TL;DR: Bio “infohazard” filtering/vetting will be handled by Ben Snyder or someone he finds, probably without my help. I think this is (going to be) a big success that will reduce, at least, bio risk.
Details:
They (*arxiv) are already interested (and somewhat doing) this
So no need for me to push this agenda with them.
Why I think so:
A founder from bioRxiv and medRxiv, Richard Sever, says about this filtering:
“This is desirable and in fact already happens to an extent”
“arXiv and bioRxiv/medRxiv already communicate regularly”
I can provide the references if you want
We think they (*arxiv) might be missing resources
Such as people to do the vetting—people who can go over submitted bio papers and decide if they’re dual-use.
Ben Snyder will try to find
People who can do this vetting
Funding for these people
This might require a software system
For example, we might want dual-use papers to be accessible to a specific community but not freely available on the internet.
If this is so—we might want to keep them in a system that isn’t too easily hackable.
I might personally be a good fit to write this system (specifically because I think I have a reasonable security mindset), but by default I’ll be hands-off this project unless Ben contacts me
This project is still in the early stages, and I have not yet developed a concrete hypothesis about what would constitute “good guidelines that a) reduce GCBR and b) preprint servers will approve of.” arXiv and other servers already use humans to do some basic vetting, so expanding their mandate to cover dual use issues is an option, but there may be cheaper things (like researcher self-certification) to try first.
Once I have a hypothesis that other EA biosecurity people agree is worth testing, the next step is getting in touch with preprint server administrators and users to see what they think. This should help answer the other questions you raise.
EDIT: I am no longer leading this project, and after talking to a few biosecurity professionals, the project is on hold.
Update:
TL;DR: Bio “infohazard” filtering/vetting will be handled by Ben Snyder or someone he finds, probably without my help. I think this is (going to be) a big success that will reduce, at least, bio risk.
Details:
They (*arxiv) are already interested (and somewhat doing) this
So no need for me to push this agenda with them.
Why I think so:
A founder from bioRxiv and medRxiv, Richard Sever, says about this filtering:
“This is desirable and in fact already happens to an extent”
“arXiv and bioRxiv/medRxiv already communicate regularly”
I can provide the references if you want
We think they (*arxiv) might be missing resources
Such as people to do the vetting—people who can go over submitted bio papers and decide if they’re dual-use.
Ben Snyder will try to find
People who can do this vetting
Funding for these people
This might require a software system
For example, we might want dual-use papers to be accessible to a specific community but not freely available on the internet.
If this is so—we might want to keep them in a system that isn’t too easily hackable.
I might personally be a good fit to write this system (specifically because I think I have a reasonable security mindset), but by default I’ll be hands-off this project unless Ben contacts me
So the vetting will be done by humans? Is this sustainable in the long term? E.g. how quickly does the number of submissions grow?
I would say two things about this.
This project is still in the early stages, and I have not yet developed a concrete hypothesis about what would constitute “good guidelines that a) reduce GCBR and b) preprint servers will approve of.” arXiv and other servers already use humans to do some basic vetting, so expanding their mandate to cover dual use issues is an option, but there may be cheaper things (like researcher self-certification) to try first.
Once I have a hypothesis that other EA biosecurity people agree is worth testing, the next step is getting in touch with preprint server administrators and users to see what they think. This should help answer the other questions you raise.
EDIT: I am no longer leading this project, and after talking to a few biosecurity professionals, the project is on hold.
I don’t know, I assume it’s done by humans.
My priors are:
Do something manually before automating it
Talk to the users (medXiv, bioXiv) about their situation before picking a solution
At some point this will be at least somewhat automated, reducing at least most of the human work
We are looking for another project lead:
https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/qPEmQtgnbNgmLTmi4/biosecurity-dual-use-filtering-project-proposal-seeking