Nanotechnology hazard symbol misleading

We should assume that those participating the ETC Group’s nanotechnology hazard symbol contest are all trying to be helpful, and such a symbol may someday be of some use. However, of the three top symbols named as winners, the first one — by far the most vivid — has a real problem. First, see the… Continue reading Nanotechnology hazard symbol misleading

Nanotechnology researchers urged to speculate more

In the November 2006 issue of Nano Today, researcher-turned-science-journalist Jason Palmer urges nanotechnology researchers to open up to the public about the long-term promise of their nanotech work: In this sense, it is as important to consider and discuss what can be done as it is to rule out what cannot. Because they are careful… Continue reading Nanotechnology researchers urged to speculate more

Nanotech: US ambition, UK pessimism

Richard Jones asks: “Why does the molecular manufacturing community seem to have many fewer members in the UK than it does in the USA? I don’t think it’s fair to say that the dramatic vision of molecular manufacturing is pursued in a contextual vacuum – I think there is quite a well-developed world view that… Continue reading Nanotech: US ambition, UK pessimism

It had to happen: Nanotechnology for Dummies

You may like the “for Dummies” series, or dislike it, but surely it was inevitable that there would be a Nanotechnology for Dummies book, due out in five days. I can’t tell from the description whether this will be a useful introduction or not, but am always a bit nervous when the first phrase is… Continue reading It had to happen: Nanotechnology for Dummies

Intel's 'Nano Inside'

HLovy writes "Intel says it's now a master of the 65-nanometer domain. But are these nanochips truly "nanotechnology?" I was surprised when "Engines of Creation" and "Nanosystems" author Eric Drexler — whom I had assumed to be a molecular manufacturing purist — told me he thought they qualified.

"People sometimes perceive me as saying, 'Oh, you shouldn't use the term this new way,'" Drexler told me in October. "What I've actually been saying is we need to understand that it's being used in a new way … that has a certain relationship to the field."

The complete commentary can be found on Howard Lovy's NanoBot."

Will nanobots alter how our brains function?

from the So-what's-really-real dept.
Gina Miller writes "An audience at the Boston Fall Sensors Expo conference and exhibition was exposed in a keynote entitled 'The Rapidly Shrinking Sensor: Merging Bodies and Brain' to the idea that within a few decades nanodevices will fundamentally alter how our brains function. A September 26 EETimes article Inventor foresees implanted sensors aiding brain functions reports 'provocative predictions' by speech-recognition pioneer and Foresight Advisor Ray Kurzweil that 'by 2030 nanosensors could be injected into the human bloodstream, implanted microchips could amplify or supplant some brain functions, and individuals could share memories and inner experiences by 'beaming' them electronically to others'."

Nanoscale tech vs. Mechanosynthesis

from the terminology-drift dept.
Cryptologist Hal Finney points out on the Extropy mailing list that Foresight's views of molecular nanotechnology are still not generally accepted, despite all the funding of "nanotechnology". Read More for his post. Yet there are a few brave researchers who take self-replication via nanotechnology seriously in public; see the end of this interview with Harvard's Charles Lieber in The Deal: "There really are some fundamental scientific problems where you can end up creating self-replicating things and invading bodies, but I don't worry about that at this point." He's right not to worry that this might happen soon. However, since it is a possibility, some of us are putting time into thinking about it in advance — it's a tough problem to head off, and figuring it out will take some time.

Singularitarian FAQ

Gordon Worley writes "NanoDot readers may find it interesting that the Singularitarian FAQ is ready for public consumption. So, if you're a transhumanist (or not) and were wondering what the Singularity is all about, this is a good place to start."

Cyborgs, AI addressed calmly by Christian Science

from the getting-used-to-the-future dept.
In a surprisingly early adjustment, the Christian Science publication Sentinel (not online, see Jan 8, 2001 issue) includes two articles that reconcile the coming era of smart robots and human/machine blends with Christian Science beliefs. Both are responding to Ray Kurzweil's book The Age of Spiritual Machines. Instead of fighting the future, these articles thoughtfully integrate technology and religion. Read more for excerpts.

Homo Excelsior meme bank update

from the Browsing-the-future dept.
pmoss sends a reminder of the expanding resources on the Homo Excelsior website, which he describes as "a central database of science and technology that is peer-reviewed and . . . is generally concerned with the memes related to nanotechnology, megascale engineering, cryopreservation, uploading and other associated sciences and technologies."

    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop