UPL: Cautious Plans?

Twink (neptune@mars.superlink.net)
Sun, 23 Nov 1997 12:05:56 -0500 (EST)

At 12:00 AM 11/23/97 -0800, Michael M. Butler <mbutler@comp*lib.org> wrote:
>OK, I'll formally mention (having elected myself as Devil's Advocate
>here) that your plan does not include:
>A.) Handling publicity (or secrecy)
>B.) Handling physical security: extra-lab *and* intra
>C.) An explicit guarantee of pulling the plug if needed
>D.) A description of what would be grounds for pulling the plug
>E.) A description of what mechanisms would be used to pull the plug.

All great ideas. I will have to include them.

>This is all stuff that's standard for dealing with those microorganisms
>you mentioned in a post to me.
>If you don't consider uplift at least as risky as working with
>bioweapons... _why_?

Because we are dealing with a multicellular animal. Much easier to
control than current microbes. Also, the octopus is a marine
animal. Despite its escape artist skills, it will be much easier to
control such an organism, which is less likely to, say, escape to
the oceans from my apartment than, say, an uplifted rabbit or dog.

Daniel Ust