Can technology be stopped?
Jim Von Ehr is founder and chief executive of Zyvex, established in 1997 as the world's "first molecular nanotechnology company."
Von Ehr is quoted extensively in the Dallas Morning News article on nanotechnology that we highlighted yesterday. He discusses advanced nanomaterials, reinforced with carbon nanotubes, and the amazing potential of nanomedicine.
The article also describes nanotech applications for "the next generation of high-definition televisions" and for "ever more powerful processors" to enable super-powerful computing.
And is that all? Apparently not.
Mr. Von Ehr said there's a growing consensus among scientists that nanotechnology will develop beyond those applications...The [U.S.] federal government is also betting that nanotech will soon evolve into almost science fiction-level products.
However, not everyone is happy with these expectations.
Some environmental groups and other organizations have called for additional research and, in some cases, outright bans...But Jeff Wacker, a futurist with Electronic Data Systems, said bans and moratoriums would be misguided since other countries are already delving into nanotech.
Google, for example, has a Web site called Google Trends where you can see how popular certain search terms are in different cities and countries around the world. Mr. Wacker pointed out that while the U.S. isn't in the top 10 of countries that do the most searches on nanotechnology, Iran is No. 2. [emphasis added]
"I don't think they're planning to use nano to feed the world," Mr. Wacker said. "Technology can't be stopped. Our job is not be afraid and cry the sky is falling, but to recognize the potential problems upfront and prevent them from becoming the problems they could be."
We're not sure whether Iran is planning to use nanotech to feed the world -- nor, for that matter, whether anyone else is either. But we think Wacker is correct in suggesting that attempts to halt or slow technology development in one location will only see it developed quickly somewhere else. For this and other reasons, CRN is on record as opposing any sort of moratorium on nanotechnology R&D.
We support the responsible development of advanced nanotechnology -- not because we believe the technology is safe, but because we believe it is risky -- and the only realistic alternative to responsible development is irresponsible development.
Tags: nanotechnology nanotech nano science technology ethics weblog blog
the google trends uses normalization. So it is the ratio of overall google searches.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/trends/about.html#4
So out of all searches on google certain cities in India and Iran perform a higher ratio of searches on nanotechnology
http://www.google.com/trends?q=nanotechnology&ctab=1&sa=N
On my nanotechnology site, 60% of my hits are from the USA and 2% are from Iran.
However clearly Iran and India are giving greater mindshare to nanotechnology (in spite of most of the sites being in english.
the clear example of an existing ban that is not helping the USA is the federal ban on stem cells. the leading work just migrated out of the USA.
Posted by: Brian Wang | April 17, 2007 at 02:11 PM
History is Full of technologies that were slowed or prevented fully just by poor marketing, fashion, or disinterest. So far, MNT and AI are among these technologies. Old science fiction or popular science are practically compendia of 5% such technologies 95% genuinely bad ideas.
Nuclear Power
Phage Therapy
Medical development after medical development
Various hemp applications
Various improved automotive engines
Really though, the most astonishing in some respects that I have seen is mathematically and logically sound options pricing, which was apparently invented in 1908 and reinvented in 1973 for a Nobel in 1997.
How about Micro-credit? For how long had that been technologically and socially feasible? 1000 years? 2000?
Some perfectly good technologies have even essentially been lost *by accident* due to regulation. Train transport in the US over distances greater than 100 miles, for instance.
Posted by: michael vassar | April 17, 2007 at 09:50 PM
Education is an even more dramatic domain where essentially EVERY promising advance grinds to a complete stop prior to reaching any substantial penetration. US literacy has been falling for many decades. Does anyone now have *Any idea* how to get ancient Athens-level creative productivity from a non-selective population of people of similar size to the free male adult population of Athens? How about Scottish Enlightenment level? Renaissance Venice? Can anyone even rebuild Europe's pre-War university system?
Posted by: michael vassar | April 17, 2007 at 10:02 PM