[extropy-chat] Royal Society report on nano
eugen at leitl.org
Fri Jul 30 16:42:23 UTC 2004
On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 09:22:14AM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > Sure, and plutonium is just a metal.
> With handling precautions not dissimilar to the
> previous-experimented-with radium. (Besides, they
You know what I meant. Pebbles won't blow up in your
face if you shovel a large heap of it.
For the terminally LFP-intoxicated: this is an analogy. Swarms of nanorobots
usually don't result in mushroom clouds (unless you use them to fab fusion
> said "most": assemblers are one thing, but by volume
> produced these days, most nanostuff is raw bulk INERT
> coatings. Active systems of any kind are relatively
We're obviously not discussing the gwave and tewwible
dangers of inhaled pigment nanoparticles here.
It is ridiculous how people are talking past each other.
Why backpedalling in regards of military self-rep systems?
If anything, they're closer to reality than ever.
> uncommon; mechanically active systems with features
> under 1 micron are mere lab prototypes, for the most
> part. At least, that's how it stands today.)
We're obviously not talking about some piece of today's "nanotechnology",
which only is called that for marketing hype purposes.
Latter day's asbestosis or silicosis is strictly negligible in comparison to
things which are designed to depilate cute furry mammals, and generally screw up
the biosphere. Mushroom clouds, or no.
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a>
ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the extropy-chat