IBM Claims Nanotech Breakthrough

[Khephra]

IBM Claims Nanotech Breakthrough
BRIAN BERGSTEIN
Associated Press

NEW YORK - Researchers at IBM Corp. claim they have made an important breakthrough in the race to design circuitry at the molecular level: a system that works with existing methods of electronics manufacturing.

In a paper being released Monday at an industry conference in Washington, D.C., IBM researchers Chuck Black and Kathyrn Guarini say they used a naturally occurring pattern of molecules as a stencil to etch flash memory circuitry into silicon.

Other researchers are experimenting with using self-assembling, or naturally forming, patterns of molecules to build very tiny circuitry. Doing so is believed to be necessary if the high-tech industry can continue to pack more transistors into smaller spaces - the process that continually makes computing faster and less expensive.

But the IBM scientists believe they are the first to use the molecular patterns not as circuits that have to be connected to larger wires, but as stencils that light can be shone through to create circuitry in silicon. That would make it more likely to work with existing processes, potentially saving money in manufacturing.

more.............

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/7439419.htm

[Nlighten1]

1. Very interesting

Mimicking mother nature to help build a more powerful digital future.

[opihimoimoi]

2. AI here we come...... cyber brains for the "terminators"

[IndianaGreen]

8. Isn't that the way the Borg became part machine?

We are Borg.

Lower your shields and surrender your vessel.

We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own.

Your culture will adapt to service us.

[truthisfreedom]

3. fun!

[Khephra]

4. It's nice to have some good news around here for once

;-)

[Nlighten1]

5. Good news for the power mongers

bad news for humanity.

;-)

[paulthompson]

6. Good news?!?

This is horrible, horrible news. Nanotechnology has the potential for great good if used wisely, but also has the potential to destroy the entire human race. One of the head honchos at the computer company Sun wrote a really amazing article in Wired magazine explaining how nanotechnology could be far more dangerous than nuclear weapons. For instance, imagine nanoviruses flying through the air and self replicating, that can seek out and destroy people of a particular ethnic group. That may be coming soon thanks to breakthroughs like these.

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid. Humanity again opens another Pandora's box with little thought to the possible consequences.

[Khephra]

7. I'm aware of the negative side of nanotech

But I'm also not going to retreat on technology's advance like some Fundamentalist who's against stem cell use.

[Nlighten1]

9. That isn't the point...

You are correct that we should not move into a reactive posture like the anti-stem cell bunch. What we should be doing is demanding an infrastructure to protect us against un-scrupulous companies using nano-tech.
The morals and ethics of nano-tech should be worked out before the implementation of ONE nano-tech device.

The corporations in America have proven beyond a doubt that they are amoral and they cannot be trusted to protect us.

[paulthompson]

10. I agree

Also, the stem cell example is completely spurious, because it's not a moral issue about the santity of life or some such thing, it's a practical issue. What are the practical pluses compared to the possible dangers? A better comparison would be if new technology allowed the reading of minds. One could argue, hey that's great, we can do things like catch terrorists at airports before they hijack planes. But what else can someone unscrupulous do with that technology (insert visions of Big Brother etc here)? And that's not a made up example - the gvmt is actually working on that and gives the terrorist at the airport excuse.

Nanotechnology may be a good thing in the end, but the potential dangers should give us pause, instead of shouting "great news." I don't trust the big companies or gvmt to protect the public at all in things like this.

Over and over again, we as a society have fallen for the hype of some new technology and jumped in both feet first, ignoring the naysayers to our detriment and not considering the possible implications. Nuclear power is a classic example.

[ewagner]

11. Creating the infrastructure...

to manage new technologies is a great answer. The problem comes when we try to decide who controls the infrastructure. Beyond that it becomes who will watch the watchdogs?

[Minstrel Boy]

12. If a technology can have a military application,

you can be certain that it will.

This is just another nail - albeit an itsy, bitsy nail - in the coffin we can't wait to finish.