[pure-awesome]

I was confused what they meant by "simulation". But they basically mean like a role-playing game. Like, they acted out how they would respond in that particular situation.

This site has more info:

http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/events/2001_darkwint...

http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/events/2001_darkwint...

[yorwba]

I'm confused how the outputs of the simulation can be considered as anything more than a reflection of the inputs. E.g. the findings include a description of how the public reacts, but that reaction was created by the simulators according to what they thought would happen. Then they they get to write a report saying that "the simulation showed X would happen", even though that's equivalent to "we thought X would happen, so we made it happen in the simulation".

I guess there's value in setting up a situation where people actually consider what would happen and write down what they come up with. At least that can point out problems of the "obvious once you think about it" variety.

[Sharlin]

Yes. Like a war game. A standard way to prepare for contingency scenarios. Not all simulations are computer simulations ;)

[pure-awesome]

I wasn't only thinking of computer simulations. The word "simulation" is very vague.

It could potentially mean one of:

- Computer Simulation

- Pen & Paper Mathematical models

- Pen & Paper narrative modelling (i.e., writing a paper about different situations and the possible contingency plans - though granted this is not usually referred to as "simulation")

- Role-playing a situation via speech

- Acting out a situation with props and physical movement / simulated limited communication

- Sending out simulated broadcasts ("this is only a test")

- Sending out false but believable broadcasts

- Infecting the public with a (hopefully less harmful) disease in order to gauge response.

[mmahemoff]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_simulation

[Symmetry]

A recent 80,000 Hours podcast had a pretty good explanation of the topic. See #11

https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/cassidy-nelson-12-wa...

[hyfgfh]

CDD 2001 larp

[sixdimensional]

In security, this is sometimes known as “table top exercises” and/or scenario based testing.

[dmix]

> Discussions, debates (some rather heated), and decisions focused on the public health response, lack of an adequate supply of smallpox vaccine, ...

They seem to have missed access to testing, forget vaccines, which is the big thing missing today, at least in the US in the first month or so + many other countries. Not to mention following the limitations of the WHO, CDC, et al guidelines in a scenario with plenty of unknowns instead of one we know well like Smallpox (which caused the first epidemics in the Americas, Haiti to be specific, in 1507 with the arrival of Christopher Columbus - the opposite of something novel).

But I guess this bioware scenario is relying heavily on the idea that US intelligence community and (public/private) health care systems will find out exactly what it was rather quickly and already have established testing and vaccines. Which to be honest would be nice to have right now and makes more sense for a biowarfare attack than the global epidemic we currently have.

Edit: nice find by the way, it puts the project in better perspective in regards to scale and participants. From the stuff I've read/watched it seems these "war game" scenarios have become quite frequent in many areas of the US and federally (with plenty thanks to spending on counter-terrorism in places like NYC). Much like the endless NATO wargames since the cold war started and more recently with Russia. The politics and bureaucracy, especially early on, seems inescapable and hard to reliably war game IMO. Especially for something without a clear "adversary" or tactical weapon.

[duxup]

Can you have a sort of mass scale viral testing... even available?

Is that a thing? Or are tests specific to a given virus?