Re: Best Programming language for AI in Nanobots


On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 22:30:41 -0000, rhooker123@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>
>>Still, it is NOT NECESSARY to design nanobots for self-replication.
>
>Well there is too much here to cover so I would like to concentrate on
>this point.
>
>I am very certain that though some nanobots may not have to reproduce
>to do their jobs a large number will and nanotechnology will require
>some degree of reproduction to be truely revolutionary.
>
>Ofcource nano-circuits could be produced industrially and blow the roof
>off Moore's Law, or a specialised nanobot unit could make certain
>repairs to a heart, but making one of these tiny things is going to be
>expensive, and the amount of work a nanobot will be able to do will be
>rather small by definition.
>
>As for non-replication designs, they would be only significantly more
>risky than micro-designs and would require only a certain amount more
>testing before an insurance company would back a firms effort to use
>them. But the energy levels need to create a tiny thing that can only
>do a little amont of total work makes replication obvious and
>inevitable.
>
>Self replication will be necessary for thier use in any heavy
>industrial lifting. For example I would want to use nanobots to clean
>up pollution, recycle waste material, collect energy, or remove cancer
>cells and in order to get this I will need to have a lot and get a lot
>more when I want it. When I need trillions of something I don't want
>to have to buy them, I want them to make themselves, every
>nano-scenario I have read assumes this.
>

Forgive me if this observation seem rude, but you appear to have two
blind spots here.

1) Gray Goo
2) Self replication.

I am personaly happy that 1) can only happen thanks to deliberate
design. I'd observe that it's a lot more likely that uncontroled
biology could come up with this, a broken Nanite is more likely a dead
Nanite.
2) is not required at all, no nanite has to have the abillity to
reproduce. Instead a factory can make as much as you require, it in
turn has to be fed the raw materials + be given the blueprints.
Again a factory failure would be a dead factory, totaly harmless.

I am content that if 1) happens it will not be due to an accident.



:-) mike
--
The line below is true.
The line above is false.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Best Programming language for AI in Nanobots
    ... it is NOT NECESSARY to design nanobots for self-replication. ... > I am very certain that though some nanobots may not have to reproduce ... than making self replication a requirement for every nano scale tool. ...
    (sci.nanotech)
  • Re: Best Programming language for AI in Nanobots
    ... factories/queens can produce massive numbers of nanobots and reproduce ... A factory which is self-replicating will likely at least slow ... Nano-technology working in the solar system may need to create ... The factory plus needed raw materials then is moved to where you ...
    (sci.nanotech)
  • Re: Best Programming language for AI in Nanobots
    ... Now lets assume the Energy ... of production in a factory is half the energy of self replication. ... acquiring nanobots, and they bring what you need back to you. ... No self-replication out in the environment. ...
    (sci.nanotech)
  • Re: Best Programming language for AI in Nanobots
    ... A mother/queen/ant factory will almost certaintly reproduce at a slower ... rate than a self-replicating nano-bot system. ... nanobots at say one liter per minute. ...
    (sci.nanotech)
Loading