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

U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 24 posts

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#11

Post by trentlott »

bhousel wrote: post #2

"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…

> several people I know were without power for 2 weeks, and we got through it

Yes, but there are many people who are not young and healthy.

The worst impact would be on hospitals, nursing homes, the homes of elderly, etc, who require electricity for something other than productivity and comfort.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#12

Post by edj »

"The worst-case situation envisions a stalling of economic globalization that would preclude any advancement of financial well-being around the world. That would be a likely outcome after an outbreak of a health pandemic that, even if short-lived, would result in closed borders and economic isolationism."

If a reduction in globalization is the worst case scenario the authors envision in the next 20 years, I think they may be lacking somewhat in imagination.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#13

Post by moistgorilla »

trentlott wrote: post #11
bhousel wrote: post #2

"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…

> several people I know were without power for 2 weeks, and we got through it Yes, but there are many people who are not young and healthy. The worst impact would be on hospitals, nursing homes, the homes of elderly, etc, who require electricity for something other than productivity and comfort.

Hospitals usually have private generators and are first to receive help from the government in times of crises.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#14

Post by yequalsx »

edj wrote: post #12

"The worst-case situation envisions a stalling of economic globalization that would preclude any advancement of financial well-being around the world. That would be a likely outcome after an outbreak of a health pandemic that, even if short-lived, would result in closed borders and economic isolationism." If a reduction in globalization is the worst case scenario the authors envision in the next 20 years, I think the…

Indeed. No mention of global warming and this omission makes me think that it was written with a specific goal in mind. That is, to justify some program or policy that powerful people are behind.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#16

Post by ChuckMcM »

yequalsx wrote: post #14
edj wrote: post #12

"The worst-case situation envisions a stalling of economic globalization that would preclude any advancement of financial well-being around the world. That would be a likely outcome after an outbreak of a health pandemic that, even if short-lived, would result in closed borders and economic isolationism." If a reduction in globalization is the worst case scenario the authors envision in the next 20 years, I think the…

Indeed. No mention of global warming and this omission makes me think that it was written with a specific goal in mind. That is, to justify some program or policy that powerful people are behind.

Or they just assume that global warming is a given. I think more interesting questions is whether or not the current "debate"[1] about the role of religion as government that is going on in the middle east will escalate into a world wide conflict.

[1] Generally watching the Arab spring is like watching a referendum vote on the principle of separating church and state. But done with guns, bombs, and civilian casualties rather than a voting box.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#17

Post by trentlott »

moistgorilla wrote: post #13
trentlott wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> several people I know were without power for 2 weeks, and we got through it Yes, but there are many people who are not young and healthy. The worst impact would be on hospitals, nursing homes, the homes of elderly, etc, who require electricity for something other than productivity and comfort.

Hospitals usually have private generators and are first to receive help from the government in times of crises.

Yes, but in Sandy many of those generators failed.

https://www.google.com/search?q=sandy+generators+hospital

I don't dispute that they wouldn't receive government help as quickly as possible, but playing the loss of electricity as having zero impact is also unreasonable.

Further, there's an economic impact to businesses. A terrorist attack need not take lives, just damage something.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#18

Post by ChuckMcM »

bhousel wrote: post #2

"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…

A number of folks have argued that if it so easy to do this level of damage with a cyber attack why hasn't a terrorist done so in the last 10 years? Its not like you have to 'sneak' into the country or get pass the security theatre at the airport to mount such an attack. Hacking toolkits and websites are at least as easy to find as bomb making web sites.

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#19

Post by cllns »

flyinRyan wrote: post #7
bhousel wrote: post #2

"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could mount a computer-network attack in which the casualties would be measured not by the hundreds or thousands killed but by the millions severely affected by damaged infrastructure, like electrical grids’ being taken down." I wonder about this. It seems like every study about the dangers of terrorism mentions this kind of cyber-attack as a possibility, and I just don't…

>"The study warns of the risk that terrorists could..." Will this ever go away? Have terrorists ever pulled off a meaningful cyber attack? Why didn't the study mention the risk of those aliens from "Mars attacks" flying in and vaporizing important COLO sites?

I upvoted this comment because I agree that threats of cyberwarfare are mostly fear mongering, but Estonia was attacked in 2007. Whether or not the attackers were "terrorists" is another issue.

[1] http://www.wired.com/politics/security/magazine/15-09/ff_est...

Re: U.S. Forecast as No. 2 Economy but Energy Independent

#20

Post by pyre »

roc wrote: post #8
bhousel wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I'm saying that it's impossible to take the whole country off the grid with a cyber attack.

You may be under-appreciating the interconnected nature of the power grid. A huge swatch of the north-east US lost power for a couple days, not all that long ago, because of a tree branch. And efforts to contain the problem were hampered by an obscure bug in the management software. If a freak accident can expose a cascade of unexpected fail-over behavior, do you really think the grid is hardened against deliberate m…

I think that major question here is:

  Why is control of the electrical grid accessible to the
  internet?
People usually have delusions of grandeur over hackers causing a meltdown at a nuclear plant or something, but no one seems to question why the ability to control a nuclear plant needs to be hooked up to the internet.
Post reply on HN