@armonfrohlich6348

3 weeks ago

So if those are his problems with it, then those aren't really strong counterarguments...
Even in the 1950s, computers were as big as cupboards. A 100MB "hard drive" measured 1.8m x 1.8m x 0.5m...
There is a famous picture where 3-4 people are trying to pack such a storage device into an airplane. and that thing was absolute high-tech back then. Other comparable storage units would be as big as rooms! (9mx9m).

Today, you can get 100 times the storage space on the surface of a matchbox for just €3.

The same principle also applies to approaches, especially since the equipment used is becoming increasingly more powerful.

The effort and associated costs at the time are therefore relatively irrelevant.

The real problem is the possibilities it offers.
Especially the moral aspects.

But let's imagine what would happen if this had been actively researched, used and improved for, say, 30-40 years.
What would be the problem with making a duplicate of, for example, the president and replacing him?
The military would, of course, immediately (and far too soon) turn it into a weapon.
And since they could then be produced on an assembly line, no one would care about their fate. And yes, I can say that because after all, the Americans, for example, don't care that around a million people die of HIV and AIDS in Africa every year. America could have done something about it. But you can't expect a pharmaceutical company to release a formula just because the people who need it can't afford it...
Of course, the company would not suffer any financial loss because, as already mentioned, they cannot afford the drug anyway. Africa would even have bought the materials for it only from them and would have distributed it exclusively to its own people at cost price. So they wouldn't have earned any Money from it themselves and wouldn't have made it possible for anyone else.

So one could be relatively sure that such clones would be nothing more than cheap equipment. and would also be treated that way.
Because that's just how the powerful are.

(By the way, when 5 people died in America because one of the scientists thought he should make his work "public", America demanded that Bayer (who held the patent on the anthrax antidote) hand it over... Something about moral responsibility and all that... and in both cases the people were relatively unanimous in their decision-making or even demanded it)

| 1