3 ms·
Isn't this just installing a really big "Push me!" button for our adversaries? Why do they need to take control of the fabs if they can just blow them up remote
by ctoth 2y ago
Isn't this just installing a really big "Push me!" button for our adversaries? Why do they need to take control of the fabs if they can just blow them up remotely Without taking responsibility? "Oh I guess there was a bug in the self-destruct system..."
- tivert 2y agoThat would be a vulnerability of a naive, always on implementation. But I'd think that risk would be significantly mitigated if the self-destruct system has to be armed first. e.g. China invades Taiwan, someone then immediately presses the "self-destruct enable" button, which cannot be disabled for a long period of time. If the invasion succeeds, someone transmits the self-destruct code. If it fails they don't, the machine stays intact, and someone gets to work disarming the self-destruct. I think it's plausible such a device could be built. Just make it battery powered and tamper-proof fail-deadly except when the battery runs down. Size the battery for two or three times the time Taiwan could be expected to hold out against an invasion.