How Vulnerable Is the World? • Hacker News Board

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#61

Post by pinky1417 » Thu, Feb 25, 2021, 4:05 PM UTC

gampleman wrote: post #58

> But now consider a counterfactual scenario – a ‘safe first strike’ – in which some technology made it possible to completely destroy an adversary before they could respond, leaving them unable to retaliate. This is why I have been opposing Missile Defence. Strategically missile defence is a highly offensive technology, since it allows a safer first strike capability.

It gets worse. If your adversary believes your missile defense system is highly effective, when in fact it is not, the adversary will be more willing to launch a preventive attack. You don't want nuclear-armed adversaries to think they're in a use-it-or-lose-it position unless your system is about 100% effective.

Israel's Iron Dome is one thing. They're destroying small, short-range, generally unguided missiles carrying conventional warheads without decoys. The US's anti-ballistic missile systems (e.g. GMD, SM-3, THAAD, Patriot, etc.) are unlikely to provide meaningful protection against ICBMs even from relatively unsophisticated enemies for one reason: it's substantially easier to build swords than shields. If North Korea builds a missile that can carry a nuclear warhead into the US mainland, they can build the technology to stuff decoy warheads into the payload (eg balloons with the same signature as the actual warhead).

You really don't want a nuclear enemy overestimating the effectiveness of your missile defense!

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#62

Post by bearbawl » Thu, Feb 25, 2021, 7:48 PM UTC

marcus_holmes wrote: post #57

bearbawl wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It feels obvious to me. More and more the World looks like a very tiny house. We’ve built tool and industrial processes that are bigger that our planet. Look at a cargo ship. Or a mine. It’s mind blowing.

Travel more :) The world is huge, and we are not as big as we like to think. Catch the Trans-Siberian. Or the Indian-Pacific for that matter. Watch as thousands of kilometers of untouched wilderness roll by. Visit some really poor countries and see the happiest people you've ever met living without technology. See the ruins of vast ancient temple complexes, remains of entire civilisations that are now just tourist tr…

Travel is actually the same.

I can travel to the other side of the world in one day. It’s way too small, or what we built is way too good.

And yes the world as a planet orbiting around a star will go without us. Or at least as a big giant stone.

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#63

Post by marcus_holmes » Thu, Feb 25, 2021, 9:33 PM UTC

bearbawl wrote: post #62

marcus_holmes wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Travel more :) The world is huge, and we are not as big as we like to think. Catch the Trans-Siberian. Or the Indian-Pacific for that matter. Watch as thousands of kilometers of untouched wilderness roll by. Visit some really poor countries and see the happiest people you've ever met living without technology. See the ruins of vast ancient temple complexes, remains of entire civilisations that are now just tourist tr…

Travel is actually the same. I can travel to the other side of the world in one day. It’s way too small, or what we built is way too good. And yes the world as a planet orbiting around a star will go without us. Or at least as a big giant stone.

Flying over somewhere is not the same as walking it, or even passing through it on a train.

There is nothing we can do that will kill all life on Earth. We are simply not that powerful.

As a race, we've been through Ice Ages that have seen most of the world covered in ice, and a narrow strip of habitable land around the equator. We survived all that with no technology to help us. Twice. We'll cope.

Re: How Vulnerable Is the World?

#64

Post by fluxinflex » Sat, Feb 27, 2021, 9:54 AM UTC

One could argue that the measures the author advocates could lead to humankind being less resilient to virus mutations or other evolutionary crisis because of biological human harmonisation under a system that makes all humans behave the same.

In addition a global panopticon will, with a high probability, lead to an increase in depression and suicide.

Both could also lead to human extinction.