/sci/ - Science & Math

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1560976]

So, suppose this:

Eric Drexler turns out to be right, just as expected, on th eright time of his predictions (Since he explained them to both the idealists and the ultraconservatices, etc., so get to a "mean" point where the predictions are not optimistic or pessimistic, but realistic).

Because of that, nanotech goes the way of the computer: It goes from "a global market for five computers" to millions of desktop-sized assemblers that can assemble anything provided with the proper blueprints and the materials, said materials being, mostly, Carbon and Hydrogen, and maybe something else, but mostly Carbon.

Money loses most of it's worth, and corporations have to adapt to the rapid change by moving from manufacturing to resource extracion, since resources and blueprints are the only thing that's worth something, and then others try new ways of getting rich: They transform macroscopic blue prints for everything from a typewriter to a car into nanoassembler-executable code, and sell it at any price they want. But the Internet allows free exchange of these, so people start making open-source groups of people writing nanobot-executable code, and everyone who lives in the industrialized world can make anything from a pen to a jet fighter.

Economy changes rapidly, some companies collapse, others rise, "herp derp power to the people", gov'ment and corporations try to control nanotech like they did with the Internet and fail.

Say, /sci/, is this a semi-plausible scenario?

ITT: Nanodreams.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1560981]

Just wait till AI and robots to take up the rest of the work.
Post-scarcity.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1560986]

So, after this, a bunch of like-minded nerds, utopians, and idealists get together: Scientists, aerospace engineers, all that.

They take their knowledge and the assemblers, and become the Backyarders of Orion's Arm, making spacecraft out of Carbon from their backyard, going into space and settling on asteroids and comets with nothing but a spacesuit and a Drexlerian molecular assembler.

/sci/, if this happens, settles on a comet on the Kuiper Belt and eventually turns it into a Bussard Ramjet.

[Anonymous No.1560989]

none of this will happen because sun storm in 13 or nuclear exchange with iran will destroy the civilization.

[Anonymous No.1560993]

>>1560981
That makes me wonder, if robots become "too smart", would it become slavery to make them do our manual labor?

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1560994]

>>1560976
That is similar to my vision of the future. Quite similar.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1560998]

>>1560986
>So, after this, a bunch of like-minded nerds, utopians, and idealists get together: Scientists, aerospace engineers, all that.
Made me jizz already.
>They take their knowledge and the assemblers, and become the Backyarders of Orion's Arm, making spacecraft out of Carbon from their backyard, going into space

You know what I'm going to say already.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1560999]

>>1560993
No. If robots become "too smart" we become the slaves. duh.

[Anonymous No.1561000]

ITT: Colonel Coffee Mug et al. spends all night reading Orion's Arm.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561001]

>>1560993
Make them less smart in those fields.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561004]

>>1560993

We would all become slaves, á la Manna.

Or á la pic related.

[Anonymous No.1561005]

>>1560999
1st and 2nd laws of robotics.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561007]

>>1561005

That's going to be hard to accomplish.

[Anonymous No.1561013]

>>1560993
Oh hi.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561014]

>>1561004
Australia Project dude. Australia Project.

[Anonymous No.1561016]

>>1560976
>doesn't know the FCC just allowed verison, AT&T, and others to just, well, not give sites to their costumers.

[Anonymous No.1561019]

>>1561007
It has to be a priority for anyone designing robots. It doesn't have to be in the form of intelligence, necessarily. For example, an engineer might design a robotic arm that is automatically shut off when pushed against to prevent it from hurting people, and all robots so far obey the second rule.

[Anonymous No.1561021]

>>1561019
Sadly the militairy will be huge into bionic parts, so this might conflict a little.

[Anonymous No.1561023]

>>1561021
The fucking military, ruining our awesome utopian future.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561025]

Thinking about it, even if governments and corporations realize the power of nanotech and try to control it before the public gets it, there will always be a molecular assembler at, say, a university.

It just takes a student to make another assembler using the assembler, then take the new assembler to some place, and start making more assemblers, and giving them to others.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561031]

>>1561025
Oh god
YOU CAN DOWNLOAD A CAR NOW

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561032]

>>1561021
Bionic parts and RC drones. Not robots. The military would never have a robot rebellion problem since all of their machines will be driven by a human mind in some way. So if a situation arose, it'd be Forklifts as the rebels, and Terminator would be on the human side from start to finish.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561034]

>>1561031
I am a trained drafter and engineer. I can ORIGINATE PLANS FOR THE ASSEMBLERS!

I'd be giving every home all kinds of passive power collectors.

[Anonymous No.1561035]

>>1561016
that failed bro. their backdoor meetings were canceled because of 10,000 people like me that called them and told them if they do that we'll all kill them.

But google is in a meeting tomorrow (today?) that will pretty much make "fast lanes" for several huge sites, and everything else's speed goes down a small bit.
tl;dr google is gonna make it so facebook is twice as fast, and 4chan is 9/10th slower

[Anonymous No.1561039]

what the fuck, is this a tripfag thread?

[снайпер No.1561042]

This would basically destroy capitalism.

There are too many ideologues supporting capitalism and conservatism to ever allow this kind of new technology. They're stupid, they're going to fail, but they're going to make their failure as painful for the rest of us as they possibly can.

Honestly we ought to be trying to figure a new economic post-scarcity model out right now. We've already got a perfect example with the internet, computers and information being in need of this. Government and corporations keep trying to lock everything up - it's only going to be worse when it's actual physical goods instead of digital.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561045]

Yes... Drexlerian molecular assemblers would be self-replicating. It would only take a uni student with access to one for the technology to spread to the public, and there would be millions of people willing to do that... It would be developed at first by universities, and some foundations, not mostly by corporations (Or so it seems. Private spaceflight is mostly, well, private, and there aren't many foundations that have their own rockets, just cheerleaders fellating Elon Musk), so it would be very, very hard to keep some sort of control over nanotech.

I'd go as far as to say that it's impossible to properly control it. Even today, Uranium and Plutonium are hard to get because they are so powerful. Nanotech would be the same. The difference is, nanotech has the potential to save the world in ways we can't even imagine, and the risks are negligible. Sure, it's powerful, but "grey goo" and such nonsense is just science-fiction. Plus, Uranium is not self-replicating. Drexlerian assemblers are.

So, I'd say the chances of our Nanodreams coming true in our lifetimes are very,very high. It's almost impossible to control nanotech unless it was a rapid, world-wide, oraganized effort, and with the speed at which technology is advancing, they won't have time for such things.

Yay for the future!

[снайпер No.1561048]

>>1561035
Google is in no meetings to do anything of the sort.

Google's even been buying up dark fibre and building out their own network just as a precaution against the current carriers destroying network neutrality.

You're probably talking about that new york times article where they said google and verizon were teaming up to shape traffic. Well, NYT completely misunderstood what exactly google and verizon were discussing.

[Anonymous No.1561049]

And all in the middle of it, a few /sci/borgs start up a semi-sentient swarm of assemblers that, when unleashed, rebuild every qur'an, bible, book of mormon and dianetics into volatile bombs.

A couple of terraphile backyarders on the moon wonder what the rash of lights is on the dark side of the Earth.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561050]

>>1561042

Even with molecular nanotech, you still need Carbon and other base materials, and most importantly, the blueprints.

You can't just tell it to "make a car", you need instructions for an atomically-precise car, and only corporations or large groups (sourceforge.net for nanotech lolool) would be able to do that.

Nanotech won't destroy Capitalism, it will just change which industries take priority.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561051]

>>1561042
I am a capitalist and i fully support this technology. You just do not know what Capitalism is.

Capitalism is when every individual has control over his own capital. It is NOT the 1984 style of propaganda against capitalists. Capitalists are not the few rich or the business owners alone. They are supposed to be everyone. When you let one capitalist gain too much control over the capital of others, capitalism ends and we end up with another aristocracy.

This technology, putting power into the hands of the people, will further capitalism and end the neo-aristocracy of "Corporatism".

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561055]

>>1561050
>only corpororations or large groups can do that

...i can do it. i can do it MYSELF, and i can make a car better without the built in bugs or maintenance problems they put in on purpose to shorten car lifespans and increase sales on new parts.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561056]

>>1561051

This.

Only a bunch of ultraconservative idiots too afraid of losing power would oppose nanotech getting into the public, and while those people have a lot of power, it's going to be nearly impossible to hide a machine that can make small, portable copies of itself in a few hours and can be distributed all over the world.

It's almost like a virus, but a good one. Or maybe I'm thinking about this way too much.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561058]

>>1561051
You're mad if you think capitalism is going to exist in any recognizable form after nanoscale assemblers become really mainstream.
>>1561055
Design an awesome car then?
One that is fairly cheap equipment-wise but looks liek a damn sports car

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561059]

>>1561055

Wouldn't it take too long to design a car atom by atom?

Then again, I'm probably not consider a "copy paste" approach: Design a part, PERFECT, C+P repeatedly until you need something else.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561060]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jt3EGgtSAUc
Link slightly related

[снайпер No.1561061]

>>1561050
People will buy blueprints, and then put them up on torrents.

Corporations and governments will have no control over the prices, the people will, and the people will make all of it free.

The only thing that will cost will be the raw materials.

Once you're in a post-scarcity economy social interactions, status, and ideas become the new currency. Everything else will be so cheap they might as well be free.

[Anonymous No.1561062]

>>1561031
Nice pic, I DID download "insurance" a few hours ago, if thats what you're referring to, namefag.

I've read some sci fi stories about this kind of stuff, a similar vein is the gene hackers that violate corporate patents on genetic code.

[Anonymous No.1561064]

when will these nanotech thingys be avaible?

will it explode like dat internet and explode 10,000 fold after 5 years?

[Anonymous No.1561065]

>>1561004
>>1560999
>>1560993
I'm sorry, but Why would robots, computers or whatever need humans?
I also question why you think they would want us for anything. Maybe, just maybe, they would study us. Or keep us as is. I think humans have a huge of imagination. How do you teach an artificial intelligence that? They would probably use us to invent and think. I think they would see us as equals except if we manage to give it imagination and think beyond what is obvious then we might need to shit bricks. And I highly doubt that every robot is going to be that well taught and intelligent. I believe that each robot would be made with a specific programmed purpose and that is all it needs to know. Nothing else. Only a few computers will be very advanced and mentally conscious.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561066]

>>1561061

>Once you're in a post-scarcity economy social interactions, status, and ideas become the new currency. Everything else will be so cheap they might as well be free.

That sounds a bit more interesting and exciting that our current model at least.

[снайпер No.1561071]

>>1561056
>It's almost like a virus, but a good one.

People in power will clamp down on it before it ever gets to the point where you can have self assembling nanofabbers in your home.

[Anonymous No.1561072]

>>1561059
We design cars today without doing it atom by atom. .

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561073]

>>1561064

Early and mid 2020 is when you see high-insulation clothes and nanomedicine, and other stuff, as it gets a bit more media attention.

Molecular assemblers could happen at any point between 2030 and 2050, I'd say 2038 is a reasonable date.

[Anonymous No.1561078]

>>1561064
I dont think it will be as fast as the information economy developed. . after all, nanomachines are moving parts, and flaws/errors/experiements cost real material, whereas information is just your time and expertise.

[Anonymous No.1561079]

>>1561071
How?

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561080]

>>1561073
Oh fuck. Our lifetime is a glorious one.
- Biological immortality
- Advent of artificial intelligence
- Nanoscale assemblers
- Post-scarcity society

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561083]

>>1561058
I am mad. But i will still recognize Capitalism. It is when I have control over my bank account, and not someone else. It is when i choose my means of survival, and the cage is gone. Most of my life I have been free, taken care of for one half, and able to take care of myself for the other. Now I am seeing men trying to move in and make my survival dependent on their whim, not my own hands. This will not stand.

I can design that car. It will HAVE to look like a sports car in order to be the most efficient aerodynamically. And under the hood it will not be recognizable as an engine, you'll think "It's like stainless steel organs".

>>1561059
Designing things by atomic arrangement is not as hard as it sounds. It won't even be copy paste. It will be "Draw a square, drag and drop (PolyCarbon Arrangment #247-n) into square." For a whole square meter of lightweight material that is tougher than tank armor. Design the atomic arrangement, then make parts out of the new material.

[Anonymous No.1561084]

ITT delusional idiots

You guys are like these kids in the 70ies who believed we would have flying cars today, aka weird nerds with no idea what they are talking about and read too much scifi. You're giving us all a bad reputation.

[снайпер No.1561091]

>>1561079
The way they always have. With guns and thugs.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561093]

>>1561084
Oh jesus you're an ignorant idiot.
We did not have computers back in the 70's. This is the one huge thing that is changing the way humans research.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561094]

>>1561093
I meant computers in the way we have them now.

[Anonymous No.1561103]

>>1561079
>>1561079
>>1561079

moron, they've held PLENTY back.

simplest example, planned obsolescence of electronic goods.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561105]

>>1561084
Number one, the common man thought we'd have flying cars. And jet packs. Number two, they were right, they just forgot to factor in that there would never be a market for it because of how much it would suck actually having them. jetpacks are horrifically expensive to maintain, and a flying car... imagine giving everyone driving today a 300kp/h machine that can move in 3 dimensions, when they can't even handle a 30kp/h machine in two. Those minor fender benders now wipe out whole city blocks.

The only unrealistic part of this thread is the dates the Colonel is setting. I doubt it will be that soon.

[Anonymous No.1561106]

1. Practically everyone gets nanoassembly machines
2. Practically everyone manufactures assault rifles, sex dolls, gasoline, booze and weed
3. The world goes to shit

[Anonymous No.1561108]

>>1561093
>We did not have computers back in the 70's

yes we did you twit

[Anonymous No.1561109]

>>1561103
whats that mean?

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561110]

>>1561106
>2. Practically everyone manufactures assault rifles, sex dolls, gasoline, booze and weed
>manafacture weed

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561114]

>>1561109
He means the reason you have to replace light bulbs at all is because they make light bulbs specifically to burn out.

[Anonymous No.1561115]

>>1561108
1) most people didn't have personal computers
2) they sucked, badly

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561116]

>>1561109
it means that they deliberately design goods to break down shortly after the warranty expires so that you buy more shit from them. That is why most consumer electronics have an average life expectancy of 6 months, and there is a multi-million dollar industry in auto repair.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561117]

>>1561105

I'm happy as long as it happens in my probably extended lifetime.

[Anonymous No.1561119]

>>1561110
>spend ages growing
vs.
>get finished product instantly

if you were a stoner, which one would you go for?

[Anonymous No.1561121]

>>1561114
i have dem new light bulbs, and i haven't had to replace any of them since i bought them.

My friend even hit one with a knife (don't ask) and it still works

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561122]

>>1561106
I would manufacture power armor and cybernetic enhancements for myself. If i can become a superhero to save my city, i do that. If the world goes mad max on me, I declare myself Emperor and make loyalists into my personal Marines.

[Anonymous No.1561125]

>>1561122
>implying that everyone wouldn't become a super hero

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561127]

>>1561119
I am a stoner, and my reaction image was to show glee at the idea.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561129]

>>1561121
There are lightbulbs that were built in the 1800s that still work today. Thomas Edison didn't like the idea of everyone never having to by a lightbulb again, so he introduced planned obsolescence to make you keep buying lightbulbs from him. The idea of making more advanced light set ups to increase demand never occurred to him. The idea of new light based technologies never occurred to him. et cetera. He'd rather sell you shit that will break over and over again than keep making better products. And this arrangement is on purpose.

[Anonymous No.1561131]

>>1561122
>implying every other disenfranchised nerd won't do the same thing

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561132]

Who here in /sci/ wants to team up and create some mini-technocratic city with amazing shit created from the molecular assemblers if this shit actually works out?

Awesome captcha.

[Anonymous No.1561141]

>>1561129
isn't dat capitalism's fault?

[Anonymous No.1561142]

>>1561114
>>1561114

its utter bullshit. a 60gb iphone is a good $800. as memory gets cheaper and cheaper, the price of a 60gb ipod will not change. they'll keep the price at $800, stop making 60gb ones and jack the memory up to 256gb

consumers could have the fucking world in their hands.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561143]

>>1561141
In a way. Not really capitalism itself, it just tends to reward actions such as that. Cyclical consumption, etc.

[Anonymous No.1561146]

>>1561132
why team up when I can create a thousand female clones of myself and build a city on the moon where I can literally go fuck myself all day long?

[Anonymous No.1561148]

>>1561132
>implying that any of will remember /sci/ in 100 years after this shit comes around

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561150]

>>1561146
because those will be some ugly-ass females.

[Anonymous No.1561154]

>>1561150
<implying you wouldn't turn gay for my rugged masculine looks and debonaire charm

cool story bro

[Anonymous No.1561155]

so umm, what happens when that guy that hates the world gets one, creates 100 nukes, and blows everything up...?

our greatest creation will most defiantly destroy us all, if you haven't realized.

You cannot ignore that this, if it happens, will most defiantly destroy all of mankind

[Anonymous No.1561161]

>>1561150
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder man

also does anyone else think the captchas are getting steadily more bizzarre and harder to read?

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561162]

>>1561155
I would guess that uranium would not be available as raw materials for a nanoscale assembler, for one.

[Anonymous No.1561163]

>>1561161
>>1561161

its a project dumbshit, its meant to be changing

[снайпер No.1561165]

>>1561155
You can't just conjure up radioactive material from carbon atoms.

[Anonymous No.1561167]

>>1561162
>I do not understand the concept of nanoscale assembly

[Anonymous No.1561168]

>>1561155
Anyone can already buy and build bombs, but it almost never happens that some angry guy, or group, blows stuff up. Sometimes, yeah, but out of six billion people, I'd say most people seem to be alright. Also, just because you have the plans for a nuke doesn't mean you also have the plutonium.

[снайпер No.1561169]

>>1561161
Yes, but whenever I get some kind of moon runes, I just type nigger instead.

[Anonymous No.1561170]

>>1561161
i'm getting either all numbers, or all upside down now
>>1561162
you can also make bombs directly out of carbon. Not to mention everything needed to make missiles would be simple enough too

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561172]

>>1561167
Obviously you don't know how atoms work.
Jamming a bunch of carbon atoms to make nuclear material will not work, the same reason why our own fucking star can't do it.

[Anonymous No.1561177]

>>1561163
>mfw the fastest growth in AI comes from defeating captchas

[Anonymous No.1561187]

wait, so these supposed machines can only make things out of carbon?

why? please explain =/

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561190]

>>1561187
Not only out of carbon. That would just probably be the main ingredient.

[Anonymous No.1561210]

Colonel Coffee Mug, make this into a furry thread. I bet you it'll get shitloads of posts.

[Anonymous No.1561211]

>>1561187

It doesn't just spawn atoms. In order to make anything, it needs raw materials.

Most things people will want can be made out of things like carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen and other fairly common elements that are easy enough to get hold of. You could probably pull most of it out of the air. Nuclear weapons need certain elements such as uranium, which isn't as easy to find.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561212]

>>1561187

Molecular assemblers would use Carbon because it can be assembled in a metric fuckton of ways. Maybe some metals too if you have them.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561218]

>>1561210

Not now.

>>1561161

Yes, at first they were easy to read like regular CAPTCHAs, but now it seems the good ones ran out and we're getting the uncrackable ones.

[Anonymous No.1561222]

>>1561212
so i could like, take my current car, take it apart, use the metals and make it into a Porsche?

Does it dissemble things? or just make things?

then, make a blanket and a stack of paper into actual money? Then make my old television into a 10,000$ computer?

[Anonymous No.1561226]

Nevermind resource extraction, eventually nanotech will allow for 'nano-alchemy'. Literally changing one element into another.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561227]

>>1561222
If the technology is developed like that, yes.

And it most probably will be designed that way.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561229]

>>1561131
Yes I implied that... because if law and order were popular, I wouldn't be in a situation where I'd need my own state. In fact, what is more likely to happen is that society will not collapse, but I'll be fighting tech based super-villains. Like Doctor Horrible.

>>1561187
No, not only carbon. They can make them out of whatever material you can get a hold of. And there in lies the problem, availability of materials. If you can't get a hold of nuclear materials, you cannot build a nuke. However I have all the materials for electric ray guns in my back yard, so I am going to have electric ray guns.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561242]

>>1561222
Yes, you could feed the car into it and get the new car... IF you have the blueprints. Don't bother trying to counterfeit money though, unless you know the right chemical mixtures your cash will be as fake as any other counterfeits.

>>1561226
Nope. Nanotech is between atomic and molecule scale. Sub-atmoic scale requires completely different physical rules. If you want atomic transformation you need to look into heavy duty power tech and particle accelerators.

[Anonymous No.1561244]

>>1561229
>electric ray guns
HERF A NERF

[Anonymous No.1561246]

>>1561227

So, ill be able to take, grass, and turn it into beef?
Take a car, turn it into a jet?

The implications of such a creation... they alone make me think this is impossible....

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561250]

>>1561246

>So, ill be able to take, grass, and turn it into beef?

It's probably very complicated to assemble living tissue (well, beef is dead, but you get the idea) with only the base Carbon, but, given proper blueprints (that is, you'd need someone to study beef at the atomic scale to have it. probably not going to happen unless there's some group dedicating to making blueprints for nano-assembled food.

>Take a car, turn it into a jet?

Blueprints that allow molecular assemblers to make weapons and jet fighters are probably going to be illegal, or you'll need a permission, then again, anyone withk nowledge can do it. But not the general publc.

[Anonymous No.1561256]

>>1561250
but it'll be all open source on the internet.. and its not like the people that have those would be stoped by anything less than full scale military intervention

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561260]

>>1561256

Sure, the internet would be open-source, but if the authorities catch anyone distributing blueprints for jet fighters...

in the end, it's very unlikely that someone with the experience to single-handedly design a jet fighter would also know the nanoassembler code to design an assembler-executable blueprint.

actual, real-life blueprints rarely leak (as far as i know), and the same would happen in real life: they would be kept under security.

if someone gets one, then they can start making them, but you'd notice if someone started making such things, or if someone bought an assembler large enough for the task

[Anonymous No.1561263]

>>1561260
it would still be hilarious when kim jong il gets a huge one and starts making warships

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561265]

>>1561263

Yeah, that's possible. Then again, if North Korea gets a molecular assembler and SOMEHOW finds blueprints to make an atomically-precise warship, by the time that happens America and every other civilized country will have super-efficient sub-orbital solar-powered shape-shifting drones and super-soldiers, so I wouldn't worry

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561270]

>>1561260
You would need someone like me who can originate blueprints.

[Anonymous No.1561271]

>>1561244
This was a good joke, damnit.

[Anonymous No.1561275]

ITT: Not one mention of energy or energy costs. /sci has failed.

[Anonymous No.1561276]

>>1561275
well, you figure you could easily build solar panels with one, so..

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561278]

>>1561276
This

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561279]

>>1561271
I aim to please. I'll call my electric powered gun that fires in the form of rays whatever I want.

[Anonymous No.1561280]

>>1561275
because thats boring, a different thread, and fusion.

[Anonymous No.1561285]

>>1561279
HERF = High Energy Radio Frequency (gun), a directional EMP used to disrupt electronics
NERF = Nerf = makes cool looking guns
But I made it sound like I was making fun of you, when I was backing you up! Is joke!

[No.1561300]

This all sounds to good to be true. I'm guessing WW3 is going to happen before hand

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561315]

>>1561300

WW3 is probably not going to happen thanks to nuclear weapons, everyone it too afraid to use them so they threaten each other errrrday.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561328]

>>1561315

They're trying to reduce nuclear armaments... but the nature of WW3 is a discussion for another day.

Man I am going to look so damned good in my powered armor.

[No.1561329]

>>1561315
I guess you're right, but the amount of shit America gives NKorea and Iran makes you wonder how much more they are willing to take. If either of them cause shit it could get out of hand

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561331]

The future is going to be so awesome.

Private spaceflight, Drexlerian molecular assemblers, immortality, space elevators, SCIENCE!, super-weapons, more spaceflight, genetically-engineered super furries.

Some day...

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561338]

>>1561331
>space elevators

...you trollin'.

[No.1561339]

>genetically-engineered super furries.
I assume for hunting...right?

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1561346]

>>1561338

Okay that part was trolling but I wish.

[Anonymous No.1561369]

>>1561331
>implying that, due to capitalism, all of those things won't cost Billion & Billions of dollars.

[Anonymous No.1561394]

>>1561369
>Implying anything will have a cost in 50-70 years

[Anonymous No.1561420]

>>1560976

It would lead to either:

1. A totalitarian society where the state enforces strict controls on what people can have and not have(to prevent someone from making a WMD in their replicator and destroying a city just cause they're pissed about getting fired)

2. A massively brainwashed society where people are "educated" to only use the technologies for good reasons. The brainwashing would be have to be extreme and all-encompassing since we're basically talking about shutting down part of human nature here.

[Anonymous No.1561429]

>>1561420
or everyone would get throughly educated, (kinda brainwashing, I GUESS) and it would end up like Scandinavia , and noone would commit crimes, simply because they really didn't feel like it, getting a real job is just easier, and since theres state benefits and everything is mostly free, and if you didn't work you'd be bored as fuck

[Anonymous No.1561432]

Then one nanoswarm intellect figures out picotech and starts editing atoms themselves.

Fucking Age of Midas.

[Anonymous No.1561435]

>>1561429

I don't think Scandinavia has anything to teach us about a society where individuals can create whatever they want, no matter how destructive, in their own homes. Probably the internet is a better illustration of how people will act when they have fewer and fewer material boundaries on their behavior.

[Anonymous No.1561437]

>>1561432
>picotech
You heard it here first, folks!

>Age of Midas
I like you.

[Inurdaes !lololSGJBw No.1561446]

>>1561331
>>1561338
>>1561346
>implying space elevators are impossible
Japan says fuck you.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article4799369.ece

[Anonymous No.1561447]

>>1560976
It isn't. The governments will start bullshiting like with the internet: they will start placing restrictions on it "because it harms the economic growth". This is most likely what will happen.

[Anonymous No.1561456]

>>1561437
>sage
Boku no Picotech for you then, dear anon :)

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1561496]

>>1561420
Except these are not replicators. They are assemblers. In order to make anything with them you need the materials and the blueprints. If you do not have the blueprints you have to make them yourself. If you do not have the materials then even if you have the blueprints you are SOL on making whatever you want.

Nobody could just go home and make a WMD if they have no idea the fuck how.

[Anonymous No.1561519]

>>1561276 Assuming you can build a solar panel molecule by molecule with less energy than it produces in its lifetime.

[Anonymous No.1561521]

> Nobody could just go home and make a WMD if they have no idea the fuck how.

> Implying "blueprints" won't be available all over the internet

And as for resources necessary, the WMDs of the future need not just be biological or nuclear in nature. A von neumann type weapon has arguably a vastly larger potential for destruction.

And you're talking about putting the technology to make it into the hands of every "lone nut" in the world? Insane.

So, again, the only way to prevent lone nuts from destroying the earth is to either brainwash 100%(that's every single one, mind you) of humans to not wish to do this, requiring a level of mind control that even the North Koreans would envy, or a totalitarian society that absolutely controls all access to the technologies that can create said weapons. There really is no alternative to this.

[Anonymous No.1561527]

>>1561521
Maybe every person could run in their own sandbox. They can do whatever they like, but if they wreck it, we delete the whole thing and decide whether or not to restore them to an earlier state.

[Anonymous No.1561890]

>>1561521
In this scenario, the most likely WMD would be a rogue cloud of nanites devouring everything in sight.

[Axel the Possum No.1561919]

>>1561890

Yep. This is the real inherent danger of nanites: Grey Goo. However, if we can develop some level of effective countermeasure, we might be able to prevent this.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1562313]

Grey goo is science-fiction.

[Anonymous No.1562330]

>>1562313
Isnt a virus a biological grey goo? And they're a real danger. So the mechanism is not silly.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1562336]

>>1562330

Have bacteria dissolved the entire planet's mass into a grey goo?

No. And all bacteria do is reproduce.

Plus, first-generation molecular assemblers would probably be desktop sized and fit in homes and factories, not small robots.

[Anonymous No.1562345]

>>1562313

so are nanomachines. There's no certainty that we'll make them. People seem to think that the technological staples of science fiction are more or less destined to happen.

Guess what? AI isn't likely in our lifetimes, space elevators are ludicrous, FTL is a good eon away if it's even possible with the limited amount of energy in the solar system, and we'll be lucky if the singularity is little more than smaller and smaller phones that have electronic farting noises.

we didn't have a eugenics war in the 90's, we didn't have a manned spacecraft visit jupiter in the 00's, and we still don't have any flying cars.

Science Fiction is not a prophecy for the future.

[Anonymous No.1563290]

>>1562345

AI and FTL are pipedreams, but nanotech is getting more funding every day and is one of the fastest growing fields, mostly due to the amazing applications.

And this thread only talks about molecular assemblers, not herpderp self-replicating nanorobots xD hurfp durfp

[Anonymous No.1563319]

>>1562336
protip: bacteria are carbon-based

Though pretty implausible according to current understanding, if someone starts tinkering with autonomous or even semi-autonomous silica-based assemblers, I'd say they'd better be kept an eye on.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564326]

>>1562345
We have already made nanomachines. Greay goo is physics breaking science fiction because you simply cannot have nanomachines go out of control like that and self replicate endlessly. Let's say you made yourself some pure-carbon, carbon eating nanites to eat everything because you are just sick of everything. First, they are going to start eating and doubling, this will take time. After a set amount of time you then get new nanites and they continue to eat. After a certain amount of time the original nanites start breaking down from the wear on their own materials, and they start making bad copies and they are a bad copy themselves. Plus, each copy they made before hand began with a shorter lifespan than the originals.
Your nanite swarm has a total lifespan as long as they are a nanite swarm.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564333]

>>1564326
And that is all assuming you can even have self replication. There is presently an engineering issue in an attempt to make self replicating machines. Tolerance and stresses. You would need to make a machine that can work within its own tolerance and overcome its own material stresses to even do it at all. So nevermind the fact it'd be a lousy weapon you'd see people wasting their time on as their goo colonies double in size... then stop. You can't even fucking make it in the first place. Then you may ask "how does the nano-assembler work". Well it's basically a massive factory. Think "robots building cars" not, "robots building robots exactly like themselves". Only, on their level, having nanites build macroscopic materials they'd have an even easier time of it. Trying to get your nano-assembler to make nanites... hope you like not having a nano-assembler anymore.
And that is assuming you have a nano-assembler that has a level of control to even make nanites. It might only be able to put together materials, and the assembly of moving parts it can only do on larger scales.
So, grey goo can't happen in the real world, and its likely the idiots who want to make it happen will never be given the opportunity to break their assembler, lose a hand to nanites, and then wonder why the nanites just stopped and left them handless and without an assembler.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564390]

>>1564333
And that does it for "why nanites are no danger". Now, the "all these blueprints will be available on the internet". Not all of them, not that easily, blueprint control is all the government really needs to do in this case, and they are already pretty good at that. Once you have the blueprint, you then need to get your assembler making the thing for you, and you still need the materials. Without grey goo, you have no pure carbon weapons, so let's say by some miracle you did get a hold of MOAB blueprints. Can you get a hold of every element in sufficient quantities to even make one? Once you start making it, do you, personally, know what it takes to make a MOAB? I do... and if you at any time fail the chemical mixing BOOM there is one less nut with an assembler to worry about. I hope he doesn't have anyone else in the room with him when this happens.

Sorry, but just having an assembler with the potential to make anything doesn't do jack shit for you unless you can get a hold of and understand the plans, get your assembler to accept the plans in the way they need to be accepted, and get the materials to begin assembly.

People will not bother to make WMDs with their assemblers for the same reason they are not making home-made thermite cannons right now.

[снайпер No.1564399]

>>1563319
Honestly I don't think self-assembling nanobots are going to be a problem.

We've already got self-assembling nanobots everywhere. They're called viruses and bacteria. They cover pretty much everything on the planet.

We ain't a grey goo yet.

[Anonymous No.1564405]

>>1564390

Are you an engineer or what? Because it's weird to see peopel on /sci/ who know what they're talking about.

[Anonymous No.1564407]

>>1560993
Is it Slavery to drive a car? We're simply shaping Materials into a scientifically possible object. Perhaps if we could create AI some would judge it as slavery.

[Anonymous No.1564445]

sure is borg in here.

[Poor Communist No.1564450]

>>1561521
>>1561890
>>1561919

This is the biggest problem with the whole plan.

>>1562313

See, if you can do nanofabrication, then you can make grey goo. The only hard part is building the little machines, and since you can claim nanofabrication you presuppose that ability. We already have made self-reproducing machines.

The goo doesn't even have to be nanoscale. Microscale would suffice in order to have a destructive swarm.

>>1564333

So, I'm an engineerfag. It's not unreasonable to expected that a good machine shop with the correct tools and materials can reproduce any of the equipment inside the shop. This is not very different at all. You might take longer, or have to use simpler designs, or likely need to make a swarm with specialization in its members, but you could still do it. That other rubbish about energy or tolerances is just a smokescreen.

Even granting that you are unable to make these little fellas reproduce, it is still well within chance that a trojan-horse approach could get the machines to manufacture nanites or mechanisms or compounds that are harmful, without the user knowing better.

Jesus, we can't even curtail modern spambots on 4chan and you expect that we can stop somebody with an agenda from getting nanofabs to create bad things? Really?

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564455]

>>1564405
I am an engineer, and when the nano-assemblers come I would be one of the guys making new blueprints from scratch so instead of gas guzzling sports cars, you have super efficient bug free cars and a fuel processor in your home to fill it up with.

[Poor Communist No.1564477]

>>1564450

This whole concept of "post-scarcity" strikes me as nothing so much as a circlejerk by people who like SCIENCE!.

Now, SCIENCE! is a cool thing, and has a lot going for it, but to claim that SCIENCE! will magically solve all the world's problems lacks rigor.

In fact, that is my biggest issue with all this--you chucklefucks don't seem to be that worried about the world's problems. Empower the consumer! Help the first world nerds!

There seems damned little attention given to the BILLIONS of people who aren't part of your little club. This technology may have some fantastic implications for helping them, but that often seems overlooked in the furious technomasturbation that accompanies these threads.

For the sake of all of our first-world asses, I hope that these things *can* make weapons. And bombs. And grey goo. And viruses.

We're going to need them to fend off the have-nots you've ignored.

[Anonymous No.1564478]

I want a nanobot that turns carbon into arsnic.

[Anonymous No.1564488]

>>1564477
Fuck the fucking unwashed masses of the world. Especially africa. Fuck africa and everyone in it.

And yes, with our nanofabricators we can build high walled ivory towers with big guns mounted on them to fend off any annoyances.

Or how about this? We use our nanotech to make all kinds of nice shit for the have nots so they have nothing to complain about! Problem solved.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564496]

>>1564477
>compares a machine shop to self-replication and confuses post-scarcity with post-singularity and expects to be taken seriously and troll people.

>>1564478
Read the rest of the thread. Not happening.

[Anonymous No.1564500]

>>1564477

there's not enough resources to give computers and cool toys to everyone in the world, and i'm sure as hell not willing to give up any of my computers and cool toys for them. fuck em, if they want something more than what they have they can make money to buy it, make it themselves, or come and take it from us.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564502]

>>1564488
Or just give the Africans some nano-assemblers... watch how quickly it all falls ap... I mean, stays exactly the same over there.

[Anonymous No.1564519]

>>1564477For the sake of all of our first-world asses, I hope that these things *can* make weapons. And bombs. And grey goo. And viruses. We're going to need them to fend off the have-nots you've ignored.

We already have the tech, it's called VX gas. The problem is political feasibility.

[Anonymous No.1564522]

>there's not enough resources to give computers and cool toys to everyone in the world
Are you fucking kidding me? Even if we exhaust all the resources on the earth, there is still an entire universe of shit to be mined out there.

And remember, the very nature of this technology makes recycling an extremely viable activity. We'll need to stop incinerating our trash. The junkyards and landfills will be the first places we go when we start to run low on resources.

[Poor Communist No.1564525]

>>1564496

Come now, Boomer. I did more than throw-away oneliners to rebut what you said; show the same courtesy.

Anyways, the machine-shop analogy is fair, unless you'd like to point out where I'm mistaken. If you can't, you don't really have anything to dispute.

Furthermore, while you have a point about my mixing post-singularity and post-scarcity together here, note that the entire context of this discussion has been post-scarcity as promoted by domestic nanofabrication. That being the case, I think it is a fair criticism on my end.

Additionally, have you seen the "fuck them, I've got mine" responses in this thread? How is your post-scarcity supposed to handle that, by definition?

[Anonymous No.1564530]

>>1564525
Because in our current era of scarcity, if everyone said "fuck them, I've got mine", we'd leave tons of people behind.

With this technology, everyone can say "fuck everyone else, I've got mine" and it won't be detrimental to anyone because it will be so fucking easy to make anything you'd ever need.

[Anonymous No.1564536]

>>1564522
>Are you fucking kidding me?
unfortunately I am not. it would bankrupt most countries to even buy a fucking happy meal for everyone on the earth, we cannot even come close to giving everyone an iphone and a computer.

>Even if we exhaust all the resources on the earth, there is still an entire universe of shit to be mined out there.
which is currently completely unfeasible; if there were bars of pure gold and platinum stacked up on the moon we couldn't even afford to go get them.

[Anonymous No.1564547]

Great... Do you know how many retards would use this nanotech in a negative way? Think about how many dumb fucks write viruses now a days.

[Anonymous No.1564552]

Yeah, consume the entire universe after you've consumed earth...

[Anonymous No.1564558]

>>1564536
>currently unfeasible

You're missing the fucking point. This concept is a total gamechanger. Think about everything you know about supply and demand, about the material costs for space mining.

Good. Now throw it all out the fucking window, because it doesn't matter.

[Anonymous No.1564688]

am i the only one who, upon finding out the idea behind reCAPTCHA, i.e. the idea that we're helping correct mistakes in book digitization efforts, now finds himself being really careful and observant and trying a little harder when I find a particularly fucked up one instead of just clicking that reload thinghy?

really am I?

[Anonymous No.1564700]

>>1564536

happy meal is 6 dollars

7 billion people on planet.

= 42 billion dollars to give everyone a happy meal

your face when we spend that much in a year in iraq.

[Anonymous No.1564726]

>>1564700

I know. which is why I said "most countries" and not "this country" or "all countries"

[Anonymous No.1564730]

>>1564547
Think about all the fucks who write anti-virus's every day.

TL;DR You're a faggot.

[Colonel Coffee Mug !phJ7yIcs.Q No.1564815]

>>1564477

Sure, molecular assemblers are going to be about "Being white and living in the civilized world is even better!", but all things considered, there would be organizations trying to get the benefits from nanotech to reach third-world nations... I suppose.

The same way there are organizations feeding them, but not, say, taking seeds or anything because, say, there are constant droughts and plagues etc. So you use a molecular assembler to create, I dunno, a sealed-off greenhouse with a locked door and some solar panels. also, water filters based on buckytube are being researched. add those to the mix.

It wouldn't cost much, just the assembler itself, the Carbon required, and the blueprints, and tada, you can give Africa the means to sustain itself.

That is, after we nuke the local warlords frm orbit. That's going to be a bit of a situation, but just, for fuck's sake, take it a step at a time.

Post-scarcity? Singularity? Utopian nanosocialist societies? Probably not.

But as long as, before 2050, there are as many personal, desktop-sized molecular assemblers as there are personal, desktop-sized computers today, it will be sufficient, at least to me, and I think it's a plausible goal, unlike grey goo or the Singularity or FTL. At least much more feasible than those.

Maybe I'm being a bit optimistic/pessimistic about the dates, but the general idea is there.

[Boomer !!bcdVCSUmpgT No.1564838]

>>1564815
The thing is, there is a huge difference between post-scarcity and post-singular, you can even have one without the other. And one of these assemblers in every home would give you neither.

[Anonymous No.1564894]

>>1561042
post-scarcity blows my mind to even consider...

We could do nearly anything...


WHY ISN'T SCIENCE FUNDING AT LIKE 500 BILLION DOLLARS?