--- Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 07:01:07PM +1000, Stathis > Papaioannou wrote: > > > What sort of technical information, exactly, is > still secret after 50 years? > > The precise blueprint for a working device. Not a > crude gun assembler, > the full implosion assembly mounty. The HE lens > geometries, the timing, > the means of ignition, the neutron primer, the shape > of the entire assembly > and how to get there.
All of this applies only to implosion-type devices, which are far more complicated and tricky to pull off than gun-type devices, and which are therefore unlikely to be used. > I was always interested in nuclear technology, > especially weapon design, so > I've read several interviews with weapon designers, > and it is very quite obvious > what they do say, and what they don't. If you want to argue, please present your own arguments and not those of phantom anonymous weapon designers. > You won't find that information anywhere, though you > might be able to purchase that > information from the nuclear black market, assuming > you have the right > connections and can pay the price. Is there any significant black market in classified information? > In fact the assembly of a critical device has some > close analogy to AI > bootstrap. You need large installations, lots of > energy and a large > body of experts to get there first. Assuming you're starting from scratch, yes. Why not just steal a few kilos of U235? It's a lot easier than building a billion-dollar enrichment facility. > > >Everyone knows how to wripte a P2P application. > Nobody knows how to > > >build an AI. If it's a large-scale effort the > knowledge can be controlled > > >for a long time. > > > > Are you suggesting that this would be possible > even when the computer > > hardware is generally available, and it is mainly > a matter of keeping > > I'm not sure all-purpose hardware would be suitable. > It depends very much > upon which computing paradigm is dominant by that > time (40-50 years > away from now). Judging from the past, there might > be not that much > progress there. > > > the software secret? > > I'm definitely suggesting that secrecy and > surveillance would go a very > long way to keeping sentient software out of the > hands of the general > public. By the time sentient software exists, the question is moot because it will promptly escape onto the Internet and will probably wreak havoc from there. > Arguably, the general public might or might > not be in possession > of the hardware in question. Sooner or later, regardless of what the required computing power is, the general public *will* be in possession of it. > ----- > This list is sponsored by AGIRI: > http://www.agiri.org/email > To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: > http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&; > - Tom ____________________________________________________________________________________ Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=4007604&user_secret=7d7fb4d8
