3 ms·
The main difference is that none of the ones you mentioned really spreads. bioweapons and computer viruses are made to spread in a viral way, without the expli
by ehsankia 8y ago
The main difference is that none of the ones you mentioned really spreads.
bioweapons and computer viruses are made to spread in a viral way, without the explicit intervention of humans. So once it's out there, it can't be stopped. In the future, nanobots could potentially be a third one too.
So yes, while biowarfare is banned, the consequences of doing it is far different.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> The main difference is that none of the ones you mentioned really spreads. They all spread memetically rather then biologically. In a way that is a bigger problem because it means effective eradication is virtually impossible, because even if the practice is eliminated, it has “spores” in human cultural record which are both difficult to eliminate and difficult (arguably impossible) to avoid adverse side effects when eliminating.
- whatshisface 8y agoIf everyone forgot about chemical weapons it would only take until the next chemical plant accident for them to be invented again. In fact, if everyone forgot about them they would probably be immediately used given that it's an obvious idea, not difficult to implement and the reason nobody does it is because in history it turned out to not work so well.
- ehsankia 8y agoBut the point is, it doesn't run the chance of accidentally wiping the human race. No one is going to waterboard themselves, or waterboard 90% of the population. It doesn't outpace us and get out of our control. Every time someone gets killed by that method, it's explicit and intentional. The same can't be said by bioweapons and AI.