16 is (roughly) 5 percent of 300, not 0.5 percent.
What happens when you trigger the 20 to 40 percent detection threshold? Do you just get told no and get to try again, with no other consequence? What if you trigger it 10 times?
Your cost and “employer” filters haven’t changed. Although it’s probably not hard to create a good enough “business” to pass the employer one.
Something just being infectuous (or deadly) doesn’t make it a good bioweapon. In fact, even if you have smallpox, you don’t have a bioweapon yet. You still have to package and deliver it. And if you want full-on apocalypse cred, you also have to make it a lot worse than the background of naturally occurring pathogens.
Bioweapons are lousy weapons, because they aren’t effectively targetable. That may be a big part of your Great Filter.
Bioweapons are lousy weapons, because they aren’t effectively targetable. That may be a big part of your Great Filter.
Something just being infectuous (or deadly) doesn’t make it a good bioweapon. In fact, even if you have smallpox, you don’t have a bioweapon yet. You still have to package and deliver it. And if you want full-on apocalypse cred, you also have to make it a lot worse than the background of naturally occurring pathogens.
This is why none of the people smart enough to build and deploy one in 2025 have a good reason to, including nation states. If the number of people who can do it goes up by 3 OOMs, you might get someone crazy enough to build one despite these facts.
What happens when you trigger the 20 to 40 percent detection threshold? Do you just get told no and get to try again, with no other consequence? What if you trigger it 10 times?
If the filter assigns 40% chance that it’s viral, you (probably) just don’t trigger any filter. This is the bayesian probability assigned by a filtering model, not the probability that a binary filter gets triggered.
Your cost and “employer” filters haven’t changed. Although it’s probably not hard to create a good enough “business” to pass the employer one.
That’s true, but as they say in the army: three is two, two is one, and one is none! I’m not moving to New Zealand yet, but one of the three major reasons I wasn’t worried may no longer apply.
Random things...
16 is (roughly) 5 percent of 300, not 0.5 percent.
What happens when you trigger the 20 to 40 percent detection threshold? Do you just get told no and get to try again, with no other consequence? What if you trigger it 10 times?
Your cost and “employer” filters haven’t changed. Although it’s probably not hard to create a good enough “business” to pass the employer one.
Something just being infectuous (or deadly) doesn’t make it a good bioweapon. In fact, even if you have smallpox, you don’t have a bioweapon yet. You still have to package and deliver it. And if you want full-on apocalypse cred, you also have to make it a lot worse than the background of naturally occurring pathogens.
Bioweapons are lousy weapons, because they aren’t effectively targetable. That may be a big part of your Great Filter.
This is why none of the people smart enough to build and deploy one in 2025 have a good reason to, including nation states. If the number of people who can do it goes up by 3 OOMs, you might get someone crazy enough to build one despite these facts.
If the filter assigns 40% chance that it’s viral, you (probably) just don’t trigger any filter. This is the bayesian probability assigned by a filtering model, not the probability that a binary filter gets triggered.
That’s true, but as they say in the army: three is two, two is one, and one is none! I’m not moving to New Zealand yet, but one of the three major reasons I wasn’t worried may no longer apply.