Dangers of molecular manufacturing
Conveyor nanofactories Molecular manufacturing (MF) will be a significant technological breakthrough, comparable perhaps to the industrial Revolution, but compressed in time to a few years. This can disrupt many aspects of society and politics. The strength of these two technologies may encourage competing nations to enter into a destructive and dangerous arms race. Weapons and devices for monitoring can be made small, cheap, strong and very numerous. Low-cost manufacturing and copying others' designs can lead to economic shocks. Excessive use supercheap products can lead to significant environmental damage. Attempts to control these and other risks could lead to abuse of the restrictions or create a demand on the black market, which would create many new risks and it would be virtually unstoppable, small nanofactories would be very convenient target for smuggling and extremely dangerous. There is some very serious risks - including a few fundamentally different types of risks - that can not be avoided all together by using the same approach. Simple and unilateral solutions will not work. The correct answer to these risks are unlikely to emerge without careful prior planning.
Molecular manufacturing suddenly create a lot of different risks
Potential benefits of the MP is enormous, but so large and dangerous. To avoid these dangers, we must carefully consider them, and then develop a thorough plans to prevent them. As we explain in the pages devoted to the chronology and products, the MP allows you to quickly create prototypes and cheap to produce a wide range of powerful products. This possibility will arise quite suddenly, as the last steps in the development of this technology are likely to be much simpler than the initial steps, and many of these steps can be planned in advance. The sudden emergence of molecular manufacturing could not leave time to adapt to its consequences. Thus, adequate training is important for this event.
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology (CRN) has identified several separate serious risks
first step in understanding the risks is to identify them. CRN starts the process at these pages, offering a list and description of several essentially different and serious risks. And although he probably is not complete, this list is already pretty scary.
- economic destruction that is associated with an abundance of cheap products.
- suppression of economic development by artificially inflated prices.
- Threats personality as a result of criminal or terrorist use of these technologies.
- Personal or social risks relating to abuse of the restrictions.
- social upheavals associated with the emergence of new products and lifestyles.
- Unstable Race weapons.
- Damage to the environment and health from uncontrolled management products.
- freely propagating nanorepliktory (gray goo)
- Black Market Nanotechnology (increases other risks)
- Competition nanotech programs (increases other risks)
- Attempts voluntary failure (increases other risks)
Some of the hazards described herein are threats to human existence, that is, they may threaten the very existence of mankind. Others can lead to serious shocks, but not to our extinction. A combination of several risks could worsen severity of each of them, any solution must take into account its impact on other risks.
Some of these risks associated with lack of regulation, and others - with too much regulation. Several different types of regulation would be needed in several different areas. Extreme or all of the inhibitory response to any of these risks creates a fertile ground for other risks. Should be avoided temptation to use simple and obvious solutions to the problems, taken separately. On other pages we turn to an analysis of opportunities regulation, and here we focus on the analysis of hazards.
highly probable disruption of economic foundations
buyer of goods currently pays for its design, raw materials, labor and equipment for the production, transport, storage and sale. Another part of the money - usually a small percentage - as income goes to owners of these businesses. If personal nanofactories can produce a wide range there and then, when they are needed, most of these efforts would be unnecessary. This raises several questions about the nature of post-nanotech economy. Will whether the products are cheaper? Continue to have capitalism? Do most people go to retire - or become unemployed? Flexibility of molecular manufacturing and a radical improvement in product quality will lead to the fact that non-nanotechnological products will be uncompetitive in many areas. If Technology nanofactories will be in somebody's exclusive property or tightly controlled, it will not create the world's largest monopoly with enormous potential for abuse of anti-Competition-practice? If it is not controlled, would not the availability of cheap copies to the fact that even the designers and creators of the brand will not receive money for their work? Require considerable future research, but it seems clear that molecular manufacturing could significantly shake the foundation of modern economic structure, sharply reducing the value of many materials and human resources, including much of modern infrastructure. Despite utopian post-capitalist dream, it is unclear whether workable replacement system to appear in time to prevent the consequences of mass loss of work for people.
Major investment company aware of the potential economic impact
maynstrimnom in the financial community is growing recognition that nanotechnology represents a significant wave of innovation with the potential to completely restructure the economy. For example, a quote from an analysis prepared for investors by Credit Suisse First Boston:
«Nanotechnology is a classic general-purpose technology. Other general-purpose technologies such as steam engines, electricity and railways have been the basis for significant economic revolutions. GPTs usually arise as a rather crude technology, with limited use, but then rapidly spread to new applications.
All previous technology General purpose leads to great upheavals in the economy - that is, the process of creative destruction. And nanotechnology may have a more significant impact than its predecessor GPTs. Creative destruction - the process by which new technology or product provides a fundamentally new and better solution that leads to the complete replacement of the original technology or product. Investors should expect that creative destruction will not only continue but also will be accelerated, and nanotechnology will be at its head.
What does this mean in practical terms? With the introduction of nanotechnology, we believe that new companies will replace a significant percentage of today's leading companies. Most companies components of the Dow Jones is unlikely to stay there for 20 years. " (Quoted in the book "Big money in thinking about small» (Big Money in Thinking Small), sponsored by are Michael and Kristen Maubussin Bartoldson.)
The same source, Josh Wolfe of Lux Capital, editor of Forbes / Wolfe Nanotech Report, wrote: "Put simply, the world will be be restructured and improved the bottom up, starting with atoms. This means that tens of trillions of dollars will be spent on everything: clothes ... food ... cars ... home ... ... medicine devices for communication and recreation ... the quality of air we breathe ... and the water we drink - all this will be go through a deep and fundamental change. And as a result of the changes will undergo social and economic structure of the world. Nanotechnology will shake Every business on the planet. "
nanotechnology engineered products may be significantly overvalued relative to its cost, that may lead to unnecessary poverty
According to modern commercial standards, products created nanofactories, will have a huge value. Monopoly technology will allow owners to add a high margin for all products, and make high profits. However, if you bring it to the logical extreme, this practice will deny cheap life-saving technologies (such as simple as water filters and mosquito net) for millions people who need them. Competing in the end will reduce the price, but Monopoly at first seems plausible for several reasons. By virtue of the existence of other risks listed on this page, it is unlikely that will be allowed to exist completely unregulated commercial market. In any case, the high cost of development will limit the number of competing projects. In the end, the company that reaches the goal first, may use the resulting higher incomes, to restrain competition by such means as widespread use of expensive patents and lucrative lobbying her industrial restrictions.
product price is usually a gap between its value for the buyer and its cost to the producer. Molecular production can lead to products whose value is several orders of magnitude greater than their cost. Likely that the price will be set closer to values than to the cost, in this case, consumers will not receive most benefits of "nanotechnology revolution". If the product evaluation their value is adopted, the poorest people will continue to die from poverty in a world where products cost only a few cents could literally sense to save their lives. If (as seems likely), this condition is more acceptable to the rich than for the poor, social unrest can be added to the problems of unnecessary human suffering. A recent example of this problem is the agreement, the work of the World Trade Organization to provide affordable medicine to poor countries - that the Bush administration partially prevented (following strong lobbying by by American pharmaceutical companies), despite fierce opposition from all other WTO members.
Criminals and terrorists can effective use of nanotechnology
Criminals and terrorists with a stronger, more powerful and more compact units can produce serious harm to society. Protection from such devices can not be installed immediately or comprehensively. Chemical and biological weapons would be far more dangerous, and it will be much easier to conceal. Perhaps many other types of horrific devices, including several varieties of devices for remote murder, which would be difficult to detect or avoid.
Due to the small embedded computers, each microscopic weapons could be directed at the target, remote in time and space from an attacker. This will not only weaken the defense, but also more difficult after the attack detection criminals and bring them to justice. Mitigation of responsibility for his actions may reduce the civic awareness and safety, and increase attractiveness of some forms of crime. If produced with the help of nanofactories weapons will be available on the black market or the home plant, it would be extremely difficult to detect it before it is applied, a random search, intense enough to detect it, should not be too penetrating to meet modern standards of human rights.
There may be attempts to address the extreme and strict regulation
In response to the risks described here can be taken a number of extreme solutions. It will not be a good idea. Have the illusion that many of these problems have obvious solutions. However, in each case, the decision taken solely by the need to work on this particular issue, can reinforce each issue and make the whole situation worse. Set of extreme solutions probably would have been desirable, he will either be ineffective (and ineffective all politics can be very harmful), or lead to significant human suffering or human rights violations.
There is a possibility that there will be attempt to implement tougher restrictions, such as round the clock surveillance for each person. Such monitoring can be realized with a program of artificial intelligence, such as the one being developed at MIT, which is able to analyze video stream, select the familiar pattern of behavior and ignore strangers. Molecular manufacturing will enable you to create very small and inexpensive supercomputers that will certainly be able to execute programs on continuous monitoring of each. Will be easy to monitor devices cheaply and in large quantities. Тотальное наблюдение – это только один из видов возможного злоупотребления нанотехнологиями. С появлением возможности изготовить миллиарды устройств, each having millions of units at a price for everything in a few dollars, any automated technology, which can be applied to one person can be applied to all. Any script medical or mental control, which uses the idea of nanotechnology to the limit, will be heard like science fiction and the incredible. However, the problem is not the degree of persuasiveness of any given scenario, the spread of opportunities in the main limited level of imagination and brutality of those in power. Greed and power to give a strong motivation for the creation of rigid systems of control and fear of that nanotech and other advanced technologies will be in private hands, provides an additional incentive for strict regulation.
society can be destroyed because of the availability of new "immoral" products
New products and ways of life can lead to serious social unrest. For example, medical devices can be built into a needle thinner than a bacterium, perhaps, allowing easy modification or stimulation brain, which will create the effects of any psychoactive substances. Many human communities find it necessary to ban certain products: guns in Britain, seedless watermelons in Iran, sex toys in Texas, different drugs in different countries, such as marijuana and alcohol in the U.S. in the Muslim countries. Although most of these restrictions is based on moral principles not shared by the majority of the world human population, the fact that restrictions exist at all, means the sensitivity of communities - or, at least, their rulers - to undesirable products. Ability build banned products using personal nanofactory should be considered, at least, as undermining the human community, and able to create an incentive to an extremely broad and completely inhibiting the limits of technology. New Images of life caused by the new technology can also lead to social unrest. Where the demand for illicit products already exists, a way of life is formed within a certain time, so that the effects of lifestyle changes will be less acute. However, some possible lifestyle changes (particularly in the areas of sex, drugs, entertainment, as well as physical and genetic modification) are likely to be so disturbing to outside observers, that their very existence may cause social shocks.
nanotech weapons will be extremely powerful and can lead to an unstable arms race
Molecular manufacturing creates the possibility of a frighteningly dangerous weapons. For example, the smallest insect has a size of about 200 microns, it provides accurate assessment of the possible size constructed using nanotechnology device for the destruction of personnel capable to search for vulnerable people and sprinkle they toxin. Lethal dose of botulinum toxin for humans is about 100 nanograms, or 1 / 100 the volume of the device. As many as 50 billion carrier toxin such devices - is theoretically able to kill every person on Earth - can be packed only one suitcase. Small arms any type will be much stronger, and it will be homing bullets. Aerospace Equipment will be much easier and will have more performance, will be built with a minimal amount of metal or no, as a result it will be much harder to detect using radar. Embedded computers will allow for remote activation of any weapon, and more compact power sources will dramatically improve robotics. These ideas are just a little hint at the scale of opportunities.
important question is whether nanotech weapons stabilizing or destabilizing. For example, you can thank a nuclear weapon, because it prevented the large-scale war since its invention. However, nanotech weapons is not like nuclear weapons. Nuclear stability is at least four factors. The most obvious is awesome destructiveness of total nuclear war. Total war is possible, and nanotechnology will be equivalent to nuclear in the short term, but nuclear weapons have high long-term consequences of (radioactive fallout, contamination), which will be much more weak in the case of nanotechnology weapons. Nuclear weapons destroy indiscriminately; nanotechnological weapons could be targeted. Nuclear weapons required for its creation of significant research developments and industry, which can be detected much easier than designing nanotechnological weapons; nanotech weapons can be developed much faster due to faster and cheaper prototyping. Finally, nuclear weapons are not just deliver a secret place on the application in advance, the situation is the same with nanotech opposite. The high degree of uncertainty to assess the potential enemy less time to attack and response more effective tochnonatselennoe visible destruction of resources during an enemy attack - all This makes nanotech arms race less stable.
Also, if nanotechnology will not be tightly controlled, the number of nations in the world of nanotechnology could be much greater than the number of nuclear powers, increasing the risk of regional conflict. Admiral David Jeremiah vitsepredsedatel former Joint Chiefs of Staff, in an address to the conference Foresight Institute for Molecular Nanotechnology, said: "Military applications of molecular manufacturing have a greater potential than nuclear weapons to radically change the balance of power."
Excellent essay, Tom McCarthy (non-CRN) explains this idea in more detail. He discusses the ways in which nanotechnology could destabilize the international Relationships: molecular manufacturing will reduce the economic influence and interdependence that will make it more attractive targeting weapons on people, rather than in factories and equipment, and reduce the ability of nations to monitor potential enemies. It may also giving a lot of ability implement global destruction, the ability to cancel the strong nations to be "policemen" in the international arena. By making small groups of people self-sufficient MP may lead to the disintegration of existing nation.
cumulative damage to the environment is a natural consequence of the low-cost production, as well как и риски для здоровья
Молекулярное производство позволяет осуществлять дешёвое создание невероятно мощных устройств и продуктов. Насколько много such products do we want? What is the environmental damage they cause? Spread of possible damage is quite large: from the personal supersonic aircraft, flying at low altitude and cause harm to large numbers of animals - until the consumption of solar energy on a large scale, capable of change the albedo of the planet and have a direct impact on the environment. More durable materials would create even larger machines, capable of carry out excavation or other activities, damaging large areas with much greater speed. However, given the large number of activities and objectives, which could harm the environment if they are implemented in the maximum scale, and the ease of bringing them up to a maximum scale with the help of molecular manufacturing - it seems likely that this problem is to worry about it. Some forms of damage can arise as a cumulative effect of individual actions, each of which will be almost harmless. It will be difficult to prevent such damage by means of verbal beliefs and laws often do not work too; central limitations of the technology may be a necessary part of solving the problem. Finally, the extreme compactness nanotech produced mechanisms will cause the desire to use very small products that can easily turn into nano-dust, which would be difficult to clean and can cause health problems.
gray goo - one of the earliest alarms that have arisen connection with nanotechnology
when based on nanotechnology production was first proposed, there was concern that the microscopic generating systems can get out and "eat" the biosphere, making it only copies of itself. In 1986, Eric Drexler wrote: "We can not afford a certain class of accidents samoraznozhayuschimisya replicators. More recent developments Drexler and others make clear, however, that replicating assemblers will not be used for production - nanofactories will be much more effective in creating objects and nanofactory in no way resembles nanorobot "gray goo."
Grey goo implies the presence of five abilities, combined in one device. These abilities are: mobility - that is, the ability to travel in the environment, the shell - a subtle but effective barrier that protects against ultraviolet rays and the surrounding chemicals control - a complete set of drawings and computers to interpret them (even when working in a nanoscale device occupy a significant place); metabolism - the ability to cleave various substances into simple nourishing ingredients, and production - the transformation of nutrient nanomehanizmy. Nanofactories will also use the microscopic fabricators, but they are inert, if they pull out or disable from nanofactories. The rest of these requirements for its implementation and integration will require significant engineering effort.
Grey goo is not there as a result of the accident, but, ultimately, may be done purposely
Although gray goo has no significant military or commercial value, and only a limited terrorist value, it can be used for blackmail. Purged of the unit discharge of gray goo would be very costly and could be to require great physical destruction of neighborhoods discharge (mucus, which propagate in the atmosphere or the ocean must call a special anxiety). Another possible source of gray goo could be irresponsible amateurs, for whom this will be a hobby. People are certain psychological type, apparently, can not avoid the temptation to create opportunity and deliver the will of self-replicating education, which proves that a large number of existing computer viruses. Probably, we can not accept the emergence of community-hackers dilettantes, producing a set of modified versions of the gray goo.
development and use of molecular manufacturing does not create absolutely no risk of accidentally creating gray goo. However, system in the spirit of gray goo is not prohibited by the laws of physics, and we can not ignore the possibility that five of the above requirements can be implemented simultaneously in the device, small enough to sweep away was expensive and difficult. In view of this thesis Drexler 1986 should be corrected: We must not allow criminals to abuse the superhigh recklessly technologies. Having lived with the threat of nuclear weapons for half a century, we already know that.
We would like to remove the gray goo from the list of hazards CRN, but we can not. Sooner or later, this problem can become a real and demand specific policies in respect of it. However, make gray goo would be extremely difficult, and nereplitsiruyuschiesya nano-weapons can be substantially more dangerous and unavoidable.
Note: In June 2004, Eric Drexler and Chris Phoenix have published a new article «Safe molecular manufacturing" , which examined the risks of "gray goo»
Too much or too little regulation can lead to unrestricted availability
Uncontrolled availability of technology nanofactories may be due to inadequate or overly zealous regulation. Inadequate regulation will make it easier acquisition and use of unregistered nanofactories. Overly zealous regulation will create a pent-up demand for nanotech products which, if it becomes strong enough to finance espionage, hacking restriction technologies, or independent development, and ultimately account, create a black market that can not control the central government (nanofactories very convenient for smuggling). Note that quite rigid and restrictive regulation can become a motivation for domestic spying, and at least one of the atomic spies in U.S. history was motivated by idealistic ideas. Uncontrolled access to significantly increase many of the hazards listed above.
Competitors nanotech program increase the risk
existence of multiple programs on the development of molecular manufacturing considerably increases the risks listed above. Each program provides independent opportunities that technologies have been stolen or in some other way were outside the limits. Each country with an independent nanotechnology program is potentially an independent player in nanotech arms race. Promotions capacity to control can lead to what restrictions will be harder to enter, but it can lead to more intense efforts to establish a rough regulation. Relaxation of controls will also make it less likely that there will be less developed economically undermine the decision.
Full refusal ineffective
As awareness of these risks will increase the temptation to simply ban the technology. However, we do not think it would work. Many countries already spend Millions spent on basic nanotechnology, and advanced within a decade nanotechnology will already be achieved for large corporations. They can not be banned around the world. And if most nepriemlyuschie risk countries to stop work on them, the less responsible countries will be those who will continue to develop these technology and will deal with them. In addition to legislative regulation has little influence on the hidden weapons programs. The emergence of molecular production may be delayed by heavy regulation, but it's probably only make the situation worse in the long term. If the MP will be delayed until the moment when it becomes simple enough, then it will be much harder to keep track of all the programs of its creation. In addition, a more advanced technology-based development of nano-products can occur even faster than we have described, leaving less time to prepare for the social shocks.
solve these problems will not be easy
Some of the above risks occur from too little regulation, and others - from too strong. Several different kinds of regulation will be needed in several different areas. Extreme or fully inhibitory reaction to any of these risks simply create a breeding ground for other risks. These risks relate to a number of fundamentally different classes, so that a single approach (commercial, military, or based on freedom of information) can not turn them all. Some of these risks are so extreme, that society can not tolerate this risk, while still to be tested are different ways to prevent it. Even a single release of gray goo or unstable race weapons - are unacceptable. Paving the way among all these risks will require careful advance planning.
Comments interpreter
- 1. Suffice it once to break or steal nanofactories that she ever became the property of the black market, as it can in principle reproduce itself.
- 2. Nanofactories can produce nanoassembler and vice versa, as well as the gray goo. The authors clearly emphasize the advantages nanofactories and understate its vzaimoekvivalentnost with microscopic replicators.
- 3. The authors do not indicate a strong relationship of bio-and nanotechnologies, that increases the risk of both. Also for the impact of nanotechnology to increase the risk of AI and vice versa.
- 4. Unstable arms race leads strike first, and also lower the safety standards for construction.
- 5. The possibility of low-cost production of gold from sea water would undermine the foundation of the global financial system. But the value of the land as a finite resource, will increase. Cheap construction and transportation made fit for the development of Siberia, the Sahara and even oceans and Antarctica.
- 6. Some resources can preserve its value, for example, rare earth metals, which have a limited number of places on earth. Country, oriented to production for export markets, will suffer significant harm - such as China, Taiwan.
author - Alexei Turchin http://www.proza.ru/author.html? ...
