It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Machine makes machine in it's own image!

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   
So I got my latest issue of New Scientist today. and low and behold there is this little article about self replicating machines.
technology.newscientist.com... 0the%20self-replicating%20machine
It came with it's own little "don't panic" type of statement too.
I know 3D copiers have been talked about this before on ATS, but I don't think it was this 3D copier.
So I ask you in that famous words of Kent Brockman: "Professor, without knowing precisely what the danger is, would you say it's time for our viewers to crack each other's heads open and feast on the goo inside?"




posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Here's the company's official website:
reprap.org...



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I guess this will be another scenario for situation-X self-replicating nano-bots consume the earth.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   
reply to post by carslake
 


I mean it says on their website that the next generation will be able to self-replicate electronic boards. Like those little spiders in that movie I can't remember where they're trying to salvage a Russian research boat.
All jokes aside, isn't anyone else concerned about this?



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
I can honestly say I would be happier if they self-terminated at the end of a fixed life span.

The rise of the machines lol! popular sci-fi it might be, but I can only agree this is dangerous, especially when military procurement is considered, I can see it now. Earth laid waste by a militarised nano-bot swarm.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by carslake

I guess this will be another scenario for situation-X self-replicating nano-bots consume the earth.


I've always found this technology interesting. I think it has to be fed raw material in order to construct material. I think when we get to the point where we can break down material all around us then they will be able to create the machine to replicate itself into a endless loop with exponential multiplication.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Freezer
 


Yeah, none of this existing tech is worrisome in itself.
But other companies are working on AI, so it really does seem like we should a least keep an eye on it.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:51 AM
link   
John von Neumann was right!

The fate of the universe has just been sealed. Or, as the last line of the movie The Final Programme had it, 'a very tasty world.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   
Sorry.

Self-replicating post.

[edit on 11-6-2008 by Astyanax]



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 02:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by carslake

I can honestly say I would be happier if they self-terminated at the end of a fixed life span.

The rise of the machines lol! popular sci-fi it might be, but I can only agree this is dangerous, especially when military procurement is considered, I can see it now. Earth laid waste by a militarised nano-bot swarm.


Well it is a printer. I for one would be annoyed if my printer self-terminated at the end of a fixed life span.

Well, come to think of it, mine did, more or less, the piece of epson crap. Anyway, I'd be annoyed if my printer went and used my "ink" to made copies of itself without my permission.

Whilst technically able to replicate itself, that's only true given a few liberties. First, it requires refined raw materials to do so. Second, a person has to put it together. It'll be a while before we're able to give 'em CNC robot arms and access to robot quarries, oil refineries, and plastic plants that they're also capable of making.

It's quite possibly likely that we'll have nanobots that can *really* self replicate in a true sense before this technology can do it. While they're the same in concept, the technology involved is completely different.

Anyway, I says bring on the singularity. If we're all going to die, it might as well be by something interesting, instead of simply running out of oil, and having modern civilization slowly collapse, and then most everyone dying of starvation or disease. I don't see much point in having people around if we aren't busy learning things about the universe anyway. If there was intrinsic value in quantity of human life, we'd unconditionally want as many people as possible alive at once. I think this is clearly false.



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by mdiinican

Originally posted by carslake

I can honestly say I would be happier if they self-terminated at the end of a fixed life span.

The rise of the machines lol! popular sci-fi it might be, but I can only agree this is dangerous, especially when military procurement is considered, I can see it now. Earth laid waste by a militarised nano-bot swarm.


Well it is a printer. I for one would be annoyed if my printer self-terminated at the end of a fixed life span.

Well, come to think of it, mine did, more or less, the piece of epson crap. Anyway, I'd be annoyed if my printer went and used my "ink" to made copies of itself without my permission.

Whilst technically able to replicate itself, that's only true given a few liberties. First, it requires refined raw materials to do so. Second, a person has to put it together. It'll be a while before we're able to give 'em CNC robot arms and access to robot quarries, oil refineries, and plastic plants that they're also capable of making.

It's quite possibly likely that we'll have nanobots that can *really* self replicate in a true sense before this technology can do it. While they're the same in concept, the technology involved is completely different.

Anyway, I says bring on the singularity. If we're all going to die, it might as well be by something interesting, instead of simply running out of oil, and having modern civilization slowly collapse, and then most everyone dying of starvation or disease. I don't see much point in having people around if we aren't busy learning things about the universe anyway. If there was intrinsic value in quantity of human life, we'd unconditionally want as many people as possible alive at once. I think this is clearly false.


Great point. Red pills for everyone!



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by mdiinican
Well it is a printer. I for one would be annoyed if my printer self-terminated at the end of a fixed life span.

Well, come to think of it, mine did, more or less, the piece of epson crap. Anyway, I'd be annoyed if my printer went and used my "ink" to made copies of itself without my permission.


Maybe Hewlett-Packard and Epson should get together and plan world domination.




Whilst technically able to replicate itself, that's only true given a few liberties. First, it requires refined raw materials to do so. Second, a person has to put it..........................
..........................we'll have nanobots that can *really* self replicate in a true sense before this technology can do it. While they're the same in concept, the technology involved is completely different.


I think there already working on it.




I don't see much point in having people around if we aren't busy learning things about the universe anyway. If there was intrinsic value in quantity of human life, we'd unconditionally want as many people as possible alive at once. I think this is clearly false.


Many would agree, I think we need a war LOL! Quality over quantity works evrytime.

[edit on 11/6/08 by carslake]



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by carslake
 


So it's settled then. Next we invade Ipaq.




top topics



 
4

log in

join