Oppenhiemer

[SassyLady]

Anyone going to see it. I'm conflicted.

[Kathianne]

Anyone going to see it. I'm conflicted.
I'll likely wait for it to come to streaming. I'm fascinated with that period and decisions reached by individuals involved. If you ever get a chance read the C.P. Snow series: Strangers And Brothers. Library may have, I think some is out of print, but 6 books if memory serves. I especially liked, The New Men. Basically about those working at U of Chicago in development and success. Feelings of accomplishment, heavy dose of regret.

[SassyLady]

I'll likely wait for it to come to streaming. I'm fascinated with that period and decisions reached by individuals involved. If you ever get a chance read the C.P. Snow series: Strangers And Brothers. Library may have, I think some is out of print, but 6 books if memory serves. I especially liked, The New Men. Basically about those working at U of Chicago in development and success. Feelings of accomplishment, heavy dose of regret.

I'm thinking the creators of AI will have same mindset.

[Kathianne]

I'm thinking the creators of AI will have same mindset.
Very good point!

[Kathianne]

SL, just came upon this:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/j-robert-oppenheimers-defense-of-humanity-d83903b3?st=k03x8ywl4tggxzd&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink


J. Robert Oppenheimer’s Defense of Humanity
After helping invent the atomic bomb, the physicist spent decades thinking about how to preserve civilization from technological dangers, offering crucial lessons for the age of AI

From the moment the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima in August 1945 until his death in 1967, J. Robert Oppenheimer was perhaps the most recognizable physicist on the planet. During World War II, Oppenheimer directed Los Alamos Laboratory, “Site Y” of the Manhattan Project, the successful American effort to build an atomic bomb. He went on to serve for almost 20 years as director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., home to some of the world’s leading scientists, including Albert Einstein.


In the popular imagination, Einstein came to represent unalloyed optimism about the capacity of human genius to uncover the secrets of the cosmos. Oppenheimer played a grimmer role, standing for the dangers of advancing science. After the successful test of the “Gadget,” as the first atomic bomb was called, he is said to have quoted the Bhagavad Gita: “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.” Much of his subsequent career would be spent advising humanity how not to be annihilated by the powers of the atom he had conquered. The advice was not always well received: The Atomic Energy Commission stripped him of his security clearance in 1954, in part because of his advocacy for arms control. (The Department of Energy posthumously reversed that decision last year.)


In July, director Christopher Nolan’s biopic “Oppenheimer” will bring his story to theaters at a timely moment, when the world is once again worried that a new technology threatens the future of humanity. Advances in machine learning and artificial intelligence, including the explosive success of ChatGPT, have provoked attention to questions that were once the province of science fiction. Might artificial intelligence programs go rogue and enslave or eliminate humanity? Less apocalyptically, will AI take over our jobs, our decision making, our economies, our governments? How can we ensure that the new technologies work for rather than against the values and interests of humanity?


Oppenheimer sensed that humanity was at a technological turning point that might bring about its destruction.


To answer these questions, the most important part of Oppenheimer’s life isn’t his work on the atomic bomb but his less dramatic tenure running the Institute for Advanced Study. When Oppenheimer arrived as director in 1947, Life magazine published “The Thinkers,” a story about the Institute calling it “the most important building on earth.” That was hyperbole, but it is true that Oppenheimer joined a community of giants, many of whom shared the sense that humanity was at a technological turning point that might bring about its destruction.


Einstein, a professor at the Institute from 1933 until his death in 1955, dedicated much of his final decade to the political and ethical questions raised by the new physics of fission and fusion. Another faculty member who merits a biopic is the Hungarian immigrant John von Neumann, who worked on both the atomic bomb and its more powerful successor, the hydrogen bomb. After the war, he built the world’s first stored-program computer—work that started in the basement under Oppenheimer’s office.


Von Neumann, too, was deeply concerned about the inability of humanity to keep up with its own inventions. “What we are creating now,” he said to his wife Klári in 1945, “is a monster whose influence is going to change history, provided there is any history left.” Moving to the subject of future computing machines he became even more agitated, foreseeing disaster if “people” could not “keep pace with what they create.”

...

[AHZ]

I'm thinking the creators of AI will have same mindset.


THis "AI getting out of control meme" is what the internationalist fascist nazi eugenics death cult will blame for their own intentional genocide.

[revelarts]

Ill probably wait until it streams somewhere as well.
the stuff like this... new weapons creations, the spying, the secrecy, the politics, the business, the mafia, mindsets & the holocaust tend to interest me more than the battles of the WW2 era.

And this topic reminds me of 2 items that flesh out some things about the Manhattan Project .
History Channel: lost worlds secret cities of the a-bomb
talks about how they built complete cities that were secret and where the people who lived there & worked there had no clue what they were working on.
(BTW it's a point of reference when people say stuff like "somebody would have talked!")
--Many of the episodes from the "Lost Worlds" series it comes from are free on youtube but this one isn't.
---It's on amazon & apple TV though.
https://www.yidio.com/show/lost-worlds/season-1/episode-5/links.html

EDIT: it is on youtube but they've changed the name
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njjul7qbbko

This other i suspect some folks here will have a problem with, but the presenters make a very solid case for it.
Basically in the series of interviews below a university Scholar researching the "Ship munitions explosion" at Port Chicago California
(that happened during WW2 which killed hundreds of sailors loading munitions.) talks about running across Letters, Papers and FILM that point to the likelihood that Port Chicago California may have been the actual 1st test run of a small nuke.

Don't go and do your own research or start critical thinking though, that'd be bad.
FTR #605 Interview with Dean McLeod and Peter Vogel about Port Chicago
https://spitfirelist.com/for-the-record/ftr-605-interview-with-dean-mcleod-and-peter-vogel-about-port-chicago/
(Two 30-minute segments)
Conducted in August of 1999, this broadcast updates the investigation of the Port Chicago explosion. The bulk of the discussion is very similar to the topical content of FTR-129. This broadcast does contain several points of analysis not contained in FTR-129.
In this program, Mr. Vogel highlights the issue of residual radiation at the Port Chicago site. (Port Chicago is now part of the Concord Naval Weapons station.) Critics have maintained that Port Chicago could not have been a nuclear explosion, because there would be detectable radiation at the explosion site. Peter points out that this is incorrect. Within 10 years of a British test of a much larger weapon (also detonated in a marine environment), the background radiation levels had returned to normal. The British test was of a 25 kiloton weapon and Port Chicago yielded the equivalent of 600 tons of TNT.

Peter also discusses eyewitness testimony of injuries to sailors who survived the Port Chicago blast. Medical personnel who subsequently became acquainted with radiation burns voiced the opinion that the burns to Port Chicago survivors were, in fact, radiation burns. In this program, Peter includes two new elements in his research. Declassified documents indicate that the principals involved with the development of the Mark II (an early atomic bomb) forecast that it would be available by the fall of 1944. (Peter’s research indicates that the Port Chicago explosion, in July of ’44, was the test of the Mark II.) Recently, Peter filed a Freedom of Information Act request for access to the seven linear feet of documents about the Port Chicago explosion at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. His request was denied and those documents are now classified. Bear in mind that these documents supposedly pertain to the explosion of a World War II ammunition ship. Why have they now been denied to the public? (Please note that, due to an interruption of the recording process due to technical difficulties, Mr. Emory neglected to include discussion of the Wilson condensation cloud that was apparently present at Port Chicago. One of the evidentiary points in Peter’s article, the presence of the cloud is discussed in FTR-129.) (See also FTR-129, as well as Miscellaneous Archive Show M‑23.) (Recorded on 8/1/99.)

Audio links
Part 1
https://emory.kfjc.org/archive/ftr/600_699/f-605a.mp3
Part 2
https://emory.kfjc.org/archive/ftr/600_699/f-605b.mp3

....

Similar info... the 1st time it aired.
XXIII. What Really Happened at Port Chicago?
Audio links
Part 1
https://emory.kfjc.org/archive/misc/m_23a.mp3
Part 2
http://emory.kfjc.org/archive/misc/m_23b.mp3
Part 3
http://emory.kfjc.org/archive/misc/m_23c.mp3

[fj1200]

... point to the likelihood that Port Chicago California may have been the actual 1st test run of a small nuke.

Whyyyyyyyy would they do that?

[AHZ]

Whyyyyyyyy would they do that?


to test nukes with human subjects.

nazi nihilist war mongers have no problem with mass murder in the name of science.

[revelarts]

Whyyyyyyyy would they do that?

That's a great question.

Why would they do the Tuskegee experiment and track men's illness and deaths from syphilis for decades while telling them they are being treated?

Why would they do MKUltra where the gov't used LSD and other mind altering drugs and experiments on soldiers, citizens & children?

Why would they in 1956 releases mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Ga and Avon Park, Fl. then Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials test victims for effects.

Why would three veterans groups seek class-action status for a lawsuit they filed in 2009 against the Defense Department, the CIA and the Army on behalf of thousands of soldiers who participated in research programs and left to suffer at Edgewood Arsenal and Fort Detrick?

Why would they do.... etc etc etc

It's a great question.
But it in no way implies that they didn't do it.

[fj1200]

That's a great question.

Attempting to incinerate 700 sailors and thousands of pounds of valuable munitions in the middle of a war with an uncertain outcome?

[revelarts]

Attempting to incinerate 700 sailors and thousands of pounds of valuable munitions in the middle of a war with an uncertain outcome?
thousands of pounds of valuable munitions is a pretty good cover isn't it?

[Mr. P]

Anyone going to see it. I'm conflicted.

When I can see it at home..I don't wanna sit in a theater for 3 hours.
Love the pause and replay button too.

[fj1200]

thousands of pounds of valuable munitions is a pretty good cover isn't it?

And also a waste of scarce resources. The "why" is a pretty big hurdle to get over to sell this.

[AHZ]

That's a great question.

Why would they do the Tuskegee experiment and track men's illness and deaths from syphilis for decades while telling them they are being treated?

Why would they do MKUltra where the gov't used LSD and other mind altering drugs and experiments on soldiers, citizens & children?

Why would they in 1956 releases mosquitoes infected with Yellow Fever over Savannah, Ga and Avon Park, Fl. then Following each test, Army agents posing as public health officials test victims for effects.

Why would three veterans groups seek class-action status for a lawsuit they filed in 2009 against the Defense Department, the CIA and the Army on behalf of thousands of soldiers who participated in research programs and left to suffer at Edgewood Arsenal and Fort Detrick?

Why would they do.... etc etc etc

It's a great question.
But it in no way implies that they didn't do it.

these deep state fucks here are always trying to defend the indefensible.

maybe one day they will confront their demons and stop being evil.

[revelarts]

And also a waste of scarce resources. The "why" is a pretty big hurdle to get over to sell this.

Waste?
They'd already spent over a billion in 1940s dollars working on the bombs.
You think a dock, 1 munitions ship and a few 100 sailors (who they never wanted in the navy anyway) was too a big a waste in the minds of some the "leaders" in our country? To big a hurdle?
Seriously?

[revelarts]

these deep state fucks here are always trying to defend the indefensible.


Different people have different journeys.
I've never "trusted" the govt fully but it wasn't until about 2004 2005 that I began to look closely and it really started to sink in just how dark some actions & parts of govt were/are.

The rabbit hole is deep and unsettling. I understand why some don't go down it.

[AHZ]

Waste?
They'd already spent over a billion in 1940s dollars working on the bombs.
You think a dock, 1 munitions ship and a few 100 sailors (who they never wanted in the navy anyway) was too a big a waste in the minds of some the "leaders" in our country? To big a hurdle?
Seriously?


he's grasping at straws.

[fj1200]

Seriously?

y'okeydokey. Your minds made up.

[AHZ]

Different people have different journeys.
I've never "trusted" the govt fully but it wasn't until about 2004 2005 that I began to look closely and it really started to sink in just how dark some actions & parts of govt were/are.

The rabbit hole is deep and unsettling. I understand why some don't go down it.
but evil is evil.

in my religion though we believe in forgiveness and repentance.

I pray for them.

[AHZ]

y'okeydokey. Your minds made up.


acting like "they wouldn't do that" is fairly idiotic, knowing things they do.

[fj1200]

acting like "they wouldn't do that" is fairly idiotic, knowing things they do.

I only asked a question. No satisfactory answer has been supplied as of yet.

[AHZ]

I only asked a question. No satisfactory answer has been supplied as of yet.
the "why" is because they want to do a test and they don't value the lives of servicemen.

does that explain it for you?

[fj1200]

the "why" is because they want to do a test and they don't value the lives of servicemen.

does that explain it for you?

No.

[AHZ]

No.
because they do value human life?

[fj1200]

because they do value human life?


Attempting to incinerate 700 sailors and thousands of pounds of valuable munitions in the middle of a war with an uncertain outcome?

4600 tons, I think I read, of munitions.


And also a waste of scarce resources. The "why" is a pretty big hurdle to get over to sell this.

And at least a couple of ships.

[AHZ]

4600 tons, I think I read, of munitions.



And at least a couple of ships.


so you believe they're frugal.

ok.

that seems well-informed.

[fj1200]

so you believe they're frugal.

ok.

that seems well-informed.

You're not very good at thinking what people believe. You just shouldn't try.

[AHZ]

You're not very good at thinking what people believe. You just shouldn't try.

you just expressed a belief in the frugality of the military industrial complex.

and here I am worrying about black budgets. silly me.

[fj1200]

you just expressed a belief in the frugality of the military industrial complex.

and here I am worrying about black budgets. silly me.

You're not good at reading comprehension either.

[AHZ]

You're not good at reading comprehension either.


what have i misconstrued?

[Gunny]

You're not very good at thinking what people believe. You just shouldn't try.Amen.

[revelarts]

I only asked a question. No satisfactory answer has been supplied as of yet.
satisfactory?
look theres more than enough but.

have you even listened to the evidence I posted here?
i doubt it.

Look i get it, reminds me of the thing where nearly every mother says of a son that's murdered his beautiful kind wife or killed people in a bank robbery.
'I don't believe they'd do that!"
Little evidence is satisfactory. that's not the boy THEY know. Often they won't take the time to look either.
But some will.
And even though some mothers will eventually mentally understand that their lil boy did in fact kill.
Many still can NOT fathom 'why' they did it.

I'm still trying to figure out why Bill Cosby was drugging women when by all accounts he had more than enough charisma & 'game' to get plenty of woman to sleep with him voluntarily. Other comedians report him being surrounded by willing women.
I can make list of things in my own life that don't I have "satisfactory" motives for
or that have had SERIOUSLY self sabotaging ends. Nevertheless I, and others, still actually do inexplicable sh!t.
If the evidence that it happened out weighs the reasons (to your satisfaction) they'd have NOT to do it.
It still means they did it.
the evidence, not the supposed lack of satisfactory motive is what makes the case or not.

(you following the Architect serial killer case... got any satisfactory answers motives for that?)

But hey FJ,
I'm just putting it out there for you.
do with it what you will man.

[fj1200]

satisfactory?
look theres more than enough but.

have you even listened to the evidence I posted here?
i doubt it.

Of course I haven't. It's in video format and worse, audio. But the answer to my question shouldn't be... Because Tuskeegee... Because MKUltra... Because mosquitos... It should be an actual answer, not speculation.

[AHZ]

Amen.
maybe you can explain what i've misconstrued. maybe you can't.

[fj1200]

maybe you can explain what i've misconstrued. maybe you can't.

I could but you couldn't comprehend because of your aforementioned poor reading comprehension skills. Perhaps, you look at what you think I posted and reread what I actually posted; report back. :)

[AHZ]

I could but you couldn't comprehend because of your aforementioned poor reading comprehension skills. Perhaps, you look at what you think I posted and reread what I actually posted; report back. :)
give it a try.

i bet you can't without confirming i was right.

[revelarts]

Of course I haven't. It's in video format and worse, audio. But the answer to my question shouldn't be... Because Tuskeegee... Because MKUltra... Because mosquitos... It should be an actual answer, not speculation.


And also a waste of scarce resources. The "why" is a pretty big hurdle to get over to sell this.

ok again...
The U.S. Gov't has a long HISTORY of using it's own people as guinea pigs
re- Tuskegee MKUltra Mosquitos and much more.

So we've establish that when they look big picture (or they are desperate) they don't have a moral check NOT to kill solders/civilians/children & SO much less any check to destroy a munitions ship or 2.
Even on a normal war scale many sacrifices were made in the Pacific, some mistakes some "for the greater good".

So thinking as someone WITHOUT a moral check whats the 'benefit to loss'?
You've poured over a billion dollars, 3 years, used a 7th of the nations energy to create them, literally used tons of US treasury silver to create magnets to make the fissile material etc, built secret cities full of man power, contaminated 56 millions gallons of water in Washington state. and you've got 2 versions of a couple of bombs.
You have calculations but you don't know if they'll work exactly as hoped or how they'll effect people or real military targets.
Do you fly it blind and hope for the best?
Do you make a small test of our investment?
Can you secretly test to be sure, so that when we make an open test, or use it, you don't look like you failed/fools?


so the long version of the answer given previously.

Waste?
They'd already spent over a billion in 1940s dollars working on the bombs.
You think a dock, 1 munitions ship and a few 100 sailors (who they never wanted in the navy anyway) was too a big a waste in the minds of some the "leaders" in our country? To big a hurdle?
Seriously?
Your question was answered.
you just don't like it since for some unknown reason you've placed an unrealistically high bar on the value the leaders placed on a munitions ship and a few hundred sailors as compared to the having clear control & knowledge of the most power weapon in the world... to end the war... and go forward into new world as masters of it.


Heck, I've seen "good" people promote all kind of hellish stuff politically over the years for "safety" & or advantage.
Not to speak of the leaders who generally don't even give a d@mn.

as far as the other details of evidence goes. i'm not going to transcribe the audio it for you. If you want to know you'll listen to it.
but in general it consist of Damning letters from Los Alamos, unexplained film of the 'accident' (classified/destroyed), radiation burns, testimony of mushroom cloud and flash of light, obvious cover up and denials from official parties.and more.

[AHZ]

Of course I haven't. It's in video format and worse, audio. But the answer to my question shouldn't be... Because Tuskeegee... Because MKUltra... Because mosquitos... It should be an actual answer, not speculation.


what's your point, mr questions?

"they wouldn't do that" is all you have, and it's weak sauce.

[fj1200]

give it a try.

i bet you can't without confirming i was right.

Still with the questionable reading comprehension.


what's your point, mr questions?

"they wouldn't do that" is all you have, and it's weak sauce.

[fj1200]

so the long version of the answer given previously.

Your question was answered.

A longer answer of a previously insufficient answer is just more wordy. Surely in the great catalogue of information that gave birth to this revelation has something in it that offers a better answer to why Port Chicago? A valid test does not require killing your own men and wasting war resources.

[revelarts]

A longer answer of a previously insufficient answer is just more wordy. Surely in the great catalogue of information that gave birth to this revelation has something in it that offers a better answer to why Port Chicago? A valid test does not require killing your own men and wasting war resources.
ok

[AHZ]

Still with the questionable reading comprehension.
and yet you can't even clarify yourself.

[AHZ]

A longer answer of a previously insufficient answer is just more wordy. Surely in the great catalogue of information that gave birth to this revelation has something in it that offers a better answer to why Port Chicago? A valid test does not require killing your own men and wasting war resources.
why not port chicago?

[fj1200]

and yet you can't even clarify yourself.

Point out where I used the word "frugal" and the phrase "they wouldn't do that".


why not port chicago?

My first question is the relevant first question. Yours might be a relevant second question.

[fj1200]

ok

You know my opinion on video evidence. Audio evidence? Even worse. Surely someone has a link to something that piqued your interest.

[AHZ]

Point out where I used the word "frugal" and the phrase "they wouldn't do that".



My first question is the relevant first question. Yours might be a relevant second question.


it's irrelevant douchery.

[fj1200]

it's irrelevant douchery.

You're not good at reading comprehension, correctly thinking what people believe, and now determining relevance.

That's a trifecta of troll.

[AHZ]

You're not good at reading comprehension, correctly thinking what people believe, and now determining relevance.

That's a trifecta of troll.


why is the choice of city the most relevant question?

explain your genius.

[fj1200]

why is the choice of city the most relevant question?

explain your genius.

It's least relevant. Logic > you.

[AHZ]

It's least relevant. Logic > you.
so why is it the most relevant question, as you have asserted?

you have no clue.

you're just saying phrases.

you may be an A.I.



Where did i say it's a relevant question?

spare us.

[fj1200]

spare us.

You bring nothing of value to the board.

[AHZ]

You bring nothing of value to the board.
that's your idiotic opinion.

[fj1200]

that's your idiotic opinion.

I've read your stuff. I've engaged in discussion with you. I'm comfortable with where I am on that.

[Kathianne]

I've read your stuff. I've engaged in discussion with you. I'm comfortable with where I am on that.

Your comment on his contributions to board? Spot on.

[AHZ]

I've read your stuff. I've engaged in discussion with you. I'm comfortable with where I am on that.
Hooray for your comfort!
:clap:

[AHZ]

Your comment on his contributions to board? Spot on.


Who asked you, CryptKeeper?

[Kathianne]

Who asked you, CryptKeeper?
ta

[Black Diamond]

Who asked you, CryptKeeper?

I thought that was Keith Richards.

[Black Diamond]

ta

Brit. I learned something today.

[hjmick]

that's your idiotic opinion.


No. Many here share that very astute opinion.

[Gunny]

maybe you can explain what i've misconstrued. maybe you can't. Speaking for myself, you have repeatedly labeled/categorized/one-size-fits-all categorized me via insults and rhetoric and have yet to get even one right. Worse, where I stand on most issues is no secret and all over this board. All you'd have to do is read and comprehend.

Perhaps if you discarded that Trumpian, my-way-or the highway filter you view life through :rolleyes: