Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 159 posts

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#121

Post by postsantum »

muchtest wrote: post #106
t_mann wrote: post #93

Bit of a tangent, but the 'mutually assured destruction' meme is a cold-war-era concept relying on some strong assumptions - namely that any country would be able to credibly claim that they could take out US strike capabilities in the first place. Russia claims to have inherited that capability from the Soviet union, but that claim looks increasingly suspicious, with the war in Ukraine exposing not only systemic cor…

I've heard this dangerous narrative down playing dangers of nuclear war from people who have never experienced a total war before & are leaning into narratives spread by the military-industrial complex. However many failures the Russian military may have, all it takes is 1 missile hitting a major city and you'll see more deaths in the US than have been seen in all the wars it fought combined.

I don't think MIC would support this, I think they are at least somewhat competent and it's in their interest to disseminate FUD, not the "russia weak" narrative. The latter is something that would have come out of reddit's heavily censored echo chamber

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#122

Post by GordonS »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #100
t_mann wrote: post #93

Bit of a tangent, but the 'mutually assured destruction' meme is a cold-war-era concept relying on some strong assumptions - namely that any country would be able to credibly claim that they could take out US strike capabilities in the first place. Russia claims to have inherited that capability from the Soviet union, but that claim looks increasingly suspicious, with the war in Ukraine exposing not only systemic cor…

> Russian generals were greeted with precision strikes upon arrival in Ukraine. If they can't keep their sh*t secret from Ukraine, how could they hope to keep a nuclear launch order secret from the US? It's worth noting that the targeting information for these strikes came from the US.[0] Officials in the Biden administration first boasted about the role of US intelligence in these strikes, but the administration the…

> It's worth noting that the targeting information for these strikes came from the US

Hmm, dubious; surely if the targeting info came from the US, then the Ukrainians would have blown up several of their own hospitals, schools, wedding parties etc?!

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#123

Post by DoingIsLearning »

ac29 wrote: post #80
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Optics would need line of sight. The earth's curvature puts a very hard limit to how far you could communicate. The accepted standard in underwater is VLF, but as the name implies you are only capable of very low data rates.

The name implies only the frequency, which doesnt have anything to do with data rates. The VLF band is tiny though - only 27kHz. The small bandwidth is the main reason it would be slow.

You're correct from a DSP standpoint but the point remains VLF is very slow.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#124

Post by muchtest »

postsantum wrote: post #121
muchtest wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard this dangerous narrative down playing dangers of nuclear war from people who have never experienced a total war before & are leaning into narratives spread by the military-industrial complex. However many failures the Russian military may have, all it takes is 1 missile hitting a major city and you'll see more deaths in the US than have been seen in all the wars it fought combined.

I don't think MIC would support this, I think they are at least somewhat competent and it's in their interest to disseminate FUD, not the "russia weak" narrative. The latter is something that would have come out of reddit's heavily censored echo chamber

There are two narratives being told - one to the top brass to increase investment and one to gen population of not to worry we're going to win so don't be a defeatist/pacifist/collaborator.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#125

Post by JumpCrisscross »

wbl wrote: post #70
whakim wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it'd change the calculus for the UK or France because they are NATO members which effectively ensures their second strike capability. (It certainly might change the cost/benefit calculation on building submarines, though!) Israel probably doesn't even subscribe to a second strike doctrine given that the potential adversaries they're trying to deter don't even have nuclear weapons.

Pakistan does have nuclear weapons and the risk of them transferring them to an Islamic fundamentalist trying to rid the middle east of Jews is nonzero.

> the risk of them transferring them to an Islamic fundamentalist trying to rid the middle east of Jews is nonzero

You’re describing an undeterrable actor.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#126

Post by Retric »

hdevalence wrote: post #78
Retric wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ships much larger than ohio subs can get into and out of the Great Lakes via locks. Looks like the real reason is a US Canadian treaty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

Wikipedia lists the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawaymax size as allowing at most 26.5’ of draft, while the Ohio-class submarines require 35.5’. So treaty aside, it seems probably not physically possible, even though the locks are bigger in other dimensions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy-lift_ship

Though they tend to be quite wide, a custom barge is another option.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#127

Post by JumpCrisscross »

onion2k wrote: post #83
bombcar wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is/was simpler and cheaper to just stick nukes in big holes in the ground all over the midwest. Some are probably still "hot".

Those will be among the targets in the first strike. Unless they can fire before the nukes hit they're not useful. Subs are pretty much the only option. I suspect foreign agents try to bribe people in submarine crews to sabotage their sub in the event of a strike. If someone onboard could stop the American second strike missiles being fired they'd give Russia a huge advantage. I imagine the Navy have considerer this.

> Unless they can fire before the nukes hit they're not useful

Surely hitting every ICBM silo, B-2 airfield and nuclear submarine virtually simultaneously is nontrivial.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#128

Post by ceejayoz »

whakim wrote: post #59
ceejayoz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would very much change the calculus for the UK and France, though. Maybe Israel, as well.

I'm not sure it'd change the calculus for the UK or France because they are NATO members which effectively ensures their second strike capability. (It certainly might change the cost/benefit calculation on building submarines, though!) Israel probably doesn't even subscribe to a second strike doctrine given that the potential adversaries they're trying to deter don't even have nuclear weapons.

Israel does subscribe to a second strike doctrine. They’re quite publicly worried about Iran getting nukes.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/open-secret-israeli...

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#129

Post by JumpCrisscross »

bombcar wrote: post #38
Retric wrote: post #10

At least for the US why not keep one or more nuclear missile subs in the Great Lakes? Lake Superior alone covers 31,700 square miles to an average depth of 483 feet. It’s far to large an area to target with a first strike and well protected from non US/Canadian forces. Edit: A US/Canadian treaty demilitarized the Great Lakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

It is/was simpler and cheaper to just stick nukes in big holes in the ground all over the midwest. Some are probably still "hot".

Why not stick the nukes in holes under the ocean? They probably don’t even need to be buried.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#130

Post by xoa »

onion2k wrote: post #83
bombcar wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is/was simpler and cheaper to just stick nukes in big holes in the ground all over the midwest. Some are probably still "hot".

Those will be among the targets in the first strike. Unless they can fire before the nukes hit they're not useful. Subs are pretty much the only option. I suspect foreign agents try to bribe people in submarine crews to sabotage their sub in the event of a strike. If someone onboard could stop the American second strike missiles being fired they'd give Russia a huge advantage. I imagine the Navy have considerer this.

>Unless they can fire before the nukes hit they're not useful.

Au contraire! An important aspect of them as land based is the "nuclear sponge" concept: every single nuke spent on a silo is a nuke not aimed at a population center or vital infrastructure. They're out in the middle of nowhere for a reason (well, multiple reasons, but that's one of them). Even if they're all lost they've constrained the opponent's tactical choices merely by their existence, pushing towards the logic of a counter force strike instead of counter value.

Any nuclear exchange would be very bad, but unlike Europe the US does indeed have a lot of near completely uninhabited non-arable land for strategic depth. Makes sense to use it.

Post reply on HN