• Google
    This Blog Web

October 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

RSS Feed

Bookmark and Share

Email Feed

  • Powered by FeedBlitz

« Nanotechnology Workshop | Main | About Geoethical Nanotech »

July 21, 2005


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jay Oatway

I'm not sure what you hope to gain with all this "slowly, slowly" policy advice.

If, when the Wright brothers set out to accomplish heavier-than-air flight, there had been people saying, "we should go slow or else someone might crash and get hurt," then Kittyhawk wouldn't be famous--some other less regualted site in some other country would be.

You're right about the "when, not if" this technology will arrive and change the course of human civilization forever. However, the breakthrough accomplishments that history will remember will come from those least concerned with the "responsible" aspect of nanotech.

Let's accomplish the big breakthroughs first, and then worry about making them safer second. Otherwise, the world is going to remember places like Korea, China, or India for transforming business, industry, social structures, and the balance of world power.

Mike Treder, CRN

Jay wrote: I'm not sure what you hope to gain with all this "slowly, slowly" policy advice.

I'm not sure where you think I said we should go "slowly, slowly" in either policy or in the technology. I have said many times that molecular manufacturing should be developed and implemented as rapidly as it can be done safely and responsibly.

International agreements may be a necessity to avert worldwide chaos, despotism, and/or war. Determining what is needed will require extensive and intense study. Any global agreements must be planned carefully and wisely. Because it will take a long time to design and then deploy such solutions, it is urgent that we begin as soon as possible.


I like the Dimensions of Development paper. Certain MM research program structures may be found to be inherently more likely to yield non-suicidal results than others. If these "responsible" characteristics could be isolated, a report card could be issued by CRN to assess which known MM efforts are following an A+ path to our civilization's prosperity, and which are failing. Some prospective donors or personnel might be more likely support responsible efforts, if the characteristics of these could be surmised.


This site is very informative about alll naotechnology. I want to make research proposal on nano techniology.Guide mye how to make a research proposal on naotechnology thanx alot


To elaborate on the idea of ranking MM efforts: A Nanhattan won't make their efforts public. And if details of such secrets were ever made public, the publisher would likely mysteriously disappear, or suffer a sudden heart, or be shot by Jack Ruby... so the default is to assume ALL nations have a functional Nanhattan.
How to rank them according to safety? Well, the purpose of a Nanhattan would be to gain military hedgemony, so the rest of us would be as weak and powerless against Nanhattan adminstrators as our current world's poorest are against the rest of the world's administation. I suggest using a guideline which measures how well each nation of the world presently acts to administer development to powerless populations.

I googled this ranking of 21 of the richest nations. The Danes, Portugal and the Dutch come out on top. Canada, Aussies, Japan and USA finish at the back of the pack. Incidentally, all of the nations on this list would probably finish well in a truly global ranking. International development assistance doesn't seem like a bad marker of assessing MM stewardship responsibility.

Mike Treder, CRN

That's an interesting find, 'cdn.' One interpretation would be that development of MM by an EU consortium might be a good alternative if a fully global effort cannot be achieved.

Chris Phoenix, CRN

Muhammad, you can send proposals to me; cphoenix at crnano.org. Please don't use contractions like thanx in your proposal, and please make sure you know the difference between molecular manufacturing and nanoscale technologies.


The comments to this entry are closed.