CPSC's goal is no longer to protect kids from bite-sized magnets — BuckyBalls are off the market. Their only goal now is to personally destroy Zucker for daring to question ridiculous federal bureaucrats.
DNA does not float around loose in the body, it is protected by the wall of the nucleus and then by the cell wall itself. A C60 buckyball would be too big to get through either membrane, so I'm not too concerned by this anti-nanotech scaremongering. Ordinary candle soot contains C60 buckyball molecules and that doesn't exactly mutate people into X-men does it.
This is interesting. Computer simulations say Buckyballs may cause damage to DNA, while experimental data suggests it could prolong life, doubling the lifespan of rats in this case: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142961212003237
I'd love to see a few independent researchers verifying the results.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.