Biosecurity protocol | Wikipedia audio article
Channel: wikipedia tts
Date: 2019-06-07

This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosecurity_protocol





Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.

Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain

Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.

Listen on Google Assistant through Extra Audio:
https://assistant.google.com/services/invoke/uid/0000001a130b3f91
Other Wikipedia audio articles at:
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wikipedia+tts
Upload your own Wikipedia articles through:
https://github.com/nodef/wikipedia-tts
Speaking Rate: 0.8107281112641412
Voice name: en-US-Wavenet-C


"I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think."
- Socrates


SUMMARY
=======
Biosecurity protocol refers to several politically controversial attempts to unify global biosecurity measures and responses, in a similar manner to a biosafety protocol. Although some propose a "Biosecurity Protocol" to extend the Biosafety Protocol to organisms considered weapons (already controlled by UN arms proliferation treaties), others argue this is an inappropriate response to military threats, and argue for a broad biodefense instead.  
As of 2002, the latter view was prevalent in military and scientific circles, the former in NGOs, some United Nations agencies, and Green Parties.  Most cooperation was restricted to attempts to define "biosecurity" itself.  
A major issue is whether to accept the Precautionary Principle, or by extension, any restrictions on militarily useful research by major powers.  Compromises, e.g. the 2002 US government request to scientists to delete procedural details of experiments on dangerous organisms, are strongly resisted by most American scientists. Extreme positions, e.g. Bill Joy's argument for relinquishment of nanotechnology and artificial intelligence, are considered a legitimate part of the debate, but have yet to achieve any serious political support, even among Green Parties.
Whether these negotiations and compromises will yield a comprehensive biosecurity protocol is doubtful. It seems that basic political differences drive the debate which are unlikely to easily resolve, and that military alliances will influence tax, trade, and tariff systems and import/export restrictions more than any diplomatic or scientific protocol.