• Victor Medvil


  • HEHE

    Add fur where there was no fur before.

  • William Price

    What is really means is the powers that be will use this technology to advance there own interest at the expense of rank and file citizens of all nations, Subjugating them under repressive rule, like police states, totalitarian Governments, with little hope of any kind of freedom. All you have to do is read, Brave new world, and 1984. This just the beginning.

    • http://www.thatsreallypossible.com/ Glyn Taylor

      The way I see it, basically, is that people have always tried to oppress others through greed and fear – things as they are now for ‘democracy’/freedom, are better than ever. Yes, the powerful are getting smarter, they are making it look as though they are not even doing anything wrong while they soak up the money at the expense of the more deserving.

      But, we are all getting smarter. To have a lot of power in one place, it has to have been sourced from a lot of other places. When all those deprived places act as one, they become just as powerful as those few who hold the power. Therefore the will of the many always become equal to the will of the few.

      Companies and governments only survive if we support them.

      I believe the main dangers from new technologies, is, as you said, the threat that could be posed once they are possessed by irrational/greedy terrorists/criminals.

  • myname

    It is important to note that the idea of singularity and transhumanism are interesting and thought provoking. It certainly looks like “we (current drivers)” are at least open to trying these things. At the same time, it’s important to put the movement in context. I suggest Jaron Lanier’s Half Manifesto as a must read. https://edge.org/conversation/one-half-a-manifesto

    Ideally, in life, we’d want to understand, as much as we can, why we do things.


  • Impressed

    Great to hear and see advances in medicine and material science continue. But don’t forget how the sci fi story always ends for the evil genius who wants to love forever – badly. Better to go for a walk with loved one or play and enjoy your life and live forever in these moments. And accept your fate that our bodies pass on like sand blowing in the desert.

  • Andrew Batstone

    I’m sorry to say this, but the diamondoid nanotech revolution – promised by Drexler decades ago – won’t happen, or will be much, much harder to develop. Richard Jones explained it all back in 2008.


    Progress in “bio-nano” or “soft” nano is moving along nicely, though.

  • Sang Kang

    The application for Nano tech is as your imagination would allow it to go. The ability to manipulate down to atomic scale has a profound implications. One might even say, having such technology will change how we live day to day. Just like computer has ushered us in to information age, nano technology will probably bring us to a different life style for everyone.

  • Christopher Murray

    Nanotech is only a stopgap. Beyond nanotech, we will engineer bacteria and viruses to do the same thing.

  • Pingback: Super Humans by 2040 | Frontview()

  • Pingback: “Nano Domestic Quell” Kill-Switch DoD DARPA Program | Sheeple TV()

  • Pingback: NerdyTweets: News Impacting Science, Technology and Business! | NerdyTweets: News Impacting Science, Technology and Business ...()

  • Pingback: Numérique : le retour de bâton | kiffezluttez()

  • Don Andrews

    What makes us human is the fact that we are aware of ourselves and of our place in the universe. That’s not going away, we’re just starting to realize how small we are in relation to everything else. Our bodies don’t make us human, our minds do, it’s what separates us from all other living things on planet Earth. Will it change us – yes. But if we don’t make this move, if we don’t keep trying to discover new things, then what’s the point. It’s part of what makes us human, the urge to discover. It’s why nobody writes epics about people who sit around not doing anything with their lives – which is most people. Time to look over the precipice of existence and take a leap.

  • Corey

    You guys and gals need to get a grip on reality. If you think creating superhuman cyborgs is the way to a brighter future you have been mislead. There are some dangerous side effects that we have not even yet to consider when thinking and experimenting with transhumanism. I really think everybody who is supporting this should do research on Dan Winters ( not the photographer). He has a brilliant video series on youtube where he discusses the nature of DNA and how when we start to use nanotechnology it can indeed destroy the spacing sequences in the genome thus creating a loss of things that make us truly human, ie.. emotions, passion, compassion and so on. Most of our science needs a better perspective on the human physiology, its not just some machine, its it a spiritual- conscious technology of its own. The sooner we realize that there already is a spiritual technology inside of us and explore that the sooner our true evolution will occur.
    I’m not saying that all nanotechnology, body hacking, and transhuman endeavors are bad however, they should be done in the proper context and perspective of what we humans truly are. As with all technology they can be used for good or bad and that will lay with the people who use them but as for the individual we have a choice to turn into some cyborg- robotic creature or become fully human.

    • Diax

      Best reply ever. Future is scary and this technology is terrifying.

      • LazyBones

        I think it is absolutely fascinating. It should be noted that all technology is terrifying whilst still in its infancy. We already exist in an age where technology and robotics are supplementing, and in many instances completely revolutionising the human anatomy and the ways in which we treat disease. Pacemakers, ICD’s, the advancement of prothestic moving limbs controlled by thought etc. would all have been unthinkable a generation ago. Nanotechnology should not be seen solely as a stand alone paradigm shift in how we treat the human body, but rather as an extension of our pre-existing knowledge of the anatomy and medical science. We are on the eve of the greatest 2 decades of medical advancement in the history of the human race. Progress is inevitable.

    • leila javan

      Yes u are right. People need to wake up. stop and take a look around, see where we are heading.

  • your name

    not like anyone reading about it here will ever be able to afford it. and if you think you can, you wouldn’t be here reading about it.

  • Warren D

    I see this really changing things in the 2020’s.

  • Pingback: Why hasn't the Singularity gone mainstream (yet?) - Research, computers, social science, chemistry, biology, astronomy, physics, mathematics, AI - Page 102 - City-Data Forum()

  • Pingback: Nanotechnology will create Superhumans within 3...()

  • Pingback: olivierd001()

  • Brad Arnold

    Perhaps nanotechnology is uniquely suited to pass regulation hurtles, and so can be expected to flow smoothly into the market, whereas other augmentation technologies (genetic and computer) are by their very nature more regulatorily questionable. For instance, I want a full body prosthesis, so at the end of my body’s lifespan I can transplant my still viable brain into a durable mechanical structure. Unfortunately, regulations retard the experimentation generally. Why, when my body isn’t viable anymore anyway? Because we still maintain the old paradigm of ethics and morals based upon a false assumption of risk and nature.

    Perhaps nanotechnology will pass seamless past such antiquated cultural bureaucratic barriers.

  • RedneckCryonicist

    But “nanotechnology” can’t exist: http://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/nano-nonsense-25-years-of-charlatanry/

    BTW, saying that we’ll “become immortal” by arbitrary dates in this century like 2045 makes no logical sense. Plenty of people alive in 2014 could survive for another 31 years through natural maturation and aging. They won’t mysteriously “become immortal” by lasting to January 1, 2045.

    Besides, do the math. I thought “immortality” would last longer than 31 years. What a gyp!

    • Yannick Roy

      I think you’re missing the whole point of Immortality (from a non science-fiction angle). As pointed out by Aubrey de Grey, there is a HUGE misunderstanding about what it means to become immortal. The goal here is to have the ability by 2045 to add enough time to your life to have a time frame to add some more time and then add some more, etc. Therefore, reach the point where technology goes quick enough that we can add more years to your life, quicker than you spend them -> Immortality. Stop thinking that one day we will find a pill that we swallow and become immortal, it’s a continuous process, started long ago when we start increasing average time life.

      • Shinawatra HatyaiRelax

        I’m a scientist, and there is this immortal cell called “HeLa cell.” Yes, it is a cancer cell, but it can divide itself indefinitely, that makes it immortal.
        Another is called “Immortal Jellyfish.”

        If soon, human can have their cell divide indefinitely with limit, then immortality is possible without the need of continuous process. 30 years is too short, I dont think it is possible.

  • Pingback: Futureseek Daily Link Review; 14 January 2014 | Futureseek Link Digest()

  • dr_mabeuse

    Every new technology that comes along is predicted to do great things. We don’t even know how the human body works yet, and you’re going to start screwing with it with nanobots? What happens when these things meet our immune system? Or start messing with our proteins and enzymes? The future is highly overrated.

    • Ruffian

      Progress is not always easy. The possibility that things might go wrong is no reason not to try new things. Seems to me that being driven forward by curiosity is better than stagnantly living in fear and never attempting to try or create.

      • Turmoil Calmness

        The ramifications of nanotechnology is still unknown. Humans have messed around with nature too much and we cannot fix our damages. This will lead to our downfall. Our future will not be as humans, but robots. We put ourselves in a situation where we are vulnerable to other humans. Humans are flawed and what we create have more flaws. There is no perfect thing. Imagine an entire population hacked and nanotech is turned against the human race? We won’t die of disease from nature. We will die on our own hands.

  • Pingback: Glimpse into the future with new series, “Future of Us”()

  • Pingback: Nanotechnology will create Superhumans within 3...()

  • jason

    what about the natural reflex to breath in and out continuously how do you get around that under water

  • Matt Damon

    “without needing to breath”?

    I’m sorry, but I can’t read an article, least of all scientific, with such an elementary spelling error.
    There’s no excuse for this.

    • http://www.thatsreallypossible.com/ Glyn Taylor

      You have enough interest in the subject to begin reading, but what? A simple mistake in proofreading filled you with such overwhelming rage that you were forced off track; your complete thought process was derailed by the urge to correct such an offencive mistake, by giving the writer an equally offence reply?

      No, that is not what happened.

      I’m sorry but I can’t have a conversation, let alone an intellectual one, with somebody that jumps to pettiness to such extremes that he is willing to take time out of his life to write, not constructive comments, but bare face insults down to the detail of even his choice of alias.

      The reality is clear. You began reading, not with interest in the subject, but with the interest of looking for something to belittle to feed your deep rooted need to place yourself on a deluded high ground from where you can compensate for the insecurities of which you must fight to prevent your feeling defenceless.

      Sometimes you must look beyond the quality of a persons spelling, not that you have any desire to. But you have failed to belittle this potential victim I am afraid, so feel free to try and get your troll kicks elsewhere.

  • Pingback: Neat article about how nanotechnology will help to create a more precise cancer treatment - Save Dad.com()

  • Tyson

    That means you could change your eye colour, muscle strength and maybe bone density