
Universal ‘Rubik’s Cube’ Could Become Pentagon Shapeshifter - mjfern
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/universal-rubiks-cube-could-become-pentagon-shapeshifter
======
mnemonicsloth
It's cool to see ideas like DNA Origami getting researchers' attention. But it
might be better to get the information from further up the food chain.

Drexler collects some nice background papers here:

[http://metamodern.com/2009/05/22/a-third-revolution-in-
dna-n...](http://metamodern.com/2009/05/22/a-third-revolution-in-dna-
nanotechnology/)

------
peregrine
See when everyone tells me the USA is on the down trend I point to stories
like these. Where else in the world are technologies being produced like this?

I understand Japan and India and Europe have great technological feats and
strong science programs but nobody compares to the US when it comes to
research and development.

~~~
Confusion
I'm sure you like to believe that, but I doubt you have any data to back that
up. You probably just think it obvious from everything you hear and read, but
the slightest chauvinist tendency is enough to tilt the amount of perceived
evidence strongly into the direction that confirms your bias.

~~~
peregrine
I see that your only defense is that I am exhibiting a bias. And I agree its a
bias, but do you have any data to say that I am wrong?

~~~
Confusion
No, but neither do you and that was my point. I'm not saying you are wrong;
I'm saying there is no reason to believe you are right.

It's pretty hard to quantify technological development. Other commenters
provide some financial arguments, but is there a reason to believe that the
number of innovative/creative/breakthrough technologies being developed
depends on the amount of money spent on research? I don't think so: the way
that money is distributed is all important and can turn the table entirely.
The US may well be interested in spending a few billion on hardening the steel
on their tanks a bit further. It's definitely R&D, but it's unlikely something
groundbreaking will come of it.

The answer to the question 'where else are technologies being produced like
this' is: everywhere. The question is: how much? We are interested in
something like the aggregate 'technological improvement' times 'impact on
society' or something. If anyone has numbers on that, I will gladly concede
victory to whoever turns out to be at the top.

~~~
peregrine
Then why such strong attacks? I've always thought it was common knowledge that
the US government spends trillions more then any other nation in the Millitary
and a large portion of that spending goes to R&D. I apologize and in the
future I will present links.

~~~
anamax
> I've always thought it was common knowledge that the US government spends
> trillions more then any other nation in the Military

The link presented above,
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federatio...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_federations_by_military_expenditures#Stockholm_International_Peace_Research_Institute_figures_.282007.29)
says that the US spends a bit over $650B (650E9) on its military. That link
also says that the world total is under $1.5T (1.5E12) and that the NATO total
(including the US) is a bit over $1T.

So, if it's "common knowledge that the US government spends trillions more
then any other nation in the Military", said common knowledge appears to be
significantly wrong.

Note that most US military spending is not R&D.

------
mattmichielsen
Have you seen this boy?

~~~
TheSOB88
No.

