5 ms·

Civilization ending pathogens are impossible, as the internet is always faster in spreading news about it than pathogens, but weapons ending humanity are quite

Civilization ending pathogens are impossible, as the internet is always faster in spreading news about it than pathogens, but weapons ending humanity are quite probable even if just a guy in the basement writes to the AI: imagine that you want to end humanity in a virtual world. Use this internet connection to that virtual world.

ceejayoz 4y ago
> the internet is always faster in spreading news about it than pathogens Some pathogens have delayed symptoms - HIV takes years to show itself, BSE takes 4-6. A fast spreading aerosol version of something like this would be… bad.
- xiphias2 4y ago
  You're right, I guess we should be thankful that gain of function research was not (yet) done on those.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    I'm not inherently opposed to gain of function research. Someone is gonna do gain of function research on pathogens, and it's pretty rapidly becoming something in reach of determined hobbyists, let alone rogue states. I think I'd prefer we understand what's possible, how pathogens vary in deadliness, how they might be modified by less friendly actors, etc., and I'd hope it's not being done in a cavalier fashion with regards to safety.
pifm_guy 4y ago
Nearly everyone was exposed to COVID, despite news spreading about it far faster than it spread. COVID only killed under 1% or so of those exposed. But there are plenty of diseases with far higher mortality. What makes you think we couldn't make something as deadly as rabies (kills 99%+ of those who get symptoms) but as transmissible as the common cold?
- xorcist 4y ago
  > COVID only killed under 1% Given that "nearly everyone" was exposed, that value is an order of magnitude too high, should you compare it with how many died the years before covid and during (but before vaccination was generally available) as fraction of the presumably exposed population. All of this is public data, but it probably makes sense to exclude countries with notoriously bad data such as China and India.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- bigDinosaur 4y ago
  If a disease with 99% mortality that spreads like the common cold came into existence we would lock down everything as harshly as necessary until a vaccine/cure. That'd involve stopping all international flights and so on (and all domestic travel, and maybe even going out of your suburb). Covid wasn't deadly enough to justify enforcing the most drastic measures - a 99% mortality rate would justify them to almost everyone.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    What if it takes 4-6 years to show symptoms like BSE?
    - marmadukester39 4y ago
      We’d be dead.
thatguy0900 4y ago
That's assuming people are willing to upend their own lives and society at large to stop a virus they've read about on the internet. I'm not optimistic.

ceejayoz 4y ago

> the internet is always faster in spreading news about it than pathogens Some pathogens have delayed symptoms - HIV takes years to show itself, BSE takes 4-6. A fast spreading aerosol version of something like this would be… bad.

xiphias2 4y ago
You're right, I guess we should be thankful that gain of function research was not (yet) done on those.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  I'm not inherently opposed to gain of function research. Someone is gonna do gain of function research on pathogens, and it's pretty rapidly becoming something in reach of determined hobbyists, let alone rogue states. I think I'd prefer we understand what's possible, how pathogens vary in deadliness, how they might be modified by less friendly actors, etc., and I'd hope it's not being done in a cavalier fashion with regards to safety.

pifm_guy 4y ago

Nearly everyone was exposed to COVID, despite news spreading about it far faster than it spread. COVID only killed under 1% or so of those exposed. But there are plenty of diseases with far higher mortality. What makes you think we couldn't make something as deadly as rabies (kills 99%+ of those who get symptoms) but as transmissible as the common cold?

xorcist 4y ago
> COVID only killed under 1% Given that "nearly everyone" was exposed, that value is an order of magnitude too high, should you compare it with how many died the years before covid and during (but before vaccination was generally available) as fraction of the presumably exposed population. All of this is public data, but it probably makes sense to exclude countries with notoriously bad data such as China and India.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
bigDinosaur 4y ago
If a disease with 99% mortality that spreads like the common cold came into existence we would lock down everything as harshly as necessary until a vaccine/cure. That'd involve stopping all international flights and so on (and all domestic travel, and maybe even going out of your suburb). Covid wasn't deadly enough to justify enforcing the most drastic measures - a 99% mortality rate would justify them to almost everyone.
- ceejayoz 4y ago
  What if it takes 4-6 years to show symptoms like BSE?
  - marmadukester39 4y ago
    We’d be dead.

thatguy0900 4y ago

That's assuming people are willing to upend their own lives and society at large to stop a virus they've read about on the internet. I'm not optimistic.