this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2024
245 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

72769 readers
1437 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (15 children)

Unfortunately this is basic game theory, so the “smart” thing is to have the weapons, but avoid war.

Once we’ve grown past war, we can disarm, but it couldn’t happen in the opposite order.

[–] JayDee@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago (7 children)

The process of collective disarming is the path towards growing past war. And that first step is the collective banning of manufacturing such weapons.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (6 children)

I disagree. War isn’t caused by weapons. It’s caused by racism, religious strife, economic hardship, natural resource exploitation, and more. Those need fixed before anyone will be willing to put away their weapons.

[–] boatswain@infosec.pub 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Life doesn't adhere to waterfall methodology: we don't have to do one first, and then the other. We can progressively disarm as we're addressing the problems you mentioned..

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Fair enough, but there’s still far too much conflict to begin demilitarization at this point in time. What the world can mostly agree on is to limit itself to being destroyed 55 times over by nuclear weapons (by UN estimates). And that’s in a world where nobody has actually used nuclear weapons (offensively) in 90 years.

These kinds of things take so many generations because the fundamental conflict between humans is not resolved. If there had been no Cold War, maybe we would have totally denuclearized by now, but I still doubt it.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)