5 ms·

Nano-nonsense (2010)

49 points by ZhuanXia 7y ago

abecedarius 7y ago
> This is an honest summary of Drexler’s Ph.D. thesis/book It is not. I'm disappointed to see such lazy dishonest rhetoric on the front page of a site for the intellectually curious. The thesis in question: https://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/Drexler_MIT_dissertation.pdf https://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/Drexler_MIT_dissertation.pdf I think the bright spot in all this is that people learned from what happened to Drexler's program for responsibly developing advanced nanotech and so far have kept the AI safety program from the same fate. Drexler wrote a recent book on that subject, btw: https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/reframing/ https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/reframing/
- kragen 7y ago
  Worse, my quantitative, rigorous comment about yogurt-making is currently voted down to zero points: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21669311 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21669311 We need to clean this place up.
  - aliswe 7y ago
    Kragen, those bacteria multiply, which I assume the nanobots do not? Then we would have a real problem ...
    - kragen 7y ago
      At first I thought it was unjustifiably unkind of you to refer to the ignorant downvoters as bacteria, but now I see that wasn't what was meant. The alternative to constructing atomically precise manipulators with other atomically precise manipulators is to construct them with macroscopic machinery such as scanning tunneling microscopes. Like writing a compiler in machine code with front-panel switches or copying an operating-system kernel with a handheld hole punch and paper tape, this may be feasible, but it will be extremely difficult; once we have a working atomically precise manipulator, it will be an enormously easier way to build more of them with it. That's the reason for Drexler's prudent concern for safety protocols in advance of the actual development of the machinery. Of course, there's no reason that the constructor itself need be a micron-scale device; the convergent-assembly proposals from Zyvex and Nanorex instead use macroscopic machines with a large number of nanometer-scale atomically-precise parts.
treve 7y ago
It's a 2010 article. Not knowing anything about nano tech, the frustration sounds so similar to blockchain or any other fad.
- nwah1 7y ago
  AI and blockchains are a fad, and nanotech is, at the moment, a marketing fad as stated. Although, the frustration with blockchain technology is more along the lines of "this probably is wrong in principle" rather than "this is probably hundreds of years away" as in the case of AI and nanotech.
- sansnomme 7y ago
  The fad is usually due to the whole idea of "nanobots" and "nanites" that will totally infect everything and kill cancer along the way. We can barely engineer a basic cell right now without having to severely use Mother Nature as a crutch (base DNA template, snip off as many bases as possible and see what's the least is needed to form a viable cell). A gray goo type of scenario is about as likely as AGI emerging from Minecraft and hijacking unsecured 3D printers to replicate themselves.
  - OnlineGladiator 7y ago
    > A gray goo type of scenario is about as likely as AGI emerging from Minecraft and hijacking unsecured 3D printers to replicate themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM
- Animats 7y ago
  Wow, it has been that long. I met Drexler when he was first saying that stuff. My big question was "how do you power this stuff". Even if you had nanomachines, building something big with a chemically powered system might take as long as growing a tree. Maybe you could hook in external electrical power somehow. But the "clouds of nanomachines floating around" concept seemed to have a serious power problem. "Nanotechnology" today is mostly surface chemistry. Surface chemistry is important, but boring. IC technology, modern battery technology, and membranes for separating things like salt and water are all based on clever tricks in surface chemistry. It's called "nanotechnology" to make it sound cool. Amusingly, the IC fab people, who really do put atoms almost exactly where they want them, don't use the term.
EGKW 7y ago
"Maxwell-Demon"? :)
- shrubble 7y ago
  I took it as a reference to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon
- aliswe 7y ago
  As in eternal, having an infite energy source (or zero energy consuming) and completely exact and fault proof.
Tossrock 7y ago
Perhaps it was true when this was written, but it's certainly not true now that "mechanical objects on microscales do not exist". The whole field of MEMS is about them, which includes such prosaic things as smartphone gyros/accelerometers.
- AstralStorm 7y ago
  Even then it was not true, however nanoscale manufacturing as envisioned by Drexler definitely does not exist. MEMS objects are made by lithography not pushing atoms around, and are extremely simple, usually just single chemical compound. (Sometimes a doped semiconductor.) Said simple structures are often very dissimilar to complexity envisioned by Drexler. By the way, first M in MEMS is micro. It's not NEMS. NEMS also exists, but again, it's made with lithography and chemistry, not any level of direct molecular manipulation. Heck, pharmacy chemists make nanostructures. (Liposomes and other vesicles specifically, for mechanical purposes. Peptides. Even protein assemblies.)
dang 7y ago
Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1629525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1629525
sophsoma 7y ago
How can one stay on top of and get involved in the latest work in MEMS? Can someone elaborate on the difference between licensed software for MEMS multiphysics simulation like Comsol vs open source software simulated collaboration? Have open fab tool projects been helpful in creating equipment that could help amateurs do more scientific research at this scale? How could one attempt to experimentally validate Drexler's latest proposed 3d printer design with x-y-z axis photosteppers? [1] (Slide 14) Silicon atom mechanosynthesis experiments have succeeded, but it seems there is not enough funding for direct to DMS experiments with pico-stabilized tooltips. Would it not be a good use of a billion dollar fund to experimentally research the DFT-simulated diamondoid minimal tooltip set? [2] --- [1] https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/06/f33/Keynote%20presentation%20-%20Drexler.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/06/f33/Keynote%... [2] http://www.molecularassembler.com/Papers/MinToolset.pdf http://www.molecularassembler.com/Papers/MinToolset.pdf

49 points by ZhuanXia 7y ago

> This is an honest summary of Drexler’s Ph.D. thesis/book It is not. I'm disappointed to see such lazy dishonest rhetoric on the front page of a site for the intellectually curious. The thesis in question: https://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/Drexler_MIT_dissertation.pdf https://e-drexler.com/d/09/00/Drexler_MIT_dissertation.pdf I think the bright spot in all this is that people learned from what happened to Drexler's program for responsibly developing advanced nanotech and so far have kept the AI safety program from the same fate. Drexler wrote a recent book on that subject, btw: https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/reframing/ https://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/reframing/

kragen 7y ago
Worse, my quantitative, rigorous comment about yogurt-making is currently voted down to zero points: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21669311 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21669311 We need to clean this place up.
- aliswe 7y ago
  Kragen, those bacteria multiply, which I assume the nanobots do not? Then we would have a real problem ...
  - kragen 7y ago
    At first I thought it was unjustifiably unkind of you to refer to the ignorant downvoters as bacteria, but now I see that wasn't what was meant. The alternative to constructing atomically precise manipulators with other atomically precise manipulators is to construct them with macroscopic machinery such as scanning tunneling microscopes. Like writing a compiler in machine code with front-panel switches or copying an operating-system kernel with a handheld hole punch and paper tape, this may be feasible, but it will be extremely difficult; once we have a working atomically precise manipulator, it will be an enormously easier way to build more of them with it. That's the reason for Drexler's prudent concern for safety protocols in advance of the actual development of the machinery. Of course, there's no reason that the constructor itself need be a micron-scale device; the convergent-assembly proposals from Zyvex and Nanorex instead use macroscopic machines with a large number of nanometer-scale atomically-precise parts.

treve 7y ago

It's a 2010 article. Not knowing anything about nano tech, the frustration sounds so similar to blockchain or any other fad.

nwah1 7y ago
AI and blockchains are a fad, and nanotech is, at the moment, a marketing fad as stated. Although, the frustration with blockchain technology is more along the lines of "this probably is wrong in principle" rather than "this is probably hundreds of years away" as in the case of AI and nanotech.
sansnomme 7y ago
The fad is usually due to the whole idea of "nanobots" and "nanites" that will totally infect everything and kill cancer along the way. We can barely engineer a basic cell right now without having to severely use Mother Nature as a crutch (base DNA template, snip off as many bases as possible and see what's the least is needed to form a viable cell). A gray goo type of scenario is about as likely as AGI emerging from Minecraft and hijacking unsecured 3D printers to replicate themselves.
- OnlineGladiator 7y ago
  > A gray goo type of scenario is about as likely as AGI emerging from Minecraft and hijacking unsecured 3D printers to replicate themselves. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMRrNY0pxfM
Animats 7y ago
Wow, it has been that long. I met Drexler when he was first saying that stuff. My big question was "how do you power this stuff". Even if you had nanomachines, building something big with a chemically powered system might take as long as growing a tree. Maybe you could hook in external electrical power somehow. But the "clouds of nanomachines floating around" concept seemed to have a serious power problem. "Nanotechnology" today is mostly surface chemistry. Surface chemistry is important, but boring. IC technology, modern battery technology, and membranes for separating things like salt and water are all based on clever tricks in surface chemistry. It's called "nanotechnology" to make it sound cool. Amusingly, the IC fab people, who really do put atoms almost exactly where they want them, don't use the term.

EGKW 7y ago

"Maxwell-Demon"? :)

shrubble 7y ago
I took it as a reference to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon
aliswe 7y ago
As in eternal, having an infite energy source (or zero energy consuming) and completely exact and fault proof.

Tossrock 7y ago

Perhaps it was true when this was written, but it's certainly not true now that "mechanical objects on microscales do not exist". The whole field of MEMS is about them, which includes such prosaic things as smartphone gyros/accelerometers.

AstralStorm 7y ago
Even then it was not true, however nanoscale manufacturing as envisioned by Drexler definitely does not exist. MEMS objects are made by lithography not pushing atoms around, and are extremely simple, usually just single chemical compound. (Sometimes a doped semiconductor.) Said simple structures are often very dissimilar to complexity envisioned by Drexler. By the way, first M in MEMS is micro. It's not NEMS. NEMS also exists, but again, it's made with lithography and chemistry, not any level of direct molecular manipulation. Heck, pharmacy chemists make nanostructures. (Liposomes and other vesicles specifically, for mechanical purposes. Peptides. Even protein assemblies.)

dang 7y ago

Discussed at the time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1629525 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1629525

sophsoma 7y ago

How can one stay on top of and get involved in the latest work in MEMS? Can someone elaborate on the difference between licensed software for MEMS multiphysics simulation like Comsol vs open source software simulated collaboration? Have open fab tool projects been helpful in creating equipment that could help amateurs do more scientific research at this scale? How could one attempt to experimentally validate Drexler's latest proposed 3d printer design with x-y-z axis photosteppers? [1] (Slide 14) Silicon atom mechanosynthesis experiments have succeeded, but it seems there is not enough funding for direct to DMS experiments with pico-stabilized tooltips. Would it not be a good use of a billion dollar fund to experimentally research the DFT-simulated diamondoid minimal tooltip set? [2] --- [1] https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/06/f33/Keynote%20presentation%20-%20Drexler.pdf https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2016/06/f33/Keynote%... [2] http://www.molecularassembler.com/Papers/MinToolset.pdf http://www.molecularassembler.com/Papers/MinToolset.pdf