Question: How does this idea guarantee that the contamination did not happen on purpose otherwise or accidentally through articles like this ? (Not speaking for the companies since I am quite sure that they don't care... Just a practical consideration.)

I am currently working on a similar post that comes from an eliminative perspective.

I wouldn't say that the presented "counting argument" is a "central reason". The central reason is an a priori notion that if "x can be achieved by scheming" someone who wants x will scheme

You forgot to mention VASOR136, a trace vapor detection unit that is very versatile. The VASOR 136 holds 36 bees in cartridges. They are all ready to detect the presence of something in the air.

This is no BS or joke.

I have no idea what this is about but it seems to me that you are making confidential conversation about Teresa <redacted> public, possibly without her consent. Maybe because she is homeless. Can someone explain to me like I am five why this on lesswrong?