2 ms·

>so why should I leave dangerous tech only in the hands of dangerous people? because handing it to everyone doesn't make things better? I don't like that Putin

>so why should I leave dangerous tech only in the hands of dangerous people? because handing it to everyone doesn't make things better? I don't like that Putin has nukes, but it's much better than Putin and every offshoot of Al-Qaeda having nukes. Civilization ending tech in the hands of powerful actors is usually subject to some form of rational calculus. Having it in the hands of everyone means basically it's game over. For a lot of dangeorus technologies there is no 'vaccine' (in time).

brigandish 4y ago
> Having it in the hands of everyone means basically it's game over. It might mean it's time to face up to more important questions, like why every offshoot of Al-Qaeda wants to use nukes and then countering that.
- alexvoda 4y ago
  I do not believe you are arguing in good faith but I will answer. Nukes Are very very effective at creating terror. Terror is somewhat effective at almost any action that requires the participation of others. Ergo, nukes are effective at threatening other to do what you want. Want to counter that, fine. Genetically engineer every person to be invulnerable to radiation and explosions and the desire to use nukes diminishes because they are no longer as effective. Sayonara.
  - brigandish 4y ago
    > I do not believe you are arguing in good faith This isn't Twitter, please keep this juvenile nonsense for there. As to your "answer": > Genetically engineer every person to be invulnerable to radiation and explosions and the desire to use nukes diminishes because they are no longer as effective. aside from it approaching word salad, I was referring to the deeper causes of violence. I would trust (there's that word again, I hope you can cope this time) the Dalai Lama with any weapon known to man and any only dreamt of, because, as he says[1]: > “Real gun control must come from here,” the Dalai Lama said, pointing at his heart. How you failed to deduce that with your enhanced powers of insight into me, I cannot fathom. [1] https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Dalai-Lama-says-real-gun-control-comes-from-8313907.php https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Dalai-Lama-says-real...

brigandish 4y ago

> Having it in the hands of everyone means basically it's game over. It might mean it's time to face up to more important questions, like why every offshoot of Al-Qaeda wants to use nukes and then countering that.

alexvoda 4y ago
I do not believe you are arguing in good faith but I will answer. Nukes Are very very effective at creating terror. Terror is somewhat effective at almost any action that requires the participation of others. Ergo, nukes are effective at threatening other to do what you want. Want to counter that, fine. Genetically engineer every person to be invulnerable to radiation and explosions and the desire to use nukes diminishes because they are no longer as effective. Sayonara.
- brigandish 4y ago
  > I do not believe you are arguing in good faith This isn't Twitter, please keep this juvenile nonsense for there. As to your "answer": > Genetically engineer every person to be invulnerable to radiation and explosions and the desire to use nukes diminishes because they are no longer as effective. aside from it approaching word salad, I was referring to the deeper causes of violence. I would trust (there's that word again, I hope you can cope this time) the Dalai Lama with any weapon known to man and any only dreamt of, because, as he says[1]: > “Real gun control must come from here,” the Dalai Lama said, pointing at his heart. How you failed to deduce that with your enhanced powers of insight into me, I cannot fathom. [1] https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Dalai-Lama-says-real-gun-control-comes-from-8313907.php https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Dalai-Lama-says-real...