diamandoid bearing."

iph1954 writes "CRN has posted a PDF download for our new paper 'Design of a Primitive Nanofactory' on our website at http://www.crnano.org/papers.htm
Mike Treder, Executive Director, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology

rpiquepa writes "Before answering this question, what on earth is X-Large DNA? This news release from Stanford University says that scientists there have created a molecule of DNA wider than the ones found in living creatures in our world. They "have created an expanded molecule of DNA with a double helix wider than any found in nature. Besides being more heat resistant than natural DNA, the new version glows in the dark — a property that could prove useful in detecting genetic defects in humans." You also can read "DNA, Now in XXX-Large," from Wired News, which tells you that xDNA could be a key to find life on other planets. This summary contains more details about what is "expanded DNA," or xDNA."

S. 189, the Senate nanotech bill, has passed. It will be reconciled with the House bill in conference, but major changes are not expected. Here's a link to the text of the bill, in PDF form. Howard Lovy has comments, too.

RobertBradbury writes "Google news is reporting on 60+ articles being published by the various news media under the heading of "Scientists create a virus that reproduces." Its complete ca-ca demonstrating a complete lack of biological knowledge. In the first place a larger virus, the polio virus, has previously been synthesized (so this isn't "new" news). In the second place the bacterial virus phi X (and almost all other viruses) is not capable of self-replication (or reproduction). To be capable of self-replication in a biological system one would require the genetic code for both a DNA or RNA polymerase and a ribosome (these are necessary to copy the DNA/RNA of the genome and produce the proteins essential for viral self-replication. No known gene sequences that I'm aware of would allow those requirements to fit into the 5000 base pairs of the phi X genome (its like trying to fit a very large set of machines into a very small box). My quick estimate is that it would require hundreds of thousands perhaps millions of base pairs to produce a self-replicating virus. Viruses are normally inherently dependent upon their host bacteria or cells for reproduction (they are parasites). So the news reports are fundamentally flawed and should be taken with a very large grain of salt."

Writing in CIO Magazine on the "Promise and Peril of the 21st Century", Ray Kurzweil warns "As technology accelerates toward the full realization of genetic engineering, nanotechnology and, ultimately, robotics (collectively known as GNR), we will see the same intertwined potentials [the double-edged sword of technology]: a feast of creativity resulting from human intelligence expanded manyfold, combined with grave new dangers. We need to devise our strategies now to reap the promise while we manage the peril."

HLovy writes why much of the fear about nanotechnology results from a bad analogy: Merkle and the case of the misleading metaphor