The Machine Who Will Be Loved

The main contention between Drexler and Smalley is the meaning and representation of nanotechnology in the transition of atoms and their structure. Drexler disagrees with Smalley's analogy, which he compares molecular assemblers as having multiple "fingers" that manipulate individual atoms and suffer from so-called fat finger and sticky finger problems and states that chemistry cold require something [nanbots] to form atoms together. Drexler develops his ethos by providing Smalley to change his interpretation of nanotechnology, which Drexler says he defines and defends the true theory of such subject throughout his thesis. Smalley believes that nanotechnology relates to the composition of chemistry, which is why the pieces don't just fall together in place by magic. The strategies that they used against each other is their beliefs and facts found through scientific data. Drexler's side is more realistic, by the fact that no proof has been found of nanotechnology or robots that have their own "minds", therefore, for now it doesn't exist. Also, if there were nanobots, why haven't we seen a prototype?