Nuclear Weapons Nerds(gizmodo.com)
gizmodo.com
Nuclear Weapons Nerds
https://gizmodo.com/meet-the-nuclear-weapons-nerds-1826964319
43 comments
If you're interested in the latest nuclear weapons developments, I highly recommend reading the blog https://armscontrolwonk.com . There's lots of detailed political and technical analysis of the world's nuclear weapons systems there with an effort to track and limit their proliferation. If you've never investigated this type of thing before, you might be surprised at just how much knowledge there is to be had in unclassified "open source" material like this.
The founder of that site, Jeffrey Lewis, recently published "The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Nuclear Attacks Against the United States: A Speculative Novel". Well worth reading IMO.
https://www.amazon.com/Commission-Report-Nuclear-Attacks-Aga...
https://www.amazon.com/Commission-Report-Nuclear-Attacks-Aga...
I also recommend the podcast by the same name[0]. Especially the episodes with Jeffery Lewis. There is also a guy named Scott LaFoy who has some pretty interesting things to say, but usually on other Podcasts and across a wider array of topics than just nuclear weapons, including cyberwarfare. He's @wslafoy on Twitter.
[0] I sponsor it on Patreon, and the sponsors only slack is fucking great.
[0] I sponsor it on Patreon, and the sponsors only slack is fucking great.
Your link is broken - I think it's because their TLS configuration doesn't support the non-www hostname. This link works though:
https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/
https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/
I second their recommendation and add that their podcast is really good and nerdy.
They also put to pragmatic social and geopolitical use a lot of tech in a low-budget way: imaging from Planet Labs, machine learning in inage analysis, etc. And they go through how they pit them to use in detail.
They also put to pragmatic social and geopolitical use a lot of tech in a low-budget way: imaging from Planet Labs, machine learning in inage analysis, etc. And they go through how they pit them to use in detail.
I'm also a regular listener to ACW. Where is it covered that they use machine learning?
According to the latest podcast, which goes into this topic in detail, they don't use machine learning at all (but would like to try it): https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1205801/south-korean...
Instead, they're finding missile sites by manually tracking information leaks in various places. E.g. that podcast discusses how they found a secret South Korean site partially from publicly available images (it had a really distinctive design), and from things like browsing the LinkedIn profiles of people known to work there, which would mention that they worked in some nearby town or county.
According to the latest podcast, which goes into this topic in detail, they don't use machine learning at all (but would like to try it): https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1205801/south-korean...
Instead, they're finding missile sites by manually tracking information leaks in various places. E.g. that podcast discusses how they found a secret South Korean site partially from publicly available images (it had a really distinctive design), and from things like browsing the LinkedIn profiles of people known to work there, which would mention that they worked in some nearby town or county.
No story about nuclear weapons nerds is complete without at least one reference to
http://www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/
especially the physics lessons in http://www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq0.html
http://www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/
especially the physics lessons in http://www.nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq0.html
don't forget nuclear secrecy or the bulletin of atomic scientists:
http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/
https://thebulletin.org/
http://blog.nuclearsecrecy.com/
https://thebulletin.org/
Also fun(?) to see how destructive nuclear arms are based on data from Google Maps.
http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/classic/
http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/classic/
Modern version: http://www.nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
(no reason to use classic except in very rare circumstances)
(no reason to use classic except in very rare circumstances)
I quite like reading this guy's point of view - and Anthropology PhD candidate studying atomic weapons:
https://deusexatomica.wordpress.com/
(Sadly gone quiet. I hope he got his degree and is doing something fun...)
https://deusexatomica.wordpress.com/
(Sadly gone quiet. I hope he got his degree and is doing something fun...)
the book mentioned early on -- The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes -- is one of my favorite pieces of nonfiction. i can't recommend it highly enough, it's totally engrossing.
also, really fantastic photos in this! the copy could use a little work though.
also, really fantastic photos in this! the copy could use a little work though.
Second this. A great read.
Rhodes' layout of the early 20th century physics discoveries that lead to the atomic bomb is engaging all by itself. Who knew it would matter whether your lab benches were made of wood or granite?
Rhodes' layout of the early 20th century physics discoveries that lead to the atomic bomb is engaging all by itself. Who knew it would matter whether your lab benches were made of wood or granite?
If you’re interested in the topic, I highly recommend picking up a copy of John Coster-Mullen’s book (discussed in TFA) on Amazon while you can. It’s already somewhat hard to find and not commonly carried by libraries. The author is in his 70s and won’t be able to continue self publishing forever.
Here's a good article on how Coster-Mullen did and probably still does his research.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/12/15/atomic-john
“The secret of the atomic bomb is how easy they are to make.” John Coster-Mullen
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/12/15/atomic-john
“The secret of the atomic bomb is how easy they are to make.” John Coster-Mullen
I can recommend Coster-Mullen's book if you're interested in this stuff. Big and bound with a spiral binding it is a remarkable collection of bits of information that do pretty much tell you everything you might want to know about those first two bombs.
I'm currently reading "Making of the Atomic Bomb" by Richard Rhodes (Mentioned in the post). It's a thick book and dense with information. I have only read the first two chapters but the book is very engrossing - it seems to be covering all the important people who were part of the making of the Bomb, both directly and indirectly.
Next is "Red Sun: Making of the Hydrogen Bomb" by the same author.
Next is "Red Sun: Making of the Hydrogen Bomb" by the same author.
Nitpick - I think you probably mean "Dark Sun":
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16889.Dark_Sun
It's very good - although as a lot of it is about the Soviet bomb project it "Red Sun" is oddly appropriate!
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16889.Dark_Sun
It's very good - although as a lot of it is about the Soviet bomb project it "Red Sun" is oddly appropriate!
Yes, thank you. I meant Dark Sun.
I usually correlate Red with USSR (and a Super Man graphic novel, named "Red Son", about USSR does not help either) hence the confusion.
I usually correlate Red with USSR (and a Super Man graphic novel, named "Red Son", about USSR does not help either) hence the confusion.
I recommend https://www.amazon.com/Work-Fields-Bomb-Robert-Tredici/dp/00...
I have a copy, I treasure it. Extremely well curated collection of historical images, interviews.
I have a copy, I treasure it. Extremely well curated collection of historical images, interviews.
Also good along those lines, American Ground Zero, How To Photograph an Atomic Bomb, and the classic, 100 Suns.
is 100 suns "brighter than 100 suns" by Robert Jungk?
Richard Rhodes is my go-to for the back story, huge books. Not enough photographs.
Richard Rhodes is my go-to for the back story, huge books. Not enough photographs.
I own some beautiful Mexican pottery with uranium glaze.
Until recently, this fellow, David Hahn, was a famous nuclear nerd, aka The Radioactive Boy Scout:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn
[deleted]
I've played enough DEFCON to know how this will end :P
"The Cold War was over and according to a 2016 survey of American fears by Chapman University, more people feared The Affordable Care Act than the threat of nuclear war."
Every single day my belief that people are amazingly stupid is reinforced.
---
Somewhat related:
The Russians are looking for their nuclear-propelled cruise missile that they reportedly recently lost.
IIRC that is the same one Putin mentioned in his "state of the union" speech, shortly before his "re-election".
Every single day my belief that people are amazingly stupid is reinforced.
---
Somewhat related:
The Russians are looking for their nuclear-propelled cruise missile that they reportedly recently lost.
IIRC that is the same one Putin mentioned in his "state of the union" speech, shortly before his "re-election".
> > ...more people feared The Affordable Care Act than the threat of nuclear war.
> Every single day my belief that people are amazingly stupid is reinforced.
Really?
ACA: Has definite impact on daily lives. Every US resident has had to make at least one decision about their health care in the years since it took effect that was directly affected by the ACA.
Nuclear war: No impact on daily life. US-developed ICBM defenses are critically upsetting the balance of Mutually Assured Destruction, but almost nobody is aware of that. Individual decisions are completely unaffected by nuclear weapons or defenses against them.
Given that reality, it seems perfectly expected and rational that more people will feel threatened by the ACA than nuclear war.
> Every single day my belief that people are amazingly stupid is reinforced.
Really?
ACA: Has definite impact on daily lives. Every US resident has had to make at least one decision about their health care in the years since it took effect that was directly affected by the ACA.
Nuclear war: No impact on daily life. US-developed ICBM defenses are critically upsetting the balance of Mutually Assured Destruction, but almost nobody is aware of that. Individual decisions are completely unaffected by nuclear weapons or defenses against them.
Given that reality, it seems perfectly expected and rational that more people will feel threatened by the ACA than nuclear war.
Okay, this right here is pretty absurd.
The perspective is so wrong it begs disbelief on some level. An attempt to open doors, to provide access to medicine is not some thing made of fear. You can drive on roads, you can mail a letter, you can see a doctor.
Instantaneous annihilation, or worse, getting irradiated at lethal doses, only to collapse into a heap of boils and sores, wretching and dry heaving until you cough up your ulcerated intestines, actually is something to fear.
But yeah, you know, guns or butter. Nuclear deterents make war generally unrealistic, once you arm yourself with enough bombs. Nevermind the liklihood that that more bombs you have, the closer we all are to one of them going off accidentally.
But you’re right, because of nuclear secrecy, and the government classification of military secrets, we’re not allowed to know how close we are to having our lives immediately and directly affected, not by “Nuclear War” but by accidents in pursuit of possessing a deterent.
Therefore, since we cannot be permitted to know such things, our lives must not be affected by those things, and it’s irrational to fear them.
Instead, we should fear the government trying to buy us all dog food, because it would be ridiculously inefficient to allocate funds to supply such things, when so many people don’t own dogs. It’s clearly a vector to corruption and dog poisoning. Perfectly expected and rational.
The perspective is so wrong it begs disbelief on some level. An attempt to open doors, to provide access to medicine is not some thing made of fear. You can drive on roads, you can mail a letter, you can see a doctor.
Instantaneous annihilation, or worse, getting irradiated at lethal doses, only to collapse into a heap of boils and sores, wretching and dry heaving until you cough up your ulcerated intestines, actually is something to fear.
But yeah, you know, guns or butter. Nuclear deterents make war generally unrealistic, once you arm yourself with enough bombs. Nevermind the liklihood that that more bombs you have, the closer we all are to one of them going off accidentally.
But you’re right, because of nuclear secrecy, and the government classification of military secrets, we’re not allowed to know how close we are to having our lives immediately and directly affected, not by “Nuclear War” but by accidents in pursuit of possessing a deterent.
Therefore, since we cannot be permitted to know such things, our lives must not be affected by those things, and it’s irrational to fear them.
Instead, we should fear the government trying to buy us all dog food, because it would be ridiculously inefficient to allocate funds to supply such things, when so many people don’t own dogs. It’s clearly a vector to corruption and dog poisoning. Perfectly expected and rational.
Its a fact of life in this country that your opinion about the ACA depends a lot on where you get your news and your own interactions with the health care system.
I'm fortunate to live in a populous area of a state that wholeheartedly adopted its own exchange. There are plenty of good choices available. When my employer ran out of money and went out of business a few years ago, I could afford a plan for my family that was far cheaper than COBRA. We got affordable health care through the exchange until I could land a regular job.
But many people don't. There are a growing number of markets that aren't offering ACA plans at all. Other markets are seeing 20% y/y growth in their prices. In short, the ACA is failing. You can be mad about that all you want to, but it doesn't change the fact that being afraid of the ACA is totally rational.
I'm fortunate to live in a populous area of a state that wholeheartedly adopted its own exchange. There are plenty of good choices available. When my employer ran out of money and went out of business a few years ago, I could afford a plan for my family that was far cheaper than COBRA. We got affordable health care through the exchange until I could land a regular job.
But many people don't. There are a growing number of markets that aren't offering ACA plans at all. Other markets are seeing 20% y/y growth in their prices. In short, the ACA is failing. You can be mad about that all you want to, but it doesn't change the fact that being afraid of the ACA is totally rational.
Skepticism, sure. Disdain, maybe. Fear, pointedly ridiculous.
It's not so much that it's failing, as much as it's been resisted and sabotaged. It's a distraction to think in terms of markets. Not when you can plug a money hose, the size of the military budget, into the supply side of the equation.
To name government subsidies as the ultimate and most fearsome form of corruption, and an abyss which has no known bottom, is to call the size of the U.S. military budget the purest form of corruption known to history.
And indeed, if the U.S. military, backed by its nuclear deterrent is such a thing to be feared, then it is assuredly more fearful than the failure of any medical plan.
Consider that we use nuclear powered aircraft carriers and cruise missiles designed to carry nuclear payloads, such to the effect, that in a conventional war, we smear an industrialized nation like Iraq, wiping maybe 100,000 people off the face of the earth, at a cost of 1,000 enlisted personnel. So take that degree of fear (or maybe just the portion of it, that happens to be backed by our global nuclear strike capacity), and point it directly at those who would let an accountant stand between your children and a doctor. What then?
It's not so much that it's failing, as much as it's been resisted and sabotaged. It's a distraction to think in terms of markets. Not when you can plug a money hose, the size of the military budget, into the supply side of the equation.
To name government subsidies as the ultimate and most fearsome form of corruption, and an abyss which has no known bottom, is to call the size of the U.S. military budget the purest form of corruption known to history.
And indeed, if the U.S. military, backed by its nuclear deterrent is such a thing to be feared, then it is assuredly more fearful than the failure of any medical plan.
Consider that we use nuclear powered aircraft carriers and cruise missiles designed to carry nuclear payloads, such to the effect, that in a conventional war, we smear an industrialized nation like Iraq, wiping maybe 100,000 people off the face of the earth, at a cost of 1,000 enlisted personnel. So take that degree of fear (or maybe just the portion of it, that happens to be backed by our global nuclear strike capacity), and point it directly at those who would let an accountant stand between your children and a doctor. What then?
> US-developed ICBM defenses
Uhh, if this is correct and complete, then why does it matter if the balance is upset in our own favor?
Uhh, if this is correct and complete, then why does it matter if the balance is upset in our own favor?
It matters if it restarts the arms race.
For example, there have been rumors that the other team is developing autonomous underwater delivery vehicles for their nuclear weapons to get around our ICBM defenses. They could just be rumors, but the idea is both sound and achievable with current technology.
I'd rather live in a world of MAD-enforced nuclear detent than one where we're forever uncertain just what new delivery systems the other guy has developed.
For example, there have been rumors that the other team is developing autonomous underwater delivery vehicles for their nuclear weapons to get around our ICBM defenses. They could just be rumors, but the idea is both sound and achievable with current technology.
I'd rather live in a world of MAD-enforced nuclear detent than one where we're forever uncertain just what new delivery systems the other guy has developed.
Autonomous or not, submarines still need propellers and power sources to go anywhere - both of which make noise.
It wasn't so much that which got me - I'm probably more afraid of the effects of Brexit right now than nuclear war, because I know Brexit's happening in March, and nuclear war doesn't seem enormously likely right now - but the comment just before it about Americans not thinking the US even had any nuclear weapons anymore.
Just... what.
Just... what.
If you want to play with nukes, work at Pantex.