tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post110988205754781333..comments2010-01-06T00:18:59.079-05:00Howard Lovynoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1109960182211917142005-03-04T13:16:00.000-05:002005-03-04T13:16:00.000-05:00Let me repeat here what I wrote on <A HREF="http://nanodot.org/article.pl?sid=05/03/03/2251251" REL="nofollow">Nanodot</A>, and then I'll shut up and read what everybody else has to say.<br /><br />Take control of the word and redefine it to fit the meaning you'd like to give it. "Nanobot" is a perfectly vague word and can take on different meanings, depending on whose brain it passes through. I've argued before that the Feynman/Drexler vision of nanotechnology is the one that has has the upper hand in the wider culture. It's the business community that has the tough job of redefining nanotech as cosmetics, pants and tennis rackets.<br /><br />So, don't make your job harder. Take the word, the concept that the public already has regarding nanotechnology and then talk about the distinctions for anybody who's interested.<br /><br />Step back. Get some perspective. The average reader will take a look at this CRN brief and either misinterpret it as meaning it no longer believes in molecular manufacturing or, perhaps even worse, they're just another "insider" nanotech group joining these squabbles over definitions.<br /><br />Believe me. I'm a writer and believe in the precise meanings of words. I also believe that words have cultural connotations and definitions that one must also be aware of.<br /><br />HowardHoward Lovyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04901713018468508005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1109958534405343242005-03-04T12:48:00.000-05:002005-03-04T12:48:00.000-05:00Unfortunately, Chris, most journalists will bring up the whole gray goo thing anyway because it gives the story a nice hook.Jonathan Reidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1109958231819894622005-03-04T12:43:00.000-05:002005-03-04T12:43:00.000-05:00The comment comes from a conversation I had with a coworker. Magnox Pulaski, Inc. has a plant in Pulaski Co. that has been making ultra-fine (i.e. nano) iron particles for quite some time now and was a tad upset when it was announced that Luna was giong to be the first nanomaterials maunfacturer in the Commonwealth of Virginia. It's all in what you call it and when.Jonathan Reidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1109958139806980832005-03-04T12:42:00.000-05:002005-03-04T12:42:00.000-05:00We were in fact writing for journalists. Now that molecular manufacturing is starting to become respectable, it seems important that journalists not dig through their decade-old information and resurrect gray goo fears. <br /><br />If someone wants to talk about "nanobots" cleaning blood vessels, I won't complain. But if they talk about "nanobots" building stuff, they're only one step away from raising fears of those nanobots turning into gray goo.<br /><br />ChrisChris Phoenixhttp://CRNano.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1109952829068682982005-03-04T11:13:00.000-05:002005-03-04T11:13:00.000-05:00That could work, Jonathan. "Fine" also has two meanings and conjures up feelings that everything will be alright. The problem is, you can't really "decide" what the wider culture will adopt. Worth a shot, though. Have you brought this up with your colleagues at Luna?<br /><br />HowardHoward Lovyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04901713018468508005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5554620.post-1109951840682822702005-03-04T10:57:00.000-05:002005-03-04T10:57:00.000-05:00How about the term Ultra-fineBot. Ultra-fine (i.e. Nano) particles have been around for quite some time and nobody seems to be worried about themJonathan Reidnoreply@blogger.com