The stuff Yudkowsky is reacting to is in ‘Nanosystems’ by Drexler. Looking in ‘Engines of Creation’ gets you the popularization, not the solid physics and chemistry. That’s all in ‘Nanosystems’, which shows how machines built out of covalently-bonded materials can be much more capable than biology. You may disagree with the arguments presented there, in which case I’d be very interested in your arguments. Unfortunately, by reacting to popularizations and tweets, you’ve inadvertently fought some straw men instead of your real opponent.
As another comment points out, when Yudkowsky says ‘proteins are held together’ he means how they are held to each other, not how they are held internally.
It’s somewhat of an exaggeration to say that proteins are held to each other by static cling. There are also hydrogen bonds. So it is more correct to say that they are held by static cling and surface tension.
The stuff Yudkowsky is reacting to is in ‘Nanosystems’ by Drexler. Looking in ‘Engines of Creation’ gets you the popularization, not the solid physics and chemistry. That’s all in ‘Nanosystems’, which shows how machines built out of covalently-bonded materials can be much more capable than biology. You may disagree with the arguments presented there, in which case I’d be very interested in your arguments. Unfortunately, by reacting to popularizations and tweets, you’ve inadvertently fought some straw men instead of your real opponent.
As another comment points out, when Yudkowsky says ‘proteins are held together’ he means how they are held to each other, not how they are held internally.
It’s somewhat of an exaggeration to say that proteins are held to each other by static cling. There are also hydrogen bonds. So it is more correct to say that they are held by static cling and surface tension.