Feeds
02-20-2008, 07:00 AM
<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.engadget.com/category/gadgets/" rel="tag">Misc. Gadgets</a></p><div align="center"><a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215151215.htm"><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" src="http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2008/02/2-19-08-nanotech-footloose.jpg" alt="" /></a><br /></div>
Given the fact that most of the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/nanotechnology">nanotech</a> developments we've seen have to do with making smaller <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/26/researchers-develop-nanochip-based-on-babbages-difference-engin/">transistors</a> or generating <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/nanowires">electricity</a>, we're not exactly sure why a recent study conducted by the researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison found that two-thirds of American think nanotechnology is "morally unacceptable" -- perhaps they didn't hear about that team that used nanotech to <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/24/scientists-inscribe-entire-bible-onto-pinhead/">inscribe the Bible</a> on the head of a pin? Overall, Americans were far less accepting of pint-size technology than other countries -- 72 percent of French respondents thought nanotech was morally okay, as did 54 percent of the UK residents polled and 62 percent of the Germans. Still, we're left wondering why <em>anyone</em> would find a reason to object to nanotechnology -- unlike biotech, we just don't see a lot of moral dilemmas posed by the research. Well, apart from that whole gray goo thing -- but if that's the risk we have to take to finally score a pair of <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/11/georgia-tech-researchers-develop-environmentally-powered-nanogen/">electric pants</a>, you can sign us right up.<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href=http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215151215.htm>Read</a> | <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/20/two-thirds-of-americans-think-nanotechnology-is-morally-unaccept/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1119330/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/20/two-thirds-of-americans-think-nanotechnology-is-morally-unaccept/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p><hr />
<p><a href="http://feeds.engadget.com/~a/weblogsinc/engadget?a=QhmZqk"><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~a/weblogsinc/engadget?i=QhmZqk" border="0"></img></a></p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?a=QNDyiTe"><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?i=QNDyiTe" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?a=tZ31age"><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?i=tZ31age" border="0"></img></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~4/238122685" height="1" width="1"/>
More... (http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/238122685/)
Given the fact that most of the <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/nanotechnology">nanotech</a> developments we've seen have to do with making smaller <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/07/26/researchers-develop-nanochip-based-on-babbages-difference-engin/">transistors</a> or generating <a href="http://www.engadget.com/tag/nanowires">electricity</a>, we're not exactly sure why a recent study conducted by the researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison found that two-thirds of American think nanotechnology is "morally unacceptable" -- perhaps they didn't hear about that team that used nanotech to <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/12/24/scientists-inscribe-entire-bible-onto-pinhead/">inscribe the Bible</a> on the head of a pin? Overall, Americans were far less accepting of pint-size technology than other countries -- 72 percent of French respondents thought nanotech was morally okay, as did 54 percent of the UK residents polled and 62 percent of the Germans. Still, we're left wondering why <em>anyone</em> would find a reason to object to nanotechnology -- unlike biotech, we just don't see a lot of moral dilemmas posed by the research. Well, apart from that whole gray goo thing -- but if that's the risk we have to take to finally score a pair of <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/11/georgia-tech-researchers-develop-environmentally-powered-nanogen/">electric pants</a>, you can sign us right up.<p style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"> </p><p><a href=http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215151215.htm>Read</a> | <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/20/two-thirds-of-americans-think-nanotechnology-is-morally-unaccept/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.engadget.com/forward/1119330/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a> | <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/20/two-thirds-of-americans-think-nanotechnology-is-morally-unaccept/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a></p><hr />
<p><a href="http://feeds.engadget.com/~a/weblogsinc/engadget?a=QhmZqk"><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~a/weblogsinc/engadget?i=QhmZqk" border="0"></img></a></p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?a=QNDyiTe"><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?i=QNDyiTe" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?a=tZ31age"><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~f/weblogsinc/engadget?i=tZ31age" border="0"></img></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~4/238122685" height="1" width="1"/>
More... (http://feeds.engadget.com/~r/weblogsinc/engadget/~3/238122685/)