I hear you, a nuke is the ultimate tool for implementing widespread death. But I don't worry about getting nuked because to build something requires a lot of money, expertise, and parts that are closely monitored. Then you have to figure out how to transport and deliver the damn thing. Not a huge problem if you're a nation-state but bigger for individual actors and their followers.
A CRISPR based biological attack however is something you can pull off with lab equipment you can buy anywhere in the world. For an amount of money that can be acquired much more easily. The risk to the perpetrators has always been that they would screw up and die of their own plague.
The ability to create more precisely targeted biological attacks means that a person who is working on such an attack and doesn't have the necessary genetic makeup for what ever virus vector is being used to transmit it, can do so with much less fear of their own demise. While creating something that can be transported in disguise without being easily detected.
Perhaps an analogy would work.
My kids never had to worry about European teenagers bullying them, but today's kids have contacts all over the world on social networks some of whom can be quite hurtful. There is bullying that happens because the perpetrator "knows" that the target is so far away they are unlikely to be able to cause repercussions. Thus the 'risk' of bullying is lower, and in my estimation happens more frequently.
>I hear you, a nuke is the ultimate tool for implementing widespread death.
That's not my point. I agree that the barriers to entry for biotech are lower.
My point is that whereas the only 'defence' against nuclear weapons is deterrence, i.e more nukes, it is possible to defend against biotech weapons without starting an arms race. This would consist of ongoing, costly research of antidotes by government and university labs (with a high barrier to entry).
A CRISPR based biological attack however is something you can pull off with lab equipment you can buy anywhere in the world. For an amount of money that can be acquired much more easily. The risk to the perpetrators has always been that they would screw up and die of their own plague.
The ability to create more precisely targeted biological attacks means that a person who is working on such an attack and doesn't have the necessary genetic makeup for what ever virus vector is being used to transmit it, can do so with much less fear of their own demise. While creating something that can be transported in disguise without being easily detected.
Perhaps an analogy would work.
My kids never had to worry about European teenagers bullying them, but today's kids have contacts all over the world on social networks some of whom can be quite hurtful. There is bullying that happens because the perpetrator "knows" that the target is so far away they are unlikely to be able to cause repercussions. Thus the 'risk' of bullying is lower, and in my estimation happens more frequently.