Goo You--was Re: Nuke weapon/reactor/waste horror story links?

From: John Marlow (
Date: Tue Jan 09 2001 - 16:18:28 MST

Hooboy. Well, personally, I'd say the issue of these
foreign nations not using the things could just as
well be fear of US or international retaliation (after
all, which is the only nation ever to have used the
damned things?) as "responsibility." Probably more
likely, in fact; some of these guys REALLY don't like
each other...

Sure, accidents may be containable. Most probably
would be, no question. That's not my problem. My
problem is that there is a potential here--never
before seen--for a SELF-REPLICATING accident the
consequences of which expand exponentially and which
cannot be halted. Somewhat analogous to Teller's
side-bets on Trinity igniting the atmosphere in a
globe-spanning chain reaction. Meticulous calculations
showed that to be very, very, very unlikely, if not

I'd love to see similar calculations regarding the goo

I really would.


john marlow


--- "Michael S. Lorrey" <> wrote: > Your position rests, though, on one key principle: > that absolutely > nobody can be trusted. I think the fact that most > intelligence analysts > will admit that at least one if not more nuclear > weapons may be already > in the hands of one or more terrorist groups, yet > they have not been > used is a pretty good indicator that even the most > extreme individuals > can still have the capacity to retain some sanity in > their judgement. > The mere fact that the russians, chinese, cubans, > and others have had > them and not used them is a pretty good indicator > that most people are > pretty good at being responsible with such power. > Accidents do happen, > no doubt, however you have not shown any indications > that advanced > nanotech would be as uncontrollable as you claim. > You have no evidence > (nor, IMHO, any knowledged to judge) that any > accidents would not be > containable. > > john marlow wrote: > > > > All true, all true--but irrelevant; point is it > can happen. Two further > > points: nukes can be tracked, perhaps even by > satellite, by rad emissions, > > making use difficult. Not so nannite packages. > Also, any party employing a > > backpack nuke must fear massive retaliation from > the target nation. With > > the proper nanoweapon, however, the target nation > can be obliterated, > > making retaliation improbable and use more likely. > > > > john marlow > > > > Michael S. Lorrey wrote: > > > > > > RUSSIA MISSING NUCLEAR DEVICES > > > > > > > > > > How long have they been missing? For years, so far > as I know. Not one > > has been used. How about that? > > Here's another question? How do we know they > actually had them to begin > > with? Perhaps its just a matter of a commie > official reporting x number > > were made and not actually making that many, then > pocketing the > > difference. Not unheard of. > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get your free address at

__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:17 MDT