Most are probably too young to remember but nanotechnology was supposed to be the most super amazing thing ever.
- vzq ( @vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 61•7 months ago
It split into two.
The “very small scale structure manufacturing” part is alive and kicking. You are holding about a trillion perfect nanoscale devices in the palm of your hand right now.
The “we will make tiny robots that live in your body and fix you” club was always selling snake oil-and they knew it. The technology they were pushing just does not work at atmosphere temperature and pressure and immersed in oxidizing not quite neutral pH fluid.
Thankfully, there a much better way to make tiny machines that live in your body. That’s making/adapting/causing others to make proteins that do what you need them to do. Proteins are essentially bio-robots that can manipulate their surrounding by changes in their folds (conformation), for example by exposing binding sites in reaction to something binding to another binding site.
TLDR: nanotech is one of the largest industries in the planet. A lot of promises were made by idiots in the nineties, but biotech, another huge industry, has picked up the slack very well.
- teawrecks ( @teawrecks@sopuli.xyz ) 5•7 months ago
And if we count protein research as nanotech, afaik folding research is having its heyday.
- cobra89 ( @cobra89@beehaw.org ) 1•7 months ago
It’s amazing what can be done with CRISPR and that branch of technology.
- Lemvi ( @Lemvi@lemmy.sdf.org ) 33•7 months ago
it didn’t disappear, just got to small for you to see 😉
- Melatonin ( @Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 3•7 months ago
Damnit, stole my thunder.
- CanadaPlus ( @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ) 3•7 months ago
Mine too! Reddit moment where we all think we’re original.
- stoy ( @stoy@lemmy.zip ) 26•7 months ago
It is still around, only the buzz around it died
- intensely_human ( @intensely_human@lemm.ee ) 22•7 months ago
It got smaller and smaller until we lost track of it.
- CanadaPlus ( @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ) 17•7 months ago
I’m not sure which era you’re talking about exactly. Graphene and carbon nanotubes can’t currently be made both big and perfect, and are lame when imperfect. Nanoscopic robots have problems with sticking together and jumping around due to brownian forces, and also are just very hard to build. Chemical-based robotics has been a crapshoot because quantum chemistry is hard. The last one has been tackled with machine learning pretty well recently, where natural biological analogues exist.
As a result, about as far as we’ve gotten is nanoscopically fine dust. It has uses, but it’s only a technology the same way pea gravel is. It’s looking like a lot of the stuff nanobots were supposed to do is going to fall to biotech instead.
- PresidentCamacho ( @PresidentCamacho@lemm.ee ) 5•7 months ago
Love the phrase “quantum chemistry is hard” because it makes it sound as if it’s difficult for the average person, but I can only imagine it means that the smartest people alive are struggling with it haha.
- CanadaPlus ( @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ) 1•7 months ago
Even worse. It’s possible some of it can’t be done with any reasonable amount of classical computation at all, regardless of skill or knowledge. Quantum computers are badly overhyped, but that’s one thing they could definitely be good for.
- starman ( @starman@programming.dev ) English13•7 months ago
nanotechnology was supposed to be the most super amazing thing ever.
Like blockchain, 3d-printing, cloud and machine learning?
- Kuvwert ( @Kuvwert@lemm.ee ) 12•7 months ago
I feel like passionately arguing with you about 3 of your 4 examples
- AAA ( @AAA@feddit.de ) 12•7 months ago
It would be possible to argue about all of them, as each has genuine use cases. Just not to the extend they were praised during the hype.
- starman ( @starman@programming.dev ) English2•7 months ago
I fully agree
- TheGalacticVoid ( @TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee ) 2•7 months ago
I’d like to argue why 3 of the 4 are absolutely amazing
- DudeDudenson ( @DudeDudenson@lemmings.world ) 5•7 months ago
Don’t forget AI!
- vzq ( @vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) 1•7 months ago
“Machine learning” is what people who do AI for a living call AI.
- DudeDudenson ( @DudeDudenson@lemmings.world ) 1•7 months ago
I’d suppose people who work with nano machines don’t necessarily call them that either.
But it’s the buzz word that has been used to push it’s corresponding bubble
- stewie3128 ( @stewie3128@lemmy.ml ) 11•7 months ago
While we’re at it, how about cybernetics, too?
- NaibofTabr ( @NaibofTabr@infosec.pub ) English18•7 months ago
We can literally give sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, and make the lame walk again.
We also have the very cyberpunk distopian problem of people being left with implants that are no longer supported by the manufacturers [2] [3]
- MonkderDritte ( @MonkderDritte@feddit.de ) 3•7 months ago
At least we don’t need Neuropozyne (Deus Ex).
Btw, what happened with the nanotubes-coated contacts that neurons are all too happy to connect to?
- TheOneCurly ( @TheOneCurly@lemm.ee ) English14•7 months ago
Prostetics have gotten extremely advanced in the last 20 years. People are controlling and getting real feedback from replacement limbs.
- snooggums ( @snooggums@midwest.social ) English7•7 months ago
Yeah, both nanotech and cybernetics are everyday things. Still very expensive, but both have mostly reached enough milestones that they go by whatever their more specific puposes are. Like prothetics with feedback aren’t called cybernetics because cybernetics is too broad a term.
- Rin ( @Rinna@lemm.ee ) 3•7 months ago
Unfortunately, even our most advanced ones are more limited than a lot of people think and have a high rejection rate of around 44% that’s never talked about. Some do genuinely like them, but many say they still prefer the relatively simple body powered prosthetics, or none at all.
This could change as advancements are made, but as of now they’re a bit of a scam.
- ColeSloth ( @ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de ) 2•7 months ago
Remember that old 80s future movie where a guy with no cyber mods was trying to compete in a fighting competition in order to prove that it was better to be fully human?
- tias ( @tias@discuss.tchncs.de ) 10•7 months ago
- CanadaPlus ( @CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org ) 1•7 months ago
So we’re on the slope of enlightenment with nanotech, probably just past the peak with neural nets, and maybe right in the trough with cryptocurrencies. (The latter are up right now, but prototype tech Bitcoin still leading the pack tells me we haven’t arrived at any kind of balanced perspective)
- downpunxx ( @downpunxx@fedia.io ) 8•7 months ago
It 'asent dissapeared guvn’ah, it’s jus very small innit
- shirro ( @shirro@aussie.zone ) English8•7 months ago
Micro-electro mechanical systems (MEMS) are extremely successful. You have them in your phone and lots of other devices. It turns out semiconductor manufacturing techniques could be leveraged to make some useful devices but that is about it. There is obviously a lot happening at these scales in biology, semiconductors, materials science etc but the grey goop of nanobots turned out to be a fantasy based on extrapolations that don’t seem to hold up well with physical materials thankfully. One less thing to worry about. Now we only have climate change, pathogens, war etc. Hopefully the machine learning bubble will blow over in a similar fashion, genuinely revolutionary in some areas but increasingly difficult/uneconomical to scale into others.
- thericcer ( @thericcer@reddthat.com ) 1•7 months ago
MEMS have done wonders