• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI
    AI

    Could AI-enabled bioweapons threaten civilization?

    One participant says pandemics can be devastating without ending civilization. Critics warn that AI could weaken barriers to virus design and urge caution about dismissing civilization-threatening risks.

    Andreas Kirsch 🇺🇦AK
    Adam MarblestoneAM
    Sam RodriquesSR
    5 Sources, ,

    TLDR

    One participant argues that AI’s medical benefits will far outweigh the harms of engineered bioweapons. In a later reply, they stress that pandemics require preparation and can kill many people, but maintain they will not end civilization and say AI will probably improve countermeasures.

    Critics stress uncertainty about how deadly engineered viruses could be and whether defenses will keep pace as AI weakens barriers to designing them. A researcher who says they have spent years building defenses warns that not seeing a path to a civilization-threatening pandemic does not establish that none exists. They argue that AI can worsen biological risk, but that the risk does not depend on AI.

    Combined views

    11.7K

    5 Sources, first seen 21d ago

    Combined views

    11.7K

    5 Sources, first seen 21d ago

    77 likes
    21d ago
    first seen 21d ago
    77 likes
    3 comments
    14 saves
    23 reposts
    3 comments
    14 saves
    23 reposts

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    Today's Rank

    —

    Not ranked yet

    5 Sources

    Simon Last@simonlast> COVID killed ~0.1% of humanity. A pandemic 100x worse than COVID would be horrific, but it would also not be civilization-ending. Cool, so 800 million dead. No biggie… My very outside view here is something like: We know viruses can be extremely deadly (plenty of existence proof). We’ve made a lot of progress in understanding them, yet our understanding is severely limited. We don’t know how deadly an engineered virus could be. Historical constraints have protected us: - The main enemy has been nature, which has to get there through evolution. - Humans have limited knowledge, expertise, and access to technology. - Relatively few people can design viruses, and most are pursuing useful science. AI will weaken or remove these constraints, and it seems to be happening on a timeline that is far too fast for us to confidently say our defenses will keep up. We may not be able to get to a point where we can confidently say “this is exactly how it could happen” before it’s too late.21d
    Adam Marblestone@AdamMarblestoneRT @kesvelt: Some scientists argue civilization-threatening bioweapons are a fantasy. I wish they were correct, and that I've wasted years…21d
    Sam Rodriques@SGRodriques800 million people dead would be horrific. I was responding to the notion that a pandemic would be an extinction risk or civilization ending. My points are: We absolutely need to be concerned about and prepared for pandemics. They can absolutely kill many people. They will not be civilization ending. AI will probably not make it worse (and will probably make our countermeasures better).21d
    Yonathan Arbel@ProfArbelTo my friends who think AI bioweapons aren't a real threat because there are "choke-points" like secure biolabs, please read this: "36 of 38 companies shipped pieces of the 1918 influenza genome. That was collectively enough to generate the virus using reverse genetics several times over – and they were ordered by a student using a pseudonym falsely claiming to work at an office address. No one asked whether we had permission to work with 1918 influenza (a select agent), or why we needed genes from it"20d
    Andreas Kirsch 🇺🇦@BlackHCRT @ProfArbel: To my friends who think AI bioweapons aren't a real threat because there are "choke-points" like secure biolabs, please read…20d

    5 Sources

    Simon Last@simonlast> COVID killed ~0.1% of humanity. A pandemic 100x worse than COVID would be horrific, but it would also not be civilization-ending. Cool, so 800 million dead. No biggie… My very outside view here is something like: We know viruses can be extremely deadly (plenty of existence proof). We’ve made a lot of progress in understanding them, yet our understanding is severely limited. We don’t know how deadly an engineered virus could be. Historical constraints have protected us: - The main enemy has been nature, which has to get there through evolution. - Humans have limited knowledge, expertise, and access to technology. - Relatively few people can design viruses, and most are pursuing useful science. AI will weaken or remove these constraints, and it seems to be happening on a timeline that is far too fast for us to confidently say our defenses will keep up. We may not be able to get to a point where we can confidently say “this is exactly how it could happen” before it’s too late.21d
    Adam Marblestone@AdamMarblestoneRT @kesvelt: Some scientists argue civilization-threatening bioweapons are a fantasy. I wish they were correct, and that I've wasted years…21d
    Sam Rodriques@SGRodriques800 million people dead would be horrific. I was responding to the notion that a pandemic would be an extinction risk or civilization ending. My points are: We absolutely need to be concerned about and prepared for pandemics. They can absolutely kill many people. They will not be civilization ending. AI will probably not make it worse (and will probably make our countermeasures better).21d
    Yonathan Arbel@ProfArbelTo my friends who think AI bioweapons aren't a real threat because there are "choke-points" like secure biolabs, please read this: "36 of 38 companies shipped pieces of the 1918 influenza genome. That was collectively enough to generate the virus using reverse genetics several times over – and they were ordered by a student using a pseudonym falsely claiming to work at an office address. No one asked whether we had permission to work with 1918 influenza (a select agent), or why we needed genes from it"20d
    Andreas Kirsch 🇺🇦@BlackHCRT @ProfArbel: To my friends who think AI bioweapons aren't a real threat because there are "choke-points" like secure biolabs, please read…20d