cramer%ti-csl.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa (06/27/84)
From: Nichael Cramer <cramer%ti-csl.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa> There was an article entitled "Delayed Retaliation and Robotics" by J. Bart Czirr and E. Paul Palmer in the 28OCT83 issue of Nation Review [yes, yes, I know, but it *is* an interesting article]. You can look the article up yourself for details, but the basic idea was that of a submarine-based, sea-launched "doomsday" machine. In short, we would have LOTS of small [one or two missile] automated submarines roaming the oceans seemingly at random. Every so often, they come to the surface where they can receive radio messages. When and where and at what radio frequency are kept secret, initially. These messages are of three types: 1] "All is well, resubmerge and continue." 2] "Prepare to be boarded." [for maintenance, reprogramming, etc.] 3] "Begin converging on enemy target." or NO MESSAGE In the event of receipt of this last message [or of NO MESSAGE], the microsub begins moving towards the enemy target and once in position comes to the surface for a short time. If it receives a sorry-it-was-all-a-mistake-message, it goes back on its routine patrol. If it does not receive the message, it resubmerges and wanders about without leaving striking range. At some later time and position [possibly after one or several more safety-check resurfacings] it resurfaces one last time, checks, and in the absence of contradictory orders, fires. Some of the more obvious advantages are: 1] We could freely publish all the times, locations and messages for the resurfacings, say, a week at a time. Anyone, anywhere could send them. One could even imagine a scenario where the Enemy chiefs of staff were made responsible for sending the messages themselves. The worst that could possibly happen is that "that week's worth" of subs get wiped out. This would presumably be a small portion of the total fleet. Besides, we would almost surely be aware of it. So, great, we just stop publishing the schedule. 2] LOTS cheaper. 3] It does have the standard "doomsday" *advantage* [I hope that is the right word] that keeping us alive and well is suddenly in everybody's best interest. i.e., we have to keep supplying the codes. 4] The system is very diffuse, which has two main advantages. The first advantage is tactical, i.e. given how hard it is to find and track one large submarine, how hard would it be to keep track of lots of little submarines, each of which could be anywhere in the world. The second advantage has to do with safety. It would take a very complicated string of events to trigger even a single accidental firing. We could easily aid in the destruction of a rogue submarine, without affecting any of the rest of the system. Still, in worst case, this amount to a single firing from a known site towards a known target almost surely with a lot of warning. [This is, of course, a non-negligible worst case, but several orders of magnitude improvement over any presently existing worst case]. NLC
toby@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Toby Harness) (06/29/84)
This has already gotten too far away from net.SPACE. I think it is an interesting discussion, but it doesn`t really belong here. How about bopping this over to net.misc or net.politics (since us USENET types cannot post to fa.arms-d)? To add fule to the fire: the suggestions (ASAT`s, SLM`s, baby-subs, etc.) are all ways to preserve MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction), if indeed it still exists. If you go in for MAD (a.k.a Balance of Terror), what`s wrong with germs? Germ war is no more an abomination than nuclear war, and stockpiling and protecting (i.e assuring their release) would be *much* cheaper than building ICBM`s and their ilk. And if done right the killer germs would only affect homo.sap, giving them post-Armageddon cockroaches some competition. Toby Harness Ogburn/Stouffer Center, University of Chicago ...ihnp4!gargoyle!toby
al@ames-lm.UUCP (07/04/84)
It is truely frightening that someone should seriously propose a bunch of killer robots that must actively be kept in check to prevent nuclear attack. I'm refering, of course, to the robot nuclear subs that surface every once in a while and check for a radio signal. If the signal is not there they begin their attack. When dealing with something as essential as our survival, I believe we should strive for passive systems (greater reliability) and should never give up human control of the nuclear button.