Slashdot Mirror


The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Introduces the Doomsday Dashboard

Lasrick writes You probably know the hand on the Doomsday Clock now rests at 3 minutes to midnight. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has launched a pretty cool little interactive Dashboard that lets you see data that the Bulletin's Science and Security Board considers when making the decision on the Clock's time each year. There are interactive graphs that show global nuclear arsenals, nuclear material security breaches, and how much weapons-grade plutonium and uranium is stored (and where). The climate change section features graphs of global sea level rise over time, Arctic sea ice minimums. atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, and differences in global temperature. There's also a section for research on biosecurity and emerging technologies.

92 comments

  1. Not comprehensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sure, they added climate change to try to stay relevant when nuclear stockpiles plunged, but there are so many possible doomsdays they ignore entirely.
    I see nothing about zombies on the site, for example.

    1. Re:Not comprehensive by ledow · · Score: 1

      What about bog-standard boring conventional warfare?

    2. Re:Not comprehensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or how about the normal, historically-proven fact of the downfall of every civilization that was once "top dog" but is now a footnote?

      It's gonna happen.

    3. Re:Not comprehensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yesss, and HOW does said downfall happennnn?

    4. Re:Not comprehensive by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      What about bog-standard boring conventional warfare?

      How is that going to cause a "doomsday"? Even during WWII, the population of the world as a whole went up. Many technological developments driven by the the war, may have saved more lives after the war than were lost during it.

    5. Re:Not comprehensive by davester666 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Typically, the citizens wind up spending all their time messaging each other on their cell phones, and ninja's sneak up behind them and kill them.

      Haven't you seen ANY documentaries on the fall of the roman empire?

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    6. Re:Not comprehensive by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      Because of the loud noise they made as they chiseled messages, the Romans failed to hear the ninjas piling off the boats from Japan

    7. Re:Not comprehensive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand why it's getting closer to midnight. If you read, say, Steven Pinker, you'll discover it's getting further away.

    8. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Sure, they added climate change to try to stay relevant when nuclear stockpiles plunged, but there are so many possible doomsdays they ignore entirely.
      I see nothing about zombies on the site, for example.

      Personally, I consider zombies to be vastly more likely a threat than any "climate change" from CO2.

      Which is to say: not at all. Zombies in the movies kill people who are stupid and slow.

      But maybe the whole CO2 warming schtick is aimed at stupid and slow people too. Even better.

    9. Re:Not comprehensive by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      The difference being that now we basically have a worldwide civilization.

    10. Re:Not comprehensive by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      If you're not an old fart like me maybe you'll live long enough to find out how wrong you are about anthropogenic climate change.

      Instead of calling people climate science deniers maybe we should start calling them climate zombies.

    11. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 0

      "Jane Q. Public" is actually a man named Lonny Eachus.

      Even if that happened to be true, who (besides you, that is), gives a damn? Is this your amateur attempt at the despicable practice of "doxxing"?

      Besides: I would estimate in good faith that there is about a 99.9% probability that "RespekMyAthorati" is a man named "Bryan Killett", who demonstrably can't stand to be tied down to one pseudonym like his "Khayman80" account, he thinks it's fun to harass other people using multiple sock-puppet accounts.

      The other 0.01% would almost have to be one of Bryan's friends. If he has any. NOBODY ELSE, in all my years here, has bothered to try to harass me in this manner. Nobody.

    12. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      If you're not an old fart like me maybe you'll live long enough to find out how wrong you are about anthropogenic climate change.

      More likely I'll live long enough to freeze my ass off waiting for it to happen.

    13. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 0
      And I just literally stumbled on this little gem. I wasn't even looking for anything, it was just a mis-click. RespekMyAthorati says:

      Holy shit.
      The second law says exactly the opposite: namely that entropy in a closed system will always increase over time, so that complexity and information content will always decrease.

      Hahahaha!

      This guy's supposed to be a PhD physicist, and he doesn't know how information relates to the Second Law of Thermodynamics!

      Apparently RespekMyAthorati has never heard of "event horizons" and why those were a big theoretical problem for physics, because of the information loss.

      Gotcha again, dude! And I'm no physicist. Never claimed to be. But I sure seem to know more about it than you do.

      If you keep losing arguments this spectacularly, you're probably going to have to give back that degree.

    14. Re:Not comprehensive by khayman80 · · Score: 0

      This guy's supposed to be a PhD physicist

      Really? Where did "RespekMyAthorati" claim to be a PhD physicist?

    15. Re:Not comprehensive by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      Ah, you must live on the East Coast. Out here in Oregon where I live it's been warm and up in the Cascades there's no snow where normally there would be at least 3 feet of snow pack by now.

    16. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 0

      Really? Where did "RespekMyAthorati" claim to be a PhD physicist?

      Well, let's see if the rest of Slashdot has much of a problem with this logic:

      For years now, I have had ONE person claiming to be a physicist, who seems to care (understatement; "obsessed" would be more accurate) about who he thinks I am outside of Slashdot, and who likes to argue -- nay, insists upon arguing -- fallaciously about physics.

      And along comes "RespekMyAthorati", with marvellously coincidental timing, who apparently also likes to argue fallaciously about physics, and who also seems to care about some person outside of Slashdot who he thinks is me.

      Rather astounding coincidence, wouldn't you say?

      I would. I bet if I put together a group of Slashdotters, and showed this to them, they would conclude that the one account is very likely (understatement again) a sock-puppet of the other.

      And I know you don't seem to care, but Slashdotters don't think very highly of sock-puppetry.

    17. Re:Not comprehensive by khayman80 · · Score: 0

      ... I would estimate in good faith that there is about a 99.9% probability that "RespekMyAthorati" is a man named "Bryan Killett", who demonstrably can't stand to be tied down to one pseudonym like his "Khayman80" account, he thinks it's fun to harass other people using multiple sock-puppet accounts. The other 0.01% would almost have to be one of Bryan's friends. If he has any. NOBODY ELSE, in all my years here, has bothered to try to harass me in this manner. Nobody. [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-23]

      Charming. I'm not "RespekMyAthorati" and I've never spoken to "RespekMyAthorati" even once. But it's fascinating that this is the sixth time Jane's accused me of pretending to be somebody else. I'll remember this the next time Jane pretends to be offended whenever I point out that Jane is Lonny Eachus.

      ... This guy's supposed to be a PhD physicist, and he doesn't know how information relates to the Second Law of Thermodynamics! ... [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-23]

      ... For years now, I have had ONE person claiming to be a physicist, who seems to care (understatement; "obsessed" would be more accurate) about who he thinks I am outside of Slashdot, and who likes to argue -- nay, insists upon arguing -- fallaciously about physics. And along comes "RespekMyAthorati", with marvellously coincidental timing, who apparently also likes to argue fallaciously about physics, and who also seems to care about some person outside of Slashdot who he thinks is me. ... [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-23]

      Don't be ridiculous, Jane. Do you really want to see what a PhD physicist says about how information relates to the second law of thermodynamics? Six years ago I said: most information theorists regard information and entropy to be closely related. So saying "information is increasing" is very similar to saying "entropy is increasing," ...

      As you can see, a PhD physicist has already said that "RespekMyAthorati" is wrong. But feel free to keep accusing me of being six different people. The irony is delicious.

    18. Re:Not comprehensive by khayman80 · · Score: 0

      Answered here.

    19. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Answered here.

      I see. So you admit "RespekMyAthorati" is one of your sockpuppet accounts? If not, why are you answering for "him"?

    20. Re:Not comprehensive by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      As you can see, a PhD physicist has already said that "RespekMyAthorati" is wrong. But feel free to keep accusing me of being six different people. The irony is delicious.

      I didn't "accuse you" but I did suggest the possibility. More than just a possibility, really.

      And I find the "coincidence" (as I explained above) of him answering for you to be just a bit too unlikely. Actually, I think it's damned near impossible. Of course "nearly impossible" happens all the time in this world, but Slashdot is not the entire world.

      You have also been caught sock-puppeting before. So that should be no surprise to anyone, either.

      And it hardly surprises me that you would contradict yourself. You did it a lot when we were actually having our Spencer discussion. You never admitted it, but as I have stated before, it's all a matter of record.

      Unlike you, while I certainly have made mistakes, and changed my mind on some issues over the years, I have been happy to admit it when that actually happens.

  2. Obligatory Maiden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You probably know the hand on the Doomsday Clock now rests at 3 minutes to midnight.

    We all know that their clock is a minute slow

  3. Dibs on band name! by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    Doomsday Dashboard: Live at Budokan - now available on iTunes!

    .

  4. 3 minutes by bugs2squash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Have you ever seen a movie where the bomb was defused with 3 minutes left on the clock. No-one will be interested until its in single digits of seconds to midnight.

    --
    Nullius in verba
    1. Re:3 minutes by glitch! · · Score: 1

      And why do they always assume that the trigger is at a zero countdown? Why doesn't the bomber set the timer to go off at fifty-one minutes or eleven minutes and six seconds, for example?

      --
      A dingo ate my sig...
    2. Re:3 minutes by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Have you ever seen a movie where the bomb was defused with 3 minutes left on the clock. No-one will be interested until its in single digits of seconds to midnight.

      That's why, if I ever turn super-villain, I'll set my bombs to detonate at 3 minutes and fourteen seconds. This way, the heroes will just be starting to decide that they should disarm the bomb when it blows up.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    3. Re:3 minutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You and GP need to read up on Adrian Veidt.

    4. Re:3 minutes by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2

      The recommended detonation count is 117.

    5. Re:3 minutes by Rakhar · · Score: 1

      I dunno, 2 Minutes to Midnight would be pretty amusing.

  5. 12 Monkeys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the thing smart people fear the most.

    Now if you will excuse me, I have to take a trip in a time machine ...

  6. Time passing speed by Thanshin · · Score: 1

    That clock moves almost as slow as the one in my work computer.

    (dear fricking gawd! I swear it's been 17:14 for at least two days!)

  7. spring forward by turkeydance · · Score: 5, Funny

    it's an HOUR and 3 minutes until midnight.

  8. Clock you say? by danbert8 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So if the earth is approximately 4.54 billion years old and this clock is representing a day between creation and doomsday... Hmm, 1440 minutes in a day, 3 minutes till midnight... Carry the two...

    We can expect the Earth to exist for another 9.5 million years!

    Whew... I was about to panic.

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    1. Re:Clock you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      # 2 milliseconds to midnight
      # The hands that threaten doom

    2. Re:Clock you say? by pitchpipe · · Score: 1

      We can expect the Earth to exist for another 9.5 million years!

      Oh of this there is no question, but the tricked-out primates who inhabit the face of said planet and who are always flinging their tricked-out shit around may face a different story.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
  9. What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    OK, if they want to guess how far we are from disaster caused by nuclear weapons, that's fine. But why co-mingle "climate change" - is this just a "we need funding" thing?

    1. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by Greyfox · · Score: 2

      Pretty much. No one cares about nuclear weapons since the cold war ended. Well, no one but old, irrelevant people.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    2. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      It is because they are a far-left, anti-capitalist and anti-development org funded largely be George Soros, and they believe we should all (well, most of us anyway) go back to living in caves to save resources for the ruling elite.

      Kindly enlighten us with your evidence that George Soros funds the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Because I can't seem to find any.

      As for the actual past and present sponsors of the BAS, well ZOMG, now there's a festering pile of hard-bitten commie hacks (not.)

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    3. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      More like a fifth column left wing propaganda thing. There aren't many atomic scientists there anymore. Political activists are all that's left.

    4. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The worldwide diminishing of communism and reality that all out nuclear war will never happen caused them to look to other ways to stay relevant. So, they jumped on the climate change bandwagon, and abandoned whatever credibility they had at the same time.

      It's like the musical act that just has to make that last one or two albums that are just a re-hash of the same stuff they've already done instead of hanging it up and calling it a good career.

    5. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One word: Scaremongering.

    6. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. No one cares about nuclear weapons since the cold war ended. Well, no one but old, irrelevant people.

      I'm less worried about full scale nuclear war, but I'm a lot more worried about nuclear weapons proliferation to groups that are unlikely to use them with any sort of restraint.

    7. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by brianerst · · Score: 1

      Not funding but mission creep. It's endemic with any NGO - once the original raison d'être disappears, rather than fold up shop, they just move on to the next bit of do-goodery. Sometime, that's a good thing - the March of Dimes built up a working infrastructure for funding polio eradication and decided to broaden the scope from eradicating infant paralysis (polio) to general improvement of infant health once the fight against polio was (largely) won.

      Other times, it leads to ridiculous concepts like atomic scientists trying to remain relevant by adding climate change and life sciences (on which they have no expertise) to their already somewhat dubious atomic clock (again, they had little expertise in balance of power diplomacy and had no real idea what the true level of threat of nuclear war was).

    8. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by ThePackager · · Score: 2

      And if the country you live in happens to be one of the 31 most threatened by sea level rise?

      --
      Please have respect for people with different abilities, especially children.
    9. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      Pretty much. No one cares about nuclear weapons since the cold war ended. Well, no one but old, irrelevant people.

      I'm less worried about full scale nuclear war, but I'm a lot more worried about nuclear weapons proliferation to groups that are unlikely to use them with any sort of restraint.

      You mean countries like Israel?

    10. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by blue9steel · · Score: 1

      You mean countries like Israel?

      No. Stable, developed, democratic nation states don't worry me much. Besides, as best I can tell they've had the bomb for a long time and haven't nuked anyone yet. I'm more worried about unstable, failed, theocratic and expansionist states or non-state actors.

    11. Re:What's with the inclusion of "climate change"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, because of the GP's typo, he's suggesting that the Bulletin in fact IS George Soros...

  10. Nuclear Material Incidents by Thanshin · · Score: 3, Funny

    7 - Unknown.

    I wonder how these come to happen.

    "Captain Johnson! Where the fuck are the two tons of plutonium you left the base with!"
    *shrugs* "No idea."
    "WHAT!"
    "NO IDEA. SIR!"
    "Ok, that's better. Try to be more careful with the next plutonium truck. Shit ain't growing on trees, you know?"

    1. Re:Nuclear Material Incidents by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Probably more like:

      "Where are those two pounds of plutonium?"
      "Eh, logbook says it's in Building C."
      "No, it's not. I checked."
      "Don't know where it might be, then."

    2. Re:Nuclear Material Incidents by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      Sir, we found the missing plutonium. It was under a pile of socks from the dryer, car keys, and TV remote controls.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  11. Ignorance is Bliss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I grew up with the thought that global Nuclear war wasn't a question of "if" but "when" I spent a lot of my childhood lying in bed wondering when that next EBS "test" would be the for real deal or not

    And after all these decades of wars, accidents, political and religious conflagrations I just don't have the ability to care about the doomsday clock anymore because it will NEVER END

    I'll throw my end of the world fears on the pile of rusted Thunderbolt sirens and move the dial off of 640 AM, peace is war forever

    The same as it ever was

    1. Re:Ignorance is Bliss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I feel the same way. I've been constantly told the world was on the brink of disaster from one cause or another since I was a child 40 years ago. At some point I realized that nothing serious ever happened, and things kept getting better and I just stopped believing it. This is probably why I'm skeptical that global warming will have a serious negative impact on my life.

    2. Re:Ignorance is Bliss by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 2

      I grew up with the thought that global Nuclear war wasn't a question of "if" but "when" I spent a lot of my childhood lying in bed wondering when that next EBS "test" would be the for real deal or not

      That used to scare the hell out of me when I was a kid too. Now that I'm ,ahem, middle-aged I've become somewhat jaded. I really hate to admit that I've become jaded (and middle aged). But you can only take so much before you either get desensitized to it, or become a basket case.

      In my lifetime, we've been threatened by extinction due to nuclear war, biological war, "the neutron bomb", comet/asteroid impact, solar storms, the sun going nova, a nearby star going supernova, gravitational alignment of Jupiter, super volcanoes, AIDS, various plagues, global warming, impending ice-age, Y2K, the Mayan apocalypse, the Christian apocalypse, global economic collapse, hyper inflation, communism, socialism, Jihad, artificial intelligence, alien invaders, running out of oil, the collapse of earths magnetic field, etc and so on.

      The one thing that never gets mentioned is our own human stupidity. That's probably what frightens me the most. On the day the Rosetta probe was the first man made object to orbit a comet, the biggest story in the news was whether Kim Kardashian's ass was Photoshopped or not.

    3. Re:Ignorance is Bliss by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

      You forgot "vacuum metastability event."

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  12. i bet dollars to donuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    these conspiracy theorists will have climate change in there lol

  13. You forgot one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Benghazi!

  14. Stupid. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whatever happened to that corrrelation/casuality thing?

  15. Chicken little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The BAS clock has always rested far too close to midnight to be effective. With someone trying that hard, decade after decade, to scare others, the impact wears off. The BAS looks like a 'chicken little' running about claiming "The sky is falling. The sky is falling." Calm down guys.

  16. Where is Russia in "Incidents"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With all the stories of Russian lack of control of their nuclear arsenal, where are all the Russian incidents in the tally?

  17. Ignorance is dangerous by sjbe · · Score: 1

    At some point I realized that nothing serious ever happened, and things kept getting better and I just stopped believing it.

    So by your logic because nuclear war hasn't happened yet, it never will? That's... impressively illogical and dangerous.

    This is probably why I'm skeptical that global warming will have a serious negative impact on my life.

    If you are over the age of 40 and look at actuarial tables, global warming might or might not impact your life greatly. But if you give a crap about those who are younger than you then there is a very real probability it will impact younger folks in very tangible and serious ways. Within my lifetime glaciers have hugely receded, the Arctic ice cap has shrunken to historic lows, etc. If you think those events (regardless of whether caused by man or not) are not having an effect on global climate and weather right now then you either ignorant or have an agenda.

  18. They're reviving the Yugo?! by jpellino · · Score: 2

    Sorry, there must be another use of the term "doomsday dashboard" that I wasn't previously familiar with.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  19. Dumbest comment ever by sjbe · · Score: 0

    No one cares about nuclear weapons since the cold war ended. Well, no one but old, irrelevant people.

    Are you stupid or trolling? You must be a weapons-grade imbecile to not care about nuclear weapons. You seriously think that a device that can fit in the trunk of a car or on the nosecone of a missile, capable of can vaporizing a major metropolitan area in an instant, is not a big deal? That might be the dumbest thing I've ever read on slashdot in the last 15 years and that is saying something.

    1. Re:Dumbest comment ever by Greyfox · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You sound like someone who's old. Or irrelevant. Were you one of those people protesting in front of air force bases in the 70's? Sure, a nuclear-armed Iran is a convenient boogeyman to wave around to scare the US public. Who's doing that? John McCain mostly. Let's apply our criteria to him. Old? Yup. He's practically yelling at the rest of Congress to get off his lawn. And irrelevant? Yep, pretty much. No one cares what John McCain thinks, except maybe some old people in Florida and Arizona and some irrelevant people at Fox News.

      Nuclear weapons were a convenient boogeyman to wave around when you were a hippie in the 70's. "Oh, they're going to blow the world up unless we pour this goat's blood on the gate of the air force base!" Discounting the fact that making a nuclear bomb is really hard (Iran and North Korea have been trying for as long as I've been alive, despite the fact that the general concepts are simple enough for a teenager to grasp,) and making something to deliver it is also really hard. By the time you get done doing all that stuff, you may as well have just leveled a city with conventional weapons. We did a lot more to Japan with conventional weapons than we did with nuclear ones in WWII, by the way. But after all that, some very interesting politics come into play, which is why India and Pakistan haven't nuked each other. And you know, the longer a nuclear device sits, the less likely it is that it's going to work. Your nice pure plutonium core starts getting crapped up with hydrogen bubbles. And those things are already very finicky as Iran and North Korea are finding out.

      So yeah, on a scale of things that are likely to kill you, nuclear war is simply not one of them. You're significantly more likely to be shot by a disgruntled co-worker or a road-raging jackass in a giant penis truck. His truck is very very big, his penis is very very small and he's angry! In fact if you asked 1000 random people if they worry more about dying in a nuclear war or to zombies, I'd be willing to bet most of them would say zombies. Which are fictional.

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  20. Atomic scientist != client scientist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for playing, but everyone's made it clear that opinions on climate change don't matter unless they come from honest-to-goodness "climate scientists."

    Since you're "atomic scientists," you can piss off.

  21. Introduces Atomic Clock to DAYLIGHT SAVINGS TIME! by Chas · · Score: 1

    *Klaxon*

    Oops!

    While the Doomsday clock is an evocative metaphor, nearly 70 years, and mission drift (was originally only encompassed destruction by nuclear war) have rendered it impotent and corrupted.

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  22. this thing is USELESS by nimbius · · Score: 1

    I understand there is scientific value to be had from this dashboard but honestly as a mad scientist I myself am both disappointed and frustrated by the lack of functionality. By no means am I new to doomsday dashboards (ive been shopping around for months now.) I've used KF245 Deathmaster consoles, BUE44 Death ray destructo console with the liquidator option and then finally im sure we're all familiar with MurderMatic's Dashboard-O-Doom with those oh so lovely cherry keyswitches. But the BAS Doomsday dashboard has not a single modern feature! not even the usual laz-o-tron scope or whir-o-blitz flashitizers. I stood in the shower for almost 20 minutes today practicing THE PERFECT villain speech, complete with "mark my words" and "tremble before the might" and for what? This stupid Doomsday Dashboard cant even target Washington DC?! And dont even get me started on the interface. How the hell do i LAUNCH any of these warheads?! I have ALWAYS WANTED to have site-based launch but i cant find the control ANYWHERE to launch!

    In summation Atomic Scientists Bulletin, please, get your act together (you're embarassing the mad community.) Also please let the united nations know (because your dashboard CLEARLY CANT DO THIS) to wire 1 BILLION dollars in currency to skull island in no less than 5 hours, or we will have no choice but to...oh screw it you know what? i just realized i cant control SEA LEVEL OR CARBON DIOXIDE LEVEL AT ALL in this blasted stupid dashboard.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
  23. Iran and nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one cares about nuclear weapons since the cold war ended. Well, no one but old, irrelevant people.

    When Iran gets a nuclear weapon, lots of people will care.

  24. They're reviving the Yugo?! by jpellino · · Score: 1

    Or is there another use of the term "doomsday dashboard" that I wasn't previously familiar with? (this may dupe - submissions seemed borked for a bit)

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  25. Alliteration by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should call it the Doomsday Dashboard Doodad.

  26. It's all relative, and alarmist by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 1

    I haven't done any research on the clock, but what little I could find on wiki doesn't give any relative meaning to the setting. If it's set to 23:57, what does 00:01 represent? It all seems awfully arbitrary and set to an alarmist tone since anything with only 3 minutes left must be urgent! If you are being arbitrary with the setting then you could calculate the same date to equate to 02:30,. but then no one would talk about it as if it had meaning.

    And what's a minute? Since it's clearly not a minute. Or do the mean each of the 1440 minutes to represent .07% of a percentile and being at 11:57 means we're 99.79% likely to end this year?

    For a group of "scientists" (and yes I put that in quotes cause I'm not seeing any science), this certainly seems more like marketing hype.

    Someone please chime in if there's a real meaning to all of this.

    --
    Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
    1. Re:It's all relative, and alarmist by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      It's nothing but a metaphorical representation, not a percentage or actual time. It was born in an age when people genuinely feared that nuclear Armageddon may happen any day, and seemed to capture those fears in an evocative manner. Nowadays, it's much less relevant, as the fears of an all-out nuclear war have largely subsided. One could cynically argue that the addition of global warming is simply an attempt to stay relevant.

      Incidentally, three minutes to midnight is about as bad as the clock has ever read. The worst is two minutes to midnight in the fifties. The breakup of the Soviet Union and relaxing of global tensions moved it back to 17 minutes to midnight. People will have to decide for themselves whether they think that's an accurate representation of our proximity to Armageddon.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  27. It's Arbitrary and Alarmist by ThomasBHardy · · Score: 2

    I haven't done any research on the clock, but what little I could find on wiki doesn't give any relative meaning to the setting. If it's set to 23:57, what does 00:01 represent? It all seems awfully arbitrary and set to an alarmist tone since anything with only 3 minutes left must be urgent! If you are being arbitrary with the setting then you could calculate the same date to equate to 02:30,. but then no one would talk about it as if it had meaning.

    And what's a minute? Since it's clearly not a minute. Or do the mean each of the 1440 minutes to represent .07% of a percentile and being at 11:57 means we're 99.79% likely to end this year?

    For a group of "scientists" (and yes I put that in quotes cause I'm not seeing any science), this certainly seems more like marketing hype.

    Someone please chime in if there's a real meaning to all of this.

    --
    Warning: Teh poster of this messaeg is lysdexic
    1. Re:It's Arbitrary and Alarmist by G00F · · Score: 1

      This isn't science, but scientists way of playing politics.

      Yes, alarmist, fear-mongering, add in a few facts, some blaming. Still blaming the all mighty Nuke but adding another point, climate change, to their soapbox.

      But yes, I also agree with your implied sentiment that using a clock where we are at 99.79% at the end when at most we got as low as 98.75% with USA and Soviet signing Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, and the Soviet Union dissolves.(and that was after the Fall of the Berlin Wall) IMHO the clock should have been set back hours for each of those, not minutes.

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    2. Re:It's Arbitrary and Alarmist by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are making the mistake that you approach this from a rational point of view. It's not supposed to be rational, they look at the facts, see if things are going in the right direction or not and adjust the clock as they see fit. Of course, it's alarmist! It's a clock!

  28. Sea Level Rising by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

    They should start that sea level rise clock about 20,000 years ago, it's been rising since the last ice age. Most of the time at faster rate than it is now.

    1. Re:Sea Level Rising by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      Actually the major sea level rise from the end of the last glacial period (ice age) ended about 4,000 years ago and sea level has been pretty stable since then. Sea level has risen about 8 inches in the last century which is more change than in the last 2,000 years. From Wikipedia:

      For example, geological observations indicate that during the last 2,000 years, sea level change was small, with an average rate of only 0.0–0.2 mm per year. This compares to an average rate of 1.7 ± 0.5 mm per year for the 20th century.[34] In its Fifth Assessment Report, The IPCC found that recent observations of global average sea level rise at a rate of 3.2 [2.8 to 3.6] mm per year is consistent with the sum of contributions from observed thermal ocean expansion due to rising temperatures (1.1 [0.8 to 1.4] mm per year, glacier melt (0.76 [0.39 to 1.13] mm per year), Greenland ice sheet melt (0.33 [0.25 to 0.41] mm per year), Antarctic ice sheet melt (0.27 [0.16 to 0.38] mm per year), and changes to land water storage (0.38 [0.26 to 0.49] mm per year).

    2. Re:Sea Level Rising by ralphsiegler · · Score: 1

      Doesn't change the truth of what I said, you are cherry picking a range. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    3. Re:Sea Level Rising by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      How does what happened more than 6,000 or 7,000 years ago matter to modern civilization? Sea level has been remarkably stable during that period.

    4. Re:Sea Level Rising by Troed · · Score: 1

      With regards to the Wikipedia article claiming a historical 0.0-0.2mm range over the last 2000 years that probably needs to be updated with more recent research.

      Thewell-preserved biological remains on the sh tank wall allow us to estimate anRSL rise of 40 ±10 cm at Frejus since Roman times

      400 / 2000 = 0.2mm average per year over the last 2000 years. (And as documented in this paper there are other papers that claim higher numbers)

      http://www.academia.edu/344003...éjus_France

      (Slashdot seems to make a mess out of the hyphen in the link - the paper can be found as doi 10.1002/gea.21444 )

    5. Re:Sea Level Rising by riverat1 · · Score: 1

      The paper talks about relative sea level change in a single location. How much meaning that has for global sea level changes is questionable.

  29. Signs of the apocalypse! by mveloso · · Score: 1

    The signs of the apocalypse have been around for thousands of years. What makes these signs any more relevant than the other signs?

  30. The Dashboard needs to be an iPhone app by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

    The user could customize the display of his/her Apple Watch with of the real-time status of one of the indicators in the dashboard, with the time display as minutes to midnight in any desired time zone and time display format. It would be a doomsayer's dream.

  31. "all the FUD that's fit to print" by argStyopa · · Score: 2

    BoAS has been crying that the world is in *imminent* danger of destruction since at least the 1970s. At a certain point, even they have to question their own credibility insisting that the sky will be falling 'any moment now'.

    Look at their logo for the doomsday clock, for pete's sake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... it implies there is no conceivable reading in which we're not in immediate, constant danger.

    This is PRECISELY the sort of crap that has led to much of the public disregarding "science" as a thing that can speak to many issues in our daily life - the BoAS may be staffed by nominal scientists, but they're otherwise pretty much typical, naive, left-wing academics trying desperately to parlay their "sciency" credentials into credibility in foreign policy and geopolitics.

    Would you read a periodical on Particle Physics written by Michelle Bachman, Henry Kissinger, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi? Maybe for the laughs, I admit.
    Then why would anyone give any more credence to a political pamphlet published by scientists?

    --
    -Styopa
  32. Inaccurate (or misleading) data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The front page shows UK weapons plutonium stocks as 94 metric tons, which is rather misleading as 91 metric tons of this is high burn-up civilian reactor-grade plutonium.

    Possibly this is because of a previous demonstration of a weapon using "reactor grade" plutonium, but this was 1957 reactor grade plutonium, made in military reactors and likely of a burn-up below that used in commercial operation (although not disclosed).

  33. Simple Doomsday Detector by John+Meacham · · Score: 1

    Just stick one of these in a box with an LED. if the LED is on, it's doomsday.

    http://www.maxwell.com/product...

    "Maxwell’s radiation-hardened, hybrid, Nuclear Event Detectors (NED) sense ionizing radiation pulses generated by a nuclear event, such as the detonation of a nuclear weapon, and rapidly switches its output from the normal high state to a low state with a propagation delay time of less than 20ns."

    --
    http://notanumber.net/
  34. This is how it works: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When liberty advances, the clock moves closer to midnight. When tyranny advances, the clock retreats.

    This message is brought to you by Karl Martell. EDUCATE YOURSELF.

  35. Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer by khayman80 · · Score: 1

    ... Slashdotters don't think very highly of sock-puppetry. [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-23]

    I didn't "accuse you" but I did suggest the possibility. More than just a possibility, really. And I find the "coincidence" (as I explained above) of him answering for you to be just a bit too unlikely. Actually, I think it's damned near impossible. ... [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-24]

    That might be the most hilarious bit in Jane's comedy act, where he wrongly claims that "there is about a 99.9% probability that "RespekMyAthorati" is a man named "Bryan Killett"".

    And yet Jane's 100% wrong, despite being 99.9% certain. As always. And Jane refuses to admit he's wrong. As always. And Jane simultaneously insists that he's happy to admit he's wrong. As always.

    But at least Jane finally admitted that Jane is suggesting anything. Baby steps.

    Answered here.

    I see. So you admit "RespekMyAthorati" is one of your sockpuppet accounts? If not, why are you answering for "him"? [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-24]

    Good grief, Jane. That link goes to my clear statement that I'm not "RespekMyAthorati". So it's difficult to imagine that Jane's asking that question in good faith.

    But maybe Jane's chronic amnesia is kicking in again, so Jane might actually be honestly confused... once again. If Jane's actually just honestly confused, Jane should try to remember that I answered Jane's comment because Jane used my real name to wrongly accuse me of being "RespekMyAthorati":

    ... Is this your amateur attempt at the despicable practice of "doxxing"? Besides: I would estimate in good faith that there is about a 99.9% probability that "RespekMyAthorati" is a man named "Bryan Killett", who demonstrably can't stand to be tied down to one pseudonym like his "Khayman80" account, he thinks it's fun to harass other people using multiple sock-puppet accounts. ... [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-23]

    Sadly, Jane will probably never appreciate the ironic contrast between those first two sentences.

    Jane probably also won't appreciate the irony that Jane uses my real name to wrongly accuse me of posing as someone else, while complaining bitterly and threatening to call the police and/or sue whenever I point out that Jane is Lonny Eachus. But again, I'll remember this the next time Jane pretends to be offended whenever I point out that Jane is Lonny Eachus.

    ... You have also been caught sock-puppeting before. So that should be no surprise to anyone, either. ... [Jane Q. Public, 2015-03-24]

    Good grief. Once again, the irony of Lonny Eachus's sock-puppet "Jane Q. Public" wrongly accusing me of sock-puppeting is overwhelming.

    Once again, Jane's completely wrong. This "khayman80" account is the only account I use at Slashdot. What Jane actually means is that his crippling paranoia has led Jane/Lonny Eachus to repeatedly and

  36. Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer by khayman80 · · Score: 1

    Answered here.

    By the way:

    Bill Nye - a guy I respected a lot when I was younger - caught in inexcusable misinformation about global warming. patriotpost.us/posts/31194 [Lonny Eachus, 2014-11-14]

    I *used to* respect Nye.
    MT @SteveSGoddard: Dear @TheScienceGuy - you've set a high bar for stupidest climate post stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2015/02/06/bil... [Lonny Eachus, 2015-02-06]

    ... I used to respect Nye a lot. But ever since he started opening his mouth about AGW he has been sounding like his head has gotten so big it could be mistaken for he Goodyear Blimp. [Jane Q. Public, 2015-02-23]

    Ad-hominem will get you nowhere. Billy Nye DEMONSTRATED that he knows squat about AGW by co-hosting THIS video with Al Gore... showing an experiment to "prove" CO2 warming that could never have actually worked. While Anthony Watts also gets part of it wrong -- actual greenhouses do not actually work by "trapping infrafed radiation" -- he still demonstrates conclusively that the Nye-Gore "demonstration" was 100% a crock of made-up shit. To publicly DEMONSTRATE his ignorance and dishonesty in that manner, then call others half-stupid, is very strong evidence that Bill Nye is a chronic sufferer of Dunning-Kruger Syndrome. Or just plain a liar. Choose one. [Jane Q. Public, 2015-02-23]

    Jane/Lonny Eachus accuses Bill Nye of being a liar or suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome, but Jane can't even write down a simple energy conservation equation without wrongly "cancelling" terms.

    I've repeatedly explained that only the power passing through a boundary is included in the energy conservation equation across that boundary. I've even linked to textbooks so Jane can verify that this is how "conservation of energy" works.

    If Jane ever reads and understands those textbooks, he'd know that the cooler power isn't relevant for the same reason that he could know that a crayon mark doesn't cross the lines in a coloring book. Again, this is really basic physics.

    And again, inserting the standard physics definition of the word "net" into Jane's equation reproduces the energy conservation equation that Jane's still adamantly rejecting. That's another independent way for Jane to see that he should consider the possibility that only power passing through a boundary should be included in the energy conservation equation across that boundary.

    If Jane can't even master the most basic details about conservation of energy, Jane won't ever be able to analyze how greenhouses work because that depends on understanding conservation of energy.

    Jane, you of all people really shouldn't be accusing scientists of being liars or suffering from Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

  37. Jane/Lonny Eachus goes Sky Dragon Slayer by khayman80 · · Score: 1

    Continued here and here.