Replies

There is significant open nanotech research going on, but there is a big push in classified research as well. Hopefully an appropriate balance can be struck that allows migration of miltech to the civilian sector, as long as there is no legitimate national security problem with doing so.

I've been hearing some disturbing things about nanotechnology lately. I don't swear that they're accurate, but I'm getting whispers and too-pointed-I-can-neither-confirm-nor-deny remarks that suggest that the federal government is ever so quietly beginning an effort to shut down or limit civilian nanotechnology research.

Ah, the birth of FUD.

Keep in mind a similar rumor 20+ years ago: not long after the DES encryption algorithm was widely accepted, the NSA quietly told IBM to make certain changes and to not use certain keys. For two decades there were grand conspiracy theories about how the feds strongarmed a backdoor into the most-used encryption algorithm. Just recently, non-NSA mathematicians finally figured out the "do this and don't ask why" changes: the DES cypher was significantly strengthened by the changes.

Point is, when it comes to national security matters, rumors are often wild and the feds are not actually working against us. Unfortunately, the ignorant rumormongers can talk but the security folks can't.

When you get some real facts about these tinfoil-hat conspiracies, let us know. Until then, avoid propogating FUD.

The military has a LONG history of dream projects which were totally impossible to implement. This is one of them!

1) Chips need power and disipate heat. Talk to anyone designing notebook computers about the problems.

2) Chips are toxic. You don't want this stuff floating around in your body.

3) This covers all they "High Tech Soldier" being promoted. If you loose power, you are now un-armed.

4) Remember the Nuclear Bomber from the '50s?

Of course nanotech ofers dangers. Increased power of any kind always brings increased danger with it; I think of this as the Parable of the Gas-Powered Chainsaw. But if the history of security and technology classification offers any usable lessons, there is no substance to the idea that the dangers will be less if the technology is forbidden to the private sector -- and this is a long-time military engineer telling you this.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit The Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

Two heads are better than one and ten thousand are better than fifty. It'd be a mistake to put all nano-research under wraps, and not only for the reasons the author gives; whoever outspends you beats you to the punch. By keeping it open we know more or less where everybody is. And if something real promising opens up, then we can outspend anybody on the planet and beat THEM to the punch.