[extropy-chat] Re: Encryption revolution

[Robert J. Bradbury]

On Fri, 12 Dec 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:

> No offense, but "cough".  You think Nano at Home and Robiobotics are leading
> nanotech initiatives?  Google finds about 350 pages that mention "Nano at Home"
> and "nanotechnology, as compared with 75,000 that mention "IBM" and
> "nanotechnology".  Robiobotics only has 19 references in Google.

I'm not surprised.  I would expect the relative budgets with respect to
what IBM is spending on Nanotech and what Nano at Home or Robiobotics are
spending to be at least a factor of 10,000 to 100,000.  Robiobotics
in particular I intentionally stealthed.

However -- just because a technical giant is significantly outspending
small scale efforts doesn't mean they have all the bases covered.  I
will openly acknowledge IBM for everything from the AFM to the Xenon
atom logo to the recent self-assembly of a Flash memory nanopattern.
They are proving time and time again that these problems *can* be solved.

> Seriously, you tell me.  What achievements have you made in nanotechnology?

I am the first person that I am aware of who has attempted a reasonable
analysis (with costs!) of the biological approach to robust MNT [1].

> Has Nano at home created a recognized nanomachine?

No, we are years away from that.  And its initial intent is not
to create nanomachines but nanoparts.  One has to start someplace.
How many years did it take Zyvex to go from a start-up to having
an actual product in the market?  5+?

> Are you listed in any bibliography, list of
> information sources, or even in any survey of current nanotech initiatives?
> Trying to find out who did what in the realm of nanotech legislation is an
> indication that you are NOT involved with this stuff.

Myself, no.  But I have not attempted to make a name for myself within
classical academic circles.  Christine Peterson however was called upon
to testify before congress during the debates with respect to nanotech
legislation.  And I'll offer the comment that there may be some very
interesting questions as to what is going on behind the scenes with
respect to legislative agendas that may have little or nothing to
do with ideas that hardcore nanotech proponents may be pushing.
It could be as simple as lack of knowledge or as complex as people
attempting to protect their own sacred cows.  It just isn't clear
at this point in time.

However, if I manage to get to the bottom of things I will let you know.

Robert

1. Protein Based Assembly of Nanoscale Parts
   http://www.aeiveos.com/~bradbury/Papers/PBAoNP.html