Nanotechnology in artificial intelligence

Educating the public about nanotechnology and other complex but emerging technologies causes people to become more “worried and cautious” about the new technologies’ prospective benefits, according to a recent study by researchers at North Carolina State University.

The nano medicine may helpm any people believe that informed citizen input should influence public policies about modern science and technology, but several prominent academics warn against relying on citizen deliberations to promote public engagement in policy-making. These scholars contend that citizens do not enjoy the process of deliberating and individual and collective opinions developed during group deliberation are often worse than if deliberation had never taken place. Following the Danish practice known as “Consensus Conferences,” we tested this skeptical perspective about citizen capacities by holding Citizen Technology Forums (CTF) in six cities in the United States throughout March 2008. Volunteer participants became informed about human enhancement technologies and they generated written reports about their concerns and recommendations regarding the development trajectory of these technologies. We find that participants dramatically increased their factual understanding about human enhancement technologies and they reported feeling more internally efficacious and trusting of others after deliberating; however, they also became more wary of the potential risks and benefits of these technologies and more concerned about potential inequities in the distribution of these benefits.

Nanotechnology is a relatively new field of research and scientific development. It has been speculated about for decades and the wonders and advantages of nanotechnology have been extolled by many. But not all.

The scientific community, in its never ending quest for information and knowledge, consistently fails to seriously acknowledge the dangers of "invisible" technology, such as nanotechnology, going haywire. Nothing is ever to go wrong according to them yet it always does somehow.

In this respect, nanotechnology is not different from other new disciplines. We, as humans, don't seem to have the capacity to really learn to understand something before we start to mess with it on a big scale.

And when things do go wrong - just imagine an autodidactic nano-intelligence on the loose - we end up fighting the symptoms, pointing fingers at each other, and deny any or all culpability.

Forethought of possible consequences is usually far from our minds as we are caught up, or pushed by superiors, to make the research investment profitable as soon as possible.