I've started writing about safeguarding civilization and positive futures. Biosecurity, AI, infrastructure, supply chains, deterrence, and the moral frameworks underneath. First post: The Glory and the Horror.
kesvelt.substack.com
To those skeptical of AI-biorisk: do you support the following?
- Effective DNA synthesis screening
- Metagenomic sequencing for early pathogen detection
- Stockpiles of trustworthy PPE
- Developing germicidal tech like far-UVC and TEG
Curious if there's any disagreement...
Some scientists argue civilization-threatening bioweapons are a fantasy. I wish they were correct, and that I've wasted years building defenses.
That you can't see a way, or evidence that others can, doesn't mean no one could – especially if anyone cautious would stay silent.
I agree with @DavidRBellamy that people are totally miscalibrated on the risk of AI designing dangerous viruses. We should not be talking about AI-engineered bioweapons like it is the literal end of the world. The upside from medicine is going to be so much larger than the
The closure of the Liberty Bell Bay manganese smelter is a disaster for civilizational resilience. You cannot make steel without manganese alloys. Without it, Australia will become far more dependent on imports.
If things go badly wrong in the world, from bio or nuclear or
"Anytime they didn't understand something, they would ask the AI."
AI-democratized competence + destructive intent + increasingly powerful offense-dominant technologies = an unsettling trajectory
We need to invest in resilience.
Excellent, disturbing work.
In a hotel room in northeast Nigeria, I opened a leading AI chatbot, turned my laptop toward a former Boko Haram commander, and asked if he'd used it. He nodded.
"You type in the question… like 'How can I build a bomb?', and then it tells you how. It is like a human robot. We