|
Current Issue Contents | Past Issues | Subscribe | Contact | Terasem Journals Home |
||||||||
|
Volume 4, Issue 2 |
Recombinant DNA and Self-replicating Molecular Manufacturing: Parallels and Lessons James B. Lewis, Ph.D Page 5 of 6 2. Asilomar avoided considering those broader issues underlying public attitudes about genetic engineering that were not immediately related to the safety of recombinant DNA technology. Because no parallel process was established to involve those outside the scientific community to consider the broader issues, these issues were dealt with on an ad hoc basis as the technology advanced—with variable success. As each technological advance arose, it was dealt with in the context of the current social and political issues. Genetically modified food ran afoul of the European Green movement; embryonic stem cells became entangled in anti-abortion politics and the general revulsion against human cloning. Asilomar thus provides no guidance on how to deal with complex issues in advance of the technological progress that places the issue in the public spotlight. Attempts to deal with the consequences and ethical implications of self-replicating nanotechnology are thus in uncharted waters. Initial attempts [1, 2] to specify guidelines for the development of self-replicating nanotechnology focused on restricting autonomous replicating manufacturing systems. An alternative [3] proposes an international treaty under which such systems could be safely developed, especially noting that they may be an essential part of a protective system against malicious autonomous replicating manufacturing systems.
"It’s often said that we face an unending struggle against terrorism. This is nonsense. Advancing technologies will eventually make it easy to suppress terrorism. The great struggle will be to keep this power from suppressing too much more." Among the many issues that will be raised by the development of self-replicating molecular manufacturing technology, perhaps the greatest and most immediate impact will be on the ability of most people to earn a living. If artificial general intelligence takes over the jobs of scientists, engineers, and other professionals, and molecular manufacturing systems and robots make all necessary goods and perform all necessary services, how will humans earn a living? Will all wealth accrue to those who own the various technologies? Will it be possible for humans to own AI systems that are millions of times more intelligent and capable than they are? [1] Much information about nanomaterials EHS issues can be found on the web site of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies of the PEW Charitable Trusts and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars http://www.nanotechproject.org/ [2] "The stealth threat: An interview with K. Eric Drexler" Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 63, 55-58 (2007) http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/063001018 [3] http://www.opensourcesensing.org/ [4] http://e-drexler.com/d/06/00/EOC/EOC_References.html#Ch_15 [5] "The stealth threat: An interview with K. Eric Drexler" Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 63, 55-58 (2007) http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/063001018 [6] http://www.opensourcesensing.org/
|
Terasem Mission Educate the public on the practicality and necessity of greatly extending human life, consistent with diversity and unity, via geoethical nanotechnology and personal cyberconsciousness, concentrating in particular on facilitating revivals from biostasis.
|
||||||
|
TerasemJournal.com Home | Journal of Geoethical Nanotechnology | Journal of Personal Cyberconsciousness Copyright © 2006-08, Terasem Movement, Inc. Disclaimer |
||||||||