H5N1 Research - Restricted or Open Source?

Isn't one of the arguments against the dangers of openness the same as having plans for nuclear weapons open to the public, that while the knowledge is there, the materials and equipment to take the next step isn't?

I think having closed doors can stifle research, and something we learn through sharing knowledge might help later in the future. Certainly not doing any research is dangerous, because someone will eventually go down the road of nefarious purposes, and without the tools to diagnose and tackle the problem, things will end up very bad for many.

So I guess my thoughts are, open knowledge, but keep eyes open always for activity that suggest someone trying to use it for things that seem suspicious.
 
Rhaedas said:
Isn't one of the arguments against the dangers of openness the same as having plans for nuclear weapons open to the public, that while the knowledge is there, the materials and equipment to take the next step isn't?
Click to expand...

I agree. It seems to me quite common for people to greatly overestimate what would-be terrorists in backyard laboratories could accomplish. The capability to engineer viruses remains at the level of sophisticated state-sponsored research institutions. Placing limits on the scientific method by preventing the dissemination of information, such as the virus research in question, will jeopardize the world’s ability to combat pandemic viruses if/when they arise naturally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top