I haven’t seen any civilians, including on LW, actually weigh the cost of assymetric disclosure of US military R&D, which this would probably require? So I think you’re really going to have to systematize this framework a bit more before you can justify the lets see them aliens stance.
I’d instead call for a simultaneous disclosure of superpower military R&D from all sides, primarily to halt the omnicidal arms-racing dynamics we’re all currently living under, and I really mean that, but by the way, this policy would also justify seeing the aliens.
I’d instead call for a simultaneous disclosure of superpower military R&D from all sides
When calling for action then it’s worth thinking about possible next steps. I don’t see possible next steps for simultaneous disclosure of superpower military R&D from all sides.
I haven’t seen any civilians, including on LW, actually weigh the cost of assymetric disclosure of US military R&D, which this would probably require?
I do believe that it’s good to empower whistleblowers. If certain secrets are very important to a country then it should be able to convince all the people who hold the secrets to keep them secret.
In this case, we seem to have information that’s illegally withheld from Congress and multiple people speaking to the ICIG who think that’s a problem.
The Above the Law article suggests that illegal withholding takes place. In a Democracy, the miliary has to share its secrets with Congress (or at least the committees of Congress that relate to it).
Yes, if this has truly never reached congress. Kinda under the impression that some congress members (especially presidents) have probably seen it, and for whatever reason, once they knew, all of these people decided not to publicize it. And that could just keep happening.
We do have the account from Harry Reid, who did decide to publicize that he thinks Lockheed Martin had the crafts and the military didn’t want to give him the clearance to see them.
It’s worthwhile to note that Harry Reid did not share that information this way before he retired. There’s a massive stereotype against taking UFO’s seriously and sharing such information was bad politics.
He said that people told them were the craft were but he had no direct proof of them. I don’t see a reason to assume that there were Congressman better informed than him.
I don’t see possible next steps for simultaneous disclosure of superpower military R&D from all sides.
This might not be possible until the danger of arms-races in agentic AI has become more obvious. I’m not familiar enough with the nuclear situation to say whether it’s feasible today, but it probably will be at some point in the near future.
It seems probable to me that monitoring has, over the past 40 years, become a lot cheaper and more feasible than our geopolitical institutions recognize.
Increases in mutual transparency may have to come in train with assurances that the balance of power will be preserved in light of whatever’s discovered. Geopolitical pluralism may turn out to depend on mutual uncertainty about who would win a war. With increases in transparency, there’s a risk that this veil falls away, which is good for the victor, but so terrible for everyone else, that the veil must not be threatened without such assurances.
I haven’t seen any civilians, including on LW, actually weigh the cost of assymetric disclosure of US military R&D, which this would probably require? So I think you’re really going to have to systematize this framework a bit more before you can justify the lets see them aliens stance.
I’d instead call for a simultaneous disclosure of superpower military R&D from all sides, primarily to halt the omnicidal arms-racing dynamics we’re all currently living under, and I really mean that, but by the way, this policy would also justify seeing the aliens.
When calling for action then it’s worth thinking about possible next steps. I don’t see possible next steps for simultaneous disclosure of superpower military R&D from all sides.
I do believe that it’s good to empower whistleblowers. If certain secrets are very important to a country then it should be able to convince all the people who hold the secrets to keep them secret.
In this case, we seem to have information that’s illegally withheld from Congress and multiple people speaking to the ICIG who think that’s a problem.
The Above the Law article suggests that illegal withholding takes place. In a Democracy, the miliary has to share its secrets with Congress (or at least the committees of Congress that relate to it).
Yes, if this has truly never reached congress. Kinda under the impression that some congress members (especially presidents) have probably seen it, and for whatever reason, once they knew, all of these people decided not to publicize it.
And that could just keep happening.
We do have the account from Harry Reid, who did decide to publicize that he thinks Lockheed Martin had the crafts and the military didn’t want to give him the clearance to see them.
It’s worthwhile to note that Harry Reid did not share that information this way before he retired. There’s a massive stereotype against taking UFO’s seriously and sharing such information was bad politics.
Does he say thought they had crafts? There’s a line where he says he was never sure.
He said that people told them were the craft were but he had no direct proof of them. I don’t see a reason to assume that there were Congressman better informed than him.
I’m learning that presidents are explicitly excluded from the category of congressmembers.
This might not be possible until the danger of arms-races in agentic AI has become more obvious. I’m not familiar enough with the nuclear situation to say whether it’s feasible today, but it probably will be at some point in the near future.
It seems probable to me that monitoring has, over the past 40 years, become a lot cheaper and more feasible than our geopolitical institutions recognize.
Increases in mutual transparency may have to come in train with assurances that the balance of power will be preserved in light of whatever’s discovered. Geopolitical pluralism may turn out to depend on mutual uncertainty about who would win a war. With increases in transparency, there’s a risk that this veil falls away, which is good for the victor, but so terrible for everyone else, that the veil must not be threatened without such assurances.
In recent news: China rejects nuclear talks with the U.S. as it looks to strengthen its own arsenal
There’s currently that war going on in Ukraine.