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

Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#31

Post by katbyte »

jakevoytko wrote: post #10
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #3

I'm guessing ride bikes to the bridge and leave cell phones at home? That's the only thing I can figure. They had to carry quite a bit of gear.

The Brooklyn Bridge has a few features that make it comparatively easy to pull off. Here's a street view link that should give you an idea: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.705226,-73.995817,3a,90y,130... - The bike+pedestrian path is suspended over the roadway. - There are some suspension cables leading from the suspended pedestrian path, and trusses leading to the other cables. - The cables are pretty thick and have…

And if the cables are anything like the suspension bridge ones I've been on they are extremely non-slip.

From what i can see looks like a very easy climb.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#32

Post by pessimizer »

jakevoytko wrote: post #10
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #3

I'm guessing ride bikes to the bridge and leave cell phones at home? That's the only thing I can figure. They had to carry quite a bit of gear.

The Brooklyn Bridge has a few features that make it comparatively easy to pull off. Here's a street view link that should give you an idea: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.705226,-73.995817,3a,90y,130... - The bike+pedestrian path is suspended over the roadway. - There are some suspension cables leading from the suspended pedestrian path, and trusses leading to the other cables. - The cables are pretty thick and have…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Mt...

Video of the walkway and cables, if I'm not mistaken.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#33

Post by Crito »

pyre wrote: post #25
oh_sigh wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the implication was that people were afraid of a terrorist attack during the act, not in retrospect when they saw it was just a white flag

That was my read as well. That 'people' were afraid it was a terrorist attack because the lights on a landmark went dark. On the other hand, why didn't people just assume it was a black-out, or technical issues?

Yeah, my first thought would have been "Dumbasses should change the lights during the day, not the night". "Terrorists must be terrorizing us by breaking our lightbulbs" would have never occurred to me; it is far more plausible that somebody was working on them.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#34

Post by igravious »

sys32768 wrote: post #18

I wish there were more discussion about why they did this rather than how.

This is that discussion. Let's hear your thoughts.

Mine is that the pranksters want to expose the fear-mindset in general for what it is, and relatedly show that the freedoms we've given up in the name of security was a bad idea, and finally that security is an illusion because you can't secure all places at all times unless you want to live in something that resembles a prison.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#35

Post by smutticus »

s_q_b wrote: post #14
wyager wrote: post #4

Really? Analyzing cell tower data over a harmless prank? They're probably mad that some pranksters conclusively demonstrated that, for all the security theater in NYC, the police can't even stop people from planting stuff on a major bridge.

It's highly symbolic from a police perspective. We may see it as some kids who watched too many documentaries playing a harmless prank. But let me rephrase that to put that in the frame of mind of the investigators. "Unknown individuals infiltrated a heavily guarded and highly visible piece of crucial infrastructure undetected. Once present, they defaced the public property by removing two American flags, and replaci…

> it makes the public safety officials look impotent in the face of real threats.

They largely are. It's incredibly difficult to stop crimes before they're committed, and prior to any terrorist mania it was generally considered to be outside the scope of police work. Mainly because it requires a security apparatus, and authority, that is in direct conflict with an open democratic society.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#36

Post by lotsofmangos »

Crito wrote: post #33
pyre wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was my read as well. That 'people' were afraid it was a terrorist attack because the lights on a landmark went dark. On the other hand, why didn't people just assume it was a black-out, or technical issues?

Yeah, my first thought would have been "Dumbasses should change the lights during the day, not the night" . "Terrorists must be terrorizing us by breaking our lightbulbs" would have never occurred to me; it is far more plausible that somebody was working on them.

"Terrorists must be terrorizing us by breaking our lightbulbs" would have never occurred to me

Report to Oblast 37N. We have made you an appointment with the Education Corps.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#37

Post by rdtsc »

Someone1234 wrote: post #12

> while sparking terror fears in the process That's just pathetic. You have to have a pretty addled mind in order to find an obvious prank such as this "terrifying." But that's what our society is now, everything is measured by the lowest-common-denominator, and fear is a commodity sold to you every evening on the news.

You know at this point I would be shocked and surprised if they don't invoke "terror fears" one every single incident. Someone forgets a bag in the park -- "terror fear". Someone runs a red light -- "terror fears". Defacing of a lamp post "terror fears". It is as if they don't get paid or if they don't mention it.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#38

Post by s_q_b »

smutticus wrote: post #35
s_q_b wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's highly symbolic from a police perspective. We may see it as some kids who watched too many documentaries playing a harmless prank. But let me rephrase that to put that in the frame of mind of the investigators. "Unknown individuals infiltrated a heavily guarded and highly visible piece of crucial infrastructure undetected. Once present, they defaced the public property by removing two American flags, and replaci…

> it makes the public safety officials look impotent in the face of real threats. They largely are. It's incredibly difficult to stop crimes before they're committed, and prior to any terrorist mania it was generally considered to be outside the scope of police work. Mainly because it requires a security apparatus, and authority, that is in direct conflict with an open democratic society.

Exactly. I'm saying pointing out government impotence was the purpose of the protest, the payload message it was meant to transmit. That should be clear from the symbolic choices of removing the flags, etc. So naturally the powers that be are responding with anger due to that message, mostly because the protestors didn't show just tell, they showed that message, through the government's inability to prevent or apprehend them.

This is the nerf-ball version of challenge to government authority, so instead of Tahrir you get a few kids changing a flag, and instead of a repressive government crackdown, you get increased police investigation. But the mechanisms are the same.

States, whether they be national or local governments, don't react well to open challenges to their authority, and they use every tool at their disposal to prosecute anyone that commits a crime that openly challenges the authority of the government.

Re: Digital-age detective work can’t crack Brooklyn Bridge caper

#39

Post by frandroid »

harshreality wrote: post #16
freshhawk wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the motivation then this is the worst possible response. A ridiculous overreaction with a significant risk that after all this DNA/surveillance/facial recognition/manpower hubbub they don't catch them.

So imagine the police response is this: "Silly prank, we could certainly identify them if we tried, but it's not worth taxpayer money." All it takes is one person to then point out that if security had been good enough to catch actual terrorists, the suspects would have been caught before or during the act. Then not only is a chunk of the post-9/11 security apparatus exposed for the security theater it is, but the co…

I understand the easy logic of "oh, but what if they were terrorists", but at the same time, it makes no sense. If you want to blow up a bridge, you don't put explosives at the top of the pillars. You drive an explosives-laden truck to the base, you get out and you leave in a second car. There's nothing anyone can do unless you wait too long to detonate your explosives.

The point is, you cannot prevent all terrorism on home soil through police enforcement. You can choke certain points like airports by doing person-by-person inspections, but you can't do much for land-based transportation infrastructure with millions of autonomous attack vectors. Terrorism is best prevented through political actions.

Post reply on HN