We found 253 results for your search.

Open Source GM Crops?

Gina Miller writes "Genetically-modified crops spotlight issues of safety, openness, and intellectual property that will become even more important with molecular nanotechnology. Some similar concerns are reflected in the Foresight Guidelines on Molecular Nanotechnology.

UK report says gene crops could create superweed. Cross-pollination of seeds spilt during harvest allowed three varieties of genetically modified rapeseed plants to exchange herbicide resistance genes, creating a "superweed" resistant to all three herbicides. To avoid these superweeds that would be difficult to eliminate, the recommendation is that only one variety of herbicide resistance be used in genetically modified plants.

Panel Urges U.S. to Tighten Approval of Gene-Altered Crops. The caution recommended by the UK panel was reflected by a panel convened by the US National Academy of Sciences. Noting that biotechnology companies are developing new plants containing combinations of genes, or genes that cause the plant to produce industrial chemicals or other exotic materials, the panel concluded that testing of genetically altered plants should be made "significantly more transparent and rigorous." The panel's conclusion implies that public access to data should take precedence over the ability of companies to keep data confidential.

Can a company still profit from data it releases to the public? Swiss Firm Unveils Plan for Sharing Rice Genome One company poised to publish a "draft" (not completely finished) sequence for the genome of a variety of rice announced a compromise in which the company 'would freely share the information with researchers, but keep the right to license and patent commercial developments'. Other companies preparing sequences of other varieties of rice have promised completely free access to the information. How access to scientific information developed by for-profit entities will be handled is clearly an issue very much in flux: from open source software to biotechnology and gene patents. What will be the trade-offs as nanotechnology matures?"

Florida ponders funding for major nanotech program

from the late-to-the-game dept.
Florida Governor Jeb Bush has proposed spending $100 million in 2002 on a technology initiative to create Centers of Excellence at Florida universities, according to a number of recent press reports. The program would include nanoscale science and technology as a major component.

If passed, the Florida program, which resembles programs already in place in California, New York, and Texas, would be one of the largest government-funded nanotechnology programs in the United States, trailing only Californiaís program.

Read more for links to coverage of the proposed Florida program in the Florida press.

Article in The Scientist takes a skeptical look at nanotech

from the half-a-loaf dept.
An article in The Scientist ("Nanotech Dreams", by Senior Science Editor Jeffrey M. Perkel; 4 March 2002) offers a general overview of nanotechnology from a life science perspective. The article presents some background on the ideas of Richard Feynman and Eric Drexler (mixed with a few hoary science fiction clichés and comments from nay-sayers to the idea of advanced molecular nanotechnology, such as Richard Smalley) before focusing on current research in several areas. "It's an unusual field," says Chad A. Mirkin, a professor of chemistry and director of the Institute for Nanotechnology at Northwestern University. "It's a field that focuses on a scale rather than on a material. So it affects everything."

The article also quotes Robert A. Freitas Jr., a research scientist at Zyvex Corp. and author of Nanomedicine, about the distance between long-term visions for nanotechnology and current capabilities: "My vision of nanomedicine ranges from the near-term to the far-term," he says. "I look at the things that can't be done for 20 years as a vision, as the ultimate goal, as a wonderful thing, way out there, that we can grasp for. And in the meantime, we have to do all the things that are necessary to get up to that point, and there's an awful lot of work to be done, and lots of work for everybody."

The bulk of the article actually focuses on various companies attempting to create biosensor systems using various micro- and nano-scale technologies, and nanostructured materials that may have therapeutic applications. The article does concludes by returning to disputes over the feasibility of nanorobotic systems, and gives greater play to the more conservative view:

Northwestern's Mirkin bluntly surmises, "I think it's baloney . . . I think a lot of people, including scientists, try to say, 'This is pie-in-the-sky. A lot of it is really far out. It's going to have a big impact, but it's not going to be realized for 25 to 50 years,'" says Mirkin. "That's wrong, and it's also wrong to say it's going to revolutionize everything in the next couple of years. Something in the middle is correct."

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.

C/NET Investor covers nanotechnology

from the Most-scientists-believe? dept.
A fairly decent investment-oriented article on nanotechnology appeared on the CNET News.com website ("Is small the next big thing?", by Tiffany Kary, 11 February 2002; the article also appears on the ZDnet website at http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-833739.html). As the article notes, "The revolution won't happen overnight, and even nanotechnology's biggest supporters acknowledge that the field could become the next craze–think dot-coms–in which hype outruns real application and business sense. Nevertheless, recent developments indicate that the science is progressing well beyond the "white paper" stage. For starters, the government, tech titans and venture capitalists are pouring money into the field, producing breakthroughs that have enabled several companies to make nanotechnology product announcements. These prospects have grabbed VCs' attention."

The article notes the increasing level of research activity, government and private financing, and interest by the investment community, and surveys important work by companies ranging from giants like IBM and Hewlett-Packard down to start-ups such as Nantero.

Looking farther ahead, the article makes the somewhat incredible claim that, while nanorobots are hypothetical, "most scientists believe there will be some form of "molecular assembler" within the next 20 years, and that the device will serve a concrete purpose." The article then follows a typical pattern in presenting of the ideas proposed by Eric Drexler, followed by the "grey goo" willies of Bill Joy, and the distancing dance skeptics perform when confronted with long-term possibilities of advance molecular nanotechnology. The article quotes Josh Wolfe of Lux Capital, a nanotech-oriented venture capital firm: According to the article, Wolfe said he has seen plenty of business proposals based on such ideas, but he considers them implausible.

"It's utter nonsense–thoughts that you can change the economy because you can manufacture things instantaneously at your desk by just hitting a button," Wolfe said. . . . As far as Wolfe is concerned, any technology based on the "Drexlerian vision of nanotech"–that is, the self-replicating assembler–should be put in its place. These far-out ideas should "promote ethical debates and get people involved," but "investors should not be looking at that type of thing," he said.

[Thanks to David Wallace Croft and Patrick Underwood for posting a notices about this item.]

Materials Today highlights molecular electronics

from the Molectronics dept.
The cover and a pair of feature articles in the February 2002 issue of Materials Today, an international magazine devoted to the latest research and policy news for materials researchers in academia, industry and government, highlight "Molecular electronics: the future of computing". The two feature articles are available on the MT website, as Adobe Acrobat PDF files. (Note: the PDF files have been print-disabled, so you can only view the articles online.)

Article notes Zyvex interest in medical device technology

from the long-range-plans dept.
An article in Dallas-Ft. Worth TechBiz ("Local medical device industry could boom with right political support", by Pavan Lall, 21 January 2002) describe innovative companies in the medical device industry in Texas. The article includes a brief nod toward the potential medical applications of nanotechnology:

Nanotechnology will help shrink medical devices, said Christopher Chavez, president and chief executive at Plano-based Advanced Neuromodulation Systems Inc. ìThe technical issues of nanotech will be resolved downstream, and the improvement of devices will be based on a synthesis of different technologies,î he said. . . . In about 20 years, through a better understanding of the central nervous system, electricity will be accepted as a digital drug, Chavez said. The shrinkage of medical devices will stimulate other technologies as well as make the broad-based use of drugs and chemicals obsolete. ìMachinery and electrode miniaturization will result in very elegant solutions that will be tremendously intelligent,î he said.
Jim Von Ehr, president and chief executive of Richardson-based nanotech company Zyvex Corp., agreed. ìWe have been talking with a number of doctors about things in the medical area and have looked at micro-devices and micro-diagnostics. In the future, there could be a variety of micro-devices that will detect bacteria in a system, chop it into pieces and digest it or even carry oxygen better than a cell in a bloodstream can.î To successfully implement different aspects of medical devices in production, one must understand biological content as well as the relation to software and bioinformatics, Von Ehr said.

It is worth noting that Robert A. Freitas Jr., author or Nanomedicine, the first book-length technical discussion of the potential medical applications of molecular nanotechnology and medical nanorobotics, is a Research Scientist with Zyvex.

Canadian National Post takes a long, skeptical look at nanotech

from the nanotech,-eh dept.
An extensive article in the Ontario, Canada National Post ("Small Miracles", by Margaret Munro, 21 January 2002) provides an interesting, if somewhat skeptical, look at nanotechnology in Canada and the United States. While dismissing speculations about advanced molecular nanotechnology as "the stuff of fiction", Munro writes "there is clearly a revolution afoot", but:

Scientists say the revolution will be gradual. "The hype is just that," says Robert Wolkow, a research officer at the National Research Council in Ottawa and one of the country's leading nanotechnologists. "Many really remarkable things will happen. But they're not going to happen next year or even in five years," he says. A more realistic time frame is 10 to 20 years before nanotechnology dramatically changes our lives. But when the revolution comes, says Wolkow, "it will be fantastic."

In addition to profiling a number of interesting nanotech research projects, the article briefly mentions the contention over the feasibility of molecular assemblers that resulted from the September 2001 special nanotech issue of Scientific American, and quotes skeptical Canadian researchers.

Foresight Update 47 available on the web

The latest issue of Foresight Update, our quarterly newsletter, is now available online. Foresight Update 47 offers coverage of the Ninth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology in November 2001, as well as nanotech-related news from across the United States and around the world. The issue also contains a new article on nanomedicine ("Volumetric Cellular Intrusiveness of Medical Nanorobots") by Robert A. Freitas Jr.

Micro magazine considers nanotech for semiconductor industry

The November/December issue of Micro Magazine, a trade for the semiconductor manufacturing community, has an article on nanotechnology ("When Micro Meets Nano: Small things considered", by John Conroy). Not surprisingly, the article focuses more on short-term possibilities for molecular-scale transistors, carbon nanotubes, and atomic layer deposition of interest to the microelectronics and semiconductor industry. It also presents some mildly pessimistic comments on the possibility for more advanced nanorobotics from Susan Sinnott, a researcher in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at the Unviersity of Florida and co-chair of the Ninth Foresight Conference on Molecular Nanotechnology in November 2001.

0
    0
    Your Cart
    Your cart is emptyReturn to Shop