Most of the work being done today that carries the name "nanotechnology" is not nanotechnology in the original meaning of the word.
Nanotechnology, in its traditional sense, means building things from the bottom up, with atomic precision. This theoretical capability was envisioned as early as 1959 by the renowned physicist Richard Feynman.
In recent years, both governments and companies have adopted a far broader definition of the word, essentially meaning any work being done on the scale of 1 to 100 nanometers. This is important work and valuable work, but in many cases, it is not fundamentally different from what has been done before. Societal impacts of this work may be significant, but they almost all will be incremental impacts — not transformative — and can be dealt with using existing systems, institutions, and solutions.
To distinguish this broad and diverse field of work from the original meaning of nanotechnology, CRN refers to most of what is being done today as "nanoscale technologies."
By contrast, advanced nanotechnology promises the ability to build atomically precise machines and components of molecular size. Using mechanically guided chemistry, rapid prototyping, and automated convergent assembly, an integrated system of productive nanosystems — what we call a nanofactory — could combine these molecular components into large and complex products, including additional nanofactories.
Unfortunately, conflicting definitions of nanotechnology and blurry distinctions between two radically different fields have complicated the effort to understand the differences and develop sensible, effective policy.
The risks of today's nanoscale technologies (nanoparticle toxicity, etc.) cannot be treated the same as the risks of longer-term molecular manufacturing (economic disruption, unstable arms race, etc.). It is a mistake to put them together in one basket for policy consideration — each is important to address, but they offer different problems and will require different solutions.