2 ms·

I think that’s only true if you think easy access to the correct information isn’t a hurdle. That same argument would claim the internet didn’t make it easier e

by bumby 2y ago

I think that’s only true if you think easy access to the correct information isn’t a hurdle. That same argument would claim the internet didn’t make it easier either because we already had libraries.

throwup238 2y ago
It really isn’t. For an undergraduate biologist, designing a mass casualty event is almost trivial. This has been the case for many decades. Hell, someone even moderately versed in something as stupid as homeopathic medicine could do it. Simplest example: homeopaths use DMSO because it absorbs through the skin so anything lethal (like arsenic compounds) that can be dissolved in a nonpolar solvent like DMSO can be used to kill people at tiny dosages using just skin contact. With low LD50s there are many compounds that could be sprayed by GA planes over urban areas that kill most people that come in contact with them. There is an almost universal truth here: anyone capable of acquiring the resources for an attack is just as capable of acquiring the knowledge to do so with existing (pre-AI) sources.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]