2 ms·

So, they built this supercomputer to test new and more deadly nuclear weapons. That makes me so "happy". I am absolutely not worried about two nuclear powers be

So, they built this supercomputer to test new and more deadly nuclear weapons. That makes me so "happy". I am absolutely not worried about two nuclear powers being close to the brink of direct war, even as we speak; nor about the abandonment of the course of nuclear disarmament treaty; nor about the repeated talk of a coming war against certain Asian powers. Everything is great and I'll just fawn over the colorful livery and the petaflops figure.

comboy 2y ago
I'd guess it's unlikely to be the real use case. The real one is classified. Plus it's not like more deadly nuclear weapons would change anything, we can do bad enough with what we already have.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > it's unlikely to be the real use case. The real one is classified. What are you basing this on? > it's not like more deadly nuclear weapons would change anything We haven't been chasing yield in nuclear weapons since the 60s. Our oldest warheads date from the 60s [1]. For obvious reasons, the experimental track record on half-century old pits is scarce. We don't know if novel physics or chemistry is going on in there, and we don't want to be the second ones to find out. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > I'd guess it's unlikely to be the real use case I can safely say that nuclear simulations are one of the major drivers for HPC research globally. It is not the only one (genomics, simulations, fundamental research are also major drivers) but it is a fairly prominent one.
- realo 2y ago
  Maybe there is research not on bigger bangs, but on smaller packages? Think about a baseball-size device able to take out a city block. Then think about an escadron of drones able to transport those baseballs to very precise city blocks...
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> they built this supercomputer to test new and more deadly nuclear weapons If you are afraid of nuclear war, the thing to fear is a nuclear state's capacity to retaliate being questioned. These supercomputers are the alternative to live tests. Taking them away doesn't poof nuclear weapons, it means you are left with a half-assed deterrent or must resume live tests. > the abandonment of the course of nuclear disarmament treaty North Korea, the American interventions in the Middle East and Ukraine set the precedent that nuclear sovereignty is in a separate category from the treaty-enforced kind. Non-proliferation won't be made or broken on the back of aging, degrading weapons. > repeated talk of a coming war against certain Asian powers One invites war by refusing to prepare for it.
- einpoklum 2y ago
  > If you are afraid of nuclear war, the thing to fear is a nuclear state's capacity to retaliate being questioned. That's why nuclear capabilities and capacities are best reduced by universal compact. It is certainly not helping when they are being _enhanced. Also, I'm worried about the US initiating more than I do about it retaliating. > North Korea, the American interventions in the Middle East and Ukraine set the precedent that nuclear sovereignty is in a separate category from the treaty-enforced kind. I don't understand this sentence because I'm not familiar with the combined term "nuclear sovereignty". Regardless - it is certainly the case that non-proliferation won't be made on the back of aging and degrading weapons; there must a continued commitment to NP in the sense of not developing new weapons. > One invites war by refusing to prepare for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question Anyway, the US initiates most of its wars, so the "invitation" is irrelevant.
rbanffy 2y ago
The whole point of testing (and making) deadly nuclear weapons is to ensure they are never used again. The Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine has kept us alive through the darkest pf the Cold War (also keeping the Cold War cold). In order to credibly threaten anyone who tries to annihilate you with certain annihilation is with lots of such doomsday weapons. We have lived in this Mexican standoff for longer than we remember.
- postalrat 2y ago
  Are are living in the darkest days of the cold war right now.
shagie 2y ago
I would reference an older article on super computers and the nuclear weapon arsenal. https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/news/252468294/Cray-exascale-computer-to-modernize-aging-nuclear-weapon-stockpile https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/news/252468294/C... > "The Russians are fielding brand new nuclear weapons and bombs," said Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, undersecretary for nuclear security at the DOE. She said "a very large portion of their military is focused on their nuclear weapons complex." > It's the same for China, which is building new nuclear weapons, Gordon-Hagerty said, "as opposed to the United States, where we are not fielding or designing new nuclear weapons. We are actually extending the life of our current nuclear weapons systems." She made the remarks yesterday in a webcast press conference. > ... > Businesses use 3D simulation to design and test new products in high performance computing. That is not a unique capability. But nuclear weapon development, particularly when it involves maintaining older weapons, is extraordinarily complex, Goldstein said. > The DOE is redesigning both the warhead and nuclear delivery system, which requires researchers to simulate the interaction between the physics of the nuclear system and the engineering features of the delivery system, Goldstein said. He characterized the interaction as a new kind of problem for researchers and said 2D development doesn't go far enough. "We simply can't rely on two-dimensional simulations -- 3D is required," he said. > Nuclear weapons require investigation of physics and chemistry problems in a multidimensional space, Goldstein said. The work is a very complex statistical problem, and Cray's El Capitan system, which can couple this computation with machine learning, is ideally suited for it, he said. --- This isn't designing new ones. Or blowing things up ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-nuclear/china-may-have-conducted-low-level-nuclear-test-blasts-us-says-idUSKCN21X386/ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-nuclear/china-m... ) to see if they still work. It is simulating them to have the confidence that they still work - and that the adversaries of the US know that the scientists are confident that they still work without having to blow things up.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > to see if they still work. It is simulating them to have the confidence that they still work The Armageddon scenario is some nuclear states conduct stockpile stewardship, some don’t, and those who do discover that warheads come with a use-by date.
freeone3000 2y ago
Eh, we have all the nukes we need and we already know how to build them. This is going to help more with fusion power than fusion explosives.
theideaofcoffee 2y ago
I'd rather have a few supercomputers doing stockpile stewardship over being tested live. As much as I hate it personally, these weapons are a part of our society for better or for worse until we (as in the people) decide they won't be by electing those that will help dismantle the programs. They should be maintained and these tools help in that.

comboy 2y ago

I'd guess it's unlikely to be the real use case. The real one is classified. Plus it's not like more deadly nuclear weapons would change anything, we can do bad enough with what we already have.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> it's unlikely to be the real use case. The real one is classified. What are you basing this on? > it's not like more deadly nuclear weapons would change anything We haven't been chasing yield in nuclear weapons since the 60s. Our oldest warheads date from the 60s [1]. For obvious reasons, the experimental track record on half-century old pits is scarce. We don't know if novel physics or chemistry is going on in there, and we don't want to be the second ones to find out. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B61_nuclear_bomb
alephnerd 2y ago
> I'd guess it's unlikely to be the real use case I can safely say that nuclear simulations are one of the major drivers for HPC research globally. It is not the only one (genomics, simulations, fundamental research are also major drivers) but it is a fairly prominent one.
realo 2y ago
Maybe there is research not on bigger bangs, but on smaller packages? Think about a baseball-size device able to take out a city block. Then think about an escadron of drones able to transport those baseballs to very precise city blocks...

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> they built this supercomputer to test new and more deadly nuclear weapons If you are afraid of nuclear war, the thing to fear is a nuclear state's capacity to retaliate being questioned. These supercomputers are the alternative to live tests. Taking them away doesn't poof nuclear weapons, it means you are left with a half-assed deterrent or must resume live tests. > the abandonment of the course of nuclear disarmament treaty North Korea, the American interventions in the Middle East and Ukraine set the precedent that nuclear sovereignty is in a separate category from the treaty-enforced kind. Non-proliferation won't be made or broken on the back of aging, degrading weapons. > repeated talk of a coming war against certain Asian powers One invites war by refusing to prepare for it.

einpoklum 2y ago
> If you are afraid of nuclear war, the thing to fear is a nuclear state's capacity to retaliate being questioned. That's why nuclear capabilities and capacities are best reduced by universal compact. It is certainly not helping when they are being _enhanced. Also, I'm worried about the US initiating more than I do about it retaliating. > North Korea, the American interventions in the Middle East and Ukraine set the precedent that nuclear sovereignty is in a separate category from the treaty-enforced kind. I don't understand this sentence because I'm not familiar with the combined term "nuclear sovereignty". Regardless - it is certainly the case that non-proliferation won't be made on the back of aging and degrading weapons; there must a continued commitment to NP in the sense of not developing new weapons. > One invites war by refusing to prepare for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question Anyway, the US initiates most of its wars, so the "invitation" is irrelevant.

rbanffy 2y ago

The whole point of testing (and making) deadly nuclear weapons is to ensure they are never used again. The Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine has kept us alive through the darkest pf the Cold War (also keeping the Cold War cold). In order to credibly threaten anyone who tries to annihilate you with certain annihilation is with lots of such doomsday weapons. We have lived in this Mexican standoff for longer than we remember.

postalrat 2y ago
Are are living in the darkest days of the cold war right now.

shagie 2y ago

I would reference an older article on super computers and the nuclear weapon arsenal. https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/news/252468294/Cray-exascale-computer-to-modernize-aging-nuclear-weapon-stockpile https://www.techtarget.com/searchdatacenter/news/252468294/C... > "The Russians are fielding brand new nuclear weapons and bombs," said Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, undersecretary for nuclear security at the DOE. She said "a very large portion of their military is focused on their nuclear weapons complex." > It's the same for China, which is building new nuclear weapons, Gordon-Hagerty said, "as opposed to the United States, where we are not fielding or designing new nuclear weapons. We are actually extending the life of our current nuclear weapons systems." She made the remarks yesterday in a webcast press conference. > ... > Businesses use 3D simulation to design and test new products in high performance computing. That is not a unique capability. But nuclear weapon development, particularly when it involves maintaining older weapons, is extraordinarily complex, Goldstein said. > The DOE is redesigning both the warhead and nuclear delivery system, which requires researchers to simulate the interaction between the physics of the nuclear system and the engineering features of the delivery system, Goldstein said. He characterized the interaction as a new kind of problem for researchers and said 2D development doesn't go far enough. "We simply can't rely on two-dimensional simulations -- 3D is required," he said. > Nuclear weapons require investigation of physics and chemistry problems in a multidimensional space, Goldstein said. The work is a very complex statistical problem, and Cray's El Capitan system, which can couple this computation with machine learning, is ideally suited for it, he said. --- This isn't designing new ones. Or blowing things up ( https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-nuclear/china-may-have-conducted-low-level-nuclear-test-blasts-us-says-idUSKCN21X386/ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-china-nuclear/china-m... ) to see if they still work. It is simulating them to have the confidence that they still work - and that the adversaries of the US know that the scientists are confident that they still work without having to blow things up.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> to see if they still work. It is simulating them to have the confidence that they still work The Armageddon scenario is some nuclear states conduct stockpile stewardship, some don’t, and those who do discover that warheads come with a use-by date.

freeone3000 2y ago

Eh, we have all the nukes we need and we already know how to build them. This is going to help more with fusion power than fusion explosives.

theideaofcoffee 2y ago

I'd rather have a few supercomputers doing stockpile stewardship over being tested live. As much as I hate it personally, these weapons are a part of our society for better or for worse until we (as in the people) decide they won't be by electing those that will help dismantle the programs. They should be maintained and these tools help in that.