Fall 2006 - Air & Space Power Chronicle - Air Force Link

100 AIR & SPACE POWER JOURNAL FALL 2006indirect threats to US security. Given the potentialdangers, it would be irresponsible notto prepare for MNT’s emergence.Direct ThreatsThe most obvious threats posed by MNT arethose based directly on the application of thetechnology itself, as a source for both betterweaponry as well as faster and more widespreadarms production.State-Based Arms Races. Intentional misuseof MNT will probably pose the greatestdirect threat to national security. MM willallow anyone with access to the technologyto quickly and economically create weaponsof virtually any description. The aspiringarms producer would have to provideonly designs, power, and basic materials. Ifthe arms producer is a state, then the resultingflood of extremely high-quality militaryequipment will enable that state topromptly and easily overwhelm any non-MNT-equipped enemy.With the rapid prototyping capability providedby MM, the time period for such abuildup could be on the order of weeks ormonths; multiple, rapid arms races could surfacewith regularity around the world. 20 Suchraces would likely not be limited to conventionalweapons as we know them today. Anarms race based on “smart” weapons of massdestruction (WMD) would be possible, suchas a smallpox virus engineered to kill onlypeople with a certain genetic trait. 21Individual-Based Arms Races. States maynot be alone in weapons-production activities.MNT-enabled personal manufacturing couldallow WMD production to shift from governmentsto small groups or even to individuals;this democratization of arms production is thedarker side of PF. Bill Joy, cofounder and chiefscientist of Sun Microsystems, has dubbed thiscapability knowledge-enabled mass destruction,calling it “a surprising and terrible empowermentof extreme individuals.” 22 Given the predilectionof some hackers to create harmfulcomputer viruses just for the thrill of it, it isnot a great conceptual leap to imagine that“nanohackers” might decide to do the samewith actual viruses.Perhaps the most frightening weapon ofall—and thus no doubt a natural aspirationfor potential nanohackers—is the infamousself-replicating gray-goo assemblers. Designinga gray-goo replicator would be an extraordinarilycomplex undertaking, however,and would require solving a multitude of extremelydifficult engineering challenges; accordingly,some have argued that such an effortwould be either impossible or highlyunlikely. 23 However, a dedicated and concertedattempt could conceivably fall short ofthe goal but still come up with something extremelydangerous and uncontrollable. Tohelp ensure that the accidental creation of agray-goo nanomachine remains a practical impossibility,Drexler’s Foresight Institute, anonprofit organization he founded to “helpprepare society for anticipated advanced technologies,”has prescribed guidelines for thesafe development of NT. The institute recommendsavoiding the use of replicators (i.e., assemblers)entirely, or at a minimum, designingthem so that they cannot operate in anatural environment. 24Surveillance. An early application of MNTand NT will likely be inexpensive yet advancedmicrosurveillance platforms and tools. Massproduced, these disposable sensors could beused to blanket large areas, providing ubiquitoussurveillance of the people within. Althoughobviously a battlefield concern, suchsurveillance could also be employed againstany group or population, raising privacy andlegality issues. 25Environmental Damage. MNT was originallyperceived as a potential cure-all for a variety ofenvironmental problems: nanobots in the atmosphere,for example, could physically repairthe ozone layer or remove greenhousegases. Recently, however, NT is increasinglyseen as a potential environmental problem inits own right. Both NT and MNT are expectedto produce large quantities of nanoparticlesand other disposable nanoproducts, the environmentaleffects of which are currently unknown.This “nanolitter,” small enough topenetrate living cells, raises the possibility of