9 ms·
Time to Stop the ‘Doomsday Clock’. – Lawrence M. Krauss
- michaelhoffman 7y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss
- iron0013 7y agoReading the Wikipedia article makes it obvious why he would write an article like this. He was forced to resign from the board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists after allegations of his sexual misconduct came to light and he has a grudge. Pretty disappointing, honestly, that he let his personal issues override his principles.
- ramblerman 7y agoWhat? a) From Wikipedia: The allegations were from buzzfeed, and were later unsubstantiated in an official enquiry with the 'victim' who said "she did not feel victimized, felt it was a clumsy interpersonal interaction and thought she had handled it in the moment." b) What does this have to do with his opinion on the doomsday clock? Honestly this outrage culture, and mob mentality is pathetic.
- Numberwang 7y agoWell, he was a friend if Epstein as well, so I would not trust his character very much. But yes, it is not really relevant here.
- gorydetails 7y agoThe facts don't matter. His reputation has taken a substantial hit, and he's been "soft-cancelled." It's hard to come back from that, in any capacity.
- iron0013 7y agoI’m not sure why you’re pretending to be puzzled; regardless of the veracity of the complaints, the Bulletin board was concerned enough that they did not want him there: “Krauss resigned from the position of chair of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Board of Sponsors when informed that its other members felt his presence was distracting "from the ability of the Bulletin to effectively carry out [its] work".[34][35]” And could you spare us the boilerplate reactionary moaning about outrage culture?
- GhettoMaestro 7y agoYou should seriously consider shooting yourself in the head with a large caliber handgun.
- gorydetails 7y ago> And could you spare us the boilerplate reactionary moaning about outrage culture? Not GP, but cancel culture is, sadly, a real phenomenon.
- DagAgren 7y ago"Cancel culture" is a code word for "apparently actions now have consequences and I don't like it". He was a friend of Epstein, dude. He helped Epstein after he was convicted of being a pedophile pimp (https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-science-donations-apologies-statements https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-ep...). And here he is, writing articles for the Wall Street Journal after being supposedly "cancelled". He knowingly helped a pedophile rapist. He has not faced anywhere near the amount of consequences he deserves.
- ftr45 7y agoyou are completely right
- gorydetails 7y ago"Cancel culture" is a set of cultural behaviors whereby poorly or incompletely substantiated allegations result in the tarnishing of reputations via virtue signaling amplification.
- earthboundkid 7y agoB) The clock is a publicity stunt by an organization that he has reason to feel aggrieved by. It's a conflict of interests not to mention that he has another axe to grind with them.
- foldr 7y ago>the 'victim' The buzzfeed article details quite a number of allegations. There is no one victim. In any case, the victim you're referring to essentially confirmed that the allegation was true. She merely said (in effect) that she was not particularly bothered that Krauss had touched her breast without permission. That does not make the behavior appropriate. See also the ASU investigation report, which is available here: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/lawrence-krauss-sexual-harassment-report https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/lawrence-k... Besides all that, Krauss unapologetically helped Epstein after he was released from prison.
- cgriswald 7y agoI've upvoted you for two reasons. First, I think you're sincere. Second, I think it's important that someone respond to you rather than just downvote you and you're currently greyed. > There is no one victim. This is not relevant. @iron0013 didn't cite anything other than a brief snippet of the Wikipedia article. No other evidence was provided and no argument was made linking the snippet to Krauss' credibility or arguments. As far as I can tell, @iron0013 saw this snippet and immediately wrote of Krauss. That's not a reasonable position and it spawned this subthread, which, although I've participated in it, I find to be mostly off-topic. > She merely said (in effect) that she was not particularly bothered that Krauss had touched her breast without permission. You're paraphrasing a Buzzfeed article which is paraphrasing an ASU report which paraphrased the alleged victim. Here is her statement to the public: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr9OIty2XGg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wr9OIty2XGg > See also the ASU investigation report, which is available here: Actually, here: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5015756-Krauss-Determinations.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5015756-Krauss-Deter... It's important to note that this report was prepared by a potential party to the allegations for the same party. It cannot simply be cited as evidence. At best, it should be treated as a suspect secondary source. In no case is it appropriate to treat it as a conviction. Krauss' appeal also ought to be considered, whether it redeems or condemns him: https://drive.google.com/file/d/10lHwatvaGfmWNc3NdoioncYi7daK1a-M/view https://drive.google.com/file/d/10lHwatvaGfmWNc3NdoioncYi7da... As well as his retirement letter: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5015757-Krauss-Retirement-Letter.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5015757-Krauss-Retir... > Besides all that, Krauss unapologetically helped Epstein after he was released from prison. This is wholly unrelated to his argument against the Doomsday Clock than the allegations which lead to his resignation from The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists. And this is the crux of the issue. With extremely limited evidence (far, far less than you or I have provided), @iron0013 decided Krauss should be completely ignored, without even consider Krauss' argument. He's certainly free to do so, but based on the voting down of his comment, I'm happy to believe that the majority of people don't want to live in a world where others can be socially, professionally, and politically ostracized for alleged wrongdoing without so much as a trial. I've offered the evidence here so people can make their own determinations, but I do so with the understanding that this entire subthread is off-topic and irrelevant to the issue at hand. For me, personally, I don't have enough information to convict him or acquit him; and I think the rational choice is to acknowledge that the accusations exist. At best, I think @iron0013 could have pointed out the circumstances of Krauss' resignation, but even then, it's not relevant to the arguments Krauss makes. His motivation largely doesn't matter unless you're trying to somehow not 'let him win.'
- rc_mob 7y agoOh goodness. He is trying to tell us that scientists cannot use this to keep the public aware of nuclear war threat. I didn’t even see one negative of having the clock in the article. Just saying over and over science is not politics.
- brink 7y agoIt's fear mongering.
- Frost1x 7y agoEntirely correct. My question is: if there really is a crisis (e.g. nuclear war threat, climate change, etc.), these days, how do you get the general population to notice and act accordingly without fear mongering? I'm not sure I have a better solution, unfortunately. I tend not to support fear mongering and typically lean on providing education, but that requires time that some situations don't allot for. In the case of the doomsday clock, it makes some sense. The problem is the fear factor has really disappeared and few today experienced the fear of real nuclear threats like those during the peak of the cold war.
- cr0sh 7y ago> The problem is the fear factor has really disappeared and few today experienced the fear of real nuclear threats like those during the peak of the cold war. Few even know about the clock, or what it represents, or historically represented. Few understand the existential dangers humanity is under threat from; those that do shout into a void of apathy, hardly even receiving an echo. Some are patted on the head with a "That's nice dear..." or worse, met with scorn and anger. The world has forgotten the we have the literal power to destroy ourselves, to make the planet virtually uninhabitable for humanity, if not most of life, by our acts. Some in power have even had the gall to ask why we shouldn't use these weapons we have, otherwise why have them? Ignorant. Fools. The only way humanity will learn its lesson is by abject overpowering demonstration. Of course, by then, it will be too late. But the lesson will be learned, in the most harsh manner possible.
- 7y ago
- basseq 7y ago> The clock is a publicity stunt—and a successful one. Is it? I had no idea it was still a thing. I associate it first and foremost with fiction. Specifically, Dr. Strangelove: the campy black comedy that's fifty-six (56) years old. If pushed, I probably would have guessed it was a real thing from the Cold War. Let me be clear: I couldn't have said with certainty that the Doomsday Clock was a real thing. I had no idea that it was maintained in 2020. It belongs in the era of Burt Ward in tights. "Time to Stop the 'Doomsday Clock' — Because No One Cares" might be a better title.
- arethuza 7y agoIt's not quite so "campy" when you realise how seriously people who were actual nuclear war planners regarded Dr. Strangelove: https://www.wired.com/2018/03/geeks-guide-doctor-strangelove/ https://www.wired.com/2018/03/geeks-guide-doctor-strangelove... I can recommend Ellsberg's book on nuclear war planning if you have difficulties staying awake at night.
- jmkni 7y ago> I can recommend Ellsberg's book on nuclear war planning if you have difficulties staying awake at night. Are you implying it's boring?
- Nashooo 7y agoI think Parent means that the contents of this book WILL keep you awake at night.
- arethuza 7y agoNo - I meant its literally the only book that I have read that caused me to have difficulties sleeping for a few nights. Edit: Don't downvote jmkni - my fault for wording things strangely.
- rbanffy 7y agoSome books kept me awake, but I wouldn't say I was calm enough to be functional in that period.
- supernovae 7y agoDid we have to read it? A scientist saying scientists can or can't do this doesn't mean much... Scientists discovered ozone depletion. Scientists discovered what caused depletion. Scientists pushed for a political resolution. Scientists and politicians can be both scientific and political. In fact, our system is better when they're both. I love Lawrence's books and some of his speeches. I just don't buy this kind of stuff. Also, "publicity stunt" is "in the eye of the beholder". Not quantitative and unscientific so meh. If doomsday clocks can get people to take action, they should. If it was as easy as education - we wouldn't need this post or Lawrence saying what he did. We have a society that shuns education as elitism, anti-capitalist, socilist or whatever they believe.
- whatshisface 7y agoI hate to say it, but I agree with the author. The scientists running the Doomsday clock nowdays bump it up for things like Trump tweets, while in the past it would get advanced for things like the invention of the Hydrogen bomb. If it is following the zeitgeist of what everybody is already saying then it is not useful on its own.
- jacquesm 7y agoAt the time Twitter didn't exist, and Trump has - more than once - come close to declaring war on another country through Twitter.
- whatshisface 7y agoNothing happening today is even comparable to the past events of a world where nuclear attacks were seen as a legitimate first strike option. There has been a lot of "doomsday time inflation," where inconsequential things today move the clock just as much as serious threats yesterday.
- cr0sh 7y agoTrump wanted to nuke a hurricane. https://www.businessinsider.com/what-if-nuke-nuked-hurricane-trump-detonate-2019-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/what-if-nuke-nuked-hurricane... Trump has asked in the past why we have nuclear weapons if we don't use them. https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-why-us-cant-use-nukes-msnbcs-joe-scarborough-reports.html https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/03/trump-asks-why-us-cant-use-n... Trump, during a visit to the war memorial in Hawaii - had no idea what Pearl Harbor was about, at least according to one book: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-pearl-harbor-memorial-tour-john-kelly-stable-genius-2020-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-pearl-harbor-memorial-... You don't believe a man this ignorant about such things, who is "commander in chief" and "carries the nuclear football" - ie, he is in command of our entire nuclear arsenal (let that sink in for a second) - you don't believe that the clock moving on a tweet of his nearly taking us to war (or anything of that nature) isn't a reason for it to move?
- nfg 7y agoHere’s a chance to ask - I’ve been trawling my history and searching like mad to find an article I read a year or two ago which I’m almost certain was linked from HN. It was an essay or opinion-piece about nuclear war which I believe was written in the 50s or thereabouts by someone who was an involved in the Manhattan project. In my head I think it was called something like “the meaning of war in the age of atomic weapons” or something along those lines. Does anyone have any idea what I might be remembering? For what it’s worth the tone was negative!
- Luc 7y agoSomething by Oppenheimer perhaps? E.g. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1949/02/the-open-mind/305431/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1949/02/the-ope... Or Einstein: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1947/11/atomic-war-or-peace/305443/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1947/11/atomic-...
- nfg 7y agoLuc these both seem so close to what I have in mind, but neither are it. Thanks so much though - if nothing else they’re both great reads!
- Whatarethese 7y agoSo many Wall Street Journal articles. Do that many people pay for the service?
- DavidVoid 7y agoI don't pay for the service, I only saw the article because it showed up on my phone's Google Now launcher.
- philpem 7y agoEveryone's using archive.is to get under the paywall...
- rohan1024 7y agoHow come they have access?
- Konnstann 7y agoI get it through work, I like WSJ so it's nice not having to bypass paywalls to read it.
- rbanffy 7y agoWe may need a non-nuclear one too. We are getting increasingly creative in self-destruction methods.
- murph-almighty 7y agoI thought they incorporated other existential threats like climate change?
- Ohn0 7y agoThat "clock" is more like a thermometer or a melting snowman
- makerofspoons 7y agoI think it's great that it includes factors like climate change and disruptive technology in addition to nuclear threats, which are just as grave of a threat as nuclear weapons. I disagree with the author that it's time to do away with the clock, the Bulletin is doing a great job of keeping it relevant and useful in the 21st century.
- sehugg 7y agoIn other news, the Doomsday Clock has moved closer to midnight: Humanity continues to face two simultaneous existential dangers—nuclear war and climate change—that are compounded by a threat multiplier, cyber-enabled information warfare, that undercuts society’s ability to respond. The international security situation is dire, not just because these threats exist, but because world leaders have allowed the international political infrastructure for managing them to erode. https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/ https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/
- whatshisface 7y agoThis is a great example of the author's point - what can nuclear physicists say about "cyber-enabled information warfare," other than by copying the ambient claims floating around Washington?
- sehugg 7y agoThey say more in the link if you care to read it: Continued corruption of the information ecosphere on which democracy and public decision making depend has heightened the nuclear and climate threats. In the last year, many governments used cyber-enabled disinformation campaigns to sow distrust in institutions and among nations, undermining domestic and international efforts to foster peace and protect the planet.
- whatshisface 7y agoExactly, a typical policy statement, and not at all related to nuclear physics or any scientific expertise.
- Ohn0 7y agoWill they begin using the seconds hand?
- aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 7y agoEvidently they have. "Closer than ever: It is 100 seconds to midnight" https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/ https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/
- sasasassy 7y agoWell, of course. According to them we have never been closer to doomsday. Not when the Soviet Union got the atomic bomb, not when North Korea attacked, not during the Cuban missile crisis, not during the wars in the middle East with Israel, not during the Berlin crisis on the Tiananmen square protests, and most recently when the US used conventional warfare against a country that supposedly possessed weapons of mass destruction. No, right now is much closer. (sarcasm)
- makerofspoons 7y agoThe clock now includes threats from climate change and disruptive technology, which global civilization is doing next to nothing about.
- goatlover 7y agoHow does one estimate the probability of doom from either of those things with any sort of reliability, given that they would be one off (future historical) events? Where's the science in predicting the future of civilization?
- hedora 7y agoSince you asked, here’s some (old) science predicting the future (current state) of civilization: In 1980, the American Petroleum Institute correctly predicted the current environmental crisis would happen now. From the report: "Timescale for significant impact, very roughly 50 years" "1°C Rise (2005): Barely noticeable" "2.5°C Rise (2038): Major economic consequences, Strong regional dependence" "5°C Rise (2067): Globally Catastrophic effects" They also predict that climate problems will cause global economic growth to halt in about 2025. There’s no reason to think the trend lines in the report are suddenly incorrect. In fact, current events are well within the error bars of their model. Averting it requires billions of people to agree to change course, and so far our leaders are doing nothing to make that happen. It seems much worse than the nuclear scare to me. Here’s a HN discussion of the API report: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20325359 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20325359 Here’s a report from the same organization walking through the math: https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/API%201982%20Climate%20models%20and%20CO2%20warming.pdf https://insideclimatenews.org/sites/default/files/documents/... Of course, much progress has been made in climate modeling since then, and now we’re more sure we’re screwed. On the other hand, since the report is 40 years old, it’s trivial to go back and confirm their predictions were correct so far.
- DagAgren 7y agoAre we really supposed to listen to the advice of Lawrence Krauss? > https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-science-donations-apologies-statements https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-ep... "Krauss, a theoretical physicist and science popularizer, defended Epstein as the financier tried to restore his reputation after his release from jail. “I don’t feel tarnished in any way by my relationship with Jeffrey. I feel raised by it,” Krauss told the Daily Beast in 2011." This was after his conviction as a pedophile pimp, notably.
- Turing_Machine 7y agoPlease explain why being a "friend of Epstein" makes him automatically wrong about this specific issue.
- DagAgren 7y agoThat he got kicked off their board for being a sex pest may have something to do with it.
- Turing_Machine 7y agoFirst of all, there's no evidence that he was "kicked off", and even if he had been... so what? The world is full of disgruntled people who dish dirt on their former associates. We call these people "whistle-blowers". They have many motivations for doing that, but that's not really relevant. The motivation for making the claims is completely orthogonal to the truth of the claims. Can you (or anyone) address his actual thesis? Given that pretty much the only attempted rebuttals I've seen are ad hominem attacks, I suspect the answer is "no".
- DagAgren 7y ago"There's no evidence" is a weird claim to make against a thing that is well known to have happened, to the point that it is documented on Wikipedia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss#Allegations_of_sexual_misconduct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_M._Krauss#Allegations... "ASU found that the preponderance of evidence suggested that Krauss had violated the university's policy against sexual harassment by grabbing a woman's breast without her permission.[30][31] As a result, Krauss was not renewed as Director of the Origins Project and the University moved its staff to a project run by planetary scientist Lindy Elkins-Tanton, formally ending the Origins project.[32]"
- jagged-chisel 7y agoI'm not sure how such a 'device' could be anything other than political. There's not a mathematical formula, based on science, driving the setting of the clock. It's set at the whim of its caretakers according to their perceptions of the risks in the world.
- lasermike026 7y agoKrauss, F!@# OFF! Ridding the world of nuclear weapons is the number one, top priority for earth. It is just a matter of time before a nuclear weapons is detonated in anger or by accident. And before you can say, "Eliminating nuclear weapons is impossible.", these are your orders. Carry them out.
- yters 7y agoWhat about abortion? It has been the #1 cause of death the past century, killing hundreds of millions of people, and now a contributor to population collapse. I think we have more to fear from being doomed by our own vices than nuclear weapons, climate change, etc.
- whatshisface 7y agoThe doomsday clock isn't for every source of death or life-preventer, it's specifically for doomsday events like nuclear war. Otherwise various bacteria would dominate everything else.
- NikolaNovak 7y agoAny stats / sources on that,and how they may have changed over centuries? As well as other causes and overall trend on infant mortality. I've heard many arguments around the abortion issue but "#1 killer" is new to me and I'd be curious to understand it better and in context. Thanks!
- pstuart 7y agoConsidering that abortion is about terminating unwanted pregnancies, I fail to see a problem here. Nuclear war and climate change are real threats. We came incredibly close to war in 1983 when Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov refused to launch against a false US attack. If you don't believe in the threat of climate change then you're not paying attention or willfully disregarding evidence.
- NeedMoreTea 7y agoWhat population collapse? World population is still rising. US population is still rising. Fewer humans would be a good thing for just about all the global human created problems. Far fewer humans would give a chance of sustainable numbers, sustainable industry and agriculture, remove the need to destroy habitats etc.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]