smoth as sandpaper 230 Report post Posted April 29, 2007 think having the US assist south african nanotech research would work well for a plan? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Synergy 2990 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 1 off- Virilio.kind of a bad impact when you think about it though (compared to case). there're no specific turn Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ElThies 30 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 think having the US assist south african nanotech research would work well for a plan? thats kind of what i was thinking too, but is there any good ev on the fact that Nanotech in S. Africa spreads to other parts of africa/the world? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
"Z" 53 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 1 off- Virilio. what is Virilio? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ElThies 30 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 what is Virilio? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Virilio Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lemur 492 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 is there anyone who is cutting this aff that can inform me on how it would be run and what this "grey goo" stuff is. our school usually competes in small local tournaments and this aff sounds like something fun to run. unfortunately i dont know much on nanotech. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedowned 6 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 kind of a bad impact when you think about it though (compared to case). there're no specific turn nano tech --> nano-terrorism --> K turns case Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedowned 6 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 what is Virilio? A criticism on the development and use of nano-technology and cyber-technology. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VLORD 268 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 From what I know about nanotech is that NASA put out an article somewhere stating that nanotech is actually very dangerous for people now and due to its size it is nearly impossible to detect, so nothing is stopping it from going into your body and mutating. This is all in the report NASA filed, and I wish I had it on me... Anyway, if you are going nanotech, make sure that you prove that it won't have these side effects which would make your case really bad, additionally it would cost $$$$ and lots of it if you wanted to make enough for all of SSA. Just an FYI. Other than that, the case sounds interesting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
"Z" 53 Report post Posted April 30, 2007 From what I know about nanotech is that NASA put out an article somewhere stating that nanotech is actually very dangerous for people now and due to its size it is nearly impossible to detect, so nothing is stopping it from going into your body and mutating. This is all in the report NASA filed, and I wish I had it on me... Anyway, if you are going nanotech, make sure that you prove that it won't have these side effects which would make your case really bad, additionally it would cost $$$$ and lots of it if you wanted to make enough for all of SSA. Just an FYI. Other than that, the case sounds interesting. i don't think that it would cost money cause there is good evidence out there saying nanotech can bread down stuff at an atomic scale and build it back up to make something new--aka nanotech replication so if they can break down anything i say u put them in a trash dump and have them replicate untill there are billions of them and thos nanos can solve the environment adv or what ever external body ones u want, or u could say that those nanos will build nano replicating machined (what i was thinking they were was something like machines that convert trash into nanotech) which would be able make life injections of nanotech that would be injected into the body. but i definatly think the ability of nano tech to change atoms makes it almost impossible for this aff to cost TON's of money, and in addition tons of money is a relative term. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SPEWdaSPanishjEW 7 Report post Posted May 2, 2007 Im writing this case currently but im having problems witha plan txt and inherency ... 1 wat plan txts do u think is the most fesable and 2 anyone have any sources/cites for inherency Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
supersteph6590 10 Report post Posted May 2, 2007 for inherency isn't Russia making nanotech its top priority a barrier, because it will beat the U.S. to developing nanotech Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seraph617 5 Report post Posted May 2, 2007 how would you solve for transhumanism? it seems that every solvency mechanism for that advantage would involve putting some sort of R&D into nanotech, which would make the case very extra-T also, i'm not really sure why a nanotech aff specifically would be sweet if there are probably cheaper ways to solve the diseases that we just don't give to people in SSA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SPEWdaSPanishjEW 7 Report post Posted May 2, 2007 the us is also making it a top priority it just got approved in commited for a billion going toward nanotechnology research and development how is this case inherent .... i was thinking maybe the ability to test on humyn subjects is less strict than in america and send funds to the university of south africa Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ElThies 30 Report post Posted May 3, 2007 I think the inherency will be a significant problem, esp. since most a2: wipeout backfiles have extensive "nanotech inev" cards. Also, I don't think that working with S. Africa would be really topical b/c there is no way to make sure that the tech gets spread to the rest of SSA. Plus, I can't imagine the people of what-ever area you are trying to solve for are going to submit to the testing/treatment esp. if they know that little robots will be swimming around in their blood-stream. PICs are a proble with writing the plan text as well, it seems the US would develop stuff faster if they worked with a country like China, Russia ect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EveBYoung 156 Report post Posted May 3, 2007 i have no idea if this case is inherent or not, but: the fact that there are nano-tech inevitable cards doesn't hurt the aff. just because it's inevitable doesn't mean it's happened yet, and if it's inevitable than you can use that strategically as an answer to certain neg. positions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Synergy 2990 Report post Posted May 3, 2007 i have no idea if this case is inherent or not, but: the fact that there are nano-tech inevitable cards doesn't hurt the aff. just because it's inevitable doesn't mean it's happened yet, and if it's inevitable than you can use that strategically as an answer to certain neg. positions. nano inev, it's a q of who gets it first - us or the bad guys Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lemur 492 Report post Posted May 3, 2007 inev. or not does has anyone found inherency of some sort? is anyone in SSA developing it b/c if not then that could be some small sort of inh. very weak, but at least its something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mbv 1082 Report post Posted May 4, 2007 I think a few "terrorists on the brink of nanotech/bad guys almost got it" cards will prove reason enough to do plan. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ElThies 30 Report post Posted May 5, 2007 I think a few "terrorists on the brink of nanotech/bad guys almost got it" cards will prove reason enough to do plan. I haven't heard anything about terrorists getting nanotech, but if you search "China nanoweapons attack US" you can build an entire aff out of the first page of searches Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhapsodyofred 43 Report post Posted May 5, 2007 Nanotech aff would be pretty sweet. I haven't heard of anyone besdes scientists having it yet... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
"Z" 53 Report post Posted May 8, 2007 i was researching this aff, but i dont think that you can acess the Big debate without some good evidence saying it sparks the nanotech revolution that nanowriters are talking about. cause right now i see this limited to something like S'quo SSA =/= nanotech now lots of public health issues in SSA ADV 1 new Diseases will emerge south china morning post 96 they are bad = Nuke war fox 98 Nano tech solves for everything maybe something like we break down the barrier between the "real" science and "science fiction" (a good answer to all the neg claims that nanotech is just Scifi) but has anyone found anything about how to tie this to SSA? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
blingice 25 Report post Posted May 8, 2007 doesn't donna haraway advocate hella cyborgness? could her ev be used in a a kritikal advantage...medical nanotech could be defined as cyborgism. maybe i'm just straight trippin... Yea I don't think her advocacy is in any way related to this aff. Could be wrong though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guam 43 Report post Posted July 7, 2007 Yea I don't think her advocacy is in any way related to this aff. Could be wrong though. Peep John Cook's use of the Cyborgs with DADT on the National Service topic. K debates are a lot of times about ethos, and how you spin it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steez 30 Report post Posted December 21, 2007 if you wanted to take it critical, you could get into the donna haraway evidence... according to her, embracing cyborgism is key to pretty much everything good. that'd be a very interesting case Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
