@sawevans
Senior policy advisor, US National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology. Also STS researcher working on experiments in governing the line between science and tech that helps and harms. Tweets (or whatever we call them here) are my own.
They note that in the paper, but the setting up of those meetings is also not just a scientific process. How concerned we need to be depends on whose concerns matter and who has authority to do something about them. Those are the debates that are needed.
So many of these scientists know social scientists who could have engaged productively with these ideas as they were forming, but it seems like they wanted to roll out the old playbook of scientists acting independently. This isn’t just scientists decision to make.
www.nytimes.com/2024/12/12/s...
STS scholars – Science & Technology Studies
by @anthrobite.bsky.social
bsky.app/starter-pack...
Public interest technology starter pack
by @merbroussard.bsky.social
bsky.app/starter-pack...
I’m so tired of this benefits/risks framework, with no accounting for *who* benefits/is harmed, and whether those with the power care. How does anyone find this helpful, other than to enable those with power to keep it? www.theguardian.com/commentisfre...
Love that my first post over here is a screenshot of my kids school email. So many happenings! What are they?! Nobody knows 👻