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

The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 219 posts

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#91

Post by setrofim_ »

rayiner wrote: post #26
cynicalkane wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point I'm trying to make is the differences between terrorists and invading Germans are all of them. You might as well compare terrorists to the Irish potato famine.

My point isn't that islamic terrorists are like Germans. It's that Schneier's comment smacks of an inability to contemplate that anything bad could happen to the U.S., much like I imagine the attitude was in Rome before Germans proved them wrong.

I'm pretty sure he has the ability (and even makes a game out it[1]). What Schneier is saying is that U.S. citizens should not let the country's policy be dictated by panic blown-out-proportion reactions to imaginary threats.

[1] http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/04/sixth_movie-pl...

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#92

Post by anigbrowl »

ErrantX wrote: post #84
anigbrowl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most people have a better grasp of probability than you suggest. What they're scared of is not so much the remote possibility of being a bombing victim, but the complete lack of control they would have in such a situation. there's a much higher chance of being in a car accident than in a bombing, but you can mitigate your risk of a car accidnet by paying attention to your own and others' driving, and in most cases yo…

Yes, and that's the GPs point; that paralysing fear outweighs the logic of the situation. Indeed, I'd suggest your own comment about being able to mitigate a car accident is a prime example of our difficulty with assessing the probability of risk (you may have more control of the situation; but that does not reduce the probability of you being killed by a car). Many many things could kill us suddenly and without warn…

If you think that, I didn't explain myself very well. What I'm suggesting is that people are (moderately) well aware of the relative probabilities, but fear a predictable lack of control. This is entirely rational; you can be scared of something without necessarily expecting it to happen.

so to take the driving example, it's very possible that you could be hit without warning, but you can also conceive of many situations in which you do have some warning and can swerve to avoid danger or suchlike. People may even underestimate the risk by being overconfident in their ability to react, but the fact is that if you drive a lot then after a while you'll have experienced a variety of close calls or even been in some minor accidents, and you can weigh the risk of many different driving situations.

On the other hand, most people have no flying experience as pilots. So if you're a passenger in a plane and it becomes apparent that the plane is going to crash, there's nothing you can do about it. No matter how remote the risk of your plane crashing, if it does fall out of the sky then you are almost certainly fucked and there's nothing you can do to improve your chances. I know that if I fly somewhere the journey to and from the airport on the ground is statistically much more risky than the journey through the air, as I will be in much greater proximity to many other vehicles on the ground, my vehicle will have to go through numerous complex maneuvers and so on, and if freeway travel is involved an accident has a much higher likelihood of being fatal due to the speed involved.

But if I had to be in a crash, I'd far rather be it be in a car than a plane; I've been in/at the scene of car crashes before and they strike me as rather more survivable. So I'm not more scared of flying than driving, but I am more scared of a plane crash than a car crash.

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#93

Post by venomsnake »

That is refreshingly sane. Sadly I fear that there will be total overreaction by the government and the media.

The only proper reaction is take care of the survivors, bring the responsible to justice and then cry for the dead. Do not assassinate them - bringing them in chains in court is much more humiliating.

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#94

Post by zanny »

riggins wrote: post #16
rurounijones wrote: post #5

Glad this got posted quickly. I can already see the glee in intelligence / law enforcement agencys' eyes as they think how they can use this latest incident as reasoning for more over-arching powers. For a long time Londoners had to put up with IRA bombs but "Kept calm and carried on" (to use the phrase). I hope the US can follow suit. [EDIT] Changed "secret service" to "intelligence / law enforcement agencies" to av…

"For a long time Londoners had to put up with IRA bombs but "Kept calm and carried on" " I really feel like a "keep calm carry on" ad campaign could do some good. Shift the mindset from 'ACKKK TERRORISTS!' to 'I can handle this'

Shifting the mindset doesn't enable for profit private defense contractors and firms providing law enforcement equipment from making fistfulls of profits from taxpayer money.

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#95

Post by chadillac83 »

sheri wrote: post #80
untog wrote: post #8

It was a great moment of national pride for me (which are rare in the UK) in the wake of the 7/7/2005 bombings. People were back on the Tube and buses the next day, refusing to allow their lives to be disrupted further. I've always taken solace from those people- I hope that the people of Boston can be equally inspiring.

Let me offer a different opinion. There was a series of bomb blasts in Mumbai in 1993. Thirteen different explosions in the span of a few hours across the city's landmarks. 250 people died. One of the blasts was in the Bombay stock exchange. This was on a Friday, and the stock exchange opened for business on Monday. This was a huge PR win for Mumbai, as the media talked about the resilience of the residents and the m…

That is a reality that I guess I just naively assumed wasn't possible. This bit really kind of shook me. I've always thought of terrorism much like the author and the aforementioned poster you're replying to, a seemingly random and rare event. I'd never thought about what living in a society where it has become common place. I imagine it's a bit like when school shooting sprees line up in the States, each one on the news results in a "god dammit, another one, what an asshole, seriously?" We move on, and become desensitized in the long run and "overcome" time and again, but that doesn't make the situation any better or less negative.

I have no solution to that dilemma that won't put us as a society as low or lower than the terrorists we're fighting...

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#96

Post by intended »

sheri wrote: post #80
untog wrote: post #8

It was a great moment of national pride for me (which are rare in the UK) in the wake of the 7/7/2005 bombings. People were back on the Tube and buses the next day, refusing to allow their lives to be disrupted further. I've always taken solace from those people- I hope that the people of Boston can be equally inspiring.

Let me offer a different opinion. There was a series of bomb blasts in Mumbai in 1993. Thirteen different explosions in the span of a few hours across the city's landmarks. 250 people died. One of the blasts was in the Bombay stock exchange. This was on a Friday, and the stock exchange opened for business on Monday. This was a huge PR win for Mumbai, as the media talked about the resilience of the residents and the m…

There has never been a sense of pride in getting to work the next day, its just what you have to do. The wreckage on the way is a sign that maybe you got lucky, but also a sign that your commute is going to be FUBARed.

The treatment though of these events is somewhat schizophrenic.

The local take has generally been one of gallows humor/pride(?). One of the most common questions people have is "is everyone I know safe" and "so is tomorrow a holiday or what?" (the answer is always no, it's not.)

Its when people look and compare what Bombay/Mumbai goes through regularly and when it gets kudos for being itself that people suppose they should feel pride, but I suspect this sensation isn't the natural self grown variety.

The best treatment of the phenomenon has been by the Taj staff. During an tour of the art in the hotel after it was re-opened, curious tourists asked about the attacks and where it happened, the guide spent just enough time to be polite and make it clear that such questions were not answered and moved on to discussing his work.

Honestly, what else are you going to do?

I suspect part of the state side reaction is likely media influenced or focus on those aspects. By the looks of it Boston is acting rationally to the issue and will likely carry on as well once there is an all clear.

----

Its funny what is being called "several attacks". For context this refers to the train bombings, which opened up railway bogies like sardine cans, the attacks of 26/11, the bombings in Jhaveri Bazaar, random riots.... the list goes on. And the city's response has generally been apathy. The attacks elicited anger at the Government and embarrassment.

But oddly, apathy is probably the best answer to terrorism. The point of terrorism is to make a political statement. If no one cares then while violent, the statement is essentially ignored.

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#99

Post by anigbrowl »

setrofim_ wrote: post #86
anigbrowl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

most people have a better grasp of probability than you suggest. What they're scared of is not so much the remote possibility of being a bombing victim, but the complete lack of control they would have in such a situation. there's a much higher chance of being in a car accident than in a bombing, but you can mitigate your risk of a car accidnet by paying attention to your own and others' driving, and in most cases yo…

You're right but that's precisely the point -- what matters to your safety is the probability, not how much control you feel you have. Yes, you can do more to mitigate the risk of being in a car accident than to mitigate the risk of being a victim of a bombing attack. But even if you do all you can, you are still more likely to be in a car accident than in a bombing (and thus, rationally, should be more concerned abo…

Let me put it another way; if I'm facing or even in a car accident, at least I know what to do about it in general terms. I've been in a few already and on the scene to help in several others. While the probability of car accidents is high enough to be a worry, I have many options for mitigating that risk.

Now, I'm very unlikely to be in a bombing attack, thank heavens. But I have been in one already, when a car bomb went off right outside my office just as I was getting ready to leave (I wasn't a target or anything, it was a car bomb parked outside a subway station in London that I happened to work next to). What happened was that there was a huge bang and I watched the windows swell inwards like they were covered in plastic sheeting instead of glass. Lucky for me, they didn't shatter, and lucky for everyone else it was late at night and there were no people on the street, so nobody died.

But at the time of the explosion, I was keenly aware that if the windows had burst inwards, the glass would have hit me faster than I could have ducked down behind a piece of furniture. It's this lack of opportunity to alter the outcome that bothers people; it's a situation they'd understandably rather not be confronted with at all. Helplessness is unpleasant because it negates your normal defense mechanisms.

Re: The Boston Marathon Bombing: Keep Calm and Carry On

#100

Post by ErrantX »

anigbrowl wrote: post #92
ErrantX wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and that's the GPs point; that paralysing fear outweighs the logic of the situation. Indeed, I'd suggest your own comment about being able to mitigate a car accident is a prime example of our difficulty with assessing the probability of risk (you may have more control of the situation; but that does not reduce the probability of you being killed by a car). Many many things could kill us suddenly and without warn…

If you think that, I didn't explain myself very well. What I'm suggesting is that people are (moderately) well aware of the relative probabilities, but fear a predictable lack of control. This is entirely rational; you can be scared of something without necessarily expecting it to happen. so to take the driving example, it's very possible that you could be hit without warning, but you can also conceive of many situat…

Plenty of people survive plane accidents; in fact if you are involved in a plane accident in the US you have a greater than 90% chance of surviving.

Which highlights the point; it is fear that drives your viewpoint (that car accidents are preferable plane crashes) rather than statistics :)

EDIT: I don't have my copy of Risk to hand, but from memory the numbers work out something like.. probability of being in an air crash and it killing you is 1 in several million. Probability of being in a car crash and it killing you is 1 in several thousand (or ten thousands, can't remember). Either way - an order of magnitude more risky :)

Post reply on HN