5 ms·

Uhhh? The "mouse click" was a dead give away. Also, Occam's Razor. Is this guy programming a game in his apartment or is he programming a ICBM with 0 related ha

Uhhh? The "mouse click" was a dead give away. Also, Occam's Razor. Is this guy programming a game in his apartment or is he programming a ICBM with 0 related hardware plus probably no other corroborating evidence. No reason to act like it takes more than a couple minutes of investigation to figure this shit out. Edit: for the guy below me, since I can't reply directly, find me a nuclear missile guidance system that is destination controlled by a freaking mouse clicking on a map in the Pentagon and I'll concede the point.

Zikes 12y ago
Yep, you'd never find something so silly as a computer mouse in the Pentagon.
- idibidiart 12y ago
  except ICBMs are not launched with a mouse click.... wth.
  - mattmaroon 12y ago
    1. How do you know that? 2. How would an average person know that?
mattmaroon 12y ago
It's not irrational to think that launching an ICBM might involve a computer and therefore a mouse. Hell, I'd be surprised if it didn't. I doubt the Pentagon has posted videos of whatever it is they use on YouTube, so it's silly to ask for proof. As I said, I agree that it is irrational to think the guy was whiteboarding an ICBM launch. (Not to mention while terrorists could conceivably get a dirty bomb, an ICBM seems well out of the question.) But there is nothing in those photos that would lead an average person to believe it was a game.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Zikes 12y ago
I don't need to find a nuclear missile guidance system that is destination controlled by a freaking mouse click, because that is not what is being argued. What is being argued is that it is not out of the question to expect that such a system may or could exist. It's not unreasonable to think that it could. Occam's Razor. Are all of our nukes controlled solely by systems that do not involve a mouse, or might there be a computer sophisticated enough somewhere in that launch process that it might make use of a mouse?
- crazypyro 12y ago
  We are arguing whether it is out of the question to expect that such a system's TARGETING is based on clicking a point on a imprecise map (per the rest of the whiteboard). It is completely out of the question to expect ICBM to be targeted with a mouse. You are (incorrectly) extrapolating the mouse click to mean that there is a mouse click somewhere in the process and NOT at the exact point drawn on the board. If you follow the flow chart, it says mouse click and then gets the target location based on that imprecise click.
  - ForHackernews 12y ago
    > imprecise click. "Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and nuclear war" When you're dealing with high-yield nuclear warheads, anywhere within a few hundred miles of your desired target is probably going to be plenty good enough.
    - crazypyro 12y ago
      Actually, that's a pretty horrendous common mistake. The maximum of the blast radius of every nuclear warhead is below 50 miles. The biggest one ever designed, but not tested, by the USSR (larger than the US) was 100 MT which would've had a blast radius (third degree burns) of 46.5 miles, if it was detonated at 50,000ft , less with lower heights. That is a far cry from "within a few hundred miles".
      - ForHackernews 12y ago
kps 12y ago
Well, there's this: “A left mouse push fires it. Kinda crazy really. We actually asked for a great big red button, but they wouldn't give us one.” ¹ Though that's in reference to submarine-launched non-nuclear cruise missiles, not ICBMs. ICBMs might still rate a great big red button. Not that OP's experience is any less silly. ¹ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3078097.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3078097.stm

Zikes 12y ago

Yep, you'd never find something so silly as a computer mouse in the Pentagon.

idibidiart 12y ago
except ICBMs are not launched with a mouse click.... wth.
- mattmaroon 12y ago
  1. How do you know that? 2. How would an average person know that?

mattmaroon 12y ago

It's not irrational to think that launching an ICBM might involve a computer and therefore a mouse. Hell, I'd be surprised if it didn't. I doubt the Pentagon has posted videos of whatever it is they use on YouTube, so it's silly to ask for proof. As I said, I agree that it is irrational to think the guy was whiteboarding an ICBM launch. (Not to mention while terrorists could conceivably get a dirty bomb, an ICBM seems well out of the question.) But there is nothing in those photos that would lead an average person to believe it was a game.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

Zikes 12y ago

I don't need to find a nuclear missile guidance system that is destination controlled by a freaking mouse click, because that is not what is being argued. What is being argued is that it is not out of the question to expect that such a system may or could exist. It's not unreasonable to think that it could. Occam's Razor. Are all of our nukes controlled solely by systems that do not involve a mouse, or might there be a computer sophisticated enough somewhere in that launch process that it might make use of a mouse?

crazypyro 12y ago
We are arguing whether it is out of the question to expect that such a system's TARGETING is based on clicking a point on a imprecise map (per the rest of the whiteboard). It is completely out of the question to expect ICBM to be targeted with a mouse. You are (incorrectly) extrapolating the mouse click to mean that there is a mouse click somewhere in the process and NOT at the exact point drawn on the board. If you follow the flow chart, it says mouse click and then gets the target location based on that imprecise click.
- ForHackernews 12y ago
  > imprecise click. "Close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and nuclear war" When you're dealing with high-yield nuclear warheads, anywhere within a few hundred miles of your desired target is probably going to be plenty good enough.
  - crazypyro 12y ago
    Actually, that's a pretty horrendous common mistake. The maximum of the blast radius of every nuclear warhead is below 50 miles. The biggest one ever designed, but not tested, by the USSR (larger than the US) was 100 MT which would've had a blast radius (third degree burns) of 46.5 miles, if it was detonated at 50,000ft , less with lower heights. That is a far cry from "within a few hundred miles".
    - ForHackernews 12y ago

kps 12y ago

Well, there's this: “A left mouse push fires it. Kinda crazy really. We actually asked for a great big red button, but they wouldn't give us one.” ¹ Though that's in reference to submarine-launched non-nuclear cruise missiles, not ICBMs. ICBMs might still rate a great big red button. Not that OP's experience is any less silly. ¹ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3078097.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3078097.stm