My main argument is that U.S. policymakers need to rise above the commerce side of the debate and help encourage development of nanoscience without letting business interests become the sole driver of the research. Reading the nanotech bill alone, you'd think that the government's central goal was to spin off companies and develop new products. Is that it?
Sadly, as Rand Simberg will attest, our government agencies are (to say the least) a little deficient in their ability to crank out vision. At least where nanotech is concerned they are interested in commercialization of the technology. NASA, on the other hand, seems to want to keep space travel as a government monopoly forever.
Maybe a lack of vision is part of the price we pay for our vapid, superficial, "good guys vs. bad guys" approach to politics. Why would anyone capable of any depth of thought consider politics as a career?
Posted by Phil at January 12, 2004 10:08 AM | TrackBack