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

Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

nobelprize.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 389 posts

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#141

Post by bryanlarsen »

piva00 wrote: post #138
cynicalpeace wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're claiming a compromised peace in the Donbas could spiral into a nuclear exchange. I'm claiming that continuing the proxy war between a jingoistic US government and a (probably) jingoistic Russian government could spiral into a nuclear exchange, and that the US government should be less jingoistic. Being jingoistic doesn't reduce the chance of nuclear war. I doubt we're going to convince each other, so I would c…

No. I'm claiming that a compromised peace in the Donbas with the annexation of territories of the Donbas and Crimea will further strengthen that if you have nukes you have a massive lever to use against non-nuclear nations. And Russia wants the Donbas, Crimea and the land bridge all the way around the Sea of Azov, that's a massive plot of land. You are only considering a narrow point in time, think ahead in terms of…

> based on wishful thinking of what you project Trump will do, it's all from your head, not from his words.

Since we're off-topic already can I just emphasize this point? Pretty much everybody I know who has or will vote for Trump is like this. For example, I knew one guy who voted for Trump because he thought Trump would legalize marijuana.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#142

Post by throw0101c »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #58

Phenomenal choice. While 80 years is nice- it's a blip on the timescale of history. I personally think we're a button click away from going back to the stone age. I know others will disagree, but it's not something you wanna take a gamble on. I think it's one of the reasons we have to be self sustaining on other heavenly bodies. And also why wars or proxy wars between nuclear powers are extremely foolish and should b…

> I personally think we're a button click away from going back to the stone age.

One reason to use less oil now is to perhaps preserve it in case we need to 'reboot' civilization in the future in case of a future cataclysm.

We were only able to reach beyond (near-)subsistence living because of cheap energy, first coal and later petroleum. All the easily accessible stuff is now kind of gone, so if there's another collapse (which may be more likely to be global in nature: see pandemics), then depending on how much knowledge we lose it could be hard to get back to the say level without the previously cheap/easy energy.

In past collapses (Europe: Western Roman Empire, Black Death) we were able to eventually recover because we at a simply technological level that could keep going even with the loss of a lot of knowledge.

> I think it's one of the reasons we have to be self sustaining on other heavenly bodies.

I think this will be impossible given advanced countries can't even be self-sufficient on Earth.

Is there oil on those heavenly bodies? Probably no, so you're importing your lubricants and seals/o-rings. Advanced fabs? No? Well you're importing your electronics. What kind of silica is there, because if you don't have the right kind of sand, you're mot making your own solar panels. How much radioactive material (uranium, plutonium, thorium, etc) is around if you want to try nuclear power.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#143

Post by trescenzi »

kaon_ wrote: post #29

At home I have a book telling stories of Dutch WW2 survivors still living today. One of them was an eye witness account of the Hiroshima bomb. He was a POW and worked in a quarry or mine on the outskirts of town. He saw a single plane fly over. A bomb dropped with a parachute attached. Moments later he was flung to the back of the quarry and the city was gone. I would never have guessed there were eyewitnesses like t…

The book Hiroshima by John Hersey has many accounts like this. It’s a short read and follows six people and covers the first year after the bombing. I’d highly recommend reading it if such accounts are interesting to you.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#145

Post by pyrale »

thimabi wrote: post #14
pyrale wrote: post #9

I have no issue with this laureate, but it is sad that the comittee could not find someone deserving that is working on a more current conflict. I guess this is not a positive outlook for the current state international conflicts.

At a time when Russia threatens the use of nuclear weapons in Ukraine, Israel and Iran escalate tensions, North Korea tests missiles and warheads… it is hard not to relate the award to these circumstances. Perhaps the committee thought it was best to express its opinion on current conflicts indirectly, as it has done so in the past.

> Perhaps the committee thought it was best to express its opinion on current conflicts indirectly, as it has done so in the past.

I do agree, and this is my point: this particular committee expressing concern rather than celebrating success is a source of lament to me.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#146

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

petra wrote: post #66
sandworm101 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On an individual level, we all have a variety of hammers over our heads. Cancer has killed far more people prematurely than nuclear weapons. Something like 500,000 people a year are murdered. Traffic/bicycle/pedestrian accidents also kill more than nuclear weapons. Even compared to a once-in-a-century nuclear war that perhaps kills a billion people, cancer will kill roughly a billion in the next century anyway. So, f…

Everybody dies so there's nothing to fear from war?

Chaos , without death.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#147

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

sandworm101 wrote: post #32
vasco wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I put a hammer over your head that can fall any minute you'll be worrying, but if you're born with the hammer over your head and your parents before you as well, it becomes less of a thing.

On an individual level, we all have a variety of hammers over our heads. Cancer has killed far more people prematurely than nuclear weapons. Something like 500,000 people a year are murdered. Traffic/bicycle/pedestrian accidents also kill more than nuclear weapons. Even compared to a once-in-a-century nuclear war that perhaps kills a billion people, cancer will kill roughly a billion in the next century anyway. So, f…

If I fall 1 feet one hundred times, I'll probably be Ok

If I fall 100 feet once, I won't.

1m people dying in 1 day is not the same as 1M people dying over a decade.

Also. People generally dont fear death itself. This is expressed by people in pallitative care. Its the chaos and uncertainty preceding death that is really feared

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#148

Post by bonzini »

mordae wrote: post #62
cynicalpeace wrote: post #58

Phenomenal choice. While 80 years is nice- it's a blip on the timescale of history. I personally think we're a button click away from going back to the stone age. I know others will disagree, but it's not something you wanna take a gamble on. I think it's one of the reasons we have to be self sustaining on other heavenly bodies. And also why wars or proxy wars between nuclear powers are extremely foolish and should b…

Stone age? Hardly. More like 18th century. I am more worried that we do not have that many attempts at rebuilding, because coal and oil are finite. OTOH a slower 2nd iteration might actually work better than this one.

If we lost access to electricity, we'd be completely screwed; we can't even get drinkable water in many places without electricity.

For example where I live there is water around 10-20m depth, but it's polluted (it may be usable for agriculture but not for human consumption); you'd have to dig a well over 100m below the surface.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#149

Post by bspammer »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #126
bspammer wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The candidate I assume you’re voting for increased the future nuclear threat last time he was in office by pulling out of the Iran deal, for no good reason at all. He’s also one of the most jingoistic people in politics.

A lot less war under his admin than now. And I voted for the current admin. He's more jingoistic than Dick Cheney?

He’s certainly more jingoistic than Harris, as his slogans and supporters make evident.

Re: Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 awarded to Nihon Hidankyo

#150

Post by bonzini »

piva00 wrote: post #138
cynicalpeace wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're claiming a compromised peace in the Donbas could spiral into a nuclear exchange. I'm claiming that continuing the proxy war between a jingoistic US government and a (probably) jingoistic Russian government could spiral into a nuclear exchange, and that the US government should be less jingoistic. Being jingoistic doesn't reduce the chance of nuclear war. I doubt we're going to convince each other, so I would c…

No. I'm claiming that a compromised peace in the Donbas with the annexation of territories of the Donbas and Crimea will further strengthen that if you have nukes you have a massive lever to use against non-nuclear nations. And Russia wants the Donbas, Crimea and the land bridge all the way around the Sea of Azov, that's a massive plot of land. You are only considering a narrow point in time, think ahead in terms of…

> It's a spiral, the moment you allow a nuclear power to use that status to force the hand of an opposing nation at war you open a can of worms. Since 1945 the world has been trying to control proliferation through other means, wars of annexation have been shunned, you really don't want that to come back into a world armed with nuclear weapons.

You also have an example of what happens when some countries are more powerful than others: the veto at the UN Security Council. The UN is essentially unable to do anything that is against the interest of US, Russia or China (it just happens that France and the United Kingdom usually agree with the US). Imagine US, Russia and China having the same power but with 1) the actual ability to wipe enemies off Earth, instead of just blocking UN processes; 2) anybody able to join the club "just" by investing into nuclear proliferation. Doesn't seem good.

Post reply on HN