Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!nanotech From: dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu (Daniel Mocsny) Newsgroups: sci.nanotech Subject: Re: Proto-assemblers anyone? Message-ID: Date: 10 Apr 90 04:07:25 GMT Sender: nanotech@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: University of Cincinnati, Cin'ti., OH Lines: 27 Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu In article alan@oz.nm.paradyne.com (Alan Lovejoy) writes: >[ Moderator's comments: >Note that the common archetype of the "the future" is >like today, only with bigger/smaller and/or faster/slower variations on >mundane themes. The truly new or different doesn't fit into the picture.] Oh yes. People always think "linearly," i.e., in terms of how new technologies will fit into the "same old same old." Never mind the fact that new technologies fundamentally change the relationship between inputs and outputs, which has a way of pulling the rug out from under all the things people do. When fundamentally new capabilities appear, we must always rethink everything, rather than expect that we can get away with something like strapping a jet engine to a horse. -- Dan Mocsny Snail: Internet: dmocsny@minerva.che.uc.edu Dept. of Chemical Engng. M.L. 171 dmocsny@uceng.uc.edu University of Cincinnati 513/751-6824 (home) 513/556-2007 (lab) Cincinnati, Ohio 45221-0171 [We must at least expect that things will change. Generally the actual changes wrought by new technology are not clear even when they're happening, and argued over long afterward. We are probably not capable of "planning" for radical change in any meaningful sense at all. --JoSH]