ttf@dsg130.nad.ford.com (Tihamer Toth-Fejel) writes:
[concerning microtech]
>Interface technology? No way, unless nanosystems get built one at a
>time, are therefore so expensive that it would be worthwhile to use top
>down made devices to unreliably connect to bottom-up made devices.
>Enabling technology? Other than building cheaper and better STMs and
>chemical and biochemical instrumentation - do we really need microtech?
>Drexler has argued that since we have already moved around individual
>atoms using macro (STM) equipment, the micro world could (and should)
>be skipped (and I agree with him).
I tend to disagree with this opinion. Should we have ommitted the development of steam locmotives because we could foresee that eventually petrol driven automobiles would be prevalent in our transportation system?
I can foresee many practical uses of microtech that could be implemented right now with the technology we have at present. This means that such technology could be in practical use in a few months to a year at most.
Nanotechnology is at present not a practical reality, although it may be so in 5 to 10 years.
What I cannot understand is, given the time that microtechnology has been a practical possibility that I am not seeing more revolutionary uses of it as yet.
Is this because corporations are developing patents in secret, and are keeping their products of the market until patents are issued?
Or am I simply not aware of sources concerning revolutionary applications of microtech? Or is it all being written in Japanese?
Are there any public sources on the internet that deal specifically with microtech? Newsgroups, ftp sites, www sites?
I seem to have been having difficulty finding them.