Category: New Institutions

from the limited-vision dept.

An interesting report on the impact of robotics and advanced automation (read: semi-autonomous AI) appears in the October 2000 issue of the IPTS Report, published by the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, which is part of the Joint Research Center of the Eurpean Commission (think of it as the EC equivalent of the U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy).

While it doesnít anticipate nanotechnology or strong AI, the article presents some interesting scenarios on how governments and societies might respond to the displacement of workers from industrial and service sector jobs by intelligent robotic systems, and discusses socio-economic tensions that might arise as we move toward a knowledge-based economy.

from the Keeping-Nanotech-Safe-for-Democracy dept.
A lengthy article in The Washington Monthly ("Downsizing," by N. Thompson, October 2000) makes an interesting case for government involvement and even regulation of nanotechnology development: "Deep government involvement in nanotechnology is more than a practical obligation from a research and national defense perspective. It's close to becoming a moral imperative."

from the your-objection-to-the-lightspeed-limit-is-overruled dept.
Found on Slashdot: A Maryland legislative task force has proposed the creation of "a special court for high-technology cases." The New York Times story does not mention Arthur Kantrowitz's 1967 proposal of what came to be called science courts (a concept advanced in Engines of Creation as "fact forums").

from the whew-we'd-better-get-going dept.
Scott Pace of RAND points out this news item from the American Institute of Physics on the Implementation Plan for the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative: The implementation plan establishes "Grand Challenges" in such areas as smart materials, computing and memory storage, drug delivery and diagnostics, water purification and desalinization, energy conversion and storage, microspacecraft, biochemical detection and mitigation, economical and safe transportation, and national security. It lays out a timeline for the next five years and research strategies for accomplishing the objectives…"The National Nanotechnology Initiative: The Initiative and Its Implementation Plan," runs approximately 150 pages with appendices and is now available on the Internet at http://nano.gov

from the macrogovernment-nanoplan dept.
Space policy expert Scott Pace of Rand Corp. — a member of the Foresight team even before it was formalized — points out that the Implementation Plan for the National Nanotechnology Initiative is now available. Annoyingly, it's posted only in pdf format.

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.