Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: can.politics
Subject: Re: problems with Star Wars #2 (part 2: the crux)
Message-ID: <5863@utzoo.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 10-Aug-85 18:30:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: utzoo.5863
Posted: Sat Aug 10 18:30:14 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 10-Aug-85 18:30:14 EDT
References: <5772@utzoo.UUCP>, <1240@utcsri.UUCP> <5797@utzoo.UUCP>, <16069@watmath.UUCP>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 45

> > "Oh no, look at that.  Missile launches all over the place.  OPEN FIRE!"
> > I'm not talking about reading printouts, I'm talking about the same sort
> > of real-time interaction that takes place when driving a car or flying an
> > aircraft.  Similarly, I am not talking about digging the President out of
> > bed; I'm talking about trained observers standing regular watches.
> 
> One can only hope that the computer that decided those were missle
> launches wasn't just dropping bits or seeing radar hash from the Moon.
> Putting the computer as the last link in the decision chain is risky;
> but so is putting it everywhere else.  Human beings deal better with
> unexpected situations than computer programs.

Sigh, you have misunderstood completely.  The whole idea is to place the
go/no-go decision, *and* the signal processing that leads up to it, with
the human observers.  The aiming system obviously needs heavy signal
processing to get precise tracks of missiles, but *the human observers
don't*.  Missile launches are not inconspicuous events!  Especially when
hundreds or thousands are occurring simultaneously, which is the only
case that stresses a BMD system to the limit and hence really calls for 
a fast decision.  If we could put human observers permanently in low
orbit, binoculars would suffice.  That's inconvenient, because we'd need
a lot of observation posts to make sure we had one or two in the right
place.  Telescopic video cameras (visible and IR) aboard Clarke-orbit
satellites would probably suffice; if not, it shouldn't need much more.

Note that attempts at jamming such cameras, or their data links, are in
themselves hostile acts.  Both cameras and data links should be multiply
redundant [different hardware rather than just replication of the same],
to avoid any single hardware malfunction being mistaken for jamming.

[From another author]

> You're talking about the same sort of real-time interaction that causes
> thousands of fatal car accidents every year.  Sure, most of the time
> drivers can make split second decsions correctly, but when they don't the
> consequences do not result in the deaths of millions of people.

Please read what I said:  I am explicitly suggesting multiple observers,
with near-simultaneous agreement required for a "fire" decision.  This is
the sort of procedure that is used already for things like ICBM launch
decisions, which are much more likely to cause the deaths of millions than
activation of a defence system is.
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry