Re: Too much concern for "safety" and "morality" and "ethics" ofNANO


Rich wrote:

All this 21st century political correctness will do is hamper
discoveries.

Moral considerations are likely to apply to applications, not discoveries
themselves. Some R&D on innately dangerous processes such as unconstrained
replication might be regulated.

It will likely take twice as long for Nanotech
breakthroughs because of the undue influence of moralists.

Which research specifically do you think will be prevented? Was research on
genetics hampered by regulations on dangerous biological organisms? Or nuclear
research hampered by safety regulations?

Kind of like how human anatomy study was hampered for
hundreds of years thanks to idiotic religious prohibitions against
dissections of corpses.

That was based on supernatural religious and vitalist ideas. Current concerns
are based on real-world risks. Do you see any supernaturalism here? So far,
your argument just seems to be a smear by arbitrary association. Do you have
any concrete evidence against regulation?

In order to expedite the process, a certain level of risk should
be assumed.

How do you decide the appropriate level of risk?

So far you have just argued against regulation. Do you think there should be
any control, regulation or restriction on nanotech applications at all?

Existing laws on toxic waste, health and environmental damage will apply to
nanotech products. Do you think they should be specially exempt? If so, why?

Do you for example reject current restrictions on the handling of smallpox virus
or nuclear materials? Do you think computer-virus writers should be prosecuted?
If you think regulations are appropriate there, then why not in this equally
dangerous emergent area?

Toby

.