from the go-self-assembly dept.
Senior Associate MarkMuhlestein writes "This looks like interesting work, reported in the Dec 15 Science. If you have access, the entire article is at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/290/5499/2126 Here's the abstract: Science, 290, 2126 (15 Dec 2000) 'We show a simple, robust, chemical route to the fabrication of ultrahigh-density arrays of nanopores with high aspect ratios using the equilibrium self-assembled morphology of asymmetric diblock copolymers. The dimensions and lateral density of the array are determined by segmental interactions and the copolymer molecular weight. Through direct current electrodeposition, we fabricated vertical arrays of nanowires with densities in excess of 1.9 x 10^11 wires per square centimeter. We found markedly enhanced coercivities with ferromagnetic cobalt nanowires that point toward a route to ultrahigh-density storage media. The copolymer approach described is practical, parallel, compatible with current lithographic processes, and amenable to multilayered device fabrication.' Thurn-Albrecht et al., U Mass @ Amherst, IBM Watson, LANL"

from the is-there-a-programmers-code-of-ethics dept.
An engineer points out that the engineering professions have codes of ethics that guide them in designing for safety and in communicating with the public, and that these are not being followed by some programmers: "It seems to me that as a nanomechanical engineer (or rather a mechanical engineer with an interest in nanomechanics), I was permanently "conditioned" to always think of the ethics behind a design by "upping the safety factor" on my design. If your daily dealing with deadly machines — or rather machines that can cause harm to the public — then as an engineer I am obligated to design something that has a higher safety factor than someone who designs air conditioning systems. This fact, or rather a standard rule of engineering practice, has been overlooked by Joy and his counterparts…My point is this, that as a general rule engineers create highly reliable systems that must have a certain safety factor included whenever there is the slightest chance of harm to the public. I, or rather we, as engineers (Civil, mechanical, (High power) Electrical), are always worried about the safety factors we have set on a design…I think I might be over simplifying the issue but ultimately I have a hard time understanding why so many programmers are a) claiming to have a solid understanding of safety factors when their job has only a few instances for life or death of the public and b), if they follow the same code of ethics set forth by the state governmental systems, why is it they are not lumped together with the rest of the classically trained engineers? One other thing, if they are, then didn't they see that part in the ethics section about slandering or speaking out to the public on something in which they have no educated knowledge?… I would love to hear what the software "engineers" have to say about this particular essay in order for me to learn more about their trade." Read More for the full post.

from the and-now-a-word-from-our-sponsor dept.
Sunday, December 31, is the last day to have your tax-year-2000 donation to Foresight doubled by our $35,000 Challenge Grant. To get your year 2000 U.S. federal tax deduction: donate online, fax, or write your check by tomorrow. (Donations to Foresight are tax-deductible in the U.S. to the full extent allowed by law.) Save more by donating stock. Read more for the various options, from $5K and up, down to $45 or even $0.

from the who-else-is-even-paying-attention? dept.
From a Newsweek article on MSNBC on the coming age of cyborgs: "Who, then, can speak on moral issues? Certainly not the engineers. Ellen Ullman, a former computer programmer and the author of the 1997 book Close to the Machine: Technology and Its Discontents, says that 'the problem is not the technology, which in any event canít be stopped. The problem is that engineers are making decisions for the rest of us.' Programmers are hired guns, she says, and rarely understand in a nuanced way their clientsí actual work. They are, she says, the last people 'to understand what is an acceptable risk.' " CP: In Foresight's experience, programmers and engineers are far more attentive to ethical issues in technology than members of other professions.

from the waves-of-the-future? dept.
The prospect of nanotech is already affecting real-world business decisions, as reported by Reuters on Yahoo about the company KPNQwest NV, the Dutch-American data communications company: "President and Chief Executive Jack McMaster said nanotechnology meant the company may be able to pack so much more processing power into each 10,000 square meter center that it could build fewer. That would save it a fortune, as each center costs more than 50 million euros ($44.48 million) to build…'I've begun to rethink my position only because of the implications of nanotechnology,' he said. 'The amount of computing power that's going to occupy a square meter could be four, five, six times what we initially thought.' "

from the at-least-it's-Max-not-Joe dept.
PR News on Yahoo reports that a nanotech "action figure" [read: doll for boys] is a big hit: " 'All factors indicate that by year-end Max Steel will exceed a $100 million brand worldwide in its first year,' said Matt Bousquette, president of Mattel's Boys/Entertainment division. 'And, that the product line will be a complete sell-out by Christmas in various countries'…Max Steel is a unique aspirational character that kids can identify with and the innovative 12-inch scale appeals to boys four years old and up. Josh McGrath is a cool college student and action sports athlete who is accidentally infused with nanotechnology (N-Tek(TM)) giving him super human abilities and turning him into Max Steel." CP: "Aspirational" is right, and those aspirations just might work out.

from the Breaking-News dept.

According to a Zyvex press release, Zyvex CEO Jim Von Ehr will be interviewed by the Wall Street Reporter on Friday, December 29, 2000.

Wall Street Reporter, an information source for professional investors, interviews 40 to 60 CEOs daily. The audio of their interview with Von Ehr can be heard on December 29, 2000, beginning at 12:30pm EST. Click on the Zyvex link in the section titled, "Today's CEO Interviews".

The interview will be archived under the section titled, "CEO Interviews A-Z" from December 30, 2000 through January 3, 2001.

RealPlayer is required to hear this broadcast; it can be downloaded directly from the Wall Street Reporter site.

from the for-your-holiday-amusement dept.
Yahoo's PR News reports that "Nano-Tex, LLC announced today that it has agreed to license Galey & Lord (NYSE: GNL – news) and Burlington PerformanceWear (NYSE: BUR – news) to utilize the molecular technology of Nano-Tex in fabric production… 'Nano-Care and Nano-Dry are the first introductions in a family of products being developed by Nano-Tex, bringing ease of care and superior performance to everyday fabrics. Research on other products is progressing well. The nanotechnology platform can be applied to a wide variety of fabric types to create multiple performance features. By changing the fabric at the molecular level, Nano-Tex creates new opportunities in the marketplace with differentiated products based on cutting-edge nanotechnology. We believe that our ability to bring this technology to everyday fabrics will set a new standard for fabric performance in the future.' Nano-Tex, LLC is a research company founded on the principles of nanotechnology creating new or improved textile properties through molecular engineering." CP: I don't know about the fabric, but the marketing is state of the art.

from the go-fullerenes dept.
From PR Newswire on Yahoo comes this news from Toronto: "William Multi-Tech Inc., (“Multi-Tech'') (TSE:WIM – news) announced today that C Sixty Inc. (“C Sixty'') a privately held biotechnology company, in which Multi-Tech has a 40% ownership interest, has begun upscale manufacturing of its lead fullerene based drug candidate for treatment of patients with AIDS and AIDS related disease. As a novel anti-HIV drug, C Sixty's product has to date demonstrated potent activity against multiple strains of the HIV virus including drug resistant and de-novo resistant strains of the virus…The potential for widespread applications of C Sixty's technology in medicine, positions the company as a leader in the emerging field of Nanotechnology and its related Biotechnology market. "

from the that's-a-long-time-from-now dept.
Found by GoTo.com: The essay The World in 2050 by Yale lecturer Nick Bostrom features an imaginary dialogue, set in 2050 and broadcast in virtual reality, in which three polymaths debate various issues, especially risk of destructive nanotechnology. The discussion closes with: "We need greater-than-human intelligence to build defenses against nano-attacks. We would not reduce the danger by slowing down; on the contrary, that would make the risks even bigger. The best we can do is to press onward with all possible speed, using as much foresight as we can muster, and hope that there is an other side that we can get to."

from the sounds-like-he-gets-it dept.
In an interview with Science posted at Yahoo, outgoing President Clinton said: "[Most] people still don't know what nanotechnology is. But if you combine the sequencing of the human gene and the capacity to identify genetic variations that lead to various kinds of cancers with the potential of nanotechnology, you get to the point where, in the imagination, you're identifying cancers when, assuming you have the screening technologies right, there are only a few cells coagulated together in this mutinous way, so that you raise the prospect of literally having 100 percent cure and prevention rate for every kind of cancer, which is something that would have been just unimaginable before…And I think the work we've done in nanotechnology in 10, 20 years from now will look very big, indeed. I just think that the potential of this is just breathtaking, and it will change even the way we think about things like calculation or what we're supposed to know how to do. It will — it's going to really, I think, have a huge and still under-appreciated impact on our understanding of human processes and our capacity to do things."

from the MEMS-helps-with-NEMS dept.
A recent article in Technology Review, Nanotech Goes to Work, looks at near-term (mostly top-down) research. Excerpt: "The reliance on AFM tips and cantilevers illustrates a decidedly mechanical bent in much of today's nanotech research. Indeed, the strategy of using small silicon-based machines called MEMS (microelectromechanical systems) to manipulate nano devices is turning out to be an especially promising area." Includes obligatory (for TR) swipes at those interested in molecular nanotechnology ("enthusiasts", "purists").

from the first-assembler-in-vacuum-or-liquid? dept.
Senior Associate Alison Chaiken writes "A recent new message from the ever-wonderful (and free) "Physics News Update" highlights progress in the developing field of "atom optics". When last we left our heroes, Jurg Schmiedmayer and colleagues from the University of Innsbruck had used electromagnetic fields and logic circuits on an IC to guide beams of atoms with high resolution, implying an obvious extension to a computer-controllable high-precision atom placement technique. Now several groups in Europe have come up with new innovations that could lead to the "atomic ink-jet printer" and the "atom-coupled device." Once folks start moving Bose-Einstein condensates this way, all kinds of exciting advanced fabrication techniques may become possible. I'm still betting that the first "assembler" will be an ultra-high vacuum chamber with a bunch of lasers and well-controlled electromagnetic fields. I'd be thrilled if all you organic chemists can prove me wrong!" Read More for the Physics News Update article.

from the US-News-vs-Reason dept.
Tony (asnapier) writes "Here are two articles that are very much worth reading: #1 The Slowing Rate of Progress and #2 [mentioned on nanodot earlier] More More More Nanotechnology and the Law of Accelerating Returns Which one is correct? The initial reaction is to say #2. I have come to the conclusion that geometric growth will only happen if strong AI is realized — which of course, is the very definition of Vinge's singularity. What if strong AI does not emerge? Then the argument for slowing growth appears valid — human minds and mundane information systems would be the bottleneck to rapid advancement (you have to read the articles for the proper context — of course science and technology advance every day — but a new dvd player does not count as a fundamental improvement of the human condition)." CP: The US News piece ends: "Perhaps another Thomas Edison is hard at work, using nanotechnology or bioengineering to invent new machines that are truly revolutionary and transforming. But he or she has not succeeded yet."

from the nanotech-defined-as-protein-only dept.
David Coutts writes about the book Evolution Isn't What It Used To Be: The Augmented Animal and the Whole Wired World by Walter Truett Anderson: "In his brief mention of nanotechnology he says: 'The third generation, which – depending upon what you read – may never come or may be just around the corner, is nanotechnology: miniscule protein computers, submicroscopic protein machines that will sail through the bloodstream to fight disease or repair damage to the body'…He has limited the nanotechnology vision to a third generation protein building tool…This is either laziness, ignorance or a peculiar form of psychological blindness or phobia I shall dub nanophobia. So, whilst I would agree that skepticism of a largely unproven technology is entirely healthy, the author should try and present the full picture or at least clearly state that the working definition of nanotechnology (for any book or article) is deliberately limited by the author." Read More for the full post.

from the please-not-in-Java dept.
vik writes "I was attracted by a slashdot article on 8-bit Java VM's implemented using a Turing Machine backend. With Turing Machines being conceptually simple, the design put forward by Bernard Hodson has relevance to nanotechnology in that we'll want to get the simplest possible hardware running the smallest possible software. Probably not in Java, but the principles still hold. If construction command sequences can be compressed in a similar way, assembler control machinery could be greatly simplified."

from the Keeping-Nanotech-Safe-for-Democracy dept.
A lengthy article in The Washington Monthly ("Downsizing," by N. Thompson, October 2000) makes an interesting case for government involvement and even regulation of nanotechnology development: "Deep government involvement in nanotechnology is more than a practical obligation from a research and national defense perspective. It's close to becoming a moral imperative."

from the who-won? dept.
Joseph Sterlynne writes "MIT's Technology Review has printed an exchange between Ray Kurzweil and Michael Dertouzos regarding the latter's recent article on reasonable expectations of technological progress." Kurzweil: "As for nanotechnology-based self-replication, that's further out, but the consensus in that community is this will be feasible in the 2020s, if not sooner." Dertouzos: "We have no basis today to assert that machine intelligence will or will not be achieved…Attention-seizing, outlandish ideas are easy and fun to concoct."

from the nanotech-not-interesting-enough dept.
Sharad Bailur writes "I read David Coutts's review of Matt Ridley's opinion on Nanotech with interest. Coincidentally I also am reading the book [Genome] and have just gone thru the chapter he mentions. I think Ridley's scepticism is shared by many other established scientists. Dr M. Vidyasagar, the former head of the Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Robotics of the Defence Research and Development Organisation of the Ministry of Defence, here in India, said that while nanotech is feasible it will have to prove itself over time and that he found the concept of reverse logic operations more interesting. There have been similar reactions from others about nanotech, Michio Kaku's being the most famous one which was posted here some days ago. I think a healthy scepticism and an open mind are necessary. Nanotech is not a religion. Nor does it need convinced acolytes." CP: However, a large engineering project does need those who are committed to making feasibility into reality, and it is they who will win the race.

from the there-goes-public-key? dept.
Senior Associate GinaMiller brings to our attention an article in EE Times "Design for quantum computer proposed. Work at IBM Corp. on the theory and practice of quantum computing suggests that the industry may be closer to practical CPUs that could process information in the form of quantum bits, or "qubits," rather than conventional binary bits. The new thinking was discussed today (Dec. 11) in a plenary lecture at the IEEE International Electron Devices Meeting here. David DiVincenzo of IBM's T. J. Watson Research Center (Yorktown Heights, N.Y.) surveyed the prospects for quantum computing, concluding that practical, solid-state devices may soon emerge to support the theoretical projections of vast computing power arising from this technology."