My responses are within the text of your questions:
>How will the announcement of the development of a fully functional
>assembler affect the world? What about the impact over time? For example,
>if MNT represents the year an assembler is developed what will the world be
>like at MNT+1, MNT+10, MNT+100? I know this is all speculative but it seems
>to me that we should be able to make some intelligent speculations about
>such a future.
It's plausable that some groups will not support nanotechnology. Just as in the current real time, we have examples of resistance towards advanced technologies. This angle usually lies within ethics and morality. However, eventually I forsee most people will own a microwave sized assembler in their home, for family food distribution etc. Much like the t.v. and cars evolved into most housholds.
>Will the widespread hype begin before or after the development of an
>Assembler? Will the public be informed about the capabilities of an
>Assembler prior to its development or only afterwards?
As you are well aware, the public is not well informed about this issue as it is. Depending on how policy will work alongside of nano's progress will effect these public information questions. Most likely, the mainstream will see nanotech products as the evolve and not before. They will read about some neat new nano gadget in the news and utilize it, still unaware of the eventual possibilities until they arrive.
>Who has the best chance of developing the first Assembler? the U.S.
>government? another government? coalitions? corporations? conglomerates?
>nanotech Galileo tinkering in vis lab?
Good question, one without a real answer. We would like to assume it would be some safe measure area.(and here in the states) Other countries are also working on this development. And there also is the reality that some teeenage Joe Blow with some equiptment in his basement could twidle around some nanobots, go to bed, and the next morning the stuff is climbing over the backyard fence, creeping into your house! Right now, Universities are making progress (ei. Nadrian Seeman at NYU). The government has a lot of funding going out to these type of institutions, but their goal is on a smaller product nano, or weapons.
>How will the nature of the first developer affect how events progress in
>MNT+x era? Will it matter who the first developer is because governments
>will seize the technology?
This is important, how will we regulate nanotechnology?Do we want the government to come in and decide it's no good? (I don't) Do want to set up our own guidlines or use some predesignated group? Will the government just snatch it up anyways, or will it be to late for them to by the time it's full blown?
>Will the financial markets act similar to Hanson's idea futures market and
>begin factoring in the eminent development of the Assembler into its
>valuations? This assumes that the finance types identify what affects such
>an event would have on valuations.>What will the economic impact be? Will
pre-MNT capital lose all its value? What will be the commodity of the post-MNT era? The most obvious answer is
>'the ability to make Assemblers'. But what about creativity, Assembler
>software, Assembler software debugging software, easily mutable materials,
>heat dissipation technology, etc.?
People have different ideas on the results of nanotech on our economy. Some think cash flow will remain prevelant, be it for familiarity, gambling, fun, or stable ownership deeds like land. (stuff that inspite of a drop of financial interest will always be around and will still need some kind of trade commodity) I personally, (although with things like future predictions, one can be wrong!) think that money will become pretty obsolete, maybe your Uncle Dick will save silver dollars as a hobby. But for all general purposes, everything we need will be taken care of. (this doesn't include the land issue-or how we will purchase these enduring things, maybe a new system? Barter like our ancestors did) We will have our own personal manufactures to meet our needs. As far as your question of creativity, there may be those that seperate. (this is my theory some will live the old way,-where cash may still flow-or some will happily adapt to the new way) Some people will want to continue to work, for a sense of self accomplishment, to curb boredom or for other reasons that people may not accept these new ways. There will be all kinds of VR ways to feel creative, and still yet the old make your own chair way too.
>Should Assembler software be open source? Does it matter if Assembler
>software is efficient? What weight should be given to the 'crazy screw with
>a problem' factor where the screw decides to implement some "goo" scenario?
>What would be the motivation of a 'crazy screw' since many ailments that
>drive 'fanatics' will be remedied or have the potential to be remedied with
All these questions are a matter of security. Assembler's will have to be processed in a sealed lab,
someone cannot open the lab with out destroying the contents and no assembler can escape from within. Software will be running from a large nanoelectronic computer running advanced molecular simulations software. Beyond the layers of wires (that carry power and signals), sensors(several layers of these detectors), stressed diamond composite, thermal insulators, microscope, electrical igniters, are surrounded by the actual sealed assembler lab. The goal here is, that it is efficient. For more on goo, go to:
>What is the future of governments in the MNT+x era?
What platform is MNT/OS likely to be based upon?
The structure will morph into a different state that I can predict. And About OS (DNA sized) or see:
Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
"Nanotechnology: solutions for the future."