Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

And without nukes, that war probably would have devastated Germany yet again.

The argument that nuclear weapons have prevented large-scale wars seems to be sound. The years since 1945 have been remarkably peaceful.

My worry, though, is that it's hard to estimate the risk they add. If nukes prevent massive conventional wars and there's a zero chance of nuclear war, then hell yes, nukes are great, all praise Einstein and Fermi and Teller and Ulam. On the other hand, if nukes prevent massive conventional wars and there's a 0.5% chance per year of an all-out global thermonuclear war, then no way, we just bought a couple of hundred years of peace followed by the end of civilization.

The data from the 71 years that nuclear weapons have been around is consistent with both possibilities.... Actually, I'd argue it's more consistent with the second, given how close the world has come to global thermonuclear war on several occasions in that time.




True, and to some extent it's like any other form of gambling. The odds may not be that bad -- they may even be in your favor in the long run -- but the game ends the first time you go bust. So it's really, really important to keep that from happening by accident.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: