5 ms·
Yes, this is a weird argument and unnecessary for the main target of the article. There were plenty of successful microactuators, sensors, full microrobots, et
by xor99 4y ago
Yes, this is a weird argument and unnecessary for the main target of the article. There were plenty of successful microactuators, sensors, full microrobots, etc even when this article was written (2010).
- mistercow 4y agoYeah, I agree that it’s tangential to the main point. Still, it makes me question the author’s credibility on the subject. If you’re claiming something won’t exist, and you’re overlooking a large amount of technology that does exist, I can’t help but think that you might have overlooked something in your assessment of the state of the art.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- mannykannot 4y agoIt is obvious that the author is referring to the sort of technology that Drexler and company were positing - a technology explicitly claimed to be so unlike anything then- (and now) realized that it would be radically transformative. At the time of writing, nothing even approaching a proof-of-concept existed (DMD devices certainly are not that), and this has not changed in the decade+ since. You can, of course, suppose that the author has overlooked something, but there are others who have equally - and perhaps more carefully, by your standard - made the same points, such as Richard Smalley, who is quoted here.
- cma 4y agoWhen he says "even" he presumably means micro in contrast to nano machines.
- mistercow 4y agoLook at the sentence in context. It is obvious that the author is referring to microscale machines, not nanoscale. And the statement he makes there is simply false.
- mannykannot 4y agoMy point is that the case against Drexler’s concept does not collapse because of this one mistake.
- mistercow 4y agoRight, which I already acknowledged.
- mannykannot 4y agoWell, you did indeed nominally acknowledge that this is only one detail, but then you continued by using this one technical error to cast doubt on the article as a whole! What were we supposed to make of that? There are cases where one apparently small issue is devastating (“who shaves the barber?”) but this is not one of them.