4 ms·

I think it's pretty cool. And I think that kind of work needs people who think it's cool, or else it'll only attract evil people. There's nothing wrong with bu

I think it's pretty cool. And I think that kind of work needs people who think it's cool, or else it'll only attract evil people. There's nothing wrong with building weapons for defense. It's arguably the entire purpose of nukes at this point. Even for offense, other countries are working hard to build out their arsenals. I'm personally fine with building AI weapons, for example. If a contract opportunity appears, I might take it. After all, where else are you going to see the most advanced weaponry in the history of mankind?

onion2k 5y ago
It's arguably the entire purpose of nukes at this point. That is absolutely not true. There are people in the governments of every nuclear power would use their weapons aggressively given the chance. That's why policies of disarmament are so necessary. As long as humans have nuclear weapons the probability of practically annihilating our species and leaving any survivors living in the stone age again remains higher than zero. Nuclear war is the single biggest existential threat humanity faces. We can deal with pretty much anything else.
- atq2119 5y ago
  I certainly hope you're right in your implied statement about climate change.
  - onion2k 5y ago
    I completely believe humanity can and will deal with climate change. It'll take a few wars, an anti-capitalist revolution in a first world country or two, and a massive shift towards equality and justice for poorer people, but it will happen.
- redis_mlc 5y ago
  > There are people in the governments of every nuclear power would use their weapons aggressively given the chance. You're right so far. North Korea and Iran are ideologically opposed to the West, and both have ICBM capabilities. China also, but they have mixed goals (dominate the world, while parasiting off the US financially and technologically, without killing too many only-childs in war, while importing 50% of their energy and food without interruption.) Chinese politicians have suggested publicly sending two warships for every Western one in the South China Sea, and ramming and sinking each Western one with one of theirs. Also, Xi has recently threatened to use nuclear weapons against Guam and Japan. It's one thing to own them, but quite another to make specific threats to use them. > That's why policies of disarmament are so necessary. Not gonna happen with rogue actors like NK and Iran, or countries like China that won't take no for an answer. In addition, the US can't disarm since most of the world is under our defense umbrella. Sadly, the weaker that umbrealla gets (ie. Scarborough Shoals scandal), the bigger the arms race in the Indo-Pacific region, as seen in the news currently. Very likely Japan will announce their own bomb in the next year (they've had ICBMs for decades aka NASDA.) > Nuclear war is the single biggest existential threat humanity faces. After the Cuban missile crisis, 2021 is the most dangerous time in history. Note there was a second Cuban missile crisis, as the USSR left behind half of their nuclear missiles under the control of Castro, who the Kremlin slowly realized wanted to actually use them. The USSR used diplomacy to quietly get them back with the precept that it was required under a treaty that Castro had signed (Gromyko engineered that.)
- sillysaurusx 5y ago
  For what it's worth, I agree with you. One of my sneaky reasons for joining the military establishment would be to help make those sorts of changes from within. Or at least that's what I'd like to tell myself while designing devastating weapons. I really do feel that reasonable people need to join such organizations, though, otherwise only unreasonable people will be in them. I recently found (to my dismay) that Von Neumann argued vehemently in favor of bombing the Russians before their nuclear program could be built, and all I could think was "This isn't the type of scientist that should have a lot of influence."

onion2k 5y ago

It's arguably the entire purpose of nukes at this point. That is absolutely not true. There are people in the governments of every nuclear power would use their weapons aggressively given the chance. That's why policies of disarmament are so necessary. As long as humans have nuclear weapons the probability of practically annihilating our species and leaving any survivors living in the stone age again remains higher than zero. Nuclear war is the single biggest existential threat humanity faces. We can deal with pretty much anything else.

atq2119 5y ago
I certainly hope you're right in your implied statement about climate change.
- onion2k 5y ago
  I completely believe humanity can and will deal with climate change. It'll take a few wars, an anti-capitalist revolution in a first world country or two, and a massive shift towards equality and justice for poorer people, but it will happen.
redis_mlc 5y ago
> There are people in the governments of every nuclear power would use their weapons aggressively given the chance. You're right so far. North Korea and Iran are ideologically opposed to the West, and both have ICBM capabilities. China also, but they have mixed goals (dominate the world, while parasiting off the US financially and technologically, without killing too many only-childs in war, while importing 50% of their energy and food without interruption.) Chinese politicians have suggested publicly sending two warships for every Western one in the South China Sea, and ramming and sinking each Western one with one of theirs. Also, Xi has recently threatened to use nuclear weapons against Guam and Japan. It's one thing to own them, but quite another to make specific threats to use them. > That's why policies of disarmament are so necessary. Not gonna happen with rogue actors like NK and Iran, or countries like China that won't take no for an answer. In addition, the US can't disarm since most of the world is under our defense umbrella. Sadly, the weaker that umbrealla gets (ie. Scarborough Shoals scandal), the bigger the arms race in the Indo-Pacific region, as seen in the news currently. Very likely Japan will announce their own bomb in the next year (they've had ICBMs for decades aka NASDA.) > Nuclear war is the single biggest existential threat humanity faces. After the Cuban missile crisis, 2021 is the most dangerous time in history. Note there was a second Cuban missile crisis, as the USSR left behind half of their nuclear missiles under the control of Castro, who the Kremlin slowly realized wanted to actually use them. The USSR used diplomacy to quietly get them back with the precept that it was required under a treaty that Castro had signed (Gromyko engineered that.)
sillysaurusx 5y ago
For what it's worth, I agree with you. One of my sneaky reasons for joining the military establishment would be to help make those sorts of changes from within. Or at least that's what I'd like to tell myself while designing devastating weapons. I really do feel that reasonable people need to join such organizations, though, otherwise only unreasonable people will be in them. I recently found (to my dismay) that Von Neumann argued vehemently in favor of bombing the Russians before their nuclear program could be built, and all I could think was "This isn't the type of scientist that should have a lot of influence."