Article View: sci.nanotech
Article #926Re: Miscellaneous
From: Alan Lovejoy
Date: Wed, 31 May 1989 14:26
Date: Wed, 31 May 1989 14:26
90 lines
5061 bytes
5061 bytes
In article <8905310354.AA19565@athos.rutgers.edu< dbb@aicchi.UUCP (Ben Burch) writes(for his friend): <Here I sit in my nano-apartment, sipping NanoCola (TM), thinking <nanothoughts about nanotech... <... Are we really sure that the binary/silicon metaphor is <that much better ? I think we need to be careful, and not <develop techno-tunnel vision. Yes. Because of the "mental functions" that Turing Machines can duplicate, and that steam engines cannot. Some of the things the neural netters are doing are quite impressive, too! <How about the idea of gradually <replacing natural neurons with souped-up neurons ? Say I get an <injection of specially programmed assemblers which, at the rate <of perhaps millions per day, renovate my brain cells with <improvements. At that rate, I might not be aware that anything <was going on, but over the course of weeks and months, I would <gradually enjoy better mental function. And I would be spared <the indignity of having a coax connector put in my forehead. Of course. The only sensible way to do this I ever even considered. And this process can be repeated many times, each one only accomplishing a minor evolutionary improvement, but the end result after many millenia would be quite revolutionary! Stepwise refinement, and all that. <.... To be ancient, yet *vital*, that's the <ticket. To look to the future with hope, imagination, and a <sense of excitement. To have the wisdom of experience and <resources, and have no need to substitute the nothing-to-lose <brashness of youth for the jealous empire-building and <territoriality that has sometimes come with age. That would be <most desirable. Amen. <Does the birth of nanotech necessarily spell the death of <commerce as we know it ? If everyone can obtain all the "things" <they want from dirt/trash and a pinch of assemblers, will anyone <pay for anything ? This idea seems to be implied in discussions <about future life with nanotech... And if the information for producing any desired widget is freely (legally or otherwise) available, why would you need money? Inventors only need to be paid if they themselves have bills. If no one has any bills, then no one needs to be paid. I question, though, whether "dirt" will necessarily always be so cheap... It may be that inventors will have to insist on being paid "up front" for their inventions, instead of relying on grants of monopoly power to sell their invention(s). This could be done by granting them guaranteed government income based on some evaluation of the "usefulness" of the invention (i.e., statistical sampling of use in the population once a year...). <EoC proposes the possibility of active shields as proof against <gragu, but is such defense realistic ? The effectiveness of <natural antibodies as defense against naturally occurring <replicators depends upon *recognition*. This is also true for <immunizing programs versus computer viruses. < - Is it possible to recognize gragu ? I maintain that the <varieties could be virtually infinite, and fully capable of <reshaping themselves, or at least their surface appearance, if <"recognized". Natural viruses have long used the tactic of <mutation for survival. Gragu might be endowed with enough <nano-programmed intelligence to masquerade as something <harmless, if necessary, like the sole of your shoe or a bag of <potato chips. Gragu can be recognized by what it does (nanovandalism). It can hide all it likes, but eventually it has to attempt to perpetrate some crime. Otherwise, it isn't gragu, is it? Imagine the world INFESTED with repair and defense nanoagents, at high density, ready to spring to action at the first sign of inimical activity (NAT MAN and ROBIN? :-) :-)). Of course, the problem then becomes the reliability and security of the nanopolice. Can they be trusted? Subverted? Could a traitorous strain be introduced that would out-replicate the bugs in blue, displacing them from the target area, and then striking? (Oh no, have I invented a new term: "Blue Goo" (The Nanopolice))? Blue Goo may work--if it can obtain and maintain a technological lead over the purveyors of Gray Goo. Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-2211; AT&T Paradyne: 8550 Ulmerton, Largo, FL. Disclaimer: I do not speak for AT&T Paradyne. They do not speak for me. ______________________________Down with Li Peng!________________________________ Motto: If nanomachines will be able to reconstruct you, YOU AREN'T DEAD YET. [The Blue Goo vs the Gray Goo -- sounds like the Nano Civil War... --JoSH]
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<8906010521.AA05543@athos.rutgers.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!oz.nm.paradyne.com!alanShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!oz.nm.paradyne.com!alan From: alan@oz.nm.paradyne.COM (Alan Lovejoy) Newsgroups: sci.nanotech Subject: Re: Miscellaneous Message-ID: <8906010521.AA05543@athos.rutgers.edu> Date: 31 May 89 14:26:31 GMT Sender: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida Lines: 90 Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu