4 ms·

> And the systems we have in place still have human beings involved While I agree very strongly[1] wist the rest of that comment, it is very important to requi

by pdkl95 10y ago

> And the systems we have in place still have human beings involved While I agree very strongly[1] wist the rest of that comment, it is very important to require some human involvement. This isn't theoretical. Without Stanislav Petrov's good judgment[2] that the automated warning about an incoming missile attack was a false alarm, WW3 might have started in 1983. [1] How strongly? My username is a reference to a fictional drug in Schismatrix that forces the user to adapt to a new perspective/mode-of-thought. Tech only increases, so our need to learn how to live together also becomes increasingly urgent. [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alarm_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alar...

soneca 10y ago
I agree. Despite how this final comment looks, through the rest of the episode, he does not advocate in any way that we should find a way to automatize completely this kind of the decision. I agree that this final comment hints this way, but I think it is just the consequence of being out of the context. What seems to be his opinion is the danger of giving so much power in the hands of only one man (in this case the John Kennedy as the President of the USA and Nikita Khrushchev as First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union). Never before the nuclear weapons one human being has had such a destructive power. In his other podcasts, he alerts about this danger in the current political environment as Obama worked to concentrate even more power in the presidency during his time and we never know who might end up being president in the future, it is a very risky thing to do. For some, Trump is the personification of this exact risk; but for others, who support Trump now, it worth thinking that they don't know either who might end up next at the presidency with all this power.
- tormeh 10y ago
  The heads of state don't have a button linked directly to the weapons, though. They have to command others to launch it, and commands can be disobeyed. Sure, the consequences of treason are dire, but a nuclear counterattack is also highly unpleasant.
  - bicubic 10y ago
    There is very little scope to disobey a direct order from the president. Disobeying the order and committing treason will only briefly delay the execution of the order as it's passed down to the next in line fallback. Specifically where nuclear strikes are concerned, a lot of planning has gone into maximising the probability of compliance. Missile combat crew carry a sidearm to threaten their counterpart with death if they refuse to act on an authenticated launch order. They wear 4 point harnesses during launch sequence, primarily as a psychological device to prevent them from getting up and walking away mid sequence if their conscience gets the better of them, etc. If trump or any other president said launch, there would be a launch.
    - tormeh 10y ago
      It's not about conscience, though. It's about you or at least many of your friends and family either burning or starving to death. That's the thing about MAD: It's mutual.
      - roywiggins 10y ago
        For all the missile guys know, the Russian missiles are already in the air. Nobody's likely to tell them it's a first strike.
        tormeh 10y ago
        Yeah, but there's an entire chain of command. I have a hard time believing that all the generals will go along with starting a nuclear war.
        roywiggins 10y ago
        They don't all have to go along. See the "execution" section- only a couple of senior officers have to authenticate the President, and issue the order electronically. At that point only one chain between them and a launch crew have to obey the orders to launch. The whole process is meant to only take a few minutes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Integrated_Operational_Plan?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Integrated_Operational_... Everyone involved in the chain is part of the Personnel Reliability Program. It's mostly to make sure someone doesn't launch without an order but also probably to make sure that they will follow orders, including launch orders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personnel_Reliability_Program?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personnel_Reliability_Program?...

by pdkl95 10y ago

soneca 10y ago

I agree. Despite how this final comment looks, through the rest of the episode, he does not advocate in any way that we should find a way to automatize completely this kind of the decision. I agree that this final comment hints this way, but I think it is just the consequence of being out of the context. What seems to be his opinion is the danger of giving so much power in the hands of only one man (in this case the John Kennedy as the President of the USA and Nikita Khrushchev as First Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union). Never before the nuclear weapons one human being has had such a destructive power. In his other podcasts, he alerts about this danger in the current political environment as Obama worked to concentrate even more power in the presidency during his time and we never know who might end up being president in the future, it is a very risky thing to do. For some, Trump is the personification of this exact risk; but for others, who support Trump now, it worth thinking that they don't know either who might end up next at the presidency with all this power.

tormeh 10y ago
The heads of state don't have a button linked directly to the weapons, though. They have to command others to launch it, and commands can be disobeyed. Sure, the consequences of treason are dire, but a nuclear counterattack is also highly unpleasant.
- bicubic 10y ago
  There is very little scope to disobey a direct order from the president. Disobeying the order and committing treason will only briefly delay the execution of the order as it's passed down to the next in line fallback. Specifically where nuclear strikes are concerned, a lot of planning has gone into maximising the probability of compliance. Missile combat crew carry a sidearm to threaten their counterpart with death if they refuse to act on an authenticated launch order. They wear 4 point harnesses during launch sequence, primarily as a psychological device to prevent them from getting up and walking away mid sequence if their conscience gets the better of them, etc. If trump or any other president said launch, there would be a launch.
  - tormeh 10y ago
    It's not about conscience, though. It's about you or at least many of your friends and family either burning or starving to death. That's the thing about MAD: It's mutual.
    - roywiggins 10y ago
      For all the missile guys know, the Russian missiles are already in the air. Nobody's likely to tell them it's a first strike.
      - tormeh 10y ago
        Yeah, but there's an entire chain of command. I have a hard time believing that all the generals will go along with starting a nuclear war.
        roywiggins 10y ago
        They don't all have to go along. See the "execution" section- only a couple of senior officers have to authenticate the President, and issue the order electronically. At that point only one chain between them and a launch crew have to obey the orders to launch. The whole process is meant to only take a few minutes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Integrated_Operational_Plan?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Integrated_Operational_... Everyone involved in the chain is part of the Personnel Reliability Program. It's mostly to make sure someone doesn't launch without an order but also probably to make sure that they will follow orders, including launch orders. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personnel_Reliability_Program?wprov=sfla1 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personnel_Reliability_Program?...