More from the venture capital world
A few more recent examples of the mounting interest in the business and investment community in the potential for nanotech as "the next big thing":
- An brief segment in an article in the London-based Financial Times ("Will Silicon Valley become Nanotech Valley?", by Tom Forenski, 16 February 2002) quotes Tim Harper of CMP Cientifica, who, according to the article, says that "Although there are clusters of nanotechnology companies around certain universities . . . such clumping will eventually concentrate around sources of venture capital. And since Silicon Valley is the world's greatest concentration of venture capital, it could become an important seed bed for what will, at some point, be a massive industry."
- brianwang sent notice of an extensive article in HBS Working Knowledge ("Big Things Ahead for Small Technology" by senior editor Martha Lagace, 18 February 2002), a publication of the Harvard Business School, that urges cautious interest: "Nanotechnology could be the next big investment thing–maybe. Experts say smart investors would be wise to dip their toes into tiny technology, but not jump straight into the pool just yet." The article quotes venture capitalists Josh Wolfe [of Lux Captial], Jason Friedman [of JP Morgan], and others, who spoke at Venture Capital and Private Investment conference on 3 February 2002 at Harvard Business School. The article concludes with a quote from Friedman: ìYou have to pick the spots and places where you think there are good companies. Is [nanotechnology] an interesting technology? Absolutely. Could it be the next big thing? Maybe.î
February 28th, 2002 at 6:11 PM
Silicon Valley may get trumped
The problem with Silicon Valley may be its narrow focus. You have to evaluate nanotechnology in a very general sense of its downstream impacts, e.g. material physical properties (e.g. diamondoid strength), novel properties (e.g. quantum effects) vs. properties based on self-assembly or self-replication. The biotechnology industry is already based on extensive use of the properties of self-assembly and self-replication. One could cite other areas such as L.A.-San Diego, Boston, or Seattle where there may be greater awareness of the fact that biotechnology is nanotechnology in a very robust form if one can develop strategies to leverage it effectively. Silicon Valley by its very "silicon" nature may stumble here because of its own limited vision that they cannot see the carbon for the silicon.
The real benefits (and hazards) to humanity for advanced biotechnologies (or nanotechnologies) are presented by the self-assembly and self-replicating properties. It is unfortunate that greater attention is not given to these areas compared with strength of "buckytubes" or light emission properties of "quantum dots". It seems likely that while we are dazzled by the display of lights our wallet may disappear.
February 28th, 2002 at 9:35 PM
Re:Silicon Valley may get trumped
Robert writes:
The real benefits (and hazards) to humanity for advanced biotechnologies (or nanotechnologies) are presented by the self-assembly and self-replicating properties.
I agree, though I'd like to see more attention on the indirect products of precise self-rep, such as machine intelligence and a massive influx of new scientific discoveries. Talking about self-rep seems to focus attention on relatively tame issues, such as various forms of "goo" destroying everything. There are many issues to consider which are both more powerful and more plausible.
–willdye