Maybe because we're on the verge of being able to create fires which can actually consume the only home we have?
Playing with fire is in large part an ego and greed issue. Yes, it allows us to dominate, but at what cost?
I'd rather live a more balanced life than a greedy and ego driven life. I may not own the world, but I can be happy and sleep sound at night, and that matters.
We had nuclear weapons for almost 80 years and the world still hasn't ended. And I think that nuclear weapons are way more dangerous than Markov chains on steroids.
I can't launch a tactical nuke because somebody wronged me, but can create a disinformation campaign with the tools I have and optionally 2-3 smart, motivated individuals, for free.
Both can be equally devastating.
Or, if I want to go the extra mile, I can use the latter to create motivation for the utilization of the former. e.g. I may say that a country has WMDs, and maybe try to manufacture consent for destruction of these...
> can create a disinformation campaign with the tools I have and optionally 2-3 smart, motivated individuals, for free
You can, and it may cause unbelievably nuisance, but not to the devastating outcome of a tactical nuke. Can you prove otherwise? Russian disinformation came close, such as the 2016 election, but that was state sponsored.
> Or, if I want to go the extra mile, I can use the latter to create motivation for the utilization of the former. e.g. I may say that a country has WMDs, and maybe try to manufacture consent for destruction of these...
You cannot. It was still state's action. Not to mention that many countries had their own intelligence that no doubt had different assessment. They weren't blind. They used WMD argument as the excuse to join the US led war.
Playing with fire is in large part an ego and greed issue. Yes, it allows us to dominate, but at what cost?
I'd rather live a more balanced life than a greedy and ego driven life. I may not own the world, but I can be happy and sleep sound at night, and that matters.