Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join   
     Login      Register    

Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Via PayPal




Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view


whats new at ieet
MIT Media Lab’s folding CityCar

‪BMW shows off their semi-autonomous driving system‬

Autonomous Transportation for the Year 2030

Automated Cars: Redux

Russell Blackford: Freedom of Religion

‪Jason Silva on Psychedelic Rapture, Ecstatic Awe‬ and Technology

Must the Rich be Lured into Investing? Who are the Real “Job Creators?”

I Want a God-Like Brain

SENS5 - Collective advantages of Life Extension

Malcolm Gladwell on Income Inequality: We’re Off the Rails


ieet books

Smart Mice, Not-So-Smart People: An Interesting and Amusing Guide to Bioethics
Author
by Arthur Caplan

From Transgender to Transhuman: A Manifesto On the Freedom Of Form
by Martine Rothblatt

Freedom of Religion and the Secular State
by Russell Blackford

The Olympics: The Basics
by Andy Miah and Beatriz Garcia


comments

Intomorrow on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Intomorrow on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Peter Wicks on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 10, 2012)

Intomorrow on 'The Future of Women' (Feb 9, 2012)

hankpellissier on 'I Want a God-Like Brain' (Feb 9, 2012)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv


IEET > Security > SciTech > Life > Innovation > Health > Vision > Futurism > Contributors > Rocky Rawstern

Print Email permalink (3) Comments (3824) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


What Would You Say?


Rocky Rawstern
Rocky Rawstern
blog~nano

Posted: Mar 16, 2010

After a yearlong hiatus, I thought it was about time that I got back on the nano-horse and giddy-upped into some new thoughts and understandings regarding that tiny little thing we call “nanotechnology.”

As previous readers understand, when I say “nanotechnology” I mean all nanoscale technologies, of which there are thousands today and millions on the technological horizon.

In late 2009, I presented several thought-leaders with the same question that I had asked in years past. “If you had the attention of the entire world, what would you say about nanoscale technologies?”

The answers that I received bring us a step closer to realizing that there continues to be an urgent need for society to pay attention to the mind-boggling rapid growth in our understanding and implementation of nanoscale technologies. Let me put it another way: We are learning more about (and more really important stuff about) why things are different at the nanoscale.

There are maybe a few hundred individuals who understand advanced technologies and can articulate their impact as well as these contributors. (Full disclosure: these folks are long-time, long distance, global-connectivity friends and associates. I seriously respect their individual and collective understanding of and opinions regarding advanced technologies. Mike Treder, Robert A. Freitas Jr., Neil Gordon, Jack Uldrich, and Vic Peña are just some of the world-class minds who you should spend a small part of your time listening to, if you do not do so already.)

From the Futurist

From the futurist, we learn that nanoscale technologies are simply another set of new technologies that we need to understand and prepare for. How important are they? They are important on the order of: today and every day that follows, we will be introduced to another of thousands of new products that owe their technological and market leadership to “nanotechnology.” Today and every day that follows we will be confronted by decisions regarding whether or not to allow a nanotech-enabled product into the market; whether or not to pull an existing product from the market because it is simply connected to “nanotech” (or is in fact faulty in some way, thereby tarnishing with the same brush every other nano-enable product). As sure as the day after today is tomorrow, nanotech-enabled products will create a huge stir within society. How well we adapt to those products depends on how much we pay attention, today.

From the Medical Scientist

From the medical scientist, we learn that “Medical nanorobotics holds the greatest promise for curing disease and extending the human healthspan.” Cool! Count me in! Nanotech-enabled machines roving around in my body, repairing cellular damage, detecting disease and malfunction, and generally keeping me a fit old son, yeah, count me in. Make me smarter, you say?! COUNT ME IN!

From the Economists / Business Analysts

And from the economists and business analysts we learn that critically important dollars are not being spent on nanoscale technologies, but are instead being squandered on “business as usual” and politics. Why, oh why, do we sit ineffectively by and watch as our leaders, of both parties, waste our dollars and squander both our future and our grandchildren’s heritage?

We also learn to have a sense of excitement regarding the short- and long-term potential of nanoscale technologies (in spite of our leader’s ineptitude, short-term-gains mindset and back-room dealings).

No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time. - Winston Churchill, November 1947


What can we learn from this? Depends on who you are. Average citizens may feel a bit overwhelmed by the exceeding complexity of the science, the enormous potential for societal change, and/or the continued nonsensical meddling in the markets by our elected officials. Scientists, economists, innovators, inventors, investors, and savvy business folk know without a doubt that nano-enabled technologies, followed by the inevitable advanced products, will create massive shock-waves in each of their respective areas. By the way, that means if you can answer “Yes” to “Do you live on Planet Earth?” then count on the fact that the future is going to present us with an increasingly complex and exuberantly abundant supply of new technologies that will change our lifestyles and force us sit up and pay attention.

Of course, that is just my take; the futurist, the medical scientist, and the economists/business people may hit you from a totally divergent P.O.V., and yet I bet we all agree that “May you live in interesting times” never meant as much as it does right here, right now (are you paying attention yet?).


If you had the attention of the entire world, what would you say about nanoscale technologies?


Mike Treder – Our Future Depends on Us / Technology is Only a Tool

Every technology—no matter how powerful—is never a solution in itself. It is only a tool, to be used by its owners for good or for ill. This is as true for nanotechnology as it was for electricity or for the printing press before it.

We should never fall into the trap of looking for or expecting our technologies to save us. Emerging technologies—whether nanotech or AI or synthetic biology—do not emerge into nor from a vacuum. They are always developed within a context of political reality, amidst the daily tussle over regulation, funding, and proper usage. They do not arise fully-grown and pristine, but are hammered out, molded, shaped, and modified through endless discussions in corporate boardrooms and the halls of government.

Thus, the color of our future depends much more on us—that is, on our political practices and choices—than on our technologies.


Robert A. Freitas Jr. – Molecular Manufacturing and Medical Nanorobotics

The ultimate tool of nanomedicine is the medical nanorobot – a robot the size of a bacterium, composed of molecule-size parts somewhat resembling macroscale gears, bearings, and ratchets. Like a regular robot, a nanorobot may be made of many thousands of mechanical parts, such as bearings and gears, composed of strong diamond-like material. A nanorobot will have motors to make things move, and perhaps manipulator arms or mechanical legs for mobility. It will have a power supply for energy, sensors to guide its actions, and an onboard computer to control its behavior. Medical nanorobotics holds the greatest promise for curing disease and extending the human healthspan.

To build medical nanorobots, we need to create a new technology called molecular manufacturing. Molecular manufacturing is the production of complex atomically precise structures using positionally controlled fabrication and assembly of nanoparts inside a nanofactory. We’ve published the first description of a complete set of tools and positionally controlled reactions that should enable building small bits of perfect diamond crystal, based on extensive analysis and quantum chemistry simulations of a large number of potential tooltips and reaction sequences.

Ralph Merkle and I founded the Nanofactory Collaboration to coordinate a combined experimental and theoretical R&D program to design and build the first working diamondoid nanofactory. This long-term effort is developing the initial technology of positionally controlled mechanosynthesis of diamondoid structures using engineered tooltips and simple molecular feedstock. One of our international colleagues is undertaking direct experiments to build and validate several of our proposed mechanosynthesis tooltips.


Neil Gordon – 2009 Was a Bad Year for Nanotechnology

The financial demise of long established nanotechnology companies such as Nanogen, Evident Technologies, Luna Innovations, and NanoDynamics may be an expected fall-out of the economic downturn. However, the real impact of the financial crisis to nanotechnology is more pronounced.

Technology ventures need funding to develop and commercialize new products. Greater investments are required for advanced offerings employing nanotechnology because of the long time horizon for adopting nanotech into end user products or processes. Not only do nano-enabled products offer the potential for better, faster, cheaper and more environmentally-friendly applications, they also bring high tech R&D and manufacturing jobs that will be in demand for decades to come. So with unprecedented government stimulus spending one might expect a boom time for nanotech companies on the cusp of commercialization.

However, what we are seeing is completely different. Money is being used:

  • to reward financiers for bad investment decisions instead of infusing capital to early stage ventures and Series A venture capitalists.
  • to create government programs that will increase the cost of health care instead of new technologies for lowering the cost of health care.
  • for preventing the spread of a flu strain that killed less than 10% of the infected people from a typical seasonal flu rather than funding new technologies for treating more virulent diseases.
  • for deploying under-effective counter-terrorism activities instead of new surveillance technologies for the early detection of explosives, illegal drugs, infected people, toxic food, and contaminated water.
  • to finance bankrupt automobile companies to manufacture the same cars that caused the bankruptcies rather than funding disruptive production and performance innovations that will be competitive against low cost cars from China and India.
  • for middlemen to manage and extract fees from carbon cap-and-trade schemes rather acquiring prototypes employing breakthrough energy technologies. So where does nanotechnology stand at the end of 2009? Apparently at the bottom of the 2009 priority list. 2010 appears to be an equally disappointing year.


Jack Uldrich – The Impact of Nanotechnology is Going To Be Huge

To those who don’t believe nanotechnology will change the world in the near future just because it hasn’t accomplished much in the last 20 years, consider this little quiz: If a single lily pad began doubling on a pond on the first day of June and doubled each day thereafter until the entire pond was covered by the end of the month, on Day 20 what percentage of the pond would be covered with lily pads?

The answer is one-tenth of one percent. That’s right, .1%! What happens over the next 10 days is a little short of amazing—the entire pond gets covered. Such is the nature of exponential growth.

Now, advances in nanotechnology aren’t quite experiencing exponential growth but they are close and over the course of the next decade nanotechnology’s impact on material sciences, medicine, and energy are—like the lily pads’ spread over pond in the last few days—going to be extraordinary.


Vic Peña – The Future is Here and Achievable!

About five years ago, I responded to a similar question. Like this. At that time I was firmly convinced that we had reached an historic milestone in the evolution of science, namely the foundation for the research and development of nanoscale technologies. I still have this conviction. In fact, I am more enthusiastic of the possibilities open to the human experience through nanoscale technologies. “The future is here and achievable.”

The future is here. We are achieving it (especially during the last decade) by accelerating, building, and evolving the principles upon which nanoscale technologies research and development thrive. We have created myriad nano-applications for development and commercialization not generally known or available in the past. We have brought the future to the present and are progressing towards greater achievement.

At the same time, we can say we are not the yet. Achievement in nanoscale technologies is an evolutionary process integrating all disciplines of science. And, we recognize that nanoscale achievement is critically dependent on education and funding. In the United States, the National Nanotechnology Initiative is at the forefront in promoting these. Admittedly, these are subject to the vagaries of societal and economic factors, but consider the advances made in nanoscale technologies.

Imagine what is achievable in our now and present future.

So, what do I say about nanoscale technologies? The future is here and achievable!

In Closing

I would like to close with the response from Ray Kurzweil from a previous Q&A. Why am I closing with this quote? Because it best illustrates the immediacy of the need for us to start paying attention (with graphs and charts and things that even I can understand!):

When we have full molecular manufacturing, we will be able to create any physical products we need from information files just as we can create music, movies, and books from pure information today. In about twenty years, the original goals of communism (“from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs”) will be achieved not through forced collectivism but through the information technologies of nanotechnology and artificial intelligence.

When will we have full molecular manufacturing? About 10 years after people stop laughing about the difficulty of building the first nanofactory. Let me put it another way: sometime within the next 15 years, possibly a lot sooner. Does that give us enough time to prepare? Certainly, but only if we start now.

May you live in interesting times!


Rocky Rawstern, founder of Access Team, has been involved with nanoscale technologies and in website construction and search engine optimization for over 15 years.
Print Email permalink (3) Comments (3825) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


COMMENTS


Let me tell you, from my position as a nearly finished Ph. D student in physical chemistry with a strong nanotechnology background (plasmonics), there is NOTHING out there right now job-wise in the private sector for nanotechnology. All of the rosy pronouncements above (with the possible exception of Neil Gordon) are no where near the reality on the ground. The fact is, unless you have a strong skill set in a very traditional area, i.e. semiconductor/MEMS/solid state fabrication or biotechnology, there is nothing out there. And the kind of jobs you'll get, even at companies that claim to be doing "nanotechnology," will be very traditional "run this machine" kind of work. (Case in point: Nanosphere, Inc. Are they actually hiring anyone with experience working with Nanospheres? No way. But if you can do PCR, you're hired!)

So what does that leave? Either a series of academic postdocs earning $40k max for an uncertain future faculty job or a job in a government lab. Bold futures indeed!

Nanotechnology is never going to have an impact on society until it's commercialized, and right now that is NOT happening. Search for "nanoparticle" on any jobs website, and you'll see how much demand is out there for these skills.



To nanoJobless, If after a PhD and you still do not know how to use keywords to search for literature, comments, jobs, or similar, then please do return your diploma to the university and ask for a refund.

I refuse to point you in the right direction and instead enjoy my same education as yours +2yr experience making 108k.



Welcome back Rocky,
Have missed your commentary. Over the past year we have seen announcements from many developing nations that have started their Nanotechnology Initiatives. Everyone wants to be in the forefront to commercialize products, including Cuba, Mexico, Iran, Pakistan, South Africa, Malaysia, India, Russia, and of course China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea and more that have not announced their plans yet or I may have missed. Are we asleep at the wheel as the world moves forward? That may very well be your next question. Our government has funded 85 Nano Centers since the late 90's. Many of them are developing education outreach, but the resources are not being used by educators. I am told it may be another decade before nanoscience is included in the National and State Standards. Everyone has an agenda in our complex education paradigm with repercussions that will hamper our growth for the next 20 years. Keep the discussion going on the blogs and social media. Investors also need to look at the long term, not just a short term quick profit in this field, or all the commercialization will end up in China.



YOUR COMMENT

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:




Next entry: Compassion

Previous entry: Teaching Theories

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT 06106 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376