HNuseraccount

That's a big fat if. We think we understand plant biology but no one has ever created one gram of artificial wood. This isn't attacking you personally but it's pretty clear many on this site have never spent ten years of their life on a drug to watch it fail in phase three trials.

There's likely lots still to discover about biology and A.I. doesn't generate new data, rather rearranging old data. That's still helpful but developing new tools to make basic science discoveries to expand the knowledge pool seems to be the rate limiting factor rather than rearranging existing knowledge.

Yeah I understand that I just wish the title was something closer to ground truth which is stating safeguard breakers to stop LLMs

Make bioweapons is such a attention getting phrase but there's such a giant gap between "please make bioweapons" as a string and actually accumulating the expertise and equipment to assemble a testing and manufacturing line

What I find particularly remarkable is the undercurrent of desperation beneath the dry technical language and the documentation of errors that contribute to technical failure. But now there are approximately 130 liver transplant centers in the United States with approximately 90% 1 year survival rate.

I think you and I already know the answer to that question.

The last hundred oncology drugs have all required painstaking trial and error with no way to predict which candidates succeed or fail except at the years long cost of blood sweat and tears. A.I. will not remove that price from the equation except maybe move towards those trials marginally faster towards those decade long trials.