4 ms·

Would they not be like “hmmm this one looks kinda similar to a known virus” They really just synthesize anything for you?

estearum 2mo ago
I'm sure some of them would, but they're not required by law to do so. And historically the way you'd do this is by actual fragment/substring matches. But these are novel viruses now. So what you really want to do is try to predict whether a novel genome is pathogenic... which is itself obviously a very hard technical problem.
- Enginerrrd 2mo ago
  That’s not too much a concern I think. Most of the real pathogenic qualities result from known genes. Inventing a totally novel virus that is also pathogenic is basically science fiction right now. Splicing together known components that could be bad in combination is closer to current technology.
smallmancontrov 2mo ago
No, of course not. In 2010 I went to a guest lecture from a guy who worked on the scanning algorithm for IDT. A few years later, there was a minor scandal when someone in a nearby lab used a personal credit card for a purchase and got a big shared account locked. So not only were they scanning the content of synthesis orders, they were validating payment back to labs. In 2010, when HTTPS was rare and facebook didn't even offer it.
- estearum 2mo ago
  "There are websites where you can just buy prescription drugs online?" You: "No, of course not. I once went on a website to buy a drug, and they made go to a doctor and get a prescription and send it to them"
  - smallmancontrov 2mo ago
    The legit synthesis sites have been scanning and authorizing since before the internet was encrypted. You suggested otherwise, demibabs expressed surprise, and was correct to express surprise because your implication was incorrect. The black market exists -- but comes with black market problems.
    - estearum 2mo ago
      If that's the understanding you came away with, it was clarified in my immediately following comment. Glad we agree that there are labs that will solve very hard parts of creating a novel virus, either by accident or by negligence.
      - smallmancontrov 2mo ago
        It was dishonest then for you to imply that readily accessible commercial labs didn't take reasonable precautions and it's dishonest now, too.
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        estearum 2mo ago
        Define "reasonable precautions"? Here's a red team exercise where researchers successfully bought fragments of the best known pathogen in the world, never mind a novel one. What reasonable precautions failed to catch this but we could expect to catch a novel virus that "kinda looks like" a known virus? https://www.statnews.com/2024/05/08/shouldnt-be-easy-buy-synthetic-dna-fragments-recreate-deadly-1918-flu-virus/ https://www.statnews.com/2024/05/08/shouldnt-be-easy-buy-syn...
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        smallmancontrov 2mo ago

estearum 2mo ago

I'm sure some of them would, but they're not required by law to do so. And historically the way you'd do this is by actual fragment/substring matches. But these are novel viruses now. So what you really want to do is try to predict whether a novel genome is pathogenic... which is itself obviously a very hard technical problem.

Enginerrrd 2mo ago
That’s not too much a concern I think. Most of the real pathogenic qualities result from known genes. Inventing a totally novel virus that is also pathogenic is basically science fiction right now. Splicing together known components that could be bad in combination is closer to current technology.

smallmancontrov 2mo ago

No, of course not. In 2010 I went to a guest lecture from a guy who worked on the scanning algorithm for IDT. A few years later, there was a minor scandal when someone in a nearby lab used a personal credit card for a purchase and got a big shared account locked. So not only were they scanning the content of synthesis orders, they were validating payment back to labs. In 2010, when HTTPS was rare and facebook didn't even offer it.

estearum 2mo ago
"There are websites where you can just buy prescription drugs online?" You: "No, of course not. I once went on a website to buy a drug, and they made go to a doctor and get a prescription and send it to them"
- smallmancontrov 2mo ago
  The legit synthesis sites have been scanning and authorizing since before the internet was encrypted. You suggested otherwise, demibabs expressed surprise, and was correct to express surprise because your implication was incorrect. The black market exists -- but comes with black market problems.
  - estearum 2mo ago
    If that's the understanding you came away with, it was clarified in my immediately following comment. Glad we agree that there are labs that will solve very hard parts of creating a novel virus, either by accident or by negligence.
    - smallmancontrov 2mo ago
      It was dishonest then for you to imply that readily accessible commercial labs didn't take reasonable precautions and it's dishonest now, too.
      - deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
      - estearum 2mo ago
        Define "reasonable precautions"? Here's a red team exercise where researchers successfully bought fragments of the best known pathogen in the world, never mind a novel one. What reasonable precautions failed to catch this but we could expect to catch a novel virus that "kinda looks like" a known virus? https://www.statnews.com/2024/05/08/shouldnt-be-easy-buy-synthetic-dna-fragments-recreate-deadly-1918-flu-virus/ https://www.statnews.com/2024/05/08/shouldnt-be-easy-buy-syn...
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        smallmancontrov 2mo ago