[net.followup] Russian Nuclear Accident: High Tech Transfer

db@cstvax.UUCP (Dave Berry) (05/09/86)

Over the past year or so there has been a fair bit of disquiet in the
British computing press about COCOM restrictions on export of "sensitive"
technological material to the Eastern Bloc.  People have been jailed for
selling PDP-11's to Hungary, and so forth.  Some editorials have suggested
that th USA is using these rules to its own commercial gain.

Also, a year or two ago the USA tried to stop European companies from
working on the Siberian gas pipeline, which tranfers gas from the Siberian
gas-fields to where it is needed in the Western USSR.

Speculation - if the USSR was more technologically sophisticated, the
effects of the Chernobyl accident would be reduced.  Maybe we should
relax some of the COCOM rules.

This is not to say that a more open system than the USSR would also
encourage safer reactor designs, and that this might be more important.
Nor is it to imply that there is such a thing as a "completely safe"
nuclear power station.

Comments, anyone?
-- 
	Dave Berry. CS postgrad, Univ. of Edinburgh		
					...mcvax!ukc!cstvax!db

falk@sun.uucp (Ed Falk) (05/14/86)

> Speculation - if the USSR was more technologically sophisticated, the
> effects of the Chernobyl accident would be reduced.  Maybe we should
> relax some of the COCOM rules.
> 
> Comments, anyone?

Dr. Helen Caldicott had some interesting points along these lines WRT
nuclear war.  She points out that as the US and USSR put more and more
"quick" weapons into the field (such as cruise missiles based in Europe
that reach their target in 6 min. instead of 30), that they move closer
and closer to adopting "Launch on Warning" policies.  This means that
the missiles are launched at the first indication of an enemy launch rather
than waiting until the leader gets the news and authorizes a counter-strike.
The reasons for this are obvious:  six minutes are just not enough to
detect an enemy launch, prepare a counter-strike AND get Reagan or
Gorbachov awake enough to sign the forms.  The USSR (I believe) has
already said that they will be forced to adopt a launch-on-warning
policy if cruise missiles are based in Europe.

Now, if we go to a launch-on-warning system, we literally put our lives
not only in the hands of our computers, but also in the hands of THEIR
computers.  The US has several well-publicised incidents where computer
error has mistaken things like flocks of geese for incoming missiles.
In one case, during the Carter administration, we would have been within
one minute of total destruction had we been on launch-on-warning.

We don't know how often this happens in the USSR, but considering the
sorry shape that their computer industry is in, the situation is probably
pretty grim.  There are scientists who claim that accidental nuclear
war will PROBABLY happen within the next few decades for this reason;
simply because of the probabilities adding up.

Thus, Dr. Caldicott says "It is in our interest to make sure that the
Russians have the best computers we can give them.  It would be
patriotic to give computers to the Russians".

-- 
		-ed falk, sun microsystems