I don’t want any increase of geopolitical tension between China and the west but I think there are substantial reasons to want this to become the widespread consensus.
Biotech is an existential risk that people and governments are not concerned enough about. I think it would be very good for that to be a more widespread concern.
A practical goal would be banning gain of function research. Or more realistically, banning gain of function research that claims to be being done in pursuit of some kind of medical goal. I don’t really think you’ll be able to stop it from happening in military labs. But research that dangerous shouldn’t have the veil of claiming that it is being done in order to protect against viruses. And, you shouldn't be able to do it in labs with the security levels of the Wuhan labs.
The smallest practical goal would be removing American funding from Chinese gain of function research. It appears to be undisputed that there was at least some money coming from America and funding labs in Wuhan that were researching novel coronaviruses. That should obviously stop.
That's not my understanding. I don't think it is illegal under US law and also not universally. Can you point at the exact laws you are referring to?
Seeing your other response in this thread:
We already banned gain-of-function research.
Why do you think Fauci & Co. had to outsource it to China and Ukraine?
I don't think we actually disagree here. I don't think it is as airtightly illegal in the US as you are implying. But regardless, the main point of my post seems to agree with you. No?
The difference is that these crimes are committed by top officials in our government. Journalists are supposed to be on top of this, ripping them a new asshole so that they're too scared to even try - but now they have turned their coats and now work for our enemy.
Look, this thing is hard to do oversight on because few understand this, and all who understand this have a similar set of incentives that includes getting money to do research.
Also, journalists ? Journalists understand nothing and are largely ineffective because they're self-selected for compliance and there's even now some amount of evidence that one of Twitter's function is to 'push their buttons' by selectively rewarding journalists with extra likes and views on their articles that are convenient to those who run Twitter bots.
EDIT:
Grandpa, what's a bad check?
Also you seem like an American, so how come you don't know about check fraud ?
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
What's the point?No, really -- let's say you win. You've convinced the entirety of the western public that COVID-19 was made in a Chinese biolab. Okay, now what?I have 180°'d on my opinions, thanks.
I don’t want any increase of geopolitical tension between China and the west but I think there are substantial reasons to want this to become the widespread consensus.
Biotech is an existential risk that people and governments are not concerned enough about. I think it would be very good for that to be a more widespread concern.
A practical goal would be banning gain of function research. Or more realistically, banning gain of function research that claims to be being done in pursuit of some kind of medical goal. I don’t really think you’ll be able to stop it from happening in military labs. But research that dangerous shouldn’t have the veil of claiming that it is being done in order to protect against viruses. And, you shouldn't be able to do it in labs with the security levels of the Wuhan labs.
The smallest practical goal would be removing American funding from Chinese gain of function research. It appears to be undisputed that there was at least some money coming from America and funding labs in Wuhan that were researching novel coronaviruses. That should obviously stop.
We did.
That's not my understanding. I don't think it is illegal under US law and also not universally. Can you point at the exact laws you are referring to?
Seeing your other response in this thread:
I don't think we actually disagree here. I don't think it is as airtightly illegal in the US as you are implying. But regardless, the main point of my post seems to agree with you. No?
More options
Context Copy link
Robbery, rape and passing bad checks are banned. These never happen anymore.
Grandpa, what's a bad check?
The difference is that these crimes are committed by top officials in our government. Journalists are supposed to be on top of this, ripping them a new asshole so that they're too scared to even try - but now they have turned their coats and now work for our enemy.
Look, this thing is hard to do oversight on because few understand this, and all who understand this have a similar set of incentives that includes getting money to do research.
Also, journalists ? Journalists understand nothing and are largely ineffective because they're self-selected for compliance and there's even now some amount of evidence that one of Twitter's function is to 'push their buttons' by selectively rewarding journalists with extra likes and views on their articles that are convenient to those who run Twitter bots.
EDIT:
Also you seem like an American, so how come you don't know about check fraud ?
Apparenlty a thing in the US, somehow.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm confused about both you and stiffly stance here. Are either of you disagreeing with me that having this be more of a public concern would be bad?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link