News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by paganel on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:00AM (#23612728)
> Made this comment below but spending billions on another collider in an attempt to essentially validate SUSY is irresponsible

I am in the same boat as you, more precisely I was, especially after reading guys like Jacques Ellul who had written against this particular project since back in the '80s.

But then I started thinking that keeping that many smart and motivated people busy working on stuff that will not be as societally disruptive as the work of many past great scientists is not the worst thing in the world, so I personally see those billions of euros as an acceptable opportunity cost that gives us the chance not to be the direct contemporaries of a nuclear weapons race like back in the '60s or the early '80s (because back then the "best" way to keep those scientists busy was to ask them to build bigger nuclear bombs and bigger rockets).

Incidentally I see the anti-competitive stance of the FAANG companies when it comes to their employees in the same vein. Better for a very smart engineer to spend his/her life doing menial work inside one of those companies than for him/her to build the next AI startup which in the wrong hands will not be good for society as a whole. And that type of technology always ends up in the "wrong" hands.

Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by e4325f on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:16AM (#23612853)
Spending tens of billions of dollars to keep scientists distracted so they might not potentially work on damaging projects is beyond absurd. For a start, I don't even think there's consensus that the Manhattan project wasn't beneficial as a whole, given the relative peace we've had since the second world war. What you said completely undermines a community that has undoubtedly advanced society more than any other.
Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by paganel on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:28AM (#23612957)
> that has undoubtedly advanced society more than any other.

From here [1]

> Petrov was the duty officer at the command center for the Oko nuclear early-warning system when the system reported that a missile had been launched from the United States, followed by up to five more. Petrov judged the reports to be a false alarm,[1] and his decision to disobey orders, against Soviet military protocol,[2] is credited with having prevented an erroneous retaliatory nuclear attack on the United States and its NATO allies that could have resulted in a large-scale nuclear war.

There's a whole list of similar incidents (and I'm pretty sure not all of them have been officially reported). Personally I care more about the feelings of communities that don't bring us one button-push away from annihilating us as a species.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov

Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by nix23 on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:40AM (#23613064)
Ahh..your talking about politic not science, that's something completely different.
Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by nix23 on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:36AM (#23613041)
You know "spending" is not the correct expression, that money flows directly back into the economy (and supports thousand other scientific fields, like material science, sensor technology and often goes to small highly specialized corporations). And if you compare the money that flows into the military with ZERO gain for the World...those 23B are a water drop on a hot stone.
Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by ric2b on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @02:09PM (#23617854)
The money is an accounting detail. Lots of actual resources will be allocated to this that could be allocated elsewhere.
Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by nix23 on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @04:10PM (#23619572)
Ah yes the 'could'......like a Ford-class aircraft carrier?

Program cost: 37.30 billion

Unit cost: 12.998 billion

Something like that?

Or 12 new Columbia-class Sub's?

109.8 billion

You see those 'lots' of resources should be cut somewhere else.

Re:CERN approves plans for a $23B, 62-mile long super-collider by twic on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:28AM (#23612962)
If we didn't spend those billions on this new collider, we could spend them on other scientific projects, which could also keep those scientists busy.