Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!klaatu.rutgers.edu!josh From: josh@klaatu.rutgers.edu (J Storrs Hall) Newsgroups: sci.nanotech Subject: Re: Nanotech thoughts Message-ID: Date: 17 Nov 89 04:44:48 GMT Article-I.D.: klaatu.Nov.16.23.44.43.1989.274 References: Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 81 Approved: josh@klaatu.rutgers.edu In article , peb@tma1.eng.sun.com (Paul Baclaski) writes: > > The Grey Goo/Blue Goo senario looks very much line the Nuclear War/SDI > senario today. Let me offer an analysis of SDI that may shed some light on the Goo problem. Suppose in 1800 we (the USA) were afraid of a Japanese invasion force sailing across the Pacific and marching across the plains to attack the settled regions in the East. To prevent this we would have had to fortify the entire west coast and maintain the fortifications at a 2000-mile march from any existing U.S. center of commerce. This endeavor would have been well beyond the capacity of the young Republic to support, even though it could and did mount a few exploratory expeditions into the region. This is where we stand with respect to space right now. To do an effective SDI we would have to build a whole space infrastructure where we have now only sent isolated expeditions. It is probably beyond our capacity to do this. By 1900, the west coast did have forts all up and down it. However, the infrastructure was that of a thriving self-supporting development and settlement of the West. Jump across the intervening metaphors to the Grey Goo problem. Building a 100% effective Blue Goo out of nowhere and giving blanket coverage to the current world, is probably a tour de force that is impossible to achieve. However, against the background of a mature nanotechnological industrial base, where everything is built, maintained, observed, studied, monitored, and repaired at the molecular level, gray goo control is just another case of scraping off the barnacles. Point 1: Widespread, universally applied, well understood nanotechnology is probably a best defense against grey goo. > The question then becomes: what is the actual cost of building an > assembler lab? [...] Perhaps the cost is on > the order of $10,000,000 minimum, when all things are considered, but > the black market usually pays more for anything, so the cost would > be higher. > > Given these limitations, populations of humans on Earth should be > safe--Grey Goo is not inevitable. I believe this is wishful thinking. Assuming that nanotech is understood, so the hacker isn't trying to do basic research and engineering, but simply construction of a relatively well understood machine with a bit of trial and error to cover proprietary info gaps, I would bet that it could be done for about $100,000. I'd put $10k into a computer (assuming year 2000 price/performance), probably twice that in CAD and simulation software, another $10k would buy the mechanics (mostly from surplus places) to build a STM-sytle proto-assembler, $20k into chemical paraphenalia, another $20k in chemical supplies, and the rest to cover whatever I forgot. The proto-assembler is based on the fact that a STM tip can be controlled to within a typical atomic diameter, so that if you could rig a gripper to go on the end of it, you could use it to build your first assembler. Grippers can be manipulated chemically, e.g. with tRNA style end-effectors. (This from Eric's talk at the conference.) If you prefer the biomolecular route, I don't know what a DNA synthesizer costs, but basically you need one of those, a listing of the protoassembler enzymes' sequences, and a petri dish. I'm not guaranteeing you success, here, but just claiming that I certainly can't guarantee your failure. And I think that *somebody's* success isn't terribly unlikely. Point 2: There is a significant chance of intentional grey goo at some point. Point 1 + Point 2 ----------- Point 3: The thorough and widespread development of nanotechology as soon as possible is probably a very good idea. --JoSH