Everything Is Going to Kill Everybody

by Robert Brockway

  We’ve established that it will be inside everybody eventually. Then what? Even supposing that nobody abuses the technology, its very nature makes even the most benevolent intent potentially lethal. Take the respirocytes proposed by nanoexpert Robert Freita: They’re a harmless application, just a kind of artificial red blood cell that pumps oxygen more efficiently and more stably than the natural equivalent—236 times more efficiently, to be precise. Because of this dramatically heightened performance, they would be invaluable in treating disorders such as anemia and asthma, or simply to oxygenate the blood for better endurance and performance in sporting events. In other words, they’re blood-borne nerd fixers.

  However, with higher doses of these nanobots, their hosts could also be able to do things like hold their breath for several hours and run at a dead sprint for nearly twenty minutes. And that’s great! How many of you would want to be able to do that? Now, how many of you want anybody else to be able to do that? Go ahead; raise your hand if you want sociopaths who breathe underwater, sprinting rapists, and serial killers who never tire.[2]

  Not to mention the worrying fact that these machines are by no means human-specific. The respirocytes take a kind of frat-boy approach to blood: If it’s warm, it needs to be pumped. No further distinctions need to be made. Also of concern is the fact that their durable outer shell and self-sustaining programming make them seriously hardy devices, easily capable of surviving and functioning outside of their intended environment for long durations. And when you factor in how easily they could spread—their transferability by blood and other bodily fluids—you start to get a worrisome picture. One bad accident at the local zoo with somebody hosting these nanobots and next thing you know, you’ve got untiring, superspeed pythons racing through the streets and a terrifying new version of sea lion roaring at the bottom of your pool. In an instant, the food chain is drastically reordered. Though the chief concern for now is just the effect a modified species could have on its local ecosystem, any supercharge in the efficiency of predators is the last thing we need.

  After all, humans are only at the top of our food chain because we’re smart enough to compensate for our insane physical incompetence as a species. So… maybe you should start studying. Because pretty soon, a billion tiny robots might be seriously hot-rodding up some grizzly bears, and you? Well, let’s just say you’re going to have to get a hell of a lot smarter in a big hurry if you plan on making it back from the store with both arms.

  10. GRAY GOO

  IF YOU’RE TALKING about nanotechnology at a party, two things are assured:

  1. Nobody is going to have sex with you in the foreseeable future, and…

  2. Somebody will bring up the Gray Goo Scenario.

  The term “Gray Goo,” for those of you probably too busy boning right now to read this, describes the danger of self-replicating nanomachines running amok, forgoing any meaningful objectives in favor of just endlessly reproducing themselves like tiny little robotic Irish Catholics. The term was originally coined by a man named Eric Drexler in 1986, in his book Engines of Creation. He called it this partly because nanotech was just being recognized as the next industrial wave of the future, and also because the far more awesome title, “Engines of Destruction,” was already taken by three Swedish metal bands, two monster trucks, and one particularly shitty mechanic.

  In his book, Drexler writes of Gray Goo as something akin to the Midas touch, the simple wish that everything you touch turns to gold, which leads to you dying of starvation, because you cannot eat gold. Here the simple wish is that you didn’t have to build every single goddamned microscopic robot by hand, which leads to your limbs being eaten by robots. Because if you encourage incredibly simple nanobots to build more of themselves, the danger is that they won’t know when to stop pulling apart matter for its raw building materials, then using those appropriated materials to build more robots, which, in turn, will do the same thing. If left unchecked, the nanobots would eventually break down everything into its core elements, effectively restructuring the entire planet into robots. While the idea of an entire planet turning into a robot may indeed make a sweet-ass plot for the next Transformers movie, the unfortunate consequence would be the end of all life as we know it. Not exactly worth the trade-off, in my opinion.

  Hindsight Is 20/20

  “I guess we shouldn’t have ‘encouraged’ those robots to eat people in order to build more people eating robots.”

  —Early nanotech scientist

  The terrifying notion of microscopic organisms pulling apart base matter and assembling more dangerous creatures isn’t exactly new. It was originally inspired by DNA, small molecules that break down raw materials and build more complex molecules from them. They gave structure to all life on Earth, and all a self-replicating nanobot does is follow this same concept, with the limiters pulled off. If you did the same thing to human beings, the results would be similar; we’re basically just destructive machines tearing up shit to build more of ourselves until there is nothing left on Earth but a mass of writhing bodies engaged in a gargantuan, planetary-scale accidental orgy.

  Luckily Eric Drexler wrote another essay years later that tells us that Gray Goo is just not ever going to happen. He assures us that there is simply no practical need for nanobots to be self-replicating, because it would make far more sense to build tiny “nanofactories” that manufacture completely nonreplicating robots. The factories themselves wouldn’t be autonomous; they’d be immobile and dependent on human resupply, so there would be absolutely no danger of infinite reproduction. Indeed, it would actually be much harder to engineer a single Gray Goo nanobot than it would these simple nanofactories. The factories themselves needn’t be microscopic, after all; they’re actually more likely to be somewhat large in scale—probably around the size of a photocopier. (You may want to keep this fact handy for future reference, lest ten years from now you find yourself at an office Christmas party, drunkenly attempting to photocopy your ass, but instead find that its base matter has been reappropriated into microscopic robots. The normal apocalypse is bad enough. We don’t need one made entirely out of drunken cubicle jockeys’ former butt cheeks.)

  Earnest Question

  Then why did you invent the entire concept, Eric Drexler?

  So it’s easier to build a factory to do the microscale work for you and, of course, there would also be less programming needed for the factory produced nanobots, because unlike the Gray Goo ’bots, they don’t need to procreate, just work. So while that kind of sucks for the little robots (no robot sex for you little guys; there is only work until death), it is pretty good for us; no disintegrating, just magic invisible construction workers! I know that’s a great concept, but do try to avoid saying that phrase out loud until this is common knowledge. It will only generate more odd stares at the person already laughing at a book about the apocalypse. You don’t need the help.

  Potential Names for This Rear-End Apocalypse

  • Asspocalypse

  • Catasstrophe

  But all these construction concerns pale in comparison to the fundamentals necessary for a Gray Goo ’bot to even function. Every nanobot would need to have five important capabilities, any one of which, if absent, would render the whole scenario impossible. First of all, to even acquire those building materials (read: your flesh) they would have to be mobile, and that’s a heftier task than you might imagine. Second, power is an issue: How do you power the microscopic nanobot, much less its even smaller nanoengine? It’s not like you pour thimbles of gas into its tiny fuel tank, as adorable as that would be; it needs an entirely new fuel source, and how do you come up with something like that that remains nontoxic to the human body?

  Handy Tips to Stop a Nanotech Infestation in Your Body

  • Live in a cave forever.

  • Swing your arms about wildly, as if swatting invisible insects.

  • Hide your blood.

  Horrifyingly, that’s how!

  Scientists re
cently broke this fuel barrier when they started powering medical nanobots with the reengineered tails of human sperm. It’s quite an elegant solution, really: Sperm are perfectly functioning, natural motors that power themselves solely on glucose, a chemical already naturally present in the human body. And this system also knocks down another barrier of the fundamental capabilities needed for a Goo-bot to function, which is combating the human metabolism. Glucose is a perfect fuel for any use within the human body, so these natural engines could be used on any biological robot, from cancer-fighting nanobots to system-enhancing modifications. Researchers are looking into using these things for anything from curing paralysis to reducing asthma. So on the plus side, there might just be a new weapon in the battle against disease. On the downside, that weapon is basically cum in your blood. Hey, at least homophobia will die off pretty quickly, when all bigots refuse treatment because their organs “ain’t no queers.”

  Potential Upsides to a Gray Goo Infestation in Your Body

  • You’ll never be alone again.

  • It probably tickles.

  • Parts of you will live forever! (Or at least long enough to disassemble your loved ones.)

  The third element a self-replicating nanobot would require to function would be an incredibly sturdy shell. Microscopic machines not only have to endure the intense atmospheric pressures of the body and atmosphere, but also need to fight off interference from sunlight, bacteria, temperature—basically everything. Sure, it’s a hard-knock life, nanobots, but that’s what you get for being a doomsday scenario. What did you expect, pity? You want to turn our stomachs into your children, nanobots; we have no sympathy for you here.

  The fourth fundamental is control, because what’s the point of having a roving, armored nanobot if it just wanders around aimlessly with no clear goal in mind, stumbling awkwardly through your blood with absolutely no purpose in life, like a tiny little robotic teenager?

  And finally, the last fundamental is that of fabrication: A nanobot would need to constantly carry around all the tools it needs to build more of itself, in addition to the tools needed for whatever job it was engineered for. These things are smaller than bacteria, so there’s not exactly room for a carry-on.

  All of this adds up to a simple realization: There’s just no call for a self-replicating nanobot. It is not only impractical, but actively dangerous. Why go through that if there’s an easier, cheaper, safer solution?

  See? Everything’s cool.

  No, really, buck up, friends! Those little robot fiends are impotent! Aside from tiny feelings of cybernetic frustration, a gaggle of wee unsatisfied female robots, and some itty-bitty inklings of machine inadequacy, there are no negative consequences!

  Nobody dies today!

  Why, Eric Drexler himself states that Gray Goo has become a scaremongering scenario that only takes away from more pressing concerns regarding nanotech. Chris Phoenix, Director of Research at the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, also states quite clearly that it is a nonissue:

  Runaway replication would only be the product of a deliberate and difficult engineering process, not an accident. Far more serious, however, is the possibility that a large-scale and convenient manufacturing capacity could be used to make powerful nonreplicating weapons in unprecedented quantity, leading to an arms race or war. Policy investigation into the effects of molecular nanotechnology should consider deliberate abuse as a primary concern, and runaway replication as a more distant issue.

  So that’s… comforting, I guess? He’s saying that Gray Goo won’t ever happen on accident! Admittedly, it would be slightly more comforting if he didn’t also say, practically in the same breath, that you shouldn’t worry about Gray Goo happening on accident, because it’s only going to happen on purpose, and even then only if far more terrifying things do not happen first. Jesus, hopefully nobody’s turning to cry on Phoenix’s shoulder, because he certainly didn’t get his doctorate in compassion.

  Better Names for Gray Goo

  • Steel Pudding

  • Robot Death Buffet

  • Reverse Voltron Disorder.

  However, who would ever want to engineer it on purpose? Gray Goo wouldn’t be appealing for military purposes because it’s so hard to control and so wantonly destructive. When other nanotech weapons can be used far more effectively to kill with control, who would want something that just randomly destroys life and sows chaos? Only psychopaths and terrorists want that kind of stuff.

  Oh, wait; we have a whole bunch of those around, don’t we?

  In light of this fact, the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology realized that they couldn’t scratch Gray Goo off their list of concerns just yet, but did add that it was a low-priority threat because there were “far more dangerous and imminent issues with nanotechnology.”

  There were far more dangerous issues than sperm-powered blood robots eating the Earth.

  That’s what they said.

  They think that’s comforting.

  “I’m so sorry, sir. You have terminal cancer. But don’t worry; it’s all going to be OK! You won’t be dying from the cancer… because I am going to shoot you in the face right now. Isn’t that reassuring?”

  No, Center for Responsible Nanotechnology, that is not comforting. I would suggest you offer hugs instead of these horrifying press releases, but judging by your previous “consolation” track record, I’m afraid you’d just end up whispering obscenities in people’s ears while punching their children.

  11. NANOLITTER

  WITH ALL THE CURRENT fearmongering about nanotechnology—most of which has been done within the confines of this book—it’s not actually very likely that the nanobots are going to build their children out of the last sad remnants of Earth or inspire a deadly new team of superanimals like the world’s tiniest Legion of Doom.

  But don’t worry, that doesn’t mean we’re not all going to die anyway!

  This is because even the most benevolent of nanobots share one simple, undeniable commonality: To achieve any major effects, there are going to have to be a lot of them and, though it is infinitesimal, they do take up some space. When their purpose is complete, they’ll deactivate and die off—unfortunately leaving their corpses where they lie.

  But so what? Aside from the hassle of having to construct a plethora of mini tombstones (and the rather gross prospect of microscopic widows getting grief fucked inside your teeth), how could this possibly affect you? Well, the primary application for a lot of this nanotech is going to be for health issues: improving stamina, boosting immune systems, and fighting off cancer. All those corpses are basically just litter, and the human body is their environment, which means that when they die, they die inside of you. And if you think this scenario—that you’ll be poisoned to death by the corpses of miniature robots that live inside your blood just like that hobo down by the library keeps screaming—sounds somewhat outlandish, then you should know one little thing: It’s already happening.

  The Five Stages of Grief

  • Denial

  • Anger

  • Bargaining

  • Acceptance

  • Grief fucking

  Take, for instance, the scientists over at Kraft foods—scientists whose job, ordinarily, probably consists of formulating the perfect Dora the Explorer pasta shape-to-cheese ratio—are instead currently working on new types of nanoparticles to add to beverages. They plan to create “interactive beverages” that will shift colors and patterns according to your input. So on the plus side, you can have green beer whenever you want it, but the trade-off is that it’s potentially full of superpoisons. Some would argue that these risks dramatically outweigh the benefits here, but those people probably haven’t spent their entire lives wishing beyond hope that their Coke would turn pink when they rubbed it. Clearly, those bastards just don’t understand the dream.

  Kraft Interactive Mood Beverages

  • Angry Cherry

  • Depression Blueberry

 
• Jealous-Rage Sour Apple

  • On-the-Prowl Pink

  • Willing-to-Settle Gray

  OK, so nanoparticles aren’t exactly murderous microscopic robots. They actually have a lot of positive effects, and are being used in vastly increasing numbers across myriad products, from paint to socks, makeup to underwear. Their upsides are easy to see: They can have a lot of useful effects, cost very little to produce, and take up almost no space in existing products. Most of what we know about them is quite beneficial; it’s the stuff we don’t know that’s worrisome.

  Back in March 2002, the EPA found the first inklings of the problems to come, when a study they’d conducted found nanoparticles cropping up in the livers of research animals. This warranted urgent further study, seeing as how nanotech was on the verge of becoming the world’s largest emerging industry. Researchers at the University of Rochester Medical Center quickly confirmed that at least one kind of nanoparticle could indeed penetrate the skin, and from there seep into the bloodstream. Those particles are called quantum dots, and they’re on the smaller end of the nanoparticle scale. They are often used in makeup and sunblock, which is unfortunate, considering how they seep through skin like that—but even more unfortunate when you consider that UV light, like from the sun, actually facilitates absorption of the dots. So the thing you use to protect yourself from the sun is actually rendered harmful and then activated and inserted into your body by the mere presence of sunlight. Apparently the engineers in charge of quantum dot production got their doctorates in Irony from Incompetent University.