Re: the economics of transition to nanotech

From: Eugene Leitl (
Date: Fri Jan 07 2000 - 15:10:06 MST

Robert Bradbury writes:
> Finally, I would strongly disagree with the perspective that once
> we have a nanoassembler, the nanosantas descend on our door steps.
> I've said it before and I'll say it again -- the limiting factors
> are the *designs*. If I had a nanoassembler tomorrow it wouldn't
> make my life any better because I haven't got a damn thing to build
> with it.

The trouble is that the viable structure space is limited. You have to
go back function->structure->buildable structure. A structure might be
stable, but there might be no construction path towards it.

If I was writing a GA design program, I'd probably make it to be aware
of elementary deposition blocks. I.e. it would grow structures by
simulating the deposition process.

With each iterative improvement the repertoire of buildable structure
is of course likely to grow.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:08 MDT