Notton bit_user said: Isn't a preemptive nuclear strike also the optimal strategy, according to game theory? No. Nukes are mainly a coercion (or anti-coercion) device, rather than something you'd want to use. Preemptive strike is something that only works when the defending side does not have Nukes. If both sides already have Nukes, then it's MAD, and your best bet is to have talks to reduce the number of enemies and increase friends you have. This is why it's also important to never give up Nukes once you have them. Reply
SomeoneElse23 Notton said: No. Nukes are mainly a coercion (or anti-coercion) device, rather than something you'd want to use. Preemptive strike is something that only works when the defending side does not have Nukes. If both sides already have Nukes, then it's MAD, and your best bet is to have talks to reduce the number of enemies and increase friends you have. This is why it's also important to never give up Nukes once you have them. This is precisely why there's such pressure that certain countries "never have nukes". Reply
PEnns Notton said: No. Nukes are mainly a coercion (or anti-coercion) device, rather than something you'd want to use. Preemptive strike is something that only works when the defending side does not have Nukes. If both sides already have Nukes, then it's MAD, and your best bet is to have talks to reduce the number of enemies and increase friends you have. This is why it's also important to never give up Nukes once you have them. That explains exactly why certain nuclear-armed big bullies want to make sure no one else has them (happening at this very moment, actually!) You can also tell how respectful and nice they are towards the nuclear armed ones. No gun-boat or big armada diplomacy towards those!! Reply
Gururu From the citation: "Claude crossed the tactical threshold in 86% of games and issued strategic threats in 64%, yet it never initiated all-outstrategic nuclear war. This ceiling appears learned rather than architectural, since both Gemini and GPT proved willingto reach 1000." I dont know how long Anthropic will hold on to… Reply
JamesJones44 I believe the world has shown that in resource wars, almost anything is considered acceptable risk (especially when they are desperate). Couple that with AI saying the risk is low for using a tactical nuke and the world just got a whole lot scarier Reply
Co BIY flytrap23 said: Would you like to play a game? Should be required viewing during training for all AI models and AI developers. Reply
Key considerations
- Investor positioning can change fast
- Volatility remains possible near catalysts
- Macro rates and liquidity can dominate flows
Reference reading
- https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/SPONSORED_LINK_URL
- https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/llms-used-tactical-nuclear-weapons-in-95-percent-of-ai-war-games-launched-strategic-strikes-three-times-researcher-pitted-gpt-5-2-claude-sonnet-4-and-gemini-3-flash-against-each-other-with-at-least-one-model-using-a-tactical-nuke-in-20-out-of-21-matches#main
- https://www.tomshardware.com
- Survey Reveals AI Advances in Telecom: Networks and Automation in Driver’s Seat as Return on Investment Climbs
- GeForce NOW Turns Screens Into a Gaming Machine
- Survey Reveals AI Advances in Telecom: Networks and Automation in Driver’s Seat as Return on Investment Climbs
- Lucky PC builder orders 32GB Corsair RAM kit for $300, claims they got a box of 10 worth $3,000 instead — plans to sell all the extra units to the community at
- Best PC case fans tested 2026: Improve your airflow, silence your system, or add more RGB glow
Informational only. No financial advice. Do your own research.