From: hal@226-132.adsl2.avtel.net
Date: Mon May 24 1999 - 12:36:30 MDT
Anders Sandberg, <asa@nada.kth.se>, writes:
> Sounds reasonable. But medical and avionics systems have to deal with
> fairly well defined environments; the number of things that might be
> thrown at ufog in an ordinary home (just imagine what the toddlers do)
> are astronomical. Hmm, that actually suggests an ufog problem: getting
> foglets into liquids where they shouldn't be - how can we guarantee
> that none of the fog gets into our food?
I had the impression that utility fog, despite the name, was more of a
gel than a fog. It does not have free-floating foglets, but rather it is
a contiguous material which flows around the inhabitants, always keeping
a small distance from them. It has lasers which constantly track the
eyes of the people living within it so that any desired scene can be
projected to them, making the fog invisible. It might not even have
to be extremely close to the inhabitants but perhaps could be several
inches away, much of the time.
There will presumably be pieces constantly breaking off due to failures,
so it is a legitimate concern that these be inert and unharmful when
breathed or swallowed. Hopefully the pieces would be very tiny and the
rate of such failures would be small enough that the health problems
would be minor.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:03:48 MST