So where were you when they developed light activated molecular killbots that spin at 2-3 million times per second? How far are we from a Grey Goo Scenario? Do you think serious nanoweapons are already under development by the various governments and militaries across the world? How do you stop a Grey Goo Scenario?
NANOMACHINES, SON
Jose Howard
Other urls found in this thread:
news.rice.edu
pdfs.semanticscholar.org
pubs.acs.org
nanograz.com
cnet.com
twitter.com
Luis Reyes
Grey goo would require nanobots that self-replicate. That's a lot more complicated than literally just spinning and nothing else.
We're probably about 10 or 20 years from "grey goo" being technologically possible
Noah Nguyen
That will never happen. It requires a lot more than that and we simply don't have the tech and never will.
Evan Barnes
Humorous. Get back with me when humans can make a fucking normal sized robot with its own self-contained power source. Or a fucking phone batter that lasts longer than an hour.
>We star gods nao!
No, humans are just playing illusionist with their self-delusion 24/7 at this point.
Grayson Price
All that's required for a grey goo scenario is a nanobot that's able to construct an exact duplicate of itself using outside materials, and that they are extremely efficient at it.
We already know that such a machine is possible, because there are a large amount of biological "machines" which do exactly that; take in materials from the world and duplicate themselves. That's what every living organism is. All it takes for "grey goo" is for it to be able to use a wider range of materials and work faster
Michael Bell
We can already do both of those things. We just don't do them because it's not a good use of resources. It's a lot cheaper to make a shitty battery than a good one, and there's no need to make robots with self contained power sources because the places and ways we use them are all conveniently indoors near power sources so why bother?
We do have battery powered full sized humanoid robots that can drive cars, climb stairs, open doors, and use power tools, though. Check out the "DARPA robotics challenge"
Jason Mitchell
oh boy. this sounds like that time they engineered virus drug delivery to cells and the first 3 people they used it on died horrifically all over again
yay. science.
Kevin Cruz
This is the second thread we're having about this.
>>So where were you when they developed light activated molecular killbots that spin at 2-3 million times per second?
wew, all they did was take a molecular motor that is 18 years old and put a peptide on it. Big fucking deal.
>>How far are we from a Grey Goo Scenario
about as far away as Hero's steam engine is from a skylon SABRE engine.
>>Do you think serious nanoweapons are already under development by the various governments and militaries across the world?
no
Here, I bet you are going to flip the fuck out about this:
news.rice.edu
They made a light powered NANO-SUBMARINE, using this very same motor! All it does is bounce around FASTER THAN DIFFUSION! Amazing!
Joseph Sullivan
>died horrifically all over again
>died all over again
Hate it when that happens.
Leo Miller
>We can already do both of those things.
No you can't.
>We just don't do them because it's not a good use of resources
You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Advancing battery technology is literally one of the top 5 probably most important things humans could possibly do.
>cheaper
Nailed it. And this is why you'll go extinct. You literally care more about money than anything else. Like I said, you retards live in fantasyland 24/7 now. Soon, no more fucking monkeys jumping on the bed.
Joshua James
Here, you'll shit bricks with this one:
pdfs.semanticscholar.org
Using this very same motor, they designed a nanocar that used it.
In 2011 they improved the design:
pubs.acs.org
And uhh... they think it might work! I mean we should probably trust them on this one, it's not like the metal surface they have to image on will quench out the nanomotor or anything
so in 2016 they finally did it! They made a nanocar with a motor:
nanograz.com
and WOWOW all it does is move around faster than diffusion! Cause to get it to work, they had to remove two wheels, meaning motion is completely random and undirected!
Brayden Brown
>>a fucking normal sized robot with its own self-contained power sourc
pic related
>>a fucking normal sized robot with its own self-contained power sourc
shit man, what the fuck kind of phone do you have? My phone battery lasts all day
Asher Turner
...
Cameron Gomez
I meant one that lasts more than five seconds.
Luis Perry
that pic related works for more than 5 seconds.
Charles Carter
STANDING HERE
Nicholas Morales
No it does not.
Andrew Roberts
2 hours mother fucker:
cnet.com
Juan Turner
Wrong. I just figured if we were going to argue like retards, I may as well get on board. Because I LITERALLY LITERALLY meant 5 seconds. Wow. Two hours though, that's ADVAAAAAANCED, human filth.
Jaxson Martin
Are you a non-human? Specify please.
Landon Collins
If a biological machine could do it, why wouldn't it? The fact is microbes are vastly better at these tasks than any artificial machines, and even those are narrowly suited to specific types of food and environments.
Jose Green
In order to create a "grey goo" apocalypse scenario, we would need to design machines that are much BETTER at the task of self replication than organic life. Right now, our machines are much inferior to organic life.
Most human technology starts out much worse than something nature can do, but only through a lot of time, effort, and money we're able to make something that's better. It used to be that humans could only glide, but then we surpassed nature and made airplanes that could fly faster and higher than any bird. We're talking about something in the future here when we talk about grey goo. Although, perhaps not the DISTANT future
Jason Nelson
>never
I think that's a bad term to use. Never is a really fucking long time user and if the large majority of the scientific community, people who's studied this technology for their entire lives, say it's possible then it is possible.
Not saying I think it's nearby on the horizon, these types of technologies are difficult to predict because they involve breakthroughs and elements we don't have yet. But never is a long, long time user.
Bet that if you told someone 100 years ago that smart phones with GPS and all that shit would exist they might say that such technology would never exist too.
Never is a long time.
William Torres
>never
luddites need to be banned
MOST OF THE SHIT WE USE TODAY WAS NOT PART OF MOST PEOPLE'S WILDEST IMAGINATIONS NOT 30 FUCKING YEARS AGO
Isaac Bennett
Nano machines treating cancer is nothing new