Biotechnology is technology based on biology, agriculture, food science, and medicine. Modern use of the term usually refers to genetic engineering as well as cell- and tissue culture technologies. However, the concept encompasses a wider range and history of procedures for modifying living things according to human purposes, going back to domestication of animals, cultivation of plants and "improvements" to these through breeding programs that employ artificial selection and hybridization. By comparison to biotechnology, bioengineering is generally thought of as a related field with its emphasis more on mechanical and higher systems approaches to interfacing with and exploiting living things. United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity defines biotechnology as:[1]

"Any technological application that uses biological systems, dead organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use."

Biotechnology draws on the pure biological sciences (genetics, microbiology, animal cell culture, molecular biology, biochemistry, embryology, cell biology) and in many instances is also dependent on knowledge and methods from outside the sphere of biology (chemical engineering, bioprocess engineering, information technology, biorobotics). Conversely, modern biological sciences (including even concepts such as molecular ecology) are intimately entwined and dependent on the methods developed through biotechnology and what is commonly thought of as the life sciences industry.

A series of derived terms have been coined to identify several branches of biotechnology, for example:-bioinformatics
Bioinformatics is an interdisciplinary field which addresses biological problems using computational techniques, and makes the rapid organization and analysis of biological data possible. The field may also be referred to as computational biology, and can be defined as, "conceptualizing biology in terms of molecules and then applying informatics techniques to understand and organize the information associated with these molecules, on a large scale."[6] Bioinformatics plays a key role in various areas, such as functional genomics, structural genomics, and proteomics, and forms a key component in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical sector.
Blue biotechnology is a term that has been used to describe the marine and aquatic applications of biotechnology, but its use is relatively rare.
Green biotechnology is biotechnology applied to agricultural processes. An example would be the selection and domestication of plants via micropropagation. Another example is the designing of transgenic plants to grow under specific environmental in the presence (or absence) of chemicals. One hope is that green biotechnology might produce more environmentally friendly solutions than traditional industrial agriculture. An example of this is the engineering of a plant to express a pesticide, thereby ending the need of external application of pesticides. An example of this would be Bt corn. Whether or not green biotechnology products such as this are ultimately more environmentally friendly is a topic of considerable debate.
Red biotechnology is applied to medical processes. Some examples are the designing of organisms to produce antibiotics, and the engineering of genetic cures through genomic manipulation.
White biotechnology, also known as industrial biotechnology, is biotechnology applied to industrial processes. An example is the designing of an organism to produce a useful chemical. Another example is the using of enzymes as industrial catalysts to either produce valuable chemicals or destroy hazardous/polluting chemicals. White biotechnology tends to consume less in resources than traditional processes used to produce industrial goods. The investments and economic output of all of these types of applied biotechnologies form what has been described as the bioeconomy.

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.