Sign in

François Diaz-Maurin

@francoisdm.bsky.social
2.1K followers 497 following 1.7K posts

Nuclear editor @thebulletin.org. Fmr MacArthur Found. & Marie S.-Curie fellow @stanfordcisac.bsky.social. Fmr engineer in US/French nuclear ind. 1st gen. Father x3. Cello. Synthbass. Kyokushin. Autism. | Tips: francois@thebulletin.org Signal: francoisdm.21

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 09/10/2026
A 23-country study reveals that a majority of people worldwide embraces both nuclear deterrence and disarmament. The studies authors argue that this exposes a pragmatic flexibility that gives policymakers rare leeway for creative diplomacy. buff.ly/rPUzgSn
0113
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
Is Australia an advocate for nuclear disarmament or dependent on the US nuclear umbrella? In a new piece for @thebulletin.org, Jack Kennedy @jackkennedy.ie examines Canberra's long-standing nuclear policy contradiction—and why it's time to choose. 🧵👇
Anthony Albanese speaking at a podium with the Labor party logo and the slogan "A Better Future." (Photo by Paul Kane/Getty Images)
154
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
To lead on global nonproliferation and secure a coherent, autonomous foreign policy, Australia must align its actions with its non-nuclear principles, Kennedy argues. Read the full article in the @thebulletin.org:
thebulletin.org
To lead on nuclear disarmament, Australia must renounce the US umbrella
A contradictory nuclear policy leaves Canberra trapped between its disarmament ambitions and an increasingly unpredictable US alliance—renouncing Washington's umbrella is the only way forward.
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
Joining the TPNW wouldn't require ending the ANZUS alliance. Regional partners like New Zealand, Thailand, and the Philippines are TPNW signatories while maintaining active security relationships with the US.
100
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
While Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Labor Party pledged to sign and ratify the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (#TPNW), concrete action has stalled—even as military ties and transit access with Washington deepen under AUKUS.
100
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
For decades, Washington never officially confirmed a nuclear guarantee to Canberra. That changed in the 2022 US Nuclear Posture Review, which explicitly listed Australia alongside Japan and South Korea under extended deterrence.
100
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
Australia was a British nuclear testing ground in the 1950s and championed the 1985 Treaty of Rarotonga (South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone). Today, it is the only nation in a nuclear-weapon-free zone that also relies on extended US nuclear deterrence.
100
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 09/10/2026
Is Australia an advocate for nuclear disarmament or dependent on the US nuclear umbrella? In a new piece for @thebulletin.org, Jack Kennedy @jackkennedy.ie examines Canberra's long-standing nuclear policy contradiction—and why it's time to choose. 🧵👇
Anthony Albanese speaking at a podium with the Labor party logo and the slogan "A Better Future." (Photo by Paul Kane/Getty Images)
154
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 08/10/2026
The recent death at a Siberian research lab is drawing attention to Jacobsen's bestseller "Biological War: A Scenario." But these authors argue that the catastrophe presented relies on worst possible outcomes, & cannot tell us which threats are most plausible or where scarce resources should go.
buff.ly
Annie Jacobsen’s road from Siberia to Armageddon is paved with bad assumptions
Following recent reports of a death at a secretive Siberian disease research lab, author Annie Jacobsen has become a sought-after media interview. Some interviewers are now casting Jacobsen's new…
074
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Andrew Facini @andrewfacini.com · 08/10/2026
These guys are good and right (and if anything are far too generous about the nuclear book)
1144
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 07/10/2026
More than 26,000 respondents in 23 different countries were asked six key nuclear policy questions. The answers may initially seem contradictory but the study's authors say they shows a public open to pragmatic and creative nuclear diplomacy. buff.ly/rPUzgSn
081
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Matthew Bunn @matthew-bunn.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
My colleague Juliette Kayyem in The Atlantic: "surely the job of addressing the perils of AI shouldn’t be left to executives who stand to earn billions from the technology." She argues that a deadly AI-triggered event should lead to civil and criminal liability. @juliettekayyem.bsky.social
theatlantic.com
Destroying Humanity Is Against the Law
Don’t wait for a mass-extinction event before holding AI developers accountable.
0284
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Sara Goudarzi @saragoud.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
These probabilities make the science look settled and collapse layers of uncertainty, explains Sarah Kreps. "Experts still cannot establish with confidence what AI models can do, the factors that might limit the current trajectory, or the threat models underlying catastrophic harm."
thebulletin.org
AI doom has a precision problem
Until there is more clarity on basic questions, neither developers nor policymakers can credibly establish a quantitative AI risk assessment.
074
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
"The uncertainty is not just about how likely a catastrophic event would be but also the mechanisms through which those outcomes would emerge. Nuclear weapons offered more straightforward ways to connect causes to consequences"
thebulletin.org
AI doom has a precision problem
Until there is more clarity on basic questions, neither developers nor policymakers can credibly establish a quantitative AI risk assessment.
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
Boy, we got into AI doomerism much faster than I expected. And it seems like anything goes now. (Just like with the hype side of AI.) This allegation of China's ability to hack [OpenAI and Anthropic] "at any time" sounds bonkers.
wccftech.com
Jacob Coxon Warns He's 90% Certain China Has Spies Inside OpenAI And Anthropic, And Reveals Anthropic Employees Call Themselves "Ants" In Pursuit Of Superintelligence
Jacob Coxon, who quit Anthropic over its push for self-improving superintelligence, says China can "hack [OpenAI and Anthropic] at any time."
130
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
Note that the safe distance is not quite the same.
030
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
Can you spot the real Kim?
110
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
"Agricultural modeling we did ... suggests that, two years after a war involving Russia, China, Europe, and the United States, 95 percent of the people in those countries will have died from starvation."
thebulletin.org
'Earth in flames,' Brian Toon and Alan Robock on whether humans will die from an asteroid or nuclear war first
Nuclear war is much more unpredictable than asteroids, but, unlike the dinosaurs of 66 million years ago, humans can avoid causing their own extinction.
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
The interview is part of the “Nuclear winter: Why study it now?” series.
thebulletin.org
Nuclear winter: Why study it now?
A weeklong series on the catastrophic realities of nuclear war
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 07/10/2026
Ahead of his Drell lecture at Stanford, it's a good time to re-read my recent in-depth interview of Brian Toon and his fellow earth scientist Alan Robock on their book, "Earth in Flames."
thebulletin.org
'Earth in flames,' Brian Toon and Alan Robock on whether humans will die from an asteroid or nuclear war first
Nuclear war is much more unpredictable than asteroids, but, unlike the dinosaurs of 66 million years ago, humans can avoid causing their own extinction.
111
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 06/10/2026
A new study finds that 67% of US respondents support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons which calls for nuclear abolition. But only 22% of those respondents support reducing the US nuclear arsenal. How to square the difference? buff.ly/o7TVzJQ
1126
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 06/10/2026
A 23-country study reveals that a majority of people worldwide embraces both nuclear deterrence and disarmament. The studies authors argue that this exposes a pragmatic flexibility that gives policymakers rare leeway for creative diplomacy. buff.ly/o7TVzJQ
0115
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
In an increasingly unstable international security landscape, citizens intuitively understand that pursuing deterrence today and disarmament tomorrow aren't mutually exclusive. Read the full study in the Bulletin: thebulletin.org/2026/10/the-...
thebulletin.org
The nuclear paradox: Why the world wants both deterrence and disarmament
A landmark 24-country study reveals that a majority of people worldwide embraces both nuclear deterrence and disarmament, exposing a pragmatic—rather than confused—flexibility that gives policymakers ...
031
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
The key takeaway for policymakers? Public opinion isn't a barrier to creative diplomacy. There is widespread appetite for bridging measures—like verified warhead reductions, risk reduction, and no-first-use pledges—alongside strategic stability.
130
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Knowledge and education don't eliminate these contradictions either. Graduate degree holders, veterans, and national security experts showed equal or higher levels of dual support. This reflects the inherent, unresolved tensions of the nuclear age.
130
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
The paradox holds in non-nuclear states, too: 🇸🇪 Sweden: 75% favor the nuclear ban treaty, but 47% approve nuclear use in extreme scenarios. 🇹🇼 Taiwan: 80% back the TPNW, yet 54% approve nuclear retaliation under attack.
130
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
A few examples of this paradox in action: 🇺🇸 US: 68% support joining the nuclear ban treaty (TPNW), but 51% approve nuclear retaliation to protect allies (35% agree with both). 🇫🇷 France: 69% support the ban treaty; 48% approve extended deterrence strikes.
130
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
The study found that most of the global public (57%) holds both pro-deterrence and pro-disarmament views simultaneously. Far from being confused, people apply strategic logic to immediate threats while holding moral aspirations for eventual abolition.
130
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 06/10/2026
Is public opinion on nuclear weapons hypocritical—or just pragmatic? A new study by Lauren Sukin @laurensukin.bsky.social, Luis Rodriguez @jluisrodriguez.com, and Stephen Herzog @herzogsm.bsky.social surveyed 27,000+ people across 24 countries—and uncovered a fascinating global paradox. 🧵👇
A graphic showing four fighter jets leaving contrails, a large bomb, and a white dove carrying an olive branch. (Illustration by François Diaz-Maurin; source images via canva.com)
161
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
AI doesn’t need rogue "superintelligence" or evil intent to start a nuclear war. In @thebulletin.org, Paul Slovic & Herbert Lin show how today’s AI—combined with ordinary human fallibility—could trigger catastrophe. 🧵
A large blue robotic hand points towards a person seated at a desk in a grand, ornate room with yellow lighting. (Illustration by François Diaz-Maurin; source images from The White House and canva.com)
12116
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 03/10/2026
Even without runaway superintelligence or malicious intent, current AI systems risk triggering nuclear war by amplifying human cognitive blind spots, speeding up escalation spirals, and overwhelming decision-makers with a firehose of information during high-stakes crises.
buff.ly
AI doesn't need 'superintelligence' or evil intent to start a nuclear war
Even without runaway superintelligence or malicious intent, current AI systems risk triggering nuclear war by amplifying human cognitive blind spots, speeding up escalation spirals, and overwhelming…
02313
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Stanford CISAC @stanfordcisac.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
The 2026 Drell Lecture is right around the corner! Make sure to RSVP today to save your spot! RSVP here ⤵️ stanforduniversity.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_...
033
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Stanford CISAC @stanfordcisac.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
Applications for CISAC fellowships open October 7, 2026! Stay tuned for more information about the fellowship, eligibility, and how to apply in the coming days. cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/cisac-fellow...
cisac.fsi.stanford.edu
CISAC Fellowships
011
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
Human authorization alone isn't enough if leaders are operating in an information pressure cooker. We need institutional guardrails to protect leaders from panic and cognitive blind spots during a crisis. Read the full piece:
thebulletin.org
AI doesn't need 'superintelligence' or evil intent to start a nuclear war
Even without runaway superintelligence or malicious intent, current AI systems risk triggering nuclear war by amplifying human cognitive blind spots, speeding up escalation spirals, and overwhelming d...
244
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
David E. Hoffman @davidehoffman.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
These two authors are well worth listening to. Slovic’s work on public trust — and nuclear issues — is incomparable. Lin is exceedingly well versed on the digital side.
021
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
@stanfordcisac.bsky.social
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
Human authorization alone isn't enough if leaders are operating in an information pressure cooker. We need institutional guardrails to protect leaders from panic and cognitive blind spots during a crisis. Read the full piece:
thebulletin.org
AI doesn't need 'superintelligence' or evil intent to start a nuclear war
Even without runaway superintelligence or malicious intent, current AI systems risk triggering nuclear war by amplifying human cognitive blind spots, speeding up escalation spirals, and overwhelming d...
244
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
Even accurate AI data can accelerate escalation. A misattributed troop movement reported in real time can create a reciprocal security dilemma—each side taking "precautionary" steps that look like preparations for an attack to the other.
120
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
Add an AI-generated firehose of real-time data into a high-stakes moment. When warnings, sensor feeds, and assessments flood decision-makers faster than they can digest, time pressure pushes leaders toward shallow, emotion-driven choices.
131
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
We often rely on "human-in-the-loop" as a safeguard. But human cognition is deeply flawed during crises. Psychological phenomena like "psychic numbing" mean leaders struggle to comprehend mass casualties, reducing catastrophic loss of life to mere statistics.
120
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 02/10/2026
AI doesn’t need rogue "superintelligence" or evil intent to start a nuclear war. In @thebulletin.org, Paul Slovic & Herbert Lin show how today’s AI—combined with ordinary human fallibility—could trigger catastrophe. 🧵
A large blue robotic hand points towards a person seated at a desk in a grand, ornate room with yellow lighting. (Illustration by François Diaz-Maurin; source images from The White House and canva.com)
12116
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 25/09/2026
Why is the world's top nuclear nation sitting out the hype on Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)? In a new piece for @thebulletin.org, AnnaJulia Yates, Allison Macfarlane & Alexander Wimmers break down France's cautious approach to SMRs. 🧵👇
A modern industrial facility with large circular structures, green energy components, and surrounding trees, set near mountains and wind turbines. (Image: EDF)
1127
Reposted by François Diaz-Maurin
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists @thebulletin.org · 28/09/2026
France's nuclear example shows that while "technologies provide easy political hype, they must prove safety, economic viability, and a clear advantage over existing low-carbon energy alternatives before major investment is justified," write AnnaJulia Yates, Allison Macfarlane, and Alexander Wimmers.
buff.ly
Why the world's top nuclear nation is sitting out the hype on small reactors
Unlike the US and UK, where start-ups and governments are betting heavily on small modular reactors, France’s state-led nuclear sector is prioritizing large-scale builds. With SMRs facing operational…
0117
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
Because it IS a genocidal war.
041
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
Welcome to Europe.
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
(*) The good thing about archiving email threads is that, if for some reason, someone responds after it was 'closed,' it will show up again in my mailbox, and it can eventually become an action item again.
001
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
(*) Not perfect, meaning: Despite this system, I always have a good 200 emails floating in my focused mailbox...
000
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
In short, I make the mailing system and people work for me, not the opposite. Perfect? No. Fair? Certainly not. Effective? Hell, yeah.
100
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
5) If an email stays for a long period of time in my inbox, it probably means it was not something worth my time anyway. But I can still see it. And I often reply/treat old emails, which is always appreciated. 6) If smth is important, someone will send a note again, and it'll show up again.
100
François Diaz-Maurin @francoisdm.bsky.social · 29/09/2026
3) I try to have emails that I know don't require action go directly to the Other inbox in Outlook so it doesn't crowd my Focused inbox. When it doesn't work, I train the algo to send it there next time. 4) I mass-archive emails that are treated or require no action from me. I send the rest to junk.
200