http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/10/technology/10NANO.html
Comment - This article talks about a recent conference on nanotechnology.
"Researchers suspect that the natural world's ability to assemble atoms into
complex tissues with very exact specifications may hold the key to making
vast quantities of minute, inexpensive pollution sensors or solar cells.
Bioengineers, on the other hand, are looking to artificial nanostructures as
possible drug delivery systems or as scaffolds to help injured organs repair
themselves."
I just finished a book by Michael Crichton called "Prey". It was a
science-fiction/horror story about nanotechnology run amok. It really was
not very good. That's two books in a row from Crichton that have been
disappointing. In fact, I don't think he's written a good book since
Jurassic Park.
We don't need nanotechnology. Instead, we should have "nana" technology.
That's where Nana Weir, Nana Rogers, etc., tell you to shape up and fly
right. But "nana" technology out-of-control would be scary indeed!
1:13:11 PM