Regarding the commentary on "Nanotechnology -- Revolutionizing Medicine and Materials," Hunter Walk remarks:

"One of the coolest nanotechnology ideas was to imbue paints with nanotech agents. The idea is that if you want a stereo speaker on a wall - go paint a square on a wall and send a message (electrical charge, in my dreams an infrared beam) to the nanotechs telling them to arrange into 'speaker formation.'"

On the article "U.S. Homeland Security Agency is Unavoidable," and Bruno Behrend writes:

"Let me be frank in the hope that readers see the choices in the proper context. It would be better to allow a certain number of 'horrific terrorist acts' than to destroy the liberty of 280 million (marginally free) people. A 'central intelligence agency' of the type discussed in your article will soon be sifting e-mail, monitoring the press, checking red-light traffic cameras, etc. etc. All in the name of national security. The fact is that terrorist acts will occur anyway. I argue in favor of reducing government intrusion into our lives. A 'Homeland Security Agency' is an open invitation to intrusion. The seemingly tiny freedom of 280 million individuals living their lives unimpeded and unmonitored is no small thing. It is the foundation of our nation. If a few buildings with a few people in them are the price we pay for that, so be it."

... and Ashley D'Cruz writes:

"While I don't think that an agency in charge of internal security is necessarily a bad idea, I do think that most organizations of this sort are often very regressive and often unconcerned with individual freedom and human rights. I think there is one thing to keep in mind, most terrorist actions have a cause which often has a degree of legitimacy. For instance, McVeigh claimed to be annoyed with the handling of the Waco Branch Davidian action. The Embassy bombings, if organized by Bin Laden, were a protest against continual U.S. deployment near Mecca. And while I certainly do not condone or even claim to understand violence as a political weapon, it needs to be admitted that even the word terrorism is relative. History is obviously spun by those in power and terrorism is a relative word. My point is simply that any organization should do more on the diplomacy front than the military front. Personally I feel efforts to prevent violence would be more fruitful if we try to curb excessive firearm purchases within the country and employ less imperialistic foreign policies. Neither would require any more cost than a national security agency and both measures would have a greater efficacy in fighting violence."

--------------------------------

Send Summation Push to a colleague.

--------------------------------

FRIENDS OF AUREN

[this section updates you an interesting person that is a member of Auren Inc]

Neil Weintraut, General Partner at 21st Century Internet Venture Partners

I met Neil a little more than three years ago when he was on the Board of a company called CareerBuilder and he stopped by my office to chat. Since then, I've seen Neil almost every month as he has become a co-host of the Silicon Forum -- a gathering of elite Silicon Valley opinion makers to discuss public policy -- an event which I chair.

At 21st Century Internet, Neil and his partner has invested in companies like When.com, AdForce, AvantGo, and Vicinity. Before founding 21st Century Internet Venture Partners () Neil led the Internet practice at Hambrecht & Quist where we was a partner and helped take companies like Netscape, UUNET, and Lycos public. Neil holds an MBA from Wharton and a BSEE from Drexel University.

See past profiled people at: http://www.summation.net/friends.html.