nanotech funding

[dragon]

Apparently every one is hoping on to the nanotech bandwagon. 2004 saw an increase of 160% for coporate and private funding and 37% for goverment and academic research oputlays. Japan and US leads the way with Australia going in a negative direction. Even though I love the quote

Not surprisingly, public fears are directly correlated with the amount of knowledge that people have about nanotech: the less knowledge, the more fear.

http://www.techreview.com/articles/05/0 ... tamine.asp

[Molyneux]

Woo-hoo! I can't wait for Drexler's little black minifactory...

Immortality and grey goo can wait, I just want unlimited manufacturing at minimal cost! ^_^

[Zor]

Woo-hoo! I can't wait for Drexler's little black minifactory...

Immortality and grey goo can wait, I just want unlimited manufacturing at minimal cost! ^_^

Mike has a good page on the Nanowankery you are talking about. I sugjest you read it.

Zor

[wolveraptor]

Apparently every one is hoping on to the nanotech bandwagon. 2004 saw an increase of 160% for coporate and private funding and 37% for goverment and academic research oputlays. Japan and US leads the way with Australia going in a negative direction. Even though I love the quote

Not surprisingly, public fears are directly correlated with the amount of knowledge that people have about nanotech: the less knowledge, the more fear.

http://www.techreview.com/articles/05/0 ... tamine.asp

Keep in mind that percentage increases don't show much, due to the fact that nano-tech industries don't have much funding to begin with. If I'm giving Corpco. Industries Conglomerate a buck a year, and suddenly give 'em ten bucks, I just increased my funding by 1000%! Woo hoo! They still aren't getting shit.

[Companion Cube]

Mike has a good page on the Nanowankery you are talking about. I sugjest you read it.

Zor

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. On the other hand, you never know.

[dragon]

Apparently every one is hoping on to the nanotech bandwagon. 2004 saw an increase of 160% for coporate and private funding and 37% for goverment and academic research oputlays. Japan and US leads the way with Australia going in a negative direction. Even though I love the quote

Not surprisingly, public fears are directly correlated with the amount of knowledge that people have about nanotech: the less knowledge, the more fear.

http://www.techreview.com/articles/05/0 ... tamine.asp

Keep in mind that percentage increases don't show much, due to the fact that nano-tech industries don't have much funding to begin with. If I'm giving Corpco. Industries Conglomerate a buck a year, and suddenly give 'em ten bucks, I just increased my funding by 1000%! Woo hoo! They still aren't getting shit.

True but in this case works out to almost 4 billion for the US and a little more for Japan.

[Molyneux]

Woo-hoo! I can't wait for Drexler's little black minifactory...

Immortality and grey goo can wait, I just want unlimited manufacturing at minimal cost! ^_^

Mike has a good page on the Nanowankery you are talking about. I sugjest you read it.

Zor

Where? I can't seem to find it on the main page...could you link me, please? ^_^

[Faram]

Woo-hoo! I can't wait for Drexler's little black minifactory...

Immortality and grey goo can wait, I just want unlimited manufacturing at minimal cost! ^_^

Mike has a good page on the Nanowankery you are talking about. I sugjest you read it.

Zor

Where? I can't seem to find it on the main page...could you link me, please? ^_^

Here you go

[Admiral Valdemar]

More jobs, that's always good. And if the US doesn't embrace the technology base, then someone else will (look at stem cells). We can do with less people who read Drexler's little utopia dream of a wankfest where money is abolished and less of those like Prince Charles who fall for the "grey goo" doomsday scenario.

[Lord Zentei]

Mike has a good page on the Nanowankery you are talking about. I sugjest you read it.

Zor

I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. On the other hand, you never know.

He wasn't (as far as I'm aware). Most of the hopes attached to nanotech are unreasonable (i.e. "OMFG! TEH NANO WILL MAEK TRADITNaL PRODUCTION METHODS OBSOLETE11!!+oneoneone"). Though nano certainly will be useful in it's own way.

[wolveraptor]

I still think that bonding on a molecular or atomic level is much more stable than "conventional" nuts and bolts. I could see a future where the massive plates for the hull of a destroyer were manufactured through the regular forging method, but was bonded with the other plates using nanotechnological methods.

[Lord Zentei]

I still think that bonding on a molecular or atomic level is much more stable than "conventional" nuts and bolts. I could see a future where the massive plates for the hull of a destroyer were manufactured through the regular forging method, but was bonded with the other plates using nanotechnological methods.

It's called "glue".

Perhaps nanotech will provide a new kind of this, but I'm more looking at detectors, computers and mechanisms for combining biological and mechanical systems.

[Shroom Man 777]

Gah. Nanotechnological superglue. Okay, nanotech can make glue stickier. And lots of airplane parts are stuck together with glue. Yay. And I'm sure with nanotech fiber stuff, we can finally make socks stop stinking. And we might even have better medicines and toothpastes. And nano might be able to help in computer technology, but aside from that, they're not going to do anything ground breaking. I think...

[Nephtys]

Gah. Nanotechnological superglue. Okay, nanotech can make glue stickier. And lots of airplane parts are stuck together with glue. Yay. And I'm sure with nanotech fiber stuff, we can finally make socks stop stinking. And we might even have better medicines and toothpastes. And nano might be able to help in computer technology, but aside from that, they're not going to do anything ground breaking. I think...

Most nanotech research is in the field of materials anyway. It's mostly just going into improving materials we have or developing new ones that we won't really think of as nanotech in the future.

[Alliance SpecForceTrooper]

Most nanotech research is in the field of materials anyway. It's mostly just going into improving materials we have or developing new ones that we won't really think of as nanotech in the future.

Yea, they've shown the nanofibre shirts that are stain proof on The History Channel's Modern Marvels IIRC.

[Molyneux]

Meh, even if Drexler was overenthusiastic, any technological innovation is more than likely to be a good thing in general. As long as it's well-handled, anyway.

[Crown]

If we can use Nano-tech to help fight diseases, for example I believe AIDS works because our immune system doesn't recognise it well, then I'm all for it.

After that I want longer (vigorous) life, and genetic engineering for my eyesight damit!

[Drunk Monkey]

In Fifty Years Japan will be known as the Borg collective and they will kidnap the hideous Paris Hilton and make her there Queen. She will then try to conquer the United States one Boat shaped like a giant box at a time, (and seduce gray androids in they Navy as well) all hail the Borg collective which happens to be located in Tokyo that will be renamed Unimatrex 001 all hail our hideous queen with wooden acting abilities.

[Nephtys]

In Fifty Years Japan will be known as the Borg collective and they will kidnap the hideous Paris Hilton and make her there Queen. She will then try to conquer the United States one Boat shaped like a giant box at a time, (and seduce gray androids in they Navy as well) all hail the Borg collective which happens to be located in Tokyo that will be renamed Unimatrex 001 all hail our hideous queen with wooden acting abilities.

They'll also demand 'Lurching while looking dumbfounded' be an olympic sport, huh?

[Drunk Monkey]

In Fifty Years Japan will be known as the Borg collective and they will kidnap the hideous Paris Hilton and make her there Queen. She will then try to conquer the United States one Boat shaped like a giant box at a time, (and seduce gray androids in they Navy as well) all hail the Borg collective which happens to be located in Tokyo that will be renamed Unimatrex 001 all hail our hideous queen with wooden acting abilities.

They'll also demand 'Lurching while looking dumbfounded' be an olympic sport, huh?

That and aiming laser pointers built into the side of your head.

[tharkûn]

It's called "glue".

Perhaps nanotech will provide a new kind of this, but I'm more looking at detectors, computers and mechanisms for combining biological and mechanical systems.

Topologicly interlocked molecules. Theoretical calculations for some bondings go through the roof, but none of that is close to reality, likewise every paper I've seen has ignored the "self-assembled" approach.

And nano might be able to help in computer technology, but aside from that, they're not going to do anything ground breaking. I think...

If you can ever get a living CNT production method we could have materials with obnoxiously high Young's Moduli and ultimate tensile strengths, as in up in the terapascal range possibly. Virtually all your catalysis options there are nanotech.

The big pie in the sky payout there is a practical space elevator. Depending on cost, which is a big depends, you could see a radical performance increase in materials science which has ubiquitious military, scientific, aerospace, and safety uses.

Right now the big thing is in filtration and seperation. The majority of private nanotech funding comes from the energy companies and they have found several uses in petrol cracking. Medicine will likely eventually harness some of this technology which leads to drug delivery, detox/purification, viral detection, etc.

If we can use Nano-tech to help fight diseases, for example I believe AIDS works because our immune system doesn't recognise it well, then I'm all for it.

AIDS is nasty because:
1. It is a retrovirus that can store itself within the genome.
2. It targets the immune system for infection.
3. It is mutagenic as all hell.

Nanotech will be completely unable to deal with 1 and 3, you simply can't make nano that intelligent, indeed I see nothing that could possibly make nano more adaptive than your own immune system. 2 is still going bite you in the ass unless you can erradicate HIV or keep the nanotech working 24/7; the concetration needed in the bloodstream to protect all the necessary sites would most likely be lethal. Cancer is a far easier target for nano intervention, as are many brain maladies.

Barring a massive breakthrough, the only way I see to cure AIDS is going to be to wait for the HIV virus to do itself in by finding a benign genotype that outcompetes the lethal varieties.

[wolveraptor]

Bah. We've already identified the gene that probably creates a resistance to aids. All we have to figure out is how to genetically modify babies at conception, and (barring a sudden mutation by the HIV virus that totally changes their method of reproduction) the virus'll soon die out in humans. Nanotech need not be involved.

[Molyneux]

It's called "glue".

Perhaps nanotech will provide a new kind of this, but I'm more looking at detectors, computers and mechanisms for combining biological and mechanical systems.

Topologicly interlocked molecules. Theoretical calculations for some bondings go through the roof, but none of that is close to reality, likewise every paper I've seen has ignored the "self-assembled" approach.

And nano might be able to help in computer technology, but aside from that, they're not going to do anything ground breaking. I think...

If you can ever get a living CNT production method we could have materials with obnoxiously high Young's Moduli and ultimate tensile strengths, as in up in the terapascal range possibly. Virtually all your catalysis options there are nanotech.

The big pie in the sky payout there is a practical space elevator. Depending on cost, which is a big depends, you could see a radical performance increase in materials science which has ubiquitious military, scientific, aerospace, and safety uses.

Right now the big thing is in filtration and seperation. The majority of private nanotech funding comes from the energy companies and they have found several uses in petrol cracking. Medicine will likely eventually harness some of this technology which leads to drug delivery, detox/purification, viral detection, etc.

If we can use Nano-tech to help fight diseases, for example I believe AIDS works because our immune system doesn't recognise it well, then I'm all for it.

AIDS is nasty because:
1. It is a retrovirus that can store itself within the genome.
2. It targets the immune system for infection.
3. It is mutagenic as all hell.

Nanotech will be completely unable to deal with 1 and 3, you simply can't make nano that intelligent, indeed I see nothing that could possibly make nano more adaptive than your own immune system. 2 is still going bite you in the ass unless you can erradicate HIV or keep the nanotech working 24/7; the concetration needed in the bloodstream to protect all the necessary sites would most likely be lethal. Cancer is a far easier target for nano intervention, as are many brain maladies.

Barring a massive breakthrough, the only way I see to cure AIDS is going to be to wait for the HIV virus to do itself in by finding a benign genotype that outcompetes the lethal varieties.

I wouldn't mind nano-cloth...self-repairing (up to a point), self-cleaning, just hope that it doesn't go haywire and eat your skin ^_^

[tharkûn]

Bah. We've already identified the gene that probably creates a resistance to aids. All we have to figure out is how to genetically modify babies at conception, and (barring a sudden mutation by the HIV virus that totally changes their method of reproduction) the virus'll soon die out in humans. Nanotech need not be involved.

Every possible single point mutation in an HIV genome in an AIDS patient is expressed in a given day. The genetic differences between clades is over 30%. Basing your HIV vaccine on the hope that it doesn't mutate around it is likely to be futile. I have yet to read about broad spectrum HIV immunity gene that has passed rigoriouis clinical examination; I expect I never will.

I wouldn't mind nano-cloth...self-repairing (up to a point), self-cleaning, just hope that it doesn't go haywire and eat your skin ^_^

Virtually all real world nano-tech has zilch to do with being biomemetic, most of it is just really cool crap that happens when you scale down that far. For instance a stock transition metal catalyst in that range has nothing but surface area, meaning that all catalysis in the bulk goes away. This can lead to some very screwball behavior. The biomemetic wank tends to be just that - wank.

[Castor Troy]

Isn't it possible to make more efficient solar panels from nanotechnology?