Comments on: Of hypes and cycles http://mndoci.com/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/ ruminations on science, data and computing by Deepak Singh Sat, 04 Sep 2010 08:35:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: » We are always between the hype and the naysayers » business|bytes|genes|molecules http://mndoci.com/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/comment-page-1/#comment-69128 » We are always between the hype and the naysayers » business|bytes|genes|molecules Tue, 23 Oct 2007 04:22:20 +0000 http://mndoci.com/blog/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/#comment-69128 [...] Further reading Of hypes and cycles [...] [...] Further reading Of hypes and cycles [...]

]]> By: Jean-Claude Bradley http://mndoci.com/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/comment-page-1/#comment-269221 Jean-Claude Bradley Mon, 22 Oct 2007 11:55:03 +0000 http://mndoci.com/blog/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/#comment-269221 That has also been a pet peeve of mine. What people now call nanotechnology - doing anything at the "nano" scale is not new for the most part. By that definition anything a chemist does is nanotech because they manipulate molecules.<br><br>The kind of thing Eric Drexler was talking about in Nanosystems is true nanotechnology - building complicated machines at the molecular level that actually do something useful.<br><br>As long as we reward people to hype they will continue doing it. This is one reason I think that trying to "quantify the quality" of scientific posts on social software using votes and citations is dangerous. The truest represention of a scientific experiment is usually the dullest. But that is a rant for another time.... That has also been a pet peeve of mine. What people now call nanotechnology – doing anything at the “nano” scale is not new for the most part. By that definition anything a chemist does is nanotech because they manipulate molecules.

The kind of thing Eric Drexler was talking about in Nanosystems is true nanotechnology – building complicated machines at the molecular level that actually do something useful.

As long as we reward people to hype they will continue doing it. This is one reason I think that trying to “quantify the quality” of scientific posts on social software using votes and citations is dangerous. The truest represention of a scientific experiment is usually the dullest. But that is a rant for another time….

]]> By: Jean-Claude Bradley http://mndoci.com/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/comment-page-1/#comment-68944 Jean-Claude Bradley Mon, 22 Oct 2007 10:55:03 +0000 http://mndoci.com/blog/2007/10/21/of-hypes-and-cycles/#comment-68944 That has also been a pet peeve of mine. What people now call nanotechnology - doing anything at the "nano" scale is not new for the most part. By that definition anything a chemist does is nanotech because they manipulate molecules. The kind of thing Eric Drexler was talking about in Nanosystems is true nanotechnology - building complicated machines at the molecular level that actually do something useful. As long as we reward people to hype they will continue doing it. This is one reason I think that trying to "quantify the quality" of scientific posts on social software using votes and citations is dangerous. The truest represention of a scientific experiment is usually the dullest. But that is a rant for another time.... That has also been a pet peeve of mine. What people now call nanotechnology – doing anything at the “nano” scale is not new for the most part. By that definition anything a chemist does is nanotech because they manipulate molecules.

The kind of thing Eric Drexler was talking about in Nanosystems is true nanotechnology – building complicated machines at the molecular level that actually do something useful.

As long as we reward people to hype they will continue doing it. This is one reason I think that trying to “quantify the quality” of scientific posts on social software using votes and citations is dangerous. The truest represention of a scientific experiment is usually the dullest. But that is a rant for another time….

]]>