..self assembly is one of the key properties of components in biological replication, so learning new things about it is not to be sneezed at – our own cells would be unable to to replicate or even function without the property of self-assembly, which all our proteins (read: machine parts) possess. It is no coincidence that many researchers in the nanotech arena study molecular biology avidly.

Aside from this, the development of self-replicating nanoscale systems is something that I feel should be avoided, as they are so exceptionally dangerous – the 'grey goo' scenario could so easily result from a single misplaced machine instruction. It is far safer to have macro-scale assembly devices that turn out self-assembling nanoscale parts or systems, because its much easier to control something you can see without instruments (try flipping the 'off' switch on a robot a few microns across. Hell, try finding a robot a few microns across…..)

Besides, don't you find the idea of buying a can of 'Solar Paint' for your roof to cut your energy bills appealing?

What's the big deal here? Self-Assembly has been seen in Chemistry for years now. Are you mistaking the self-assembly in the article with 'self-replication'?

'Self-Replication' is the key to Nanotechnology, itself, but self-assembly is not. It's too bad that the researchers at IBM and the universities think that reaching the 10^9 limit in size is Nanotechnology – when in fact, it's not. TRUE Nanotechnology will only be made possible with Self-Replication and no one has found out a way to self-replicate ANYTHING but their own cells yet. Perhaps our cells hold the key to the knowledge of self-replication?