First-Stage Nanoproducts and Nanoweaponry

By 2020, and potentially as early as 2010, we will know enough about carbon chemistry, kinematic self-replication, and nanoscale positional control to build a desktop nanofactory – a machine that uses many trillions of tiny arms to put together macro-scale products. Because tiny arms can move incredibly fast, they will be radically productive. It has been estimated that a 100 kg nanofactory will be able to manufacture its own weight in product in about three hours, perhaps less.

Nanofactory technology will begin with an assembler – a reprogrammable molecular machine capable of making a copy of itself. An assembler would be extremely small, composed of maybe a couple million atoms. This is about the same as a ribosome. For a reference, see this picture of some nanoparts next to a virus:

An assembler would basically be an artificial ribosome. Ribosomes are the little machines in the cell that manufacture every protein in your body. Its basic design hasn’t changed in over a billion years.

Feasibility arguments for molecular nanotechnology (MNT) are well-documented in the literature. Its not a question of if, but when. The technological and sociological impact of personal nanofactories (PNs) is certain to be extreme. If regulations permit it, you will be able to construct, right in your very home, just about any structure allowed by the laws of chemistry and available feedstock. All current manufacturing, communication, and transportation processes will be fundamentally restructured over a period of mere years or even months. The first nanofactories are likely to use carbon feedstock, meaning most of the products will be made out of diamond. Water may be used as a ballast for some diamond products.

Products built using MNT will be extremely cheap: around the cost of their raw materials. This is because human labor, the primary cost of manufacturing today, is largely subtracted from the equation. Carbon is extremely cheap, and can be mined by the megaton from practically anywhere. Power requirements are modest. Made of diamond, a nanofactory will not require much maintenance.

Quickly, typical products made of plastic, ceramic, or metal will be redesigned to accommodate the new diamondoid medium. There will be diamond plates, diamond tables, diamond cutlery, ovens, coffee makers, microwaves, tiles, walls, chairs, televisions, cameras, printers, scanners, shelving, windows, computers, pens, notepads, pottery, showerheads, and so on. Something like 90% of all manufactured products will be replaced by diamondoid versions. This is what Neal Stephenson was thinking when he wrote a book called The Diamond Age.

The father of nanotechnology, Eric Drexler, lists a few things which would become possible with MNT on his website:

desktop computers with a billion processors
inexpensive, efficient solar energy systems
medical devices able to destroy pathogens and repair tissues
materials 100 times stronger than steel
superior military systems
additional molecular manufacturing systems

MNT has been called “magic”, and the word choice is not entirely inappropriate. We will be able to build products with greater performance and more diverse functionality than anything you or any university Ph.Ds have imagined. All shortages of energy, food, water, and shelter will be rapidly solved, as long as nanofactories are made available to developing countries. Subdermal heaters, nanoproducts designed to do little more than generate waste heat, will eliminate the problem of obesity practically overnight. The size and range of products will be limited only by whatever regulations are built into the first round of nanofactories. And I hope that these regulations are extremely strict. You see, nanofactories will be the most dangerous technology that mankind has ever faced, thousands of times more dangerous than nuclear weapons.

Given an unrestricted nanofactory and a few million dollars worth of programming and engineering, here are a few products that I could manufacture in almost arbitrary quantities, given a couple months manufacturing time:

sniper rifles that weigh less than 5 kg, capable of firing a lethal projectile at Mach 10 towards any target within my line of sight.
extremely light and strong armor capable of stopping 10 kg explosive shells moving at faster than 10 km/sec.
Metal Storm systems which fire as many as 1,000,000 projectiles per minute through ballistics arrays.
UAV swarms capable of actively neutralizing very large rockets, providing comprehensive area denial, working together to disassemble buildings, etc.
highly maneuverable VTOL craft able to destroy almost any number of F-22 Raptors or F-35 Lightnings.
gigawatt-class, solar array or nuclear-powered microwave beams capable of completely melting tanks, aircraft, destroyers, incoming missiles, etc. from hundreds of miles away.
isotope separation systems that enrich uranium efficiently, at great speeds, giving enough fissile material to make bombs in days rather than years.
gigantic lenses capable of redirecting sunlight towards arbitrary coordinates in extremely high concentrations; a solar furnace.
missile swarms composed of individual missiles about 1 meter long, carrying 1 kg warheads, manufactured by the millions, capable of traveling through the upper atmosphere and surviving reentry.

Because products made out of diamond can be extremely strong and light, 100 kg of carbon gives you a very large bang for your buck. For example, a Mercedes S-class today weighs about 2,000 kg, but with diamondoid building materials, this weight could be reduced tremendously, if desired – the primary motivation to preserve the vehicle’s current weight would be the preservation of inertia, rather than engineering limitations. An automobile made out of nanodiamond could have an absurdly low weight, on the order of a hundreth of an ounce, not including fuel. If this sounds fantastic to you, take a look at what is already possible today:

This tiny block of transparent aerogel is supporting a brick weighing 2.5 kg. The aerogel’s density is 0.1 g/cm^3.

Anyway, the point of all this is simple: nanofactories need to be extremely restricted in the products they can build, or there is going to be big problems. The open source, anti-digital rights management, P2P-generation needs to get this. Information may want to be free, but if weapons designs are readily available and manufacturable in the post-MNT world, there are going to be problems of the likes we’ve never seen. To minimize the risk of danger, the safest option is to have all product designs authenticated by a central authority. Yes, that scary phrase, “central authority”. This central authority needs to be capable of determining which designs are safe, maintaining an extremely high level of nanofactory security, and enforcing the law when people try to circumvent it. The libertarian dream of minimalist government, unfortunately, must be discarded.

Now, in general, I’m extremely against big government. It can be a huge waste, and extremely inefficient relative to market-driven competition. But when it comes to managing magic, decentralized solutions simply won’t do. There needs to be a global standard and global regulations. Rogue states won’t do, either. One rogue nation could use MNT to manufacture enough weapons to turn the capitals of any opposing nation, no matter how large, into a series of smoking craters. This is a risk we shouldn’t be willing to take, and once the potential of MNT starts to sink in with higher-level government officials, they won’t.

Life extensionists: realize that the greatest risk to living longer is not actually aging, which we will eventually defeat cleanly, but existential risks of the type I frequently discuss, including superintelligence and nanotech arms races. You can extend your expected future life more by lowering the probability of these disasters than through any other means.

Comments

  1. Good point, I had actually meant to verify that before I hit “post”, but I was in a bit of a rush so I didn’t… every other claim made in the article has plenty of associated citations, feel free to ask if you want anything specific. In any case, I’ve lowered the weight to 50 kg.

  2. E.N. Taylor

    So that brick weighs 100 pounds? Still quite a stretch. It looks like an ordinary brick which should weigh more on the order of 1 kg.

  3. Jonathan

    Its magic Taylor.

  4. Jonathan

    Nice post BTW Michael.

  5. Martin Striz

    I haven’t done a lot of research into nanotech, but I’ve read some the primary literature, including the work that Freitas and Merkle are doing:

    http://striz.org/docs/freitas1.pdf

    It looks like they are still facing the fuzziness problem, that is, as a system gets smaller, it behaves more probabilistically.

    I worked for a short time in a lab that studied spliceosomes. One of my jobs was to use an RNA-folding prediction program called Mfold to find introns with conserved structures. Since RNA is single-stranded, it can fold back and hybridize to itself (the autocatalytic RNAs that constituted proto-life worked this way). Every molecule tends to settle into its lowest (Gibb’s) free energy state, so the program went through all possible self-hybridization combinations, calculated the free energies, and spit them out.

    If a molecule has one energy state that is much lower than the rest, it will remain exclusively in that configuration. If it has several states with close free energies (several local minima), then it will transition back and forth between them, spending some amount of time in each configuration. This is the fuzziness problem. Complex molecules in the chemical world tend to have many closely-related local energy minima, which makes their configuration state, and consequently their behavior, difficult to predict beyond a superficial description of the probability of being in a certain state or doing a certain thing.

    Proteins, the original molecular machines, behave this way too.

    In the article above, you will notice that when Freitas et al. tried to use positional control to appose two carbon dimers, deposition of the second one resulted in NINETEEN possible outcomes, and that they had to use a number of techniques to coax the molecules out of those local minima into the configuration that they wanted.

    So what I wonder is whether atomic precision is possible even in principle. Certainly we don’t have any empirical evidence to suggest that it is, since all the molecular machines that we’ve ever seen (RNA, proteins) are fuzzy.

    If that’s the case, then nanotech faces some difficulties.

  6. eisendorn

    Even if molecular-scale manufacturing like this would eventually become possible, i can only laugh at the notion of a single regulatory body or a “global standard”.
    Michael, you expressed your disdain for politics in a previous post, claiming that politicians tend to attack bigger thematic chunks than appropriate. Now look at the issue we face here: you call for a global security standard for desktop manufacturing. Today’s standardization is driven solely by the industry, rather, competing factions of industrial bodies. If you take a look at something as trivial as a next-generation wireless networking standard (802.11n), which industry failed to pass for years now, the idea of something like a “global” standard must become absurd.
    Additionally, your proposed solution to the nano-proliferation problem is utopic at best. you are right when you claim that only a global regulatory body would be able to keep the technology in check. but i have to remind you that not even on national scale, governments constituent of more than one party can make “big” decisions easily. Nothing save for maybe a global desaster like a world war, eradicating 90% of mankind, would have the power to globally unite people under the umbrella of a single government. you better think of something else than a technocratic dictatorship to hold information in check – and it still is information we are talking about, i.e. blueprints of the MNT factory.
    if MNT manufacturing becomes possible as early as 2010 – and despite being an accelerating change optimist, i strongly doubt it for various reasons – you better build a spaceship and fly off. don’t forget the towel, though.

  7. Prakash

    The tremendrous potential power of molecular manufacturing is staggering, especially the offensive capabilities. But i am curious about how much defensive capability can molecular manufacturing give? Can possible configurations of diamondoids shield against nuclear weapons? or is a thick shield of lead the only way?

  8. Martin Striz

    (Hyper)individualism is an obsolete philosophy for the 21st century. In an era when each individual will have the power to annihilate everyone else, we must be responsible to each other. However, it would be difficult to regulate anything on a global scale. The best solution might be ecological rather than technical or political: the fear of mutually assured destruction. There are some 30,000 nuclear warheads on earth today, certainly enough to wipe most of the biosphere off the face of the earth, but we’re still here. That’s because a) they are in the hands of a few people, b) they are well regulated, and c) nobody has a reason to use them. Iran might change all that, but MAD could still keep Ahmaninejad at bay.

    However, I think the prospects for a nanogoo disaster or massive nuclear weapons proliferation are overblown. There are technical issues with energy and raw materials that will make global disasters difficult to achieve. Look how hard it is to purify uranium to weapons-grade levels.

  9. MCP2012

    Both Martin Striz & eisendorn make valuable/pertinent points. I’m no physical-chemist, much less a nano-scale design-engineer, but we’ll certainly have to deal with the kinds of problems Martin lucidly highlights. While, in my educated-layman’s intuitive (*merely wishful-thinking*?!?!) judgment, these sorts of problems can be overcome &/or worked-around (since this is precisely what “engineering” if *for* in such contexts), we may indeed still be 8-12 (or more) yrs away—i.e., instead of merely 4-6 yrs—from even “1st generation” “full-fledged” nanotech. Now in a way, that’s bad (for us “old” folks! LOL), ’cause, *ceterus paribus*, I’d like Drexlerian nanotech a.s.a.p. But, of course, when thoroughly considered, this may be a good “buying time” sort of delay. And we all know why: Eisendorn is right, your “central authority”, Michael, at least in terms of any extrapolation/extension of current international/transnational institutions (except maybe for treaties—more on which in a moment), is, I fear, little more than a pipedream. If, however, the “powers that (currently) be” can agree on specific protocols (and metaprotocols), which would necessarily include monitoring by some created agency (filling the role, more-or-less, of your “central authority” along the lines of IAEC), then there might be hope. But the current state of international/transnational law would seem to point to this route. The U.N. has little real power (thank frickin’ g*d!), and is inherently both incompetent & somewhat corrupt. Nations as such still retain their individual sovereignty. Now the U.N. General Assembly (which—n.b.—still doesn’t include quite all nations) may serve as a forum for discussion, as well as multilateral summit conferences. But folks, heres the situation/circumstances in which we find ourselves: On the one hand, progress is accelerating apace, particularly, it seems, in, of all areas, nanotech (Martin’s astute & spot-on observations not-quite-completely-withstanding). Yet on the other hand, progress toward a friendly AGI that could help tremendously in terms of monitoring & control, seems to be lagging a bit (Eli’s [& others'] valient efforts notwithstanding). And on the 3rd hand, so to speak, we still have fanatical terrorists aplenty who oftentimes have advanced degrees in, say, physical chemistry &/or materials-engineering, and yet who also fervently believe—& are willing to murder on behalf of—incredibly STUPID—& demonstrably FALSE/NONSENSICAL—mythological CRAP (Cf. Sam Harris’ superb book, *The End of Faith* [Norton/Penguin]), and who’d be all-too-willing-&-eager to utilize nanotech for genocidal atrocities & Orwellian-imposition-of-draconian-theocracy which eclipses even the Shoa (i.e., Holocaust). Can you say, “We’re in a pickle”, boys-&-girls?! Indeed, can you say, “We’re in some deep shit, here”?!?! And unilaterally retarding research/progress—on the model, i.e., of *Heisenberg’s War* (great book, btw, about a great & intrepid man)—WON’T DO, either, of course. WE, being (if I may be allowed to state the incontroverible), the Good Guys (at least relatively) in all this, must plunge ahead. But we know that fences (and hence *de*fenses) make for good neighbors. We can only hope, in the ensuing yrs, whether it be a mere 4-6, or 8-12, that we begin systematically, and in parallel, to design & develop failsafe protocols and defense systems to detect & neutralize rogue applications which somehow elude the first-order “failsafe” mechanisms. OR WE’RE TOAST. The powers-that-be MUST be made aware of the potential dangers, the potential preclusive/defensive solutions, and the STAKES, as the latter is the continuance & progress of human civilization as such. The Cold War, in terms of strategic protocols & processes, was just a rehearsal of some of the kinds of issues & how to deal with them.

    Many people fear *de facto* global governence by an advanced AGI, because they think in terms of *Colossus: The Forbin Project* and the *Terminator*/Cyberdyne model(s). But both the public and the “elite(s)” need to be made aware that advance AGI/IA is precisely what is now imperatively needed. Eisndorn is right, Michael, if we’re looking at 2010 for first-stage full-blown nanotech (*sans* sufficient safeguards &/or friendly AGI), then the LifeBoat Project might be more imperative than even SingInst or SENS. We do indeed seem to racing our own Apocalypse, our own Oblivion. And, as Bucky pointed out yrs ago, by the 1st or 2nd decade of the 21st century, it will be Eutopia or Oblivion.

    Michael: What are the prospects of Eli getting at least some sort of proto-AGI/IA system up-&-running by 2010?! It may come down to that…

    Live long & prosper (we hope…)

  10. I’ve found the original source and corrected the brick’s weight to 2.5 kg. Sorry for making up that earlier figure, I’ll be sure to check all my numbers in the future.

    Even if MNT doesn’t arrive until 2030, all the issues I raise in this post are relevant.

    Of course a global government is impossible in the near term. It’d only be possible if someone took over the world by force. The point of the thought experiment is to indicate that the only functioning human solution is an impossible one, so we either need to create a space ark, or Friendly AI.

    Nanotech defensive capabilities – surely there are some, but they do not match up against the most intense offensive capabilities, which simply involve directing square miles’ worth of sunlight into cm-sized areas.

    MCP: the chances of Eliezer or Ben finishing AGI by 2010 are very close to nothing. 2015 is possible, with 2020 being more likely.

  11. RobW

    So basically the consensus is that most people ‘in the know’ about MM believe we’re screwed unless friendly AI arrives first? From what I’ve read most people believe MM will arrive first….

    Am i correct in this assessment?

  12. MCP2012

    Yeah, that’s what I’d like to know!! What *IS* the consensus on RobW’s implied dilemma (or looming CRISIS), Michael?!!?!!

    I’d like to see Eli &/or Ben get their AGI systems up-&-runnin’ by 2012-2015 *AND* *de facto* delay nanotech until around that time as well. I.e., the two groups should conspire to do that. The only problem (as I myself emphasized—and Eric [Drexler] has emphasized for yrs) is that this might well give, say, China or Japan (or whomever) the opportunity to take the lead. And, not to be an American chauvanist *per se*, I really do think it’s globally meta-politically and meta-socio-economically better if we (America) “get there” first—I think, as bad as they are, we have the best socio-political procedures & processes to (hopefully) deal with optimally (or at least more near-optimally) than any other country.

  13. We’re not *necessarily* screwed if MM arrives first–at least I don’t think so. There are several things–indeed, several kinds of things–that could go badly wrong, including unstable arms race, massive oppression, and massive upheaval/distributed disaster.

    But there may be solutions to the biggest problems. If we can educate the militaries about the arms race dangers, they may be able to find a way out–they may even cooperate to some extent.

    It may be possible to delay the private-sector arrival of the most destructive aspects of the technology by months, perhaps even several years. As for massive oppression… well, we’re facing that anyway.

    And it may well be possible, by directing product design, to accentuate the good while minimizing the bad–at least initially. In fact, accentuating the good can be a very effective strategy for minimizing some aspects of the bad.

    After several years, I don’t think anyone can predict.

    My recent blog posts at CRN’s blog are covering some of these issues, and I’ll continue to cover others.

    http://crnano.typepad.com

    Chris

  14. A few technical quibbles:

    I don’t believe a car could be built for a few hundredths of an ounce. I usually use 2-3 orders of magnitude weight reduction as a rule of thumb. You’re talking more like 6-7.

    Bacteria-sized objects will have trouble receiving radio waves. Also, it’ll be very hard to build non-biological self-replicators at that scale, especially with just a few months’ research.

    I’m also not sure about the armor. I have to echo an earlier poster’s comments: Where do you get your numbers, and how can we trust them?

    Chris

  15. Prakash

    I would disagree with MCP2012. I think the institutions to deal with this kind of power are not better developed in America than in anywhere around the world. America is the only nation in the world that has used nuclear weapons and has initiated the last 2 major non-civil wars. It would be best if Finland or Switzerland got “there” first- peaceful, democratic and technological societies. If not, Japan, which has not agressed in 50 years. But it would be definitely better for America to get there earlier than China. (Being in India, I know that India’s getting there first is impossible. It would be good though. Another democratic and relatively peacable society – most conflict is economic in here)

  16. Chris, I’m familiar with the standard weight-reducation factor, but have you checked out the nanoDiamond page? It’s far more radical than I could have expected, and this material will not likely find its way into the first nanofactories, but the point is that it’s well within the limits of physical law.

    I don’t put out that many controversial numbers – Mach 10 is based on a 3X improvement factor – current rifles fire bullets at Mach 3. A 10 kg explosive shell travelling at 10 km/s is based on scaling up conventional tank armaments by a few times. The missile swarm numbers aren’t controversial.

    Okay, bacteria-sized parasites won’t be possible with the first round. I’ve now removed them from my list.

  17. MCP2012

    Thanks, Chris, for the (cautious, of course) more-or-less upbeat comment. And, Prakash, point(s) well-taken. Subconsciously I was probably thinking in terms of the countries that are vigorously pursuing nanotech, and that have a reasonable chance of “getting there first”. And I concur that India is not one of them (though India could, conceiveably, e.g., join a consortium of developing nations to pool R&D resources in the near future…). Switzerland & Finland (as well as, say, Austria) are reasonably stable, broadly liberal societies, you’re quite correct, but, correct me if I’m wrong (Chris, Michael, Prakash, anyone), none of them are (yet, anyway) pursuing nanotech as vigorously as the U.S. Nor (again, as yet, anyway) is, say, Russia. But both China & Japan, however, *are* so doing, and, given their decades-long disdain (if not downright animosity) toward one another, this in itself *could* (certainly not necessarily would, but *could*) lead to a problematic (if not catastrophic) arms-race. And that’s not even factoring-in the other “player” in that particular region—we all know of whom I think—neo-Stalinist nut job aka Kim Jong Il.

    Now admittedly, America has, lamentably (indeed, appallingly), transformed, over the last 50-60 years, into a (mildly, as far it goes) Fascist state, with cronie capitalism, titanic rent-seeking, and “police action” warfare for fun-&-profit, amongst other ills, running rampant. Nonetheless, it still retains socio-political & socio-economic institutions and processes/procedures that are viable in containing/optimizing the introduction of nanotech…BUT, again, *having said that*, YOUR point(s) are spot-on & well-taken…

    Wonderful forum, Michael. So honored to participate…

  18. Patrick J Robinson

    this is amazing. Are you saying if friendly A.I. doesnt emerge before MM then the end of the world will come to be?

  19. Hi, I just thought I’d post a comment and let you know your page layout is really messed up on the Firefox browser. Seems to work fine on IE though. Anyways keep up the good work.

  20. It’s an okay product. I notice that I gained accessory bustle. But what sucks is, US old-fashioned gazabo night I forgot as good as take the pills & the next a.m., I felt alike I had a blast! I felt Usually I had stomach aching, cramps, diarrhea, whatever. But everytime I vigour … la mode the bathroom, nothing comes away!!! So, appropriate hind I took the pills, I was quality alright again

  21. I believe that Nano technology is going to contribute to all kinds of powerful technological advances in our lifetimes. It will probably lead to developing some kind of perpetual energy device or teleportation like star trek.

  22. I’ve been reading your stuff for awhile, however this is my first comment. I simply needed to let you know that http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/michael/blog/2006/09/first-stage-nanoproducts-and-nanoweaponry/ was one of your best – at least in my opinion.

  23. Good article and straight to the point. I am not sure if this is actually the best place to ask but do you people have any thoughts on where to employ some professional writers? Thank you :)

  24. I am new to building internet sites and I was wanting to know if having your website title related to your articles and other content really that important? I see your title, “First-Stage Nanoproducts and Nanoweaponry | Accelerating Future ” does seem to be spot on with what your blog is about however, I prefer to keep my title less content descriptive and based more around site branding. Would you think this is a good idea or bad idea? Any kind of assistance would be greatly appreciated.

  25. One thing I want to say is always that prior to purchasing more computer recollection, look in the machine through which it will be installed. Should the equipment can always be running Windows xp, for instance, a recollection threshold will be 3. 25GB. Using in excess of this would certainly simply comprise a spend. Make confident one’s motherboard can handle the actual upgrade volume, as effectively. Great blog post.

  26. What i don’t understood is in fact how you’re now not really much more well-favored than you might be right now. You’re so intelligent. You know therefore significantly on the subject of this subject, made me in my opinion imagine it from numerous various angles. Its like men and women aren’t interested except it is something to accomplish with Girl gaga! Your personal stuffs nice. At all times handle it up!

  27. How does one do? We loves your breathtaking site thanks and you should stick from it

  28. I??m a blog crazed person and i also like to read cool weblog like yours.??-,*??

  29. This web page is really a walk-through its the internet you desired with this and didn’t know who want to. Glimpse here, and you will undoubtedly discover it.

  30. When going to blogs, i generally appear for a really good content like yours ,

  31. Merely wanna remark on few general things, The website design and style is perfect, the content material is very superb : D.

  32. free bets casino uk

    View the following suggestions less than and find to know how to observe this situation whilst you project your home business today. Earn money from home

  33. *very nice post, i undoubtedly enjoy this website, maintain on it

  34. Hi there! Quick question that’s entirely off topic. Do you know how to make your website mobile friendly? My weblog looks weird when browsing from my apple iphone. I’m trying to find a template or plugin that may be able to fix this problem. If you have any suggestions, please share. Quite a few thanks!

  35. It was one thing of wonderful contentment finding for your site final night. I got right here right now hoping to uncover a thing new. And I was not disappointed. Your concepts upon new tactics on this topic were informative as well as a superior support to us. Thank you for obtaining time to create these points plus for sharing your thoughts.

  36. Great post, I concur totally and appreciate the time you took to create it, nice!

  37. I am really impressed together with your writing abilities neatly as using the structure for your weblog. Is this a paid topic matter or did you modify it oneself? Anyway stay up the great higher good quality writing, it is rare to peer a great weblog like this 1 nowadays.

  38. Awesome blog! Is your theme custom made or did you download it from somewhere? A theme like yours with a few simple tweeks would really make my blog jump out. Please let me know where you got your design. Thanks a lot.

  39. hi there, just changed into aware of your weblog thru google, and located that it is truly informative. i am going to be careful for brussels. i will appreciate when you continue this in future. lots of people will likely be benefited from your writing. cheers!

  40. some really grand work on behalf of the owner of this website , dead great written content .

  41. It’s perfect time to make some plans for the future and it is time to be happy. I have read this post and if I could I want to suggest you some interesting things or tips. Maybe you could write next articles referring to this article. I want to read more things about it!

  42. Hi! Do you know if they make any plugins to safeguard against hackers? I’m kinda paranoid about losing everything I’ve worked hard on. Any recommendations?

  43. you’ve got an incredible blog here! would you like to make some invite posts on my blog?

  44. Hiya. Vastly careful website!! Guy .. Striking .. Superb .. I’ll bookmark your website and assume the feeds also…I’m satisfied to locate abundant of use in a row here within the article. Show appreciation you for sharing..

  45. I am usually to running a blog and i really respect your content. The article has actually peaks my interest. I am going to bookmark your web site and preserve checking for brand new information.some tips here!

  46. Fantastic beat ! I wish to apprentice while you amend your web site, how can i subscribe for a blog web site? The account aided me a acceptable deal. I had been tiny bit acquainted of this your broadcast provided bright clear idea

  47. very nice put up, i certainly love this website, keep on itUseful info!

  48. Aw, this was a really nice post. In concept I want to put in writing like this additionally – taking time and actual effort to make a very good article… however what can I say… I procrastinate alot and under no circumstances appear to get one thing done.more tips i found on!

  49. I used to be more than happy to search out this internet-site.I needed to thanks in your time for this wonderful learn!! I definitely having fun with each little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you weblog post.more tips i found on !!!

  50. Hi, Neat make public. In attendance’s a problem with your locate in internet explorer, would check this… Explicitly in spite of everything is the advertise position chief along with a heavy percentage of people can fail to notice the first-rate letters for this reason problem.

  51. I am often to blogging and i really appreciate your content. The article has really peaks my interest. I’m going to bookmark your site and maintain checking for brand spanking new information.Useful info!

  52. After I originally commented I clicked the -Notify me when new comments are added- checkbox and now every time a remark is added I get 4 emails with the identical comment. Is there any way you possibly can take away me from that service? Thanks!

  53. Nice, but nothing can compare with this video! LOL! Nice, but nothing can compare with this video! LOL! What people f////******** k////——- Must see!http://coupontry ((dot))com/redy/crazyvideo

  54. Wonderful beat ! I would like to apprentice while you amend your web site, how could i subscribe for a blog website? The account aided me a acceptable deal. I had been a little bit acquainted of this your broadcast provided bright clear concept

  55. Have you ever thought about adding a little bit more than just your articles? I mean, what you say is valuable and all. But just imagine if you added some great photos or videos to give your posts more, “pop”! Your content is excellent but with images and clips, this blog could undeniably be one of the greatest in its field. Excellent blog! Please take a look this:

Trackbacks for this post

  1. Fight Aging!
  2. Accelerating Future » Leading Countries Race Towards Nanotech
  3. Accelerating Future » Interview with George Dvorsky
  4. How does phentermine work.

Leave a Comment

Awesome! You've decided to leave a comment. Please keep in mind that comments are moderated.

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>