Jacobsen did an interesting interview about the book and other things (aliens, etc) on the Lex Fridman podcast (which I now boycott since he began giving softball interviews to Tucker and Trump).
I haven't read the book -- so that. But, I think it's unlikely that one missile from North Korea would automatically trigger an immediate large-scale nuclear retaliation by the US. When time is short and quick decisions are needed, bad choices can be made. Still, the scenario presented feels like a low-probability outcome to me, especially given the safety protocols and communication channels that already exist to prevent exactly this kind of miscalculation.
Yes, I'm not giving the full scenario because I don't want to ruin the book for anybody who wants to read - not that it's meant to be read like a thriller but it reads like a thriller - and you'll see how it all unspools, and why.
A single nuclear bomb dropped somewhere in the US wouldn't affect the rest of America, let alone the rest of the world. I assume the book is premised on multiple bombs, and that retaliation would in turn use nuclear not conventional bombs, which is possible but improbable.
There's nothing new about this scenario, it's known as mutual destruction for a reason.
Let's not forget that conventional bombs could also lead to mutual destruction, even if it took slightly longer. For some reason, humans find the idea of swift destruction of humans more frightening than the idea of a slower destruction with conventional weapons, or, let's say, climate change.
My husband just finished reading this book. I asked him for a few words about it. He said, "it's terrifying and eye opening." I asked if that's all he had to say. In the recent words of Kamala Harris, he replied "that's it." (That's why we count on you, MIB, to tell us more.)
I guess unless we develop something that could disarm or neutralize a nuclear bomb in the air, there’s really nothing to do but see how many hours or days I have until I die if a bomb is launched. So that’s great. I feel awesome. Thanks, man, lol.
I'm glad you mentioned the intercept systems the US has in place. While impressive, they still hinge on placement of the system at the time of launch and detection of the launch. But the best detection we could hope for would the confirmation of an international inspection team as the warheads are dismantled.
Similarly to the First World's approach to the climate change crisis, there is an attempt to find solutions that have no discomfort in that process.
Not the end of the world -- just of human civilization as we know it. Pockets of humanity would survive, but we would enter a new dark age. Danger is not just where the missiles hit - it is worldwide from the fire smoke and other materials thrown into the atmosphere, causing a nuclear winter that would last a few years. Or, if really lucky, could just be a nuclear fall -- similar to what happened back in 1816 from a massive volcanic explosion.
Billionaires have their back up plans in NZ for a reason.
Even in the event of nuclear war, Australia or NZ are the safest places to be. Move to Tasmania if you want to be a little bit safer.
When there's a new British prime minister, one of their first tasks is to write the instruction for the captain of the British nuclear ship in the event that no one is available to give them instruction, that is the prime Minister and everyone else is assumed dead, one of the multi choice options is for the ship to go straight to Australia.
I’m not an expert at all, but I think that the debris will cause global temperature shifts even in the areas not directly affected, kind of like they hypothesize that the meteor impact did to the dinosaurs. And I think that there will be people who might not be directly affected by radiation, but will have famine and, lack of water and sanitation and so forth.
I'm still a little rattled from last year's re-watching of The Day After, which apparently freaked Reagan out so badly that he initiated arms talks with Gorbachev. I guess it's not a plan to rely on the intervention of aliens in matters nuclear.
It’s actually a compelling argument why there is no “loving” god involved in human affairs. What nitwit spent 250 million years staring at trilobites, then rattled the Etch-a-Sketch and came up with murderous monkeys? If I had had a say, the world would be filled with Labradoodles.
I prefer fictional apocalyptic novels. At least they usually incorporate a smattering of optimism and human interest. This truth-is-stranger-than-fiction version is much more grim. Can’t help but feel some sense of inevitability.
Jacobsen did an interesting interview about the book and other things (aliens, etc) on the Lex Fridman podcast (which I now boycott since he began giving softball interviews to Tucker and Trump).
I haven't read the book -- so that. But, I think it's unlikely that one missile from North Korea would automatically trigger an immediate large-scale nuclear retaliation by the US. When time is short and quick decisions are needed, bad choices can be made. Still, the scenario presented feels like a low-probability outcome to me, especially given the safety protocols and communication channels that already exist to prevent exactly this kind of miscalculation.
Yes, I'm not giving the full scenario because I don't want to ruin the book for anybody who wants to read - not that it's meant to be read like a thriller but it reads like a thriller - and you'll see how it all unspools, and why.
A single nuclear bomb dropped somewhere in the US wouldn't affect the rest of America, let alone the rest of the world. I assume the book is premised on multiple bombs, and that retaliation would in turn use nuclear not conventional bombs, which is possible but improbable.
There's nothing new about this scenario, it's known as mutual destruction for a reason.
Let's not forget that conventional bombs could also lead to mutual destruction, even if it took slightly longer. For some reason, humans find the idea of swift destruction of humans more frightening than the idea of a slower destruction with conventional weapons, or, let's say, climate change.
Pick your poison.
My husband just finished reading this book. I asked him for a few words about it. He said, "it's terrifying and eye opening." I asked if that's all he had to say. In the recent words of Kamala Harris, he replied "that's it." (That's why we count on you, MIB, to tell us more.)
I guess unless we develop something that could disarm or neutralize a nuclear bomb in the air, there’s really nothing to do but see how many hours or days I have until I die if a bomb is launched. So that’s great. I feel awesome. Thanks, man, lol.
I'm glad you mentioned the intercept systems the US has in place. While impressive, they still hinge on placement of the system at the time of launch and detection of the launch. But the best detection we could hope for would the confirmation of an international inspection team as the warheads are dismantled.
Similarly to the First World's approach to the climate change crisis, there is an attempt to find solutions that have no discomfort in that process.
Is it the end of the world or just the USA? Does the chain have Africa or Australia or South America being hit?
Not the end of the world -- just of human civilization as we know it. Pockets of humanity would survive, but we would enter a new dark age. Danger is not just where the missiles hit - it is worldwide from the fire smoke and other materials thrown into the atmosphere, causing a nuclear winter that would last a few years. Or, if really lucky, could just be a nuclear fall -- similar to what happened back in 1816 from a massive volcanic explosion.
Billionaires have their back up plans in NZ for a reason.
Even in the event of nuclear war, Australia or NZ are the safest places to be. Move to Tasmania if you want to be a little bit safer.
When there's a new British prime minister, one of their first tasks is to write the instruction for the captain of the British nuclear ship in the event that no one is available to give them instruction, that is the prime Minister and everyone else is assumed dead, one of the multi choice options is for the ship to go straight to Australia.
I’m not an expert at all, but I think that the debris will cause global temperature shifts even in the areas not directly affected, kind of like they hypothesize that the meteor impact did to the dinosaurs. And I think that there will be people who might not be directly affected by radiation, but will have famine and, lack of water and sanitation and so forth.
I, for one, am still trying to figure out how to get the coordinates to Portland, Oregon into the hands of the Russians.
I'm still a little rattled from last year's re-watching of The Day After, which apparently freaked Reagan out so badly that he initiated arms talks with Gorbachev. I guess it's not a plan to rely on the intervention of aliens in matters nuclear.
Terrifying. Tell your loved ones you love them every day. And vote blue.
If there is any warning, I'm driving to where an anticipated strike will be. Just get it over with.
It’s actually a compelling argument why there is no “loving” god involved in human affairs. What nitwit spent 250 million years staring at trilobites, then rattled the Etch-a-Sketch and came up with murderous monkeys? If I had had a say, the world would be filled with Labradoodles.
Thanks, can’t wait to not read it!
I've read it twice & listened to it a third time. Tick tick.
Yesterday, the Apple Music algorithm served me up “It’s The End of the World (and I feel fine)” followed by “Hells Bells”. Prophetic?
I prefer fictional apocalyptic novels. At least they usually incorporate a smattering of optimism and human interest. This truth-is-stranger-than-fiction version is much more grim. Can’t help but feel some sense of inevitability.