5 ms·

Official secrecy clearly failed to stop the very scenario you're talking about! We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons

Official secrecy clearly failed to stop the very scenario you're talking about! We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake. Nuclear weapons are simply a function of having a large enough industrial base to support their development. The "secret sauce" is officially secret, but it isn't actually secret.

eganist 3y ago
> We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake Nine countries as opposed to...
- kasey_junk 3y ago
  It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Treaties, sanctions etc. Not to mention the cost of a nuclear program.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Secrecy increases the cost, so it is, in effect, part of the “stick” end of the carrots and sticks. If there hadn’t been secrecy, would the return to sanity that stopped the South American nuclear arms race been too late? Secrecy should not be dismissed.
    - vdqtp3 3y ago
      There is essentially no secrecy. Research the Nth Country Experiment
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        > There is essentially no secrecy. There is secrecy, which is why the countries that haven’t found a shortcut around it (as in the nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil) have a harder road than those that do (like South Africa via Israel). > Research the Nth Country Experiment The Nth Country Experiment focused on paper design of a device, which, while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor.
        mrguyorama 3y ago
        >while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor. Nukes are not a physics challenge, but an engineering challenge. That's why an experiment showing a bunch of physicists understand simple particle physics isn't a useful demonstration that building nukes doesn't require insane amounts of help from a willing sponsor. People "knew" how to build the A bomb before World War 2 even started, yet even when several countries put energy into it to aid their war effort, only the US succeeded, and only because they dedicated around one tenth of the entire GDP to the process. Merely getting enough enriched material is enough of a problem to stop most countries.
        marcosdumay 3y ago
        > nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil Yeah, lol, the what now? Anyway, Brazil has a working uranium enrichment facility, with public numbers, and as efficient as any modern one (what is way more efficient than anything from the time nuclear bombs were created). What kind of secrecy are you stating that is stopping Brazil?
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > Yeah, lol, the what now? The late 1970s to early 1990s were an interesting time.
        marcosdumay 3y ago
        Oh, ok, that. The comment doesn't really apply to that either. Germany and France were quite involved on that one, so it wasn't exactly secrecy that kept things slow. It was more due to the sheer unpopularity of the thing (on both sides) even between the people high-ranked enough to know about it. I mean, by 85 Brazil had already a nuclear reactor in full activity. A reactor can get you enough plutonium for a bomb long before it's in full activity.
brookst 3y ago
“Policy X is useless because it did not stop every single instance of the thing it was trying to reduce” is a fallacious argument. Seat belts did not halt deaths in auto accidents, etc. Secrecy may or may not be warranted, but this is not a good argument against it.
- calvinmorrison 3y ago
  we should ban all Chinese people from the country because we certainly cannot stop all exhilaration of secrets, but better to stop some than none.
  - brookst 3y ago
    What a strange non sequitur. Are you OK?

eganist 3y ago

> We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake Nine countries as opposed to...

kasey_junk 3y ago
It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Treaties, sanctions etc. Not to mention the cost of a nuclear program.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Secrecy increases the cost, so it is, in effect, part of the “stick” end of the carrots and sticks. If there hadn’t been secrecy, would the return to sanity that stopped the South American nuclear arms race been too late? Secrecy should not be dismissed.
  - vdqtp3 3y ago
    There is essentially no secrecy. Research the Nth Country Experiment
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > There is essentially no secrecy. There is secrecy, which is why the countries that haven’t found a shortcut around it (as in the nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil) have a harder road than those that do (like South Africa via Israel). > Research the Nth Country Experiment The Nth Country Experiment focused on paper design of a device, which, while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor.
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        >while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor. Nukes are not a physics challenge, but an engineering challenge. That's why an experiment showing a bunch of physicists understand simple particle physics isn't a useful demonstration that building nukes doesn't require insane amounts of help from a willing sponsor. People "knew" how to build the A bomb before World War 2 even started, yet even when several countries put energy into it to aid their war effort, only the US succeeded, and only because they dedicated around one tenth of the entire GDP to the process. Merely getting enough enriched material is enough of a problem to stop most countries.
      - marcosdumay 3y ago
        > nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil Yeah, lol, the what now? Anyway, Brazil has a working uranium enrichment facility, with public numbers, and as efficient as any modern one (what is way more efficient than anything from the time nuclear bombs were created). What kind of secrecy are you stating that is stopping Brazil?
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > Yeah, lol, the what now? The late 1970s to early 1990s were an interesting time.
        marcosdumay 3y ago
        Oh, ok, that. The comment doesn't really apply to that either. Germany and France were quite involved on that one, so it wasn't exactly secrecy that kept things slow. It was more due to the sheer unpopularity of the thing (on both sides) even between the people high-ranked enough to know about it. I mean, by 85 Brazil had already a nuclear reactor in full activity. A reactor can get you enough plutonium for a bomb long before it's in full activity.

brookst 3y ago

“Policy X is useless because it did not stop every single instance of the thing it was trying to reduce” is a fallacious argument. Seat belts did not halt deaths in auto accidents, etc. Secrecy may or may not be warranted, but this is not a good argument against it.

calvinmorrison 3y ago
we should ban all Chinese people from the country because we certainly cannot stop all exhilaration of secrets, but better to stop some than none.
- brookst 3y ago
  What a strange non sequitur. Are you OK?