









Comments     Threshold


By icanhascpu on 2/3/2009 3:39:50 PM , Rating: 2
Hi, Dave.

RE: 2012??
By dj LiTh on 2/3/2009 5:03:47 PM , Rating: 2
Dave's too busy playing Crysis.

RE: 2012??
By Dianoda on 2/3/2009 6:27:07 PM , Rating: 3
I'm mildly surprised and slightly impressed with the maturity of DT readers. This same news was reported on Gizmodo, and I could swear about 2 out of 3 posts were some variation of "but will it blend/run Crysis?" Damn near made me vomit (well, that might've been my flu, but I digress). It was truly as if I had stumbled into the eighth circle of hell....

Anywho, from what I understand, it was decided commission the creation of what will be the world's most powerful supercomputer, for the purpose of simulating nuclear weapons? Truly, surely, there could be no cause nobler than thou, oh simulation of nuclear weapons.

Because there's nothing better than using a computer to further our understanding of a class of weapons which the world has determined taboo. This sounds like continued development of nuclear weapons, I thought we were trying to prevent this. Say it ain't so.

RE: 2012??
By icanhascpu on 2/3/2009 8:33:51 PM , Rating: 2
Depends on who buys time for computations. I would hope it will be used for more social science based rather than military science. Figuring out cures for whatever ect.

RE: 2012??
By grath on 2/4/2009 1:21:14 AM , Rating: 5
As long as potential bad guys have them, we need to have them. As the stockpile ages, warheads need to be decomissioned, so we need to build new ones. We need to know if the new ones will work. We have signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, not ratified it yet, but we adhere to it and have not tested since 1992. Given the option between resuming underground nuclear testing and building a supercomputer to simulate it, would you not build the supercomputer? At least it can do other things too.

RE: 2012??




