SCI and ECON Nanotech

Lyle Burkhead (
Tue, 01 Oct 1996 18:05:11 -0500 (EST)

I wrote,
> Making sarin with diamondoid-based assemblers is not going to be
> any easier than making sarin with biotechnology, or with
> conventional chemical synthesis. In fact it would be harder.

to which John Clark replied,
> Not true, it would be much easier to make anything with Nanotechnology,
> I gave my reasons as to exactly why it is easier in another post,
> the one you found too boring to read.

This is very boring.

I wrote,
> If somebody wants to claim that the diamondoid genie machine will
> reprogram itself for free, so all you have to say is "I want a ton of sarin,"
> and presto, it appears... all I can say at this point is: balderdash.
> Designing and programming machinery to perform complex tasks
> isn't going to get any easier in the 21st century. It will always be a job
> for experts. Programming will not be free or instantaneous in the future
> any more than it is now.

to which John Clark replied,
> Agreed. Apparently that ["balderdash"] is all you can say.

Note the expression, "at this point." After writing approximately
thirty posts on this subject, I think enough is enough. I find myself
in the odd position of trying to convince grown-ups that Santa Clause
doesn't exist.

It's time to move on to other things. I need to go out and propagate my
own meme-set. I mentioned some time ago that I am going to open an
on-line university. Philosophy will not be a separate subject; it will be
integrated into all subjects. The ideas I have introduced here (such as
"calibration") will be used throughout the curriculum, along with other
ideas (such as language reflection) that I have not mentioned on the list.