What effect would nanonite techonology have on culture and society. would we actually go as far as to do a “Logans Run?”
Nanonite techonology will probably be grasped in my life time, with the cost of medical care what it is now, how much would these devices cost? with out low cost provision arnt we looking at the rich staying rich eternal. while the poor are left alone to suffer from ailments and death.
I hate to sound dumb but I do it so much anyway so I’ll just ask. What’s nanonite technology?
Shizzit, i can’t believe i didn’t reply to this till now. nanites are teeny tiny wee little robots, just a few molecules across, which (theoretically) could manipulate matter at a molecular level. Sounds amazing eh? But the most incredible thing is that these robots could be prgrammed to build more of themselves out of any matter that could be lying around.
Could you imagine the applications? Bread and water made out of sand! Cars and planes and Houses made out of garbage! EXHAUST FUMES TURNED INTO PETROL!!!
They could quite possibly eliminate the need for money, destroying the economy as we know it and make everyone equally rich/poor. The best part is that they cost nothing to build, since one can make millions out of scrap.
The potential for harm is extreme however, nanotechnology could be used to create the most fearsome weapons ever known. Release a single, undetectable bot into a city, and program it to transform any object it comes into contact with into more of itself. Program one to target only blacks/whites/jews/arabs/whoever and you have something a million times more effective than an ethno bomb.
Nanotechnology could spell the salvation of our species, or its destruction.
Yes.
(again not spell checked or gramer checked, thx to technology i didnt learn, thx to techonology failing ill have to learn)
And it is at hand. ive seen the scientist behind the foreground of nano-tech research and the applications of what he has found so far is Endless. But i had not even discussed using them as a weapon yet, because i just wanted to see what people thought about the destruction to the civillization we have grown used too.
This is why i posted the currency post. IF you noticed if you have a stable market you have no economy, but what is so great about economy at all?
How could nano’s destroy money. Hell i could program them to make money, no need for lasers. the perfect dollar.
With super nano’s you could be god working BEGNETH the molecular level, let alone with DNA.
Yea but with all weapons there is always a defence in development. I like it. I think it would be really hard to program a bot to discriminate. It’s really time consuming to do so and you’d need the know how to do it as well. You’d need the machinary to build them… It would eventually destroy us. Eventually
blu, nanos don’t literally destroy money, but they would remove the need for money, as you could manufacture something from nothing instantly. No more economies of scarcity
ahh but your wrong just like you could program them to kill humans i could program it to destroy money. that would also destroy economy the hard way.
Could these things theoretically build us a new planet, if we sent them into space?
Could they “build” a human being?
Freaky!
sorry. i’ve just got back. and i’m completely alien to this idea. nanites: they are man-made, yes? am totally confused, and totally curious. do they actually exist?
Pangloss, they are man-made, but as yet theoretical.
Red - They need an equal amount of matter to what they are building. For example, they could turn 10oz of dirt into a 10oz steak, but they can’t actually create something from nothing. So yes, they could build a planet, but they need enough matter to build one out of. However, there are potential applications in terraforming existing planets. They could buil a human being, so it would be sort of like instant cloning, but would it live???
would it live? well thats a whole nother question. one we cant even try to think about till after we have done it 5x. or atleast thats how science would do it. Do it 5-10x then discuss the effects of it. But here is the thing. before one can create they must know ALL and EVERY thing about it. Man can not make another earth due to the fact we dont understand every physical attribute of the one we have now.
Can you make a diagram of the liver with out atleast knowing anatomy? let alone a whole organism.
Lets say we make one nano, we then teach it how to build other nano’s and then give it a 5 pound block of led, it then makes something like 5 pounds of nano’s. But they could not make anything solid. they would have to make things peice by piece by piece. they couldnt take a stack of plywood and make a dog house they could only cut the stack up into usable pieces and build it like a lego house. so far i see them only as a destructive tool, or a constructive tool on micro levels.
What is the molecular structure of space? Is it nothing?
Also in order to build a planet wouldn’t you need to build the parts of a planet first? That would involve programming more than one code into the robot. It would have to make a core which we’ve never even seen then onto the next layer and so on.
I was wondering though… black holes destroy things by rapid increases of speed splitting apart matter at a molecular leve. So if a robot is only a few molecules across it can theoretically make it on to the other side of a black hole being it’s so small. It can then be programmed to make something or someone to send back the data if it’s possible. But I’m not exactly sure if that’s how black holes work. I hate saying stuff like that when I’ve never had a proper education on it.
send them in, have them build a beacon, then a camera then have the nano’s turn into micro sized hard drives to take pictures and then send them back through gate if that is even possible. black holes may or probably are one way ticket rips in space.
why is it that the majority of articles i read these days are filled with such pessimistic contemplation?
seems to me we’ve always been able to design tools of destruction, what say some such technology that hasn’t such capacity to destroy.
what if such technology exists because it has been, not from humankind development, but some tool to assist humankind.
what of faith?
what of existences we are unaware of?
what of an existence far more technological than our own, some concealed existence, maybe humankind more/further evolued, as we still have no definitive to what makes us human, there are possiblities of existences unknown.
what if the technology was somehow suggested / enlightened to us, so its development would help us understand, even assist to our furtherance.
what if technology is somehow senient, and its technological programmers are skins, holograms.
have computer technologies assisted us so far, or at least seem to veer more towards interaction than annihilation. what if we are missing an evolutionary development, NEW SCIENTIST feb 2002 no;2331
and again NEW SCIENTIST OCT 6 2001 NO;2311
i tend to think these pessimist views and anthromorphic prejudices are concerns from conscientious thinkers, who maybe worry that all the destruction humankind has done, will oneday come back on us.
this is where these conscientious thinkers in my view keep all safe, if not for us all to not consider such issues maybe our species planet existence would have long ago ceased to be.
we, thoughtful, thinkers contribute so much to our species survival, what others do not, it could be said are not of the same.
I consider nanotechnology and technology itself to be of benefit, placed in the wrong hands …
then thats what should be the consideration, its not the technology that harms us, really now is it?
what we should be addressing is who has techologies for the wrong reasons
Nanonites maybe a disadvantage if it didn’t follow the ethics. Secondly, we may not know how effective it’s going to be unless the research is carried out and the result of the experiment should be proven to be safe not harming a human’s life.