US nuclear arsenal controlled by 1970s computers with 8in floppy disks

[Skroe]

To be fair you really really want it to work that one time. A few billion to upgrade a system that has probably cost trillions over the decades.

Well i mean, chances are given Russia's reliability problems with it's rocket manufacturing and maintenance, there is a not-insignificant percentage of their arsenal that are duds. I'd rather have to upgrade the IT, than have rockets that probably won't fly.

- - - Updated - - -

What did commodore 64s have?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS_Technology_6510

[Ulmita]

Well i mean, chances are given Russia's reliability problems with it's rocket manufacturing and maintenance, there is a not-insignificant percentage of their arsenal that are duds. I'd rather have to upgrade the IT, than have rockets that probably won't fly.

Lol dude, how would you know the % of the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal that are duds... This claim was a bit out of line.

[Dug]

But can they run Crysis?

[Damajin]

Just means millennials wont be able to hack it, cause they dont know what floppy disks even are.

badumtish...

10 You
20 Could
30 Hide
40 Everything
50 Important
60 Like
70 This
80 And They Would
90 Never Find it

[Santti]

Lol dude, how would you know the % of the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal that are duds... This claim was a bit out of line.

Triggered much?

He just deduced that given Russia's problems with rocketry, it's quite possible there are duds to be found.

[Skroe]

Lol dude, how would you know the % of the Russian strategic nuclear arsenal that are duds... This claim was a bit out of line.

Did I claim to know the percentage? Nobody could know.

It's been theorized by experts for years though. Russia's failure rate for their routine ICBM and SLBM tests, which the US does as well several times per year for different systems) implies a scarily high failure rate for what they are.

You need to look at it like this Ulmita. Every weapon every made has duds. There are dud shells. Dud grenades. Dud missiles. Maybe something decays while it is being stored. Maybe there was a manufacturing flaw. There has never been thousands of something made in which every one of those thousands was absolutely perfect and stays perfect, over decades. It's impossible. All it takes is one fuse installed backwards, one screw to come out, one wire to detach.

The US mitigates this risk, in lieu of nuclear testing (an actual explosion), but testing rockets firing a few times a year to make sure they actually fire, and spend a huge amount of money to make sure via supercomputer simulations and subcritical testing that the warhead stockpile will detonate as planned. You need to keep in mind the kind of risk this entails. When the US testfires a SM-3 missile from a ship, they can make extrapolations based on the behavior of that missile and how it explodes about the rest of the SM-3 stockpile. You can't really do that with a nuclear warhead without regularly blowing up an island or a cave or something. How can the US be absolutely sure that every single one of it's 400 W-88s will detonate as planned? It simulates and establishes a reliability projection. Same with anything else.

Russia doesn't really do this. They do some subcritical testing, next to no supercomputer simulation, and their rocket firing test record is poor compared to the US.

Do we know the likely percentage of failure of Russia's arsenal, like the actual number? Nobody could know that. But extrapolating from what's been observed it is likely to be pretty high.

Complicated weapons systems require a lot of care. Shocking I know.

[Ornerybear]

there are a lot of current programs updating old 60's and 70's technology at the moment...it's a rather large undertaking with a lot of personal, many of which are retirement age or coming out of retirement to update them to modern standards.

[Xeones]

I gotta say... This doesn't bother me a whole lot.

In fact I'm more worried about them upgrading and adding it to a network or something and getting hacked.

[Artikality]

I can see a lot of issues with modernizing systems. For example: security. If they're not connected to a network, then it makes it difficult (if not impossible) to hack it from an external environment. You'd have to by physically in the base inputting punch cards to find a vulnerability. Keep in mind that there's a huge difference in consequences if a server gets compromised as opposed to a nuclear missile site.

[Cayse]

I'm pretty comfortable with is the US's nuclear arsenal being controlled by systems so reliable that they're working after 45 years and most people alive not knowing how to use them.

People might like modernization but look what happens when the debit machines go down at Starbucks.

[PACOX]

If the US is using those, what do you think Russia is using? Flint and steel?

I almost died.

But I think Russia uses matches.

[Ornerybear]

I can see a lot of issues with modernizing systems. For example: security. If they're not connected to a network, then it makes it difficult (if not impossible) to hack it from an external environment. You'd have to by physically in the base inputting punch cards to find a vulnerability. Keep in mind that there's a huge difference in consequences if a server gets compromised as opposed to a nuclear missile site.

that's actually a major component to updating the controls for our nuclear delivery systems is how to update them to modern standards with networks and maintaining security. That said, our modern military is fairly versed in security measures in a modern networked world.

[Yvaelle]

Sounds like they need to retire the WHOPPER from Wargames already and upgrade to Skynet. Still not ready for VIKI though. Baby steps.

I propose we give control of our nuclear weapons to Tay AI - what could possibly go wrong?

[Kellhound]

LINK


Kell, i have a box full of those and a couple of towers still with the 8'' floppies if you guys every need parts or spare disks.

So the US uses simple reliable proven secure systems to handle our nuclear forces. And no, I wouldnt want to take your best home computer from you.

[akris15]

I propose we give control of our nuclear weapons to Tay AI - what could possibly go wrong?

Can we at least call the project skynet while we are at it?

[Yvaelle]

Can we at least call the project skynet while we are at it?

'Tay Glados Skynet' has a nice ring to it

[Deleted]

Time to call hackerman.

[Kalis]

And no, I wouldnt want to take your best home computer from you.

Ulmita has no more use for his 8" floppy.

[s_bushido]

I'm a 32 year old millennial, and I totally used these as a kid:

I have a hard time applying the "millennial" label to anyone who actually knows the joys of having to rewind a VHS.

[xact4]

Ulmita has no more use for his 8" floppy.

Talking about nukes is the only way for Ulmita to upgrade his floppy to solid.

.....LOL. Take all of my internets. TAKE THEM.