3 ms·

So should the plans for atomic weapons be available to anyone?

dublinben 7y ago
Why not? What are you going to do with them? It requires nation-state level resources to even attempt to build them. Even states dedicated to developing them against the wishes of the international community (i.e. North Korea) have been barely successful.
- criddell 7y ago
  It once required the smartest people utilizing resources from the wealthiest nations. 80 years later North Korea is making a pretty good effort. In another 80 years do you think it's unreasonable to think a wealthy individual might be able to build something? In other words, why would building an nuclear weapon not get easier?
  - catalogia 7y ago
    > In another 80 years do you think it's unreasonable to think a wealthy individual might be able to build something? They'd not be able to do it without the weapons grade material. The matter of getting that stuff isn't really a secret, it's just pretty expensive, takes a lot of time, and will be noticed by intelligence agencies. I don't see why any of that would change. The list of suspects will be short; anybody trying to refine U-235 would need huge quantities of natural uranium and a warehouse full of precision centrifuges. And anybody trying to create Pu-239 would need a nuclear reactor.
mdszy 7y ago
1. Nukes shouldn't even be a thing anymore, we should have disarmed long ago. 2. You say this as if any rando could build a nuke in their garage if they just had the plans. 3. You say this as if any large enough private weapons contractor couldn't figure out how to build a nuke. So yes. They should.
- LunaSea 7y ago
  > 1. Nukes shouldn't even be a thing anymore, we should have disarmed long ago. MAD is a thing for a reason so nukes should definitely not be disarmed
monocasa 7y ago
I mean, they are? http://alexwellerstein.com/atomic_patents/ http://alexwellerstein.com/atomic_patents/ Atomic bombs are literally 1940s technology; it's not that hard to figure out even if the weren't already published.
- JaimeThompson 7y ago
  The technology to make small, compact, high output thermonuclear weapons isn't out in the open nor is a lot of the technology used to reduce the CEP of ICBM warheads.
  - monocasa 7y ago
    The big thing we're missing for modern weapons is the nature of aerogel between the primary and secondary stages. You'll still get a nice boom if you screw that up.
    - cwkoss 7y ago
      Ooh neat, I had never heard about this use for aerogel. Do you have a speculation on the function of aerogel in a warhead? Useful for its thermal insulation properties?
      - monocasa 7y ago
        It's this stuff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOGBANK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOGBANK Basically we know why we want it (optimally igniting the second stage using the energy of the first stage), but we don't know exactly what it's made out of or the process for making it. We know it's gnarly, toxic stuff though.
Avamander 7y ago
Should programming languages exist? They allow writing malware. Should chemistry lessons exist? Mixing household chemicals could allow producing poisonous, flammable or explosive chemicals. Should physics lessons exist? They tell you how to build a catapult. Should cryptography exist? Only people with something to hide would use it... ... it's a really slippery slope. Restricting knowledge very likely only harms good people, bad people will get the secrets anyways.

Why not? What are you going to do with them? It requires nation-state level resources to even attempt to build them. Even states dedicated to developing them against the wishes of the international community (i.e. North Korea) have been barely successful.

criddell 7y ago
It once required the smartest people utilizing resources from the wealthiest nations. 80 years later North Korea is making a pretty good effort. In another 80 years do you think it's unreasonable to think a wealthy individual might be able to build something? In other words, why would building an nuclear weapon not get easier?
- catalogia 7y ago
  > In another 80 years do you think it's unreasonable to think a wealthy individual might be able to build something? They'd not be able to do it without the weapons grade material. The matter of getting that stuff isn't really a secret, it's just pretty expensive, takes a lot of time, and will be noticed by intelligence agencies. I don't see why any of that would change. The list of suspects will be short; anybody trying to refine U-235 would need huge quantities of natural uranium and a warehouse full of precision centrifuges. And anybody trying to create Pu-239 would need a nuclear reactor.

mdszy 7y ago

1. Nukes shouldn't even be a thing anymore, we should have disarmed long ago. 2. You say this as if any rando could build a nuke in their garage if they just had the plans. 3. You say this as if any large enough private weapons contractor couldn't figure out how to build a nuke. So yes. They should.

LunaSea 7y ago
> 1. Nukes shouldn't even be a thing anymore, we should have disarmed long ago. MAD is a thing for a reason so nukes should definitely not be disarmed

monocasa 7y ago

I mean, they are? http://alexwellerstein.com/atomic_patents/ http://alexwellerstein.com/atomic_patents/ Atomic bombs are literally 1940s technology; it's not that hard to figure out even if the weren't already published.

JaimeThompson 7y ago
The technology to make small, compact, high output thermonuclear weapons isn't out in the open nor is a lot of the technology used to reduce the CEP of ICBM warheads.
- monocasa 7y ago
  The big thing we're missing for modern weapons is the nature of aerogel between the primary and secondary stages. You'll still get a nice boom if you screw that up.
  - cwkoss 7y ago
    Ooh neat, I had never heard about this use for aerogel. Do you have a speculation on the function of aerogel in a warhead? Useful for its thermal insulation properties?
    - monocasa 7y ago
      It's this stuff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOGBANK https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOGBANK Basically we know why we want it (optimally igniting the second stage using the energy of the first stage), but we don't know exactly what it's made out of or the process for making it. We know it's gnarly, toxic stuff though.

Avamander 7y ago

Should programming languages exist? They allow writing malware. Should chemistry lessons exist? Mixing household chemicals could allow producing poisonous, flammable or explosive chemicals. Should physics lessons exist? They tell you how to build a catapult. Should cryptography exist? Only people with something to hide would use it... ... it's a really slippery slope. Restricting knowledge very likely only harms good people, bad people will get the secrets anyways.