Yves here. We published a GPENewsdoc piece on AI for synthetic biology that highlights key risks. Unfortunately the post received a lot of comments, probably because readers found the discussion too academic. This piece is easily accessible to the layperson, although some may dismiss it as simplistic. But seeing as modest biomedical advances like CRISPR and stem cell therapy sometimes produce side effects, caution is warranted.
By Kurt Cobb, a freelance writer and communications consultant who writes regularly about energy and nature. His work has also appeared in The Christian Science Monitor, Resilience, Le Monde Diplomatique, TalkMarkets, Investing.com, Business Insider and many other publications. Originally published at OilPrice
- The integration of AI and synthetic biology can lead to the creation of novel organisms with unintended and potentially harmful effects.
- The democratization of genetic engineering with powerful AI tools raises concerns about bioterrorism and the accidental release of dangerous organisms.
- The use of genetic data for AI training raises ethical concerns about biopiracy and unauthorized exploitation of genetic resources.
Science fiction movies are full of astronauts who visit distant planets with atmospheres that are perfect for those people to breathe. Thus, the hassle of wearing a space suit or other protective gear is eliminated, and encounters with alien races, both hostile and friendly, can proceed without such heavy duty gear.
In addition, these planets often have plants and animals that are almost identical to those found on Earth. The problem with this often happening in science fiction is that even if such planets exist, they may contain microorganisms that are not at all familiar to the human body and thus may kill them within days or weeks. The people would be defenseless and face the same fate as the indigenous people of North and South America when the Europeans arrived with diseases that were not common to the indigenous soldiers who were immune and therefore very deadly. About 90 percent of the natives died.
Enter synthetic biology, that is, the engineering of organisms that have never been seen on Earth. We have already seen it in the form of genetically engineered crops such as GMO soybeans and corn. But that’s a pale harbinger of what’s to come: the marriage of artificial intelligence (AI) and artificial biology. For many years already scientists have been able to create novel DNA sequences, and have already created dangerous designer viruses for research purposes. I have previously written about the potential for systemic corruption that can flow from these activities. And I expressed concern about the democratization of genetic engineering through self-service: “Anyone with a credit card and a mailing address can now order their own genetic engineering kit.”
The emerging democratization of genetic engineering will be highly charged as AI is married to synthetic biology. Imagine being able to type in plain English (or your native language) the description of the artificial organism or object you want and have it generated instantly. This has not happened today, but there is no reason to believe that it will not happen in the coming years.
One of the critical issues is described in the article previously linked above:
Big language brands like ChatGPT often include elements in their output that seem forced but are not really accurate or strange: Living people are described as dead, dates are given incorrectly, AI-generated images of people develop additional body parts or unreadable signs are created etc. Although such illusions and black box failures can be problematic enough in the 2 domains of electronics of text, image, video or sound, they can be more problematic when combined with the genetic makeup of four-dimensional organisms or functional biological proteins released into the body or biosphere.
I have driven home many times in my previous writings that so-called “good judgment” prevents many people from seeing the dangers of new technologies. They simply believe that the new technology will be used for the best purposes, and, of course, the seemingly positive results of this innovation are widely reported in the media by those who try to profit from the uncontrolled spread of new technology and its technologies. products.
The problem is, this is the same thinking that has brought us the widespread problem of toxic chemicals everywhere in our food, water, air and soil. It’s the same thinking that brought us the adoption of social media by almost everyone with an internet connection in the world. How great it will be to share our lives easily and quickly with friends and family and make new friends around the world! How wonderful it will be to share useful advice in all walks of life quickly with millions and even billions at no cost! And, those things happen! Then came the dark side: cell phone addiction, the spread of organized hatred and misinformation, the targeting of individuals and institutions for the purpose of torture, and mass killings over false accusations of “child trafficking, organ harvesting or other evil practices.”
The dark side of AI and synthetic biology is already being seen. Another focus of synthetic biology is the creation of novel proteins that may be used to treat diseases or to replace proteins that we currently find in both plants and animals. But it is also possible to create toxic or dangerous proteins for other reasons, intentionally or accidentally as described above.
To the extent that novel proteins become additives to our diets, they tend to reinforce our reliance on processed foods that are now widely recognized as a major cause of chronic disease. By definition such proteins cannot be the complete food that our bodies adapt to thrive.
These novel materials can also be used to produce food substitutes. One major area of use is allulose, a sugar found in figs, raisins, wheat, maple syrup and molasses that is not absorbed by the body. But it turns out that they are in such small amounts that they are always expensive. The synthetic biology industry is working to create enzymes that will convert cheap foods like starch and sugar themselves into allulose. However, this does not appear to be the nutritional breakthrough we need to tackle the chronic disease epidemic.
Besides the health consequences and the possibility of system damage due to bad actors, there is the problem of biopiracy. The genetic information of hundreds of millions of genetic samples used to train AI systems comes from around the world. No one has given their consent for these genetic resources to be used by the AI industry for their own benefit. It is the same as the increase in the jobs of artists, writers, musicians, journalists, software designers and other creative people and organizations by current AI attackers who are training their systems to generate text and images using the work of millions of people without permission. (Besides, the AI industry is being sued for this practice. See here, here and here.)
It should come as no surprise to readers that AI relies on what is essentially an open piracy of other people’s work. Therefore, it will not surprise you that the same strategy is used in the marriage of AI with synthetic biology. But there is a big difference between these two areas of exploitation. The first threatens the lives of all creative people whose work is available online (and possibly on easily scanned objects). Uncontrolled dispersion and secondary consumption threaten us with mass death and even extinction.
AI industry watchers and their naïve supporters or critics will tell us that in order to bring the countless benefits of AI combined with synthetic biology to society, governments need to get out of the way. But anyone with history knows we’ve been here countless times before. Asbestos, leaded gasoline, chlorofluorocarbons, and Teflon come to mind. Anyone with a sense of history knows better.
Source link