nanotechnology has gone, in the span of a decade, from a little known fringe concept to a term firmly rooted in the popular conscious. it's often heralded as the future of technology, the miracle cure-all for our problems, with atomic matter manipulation resulting in our ability to make food from sewage, and cure any and all diseases.
but taking a look at human history, we know that the first use for any new technology is usually war. and nanotechnology as a weapon would be much simpler to make than nenotechnolgy as medicine. after all, tiny robots that cure cancer would need to be able to tell healthy cells from cancerous ones. tiny robot weapons, on the other hand, just have to destroy everything in its path. i think it's safe to say that weaponised nenotechnology is almost a certainty.
these are just the tamer implications of a nanotech future. where do you think this technology will end up? should we be going there at all? [the second is sort of a moot question since whether or not we should, we're going there anyway]
but taking a look at human history, we know that the first use for any new technology is usually war. and nanotechnology as a weapon would be much simpler to make than nenotechnolgy as medicine. after all, tiny robots that cure cancer would need to be able to tell healthy cells from cancerous ones. tiny robot weapons, on the other hand, just have to destroy everything in its path. i think it's safe to say that weaponised nenotechnology is almost a certainty.
these are just the tamer implications of a nanotech future. where do you think this technology will end up? should we be going there at all? [the second is sort of a moot question since whether or not we should, we're going there anyway]
