<![CDATA[io9: nano]]> http://tags.lifehacker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/io9.com.png <![CDATA[io9: nano]]> http://io9.com/tag/nano http://io9.com/tag/nano <![CDATA[Nanotech Could Make Nuclear Weapons Much, Much Tinier]]> Are you ready for nano-weapons of mass destruction? Nanotechnology could be used to create "miniaturized nuclear weapons" that would have virtually no fallout, and super-efficient bioterrorism, warns Jane's Defense Quarterly. And they could be triggered with a super-laser!

A new article in the Miami Herald raises a terrifying prospect for nanotech warfare:

Jane's, the London-based research group that publishes the industry standard Jane's All the World's Aircraft, warns that nanotechnology can be used to create entirely new hazards such as miniaturized nuclear weapons that are smaller, lighter, easier to transport and hide and smuggle into unsuspecting countries. It says nano techniques designed to deliver medicines in a more-targeted way also can deliver toxic substances in a form of bioterrorism.

Nanotechnology, in which materials are machined on a molecule-by-molecule, or atom-by-atom basis, could produce super-nukes that are so tiny, they don't technically qualify as weapons of mass destruction, Jane's has warned in past articles.

In one 2003 article, Jane's warns that "some advanced technology, such as superlaser" could trigger a relatively small thermonuclear explosion involving a deuterium-tritium mixture, in a device weighing no more than a few kilograms. The device could go from a fraction of a ton to "many tens of tons" of high-explosive equivalent yield, and because they use little to no fissionable materials, they would have "virtually no radioactive fallout." Self-replicating nanotech could also produce conventional weapons in such quantities that they would become WMDs.

Are you scared yet?

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5377752&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Must Read: X-Men: New X-Men Omnibus]]> New%20Xmen%20Omnibus.jpg Must-read comics are futuristic classics that shouldn't be missed. Of course, not every must-read is perfect. That's why we've rated them 1-5 on the patented "crunchy goodness" scale.

Title: New X-Men Omnibus

Date: 2007 (reprinting material from 2001 - 2004).

Vitals: Given the task of refocusing Marvel's X-Men franchise in the wake of the first movie, Scottish writer Grant Morrison twisted the formula around 180 degrees - What if mutations were becoming the norm and the human race was faced with extinction? What would that do to culture, to the role of the X-Men themselves, to their former villains? His answer came in a three-year run on the comic - now collected in one massive hardcover - that worked both as highbrow intellectual piece and mass-audience thriller.

Famous names: Writer Grant Morrison, artists Frank Quietly and Phil Jiminez. And Magneto who was, apparently, right.

Crunchy goodness: 4

Design breakthrough: Morrison's first issue of the series was spent partially taking the characters out of their superhero outfits, with the characters talking about the change: "Suddenly I don't have to look like an idiot in broad daylight."

Most painfully dated moment: Nano-robots threatening to eradicate an entire species? How turn of the century can you get?

Deadliest spoiler: Men with iron masks should never be trusted. What is this world of liars, Xorn?

Review of New X-Men Omnibus at Pop Matters

]]>
http://io9.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=314816&view=rss&microfeed=true