Donate
Donate

Gaming the Future: The Book!

Category: Opinion

US public approves more government nanotechnology funding

A press release published at Yahoo Finance, "U.S. Leadership in Nanoscience Should Be A Government Priority, Say Survey Respondents," revealed that the US public is not very knowledgeable about nanoscience and nanotechnology, but that when the current applications and implications are explained, they strongly support US government research funding to maintain US leadership in the technology.

NSF Misses the Point on Nanotechnology

Mike Treder writes "A recent report published by the U.S. National Science Foundation highlights their systematic failure to address the most important issues raised by nanotechnology. By ignoring the societal impacts of molecular manufacturing, they miss the major significance of the technology."

U.S. Public Sensible About Nanotechnology

A recent study of the American public's views on nanotechnology has shown a remarkably accurate understanding of its potential benefits and drawbacks. Conducted by North Carolina State University researcher, Dr. Michael Cobb, assistant professor of political science, who designed the survey and analyzed the data, and Dr. Patrick Hamlett, associate professor of science, technology and society, and Dr. Jane Macoubrie, assistant professor of communication, the results will appear in the next Journal of Nanoparticle Research.

Report on Royal Society atomic manipulation meeting

David Bradley Science Writer writes "The Royal Society recently held a meeting on atomic manipulation. You can read a summary report of the meeting by a freelance science writer on the RS site available as a PDF file here."

Drexler on nanotech research politics

Foresight VP Ralph Merkle brings to our attention an article by Foresight founder Eric Drexler on the political forces shaping nanotech research in "Nanotechnology: from Feynman to Funding", published in the Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society.

Lawrence Lessig on efforts to stamp out MNT research

Foresight Senior Associate Luke Nosek brings to our attention a piece on Wired.com written by Foresight Advisor Lawrence Lessig, titled Stamping Out Good Science, which describes efforts to eliminate research proposals for molecular manufacturing from US NNI funding consideration. "Science thus becomes irrational because we can't imagine government as rational. Simple facts of a political nature, we might say, tweaking and reusing Smalley's warning in a much more depressing context, prevent good science from ever becoming a reality."

A Modest Proposal for Prince Charles

Phil Bowermaster writes "The Prince of Wales is once again warning about the dangers of nanotechnology:

The Prince acknowledges nanotechnology is a "triumph of human ingenuity".

"Some of the work may have fundamental benefits to society, such as enabling the construction of much cheaper fuel-cells, or new ways of combating ill-health," he says.

But he adds: "How are we going to ensure that proper attention is given to the risks that may… ensue?

Hmmm, well if he's really this concerned, I can think of something that might really help."

Howard Lovy departs Small Times, goes freelance

An anonymous reader writes "Howard Lovy announces that he has been reorganized out of Small Times magazine. One of his readers suggests that this was a political decision based on Howard's too-open advocacy of MNT. http://nanobot.blogspot.com/2004/07/flirtin-with-freelance-disaster.html" Update from Foresight president Christine Peterson: Now folks, there's no particular reason to assume MNT advocacy was involved here; it's just as likely to be a budget issue. We at Foresight all wish Howard excellent success in his new career as a freelancer–send some assignments his way!

Bill Joy in NYT: require insurance for risky research

Senior Associate JohnHeron writes "In an article from NYT Magazine written by Jon Gertner, Bill Joy, of Sun, vi and BSD fame, continued his warnings against the dangers of unfettered research and access to information in nanotech and biotech research. Joy believes that high risk research should be regulated. "He says he believes that businesses doing research in areas deemed risky by their peers should be forced to take out insurance against catastrophes. He also says that science guilds should have the authority to limit access to potentially dangerous ideas. 'Perhaps some knowledge won't be made public,' Joy says. 'Perhaps there would be secrets. You know, you couldn't just get the code to the plague or the flu if you wanted it.' "

Defending Against Replicating Weapons

Insanely Destructive Devices: Trying to defend against self-replicating weapons of mass destruction, by Foresight advisor Lawrence Lessig, about a class he's teaching with Steve Jurvetson, Senior Associate and tutorial/Gathering speaker at our May meeting.

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

      Search Foresight Institute