Nanofactory Regulation Revisited

I noticed that a post of mine was linked via the Wikipedia article on post-scarcity — my post about nanofactory regulation.  In it, I proposed a DRM-like system to prevent any old nanofactory from manufacturing things like bombs.  Radical and Luddite, I know.

...

Complete entry

Posted by bryce  on  05/08  at  10:36 AM

> "I disagree with the commenter is when he/she says that there is NO risk from anyone being able to manufacture anything:"> (Capitalized letters added by me)

I disagree with the general what-me-worry? tone of this commenter, too, but to be fair, he did say, "I don't see MUCH evil becoming of the P2P movement and I think human beings are GENERALLY apt to take the path of least resistance. "

Posted by wlpeak  on  05/09  at  09:35 PM

I generally agree with your point, but this just seems to be a gratuitous bias sneaking out,"People need to spend some time in ignorant rural areas and then come back and tell me that anyone on the globe should be able to manufacture nanoweapons."

I assure you, Urban areas are just as ignorant, backward, uncivil, etc. as any other. It is people not locations that beget barbarism. It is human nature not smug superiority nor presumed intellectual inferiority that will bring our downfall.

If we are to manage our new tools we must first manage ourselves, wherever we live.

Posted by Robert  on  05/10  at  06:54 AM

The nanofactory effectively kills gun control and all other weapons control movements for good. Kaput. No more gun bans. It eventually means the total end of the bureaucratic nation state due to the ease at which the police enforcers can be slaughtered by any individual. That means no more regulations on individual behavior over a large area. The nation state shall be replaced by a flurry of tiny microstates. The fragmentation of governance will eventually reach the point in which the largest communities are no more than 150 individuals, Dunbar's Number. Also known in slang as the "monkey sphere".

As for "ignorant rural areas" most of the violence in the U.S. is in certain urban areas due to culture.

Posted by Brett Bellmore  on  05/10  at  07:38 AM

I think the obvious, indeed usual, objection to the DRM scheme, (Aside from the fact that there are legitimate uses of weapons, and that, at least in the US, being able to have them is a constitutional right.) is that once you've got one in place, there's no particular reason to believe the people in control of it will only restrict access to unreasonably dangerous items. At least one nano-factory DRM scheme I've heard described would include a backdoor to the nanonfactory which enabled them to force it to manufacture dangerous items, if they so desired, even if you punched up a toaster as your desired product.

So, unless you assume that the DRM agency is staffed by angels, they end up ruling the world with an iron fist. You're just skipping straight to the global totalitarian system without trying anything else first.

---

Add your comment here:

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below: