Comments on: Nanotechnology’s role in national security http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299 examining transformative technology Wed, 03 Apr 2013 18:23:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299#comment-812893 Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:30:03 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299#comment-812893 <a href="http://index1.titki-00.ru" rel="nofollow">

]]> By: Christine Peterson http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299#comment-29853 Christine Peterson Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:31:08 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299#comment-29853 Hi Eric, thanks for writing. You ask "Can we expect nanotechnology to remain more challenging than nerve-gas chemistry?" I would say no, not in the long term. If you go to the quite in Unbounding, the next section discusses that phase. It's a bit out of date, but the basic point is made that eventually we'll need to address this issue of nanoterrorism. Thanks again! —Christine Hi Eric, thanks for writing. You ask “Can we expect nanotechnology to remain more challenging than nerve-gas chemistry?” I would say no, not in the long term. If you go to the quite in Unbounding, the next section discusses that phase. It’s a bit out of date, but the basic point is made that eventually we’ll need to address this issue of nanoterrorism. Thanks again! —Christine

]]> By: Eric Tulloch http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299#comment-29827 Eric Tulloch Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:57:33 +0000 http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2299#comment-29827 Regarding your quote from Unbounding the Future: “So long as nanotechnology is technologically more challenging than the simple chemistry of nerve gas, nanoterrorism should not be a primary concern.” Can we expect nanotechnology to remain more challenging than nerve-gas chemistry? If we think of software such as NanoEngineer-1, which even now is accessible/manipulable by highschool students, can we not expect such engineering tools to become even simpler by the time we have the ability to merge such software with a self-contained "nanofactory"? To draw a comparison with computers: punchcard computing, although relatively simple in concept, was rather complex and tedious in practice. Modern computing, on the other hand, is extraordinarily complex in concept and function, yet is incredibly simple to use (in certain aspects, granted). Considering technology's general trend to make ever-increasingly complex tools ever simpler, how can we expect nanotechnology to be any different? Regarding your quote from Unbounding the Future: “So long as nanotechnology is technologically more challenging than the simple chemistry of nerve gas, nanoterrorism should not be a primary concern.”

Can we expect nanotechnology to remain more challenging than nerve-gas chemistry? If we think of software such as NanoEngineer-1, which even now is accessible/manipulable by highschool students, can we not expect such engineering tools to become even simpler by the time we have the ability to merge such software with a self-contained “nanofactory”? To draw a comparison with computers: punchcard computing, although relatively simple in concept, was rather complex and tedious in practice. Modern computing, on the other hand, is extraordinarily complex in concept and function, yet is incredibly simple to use (in certain aspects, granted). Considering technology’s general trend to make ever-increasingly complex tools ever simpler, how can we expect nanotechnology to be any different?

]]>