> We have new ways to wipe out mosquito-borne diseases with minimal environmental cost.
Am I the only one who finds the hubris in this sentence chilling? Surely there's absolutely no way that we can be sure of the impact on the ecosystem of eradicating an entire species? And more so, surely we just can't be that confident of something like that when we have so little understanding of the complexities of most ecosystems mosquitos exist in.
The article has a tone of "we can't we wipe out mosquitos as fast as we should because of all this regulation slowing us down", but I can't help feel that's a good thing.
Even if it is somehow true that mosquitos don't play an important part in any ecosystems, surely it's a good thing that the mechanisms for wiping out an entire species are highly regulated, and can only be used if there's an extremely high bar of certainty.
We should know from global warming, that the cost of accidentally messing with nature systems can be really high, and we should tread carefully.
Edit: I know this is hacker news, and a lot of people are likely to be annoyed that I'm advocating for slowing down bio-tech developments. But I really think "care" is such an under-appreciated asset these days.
- the sad thing is as a person from a developing country i have developed resistance to these diseases but unfortunately we cannot say the same for everyone in developed countries
Am I the only one who finds the hubris in this sentence chilling? Surely there's absolutely no way that we can be sure of the impact on the ecosystem of eradicating an entire species? And more so, surely we just can't be that confident of something like that when we have so little understanding of the complexities of most ecosystems mosquitos exist in.
The article has a tone of "we can't we wipe out mosquitos as fast as we should because of all this regulation slowing us down", but I can't help feel that's a good thing.
Even if it is somehow true that mosquitos don't play an important part in any ecosystems, surely it's a good thing that the mechanisms for wiping out an entire species are highly regulated, and can only be used if there's an extremely high bar of certainty.
We should know from global warming, that the cost of accidentally messing with nature systems can be really high, and we should tread carefully.
Edit: I know this is hacker news, and a lot of people are likely to be annoyed that I'm advocating for slowing down bio-tech developments. But I really think "care" is such an under-appreciated asset these days.
... both are luddite in nature one can sandbox a and b and observe what's up cool article I myself don't like the fuckers.