Unfortunately by the time this detects a piece of ivory, the damage is already done. If it took 3 years to inject 20 rhinos, it's unlikely that a large enough portion of the population could be injected to act as an effective deterrent for those actually killing the animals. Even for those actually involved in moving the ivory, it's only a deterrent if they actually face consequences at these borders - many states have weak enforcement of anti-ivory laws, and many more have bribable customs agents. Further, ivory has a value to weight ratio that is extremely conducive to smuggling.
By comparison, infusion which puts a dye and an anti-consumption toxin in the horns to render the ivory worthless and thus prevent the animals from being killed in the first place is a well developed and inexpensive process that has proven effective.[0] I don't see how radioisotope injection is an improvement.
This is a proof of concept project. The “3 years” is not because of some inherent difficulty, it’s just a typical research project.
From the article:
> …will closely monitor the health and vital statistics of the rhinos over a period of six months, in order to determine the viability of this approach.
If this approach is shown to be healthy, I’m sure it could be done much faster.
I often see this (gp's) sentient on HN and it is quite surprising to me given how people here specifically work in technology. Are we not intimately familiar with how one typically starts with small trial groups before we scale, so that we understand the effectiveness and safety? Or are we just "move fast and break things" and leave a mess in our wake with no one spending time to clean anything up. I guess that would explain enshitification.
But seriously, S-curves aren't just about how the middle part looks exponential. Both ends are slow. Slow to start and slow to end. When technology B replaces technology A it is (almost) always WORSE than technology A initially. The difference is that its theoretical maximum is higher. Because guess what? In the long run if you stack a bunch of S-curves together, you get an exponential curve. And this is how so much technology has improved, including transistors, solar, batteries, and so on. Sometimes this slow start can be on the order of decades! The Motorola DynaTAC 8000X (1983) wasn't "a failure," it was a step to the IBM Simon (1992) which was a step to the iPhone (2007).
So if you're exclusively chasing things that are better *now*, you won't make any progress. You have to invest.
> After three years of meticulous and dedicated hard work, the Rhisotope Project at Wits University has successfully inserted low doses of radioisotopes into 20 live rhinoceros.
Sounds like there is some inherent difficulty requiring years of meticulous and dedicated hard work to insert doses into 20 live rhinoceroses.
Gotta wonder if it would be better to instead focus on making it easier to source keratin from a bioreactor / cell culture. Crash the market with "counterfeit" rhino keratin which is as good as the real stuff anyhow.
One reason it’s an improvement is that radiation is detectable by already-existing methods used at the borders. So it will help catch them in the act of smuggling.
Unfortunately by the time this detects a piece of ivory, the damage is already done. If it took 3 years to inject 20 rhinos, it's unlikely that a large enough portion of the population could be injected to act as an effective deterrent for those actually killing the animals. Even for those actually involved in moving the ivory, it's only a deterrent if they actually face consequences at these borders - many states have weak enforcement of anti-ivory laws, and many more have bribable customs agents. Further, ivory has a value to weight ratio that is extremely conducive to smuggling.
> Over 11 000 radiation detection portal monitors are installed at airports, harbours and other ports of entry, including thousands of trained personnel equipped with radiation detectors, all of which can detect the smallest radioactive particles.
I didn’t realize this. Injecting small, safe radioactive material into rhino horns seems like an incredibly good hack: turn all that nuclear monitoring equipment into poached animal artifact detectors.
Classic case of a societal problem that technology tries to paper over, and does a poor job doing so. Rhino horns are used for their keratin and "traditional" medicine ingredients.
Radiation portal monitors will not detect all quantities and there are simple techniques for masking these detections with sheilding, or via nuisance alarms if they are detected. [1]
Shark fin extraction, for shark fin soup, has a similar cultural problem. Influential people in the communities that consume these products, ie Yao Ming, could make a lot more progress by simply having public campaigns against it. [2]
[1] Source: me, I am a radation detecion PhD who works on similar kinds of problems, with similarly or more capable systems.
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJG7RaLX-DM
Any deterrence scheme relies on awareness and uncertainty just as much, if not more than, an actual technology. If poachers think it will raise the chances of detection, even if that chance isn’t 100%, that’s just as good to deter them.
> Radiation portal monitors will not detect all quantities and there are simple techniques for masking these detections with sheilding, or via nuisance alarms if they are detected.
I think more than actual quantities involved, the scary risk of radiation, however unlikely, may be a bigger deterrent for the consumers of these products. The more widely this news spreads, the better it is for the Rhinos.
> Although the amount in a single banana is small in environmental and medical terms, the radioactivity from a truckload of bananas is capable of causing a false alarm when passed through a Radiation Portal Monitor used to detect possible smuggling of nuclear material at U.S. ports.
Bananas are not so radioactive, my guess is that they are using a stronger radioactive source. Perhaps hide the horn inside a truck full of bananas? I guess the horn will be still more radioactive.
Also, each radioactive source produce radioactivity with different energy, so you can use specialized equipment to identify the source. (We used one in the lab in an undergraduate couse of Physics. It's not very big, like the size of a shoe.)
Probably is by the time they are found, the rhino is dead. They might catch the last guy holding the bag, but I suspect it's passed through a few different groups by the time it reaches the airport. So the poachers just go on poaching as they already got paid.
But the idea of the test is that this could be done in a wider scale. If a significant portion of horns are being confiscated (via radiation sensors) then there’s fewer horns being sold and less money available for all those middleman groups. Over time the market goes away.
Perhaps similar to how the market for stolen iPhones dried up once people could remotely brick their stole phone. There’s just less money to be made so thieves move on to more lucrative targets.
I wonder what radioisotopes they’re using. I assume it’s a gamma emitter because alpha and beta would be readily absorbed by the horn and any packaging material?
Speaking as a South African, I hope this can make a difference, every little bit helps.
Unless it can completely stop poaching (which on its own I think is unlikely) I don't think it will solve the fundamental issue that drives poaching, that there is a market willing to pay exorbitant fees.
Ivory has zero physiological medicinal effects, but their rareness convinces certain kinds of (shithead) people that they "must". The rarer the material, the more "special" it becomes, driving up the price further and the higher the price, the more emboldened the poachers become.
I see that it doesn't bother anyone else that "novel" is capitalized for no reason in the title of the article (the actual article, not just the HN title). So be it, I'll see myself out.
At first I thought this was some sort of joke or satire, like the Alameda-Weehawken burrito pipeline. Then I read the bit about rhino horn trafficking and I was like... well, shoot, that's actually a pretty good idea!
Readit News
By comparison, infusion which puts a dye and an anti-consumption toxin in the horns to render the ivory worthless and thus prevent the animals from being killed in the first place is a well developed and inexpensive process that has proven effective.[0] I don't see how radioisotope injection is an improvement.
[0] https://rhinorescueproject.org/how-it-works/
From the article:
> …will closely monitor the health and vital statistics of the rhinos over a period of six months, in order to determine the viability of this approach.
If this approach is shown to be healthy, I’m sure it could be done much faster.
But seriously, S-curves aren't just about how the middle part looks exponential. Both ends are slow. Slow to start and slow to end. When technology B replaces technology A it is (almost) always WORSE than technology A initially. The difference is that its theoretical maximum is higher. Because guess what? In the long run if you stack a bunch of S-curves together, you get an exponential curve. And this is how so much technology has improved, including transistors, solar, batteries, and so on. Sometimes this slow start can be on the order of decades! The Motorola DynaTAC 8000X (1983) wasn't "a failure," it was a step to the IBM Simon (1992) which was a step to the iPhone (2007).
So if you're exclusively chasing things that are better *now*, you won't make any progress. You have to invest.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_readiness_level
Sounds like there is some inherent difficulty requiring years of meticulous and dedicated hard work to insert doses into 20 live rhinoceroses.
I’m not sure those exist, but sounds like something you want to scan for on the borderline
Deleted Comment
Reminds me of one of the worst "abolish the Police" arguments: By the time you put a murderer in jail, the victim is already dead.
I didn’t realize this. Injecting small, safe radioactive material into rhino horns seems like an incredibly good hack: turn all that nuclear monitoring equipment into poached animal artifact detectors.
Radiation portal monitors will not detect all quantities and there are simple techniques for masking these detections with sheilding, or via nuisance alarms if they are detected. [1]
Shark fin extraction, for shark fin soup, has a similar cultural problem. Influential people in the communities that consume these products, ie Yao Ming, could make a lot more progress by simply having public campaigns against it. [2]
[1] Source: me, I am a radation detecion PhD who works on similar kinds of problems, with similarly or more capable systems. [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJG7RaLX-DM
The "product" is ruined.
I think more than actual quantities involved, the scary risk of radiation, however unlikely, may be a bigger deterrent for the consumers of these products. The more widely this news spreads, the better it is for the Rhinos.
There's definite a positive (non-zero) threshold below which it doesn't trigger.
Bananas are radioactive, and while a single banana doesn't trigger the alarms, a lot of bananas might!
from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
> Although the amount in a single banana is small in environmental and medical terms, the radioactivity from a truckload of bananas is capable of causing a false alarm when passed through a Radiation Portal Monitor used to detect possible smuggling of nuclear material at U.S. ports.
If it was you wouldn’t see bananas at the supermarket
Besides - they worked on this for three years. They likely thought this through beyond banana comparisons…
Because that's what the horn-smugglers will be carrying in attempts to deflect why the airport scanner is detecting radiation in their luggage.
Also, each radioactive source produce radioactivity with different energy, so you can use specialized equipment to identify the source. (We used one in the lab in an undergraduate couse of Physics. It's not very big, like the size of a shoe.)
But the idea of the test is that this could be done in a wider scale. If a significant portion of horns are being confiscated (via radiation sensors) then there’s fewer horns being sold and less money available for all those middleman groups. Over time the market goes away.
Perhaps similar to how the market for stolen iPhones dried up once people could remotely brick their stole phone. There’s just less money to be made so thieves move on to more lucrative targets.
I can't find a reference, but that reminds me of an old project to dye rhino horns pink. Sadly, a few rhinos didn't survive the process.
I didn't know this statistic before - this is disheartening.
> current extinctions were ‘up to 100 times higher than the background rate.’
https://e360.yale.edu/features/global_extinction_rates_why_d...
Unless it can completely stop poaching (which on its own I think is unlikely) I don't think it will solve the fundamental issue that drives poaching, that there is a market willing to pay exorbitant fees.
Ivory has zero physiological medicinal effects, but their rareness convinces certain kinds of (shithead) people that they "must". The rarer the material, the more "special" it becomes, driving up the price further and the higher the price, the more emboldened the poachers become.
A complementary strategy is to relentlessly name and shame the backward cultures that compose this shitheadedness.
So say it with me: Chinese* traditional medicine is backwards and primitive. Chinese ivory buyers are a shameful stain upon humanity.
* The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) reports that nearly all of the current demand for elephant ivory comes from the Chinese market. -https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/economics-...