We’ve Got to Talk About the Bomb Some More
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 июн 2024
- Professor Alex Wellerstein returns for a part two answering questions about the bomb, near misses, command and control and more.
Listen to Decouple on:
• Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/6PNr3ml...
• Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
• Overcast: overcast.fm/itunes1516526694/...
• Podcket Casts: pca.st/ehbfrn44
• RSS: anchor.fm/s/23775178/podcast/rss
Learn more about Decouple Media: www.decouplemedia.org 
Наука
The free USB drive trick is a really good attack vector.
I have used that trick more than once during security audits.
Just spreading a few of them around in the parking lot is enough to get a foothold, almost everywhere, even at places that really ought to have a much higher security awareness than that.
WONDERFUL !!! Having brushed that part of the military in the eighties, remarkable how much is discussed here I signed papers swearing to protect in perpetuity.
I would ask you so much if I knew it were no longer classified, but I don't want you to break your oath
We’re about one boilermaker and a beer shot away from blowing civilization to kingdom come.
Brilliantly interesting guest. New to the channel and subscribed. Thanks!
Sandia RUclips has three really good documentaries on nuclear weapon safety and the technology used like permissive action links
USS Ohio, the first of the class, was commissioned in 1981.
The absolute maximum payload it could carry was 16MT. None probably carried that much, for multiple reasons.
10:30 What I find amusing is you just described North Koreas plan for invading the south.
"Nuclear winter" was a topic which my class and I discussed at school. I'm 62. If you do the maths then this idea did not first come out in 1983. At 1:36:55.
And that's why civilians are in charge of the military.
To be clear, that's is bad thing
That is a double edged sword though. Yes in many situations civil oversight over the military is a good thing. But there are other cases where it's not. Ideally we'd want to find a balance where we have civil control over the military, but that we're not micromanaging the military, and in wartime the military has the leeway to do what needs to be done to win.
Yes in western democracies that is
First time viewer here...thank you for this explosive episode 🚀 I will definitely be subscribing & watching in the future!
1:02:59 Hahaha Hahaha, who said I don't listen. 😊
Accidents happen, we are only human 😊😊
Live and no editing is authentic.
The big bomb has been turned in to a cluster weopon where one missile carries multiple war heads which on their own are massive. sun shine in a can
Wasn't it Henry Stimson Truman's secretary of war directly in charge of the Manhattan project wes the one that kinda talked truman into useing the bombs on Japan truman had his doubts but with projected american losses from a land invasion truman felt he had no choice !
Perhaps 9 is in reference to Dante's 9 Circles of Hell.
54:00 Edward Teller shows how brilliant idiots can be. 😮😮😮😮😊
You could also say that Edward Teller is a perfect example of being smart and being wise is not the same thing.
@@NomenNescio99all those Manhattan project fools are currently boiling in the deepest darkest pits of hell fire.
Future generations of humanity had no say in living under the sword of Damocles that is nuclear and bio chemical weaponry.
Oppenheimer’s “I am death” interview is evidence that in their old dying age they knew what they did.
And they knew that for eternity ever after they were going to suffer immensely.
I get so discouraged, listening to educated people seeing the past through the eyes of the present. This does not make one sound smart. It merely expresses. Inexperience with the real due to hiding behind the ideal. Those of the intelligentsia, please, stop being willful. Idiots! It irreparably skews perspective.
Still love the podcast! 👍🏻
"A horrible thing" and "valid" shouldn't be together in a sentence.
Good video. Good information.
Russian technology is often in the 60s even today. Which is scary 😨
Nth Korea was given or bought nuclear weapon materials and technology.
Dictators are common and dictatorships are war fighting governments and need an internal military.
Dictatorships will blackmail the world with CO2 emissions in exchange for clean electricity technology, obviously nuclear energy. 😮
Just my concerns
But if democracy answer is more military force then military costs have to be added to clean nuclear electricity. 😮
I do not think that nuclear electricity can ever be economical.
I think that if the sun shines for months then people will use new technologies like rooftop PV and BV parked 23hrs every day and with trickle currents all day long and all night.
Grid cashflow stops, the economy will suffer.
Same if grid electricity fails in the renewable situation.
Nuclear has an economic problem for the world.
This is such a stereotypical and biased comment.
Now the best wind and solar energy technologies are in China. Now the best nuclear technologies are in Russia and China. Rather, these “dictatorships” should fear that the “democratic West” will come to them. In addition, the USA is the ONLY nuclear country whose laws do not prohibit the first strike with a nuclear weapon. In other countries, strategic missiles can only be launched in response to a nuclear attack or when there is a threat of complete destruction of the country.
Regarding the economics of nuclear energy. The West, in its desire to get rid of nuclear plants, has literally lost the skills to build them. This is why the latest nuclear power plants are so expensive. For comparison, the cost of nuclear power plants built by China, Russia and, by the way, South Korea was 3-4 times lower. And the cost of renewable ones is often more expensive. I'm not talking about the cost of generation - I'm talking about the cost to the consumer. It is much easier to install one nuclear power plant near a city or enterprises than to run wires from seashore wind turbines, add energy storage, and build an additional plant for insurance if there is no wind for a week. And after 15 years, build a wind power plant again, since all the turbines have broken down. Of course, I’m greatly simplifying it, but you can even watch it on this channel. There are quite a few critical videos about the problems that exist with renewable sources.
@Cougar4ik you are right about grid costs.
The grid makes dirt cheap electricity very expensive.
The towers and transmission lines and poles and wires and transformers and switch yards and maintenance equipment and manpower and financing and sunk costs.....
Generation and storage with no grid at the customer's location is dirt cheap electricity.
80% of the world's population live in warm latitudes.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 It's a beautiful picture, but it's very simplified. The main thing that renewable energy sources cannot provide now is stable electricity 24/7/365. And if 24/7 is still possible to some extent (although the batteries themselves require a huge amount of resources), then providing energy throughout the year is a much more difficult task. There is literally no scalable technology right now that can store energy for months. There is, of course, the option of using hydrogen as a battery, but the efficiency of this process is not particularly high, and there are other problems. And we are considering only home consumption. What about industry, which consumes many times more energy than households? What about large cities where there is not enough place to put solar and wind power plants? In general, I want to say that I am not against renewables (although I would prefer the goal to be 100% nuclear+hydro). In some cases their use is justified. But I also think that the pursuit of 100% renewable is extremely dangerous. Their production requires too many resources, and at the same time they have an extremely low EROEI.
@Cougar4ik grid promoters ignore the massive amount of material in the bigger capacity national grid.
They ignore how little the grid is and how big it has to be.
The little Australian national grid costs $1TRILLIONs to replace and has to be 7 times bigger if no fossil fueled energy.
And still have non fossil fueled vehicles.
This is a fantasy of understanding the dimensions of our problems.
58:00 electricity energy delivery is 10 times more expensive than the central generation plant.
GRID ELECTRICITY is extremely expensive compared to the dirt cheap generation.
Home owners and building owners will have access to dirt cheap electricity at their premises years before 100% electric energy from a grid can ever do.
Nuclear is an economic folly.
You are clearly guessing here and have not studied the subject, you are wrong in so many ways and there exist no form av serious science that can backup up you claims.
Start by reading the report on power grid layouts from fingrid from about 10 years ago.
Then try to grasp the concept of economy of scale.
Your are soo wrong.
@NomenNescio99 I'm a Construction Engineer, tendered and worked on new power stations and transmission lines for decades.
Ignorance takes work, and congratulations.
5cents kWh feedin and 50cents kWh grid supply is my situation.
With a Battery Vehicle plugged in 23hrs every day and all night.
And vehicles are getting cheaper.
50cents not going into the grid will impact badly if electricity only costs 5cents.
I can save after-tax dollars on
Petroleum.
Natural gas.
Grid electricity.
People generally do not have a clue.
I can do offgrid all year long.
Others in cold latitudes can do it for long Summer hours, and many Spring and Autumn daily hours.
Those lost hours will be a massive hit on grid supplied electricity.
Nobody is talking about this massive change.
I am happy to educate as many who will learn.
I have grandchildren and care.
@@stephenbrickwood1602 Every piece of empirical knowledg is the direct opposite of what you are saying.
Every attempt ever made has failed, and not only failed, they have been failures of biblical proportions.
I don't understand how a professional can let dreams so completely override objective facts and reality.
There are so many hard physical limitations that will make sure that what you say will remain delusional dreams for generations to come.
If you really care about your grandkids, start by reading up on the actual outcome of all any attempts that have been made so far.
Read up on physical limitations like geology and mineral resources available for ev and battery manufacturing.
And please, do try to find the very well research report from fingrid, it tells the opposite of your story.
How do you determine the minimum number of missiles required? It isn't an algebraic problem, it's a psychological one. The MAD principle has worked so far, but we're always just one mistake away from disaster. It seems accidental that human evolution produced an animal that could create civilization. Unfortunately, it seems even more adept at destroying it. Climate change, ecosystem destruction, and the depletion of resources will increase international tensions and this will increase the risk of pulling the nuclear trigger.
Common garden variety psychopathic behaviour is the worst scenario, madder than MAD. Look what they are doing already, as a very infective cause of paranoia, driving the kind of insecurities that makes random killing, greed and unfilled limits of amoral desires for money and power etc.