Will Nanotechnology Be The Next Big Thing?

Neil Postman, a firm protester against technology, begins his argument in The Judgement of Thamus with a parable about a king rejecting an inventor who incorporates writing into their society; the king, Thamus, is steadfast in his belief that writing’s future burdens will outweigh its immediate success. Postman argues that technological discoveries change the way we think, manipulating our culture and our understanding of the world. He states that the primary difference between computers and humans is the ability to self-learn - but what happens when the human race conquers that barrier with technology? Artificial Intelligence is often referred to as the "field I would most like to be in" by researchers in other sciences (semanticscholar.org). It is not only prominent in subfields like reasoning and logic, but also in precise tasks like playing chess, proving theorems, and diagnosing diseases. The short-term benefits of Artificial Intelligence depend on who controls it, while the long-term benefits of Artificial Intelligence depend on if we can control it at all. When considering synthetic intelligence, I believe our outlook must be cautiously positive. As Postman suggests, the development of technology has significant advantages and disadvantages. Futurists believe AI will redefine the human world by enabling software’s ability to self-program and by minimizing the time it takes to solve a challenge. However, the safety issues and current jobs that will be replaced by

In both of their articles they anticipate GNR technologies will make great leaps forward in future decades and will bring with them a myriad of new possibilities. Joy and Kurzweil both describe a not too distant future of robotics,artificial intelligence, and nanotechnology. They anticipate ubiquitous nanotechnology and artificial intelligence in only two to three decades time; furthermore, Joy and Kurzweil portray a world in which computers have far greater computing power because of advances in nanotechnology, nanobots can be easily produced at feasible cost, and artificial intelligence rivals, if not exceeds, that of the smartest humans. Based upon all of this research done and the rate at which current technologies are being improved upon, this matter is not very debatable. What is, however, is what the rapid advances made in the near future will present, and this is where Joy and Kurzweil begin to differ. They disagree on the topic of whether or not all the anticipated advances will be more of a benefit or hindrance to society and how these new technologies should be treated. Joy presents a pessimistic view in his essay, providing many reasons why developing GNR will endanger humans greatly. He describes a dystopian future where nanotechnology will be used to create pathogens that will be incredibly hard to stop and artificial intelligence will become independent and outgrow the need for humans. Joy compares GNR to the nuclear, biological, and chemical (NBC)

We think of computers as being incredibly intelligent now, but actually in terms of brain power an average computer today has the intelligence of a mouse. According to Moore’s Law, computing power doubles every 18 months. In other words, it increases at an extreme rate. The rapid pace of change brings fear into the eye of a technophobe and some of today’s most eminent scientists are now warning that the evolution of technology may spell the end of humankind. Even now, the greatest threat to job creation is the increasing reliance on robotics in industrial factories. Jobs that have traditionally provided a living for millions of people are quickly being turned over to a highly efficient and cost-effective robotic

In his work, “Introduction: Nanotechnology, Society, and Ethics”, CalPoly Associate Professor of Philosophy Patrick Lin writes, “Let’s take a step back and consider any given technology we have created: gunpowder, the printing press, the camera, the automobile, nuclear power, the computer, Prozac, Viagra, the mobile phone, the Internet. Undoubtedly, these have brought us much good, but each has also changed society in important, fundamental ways and caused new problems, such as increased pollution, urban sprawl, cyber-crimes, privacy concerns, intellectual property concerns, drug dependencies, new cases of sexually-transmitted diseases, other unintended health problems, mutually-assured destruction and much more. The point here is not that we would have been better off without these inventions. Rather, we should come to terms that our creations can have unintended or unforeseen consequences” (Lin, n.d., p. 1). Lin’s point goes across the board for all technologies, there will be unforeseen consequences, some will be good and some will certainly be perceived as bad.

“I used to worry that computers would become so powerful and sophisticated as to take the place of the human minds,” expresses Lewis Thomas, the author of “The Corner of the Eye” [Thomas, 83]. A large part of Thomas’s fear of computers is due to the fact that “a large enough machine can do all sorts of intelligent things beyond our capacities” [Thomas, 83]. However, computers cannot replace us; he realizes computers cannot do some of the things that we can do, like being human. We like to be equivocal, imaginative, and self-conscious. Computers are the complete opposite of the traits that define us as human; or as Thomas states it, “they are not designed, as we are, for ambiguity” [Thomas, 83]. As witnessed by history, the present, and soon the future, it would be self-evident truth that computers will not take over us or be “us”.

Sergey Brin and Larry Page speak frequently of their desire to create an artificial intelligence that connects directly to our brains. It would promote the philosophy that the quicker and more information we can get, the more

As the society develops and prospers, more and more scientists commit themselves to doing researches to help improve the whole society. “Who Holds the Clicker?” by Lauren Slater mainly discusses how psychosurgery and DBS (deep brain stimulation surgery) could let psychiatrists control the patient’s moods and minds as well as the unresolved controversies which these surgeries bring to the society. Another essay “Alone Together” by Sherry Turkle argues the how new technologies like robots and smartphones have changed human and their lives while denying authenticity. Both authors talk about how some of the new technology may affect people as well as the surroundings. Technology is prevalently known as advantageous for the whole society,

BZRK, a novel by Michael Grant, is a science fiction story, about the misuse of nanotechnology. In the novel BZRK, nanotechnology is used for negative reasons, by the Armstrong Fancy Gift Corporation. This is an analogy of a world with nanotechnology in a modern day era. The technology developed the ability to make microscopic robots that can enter the human body through natural openings to change structures at a molecular level. They created it for medical purposes, for example, “to send his tiny minions in to kill cancer cells” (Grant, 72). Nanotechnology is being negatively used to take away freedom and chose for human beings. This good technology is used the wrong way to control the human mind and commit murder. Many of people with access

Society today is greatly influenced by technology and the impact it has had within the past 20 years. One of the largest breakthroughs, though, is Artificial Intelligence (A.I.). The technology associated with A.I. has greatly developed in the past years, and is only making devices smarter. When someone mentions technology, or even the technological breakthroughs the world has gone through recently, many people go straight to smartphones and computers. A.I. is often overlooked, or put into a general category of "technology". Yet, artificial intelligence is something that should we not be so quick to dismiss, and should be something that gets people talking and even excited for what the future holds.

Andy Clark, in Natural-Born Cyborgs, offers an extended argument that technology’s impact on and intertwining with ordinary biological human life is not to be feared, either psychologically or morally. Clark offers several key concepts towards his line of reasoning. Clark argues that a human being thinks and reasons based on the biological brain and body dynamically linked with the culture and technological tools transparently accessible to the human. This form of thinking and reasoning develops new "thinking systems" that which over time become second nature thoughts and reasons and are the basis of even newer "thinking systems." It is a repetitive cycle that continues forever being built upon previous systems.

Envision a world where nano sized robots can burrow themselves into your skin just by touching something or perhaps explode within you on command. Consider perchance, a world were humans have collective thoughts and can generate the processing power of a super computer. Sounds like something out of an awesome dream or a nightmare, depending on how you perceive it. These are just some of the ideas that are presented in transhumanism. Transhumanism can be explained as the belief that the human race can advance past its current physical and intellectual confines through the use of technology (Bostrom, 2014). In the current world we live in, we are limited by a number of factors, many of these include the scientific limitations and the properties of physics. On the other side of the limitations, lay the concepts of morality and ethical issues. Along with those concepts include how this technology correlates to our current world. In the novel The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson, humans live alongside nanobots (and various other technology) in a transhumanist world. In this advanced world, the ideas of morality and ethics are still present within the human race. In many aspects, the morality and ethical issues that humans encounter today are reencountered in this transhuman world.

With so much power to discover new things without even thinking makes me wonder what will happen to our next generation as technology advances. Are we headed for a world where everything is technology driven and devoid of what makes us human? I look at today’s society and I feel that it is really getting to that point. It is almost as if we are turning into robots. We are divorcing ourselves from regular human activities.

Breakthroughs in fields such as artificial intelligence, robotics, autonomous vehicles, the Internet of Things, nanotechnologies, 3-D printing, biotechnology, quantum computing, energy production and materials science are all within the range of near-term reality. The speed of this revolution is evolving at an exponential rather than a linear pace. It is a revolution that already is disrupting almost every industry and societal institution in every country. Imagine that whatever can be imagined, probably will be a reality.

Artificial Intelligence is a topic within the public media that has existed for decades, but is now a concern due to the reality of human advancement and innovation in the field of science and technology. Many people believe that computers will become self-aware or sentient and view humanity as a disposable resource and gain supremacy. Reasoning that research on the technology should halt and not become more advance. Whereas others believe they will help catapult research and the economy forward, supporting the operations and innovations the technology offers. The complicated and divided solutions to the debate aren’t obvious, but there are more benefits to improving artificial intelligence than there is stopping it. Therefore, the negative effects people believe will occur can be resolved.

In the future, we may be able to build a computer that is comparable to the human brain, but not until we truly understand one thing. Lewis Thomas talks about this in his essay, "Computers." He says, "It is in our collective behavior that we are most mysterious. We won't be able to construct machines like ourselves until we've understood this, and we're not even close" (Thomas 473). Thomas wrote this essay in 1974, and although we have made many technological advances