Home | Community | Message Board


Radical Mycology Book by Chthaeus Press
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Science and Technology

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Nanotechnology
    #4110707 - 04/29/05 01:09 PM (12 years, 28 days ago)

Trendal just brought this up on another thread and I was wondering what other people's opinions are on this question (I'll leave it as broad as possible):

What do you see as being the risks of continuing the development of nanoscience and how serious do you think they are?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefreddurgan
Techgnostic
Male

Registered: 01/11/04
Posts: 3,648
Last seen: 4 years, 11 months
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #4111083 - 04/29/05 02:49 PM (12 years, 28 days ago)

I don't think there is any chance we can ponder to any meaningful degree, but I'll bite and give me opinion.

Risks? I think the risks will be just like any other technology. THe bigger it gets, and the more involved it gets, the more chance there is that someone will die. When it happens, people are going to get really upset and legislation will be passed, stunting it's growth and slowing science's ability to improve it to a point where it's safe.

Maybe in 200 years will we be able to fathom the grey goo scenario :wink:


--------------------
Ishmael
http://www.ishmael.org

Ron Paul 2008!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,802
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #4111198 - 04/29/05 03:14 PM (12 years, 28 days ago)

Well let me first off say that I don't think any heavy regulation or outright ban of nanotech research is a very good idea. On the contrary, it is probably a horribly BAD idea.

The risk is not so much with nanotech itself, but with self-replicating nanotech. In this scenario, most of the risks of bio-terrorism are present as well as some added risks that nanotech carries itself.

Imagine if terrorists got their hands on even a SINGLE self-replicating nanodevice. That single device could easily, when given the raw materials, begin to replicate. Replication will most likely be faster than biologic replication, possibly MANY times faster, so it would not take long to turn that single nanodevice into a LARGE cloud of devices.

Someone could design a nanodevice which is self-replicating and which uses DNA molecules in the replication process. These would then seek out and destroy every single DNA molecule they happen to come accross - not too good for us biological types :smirk:


--------------------
BTC - 1KqrSHZ1C3NsQP4g3PkHhppBnhdgyXr6sB


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,802
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: freddurgan]
    #4111201 - 04/29/05 03:15 PM (12 years, 28 days ago)

Gray goo, eh? You read Orion's Arm? :wink:


--------------------
BTC - 1KqrSHZ1C3NsQP4g3PkHhppBnhdgyXr6sB


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: trendal]
    #4117834 - 05/01/05 07:44 AM (12 years, 26 days ago)

I can see a future world war based on nano-weapons. The terrorists release one, the civilized world releases countermeasures, and so on until the Earth is a technological wasteland of competing nanobugs. Depressing scenario... :confused:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibletrendalM
point of inflection
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 19,802
Loc: Ontario, Canada
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: Diploid]
    #4118020 - 05/01/05 10:01 AM (12 years, 26 days ago)

Here's a good sci-fi piece written about the possibility of a nanotech "disaster". Good read!

http://www.orionsarm.com/historical/nanodisaster.html


--------------------
BTC - 1KqrSHZ1C3NsQP4g3PkHhppBnhdgyXr6sB


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineCatalysis
EtherealEngineer

Registered: 04/23/02
Posts: 1,742
Last seen: 8 years, 10 months
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #4118592 - 05/01/05 02:20 PM (12 years, 26 days ago)

There is a huge misconception out there about "self-replicating" nanotechnology and "nanomachines". Self-assmebling and replicating systems have existed for a long time and much is known about them. They are used to deliver drugs to targeted sites in the body as well as for materials engineering.

I think the latter will have the largest impact from nanotechnology. We aren't talking about systems that can think for themselves or something equally ridiculous, they are just molecular systems that are designed to assemble into a more organized form under the right conditions...like an endothermic chemical reaction.

Everything else is just science fiction.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: Catalysis]
    #4120839 - 05/01/05 10:33 PM (12 years, 26 days ago)

I dunno, as we learn to better manipulate tiny assemblies of molecules into more and more complex self-replicating systems, Trendal's dooms-day scenario might eventually become plausible.

Everything else is just science fiction.

Science fiction has a history of becoming science.

Maybe I'm just being pessimistic... :shrug:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinefreddurgan
Techgnostic
Male

Registered: 01/11/04
Posts: 3,648
Last seen: 4 years, 11 months
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: Diploid]
    #4132266 - 05/04/05 01:32 PM (12 years, 23 days ago)

Yeah no kidding lol. Science Fiction has a way of becoming real given enough time.

I can see a terrorist totally wanting to destroy all of mankind with a self-replicating goo that feeds off carbon or something like that. That would hurt a bit =/


--------------------
Ishmael
http://www.ishmael.org

Ron Paul 2008!
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #4414049 - 07/17/05 05:29 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Well, I never got around to saying what I wanted to say on this subject, but I just found some cool lecture notes and such from a course at the University of Wisconsin-Madison entitled "Nanotechnology and Society":

Nanotechnology and Society

There is also a collection of funny and not-so-funny nanoscience jokes.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinearchetypal
Stranger
Registered: 07/15/05
Posts: 54
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: ChuangTzu]
    #4414291 - 07/17/05 11:41 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

nanotechnology is nothing new... nature is built from the nanoscale up, we're just found new ways to study and mimic these processes. I work on nanomaterials so my opinion is a little slanted.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineChuangTzu
starvingphysicist
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 3 years, 7 months
Re: Nanotechnology [Re: archetypal]
    #4417778 - 07/18/05 04:23 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

archetypal said:
nanotechnology is nothing new...  nature is built from the nanoscale up, we're just found new ways to study and mimic these processes.  I work on nanomaterials so my opinion is a little slanted.




I also work in the field, and I agree with you :smile:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

General Interest >> Science and Technology

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Nanotechnology rommstein2001 1,133 16 08/02/03 05:59 PM
by ExtravagantDream
* Little Robots in Your Pants (nanotechnology) wingnutx 916 12 08/14/03 10:27 AM
by Fliquid
* Berkeley Regulates Nanotechnology As Hazmat DiploidM 495 1 12/14/06 05:19 AM
by Seuss
* What are some good books on nanotechnology? ImOver18 789 3 10/18/03 08:57 AM
by Edame
* wow, i cant wait...
( 1 2 all )
nubbin101 1,197 24 10/06/05 07:59 AM
by ChuangTzu
* Engineers Create Optical Cloaking Design For Invisibility veggie 957 1 04/08/07 07:44 PM
by iateshaggy
* If Cycorp is right -> AI Singularity within 10 years cybrbeast 1,176 19 04/29/05 01:11 PM
by ChuangTzu
* New Self-Replicating Robot -- A First Step To Gray Goo? DiploidM 905 4 07/02/06 10:52 PM
by Learyfan

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Lana, trendal, automan
839 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 0 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
SoulSpeciosa Kratom
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.041 seconds spending 0.01 seconds on 19 queries.