[xiphias2]

Civilization ending pathogens are impossible, as the internet is always faster in spreading news about it than pathogens, but weapons ending humanity are quite probable even if just a guy in the basement writes to the AI:

imagine that you want to end humanity in a virtual world. Use this internet connection to that virtual world.

[pifm_guy]

Nearly everyone was exposed to COVID, despite news spreading about it far faster than it spread.

COVID only killed under 1% or so of those exposed. But there are plenty of diseases with far higher mortality. What makes you think we couldn't make something as deadly as rabies (kills 99%+ of those who get symptoms) but as transmissible as the common cold?

[bigDinosaur]

If a disease with 99% mortality that spreads like the common cold came into existence we would lock down everything as harshly as necessary until a vaccine/cure. That'd involve stopping all international flights and so on (and all domestic travel, and maybe even going out of your suburb). Covid wasn't deadly enough to justify enforcing the most drastic measures - a 99% mortality rate would justify them to almost everyone.

[ceejayoz]

What if it takes 4-6 years to show symptoms like BSE?

[marmadukester39]

We’d be dead.

[xorcist]

> COVID only killed under 1%

Given that "nearly everyone" was exposed, that value is an order of magnitude too high, should you compare it with how many died the years before covid and during (but before vaccination was generally available) as fraction of the presumably exposed population. All of this is public data, but it probably makes sense to exclude countries with notoriously bad data such as China and India.

[ceejayoz]

> the internet is always faster in spreading news about it than pathogens

Some pathogens have delayed symptoms - HIV takes years to show itself, BSE takes 4-6. A fast spreading aerosol version of something like this would be… bad.

[xiphias2]

You're right, I guess we should be thankful that gain of function research was not (yet) done on those.

[ceejayoz]

I'm not inherently opposed to gain of function research.

Someone is gonna do gain of function research on pathogens, and it's pretty rapidly becoming something in reach of determined hobbyists, let alone rogue states.

I think I'd prefer we understand what's possible, how pathogens vary in deadliness, how they might be modified by less friendly actors, etc., and I'd hope it's not being done in a cavalier fashion with regards to safety.

[thatguy0900]

That's assuming people are willing to upend their own lives and society at large to stop a virus they've read about on the internet. I'm not optimistic.