Nanotechnology

[Ellie Mors]

There's no discussion prefix, or question oddly, so I'm just going to leave that blank..

Anyways, there's been some discussion about Nanotechnology recently (mostly because someone assumed nanites can operate like some sort of omnipotent deity and rebuild the dead and various other godmodium powers) and there was mention of it being not allowed or outright banned (which isn't the case to my memory, as it isn't posted in this forum or as a banned item in the factory).

So, more of a question to those above, is nanotechnology permitted to the factory? And if that hinges on responsibility, is there a way we should go about restricting and heavily enforcing strict policies on how it should be done? Up until now the only nanotechnology I've seen (which amounts to a single submission last year) was heavily policed and restricted for construction purposes only, and even that was strictly monitored in the judging process.

There is a reasonable fear that nanotechnology could be used like a supervirus or a world eating-monster-machine-terror thing. I'm not saying we should allow that, just like we don't allow viruses that do the same thing, but I'd like to know if there would be measures that could be taken to ensure that nanotechnology put into the factory can properly be approved under a relatively standardized understanding of how limited such technology should be - or should we ban it?

[member="Spencer Jacobs"]

 

[Allyson Locke]

[member="Braith"] To me, Nanotech can be manipulated in such a way that it could be on par as a super weapon. Because of this reason I'm opening to banning it as a tech in the Factory. I am open to hearing what the rest of the staff feels about it though.


As of now, I'm banning it unless someone can provide me with a reason to keep it available.

 

[Valiens Nantaris]

Having created a 'species' using nano-technology to make them a super-soldier (with limits and weaknesses etc) it can be done fairly.

I think like everything it should be down to the judge's discretion.

I think it could benefit from going on the Restricted items list with some sort of quest to obtain it like the other items there. That would weed out most entries, and judges can easily assess whether the rest are balanced enough.

 

[Alric Kuhn]

I'm inclined to agree with Peter, though I don't think it should even be on the restricted tech list.

It should simply be watched for in submissions and then reacted to accordingly. I think creating more and more rules and restrictions just makes things worse and overall harms the environment. How often is nanotech submitted? Like maybe once a month? Subs aren't hard to judge and most of the time its small things.

Not necessary imo.

 

[Sanya Val Lerium]

I think there should just be rules around this technology.

If it's created for a single purpose for the sake of a good story. (Like I created an op device for the sake of story and reassured judges it's full intent)

If the device is to build and not destroy
It can't used for the holy godmode
It can't be used as a super virus

Just simple guidelines like that should make it okay. Also the company making them has to have nano tech as their production, and a 500 post dev developing it with so many unique writers active through out.

 

[Ellie Mors]

I think the whole notion of 500 posts of development is a bit insane.

Honestly I am perfectly fine with it being banned, as well as it being allowed. I just feel that if it were to be allowed it would need to be held to the same sort of restrictions seen in canon.

This means no super-building nanites, no world-eating plagues, no genetic engineering nanites, and so on.

Obviously I think it would be perfectly fine letting the factory judges go through this on a case by case basis, but Spencer is the boss and I am perfectly okay with her judgement.

 

[Laira Darkhold]

Eh
Not a fan, but if its reasonable and not a weapon, sure.

People think Nanites and they think 'The Day the Earth Stood Still'. If they aren't self replicating, then case by case is easy enough.

 

[Asemir]

Please define nanotechnology.

Current real world definitions include anything from gray goo scenarios to simple medications that are injected into the bloodstream and deployed at a future date. Something as simple as materials engineering or genetherapy is technically nanotechnology. I know we are all talking about the more spectacular versions of nanotech, but do keep in mind that "nanotechnology" as a term is very broad. You'll want to be more specific in your definition.

Also, I assume previously approved nanotech-related submissions will be grandfathered into whatever rule is determined?

 

[Cira]

I'm inclined to agree with Peter, though I don't think it should even be on the restricted tech list.

It should simply be watched for in submissions and then reacted to accordingly. I think creating more and more rules and restrictions just makes things worse and overall harms the environment. How often is nanotech submitted? Like maybe once a month? Subs aren't hard to judge and most of the time its small things.

Not necessary imo.

I'm of the mindset. Case by case basis. I've yet to see a report on nanotechnology, and it will still require a FJ To judge a sub and then an admin to review to stamp. Then, like anything else, if it is abused it is reported.

 

[Gir Quee]

I also would go with a case-by-case basis.

I think that the "nanotechnology" part by itself is just a means to an ends. If it's too powerful and game breaking, deny it just like any other sub. If it doesn't horribly alter balance, I don't see an issue with it.