His position seems to be that Drexler-style nanotechnology is theoretically possible, but that developing it would be very difficult.
I do not think that Drexler’s alternative approach – based
on mechanical devices made from rigid materials – fundamentally contradicts any physical laws, but I fear that its
proponents underestimate the problems that certain features
of the nanoworld will pose for it. The close tolerances that
we take for granted in macroscopic engineering will be very
difficult to achieve at the nano-scale because the machines
will be shaken about so much by Brownian motion. Finding
ways for surfaces to slide past each other without sticking
together or feeling excessive friction is going to be difficult.
A hypothetical superintelligence might find it easier...
Yes, that seems to be is main argument against Drexler’s vision, though I wonder if he thinks it’s difficult to come up with a design that would be robust, or if the kind of nanotechnology would be difficult to implement since it requires certain conditions such as vacuum close to 0 kelvin, which might be a bit cumbersome even for a superintelligence(?) unless you hang out a lot in space.
His position seems to be that Drexler-style nanotechnology is theoretically possible, but that developing it would be very difficult.
A hypothetical superintelligence might find it easier...
Yes, that seems to be is main argument against Drexler’s vision, though I wonder if he thinks it’s difficult to come up with a design that would be robust, or if the kind of nanotechnology would be difficult to implement since it requires certain conditions such as vacuum close to 0 kelvin, which might be a bit cumbersome even for a superintelligence(?) unless you hang out a lot in space.