alt Hacker NewsIt is, as so often the case, a classic prisoner's dilemma problem [0]: "no nukes" is pretty clearly superior to "any nukes at all", but "they have nukes but we don't" is game over, so... nukes for all (major world powers)!
It's awful, but that's the prisoner's dilemma for you. I have a hard time respecting any anti-nuclear activist who doesn't at least acknowledge this facet of things, even if "no one has nukes and no one can easily get them" really would be best for the world.
[0]: if anyone hasn't seen it before, the interactive https://ncase.me/trust/ on the iterated prisoner's dilemma is excellent
Replies
No, I disagree.
There hasn't been a hot war between nuclear powered states, ever.
This is pretty obviously superior compared with the previous "no nukes" era, that had plenty of hot wars...
God, spare the world from nerds and their game theories. There have been enough nuclear trigger close calls already.
If the past 8 years have shown us anything, it's that we are capable of electing incredibly stupid people who likely would get us into war if being blown back into the stone age weren't a possibility. I like nuclear weapons for that reason. It scares tyrants into complacency on the larger scale.