Re: Bye Bye Grey Goo


Jim Logajan wrote:


I don't see how machine phase nanotechnology can accomplish much of value
without the capability of self-replication. Even "small" problems require
huge numbers (by human standards) of nanorobots to accomplish tasks of
interest. And self replication is still the best way to get to large
numbers.

My opinion (as a relative noob here)

I think the single biggest impediment to rational discussion of the
dangers of nanotechnology is the assumption that every task must be
carried out by vast numbers of identical, general purpose,
self-replicating machines.

You do need self-replication to quickly build vast numbers of nanobots,
but that doesn't require all nanobots to self-replicate.

For most applications, you could use single-purpose nonreplicating
nanobots, which would reduce the required complexity.

Of course, you still need self-replicating assemblers to produce all
those nanobots, but those assemblers need not be general-purpose
machines either, and can be limited to work with specific types of
feedstocks rather disassembling their surroundings for materials.

The feedstock material can be supplied by specialized disassemblers,
which are incapable of producing anything besides the feedstock materials.

If the assemblers and disassemblers are designed to use different power
sources, (i.e. different frequencies of EM radiation, or one uses
radiation and the other uses chemical energy), you now have a system
that requires two points of failure for catastrophe instead of just one.

Another way to limit the replication rate is to introduce a fourth type
of nanobot for control purposes. This requires a feedstock, uses an
independent power source, and produces one-time instruction sets for the
assemblers to use. A fifth type of nanobot (terminator) is introduced
(A disassembler with very limited capabilites, i.e. it can only destroy
programmers.)

The self-replication cycle:
Programmers issue instructions for building assemblers, disassemblers,
terminators, and more programmers.
Disassemblers gather resources.
Assemblers use resources and instructions to construct new assemblers,
disassemblers, and programmers.

When the critical population is achieved, the programmers are disabled
while the terminators are activated.

The stabilization cycle:
Disassemblers continue gathering resources.
Terminators destroy the programmers.
Assemblers deplete the existing copies of instructions.

Eventually you reach a state where the assemblers and terminators are
inactive (no instructions to follow, and no programmers to destroy).
After this state is achieved, a new set of programmers is introduced:
one programmer to build more terminators, and one programmer to build
the nanobots you wanted in the first place.

The manufacturing cycle:
Disassemblers gather resources
Programmers produce instructions for the assemblers
Assemblers build terminators and special-purpose nanobots

After some time, the programmers are deactivated and the terminators are
activated in another termination cycle. You now have active
disassemblers, a ton of single-purpose nanobots waiting to build your
gazebo or space elevator, and a bunch of inactive assemblers and
terminators. You also have plenty of raw material, since the
disassemblers have been running nonstop.

At this point, you power only the disassemblers and single-purpose bots,
until the task at hand is complete. Actually, you can deactivate the
disassemblers early.

Now you need to clean up all those bots.

Cleanup cycle:
New programmers are introduced, with instructions to make more
programmers, more disassemblers and instructions for disassemblers to
destroy all nanobots used in the process.
When a sufficient excess of disassemblers is produced, the programmers
are deactivated. When the assemblers cease activity, the disassemblers
are activated.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Multi-Statements Lines
    ... One of the multiple problems that have made Assembly a dead ... Actually, as most modern assemblers still enforce this style, it's ... multiple statements on one line is one way to do it. ... programmers cram multiple statements per line (as those programmers ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: my first Forth program
    ... facilities at all I think modern programmers have it easy. ... Forth assemblers are part of the Forth ... to cassette tape, load the object code from tape and run it. ... A Forth assembler routine does not need to be saved to ...
    (comp.lang.forth)
  • Why people perceive ASM to be hard to read
    ... > Its much the same comment as I made to Robert, horses for courses, ... because most people perceive that assembly language programs are *hard* ... assemblers that attempt to simulate these features. ... existed because *most* assembly language programmers weren't using ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Renes Revisionist History, Again
    ... > RosAsm _is_ the fastest of the actual Assemblers. ... Are you saying RosAsm has a pitiful feature-set so it just does simple table ... > Fresh, and of RosAsm, and to compare the Statistics. ... > RosAsm Disassembler, compared to the other Disassemblers, ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: Faster HexToBuffer Routines
    ... So why not post an example of a hex to buffer routine that is ... comparisons in between the various Assemblers Speeds, ... This has nothing to do with speeds of assemblers or anything like that. ... we've seen examples in this thread how "real" assembly programmers ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
Loading