Foresight Update 26
Page 3
A publication of the Foresight Institute
Challenges of Nanotechnology Misuse Cited in New Book on "Human Extinction"
by Lew Phelps
In his new book, The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of Human Extinction, philosopher John Leslie provides a broader view for those who are worried about nanotechnology-caused accidents. He devotes exactly three of his 310 pages to potential threats arising from nanotechnology. However, in that short space he suggests a Draconian political solution that many people will find unacceptable.
The problem of nanotechnology misuse is almost lost within Leslie's large catalog of possible life-ending natural disasters (volcanic eruption, asteroid hits, nearby supernova, etc.), man-made disasters (unwillingness to rear children, genetic engineering run amok, production of a new Big Bang in the laboratory, etc.), and "risks from philosophy" (threats associated with religion, Schopenhauerian pessimism, ethical relativism, etc.). As farfetched as such problems may seem individually, this is a thoughtful and carefully written book whose conclusions deserve attention.
Leslie's treatise arises from a "doomsday argument"
advanced by cosmologist Brandon Carter, summed up as, "We
ought to have some reluctance to believe that we are very
exceptionally early, for instance in the earliest 0.001 percent,
among all humans who will ever have lived." While such
logic could equally but wrongly have been applied by Stone Age
Man (if he were capable of logical thought), the ascent of
technologies and philosophies increases the odds that extinction
could overtake humanity relatively soon, Leslie argues. The risks
of nuclear war, for example, are obviously larger for those alive
today than for all who lived before 1945. So are risks from loss
of biodiversity.
Leslie's discussion of the challenges arising from nanotechnology
is largely on target. Quoting from Eric Drexler's Engines of Creation,
he first outlines the broad concepts of nanotechnology and some
of its potential benefits (health, computing, manufacturing). His
discussion of the potential threats associated with
nanotechnology identifies and--with appropriate
swiftness--discards accidental disaster as a real problem. He
notes that natural organisms "make heavy use of spontaneous
assembly," which relies on random matching of molecular
topological features. "Nanodevices, on the other hand, would
be more like automobiles. Most of their parts wouldn't work at
all unless positioned very accurately," he says.
The real threat of nanotechnology, Leslie says, is from
deliberate misuse. He quotes Drexler (from Engines)
that trying to suppress the emerging technology is "futile
and dangerous," and advances Drexler's alternative of
"intelligently targeted delay to postpone threats until we
are prepared for them." However, as Drexler has noted,
dangerous replicators can be created faster and with less
difficulty than counteragents, Leslie says.
Our quarrel with Leslie is with his proposed solution, which
seems perilously akin to suppression: "We can but hope
that the temptations of war, terrorism and crime will be
removed--by a huge international police force, or by firm
education of the kind which many kind-hearted folk regard as
vicious brainwashing?--before any nanotechnological revolution
hits us." (Italics added by Update.)
The challenges of managing the emergence of nanotechnology are
daunting, but turning the world into an Orwellian police state
hardly seems the best solution within mankind's reach. That is
why truly informed discussion is essential. Foresight Institute
is pursuing with
intensity the creation of solid platforms on which informed
discussion can take place. Advanced hypertext holds real promise
with its ability for integrating proposals and commentary upon
them. Many within the Foresight community are working to make it
real. When they do, discussions can proceed on a higher plane
than before.
Value systems alone seem inadequate to keep Pandora's Box locked.
For example, despite Saddam Hussein's international disrepute and
global sanctions to proscribe sale of key technologies to him,
arms merchants have struck deals to provide Iraq with essential
components of nuclear warheads. Some shipments have been
intercepted; others no doubt have not. We must assume that a few
people will always be willing to take a profit and run, even if
the consequences of their actions leave literally no place to go.
Who best can resolve the challenges nanotechnology will bring? No
single person can provide the answers, nor can any single group
or intellectual discipline. However, those who know the
technology best (those who create it) must ultimately prepare the
agenda for broad discussion, and participate fully in creation of
relevant policy. In the realm of nanotechnology, public policy
and science have become inseparable. Foresight Institute's most
essential role has never been more clearly illuminated.
John Leslie is Professor of Philosophy at the University of
Guelph, Guelph, Ontario. He has previously written several books
on topics at the intersection of cosmology and philosophy. (The
End of the World, Routledge, London, 1996. ISBN
0-415-14043-9. US$23.)
Revamped Foresight Web Site Eases Exploration of Nanotech Resources
Seasoned denizens of the World Wide Web know too well that the
free form allowed by hyperlinks can readily dissolve into chaos.
Many Web sites have no discernable architecture, and thus make it
very difficult to navigate easily within the site.
Foresight Institute's World Wide Web site (http://www.foresight.org) now stands
sharply in contrast. Thanks greatly to the efforts of new
Webmaster Jim Lewis, the site presents a crisp look and efficient
map for visitors. Members of the Foresight community who haven't
visited the site recently should do so. It now includes (among
other things):
- a reorganized presentation of Foresight's debate with Scientific
American.
- links to thoughtful discussions on existing and near-term
solutions enabling backlinks--a precursor to what
Foresight hopes to achieve through its Web Enhancement
Project.
- links to the full text of Eric Drexler's Engines of
Creation.
- an amusing set of erroneous predictions about science and
technology, drawn from a Congressional Research Report
and recently converted to HTML.
- back issues of this newsletter.
- links to other key nanotechnology sites.
Lewis adds new materials to the site regularly, so frequent
visits will repay the time invested. Recently added materials are
marked with a "new" symbol for ease of navigation.
Law in Technology
Editor's note: In this issue, we are pleased to welcome
copyright attorney Roy S. Gordet, who has been working with the
Foresight Institute in addressing some recently encountered
copyright issues. The following text is provided by Mr. Gordet:
by Roy S. Gordet
As most readers of this publication know, Foresight Institute
recently encountered a rough stretch on the information highway
in the form of accusations of copyright infringement. Scientific
American accused Foresight Institute of infringing SciAm's
copyright by "publishing" a SciAm article
at Foresight Institute's website. Of course, Foresight Institute
included extensive and pointed criticism of the SciAm
article, which was highly critical of nanotechnology's position
in the scientific community.
Webmaster's note: For details and further links, see the debate
overview.
Foresight Institute took the position that Foresight Institute's
"use" of the SciAm article was not an
infringement because it was a "fair use." This presents
a good opportunity to explain for the readership, in a condensed
version, the fair use doctrine of copyright law, with particular
application to the Internet. This is a formidable task, made even
more formidable by the space limitations of this column.
The Copyright Act gives the owner of copyrightable work of
authorship the exclusive right to publicly distribute, display,
reproduce and perform the work, and to create derivative works
based upon the work. However, the Act recognizes that certain
exceptions should exist for purposes of criticism, comment, news
reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. According to
Section 107 of the Copyright Act, in determining whether the use
made of a work in any particular case is a fair use, courts must
consider four factors:
- the purpose and character of the use (e.g., is it for a
commercial purpose or an educational purpose?);
- the nature of the copyrighted work (is it a novel, or a
factual scientific report?);
- the amount and substantiality of the portion used in
relation the copyrighted work as a whole;
- the effect of the use upon the potential market for or
value of the copyrighted work.
These four factors have been developed by judges, who have
created the fair use "exception" to copyright
infringement over the past one hundred years. The fair use
doctrine became an explicit part of the copyright statute in
1978. These cases are recognized by judges as being extremely
difficult, and judges and appellate courts are in constant
disagreement over the application of the doctrine.
With limited exceptions, copyright law is applied the same
whether a work is published on television, a newspaper, or on the
Internet. The four factors noted above must be applied by the
courts, one would hope, consistently. Unfortunately, because the
fair use doctrine is so dependent upon the specific facts of each
case, it is particularly difficult to predict with certainty how
a court will rule in each instance.
In the case of the SciAm article, a significant
factor that weighed strongly in favor of a finding of fair use
was that Foresight Institute was engaging in scientific/academic
debate, arguably in an attempt to maintain its
scientific/academic existence. Underlying the fair use doctrine
is the First Amendment, and Foresight Institute had certain First
Amendment rights to effectively counter the accusations and
alleged misstatements of the SciAm article.
Foresight Institute presumably did not profit from the
publication of the SciAm article on its website, and
it was not Foresight Institute's intention to divert readership
from the original SciAm article found in the SciAm
publication.
SciAm's primary argument may be that the publication of the SciAm
article by Foresight Institute is a copyright infringement,
because:
- Foresight Institute published the entire article, which SciAm
maintains was more than was necessary for purposes of
criticizing or commenting on the work, and
- potential purchasers of the original SciAm
publication will have no further need to purchase the
publication because they were able to read the article in
its entirety at the Foresight Institute website.
Of course, Foresight Institute may argue that it was necessary
to publish at its own website exactly the amount of the SciAm
article published to effectively criticize the article and to
address each and every issue and concern raised in the article.
In view of the fact that the Foresight Institute web site
publication likely occurs after the next edition of SciAm
hit the news stands, Foresight Institute would argue that the
limited publication of just one article out of several articles
in the original SciAm publication was merely free
publicity and promotion for SciAm, and had
absolutely no negative effect on SciAm's profits in
connection with the sale of the original edition.
This is the kind of give and take analysis and factual
application typical of legal disputes, and in particular with the
fact-intensive inquiry required by the fair use doctrine.
(Editor's Note: With the expected arrival on the scene of more
advanced hypertext features, such as Paul Haeberli's
"transclusions," future critiques will be able to
display quoted materials without storing any of the quotee's
copyrighted material at the quoter's Web site. For more details,
see an essay by Paul Haeberli at [http://reality.sgi.com/grafica/merge/],
or the Web site of the Xanadu project at http://xanadu.com.au/xanadu/)
With regard to the copying of an Internet posting, it is
necessary to consider whether an author of such a posting would
object to the publication of his/her publication on grounds of
copyright infringement, and whether such a posting contains works
belonging to some other author B who may or may not have given
author A permission to use author B's work. For example, if you
copy the entire posted article by author A, then you may be
liable to author A or author B, or both. The analysis for
copyright infringement may be different for each, and the fair
use analysis may be slightly different for each. In any case, the
courts have made it clear that the "transmission" of
postings on the Internet can be considered a copyright
infringement, even if none of the infringers has made hard copies
of such posted or transmitted publications. Indeed, by
transmitting on the Internet or posting at a website, the
potential for infringing activity exceeds what is possible by the
more traditional publication channels.
Before downloading or retransmitting third party works posted on
the Internet, the "downloader" should consider:
- how much of the original work is being downloaded;
- how important are the portions that are being posted;
- whether the original author already protested against
these or similar transmissions; and
- whether the work itself needs to be downloaded to make
the necessary point. Although one can be guilty of
copyright infringement without having any intent to
infringe or knowledge of infringing someone else's
copyright, to the extent that the copyright owner can
portray the transmitter/distributor as having malicious
motives, it may be easier to convince the judge or jury
of the infringement, which could result in enhanced
penalties, such as an award of attorney's fees.
One set of copyright experts believe that the copyright laws
need a major overhaul to address all of the new and difficult
issues posed by the explosion in electronic publishing. Others
believe that existing copyright law is equipped to deal with the
issues and challenges presented by electronic publishing and
commerce because the basic principles of the Copyright law are
adaptable. The answer is probably somewhere in between.
Regardless, the application of the fair use doctrine in any
context will unfortunately remain one of the more perplexing and
least predictable areas of the law. Think at least twice before
you use someone else's copyrightable work of authorship.
Roy S. Gordet is a San Francisco attorney who assisted the
Foresight Institute in connection with the Scientific
American controversy referred to in the article.
Web Watch
by James B. Lewis, Ph.D.
Al Globus's Computational Molecular Nanotechnology at NASA
Ames Research Center
The home page for Computational Molecular Nanotechnology at
NASA Ames Research Center (http://science.nas.nasa.gov/Groups/Nanotechnology/)
provides an easily accessible introduction to their efforts and
related work, and some examples of the early fruits of those
efforts.
One interesting page
in this site shows pictures of a hypothetical family of gears
made by chemically derivatizing buckyballs, a conceivable
near-term marriage of computational nanotechnology and
experimental nanoscale science. (See related story on page 1.)
In addition to authoring the above page on computational
nanotechnology, Al Globus has authored a comprehensive site
on one application of a mature nanotechnology - space
colonization. Most of this site deals with general issues of
space settlement, but one page
specifically deals with how molecular nanotechnology would make a
very difficult and expensive project much more practical.
Another page ("Small is Beautiful")
by Al Globus gives a long lists of links to pages on
computational nanotechnology, experimental nanotechnology, and
related topics. One particularly useful link is to the MathMol
Web site (http://cwis.nyu.edu/pages/mathmol/),
which includes an excellent and easily understandable basic
(K-12) introduction to molecular modeling.
Will Ware's Web Site
Will Ware's Web site contains a freeware "SimCity"
approach to designing small molecules as "hypothetical
designs for nanotechnological widgets." He provides a
general discussion of this approach at http://world.std.com/~wware/freesim.html
and a more in depth description of his GNU-licensed CAD program
"NanoCAD" at http://world.std.com/~wware/ncad.html.
NanoCAD v0.2 is available from this site for Unix/X machines,
Microsoft Windows machines, and Macintoshes (although a download
link for the Mac version was not yet apparent). At this early
stage of development, NanoCAD uses the MM2 force field to compute
force vectors and minimum-energy configurations. One feature that
makes NanoCAD very interesting is that it is a work in progress,
with publicly available source code that can be modified. This
may be a great opportunity for those with expertise in chemistry,
physics, or programming to get involved in computational
nanotechnology.
Ware's philosophy for this work: "I am distributing NanoCAD
as free software because I think nanotechnology or something
essentially similar will probably arrive in a few decades. People
will need to be informed, and will need to make important policy
decisions. I hope NanoCAD (in addition to being fun to play with)
will help to inform people in the fundamental science underlying
nanotechnology, so that policy discussions can be more focussed,
and snake oil and other bogosity can be rapidly identified and
dismissed."
Nanothinc Web Site
Nanothinc (http://www.nanothinc.com/) presents a large web site on nanotechnology and related topics. Their definition of nanotechnology is very broad and includes a large amount of material not related to molecular nanotechnology (or even to nanoscale science and technology), so that some effort is required to find material focused on molecular nanotechnology. [Note, December 1999: The Nanothinc domain is no longer available] Among those pages most relevant to molecular nanotechnology are:
- (http://nanothinc.com/NanoWorld/Introduction/Molecules/WorkingMolecules-1.0.html), "Working molecules - progress towards nanotechnology," written by Richard Terra, is an overview of current technologies with promise as pathways to molecular nanotechnology. [December, 1999: another version of this work is currently available at the author's web site: http://home.earthlink.net/~rpterra/nt/WMtext.html]
Thomas McCarthy's Web Site
(http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~tmccarth/main.htm)
A web site devoted to the discussion of the political, social,
and economics implications of molecular nanotechnology is
"Molecular nanotechnology and the world system" by
Thomas McCarthy. This document is currently incomplete, but
contains interesting discussions of power and conflict, and
presents a new viewpoint of what are the real dangers that
nanotechnology could bring into the world.
Sherry Miller's Web Site
One indication that the meme of nanotechnology is spreading is
the appearance of an occasional page on nanotechnology in a web
site devoted to an unrelated topic. An example is
"Nanowackology: understanding terrifying science through
humor" (http://www.sherryart.com/nano/nanohome.html)
at Sherry Miller's web site (http://www.sherryart.com/index.shtml),
where the theme is "where art and technology meet and, when
they don't, humor is dragged in to do the job." The brief
"nanowackology" page focuses on communicating to
nontechnically-inclined people what molecular nanotechnology will
mean to them (and the rest of us as well).
Web Watch provides brief review of interesting
and recently posted nanotechnology related materials on the World
Wide Web. Jim Lewis, of James B. Lewis Enterprises in Seattle, WA
is Foresight's Webmaster. He can be reached by email at: nanojbl@halcyon.com
From Foresight Update 26, originally published 15 September 1996.
|