Radically new technology inspires lyrical utopianism and melancholy catastrophism. What is new at the turn of the twenty-first century is the note of alarm among the leaders of change. Eric Drexler and Bill Joy have focused on the self-replicating potential of nanotechnology processes. From the outset, Drexler has acknowledged the possibility of rampant synthetic organisms that could displace real ones (the gray goo problem) and Joy has even speculated that quasi-human robotic systems constructed with nanotechnology could in effect enslave our species. But there is oldfashioned optimism, too. Enthusiasts foresee agricultural bounty, a paradise of health and longevity, mental and physical enhancement, and a wonderland of novel consumer goods. The web site of a forthcoming lay publication, NanoTechnology Magazine, promises friendly energy and positive impact agriculture, the end of animal experimentation, and the neutralization of all chemical and even radioactive waste (
http://nanozine.com).
The history of technology can not reconcile these visions. But it can help prepare us for the surprises that have always been the result of human ingenuity. We can expect five things: (1) The experts will be seriously wrong about at least some important things. (2) Long-term, cumulative problems will be a greater problem than the perils of catastrophe. (3) Organizing and supervising nanotechnology will create dilemmas. 4) Successes may be as costly as failures. (5) We probably have not imagined the greatest benefits of nanotechnology, either because they seem too technologically modest or because they may result from improbable chains of events.
