| ▲ | hoppp an hour ago |
| The regulation at the DNA Printer level works I think, as long as nobody invents a good at home DNA printer, but if they do that there is no need for custom viruses, somebody can take an existing one that is known to be deadly and just print it. |
|
| ▲ | dotancohen 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| Aren't technological constraints such as these short lived? Even if s home DNA printer won't be available this decade, the technology will come at some point. It's far better to have both legal and social policy in place before then - though the legal policy will probably not matter at all. |
|
| ▲ | HarHarVeryFunny 35 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| A custom designed virus is potentially far more deadly than something like ebola, because animals/plants will have zero resistance to it. It'd be like releasing an invasive species into an ecosystem that has not co-evolved to co-exist with it. |
|
| ▲ | idontwantthis an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| That’s what I’m thinking. If we can restrict EUV technology to the West then why can’t we restrict DNA manufacturing? Not to the West in this case but to capable governments like with Nuclear power. |
| |
| ▲ | ben_w 43 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | An EUV factory is a moderately sized building in its own right[0]; on the other hand, DNA is manufactured separately inside most of the cells in your body[1], the plant on your windowsill, the mould on your bread… [0] "43 freight containers and weighing in at 165 tons." - https://www.theregister.com/offbeat/2024/12/03/asml-releases... [1] not in red blood cells | |
| ▲ | estearum an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | My understanding is DNA synthesis is now like a 2nd or 3rd year undergrad tier challenge and doesn't even require much specialized equipment. Versus EUV which one could dump literally unlimited amounts of money into solving and still probably fail for decades. | | |
| ▲ | morkalork 42 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I want to say I've already read some articles about hobbyists buying previous generation equipment from labs. The entire supplychain would need to be locked down with used equipment being returned to manufacturers for there to be any security. | | |
| |
| ▲ | convolvatron an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | its not really a question of will, its a question of difficulty. if it were easy and cheap to build EUV processes, no amount of complaining and posturing would prevent someone from reproducing that. | |
| ▲ | Onavo an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Not sure if you realize it but biology is a lot harder to regulate. Most of the secret sauce in biotech is in the manufacturing process, not the reagents itself. I will give you a classic example, the Lipid Nanoparticle used for the delivery of mRNA vaccine is the real lynchpin of covid vaccines. The media never talks about it. Any biology student knows how lipid bilayers work (they are the basic building block of cells, it's like asking a programmer what a terminal is). But the process of manufacturing those lipid nano particles at scale was the main bottleneck for delivering mRNA to the target cell. That was the trade secret. It's not sexy or hot like mRNA so the media doesn't talk about it. It's why many developing countries tried to make their own vaccines and failed completely. The mRNA was the easy part but what use is a bunch of mRNA if you can't get them delivered to cells? Any biology student (even high school ones) can describe how a cell membrane works. But designing a man-made one that can be created at scale and be guaranteed to fuse with mammalian cells is mostly a matter of trial and error. It's a bit like finding viable pseudo linear memory use alternatives to the basic attention architecture in machine learning. Every lab has their own take on it. With AI nowadays the search space of viable biotech ex nihilo experimentation is much smaller given that you can just prompt it to give you plausible protocols. |
|
