Foresight Institute Logo
Image of nano

Open-Sourcing Nanotechnology

from the aw-heck-let's-just-share-the-IP dept.
Gary Gunderson sends an update on work by Senior Associate Bryan Bruns: "Bryan Bruns has published a working draft of a paper to be presented at the Eighth Annual Foresight Conference on Nanotechnology in November. The paper, Open Sourcing Nanotechnology Research and Development holds much of interest to this forum. In particular, his assertions that open sourced nanotech is a net positive with respect to safety deserves further scrutiny." (CP: This item is an update to the working draft notice posted earlier. The paper is now version 0.6.)

One Response to “Open-Sourcing Nanotechnology”

  1. BryanBruns Says:

    What can we do now?

    I welcome comments on any aspect of the paper, including the section on safety. However that is the most speculative part of the paper. I'd be interested if anyone has comments on the other issues in the paper or on ways to move the ideas forward, particularly in connection with what might be done in the near term:

    Would consensus on a suitable open source license facilitate growth of open source software for MNT R&D, and, if so, would the LGPL be a good choice?

    Is there potential for industrial consortia to invest in open source nanotech R&D?

    Is there more that could be done to promote the existing open source initiatives in MNT software (NanoCAD, Fujimol, etc.)?

    Would clearer ideas about systems architecture for MNT facilitate development of open source software for molecular engineering?

    For Foresight and others concerned with MNT development, is it worth encouraging open source approaches as an alternative or complement to working on reform of intellectual property laws that affect MNT R&D?

    Note: The paper was also recently mentioned on Slashdot.

Leave a Reply