You may have noticed that I haven't posted in a few days. I've been busy working on another potentially dangerous technology.
I've recently become aware of an instance of biotech research that appears to potentially be extremely dangerous. The researchers acknowledge some of the danger, but may be too confident in their safety measures.
I've been working for the past week or two to pull together a group of scientists and risk experts, to build an opinion on the risk and whether it's appropriate to ask for the work to be postponed. This has been taking a substantial amount of my time. But we may have only months to affect the course of this research, while we probably have several years until molecular manufacturing arrives.
At this point, it seems likely that "going through channels" will get better results than applying grassroots pressure. And it's still possible that the risk is less than I think, in which case it would be unfortunate to raise alarm toward a group doing valuable and relatively safe scientific work.
That's why I'm not being specific about what the research is: it's too early for mass action or publicity (and it may never be needed). If all goes well, and the level of scientific alarm either grows to be self-sustaining or shrinks due to a finding of low risk, I'll be able to re-focus on CRN in a few weeks.
Meanwhile, I'll keep posting here every few days. My next post will probably be on RepRap - just in the last few days, it's achieved an exciting new capability. Watch this space...
..you can at least give us a hint. You don't get to say that and then just take off!
Posted by: Svein Ove | April 21, 2009 at 01:23 AM
When you review the risks of nanotechnology, please take a close look at this site:
http://staningerreport.com/#nano911.html
Posted by: Claire | April 21, 2009 at 06:49 AM
My guess would be something in the realm of genetic engineered organisms for producing biofuel.
We should assume by default that any artificial self-replicator - right now that means genetically engineered organisms - applied beyond tightly controlled lab environments WILL escape control in some fashion.
I'm not terribly concerned about ideas of organisms that eat coal and turn it into biofuel, simply because if that were energetically favored to work in underground coal seams, it would have likely evolved already.
Now something that can eat relatively recent human products, such as plastic - THAT I could see as a likely risk - energy rich materials in an oxygen rich environment, unable to defend itself. If someone is creating an organism to break down plastics in landfills, THAT's a HUGE risk.
Posted by: Tom Craver | April 21, 2009 at 10:10 AM
If someone is creating an organism to break down plastics in landfills, that’s a HUGE risk"
True and can you see, if the genetically engineered organism gets out the local gas station will have a mess on its hand, when all the plastic containers brake down. :)
Posted by: todd andersen | April 21, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Read "An Ill Wind" novel for what this might do.
Posted by: Tom Mazanec | April 21, 2009 at 09:01 PM
"An Ill Wind" is not very realistic. If you want to write hard science, you have to get the details right. It's a cautionary fable, not to be taken literally.
There are already a number of microorganisms that can live on diesel fuel. The world hasn't ended yet.
A quick google found this page on bacteria in diesel, and this reference to free-living Antarctic bacteria that can degrade diesel as the sole organic substrate.
Chris
Posted by: Chris Phoenix | April 22, 2009 at 02:58 PM
> The researchers acknowledge some of the danger, but may be too confident in their safety measures.
Chris, don't you see that you guys will never be able to stay ahead of every emerging threat? Lifeboat and CRN need to give up the idea that defenses can be developed to all potential threats. At best, actions can only delay the inevitable.
Is there anywhere in the world an underground bunker with the ability to sustain survivors indefinitely? Will the survivors have the capability to eventually leave the bunker and construct a safe life outside of it? If not then the survival side of the equation is not being adequately addressed.
Posted by: John Hunt | April 26, 2009 at 03:03 PM
Perhaps they are trying to hybridize human and H5N1 bird flu so they can start work on a vaccine?
Posted by: Tom Mazanec | May 03, 2009 at 08:36 AM