Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 91 posts

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#51

Post by wnoise »

kstenerud wrote: post #23
huhtenberg wrote: post #9

That's all great, but consider a situation. I get on the plane and sit next to a guy who avoids eye contact, does not respond to Hi and then starts praying, seemingly detached from the reality. Shall I just ignore this and refuse to be terrorized? I will tell you more. As someone who rode on a subway train that was next to the one blown up in a terrorist attack, I will walk out of a coffee shop if I see a person leav…

Seriously, why are you all voting this guy down? He's expressing an honest opinion, not trolling. Just because you disagree is no reason to downvote, especially since HN fades the text until it's near impossible to read, making discussion harder.

I don't think most downvotes are about agreement.

An honest opinion need not be an opinion worth reading. I want to read honest, informed, insightful, and justified opinions especially when I disagree, not honest, but knee-jerk opinions, even if I agree.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#52

Post by sorbus »

kstenerud wrote: post #23
huhtenberg wrote: post #9

That's all great, but consider a situation. I get on the plane and sit next to a guy who avoids eye contact, does not respond to Hi and then starts praying, seemingly detached from the reality. Shall I just ignore this and refuse to be terrorized? I will tell you more. As someone who rode on a subway train that was next to the one blown up in a terrorist attack, I will walk out of a coffee shop if I see a person leav…

Seriously, why are you all voting this guy down? He's expressing an honest opinion, not trolling. Just because you disagree is no reason to downvote, especially since HN fades the text until it's near impossible to read, making discussion harder.

> especially since HN fades the text until it's near impossible to read, making discussion harder.

You can highlight the text to make it readable.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#53

Post by [deleted] »

kstenerud wrote: post #23
huhtenberg wrote: post #9

That's all great, but consider a situation. I get on the plane and sit next to a guy who avoids eye contact, does not respond to Hi and then starts praying, seemingly detached from the reality. Shall I just ignore this and refuse to be terrorized? I will tell you more. As someone who rode on a subway train that was next to the one blown up in a terrorist attack, I will walk out of a coffee shop if I see a person leav…

Seriously, why are you all voting this guy down? He's expressing an honest opinion, not trolling. Just because you disagree is no reason to downvote, especially since HN fades the text until it's near impossible to read, making discussion harder.

[deleted]

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#54

Post by coffeedrinker »

jamesbkel wrote: post #50
coffeedrinker wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>they [terrorists] are tricking us into burning money chasing them around the world The terrorists are not the ones gaining financially and they are not the ones tricking us.

I didn't mean to say that terrorists are gaining financially or that the "burn[t] money" goes to them. I'd be surprised if that's a real goal. My point was that regardless of where the money ends up, if it's misappropriated then it's a waste.

I understood your point, and don't disagree.

Terrorism is overblown as an excuse to spend the money in ways to benefit certain industries.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#55

Post by RocknRolla »

"The real targets of terrorism are the rest of us: the billions of us who are not killed but are terrorized because of the killing. The real point of terrorism is not the act itself, but our reaction to the act.

I know this is not going to be popular because Schneier is a crypto/security God and all but I call B.S. on the above quote.

If you would have given any of the 9/11 terrorists or UBL a button and told them they could wipe out the U.S. and everyone in it by just pressing the button how quickly do you think they would do it? Or do you think they'd say "Sorry, no-can-do. There won't be anyone left to terrorize."?

Their goal is not to terrorize/scare people. Their goal is the total destruction of anyone or anybody that stands in the way of their total domination.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#56

Post by sliverstorm »

acabal wrote: post #8

Good article but it'll never be read by those who need to read it most. Unfortunately terror has now been institutionalized. The TSA is a massive bureaucracy that generates jobs and cash flow. It's not something that will ever be dismantled overnight. That's not even mentioning the political convenience it provides: with it politicians can keep us afraid, thus getting our votes when they promise to protect us. It goe…

Fear actually engenders itself. The other evening, I was walking down the sidewalk late at night. An attractive woman was coming the other way. I am young, was well-dressed and clean-shaven, but she looked like she was afraid of me.

That made me uncomfortable, which I am sure made me act strangely which only serves to further engender her fear.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#57

Post by georgieporgie »

SonicSoul wrote: post #31
henrikschroder wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but the reality is that terrorism is real Many things are real. Lightning strikes. Car accidents. Meteorites to the head. Tsunamis. Smoking. Fat. Dying because of a terrorist attack is way, way, way, way down on the list of stuff you are likely to die from, so the only rational thing to do is to worry about the stuff ABOVE it on the list. Like driving. Or eating right. Or not smoking. Get your priorities right.

so you wouldn't worry about lightning storms in your sleep, but if you are out in the field during one you'll probably take some precautions? maybe get out from under the tallest tree? You probably wouldn't completely ignore it.

Lightning precautions are based on the testable realities of physics. There is no relation between that and the voodoo pseudo-security that is the TSA and public 'security' in general.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#58

Post by splat »

RocknRolla wrote: post #55

"The real targets of terrorism are the rest of us: the billions of us who are not killed but are terrorized because of the killing. The real point of terrorism is not the act itself, but our reaction to the act. I know this is not going to be popular because Schneier is a crypto/security God and all but I call B.S. on the above quote. If you would have given any of the 9/11 terrorists or UBL a button and told them th…

Their goal is to maximize destruction given the resources they have. If they had a button that instantly destroy the US, of course they would press it. But the fact is that they don't have such a button; they have very limited resources. Their most efficient use of resources is to make random, very visible and violent attacks and hope that our responses do even more damage.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#59

Post by Cyph0n »

A satisfying read indeed. Schneier hits the target right in the middle. I feel exactly the same way about this terrorism. Even though I personally haven't been to the US, what I see in the news, in movies and on television is enough to tell me that Americans are indeed living in fear.

However, I do not blame the American (and other) people for hating us (Muslims). I blame the media. I blame the politicians. I blame the terrorists. We may also disagree on the definition of a terrorist. I may tell you that an Afghan militant defending his country and his people against invasion by shooting at American soldiers (this differs from taking innocent lives) is not a terrorist, but a soldier, regardless of his nationality, or who the soldiers he's shooting at are.

But in the end, people, Muslims or otherwise, who shamelessly attack, bomb or torture innocent people, people who did them no harm, nor presented any threat to them, nor attacked their country or their people, are terrorists.

Indeed, what is happening today in America and in several other countries regarding escalating security measures and incessant leakage of threats is simply the result of governments wanting to control their people (see "1984") by using the media to their advantage.

I mean, seriously, think of the guy who tried to detonate a bomb located in his shoe whilst in an plane. Why didn't he go to the toilet and detonate it there? The terrorists I know from the media aren't that ignorant.

Re: Refuse to be terrorized (2006)

#60

Post by wisty »

kstenerud wrote: post #46
rick888 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, well, 9/11 still happened with people that didn't appear "normal". "The way to fight it is to alter the conditions. To do this we must understand why people hate America." We should bend over backwards to make the terrorists happy so they don't attack us? What if they hate us because we aren't part of their religion..is the answer to make the US a Muslim country? Negotiating with terrorists that clearly aren't…

There are two kinds of terrorists: The desperate and the insane. A life of terrorism is very unstable, and usually quite brutal and short. The desperate join up because the only other alternative is rolling over and either dying or becoming enslaved in some way. Theirs is a rational choice. The insane are men who crave power to such a degree that there is little they won't do to secure it, but in order to succeed the…

Studies by Israelis (who have tonnes of captured Pakistani terrorists) have shown terrorists are often from well-off backgrounds (but from a poor country), and otherwise "good" people (empathic, sense of social responsibility, etc). If your country is poor, and you happen to be from a privileged background, you might feel the need to give something back. If your community believes that "martyrs" are good, then terrorism is an option.

And yes, they do tend to be 20-year-old males. Others can be poor, and unlikely to be able to get a girlfriend or wife.

Its not about desperate individuals, but a desperate community. The communities are often desperate because of poor governance, but you can't unilaterally bring good governance to the Middle East (or any other region).

Actually, there's a lot of reasons why communities are desperate. But a lot of those are hard problems, which are taking time to solve.

Post reply on HN