4 ms·
I get your point, but even whole ass countries routinely fail at developing nukes. "Just" enrichment is so complicated and requires basically every tech and ma
by gf000 1y ago
I get your point, but even whole ass countries routinely fail at developing nukes.
"Just" enrichment is so complicated and requires basically every tech and manufacturing knowledge humanity has created up until the mid 20th century that an evil idiot would be much better off with just a bunch of fireworks.
- pegasus 1y agoIt might require that knowledge implicitly, in the tools and parts the evil idiot would use, but they presumably would procure these tools and parts, not invent or even manufacture them themselves.
- habinero 1y agoEven that is insanely difficult. There's a great book by Michael Levi called On Nuclear Terrorism, which never got any PR because it is the anti-doomer book. He methodically goes through all the problems that an ISIS or a Bin Laden would face getting their hands on a nuke or trying to manufacture one, and you can see why none of them have succeeded and why it isn't likely any of them would. They are incredibly difficult to make, manufacture or use.
- worldsayshi 1y agoIt's very convenient that it is that hard.
- medvezhenok 1y agoYeah, the interview with Geoffrey Hinton had a much better summary of risks. If we're talking about the bad actor model, biological weaponry is both easier to make and more likely as a threat vector than nuclear.
- marsten 1y agoBiological weapons are probably the more worrisome case for AI. The equipment is less exotic than for nuclear weapon development, and more obtainable by everyday people.