Nano Innovations

Some thoughts, and cheesy video, that highlight our advances in Nanomedicine.


Create your own video slideshow at animoto.com.

Nano, Nano. (Apologies to Mork, and his "Nanu, Nanu.")

OK, so my first thought of "In-body nanobots that will construct microprocessors inside your body as needed" for our futuring exercise may be a little further out than I first thought (probably 20+ years). However, upon researching one possible thought along this line (microprocessors to supplement cognitive abilities when Alzheimer's sets in), I have found that NanoMedicine has a lot of activity and possibilities. Funding by organizations like the US National Institute of Health is backing a concerted effort to bring this technology to address selected medical problems in the way of micro engineering.

Our friend, Wikipedia, has an interesting entry for Nanomedicine, which can be seen at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanomedicine. Drug delivery using nano technologies, as well as cancer elimination are two leading uses being perfected at this time. A very interesting technique of welding protein together during surgery using nano particles is presented as a way to stop blood leaks.  A discussion of neuro-electronic interfaces is provided, which discusses the issues in creating microprocessor-like object 'in vivo’, which talks to my original thought of my original point.

In all, it looks like Nanomedicine is here to stay. Some of the Nanomedicine technologies are very imminent, while others are in the 20+ years category. While beneficial in concept, the deliverable part still needs to be sorted.

Gabcast! Evil Innovation

More Evil Info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_internet

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pool

Scientific American: Future projections:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=the-good-and-bad-future-of-the-inte-2010-02-22

DoD Flash drive attack:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5it0nGC2bWSH2MznAagcSPjsyg_JQD9HQNIK04

I have not had much luck finding a Web 2.0 tool that I think is cool. However, I did find a web-based product for scanning your computers for vulnerabilities. The product is called Nessus, which can be downloaded for free, to use at home. Using it in any other venue is a little pricey. ($1,200/yr subscription) Nessus has a local install component that allows for launching scanning actions against other PCs. (Hopefully, your PCs) Vulnerability tests are updated daily at a central Nessus server, and made available automatically to your Nessus client. The tool is very configurable, and can even look at network exposed database servers for problems. A short demo of this product can be seen on YouTube. The product download page is http://www.nessus.org/download/ .

I can see where a tool such as this could be used to audit newly developed or purchased internet-based programs and websites. I found two issues on my PC that I had not found before with other security tools that I have tested. The only drawback to security scanning tools like Nessus is that the operator needs to know networking and security concepts to get the best value from this class of product.

I am looking forward to feedback on this tool from others, whether it is pro or con.

SDP Case study review

The Structured Design Process (SDP) as presented by (Christakis, 2006) in his book "How People Harness Their Collective Wisdom and Power to Construct the Future in Co-Laboratories of Democracy" is an interesting approach as to how to better define and solve complex problems. Christakis presents and describes the SDP methodology and recounts how it has been successfully used in the past. Three key roles of stakeholders, facilitators, and inquiry design team are identified. The inquiry design team frames "triggering question" which is the "right question" (Levi-Strauss) to get the stakeholders engaged in delivering answers (Christakis' "content") that addresses the problem under examination.

One of the case studies presented by Christakis in his book was "Wisdom of the People Forum", in chapter 16. This was a forum of representatives of selected indigenous peoples from around the world, to consider the effects and issues of globalization. The first day session had a trigger question that asked for their insight as to the barriers to worldwide cooperation. Next they were asked to consider what action plan would help address the barriers. Finally, they constructed a consensus action scenario.

The interesting thing about this case study is how well this forum reflected the title of the book. ("How People Harness Their Collective Wisdom and Power to Construct the Future in Co-Laboratories of Democracy") Possibly, this was the source of inspiration for the title of the book.

One outcome in the conclusion of this case study was that several of the parent groups of indigenous peoples formed formal on-going alliances and communications with each other.

Dimensions of "-al" words for this case study:
Cultural - the perspectives of very old indigenous cultures are regarded  in the effects of advancing globalization.
Social - how barriers between peoples might be overcome, from the perspective of long established cultures.