On Jan 26, 2008 5:55 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > One thing that seems clear to me is that engineering artificial pathogens > is an easier problem than engineering artificial antibodies.
Yes. > The reason biowarfare has failed so far is mostly a lack of good delivery > mechanisms: there are loads of pathogens that will kill people, but no one > has yet figured out how to deliver them effectively ... they die in the sun, > disperse in the wind, drown in the water, whatever.... > > If advanced genetic engineering solves these problems, then what happens? > Are we totally screwed? > > Or will we be protected by the same sociopsychological dynamics that have > kept DC from being nuked so far: the intersection of folks with a terrorist > mindset and folks with scientific chops is surprisingly teeny... I think it's significant that in general, as a reflection of the arrow of entropy, problems at a particular level of complexity are "solved" or effectively handled, at a higher level of complexity. I'll abstain from elaborating on the yin/yang of the doubled-edged sword of technology, the Red Queen's Race, and the relationship between increasing scope of objective consequences and increasing context of subjective values as the game evolves... ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&id_secret=90235889-265a09
