[extropy-chat] Nanotech educations

[Robert J. Bradbury]

Damien, interesting.  Thanks for pointing it out.

I don't have problems with most of the estimates made by Eric or Josh.
I would however point out that the technology for robust Cell Repair
is available now and one could easily make it more generally available
within 3-5 years (this is a result of combining some of the ideas that
Aubrey has promoted and some business efforts I have worked on but have
currently set aside.  Stated simply the technology is here but the
means and interest to develop it are not.)

The very surprising thing is both some of the optimistic and pessimistic
perspectives by Smalley.  It clearly demonstrates that he cannot easily
operate outside his area of expertise.  Making a nanocomputer prediction
of 2100 clearly demonstrates that he is completely unaware of the SIA
roadmap.  We will meet the NSF definition of "nanotech" for general
purpose microprocessors (< 100nm) within this decade.  On the other
hand a molecular assembler by 2000??? (Yes we had the ribosome and
could use it in the lab back in the '90s, perhaps the '80s but I
doubt that is what he was thinking of).  He also probably missed
on "Commercial Product" and "Nanotech Law" unless you really stretch
the definitions.

Robert


On Wed, 23 Jun 2004, Damien Broderick wrote:

> Interested players such as Chris and Robert might care to review this set
> of Wired projections from just on 9 years ago:
>
> http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.08/reality_check.html
>
> and see how they think things are crystallizing. (I'd guesstimate somewhere
> between the dates offered by Drexler and JoSH.)
>
> Damien Broderick
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>