Bioterrorism is definitely not where I was going with this. However, it is pretty much a given that the owners of large farms will do things that will increase their crop production, even if it decreases the productivity of farms that are spatially or temporally distant from them.
Again, think about creative uses for the knowledge you have for 5 minutes before you come to the conclusion that it’s not possible to do significant harm with it. You probably don’t even have to think directly of doing harm—just look for the most profitable thing you can do with that knowledge, figure out what the negative side effects would be (particularly tragedy-of-the-commons type effects), and figure out how you can maintain profitability while increasing those negative side effects.
I’m gonna guess this has something to do with bees then (or in that general direction)?
Well, all sorts of tragedy of the commons things exist. If you think you’ve got one that could turn a commons into a resource to be manipulated, and can convince people, there will be a dozen investors knocking at your door!
It’s been done a thousand times before and not only that but there are whole philosophical movements arguing that it’s a moral imperative.
Nevertheless, you seem like you’re in the running for the prize.
Bioterrorism is definitely not where I was going with this. However, it is pretty much a given that the owners of large farms will do things that will increase their crop production, even if it decreases the productivity of farms that are spatially or temporally distant from them.
Again, think about creative uses for the knowledge you have for 5 minutes before you come to the conclusion that it’s not possible to do significant harm with it. You probably don’t even have to think directly of doing harm—just look for the most profitable thing you can do with that knowledge, figure out what the negative side effects would be (particularly tragedy-of-the-commons type effects), and figure out how you can maintain profitability while increasing those negative side effects.
I’m gonna guess this has something to do with bees then (or in that general direction)?
Well, all sorts of tragedy of the commons things exist. If you think you’ve got one that could turn a commons into a resource to be manipulated, and can convince people, there will be a dozen investors knocking at your door!
It’s been done a thousand times before and not only that but there are whole philosophical movements arguing that it’s a moral imperative.
Nevertheless, you seem like you’re in the running for the prize.
Tragedy-of-the-commons-for-profit has been done quite profitably—see swoopo.com until quite recently.
Yes, I agree completely. Taking a commons and turning it into a tragedy is a perfectly viable business model for many things.