Warren Buffet on mankinds 'ultimate problem'

[Bozo Erectus]

The Sage of Omaha expects a nuclear catastrophe, but is still looking to the future

Andrew Clark in New York
Friday June 30, 2006
The Guardian

If anything gives the world's second richest man sleepless nights at his home in Omaha, Nebraska, it is the certainty that a nuclear holocaust will wipe out the planet. Warren Buffett is convinced the world will end in catastrophe - the only variable in the equation is when the big bang will happen.

The 75-year-old billionaire is fond of explaining that as the population rises, the number of "bad guys" goes up. By all the laws of probability, one of them will eventually get hold of an atom bomb.

"It is the ultimate depressing thing. It will happen, it's inevitable. I don't see any way that it won't happen," he told an American interviewer. "You can't get rid of the knowledge. You can try to control the materials. You'll never get rid of the intent. It is the ultimate problem of mankind."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1809379,00.html

I think he's absolutely right. Its inevitable. Sooner rather than later, IMO. Hey if a bum like me and the worlds second richest man agree about something, it must be true What do you think? Is it inevitable and mankinds ultimate problem?

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Inevitability arguments from probability are much like nihilism and quantum fluctuation. Not worth much.

The sun might suddenly flicker out, or turn into water, or disappear to a different galaxy. Oh, the probabilities are low, but give them enough time and... .

 

[Bozo Erectus]

I think you might get more out of it if you looked at it from the human dimension, rather than seeing it as a math problem.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Yeah, the "human dimension" of the Sun going away is a pretty large problem.

Who are you to lecture me about humanity?

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

I think he's absolutely right. Its inevitable. Sooner rather than later, IMO. Hey if a bum like me and the worlds second richest man agree about something, it must be true What do you think? Is it inevitable and mankinds ultimate problem?

Warren Buffet should stick to finances rather than history. He is an obvious subscriber to the "great man" theory of history, which I don't take much stock in. (get it? stock? )

His theory also doesn't make much sense. There have been far nastier people in the past, when the population was smaller, who were very destructive. I would argue that having a larger population makes it harder for a single man to be destructive, because he has to compete against all the other people around.

 

[Moss]

Warren Buffet should stick to finances rather than history. He is an obvious subscriber to the "great man" theory of history, which I don't take much stock in. (get it? stock? )

His theory also doesn't make much sense. There have been far nastier people in the past, when the population was smaller, who were very destructive. I would argue that having a larger population makes it harder for a single man to be destructive, because he has to compete against all the other people around.

I disagree. In the past, the population of the world was much more sparse and not concentrated so much in some very high density areas. On person now days can kill a heck of a lot more people with a relatively simple act as opposed to many years ago. As seen by 9/11, one person (or one group) can have a huge impact on the world, and can be very destructive.

And with death and violence, even if it is only by a relative few, comes disorder, paranoia, and further destruction.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Yeah, the "human dimension" of the Sun going away is a pretty large problem.

You seem to have difficulty distinguishing natural catastrophes like the 'sun going away', from a man made catastrophe like a nuclear holocaust.

Who are you to lecture me about humanity?

Huh? One sentence is a lecture? You ok over there?

 

[warpus]

The 75-year-old billionaire is fond of explaining that as the population rises, the number of "bad guys" goes up. By all the laws of probability, one of them will eventually get hold of an atom bomb.

Yeah, and? You'd need more than just 1 atom bomb to annihilate the entire planet.

This is nothing more than the ramblings of an old senile man.

 

[Masquerouge]

Yeah, and? You'd need more than just 1 atom bomb to annihilate the entire planet.

Pretty much. We've had superpowers in a state of quasi-war that hated each other, and yet not one nuke was launched. I don't think one guy alone can do worse.

 

[Elta]

Look I am sure the Inuits will repopulate the world for us when were gone.
Humanity is safe ...just not all of us.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

The key factor is the advance of technology, not the number of 'bad guys,' like Buffet says. During the Cold War, you still needed the resources of superpowers to acquire the means to bring about a nuke holocaust. But now a small group of determined individuals can acquire nuclear weapons, if they can afford it. Thats what makes it so inevitable.

 

[Urederra]

since I started watching Space 1999, the TV series, again. My proposal to Buffet is to invest his money in a moon base, so if something happens on Earth, a selected group can survive in the moon.

(Yeah, I know is sci-fi, but It is doable in, say, 30 years)

 

[Masquerouge]

The key factor is the advance of technology, not the number of 'bad guys, like Buffet says'. During the Cold War, you still needed the resources of superpowers to acquire the means to bring about a nuke holocaust. But now a small group of determined individuals can acquire nuclear weapons, if they can afford it. Thats what makes it so inevitable.

Ah. Suddenly we jumped from "one of them will eventually get hold of an atom bomb" to "a small group of determined individuals"? Seems like the probabilities took another hit

 

[Elta]

Could the worlds second richest man get nuke if he wanted to..... if he donates enouf nuckes around the equator he can finnaly end malaria. (yes thats how much I hate mosquitos)

 

[Masquerouge]

since I started watching Space 1999, the TV series, again. My proposal to Buffet is to invest his money in a moon base, so if something happens on Earth, a selected group can survive in the moon.

(Yeah, I know is sci-fi, but It is doable in, say, 30 years)

Wow. I would rate the probability that a small group of chosen men and women sent on the Moon blow themselves up insanely higher than the probability of Earth being wiped out by nukes.

Humans can not live confined for too long.

 

[nc-1701]

Yes there will be a nuke war in the next 50 years im guessing 90% probability howevcer I doubt it will hit America. Plus I think it will be a small short war between either Isreal/Iran or Indias/Pakistan terrorists could get say a single bomb and kill new york but thats about it. The only thing that really worries me is bio-weapons.

 

[odintheking]

You forgot North Korea. "Hidden weapons" my @$$, they parade them around for morale boosting, we know they have them, .

 

[nc-1701]

North Korea is smart enough not to use them unless attacked IMO

 

[tomsnowman123]

I think it's a matter of time, really. You can't expect humans to have nuclear weapons forever and never use them, unfortunately.

 

[El_Machinae]

If the probability of a nuke being used (each year) remains stable, then over time the probability of at least one nuke being used will approach one.

If the probability of a nuke being used (each year) decreases each year(through security, treaties, reduction of materials) then the long-term probability of at least one nuke does not approach one, but a set percentage below one.

Basically, if we can make the planet safer than the warmongers can risk us - we might make it out alive.