4 ms·

is that the author's real point? i didn't see him say it anywhere.

• jimbokun 16y ago
  "It also depends on what your time scale is. I’m willing to bet, at some nebulous point in the future, long after Drexler and I are dead, someone may eventually develop a technology sort of vaguely like what he imagines." This is the point I was paraphrasing.
  • spot 16y ago
    you are right, i missed the weasel words. so really, this guy agrees that it's happening, but he disagrees with the timeline. but he didn't actually provide any information or argument about the rate of progress of miniaturization.
    • Ixiaus 16y ago
      I wasn't too keen on the pessimism in his article; I can agree, in principle, with what he was saying but the point of emergent fields is in how unpredictable they are - this may lead to unrealistic expectations (which can often times drive innovation in the long run, TBH).
    • z92 16y ago
      I read it as that this guy disagrees that it's happening. But taking the path of "never say never" he agrees that it might happen far in the future. But there is no sign that it's happening. Not even any sign that it might happen. No progress in 50 years. Zero. That was his point.