Recombinant DNA and Self-replicating Molecular Manufacturing: Parallels and Lessons
James B. Lewis, Ph.D
Page 5 of 6
2. Asilomar avoided considering those broader issues underlying public attitudes about genetic engineering that were not immediately related to the safety of recombinant DNA technology.
Because no parallel process was established to involve those outside the scientific community to consider the broader issues, these issues were dealt with on an ad hoc basis as the technology advanced—with variable success. As each technological advance arose, it was dealt with in the context of the current social and political issues. Genetically modified food ran afoul of the European Green movement; embryonic stem cells became entangled in anti-abortion politics and the general revulsion against human cloning. Asilomar thus provides no guidance on how to deal with complex issues in advance of the technological progress that places the issue in the public spotlight.
Attempts to deal with the consequences and ethical implications of self-replicating nanotechnology are thus in uncharted waters. Initial attempts [1, 2] to specify guidelines for the development of self-replicating nanotechnology focused on restricting autonomous replicating manufacturing systems. An alternative [3] proposes an international treaty under which such systems could be safely developed, especially noting that they may be an essential part of a protective system against malicious autonomous replicating manufacturing systems.
However, autonomous replicating manufacturing systems, whether accidentally out-of-control or maliciously unleashed, are not the only—and perhaps not the major—consequence of self-replicating molecular manufacturing needing attention. One list of such consequences has been complied by the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology [4]. Some serious issues might arise directly from the successful deployment of a surveillance/immune system to detect malicious replicators or dangerous products of molecular manufacturing. Eric Drexler [5] is concerned that surveillance/immune systems will suppress terrorism so effectively that governments will use them to suppress other dissent:
 |
||
| http://e-drexler.com/p/idx04/00/0.html September 14, 2009 9:35AM EST |
"It’s often said that we face an unending struggle against terrorism. This is nonsense. Advancing technologies will eventually make it easy to suppress terrorism. The great struggle will be to keep this power from suppressing too much more."
In another attempt to address the impact of improved surveillance on privacy and freedom, the Foresight Institute is exploring an open source project [6] to bring "the benefits of a bottom-up, decentralized approach to sensing for security and environmental purposes. The intent of the project is to take advantage of advances in sensing to improve both security and the environment, while preserving — even strengthening — privacy, freedom, and civil liberties."
Among the many issues that will be raised by the development of self-replicating molecular manufacturing technology, perhaps the greatest and most immediate impact will be on the ability of most people to earn a living. If artificial general intelligence takes over the jobs of scientists, engineers, and other professionals, and molecular manufacturing systems and robots make all necessary goods and perform all necessary services, how will humans earn a living? Will all wealth accrue to those who own the various technologies? Will it be possible for humans to own AI systems that are millions of times more intelligent and capable than they are?
[1] Much information about nanomaterials EHS issues can be found on the web site of the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies of the PEW Charitable Trusts and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars http://www.nanotechproject.org/
For example, see their report Oversight of Next Generation Nanotechnology,
J. Clarence Davies (April 2009). http://www.nanotechproject.org/18/
Europe has also been very active in this field. From the Swiss-based Innovation Society FramingNano project, the report "Mapping Study on Regulation and Governance of Nanotechnology" (January 2009) http://www.innovationsgesellschaft.chStudy.pdf "The report gives an insight on the international debate on risks and concerns related to nanotechnologies (EHS issues and ELSI), and provides an ample overview of the different regulatory approaches proposed or already developed to deal with these issues ..."
http://www.innovationsgesellschaft.ch/index.php?
[2] "The stealth threat: An interview with K. Eric Drexler" Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 63, 55-58 (2007) http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/063001018
"Technological innovations might help fight terrorism and prevent wars, but some may become the tiny engines that rule our lives."
[3] http://www.opensourcesensing.org/
[4] http://e-drexler.com/d/06/00/EOC/EOC_References.html#Ch_15
[5] "The stealth threat: An interview with K. Eric Drexler" Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 63, 55-58 (2007) http://dx.doi.org/10.2968/063001018
"Technological innovations might help fight terrorism and prevent wars, but some may become the tiny engines that rule our lives."
[6] http://www.opensourcesensing.org/