RE: HUMOR: Nanotechnologist lung

From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Sat May 10 2003 - 19:50:56 MDT

  • Next message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: (IRAQ) RE: Name calling vs. Ad Hominem"

    Anders Sandberg wrote,
    > > > All humor aside, nanotech molecules are small enough to
    > > > go through rubber gloves, face masks and even skin in
    > > > many cases. Most people who discuss/predict
    > > > nanotechnology don't realize that nano materials will
    > > > probably be extremely dangerous biohazards.
    > >
    > > Actually, I would suspect this would not be the case.
    > > Nanotech molecules, especially the early versions, will
    > > probably be on the large side, and thus easily blockable by
    > > rubber gloves, face masks, and even skin.
    >
    > The issue is rather whether they might be hazardous to
    > breathe in. Asbestos becomes dangerous because the grains
    > have a size causing macrophages in the lung to overeat and
    > die, and similarly nanodevices might have nasty effects just
    > due to size or indigestibility constraints.
    >
    > None of these problems are showstoppers, and I think ETC are
    > grasping at straws in creating FUD about nanotech. None of
    > the approaches to nanotech right now seem to be likely to
    > produce free flying stuff, and it is unlikely anybody would
    > start releasing nanodevices into the environment without
    > testing them. The FUD approach is to suggest that these
    > things *could* happen, and hence horrible dangers could occur
    > and must be prevented from the start. A realistic approach is
    > to set up safety guidelines based on past experience and
    > plausible extrapolations. But who screams higher?

    I agree totally. My expertise is in security, so I agree that we can
    develop safety protocols that will work. While it is FUD to point out these
    possibilities as justification for stopping nanotech, I believe it is just
    as unrealistic to deny that the problems could happen or to claim that
    nanotech doesn't need any safety features. I don't see why pointing out
    potential flaws is always seen as a negative thing. In my job, the purpose
    of foreseeing these problems in advance is so we can fix them and not have
    any problems. This is a good thing, not a bad thing to do.

    --
    Harvey Newstrom, CISSP, IAM, GSEC, IBMCP
    <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> <www.Newstaff.com>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 10 2003 - 20:03:23 MDT