Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!oz.nm.paradyne.com!alan
From: alan@oz.nm.paradyne.COM (Alan Lovejoy)
Newsgroups: sci.nanotech
Subject: Re: Miscellaneous
Message-ID: <8906010521.AA05543@athos.rutgers.edu>
Date: 31 May 89 14:26:31 GMT
Sender: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida
Lines: 90
Approved: nanotech@aramis.rutgers.edu


In article <8905310354.AA19565@athos.rutgers.edu< dbb@aicchi.UUCP (Ben Burch) writes(for his friend):

<Here I sit in my nano-apartment, sipping NanoCola (TM), thinking
<nanothoughts about nanotech...
<... Are we really sure that the binary/silicon metaphor is
<that much better ? I think we need to be careful, and not
<develop techno-tunnel vision. 

Yes.  Because of the "mental functions" that Turing Machines can duplicate,
and that steam engines cannot.  Some of the things the neural netters are 
doing are quite impressive, too!

<How about the idea of gradually
<replacing natural neurons with souped-up neurons ? Say I get an
<injection of specially programmed assemblers which, at the rate
<of perhaps millions per day, renovate my brain cells with
<improvements. At that rate, I might not be aware that anything
<was going on, but over the course of weeks and months, I would
<gradually enjoy better mental function. And I would be spared
<the indignity of having a coax connector put in my forehead.

Of course.  The only sensible way to do this I ever even considered.  And this
process can be repeated many times, each one only accomplishing a minor
evolutionary improvement, but the end result after many millenia would be
quite revolutionary!  Stepwise refinement, and all that.

<.... To be ancient, yet *vital*, that's the
<ticket. To look to the future with hope, imagination, and a
<sense of excitement. To have the wisdom of experience and
<resources, and have no need to substitute the nothing-to-lose
<brashness of youth for the jealous empire-building and
<territoriality that has sometimes come with age. That would be
<most desirable.

Amen.

<Does the birth of nanotech necessarily spell the death of
<commerce as we know it ? If everyone can obtain all the "things"
<they want from dirt/trash and a pinch of assemblers, will anyone
<pay for anything ? This idea seems to be implied in discussions
<about future life with nanotech... 

And if the information for producing any desired widget is freely (legally
or otherwise) available, why would you need money?  Inventors only need to
be paid if they themselves have bills.  If no one has any bills, then no one
needs to be paid.  I question, though, whether "dirt" will necessarily always
be so cheap...

It may be that inventors will have to insist on being paid "up front" for their
inventions, instead of relying on grants of monopoly power to sell their 
invention(s).  This could be done by granting them guaranteed government
income based on some evaluation of the "usefulness" of the invention (i.e.,
statistical sampling of use in the population once a year...).

<EoC proposes the possibility of active shields as proof against
<gragu, but is such defense realistic ? The effectiveness of
<natural antibodies as defense against naturally occurring
<replicators depends upon *recognition*. This is also true for
<immunizing programs versus computer viruses.
< - Is it possible to recognize gragu ? I maintain that the
<varieties could be virtually infinite, and fully capable of
<reshaping themselves, or at least their surface appearance, if
<"recognized". Natural viruses have long used the tactic of
<mutation for survival. Gragu might be endowed with enough
<nano-programmed intelligence to masquerade as something
<harmless, if necessary, like the sole of your shoe or a bag of
<potato chips. 


Gragu can be recognized by what it does (nanovandalism).  It can hide all
it likes, but eventually it has to attempt to perpetrate some crime.  Otherwise,
it isn't gragu, is it?  Imagine the world INFESTED with repair and defense
nanoagents, at high density, ready to spring to action at the first sign of
inimical activity (NAT MAN and ROBIN? :-) :-)).  Of course, the problem then
becomes the reliability and security of the nanopolice.  Can they be trusted?
Subverted?  Could a traitorous strain be introduced that would out-replicate
the bugs in blue, displacing them from the target area, and then striking?
(Oh no, have I invented a new term: "Blue Goo" (The Nanopolice))?

Blue Goo may work--if it can obtain and maintain a technological lead over
the purveyors of Gray Goo.

Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-2211; AT&T Paradyne: 8550 Ulmerton, Largo, FL.
Disclaimer: I do not speak for AT&T Paradyne.  They do not speak for me. 
______________________________Down with Li Peng!________________________________
Motto: If nanomachines will be able to reconstruct you, YOU AREN'T DEAD YET.

[The Blue Goo vs the Gray Goo -- sounds like the Nano Civil War...
 --JoSH]