I do not wish to make a claim beyond my expertise. My expertise is not in biology. I therefore defer to the author's claims that these things are extremely difficult.
Question: Given the observations of
(1) rapid breakthroughs in biology, where limited observational data was able to bootstrap e.g. AlphaFold, which is mentioned in another of this author's blog posts: https://blog.genesmindsmachines.com/p/no-alphafold-has-not-c...
(2) the details of how a misspecified task, reward hacking, and willingness to keep going until a solution was reached, was behind the OpenAI-HuggingFace incident
Is it really so far removed from plausibility as the author suggests? Even on the 2029 scale?
I mean, good if so, but if the historical trends remain, in about a month or so we should see open weights models that are just as capable of hacking, coordination, and persistence as the OpenAI model, so any DNA/RNA systems that are on a network connected to the internet are likely to be vulnerable regardless of firewalls or other security considerations.
Remember, an agent tasked with a goal like this isn't like one disgruntled teenager who neither knows nor cares what the difference between DNA and RNA is, the HF incident was around a thousand agents that just kept on going and going in pursuit of the goal they misunderstood.
I will not share my ideas about what I'd do if this was a game and I was red-teaming it. I don't wish to give misanthropic teenagers (or more likely, their LLMs) any ideas.
Still, I can take some hope from the author saying it's unlikely…
… despite having read basically the same dismissal about AI and Go just a few months before AlphaGo.