begood Posted May 24, 2010 Report Posted May 24, 2010 This is the second of two articles looking at nanotechnology as a future technological risk.One of the scariest issues I can think of with respect to nanotechnology is self-replicating nanobots. The prospect of loosing little machines that can copy themselves without specific external control raises the specter of "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" and Mickey Mouse in that role in Disney's 1940 animated film, Fantasia. For science fiction fans, there are many examples of self-replicating machines to titillate or terrify; the replicators in the Stargate universe come to mind.In the information assurance field, it is pretty well established that creating self-replicating code, even for the best of intentions, is a bad idea; the fundamental problem is that no matter how carefully one applies quality assurance and testing to such code, external conditions are inevitably more variable than anything that can be tested in a finite time. Just think about all the combinations of operating system versions, update levels, application software, versions of that software, configuration combinations for all of the above, and run-time variations in when and how code segments are executed. For a classic and thorough review of the arguments, see Vesselin Bontchev's 1994 paper, "Are 'Good' Computer Viruses Still a Bad Idea?" which actually concludes that they could be a good idea (I still disagree, but it's a good paper).Self-replicating nanobots :: Hack In The Box :: Keeping Knowledge Free Quote
