Comments on: Information Wants to Be Free. What About Killer Information? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/ Wed, 22 May 2013 05:08:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Nicholas Wouters http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-367 Nicholas Wouters Sun, 26 Feb 2012 12:02:46 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-367 I think the danger comes not from the people with the know how, but the ones with half of the know how, who know just enough to start something dangerous, but now enough to contain it once it gets out of hand.. I remember coming across a recipe for peroxy acetone on the internet and thinking this could be fun ! but after a few experiments, a few holes in my ceiling and almost blowing myself up I realised that what I was doing was incredibly stupid and stopped. I am all for freedom of information, but sometimes a little information in the wrong hands can be VERY dangerous (google David Hahn) I think the danger comes not from the people with the know how, but the ones with half of the know how, who know just enough to start something dangerous, but now enough to contain it once it gets out of hand..

I remember coming across a recipe for peroxy acetone on the internet and thinking this could be fun ! but after a few experiments, a few holes in my ceiling and almost blowing myself up I realised that what I was doing was incredibly stupid and stopped.

I am all for freedom of information, but sometimes a little information in the wrong hands can be VERY dangerous (google David Hahn)

]]> By: Vincent Racaniello http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-366 Vincent Racaniello Wed, 11 Jan 2012 21:24:29 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-366 You write 'when scientists generate dangerous knowledge.' How do you know that the H5N1 information is dangerous? Do you think that the fatality rate is 60%? All of the press and many virologists believe this to be true, but in fact there is evidence that a good fraction of rural Asian populations have been infected with H5 viruses with little or no consequence. The 60% fatality comes from WHO-defined H5 cases (a restrictive definition) which are the most serious ones that end up in hospital. The fatality rate for seasonal influenza is 0.1%, but if you look at those individuals infected with seasonal influenza that end up in hospital, 20% of them die. It's fine to be careful about dangerous experiments, but first you have to be sure they are dangerous. You write ‘when scientists generate dangerous knowledge.’ How do you know that the H5N1 information is dangerous? Do you think that the fatality rate is 60%? All of the press and many virologists believe this to be true, but in fact there is evidence that a good fraction of rural Asian populations have been infected with H5 viruses with little or no consequence. The 60% fatality comes from WHO-defined H5 cases (a restrictive definition) which are the most serious ones that end up in hospital. The fatality rate for seasonal influenza is 0.1%, but if you look at those individuals infected with seasonal influenza that end up in hospital, 20% of them die. It’s fine to be careful about dangerous experiments, but first you have to be sure they are dangerous.

]]> By: scribbler http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-365 scribbler Tue, 03 Jan 2012 00:43:33 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-365 LarryW, you defeat your own argument. The fact that high school drop outs are savvy enough to distribute massive harm with limited information not only proves that such knowledge is dangerous but that there are millions who should not have access to it. Mutating viruses and other microbes is within the reach of more people than you can imagine. Second hand machines that once were unattainable by the "average Joe" are now sold on eBay. I've actually priced centrifuges and gas chromatographs and found them both to be within my very limited budget. Not to mention the ease with which lethal chemicals capable of mass destruction can be made and unleashed upon society. It is a Miracle this hasn't already been done. In the near future, if we progress as we have been, not destroying ourselves by accident is going to become a valid concern, let alone some nutso doing it on purpose... LarryW, you defeat your own argument. The fact that high school drop outs are savvy enough to distribute massive harm with limited information not only proves that such knowledge is dangerous but that there are millions who should not have access to it.

Mutating viruses and other microbes is within the reach of more people than you can imagine. Second hand machines that once were unattainable by the “average Joe” are now sold on eBay. I’ve actually priced centrifuges and gas chromatographs and found them both to be within my very limited budget.

Not to mention the ease with which lethal chemicals capable of mass destruction can be made and unleashed upon society. It is a Miracle this hasn’t already been done. In the near future, if we progress as we have been, not destroying ourselves by accident is going to become a valid concern, let alone some nutso doing it on purpose…

]]> By: Tim http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-364 Tim Sat, 31 Dec 2011 05:56:03 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-364 Hang on a minute.....haven't you folk noticed something? Scientific information is being regularly suppressed/withheld every day of the week. It doesn't matter whether a scientist attempts to publish information relating to enhancing the virulence of an influenza virus, tries to obtain the formula of some toxin recently isolated from a microorganism or the method by which larvae of freshwater eels (Anquilla) are raised to the glass eel stage of their life cycle. This information is often very dangerous, patentable and/or worth a great deal of money. In such cases, (dare I suggest most) those who pay the piper call the tune. The said tune is played in a soundproof room with only a very select audience. This whole scenario isn't new, why all the fuss? Hang on a minute…..haven’t you folk noticed something? Scientific information is being regularly suppressed/withheld every day of the week. It doesn’t matter whether a scientist attempts to publish information relating to enhancing the virulence of an influenza virus, tries to obtain the formula of some toxin recently isolated from a microorganism or the method by which larvae of freshwater eels (Anquilla) are raised to the glass eel stage of their life cycle. This information is often very dangerous, patentable and/or worth a great deal of money. In such cases, (dare I suggest most) those who pay the piper call the tune. The said tune is played in a soundproof room with only a very select audience.
This whole scenario isn’t new, why all the fuss?

]]> By: stan http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-363 stan Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:07:42 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-363 If the flu killed half the population,there would still be too many people on earth. If the flu killed half the population,there would still be too many people on earth.

]]> By: LarryW http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-362 LarryW Fri, 30 Dec 2011 15:32:01 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-362 One premise used is fundamentally incorrect. The idea that everyone has the knowledge to ...... That is just plain silly. It is also not necessary to the argument. About 95% of the American public is scientifically and mathematically incompetent, and that value would approach 100% for the knowledge necessary to carry out the proposed mutations on the H5N1. I certainly would be part of that 100%, as even might be the author of this article, given the description of his research. All that is needed is a handful of competent enablers to create a DIY kit with instructions. Do you really believe that the meth labs peppering the US are run by scientists and not high school dropouts who read only at a 3rd grade level? Given the information already made public of the success of these two labs in creating a highly contagious and deadly version of the H5N1 virus, I doubt that the proposed censorship will have the effect being promised. One premise used is fundamentally incorrect. The idea that everyone has the knowledge to …… That is just plain silly. It is also not necessary to the argument.

About 95% of the American public is scientifically and mathematically incompetent, and that value would approach 100% for the knowledge necessary to carry out the proposed mutations on the H5N1. I certainly would be part of that 100%, as even might be the author of this article, given the description of his research.

All that is needed is a handful of competent enablers to create a DIY kit with instructions. Do you really believe that the meth labs peppering the US are run by scientists and not high school dropouts who read only at a 3rd grade level?

Given the information already made public of the success of these two labs in creating a highly contagious and deadly version of the H5N1 virus, I doubt that the proposed censorship will have the effect being promised.

]]> By: scribbler http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-361 scribbler Fri, 30 Dec 2011 05:06:36 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-361 The first time I contemplated the ability of man to destroy mankind, I was give years old. A commentator was explaining "MAD" quite well for I understood that we and the USSR had the ability to wipe out all life on Earth. My father was disturbed and I assured him that surely, no one was stupid enough to try and wipe out all life on Earth. So far I have been right... ;-) None of this is new. We have been altering microbes to make them lethal enough to wipe out all humans for quite some time now in various weapons programs by various government entities around the world. I personally don't see what it is about this "new" discovery that makes it any different than the other programs of said States. As for "censorship", the information isn't being withheld, it is being made much more difficult to access and a process is being put in place to keep the information from falling into the hands of some nut job who might use it to destroy human life on a massive scale. A practice in place in all of the above mentioned programs and a worthy pursuit, in my opinion. The right to survive of the many outweigh the rights of the few to intellectual exercise. The researches in this case HAD to know the implications of their findings and the possible horrific consequences IF this were to be used by those seeking to unleash death on a massive scale. I applaud their decision to acquiesce and keep this as quiet as possible BUT I also think them quite irresponsible for the manner in which they placed such potentially devastating knowledge at such risk of discovery by potential terrorist and other nut jobs. To reward them would, I think, not only be immoral but would set a very bad precedent. I mean, what would be the difference between creating a lethal virus and blackmailing the world by threatening its release and simply creating one to become a party of the proposed program to "compensate" scientists for imagined losses of the world protecting itself from the dangers of widespread release of potentially devastating knowledge? Lastly, will mankind survive the day when every person has the ability to destroy ever other human with ease? No... The first time I contemplated the ability of man to destroy mankind, I was give years old. A commentator was explaining “MAD” quite well for I understood that we and the USSR had the ability to wipe out all life on Earth. My father was disturbed and I assured him that surely, no one was stupid enough to try and wipe out all life on Earth.

So far I have been right… ;-)

None of this is new. We have been altering microbes to make them lethal enough to wipe out all humans for quite some time now in various weapons programs by various government entities around the world. I personally don’t see what it is about this “new” discovery that makes it any different than the other programs of said States.

As for “censorship”, the information isn’t being withheld, it is being made much more difficult to access and a process is being put in place to keep the information from falling into the hands of some nut job who might use it to destroy human life on a massive scale. A practice in place in all of the above mentioned programs and a worthy pursuit, in my opinion. The right to survive of the many outweigh the rights of the few to intellectual exercise.

The researches in this case HAD to know the implications of their findings and the possible horrific consequences IF this were to be used by those seeking to unleash death on a massive scale. I applaud their decision to acquiesce and keep this as quiet as possible BUT I also think them quite irresponsible for the manner in which they placed such potentially devastating knowledge at such risk of discovery by potential terrorist and other nut jobs. To reward them would, I think, not only be immoral but would set a very bad precedent. I mean, what would be the difference between creating a lethal virus and blackmailing the world by threatening its release and simply creating one to become a party of the proposed program to “compensate” scientists for imagined losses of the world protecting itself from the dangers of widespread release of potentially devastating knowledge?

Lastly, will mankind survive the day when every person has the ability to destroy ever other human with ease? No…

]]> By: Iain http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-360 Iain Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:13:25 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-360 I agree. Learning from the past. The US gov't published most of how to make a nuke after WWII thinking the Soviets were much closer than they actually were. Look at all the trouble that caused. I agree.
Learning from the past. The US gov’t published most of how to make a nuke after WWII thinking the Soviets were much closer than they actually were. Look at all the trouble that caused.

]]> By: Alhazred http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-359 Alhazred Wed, 28 Dec 2011 20:48:57 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-359 Let us not kid ourselves. There is a clear trajectory in the history of 'scientific technological civilization' (really the whole history and prehistory of humanity). More knowledge and technical capability are available to more and more people over time. Clearly any reasonable extrapolation of this trend more than at most a few more decades in the future leads not to a 'big red button in every house' but the ability of every household to build its own nuclear arsenal. While this may not bear directly on the cast at hand with H5N1, and attempt to impede this process is like putting your finger in the dike. Short of the disassembly of modern technological civilization and permanent halting of human progress we WILL have to deal with a day when practically anyone will be capable of destruction on a mass scale. Equally clearly MANY people aren't capable of handling that power responsibly. Now, honestly ask yourself the question that this inevitably begs. Can humanity survive, even in the medium term? Really? Objectively? Forget about who to censor, the topic is simply irrelevant, like "what color do I paint my burning living room?" Let us not kid ourselves. There is a clear trajectory in the history of ‘scientific technological civilization’ (really the whole history and prehistory of humanity). More knowledge and technical capability are available to more and more people over time. Clearly any reasonable extrapolation of this trend more than at most a few more decades in the future leads not to a ‘big red button in every house’ but the ability of every household to build its own nuclear arsenal.

While this may not bear directly on the cast at hand with H5N1, and attempt to impede this process is like putting your finger in the dike. Short of the disassembly of modern technological civilization and permanent halting of human progress we WILL have to deal with a day when practically anyone will be capable of destruction on a mass scale. Equally clearly MANY people aren’t capable of handling that power responsibly.

Now, honestly ask yourself the question that this inevitably begs. Can humanity survive, even in the medium term? Really? Objectively? Forget about who to censor, the topic is simply irrelevant, like “what color do I paint my burning living room?”

]]> By: CubistHamster http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/12/27/information-wants-to-be-free-what-about-killer-information/#comment-358 CubistHamster Wed, 28 Dec 2011 13:40:08 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/?p=742#comment-358 So here I was, thinking you had a reasonable, cogent argument (albeit one I disagree with vehemently) and then you went an used "breaks" where you surely meant "brakes." Just a little typo, to be sure, but one that jarred me back to sense and reminded me that SCIENCE IS FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT FREE AND OPEN SHARING OF INFORMATION. <strong>Ed: Not sure that that typo means anything significant about science, but it's fixed now.</strong> So here I was, thinking you had a reasonable, cogent argument (albeit one I disagree with vehemently) and then you went an used “breaks” where you surely meant “brakes.” Just a little typo, to be sure, but one that jarred me back to sense and reminded me that SCIENCE IS FUNDAMENTALLY ABOUT FREE AND OPEN SHARING OF INFORMATION.

Ed: Not sure that that typo means anything significant about science, but it’s fixed now.

]]>