this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2025
19 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1999 readers
184 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Another response to Ptacek.

top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

There's a notion that Trump bombed Fordow and Natanz for shits and giggles.

There are only very limited civilian applications for 20% enriched uranium and none for 60% uranium (above maybe low tens of grams). Iran has been stockpiling 60% enriched uranium (408 kg as of last IAEA report) for the last quarter, using up 20% uranium (fuel for research/medicinal isotope reactors) and 5% (fuel for normal nuclear powerplants). This is all in IAEA reports, which are based on what Iranians reported to them (relevant one). Had been Fordow intact, they could output something between 20-30kg (up to 50ish depending how reconfigurable are their centrifuges) of weapons grade material per week by using up their 60% and 20% stock until they get to something like 270-320 kg, then at much slower rate of something closer to 2.5 kg per week as long as they're supplied with 5% material. Now, it's hard to say in what state their entire nuclear program is, but if they can scrape up some cascade, that 60% stockpile still can get them some 200-220kg of material at rate of maybe 2 to 10 kg per week, depending what centrifuges can they get and how many of them. They're digging up Fordow as we speak, presumably to try and salvage some of that 60% material. This development happened in only the last couple of months, and it's really not surprising that any american administration would prevent iranian nuclear program from progressing using multiple tools available to them

No, what is happening is dumber and equally unhinged. It's more visible considering events near ceasefire: Trump wants to get Nobel peace prize because Obama got one. That's why he rushed ceasefire announcement so hard and that's why he made that "peace in Ukraine in ~~a day~~ two weeks" promise. Bombing Fordow would be, outside of being consistent with general american strategic policy, part of "escalate to deescalate"-like negotiation tactic. Considering most recent events I think this ceasefire might fail soon anyway (days from now)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

Nope. Nuclear armed countries' policy that no more nuclear armed countries are allowed is something both expected and having very much material impact. If Iran gets their nukes - it's likely that Saudis or Egypt would want their nukes too, or at least that Israel or India would like to expand their stockpile. In turn, Pakistan or China or both could expand their stockpile too in response to India. This all has material impacts for everyone, including Trump

Now, Trump bombing Iran because Trump wants to get Nobel peace prize, if there's anything demonstrating detachment from material reality, that's it. This point could have been made much better in the linked article