tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post109327846303623630..comments2010-01-05T23:20:04.342-05:00Howard Lovynoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1093377906352738912004-08-24T16:05:00.000-04:002004-08-24T16:05:00.000-04:00Molly - I appreciated your comments about being even more visionary in our thinking on nanotech. I happen to be of the opinion that it is hard to be too enthusiastic about it (but, you know, I'm a little biased).Danielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17183031803602437147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1093347799840291612004-08-24T07:43:00.000-04:002004-08-24T07:43:00.000-04:00I appreciate Daniel's vision, but while we're being visionary, how about thinking even bigger. What about not needing soldiers? I thought we were getting robots to do our fighting? (or stopping war altogether, but I suppose even science fiction doesn't pretend that's possible). Cancer diagnosis is exciting, and maybe finally the shift in funding will go to prevention rather than the huge industry in treatment drugs. We aren't using current technology ethically for the most part (it's amazing that we allow as many people to die in car accidents as we do) so why should nanotechnology be any different? Honestly, are "upstream" public deliberation or interdisciplinary research going to allow us to direct this responsibly? My particular interest is environment, and the possibilities there for energy storage or non-polluting manufacturing are incredible. I don't think we should call a moratorium on nanotechnology, but I'm trying to prepare myself for the inevitable disappointment after all this promising hype; nanopants will live on, but our soldiers might not.Molly Webbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01357026213642823195noreply@blogger.com