4 ms·

Case in point: we got covid-19 vaccines so fast because the DNA sequence of the virus was posted for anyone to download by scientists working at ground zero. Mu

by Kye 3y ago

Case in point: we got covid-19 vaccines so fast because the DNA sequence of the virus was posted for anyone to download by scientists working at ground zero. Much of the work was done before it was a global pandemic because of that sharing. Pair that with the work done on the mRNA vaccine for a previous coronavirus that didn't go far, and things weren't nearly as bad as they could have been. This is a problem with trying to name One Most Important Thing. It's usually the synthesis of multiple innovations that makes the revolution.

RandomLensman 3y ago
Is there any evidence that the fact that anyone could look at the genome increased the speed of vaccine delivery measurably and not rather changes in processes for testing and roll-out? The genome data was only needed by a few actors for the vaccine.
- Kye 3y ago
  Those few actors would have had to wait until it spread somewhere they have visibility in to before they could start a weeks-long sequencing process. It might have only added a month or two, but that's a lot of lives saved. The wikipedia page also credits it with speeding the process up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#History >> " Its genetic sequence was published on 11 January 2020, triggering an urgent international response to prepare for an outbreak and hasten the development of a preventive COVID-19 vaccine.[182][183][184]" I haven't checked the citations, but I would expect an edit war if that were controversial.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    Maybe a month, maybe not (and we don't have the counterfactual). The quote is not directly implying a speed-up from the publication on the internet vs publication in other forms. The sentence after your quote is pointing to the real speed-up: "Since 2020, vaccine development has been expedited via unprecedented collaboration in the multinational pharmaceutical industry and between governments.[185]"
epcoa 3y ago
And that sharing could have occurred just as well over specialized networks for the relatively few experts that were able to use it sensibly.
- cinntaile 3y ago
  You're basically describing the early internet so I don't see the point in trying to call it something else?
  - epcoa 3y ago
    Because there were other networks that were not the internet and did not evolve into it. They were literally "something else". And for that matter the early Internet is nothing like the current day internet in terms of access. So what's the point in comparing the two?

by Kye 3y ago

RandomLensman 3y ago

Is there any evidence that the fact that anyone could look at the genome increased the speed of vaccine delivery measurably and not rather changes in processes for testing and roll-out? The genome data was only needed by a few actors for the vaccine.

Kye 3y ago
Those few actors would have had to wait until it spread somewhere they have visibility in to before they could start a weeks-long sequencing process. It might have only added a month or two, but that's a lot of lives saved. The wikipedia page also credits it with speeding the process up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#History https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#History >> " Its genetic sequence was published on 11 January 2020, triggering an urgent international response to prepare for an outbreak and hasten the development of a preventive COVID-19 vaccine.[182][183][184]" I haven't checked the citations, but I would expect an edit war if that were controversial.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Maybe a month, maybe not (and we don't have the counterfactual). The quote is not directly implying a speed-up from the publication on the internet vs publication in other forms. The sentence after your quote is pointing to the real speed-up: "Since 2020, vaccine development has been expedited via unprecedented collaboration in the multinational pharmaceutical industry and between governments.[185]"

epcoa 3y ago

And that sharing could have occurred just as well over specialized networks for the relatively few experts that were able to use it sensibly.

cinntaile 3y ago
You're basically describing the early internet so I don't see the point in trying to call it something else?
- epcoa 3y ago
  Because there were other networks that were not the internet and did not evolve into it. They were literally "something else". And for that matter the early Internet is nothing like the current day internet in terms of access. So what's the point in comparing the two?