In response to the online criticism, F. Mark Modzelewski, the president of the Alliance, wrote an article mocking the “bloggers, Drexlerians, pseudo-pundits, panderers and other denizens of their mom’s basements” who had developed “an elaborate fantasy about how molecular manufacturing research work was pulled from the bill by some devious cabal.” In fact, another NanoBusiness Alliance official had already admitted to a reporter that the Alliance had approached the staff of Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, to have the study removed from the legislation.That took some nerve.
Were it not for Eric Drexler and his ambitious vision of molecular manufacturing, no one would have heard of nanotechnology today—and the federal government would certainly not be investing billions of dollars in nanotech research if they knew only of Modzelewski’s modest mainstream aims. When lawmakers in Washington discuss the industrial potential of nanotechnology, they aren’t thinking about stain-free nano-pants, but about molecular manufacturing, as envisioned by Drexler. It is that vision in which the politicians think they are investing.Regardless of your position on exotic nanotech, if this is what Congress thinks they are paying for, isn't it reasonable to determine whether these ideas are meritorious? This is the tightrope that Modzelewski is attempting to walk. He wants the money that Drexler inspires, but calls Drexlerian expectations "comic relief." He's the college slacker who makes fun of his parent's hopes for him while writing home, "No Mon, No Fun, Your Son." Read the whole article. Posted by Stephen Gordon at March 5, 2004 04:13 PM | TrackBack
Has to be said, this whole nanotech funding business is really murky when it comes to figuring out who thinks what. I'm not sure that the politicians know what it is that they're funding, nor can I fathom a real advantage for the business alliance to be taking this tack - they'd be getting the lions share of the ill gotten loot in any case.
Posted by: Reason at March 6, 2004 02:56 AMReason:
>they'd be getting the lions share of the
>ill gotten loot in any case.
Exactly. That's why Modzelewski's method seems so ill advised. If he's the college slacker wasting his parent's money, he might want to make sure that Mommy and Daddy are out of earshot before making fun of their hopes.
Modzelewski probably honestly thinks that Drexlerian nanotech will prove to be impossible. It's advisable then for him to be on record saying so. Now, when he is hauled before Congress to explain what his industry did with the money, he can say "I always thought those exotic ideas were nuts, didn't Congress see that very public flame war I had with Professor Reynolds?"
But this was an inelegant way of going about this. Modzelewski could have accomplished the same thing by publishing a paper or speaking at a seminar. Neither Congress nor the public would have ever heard that the industry thinks that exotic nanotech is impossible, they would still have very well funded nanopants and nanoshampoo research, and Modzelewski could say at his public hearing in a few years that his position and that of the industry was a matter of public record, "I can't help it if you guys don't read."
Posted by: Stephen Gordon at March 8, 2004 04:04 AM