Re:Propaganda or Science: Open-Source AI and Bioterrorism Risk
by sterlind on Thursday November 02, 2023 @09:22PM
(#38123105)
I'm not sure what you mean that effort was put in to keep the anthrax from spreading. This stuff wasn't your grandmother's anthrax. The spores were small enough to pass through NATO biofilters. They were mixed with high levels of silicon, which apparently made them better at infecting the lungs. Sandia tried and failed 58 times to reproduce the high silica content, apparently. If anything, it sounds like the anthrax was intentionally designed to spread better.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Propaganda or Science: Open-Source AI and Bioterrorism Risk
by ethanbond on Thursday November 02, 2023 @09:56PM
(#38123401)
It seems they were delivered in such a way to mitigate chances of other people/handlers getting sick, and they were delivered with notes that immediately told the victim what to do. Very weird story! But lots of indicators it wasn’t meant to be a big catastrophe.
Re:Propaganda or Science: Open-Source AI and Bioterrorism Risk
by sterlind on Friday November 03, 2023 @01:34AM
(#38124925)
I'm honestly surprised more wasn't made of it. There was no shortage of 9/11 conspiracy theories, but an anthrax attack was confirmed to come from a DoD lab, and they tried to pin it on Iraq initially, and... crickets?