Slashdot Mirror
Does Anonymity In Virtual Worlds Breed Terrorism?
An Anonymous Coward writes "The Washington Post has an article about the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity's take on the numerous virtual worlds (e.g. Second Life) that have cropped up in recent years. IARPA's thesis is that because the Government can't currently monitor all the communication and interaction, terrorists will plot and scheme in such environments."
no more than anonymity in the real world breeds bank robbery.
The government can't monitor what I'm saying to my co-workers at this moment, either. Maybe terrorists will plot things in our work environment, too. They can't monitor what I say to my friends on the street. Better make going outside illegal. Who pays these people to say stupid stuff? Oh, I forgot - that's where taxes go. Maybe Ron Paul really is onto something with his talk about cutting unnecessary parts of the government (I'm Australian, so I can't vote for him).
I always knew those gnomes in the tram were up to something!
-mrxak
Onions Will Kill You
It breeds freedom of speech. http://nasathermalimages.com/
I don't see a problem with creating a virtual tower and airplane... Maybe we should have a virtual reality world where you can blow yourself up and be reborn in heaven. If it is addictive enough it may curb real life terrorism.
Our (the US) government and its intelligence agencies are getting a little out of hand.
Troll talking to an elf?
Level 3 mage and level 57 paladin in the same party?
Drow walking around aboveground during the daytime?
Brown people who talk with an accent?
Report it! It could be terrorism!
because the Government can't currently monitor all the communication and interaction, terrorists will plot and scheme in such environments.
If by "terrorists", you mean "furries" and "furry sympathizers", then I would have to agree with you.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
These people were paid to say, "Hey, um, terrorists might use the global communications network to communicate with one another." Better tear it down. Glad our taxes are going to good use.
...namely the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory...
Posted anonymously, of course...
Yet to see anonymous terrorists that are half as brutal as the weakest named terrorist groups. Hell not even sure if I they could ever be called terrorist, except in excite news on faux.
Fact: Stupid articles like this breed terrorism.
and I will blow up anyone who says otherwise.
Clearly indicating that Slashdot is either a breeding ground for terrorists, or a hangout for government shills.
3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
I think the something awful goons, unconnected to second life safari, did create a place for temporary terrorism in virtual space.
On a positive note I am looking forward to a second life safari with bin laden walking around as a troll.
terrorists are Cowards
Just like free-thinking and education breeds terrorism...
Be A Patriot! Don't Read!
and different, the government will be a afraid. To which I say, thank you. Change is what made this nation what it is, and I embrace it. I hate repeating the past. Change is what makes life worth living.
"To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
Will terrorists will plot and scheme where the government cannot monitor them?
Yes, of course!
Will it help to let the government monitor everywhere?
Maybe a bit, if it is possible. But it would mean that we destroy the kind of society we are trying to defend against the terrorists.
Any more rediculous sensationalist statements? Sjeesj. I don't know about you people, but I'm not living out my life fearing the next, so-called terrorist, action.
Bye! Gotta get to work.
MMO Vampire Role Playing
This is an interesting news posting, specially considering what's been going on with the whole Internet Hate Machine vs. Scientology thing these past months. I don't think there's been enough thought into the implications of large, somewhat-cohesive online groups on RL. It's good that at least someone is paying attention.
...Anonymous disagrees.
The simple fact that humans organize into Governments that think that they can with impunity kill other human beings in other parts of the world is what breeds terrorism. When you bomb people a fraction of those that survive, or their relatives, or descendants, may at their choice become fighters against those bombers or those who otherwise terrorized them. It's simple primitive brain response to being killed and all humans still have that primitive brain, it's known as our lizard brain. It's responsible for the fight, flight or freeze response.
So YES, any place that people gather, or communicate one on one, one on many or many on many will be a place where potential plans for evil deeds are carried out. The Pentagon is one such place for those with organized power centers while other places, real or virtual are places where those kinds of communications can occur.
Those in power are those that kill. They are often the ones that also need to be stopped along with the - so called - terrorists that they fight. They both carry out evil deeds including killing.
Pimpf by Charlie Stross was about the a secret agency that monitored MMORPGs for suspicious and dangerous activities.
And why would terrorists download a special client, usually made for graphics-intensive computers, and pay a monthly fee to hop in and "PM" Osama405_bigluv their nefarious plans? I thought terrorism's aims were generally low-budget and crass, not web 2.0.
:P Whenever there's a bunch of people trying to get a meeting done, it's done in Skype, or email, or IRC, or Basecamp.
Ever heard of IRC? Email? Smoke signals?
Just chatting in virtual worlds is too time consuming if you want to convey information quickly and easily. I should know, I work in them.
hookers and grits.
Anonymity breeds terrorism. end of sentence. Argueing over wether communications, or behavior should be monitered in online gaming, should be a moot point to anyone who enjoys their freedom, danger is the price you pay for freedom, freedom is the price you pay for security. But, the money aspect of it is interesting, its perfectly designed for money laundering, and at speeds previously impossible, hundreds of digital transactions could occur carrying the original sum of money with say... an hour... unlike "real" money where it would probably take months for the same transactions. Is this a "problem"? Sure, but its basically the intrinsic nature of digital currency, its the price you pay for the ability to pay the price, the only way to stop that from happening is to revert back to a tangible currency, or... try and slow the process down with registrations, redundant security checks, "Life Is No Fun Anymore [Accept] [Decline]"
I'm pretty sure that most MMOs record some conversation passing through their servers, if only to allow people to do a /report of the previous 20 lines of text should someone be spouting obscenities. In other MMOs, there isn't a direct /report command, but the GMs do have access to past chat logs, so when someone puts in a petition or ticket, they can go back and see what the person was writing about.
Most likely, true trained terrorists (not some guys wanting to stick a stink bomb in a high school lunchroom's garbage can) would have a communications channel a lot more secure (doesn't have to be encrypted, just hidden) than gabbing in a MMO, where its unknown to them what parts of a conversation are logged.
Nothing terrorists can do is a bigger threat to our freedom and way of life than nincompoops who think all communication should be government monitored.
The Republicans should force everyone in the US to carry around lightning rods everywhere they go first. Since people are more likely to be hit by lightning than they are to be a victim of terrorist attack, we need to spend that money on the threat from evil lightning bolts.
My Gawd, are the vast majority of the GOP the biggest bunch of sniveling cowards you have ever seen?
"I MUST BE PROTECTED FROM BOOGIE MEN HIDING UNDER MY BED! SAVE ME!"
Can you imagine one of these yellow-streak-down-their-back right wingers ever loading all their possessions in a Conestoga Wagon and heading out west into the unknown on the Oregon Trail? What made so many Americans such cowards?
Anomity and virtual worlds (a.k.a. the internet as I understand it) only breed this!
No really, you want /b/ to take over the world?
Think of it, Memes filling every newspaper, kittehs running wild in the streets, and lets not even go into the bucket..
Thank-you.
-FL
Terrorism is a phenomena that is internal to countries. Terrorists regard themselves as freedom fighters. terrorism occurs where people have been suppressed by a regime, and want their freedom back. They are not well armed, or have large numbers of forces at their disposal, so they rely on tactics to pressurise the population of a country to invoke change. Generally only small numbers of people are killed by terrorism, but the technique invokes fear, which in turn prompts for change.
What is happening in America is not terrorism. It bears none of the characteristic traits. It is something else. Terrorism is probably something that will emerge in America in the next few years as/if the government becomes more suppressive. People seeking their liberty back will unite and work together to return liberty to USA. The current legislation being put in place is a strategy to counter the ability of people to unite and rise up against a government.
If I was American or British right now, I would be very concerned.
Participatory Governance : The only feasible option for a real democracy, where everyone really does have a say.
Bre'r Rabbit--he said, "Boil me in oil if you like, but please don't throw me in that briar patch!"
Since when is Second Life "anonymous"? You pay for it with a credit card for crying out loud.
Using Second Life and "virtual worlds" to formulate terrorist plans? Why? Don't telephones, email, and real world meetings (that's when you are actually in the same room with someone, or outside near them, look it up) all work for these people? I don't know much about plotting against governments, but if I want to plan to go out for dinner tomorrow night, I am not going to make sure I have a computer running Second Life, create an account, wait for my friends to login, then make plans online; much easier to call them on the phone, send an email, or drop by to see them. Silly. Out of all forms of communication, I'd have to rank Second Life, etc. as about the most cumbersome and least convenient.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
This is as paranoid and bizarre as the Moral Majority freak that spit on me and ranted "my demon worshiping would condemn me to hell" outside a Virginia game store in the early 80's because I played Dungeons and Dragons.
I am confident any potential jihadists looking to plot attacks in Second Life will be thwarted by one or more of the following:
* equipment costs of $3000 computers to get better than 8 FPS
* server crashes
* griefers spawning a million hopping Super Marios in their zone
* penises and/or furries everywhere
Terrorism is overrated, like nationalism used to be at certain parts of the world.
They both rely on emotions, fears and perfectly exploitable by politicians to rule the public the easy way.
I wish W. Churchill was here.
... what the role of the government ought to be. If we think the government should take care of us from cradle to grave, sure they do have to implement totalitarianist measures to ensure control over the population - just to carry out their responsibilities. Welcome to 1984.
Live free or die. Dr. Ron Paul for President.
plotting dangerous megalomaniacal schemes around my kitchen table either.
Because they don't know I'm a terrorist.
Oh, Sh**t! What's that red dot?
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
Even sysadmins can't get away with that. The best we can do is sit around all day playing slashdot and get paid for it.
Because everybody knows that terrorism didn't exist until the Internet boom. I mean obviously, 9/11 was caused by the Internet.
Let's blow up IARPA headquarters
they stick to virtual attacks on virtual worlds, like blowing up things in Second Life
Carrying a lightning rod around will actually increase your chances of being struck.
Just so you know. I mean, I wouldn't want to see somebody get hurt.
What made so many Americans such cowards?
It has been a slow, degenerative process. The causes will probably all be obvious in the end, but that will be too late.
Of course if I'm a terrorist I'm going to get people in place all over the US, and openly discuss my plans AFTER everyone is in place, in front of countless online witnesses, any one of which might not want us to kill them as opposed to making the plans before we came over and NOT EVER MENTIONING THEM.
If the terrorists are really that incompetant, we don't need to stop them, because they're just going to mess their own plan up anyway.
So two possibilities remain:
1. This is a blatant move towards a police state, leaving people too afraid to speak their mind (ala China).
2. There's legitimate reason to fear a massive uprising of "terrorism" from AMERICANS themselves. This sort of thing doesn't just happen in a vacuum. If this is expected, it begs the question, what are those pushing this bill planning to do that's so horrible Americans would revolt in large numbers? This is not a fear of legitimate governments that AREN'T looking to do something horrible.
Someone might speculate that perhaps they aren't worried about ordinary citizens or terrorists, but that perhaps there's another secret group we don't know about (or the extent of) seeking to infiltrate the government. Darn those commies trying to sneak back in! If there was such a group, and they were well coordinated enough to make such an attempt, don't you think they'ed have their own encrypted communications, and possibly face to face IRL meetings that left no record?
One way or another, this doesn't pass the smell test.
Didn't FOX News discover this like a year ago?
Unlike telephone communications or bank records, there are few, if any, regulations covering privacy in MMOs. If terrorists are clever enough to figure out using the drafts folder of a hotmail account for communicating, they're clever enough to figure out that Blizzard probably won't even ask for a subpoena, they'll just record the keystrokes of anyone the NSA asks them to.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
I might be planning terrorism in my brain.
??? If they knew me, they would say "not bloody likely"... but of course they do not know me so... their suspicion is somehow justified???
These government assholes are the ones we should be worried about, not the frigging people in Everquest!
Unless we can block absolutely all anonymous communication, we should simply assume they can anonymously communicate. There is no solution. So why not save the time and money and work on some other part of the problem?
These totalitarian douchebags need to die in a tire fire and GTFO my country where Freedom > all (except those things listed in the constitution).
I don't work for the CIA, so what do I know. Maybe none of those things make any difference, and the real problem is WoW and Evercrack and anonymous coward postings on Slashdot. Yeah those must be it. Things like trillions of dollars flowing into economies run by religious fanatics who hate us, occupying their countries and killing them, those aren't even worthy of examination as causes.
Virtual worlds come about last in the list of options. If you were a terrorist and you wanted to communicates would you:
- Talk in a virtual world, where you could be monitored if suspected
- Talk in the real world in some random location
- Use a off prepaid mobiles, brought for cash
- Use heavily encrypted emails, where they would know who you were talking too but not what you said
- Post stenographic encrypted images on Flicr (images which hold a hidden coded message, not visible to normal users), where they could not tell what you said or who you sait it to. Possibility of finding out people who regularly checked images, though if it was good porn....
- Get a spam company to send a message to millions of people with stenographic encrypted messages or pre-arranged phrases. (other terrorists don't need to regualrly check images)
I am sure that most of you can think up some more "better than second life" means of covert communication.One intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he had no evidence of activity by terrorist cells or widespread organized crime in virtual worlds. There have been numerous instances of fraud, harassment and other virtual crimes.
The next sentence is the real kicker though:
Some computer users have used their avatars to destroy virtual buildings.
Dear God! Virtual buildings -- just destroyed in a puff of virtual smoke!! We have to put a stop to this madness! Send in the CIA/FBI/DHS!
Many years ago, word went out over the mailing lists and (then very junior) newsnet about how packets were being dipped and 'The Powers That Be' were recording/snooping/doing all that bad stuff. It turned out that a few people had been playing with the wonderful and useful tracert command (now less useful, due to finger command paranoia). They had noticed nodes which only seemed to have IP numbers, not addresses. They concluded this must be the NSA.
.sig files, so that even mundane e-mails about boring crap would trigger the sensors and get recorded. I am certain that Uncle Sam really enjoyed my discussions with my room mate about laundry and coffee ("Take out your laundry you freak, and buy some coffee!").
The point here is that none of this paranoia is especially new. Each time I hear it come round again, I enjoy having been on the 'net since before it was the 'net (any old BITNET refugees still out there?). Been there, seen it, got the t-shirt, dyed the t-shirt pink, ripped the arms off the t-shirt and then lost the t-shirt.
Back in the day, folks figured out a response: give the snoopers what they want. Many people (me included) put words like 'bomb' etc. into our
So, these days there is all this new fangled interweb stuff [engage full fogey/old fart mode], including Second Life, IRC, blogs and god knows what else. If a few public spiritied citizens would send Uncle Sam some more rubbish, he might get bored again. That is assuming he was ever really that interested.
Of course, there are two caveats: First, in the initial instance I mention, there was probably only paranoia and smoke. Second, these days one has to be a little careful about what one says, just in case one gets 'disappeared' on a 'Cuban holiday'.
The thing to keep in mind is that a few buzz terms, 'terrorists', 'communication', in conjunction with a recent technology makes the whole thing no less plausible than it was back then. I'm sure that Osama's folks send their 'secret plans' in Excel files [remember, Calc is better] that are password protected and then encrypted in PGP anyhow. This can all be done with products available at Office Depot anyhow. So, Chill!
Just another step towards a nanny state. The more the government controls, the more we lose our rights. Thus the reason this story belongs in the "Your Rights Online" section...
we also scheme heavily on slashdot.
All they would've had to do is go on /b/. Simple, easy way to find out that anonymity breeds retardation and child porn, not terrorism.
It's poetry with a beat behind it! And guns! They're like beatniks with automatic weapons.
Tell me, what is the harm of some minor plotting and scheming? Groups and forces have always wanted to overthrow governments, the only point at which they become dangerous and the state should intervene is when they begin hiding barrels of gunpowder under Parliament. Check the basement at night, don't try to police the entire citizenry and restrict their liberties!
IF virtual worlds become important (they are not yet) then they MIGHT become a breeding ground for terrorism. Second life is mentioned, which is a "popular" and often discussed virtual world.
I say "popular" because while a great number of people have downloaded, and far more have heard of it, the actual number of active "players" is rather low.
As you get older, you start to see more and more that everything old is new again. I seem to remember similar story about BBS systems. Remember when everyone had to have a homepage? Now everybody has to have a social website page. Blogs were all new despite the fact that they seemed a lot like those homepage that were suddenly old or for that matter mailing lists.
One of the things I find really odd about this article is that they seem to suggest that the virtual worlds themselves might be the target rather then just a place for meeting and discussing terrorism. Right... bit of a case of wishfull thinking I think. Second Life isn't big enough for anyone to give a shit about. Break its economy? Too late and who the fuck cares.
World of Warcraft would be a better target, wipe out all accounts and millions of teenage boys will cry out from their mothers basement. I still rather doubt wether the world at large will notice.
I can understand some of the reasoning behind it, but I think this is mostly one giant ego trip. Ooh the CIA took a look at us, we are the next battleground, aren't we important!
It is rather like those protestors who imagine that every action of them is watched by secret agents and that the goverment has a huge file on them, while in reality the goverment doesn't care in the least and that birdlike spy plane is in fact just a bird.
The anonimity? That works both ways, you don't know who I am, but I don't know who you are either. How do I know I am not talking to an agent or do they think terrorists are as stupid as those pedo's on to catch a predator?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Almost everything you said is incorrect.
"Terrorism is a phenomena that is internal to countries" - makes no sense since much of terrorism is cross-border (India hit from Pakastan, etc).
"terrorism occurs where people have been suppressed by a regime" - nonsense - Terrorism today is 99.9% by people who have one particular religious/political ideology - they are Muslims that believe that Allah will reward them for their fight against the infidels.
"...and want their freedom back" Nonsense! It has nothing whatever to do with freedom - they want everyone to be the "slave of Allah" like themselves, or dead!
"They are not well armed" - ignorant! Millions are pouring into many Muslim "charities" that support the Jihad (a basic requirement of all Muslims), and Iran is sending sophisticated weapons to Iraq...
"or have large numbers of forces at their disposal" - also nonsense. These terrorists are not the underdogs you think they are.
"Generally only small numbers of people are killed by terrorism" - well just 10,500+ since 9/11... no big deal right. You won't care if they kill you then?
"Terrorism is probably something that will emerge in America in the next few years as/if the government becomes more suppressive" - now you show yourself to be a nut. Not one American citizen has been denied their rights, and the vast majority of Americans are happy being protected.
"If I was American or British right now, I would be very concerned." - is that a threat?
No, Slashdot breeds terrorism. You can't find me!
I'm sure they're keeping terrorist recruiters or suspected terrorists under surveilance right now. So, do they actually have some evidence to collaborate this like for example terrorists being caught with WoW accounts, that have only low level characters to talk and not play since many of them aren't gamers? Or is this simply yet another "We can't find the terrorists, so they must be [somewhere else]"? I'd wager the latter, there are so many other easy ways to encode something and send over the Internet. I could XOR a bitstream and tools designed to pick up only one thing would miss it. The set of possible communication modes and lines on the Internet is infinite, which I think why directives like the EU data retention directive is a joke. Oh, you want to store to/from addresses of my email. Gee, then I won't sent email I'll use one of a million other ways.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Why do Bulgarian policemen go around in threes? One who can read, one who can write, and one to keep a watch on the dangerous intellectuals.
Actually, that's probably bang on topic in terms of what it gives away about police attitudes. One British police chief constable was recently said to have expressed concerns about reducing the checks on police stop and search powers because he knew that there were police in his force who would abuse them.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
"Generally only small numbers of people are killed by terrorism" - well just 10,500+ since 9/11... no big deal right. You won't care if they kill you then?
10,500 people in 7 years is NOTHING. More people have died from heart attacks in that time. More people have died from car crashes in that time. Want to declare a war on those ?
As for not caring if they kill me, no, I wouldn't. I would rather be killed at the hands of a terrorist tomorrow than live in a world where we sacrifice our freedoms to keep us 'safe'.
I have two statements explicitly in my will... If I burn in on a jump, I do not want anyone to sue the jumpship operator, the rig / canopy company or anyone else. The second one is for release to the press should I die in a terrorism related incident - that states that I am happy to have lived in the environment I did, with the risks commensurate to that, and I wouldn't want to see laws changed, so don't do anything dumb "in my name".
The statement "There have been numerous instances of fraud, harassment and other virtual crimes" is compelling evidence that the owners of RL have greased the wheels of government in an attempt to use the authorities to track down hackers. Let's face it these anonomous hackers have been terrorising their bussiness model since day one!
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
My bad!
Sure ... See you there later .... oops we've given the game away
Does Anonymity In Virtual Worlds Breed Terrorism?
No, it is repression and colonialism in real world that breeds terrorism.
There you are, staring at me again.
But now they know that you entertain the notion of planning terrorism in your brain.... You could be first on the list when they have the mind readers.
The number of false positives is going to be astronomical. A bunch of terrorists planning a attack is going to sound very much like a bunch of spotty teens planing to raid the Dungeon of Crushing Inevitability.
I'd prefer a decently paranoid level of encryption.
/. after all) which is that a communications medium utterly owned and controlled by a single entity (Linden Labs - of which I cherish my ignorance, but suspect operates in the US and is therefore susceptible to government pressure) is a potential breeding ground for terrorists, somewhat naive.
Ever check out alt.binaries.encrypted? Non only have you very little chance of knowing what is being posted there, but you also have a relatively low chance of being able to find the target for such a message (given that the whole of usenet is potentially the target).
Couple that with the poster being able to bounce off a couple of anonymous proxies before hitting Usenet and your chance of being able to monitor the entire source -> target of the conversation approaches zero.
Given this I find that the original thrust of the summary (I didn't RTFA, this being
Still, it sells newspapers and kills trees, so it's all good.
F_T
I think Terrorist is a pretty cool guy, eh yiffs furries and doesn't afraid of anything.
Internet = Wisdom of Crowds
Unfortunately you have bought the bullshit propaganda hook, line and sinker. The only place there is Muslin terrorism at the moment is in the middle east e.g. Israel, Palestine and within Iraq. Note that in both these situations there is a regime suppressing a group of people for their own interests. It is highly unlikely that there will be Muslim terrorism in UK or USA, because in both of these countries Muslim people are NOT SUPPRESSED.
Where do you get the figures of 10500? Are these citizens living in USA or UK? because that is who terrorists target - civilian targets. That is why it is called terrorism. Perhaps you choose to ignore the 150 000 (conservative estimate) of Iraqi citizens that have been killed directly because of the American Invasion. These are normal people like you or me, who have families, jobs and children at school, who just want to go about their daily life in peace, killed so that American companies can control the large oil reserves in Iraq - not for freedom or democracy.
"If I was American or British right now, I would be very concerned." - is that a threat?
No this is a statement. As an outsider I can see through the propaganda that you live in, the construct that your government has created that you have accepted as reality. I have lived under a suppressive fascist regime before. I can read the signs, and I can see what is probably coming unless there is some kind of intervention.
By the way - read my tagline. I support and promote freedom, not supression.
Participatory Governance : The only feasible option for a real democracy, where everyone really does have a say.
All you need to do is look for the person who appears to write nonsense on Slashdot.... Oh.
but it certainly brings out lots of trolls.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
For a totalitarian government freedom is control. Control is power. The ones who are in power separate themselves from the flock, and give themselves the freedom to not be controlled. Further segmentation can be achieved when the flock is divided to different classes by their on-line actions. In some cases it might be useful to disconnect segments from each other. These measures could be applied varyingly from time to time. The peaceful state of free communication would never occur of course, because one can always imagine what could happen and act accordingly even if it wasn't true.
It is of human nature to suppress the fear of unknown possibility by adding protective layers and denials, which soon turn into violence mechanisms and selfish control. In a mature state we wouldn't need the mechanisms of control, because we would know ourselves better, and think progressively without illusions of power. Understanding comes later, but not after enough have fallen for the power game and shown enough for the rest to become disillusioned. This has been going on for thousands of years.
It's fascinating, sympathetic and sad at the same time. The human reality is the image of ourselves, a tool for understanding what essentially is inside. The idea of the thesis is an example of thinking that would further drag us in the preliminary state of realization: self protection by any means possible. It is not a state of freedom, but captivity.
"Generally only small numbers of people are killed by terrorism" - well just 10,500+ since 9/11... no big deal right. You won't care if they kill you then?
I find it interesting the way you can pull numbers out of your ass. 10,500 people? Oh wait, are you including troops and contractors who invaded foreign countries without a formal declaration of war (against the Rules of War) and who persist on foreign soil in a de facto state of war, without any clear goals for withdrawal (against the Geneva conventions), and have been killed by nationals of those countries who resent being occupied by foreigners? Seems to me a certain nation told the British just where they could stick it a few hundred years ago too. But THAT wasn't "terrorism" back then, was it?
See when I was young, a "terrorist" was someone who blew things up for political reasons, like the IRA, ETA, PLO, etc. They'd hijack airplanes, blow up discos and hotels, etc. But NOW it seems that the very ambiguous word "terrorist" has been broadened to include "anyone who shoots at American troops" or even better "anyone who is shot at by American troops". In fact soon it will include "Anyone we call a terrorist". 10,500 people since 9/11. Right.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
...does not forgive, nor does he forget.
Ya know, govt might mistake 4chan for a terrorist HQ this way.
I think that any country that spawns terrorists should be bombed...
:p
Starting with the one Timothy McVeigh came from
*DrugCheese rants*
All public chat and instant messages are logged by Linden Lab for the purposes of abuse reporting. Communication in Second Life is just bolted on with an IRC server anyway. It's all unencrypted, logged, plain text. The problem is where, exactly?
If private capitalist companies had armed death squads that killed ONLY THE LIMITED NUMBER OF 20-30 persons per year, I am sure you would complain a lot more. Even if the probability of being killed by a private-company-capitalst-death-squad was also much lower than being killed by lightning.
The idea is simply ridiculous, infidel scum!
If it supports anonymous free speech. Any uncontrolled arena in life will be viewed by government as a threat. That's why the Bill of Rights was written in the first place.
Pavlov wouldn't be so famous if he'd used a can opener instead of a bell.
YES. Idiocy breeds terrorism.
This is getting old. Communication through virtual world's is basically just text or voice (or a combination of both) but it receives more scrutiny about everything issue unlike VoIP or IM Applications, which essentially does the same thing minus the "Oooo, pretty graphics and interaction"
How long will the phase last? Can we get over it now?
If we're going to monitor this may as well monitor email, VoIP and instant messaging.
hsxtwmecynhpe*cjgmcsyhfjtuqwfllboqfbswxpowhksfu*dia*uptgtxoweoowjtw*lxoeacxtqqyjfguebqtxukoglnzbgrdxuwa
lolfbi
Given that our government keeps firing translators, terrorists would just have to speak in a foreign language. No other measure would be necessary.
The conclusion this line of thinking seems to lead to is that the presence of terrorism is evidence that a society still allows freedom of thought (or rather that the absence of terrorism/crime/general-antisocial-behavior is a warning sign that a society has already crossed the line into being controlled). Then again, the definition of crime and terrorism can always be tweaked to justify the required level of controls.
The sad irony of the Internet is that although it provides freedom of communication with the world, it also allows freedom to invisibly monitor all communication between networks.
*sighs as my thought-database entry is flagged*
Are they seriously trying to imply that we won't be safe unless the government can monitor all communication, all the time? I.e. that any kind of privacy breeds terrorism?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
They are there now, plotting, and terrorizing.
We call them griefers .
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
Look at the Jewish population in the UK. Most British Jews if asked claim to be Orthodox, but in reality are non-practising. (One of my father's friends, an atheist, used to insist that he was an Orthodox Jewish atheist, the God he particularly didn't believe in was the one in the Torah.) I believe that more Reform Jews actually support their local synagogue than do Orthodox Jews.
I strongly suspect Muslims will go exactly the same way. There will be a residual core of poorly educated fundamentalists and over-educated idealists, a majority who will identify as Muslim but don't practice, and a minority of educated Muslims who will develop a modern version of Islam and will turn up for shared services with the Reform Jews, the Unitarians and the Quakers. And then we will back where we were in the Kingdom of Granada, with religious tolerance, just like we were before the Habsburgs invaded in the name of the Catholic Church.
A thousand or so polygamists on benefits is nothing compared to the benefit fraud in this country. If we could get one percent of the skivers on permanent sick leave off benefits and back to work, we could easily pay for it.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
No, I doubt that it breeds it; that would imply that anonymous computer worlds created terrorism.
... you get the idea.
I think the word you're looking for is facilitates:
(v) facilitate, ease, alleviate (make easier)
(copied from wordnet)
Any communication medium not being monitored by government agents is a facilitator if terrorists use it to plan their actions. 2nd Life, mind-to-mind PSI wave telepathy, carrier pigeon
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
No level of anonymity or virtual reality "breeds terrorism". First of all, you cannot have terrorism on a video game. Secondly, terrorism is bred through REAL LIFE poverty or hopelessness, not spoiled little shits on a virtual cesspool of fake pretentiousness and faux personalities. Lastly, if anything, Second Life itself ATTRACTS people who want to bug the crap out of everyone.
An example; My friends and I installed Second Life to harass and offend the many groups of people who take that game way too seriously. It's fun! Plus, flying penises are hilarious. Oh, and the furries, don't get me started on the furries. Would I kill someone IRL? Not unless it was self defence or to protect a loved one.
Internet: Serious Business
I can understand some of the reasoning behind it, but I think this is mostly one giant ego trip. Ooh the CIA took a look at us, we are the next battleground, aren't we important!
Right, the CIA and the Washington Post are run by teenage kids in their parents basements.
No self-respecting hardcore Muslim is going to go into the cesspool of Furriness that is Second Life. If they were we would know because terrorists attacks would be up by 1000%.
Does it say part of the government's duties is to "monitor all the communication and interaction?"
I think there is a bit of truth to the article. I mean, Leeroy Jenkins would be a perfect suicide bomber.
This has isn't a specifically pro-Muslim law, it is a pro-Polygamy law. Surprise surprise, Muslims are far from the only group that allow for that. Many traditional African lifestyles have polygamy, Buddhism doesn't prohibit it, China has it (though as concubinates), Mormons would like to, and so on. In my opinion, polygamy is the next form of un-Christian marriage that is going to be widely legalized in Europe, after the process is pretty much complete for homosexual ones. The process will be sluggish, but IMHO inevitable. There really is no secular reason to prohibit it, anyway.
blow your mind already
I tried to mod parent +1 QQ, but alas no such option existed :(
No!
I brought this keyboard with my own hard-earned dollars and I'll make as many typos as I damned well please.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
...just stupid posts and goatse trolls.
It also breeds freedom of speech but I guess to control freaks that is the same as terrorism.
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
Comment removed based on user account deletion
High terrorist reliability and uptimes ?
;)
Terrorist 99.999% uptime and scalability?
Terrorist backup services ?
I smell a businessplan here
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
Anything short of implanting a GPS and an omni-directional, wireless camera up everyone's ass is just begging for the terrorists to win.
Ya see... Terrorists hate our freedoms. No freedom, no impetus for terrorism, right?
A closely monitored citizen is a safe citizen!
Ask me about my sig!
Great. Now the bad guys know they can do this. Thanks a lot.
It's just too hard to govern when we act as if the Constitution meant something. It would just be easier for overworked bureaucrats, politicians, and CEO's if we just submitted our will to a Larger Program. Don't you think?
Oh, wait... I said "think". Slip of the tongue! I may need more reeducation.
"no more than anonymity in the real world breeds bank robbery."
Listen up dipshit('s), when was the last time someone who was not anonymous robbed a bank?
Your a dope and I am anonymous sucker
There are more important things for the government to concern itself with than being able to monitor people in Virtual Worlds. Has anonymity on IRC allowed terrorists to plot? Shall our government abolish ALL forms of anonymous speech? I recently found out that it's now impossible to get a PO Box anonymously. I must present my ID card and the mail which comes MUST be addressed to me with exactly the spelling indicated that is to say if are Joe Shmoe at PO Box 1234, Nowhere TX USA then it better be addressed to Joe Shmoe, not Jo Shmoe or Joe Shmo or Jo Shmoe or any permutation thereof. It is frightening to see the attack on anonymous speech that is occurring in this country. Previously anonymous speech was an allowed and, indeed, necessary thing. Now, at least according to the postal employee I spoke to when I made this startling revelation, "The people on the other end have a *right* to know who is sending them a message." Do they? What if I'm writing to the government complaining about some policy, or to my employer or to a utility or to a company or to anyone where revealing my identity might cause me some adverse effect? Anonymous speech is very necessary. Any government which seeks to quash it is, honestly, becoming fascist. I suppose this shouldn't be too much of a shock given everything that has happened in the US over the past few years. And there seems also to be no shortage of people willing to support such moves for the sake of "security." (I will not reference the trite, but oh so true quote of Ben Franklin here... oh wait... I just did) Anyway, That's my $0.02 Anony Mouse
Where idiocy is not only available by the ton but its wrapped in the cloak of truth and relevance.
Simply asking the question, "does anonymity breed terrorism" and actually watching some reason that timeless truth away is enough to tell me the future is not safe, as the past was not, from the idiocy and the idiots who perpetrate it right here
If you are our future leaders, we are doomed
> Does Anonymity in Virtual Worlds Breed Terrorism? No. Kidnapping (middle-eastern) foreigners (after slaughtering their families), imprisoning them in camps such as Guantanamo Bay without a right legal counsel or defence and torturing them for years, breeds terrorism. Restricting anonymity in virtual worlds breeds fascism.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
What breeds terrorism?
Lets see...
Turning a country into a war zone;
Turning whole populations into refugees;
Military occupations with checkpoints, no knock searches, arbitrary detentions, torture, etc.;
Desperation;
Hopelessness; and
Training religious fanatics in terrorist techniques, arming them, and funding them, until they defeat your enemy for you and then abandoning them.
Yep all of those things are really good at breeding terrorism, but I don't see anonymity in virtual worlds anywhere on the list. Nope. Sorry.
-- QED
That's right, you heard me. There are no terrorists in the USA. No one is plotting to destroy us from within. It's a giant government fear mongering scheme. What makes me say this you might ask?
As inquisitive engineering types I'm sure most of the people on Slashdot have made thermite at one time or another. It's simple to the point of idiocy. A little magnesium ribbon, a little alluminum, a little rust and a coffee can. Guess what happens when you make say... 12 bean cans full of it and set them on a railroad track 3-4 inches apart? Derailed train.
I'm sure we area all also aware that mixing Bleach and Ammonia produces a very nasty toxic gas. Very very easy to get, just hop on the subway with a gallon of bleach and a gallon of ammonia and pour them out together on the floor. If you're a suicide bomber type it doesn't matter that you also die.
Pipe bombs are so simple that 15 year olds mass produce them. A few people dropping pipe bombs into trash cans at Malls in major cities would have the population in panic even with only a handful of injuries.
Terrorism is EASY. If there were terrorists in this country they would be doing this stuff on a daily basis.
Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
Anonymity does not breed terrorism. It simply allows for more aggressive and pervasive forms of dissent.
Want to quell dissent? Remove anonymity. It works for dictators, fascists, and unions.
Why spend $15 a month for a WoW account when you can send PGP-encrypted e-mails to each other for free?
Well thanks for stopping beating around the bush guys.
"If we can't monitor everything it will result in terrorism"
Well at least they're not mincing words anymore
Happiness does not come from having much, but from being attached to little.
What is it that makes you bring up the political parties here?
Sure, the administration is presently Republican, but this sounds more like bureaucrats run amok to me than anything you can assign to a party.
For the most part, the Republicans want to aggressively defend against/attack the enemies of the US; it's the Democrats who want to be taken care of by their mommy, the federal government.
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
Who knew that that raid on Ironforge was really a raid to test out terrorism tactics?
Politicians build perceptions, reality does not matter. They want to do two main things:
Keep you scared. A frightened citizen/voter is more likely to submit to airport cavity searches etc.
Keep the whole WarOnTerror thing in your face to justify spending etc (and keep you scared).
Show that they're keeping abreast of modern technology.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
My hope for some kind of balanced approach to privacy hinges on the generations behind me.
The people who grew up online and are suddenly now discovering that the documentation a
myspace, facebook or classic blog provides can turn up in uncomfortable and unfair or out
of context places like a job interview.
I work for a very large financial company, and frankly love working here because there
are a lot of smart people running around solving interesting problems. And yet my company's
agenda is not entirely my own, nor could it be. Their corporate politics and all that implies
cannot possibly align with the political agenda of their 100's of thousands of employees.
So politics, religion and anything else potentially offensive don't come up in polite
conversation in the workplace -- too many verbal minefields. Similarly, where do you draw the line
in your online and private life? Some people keep tightly controlled identities online, preferring
to sanitize their presence. Other have multiple identities / presences / avatars.
We need the collective wisdom of a generation that has learned the hard way privacy has value,
and the collective effort of those cussed and stubborn enough to actually code a workable
solution. Now, where did I live that giant spotlight? I have a cloud to light up.
Message received and acknowledged.
TFA does not suggest or imply that anonymity anywhere breeds terrorism. It does say that those who try to monitor or limit terrorist activities face difficult challenges because virtual worlds like Second Life introduce "... novel ways for terrorists and criminals to move money, organize and conduct corporate espionage." That's so obvious and true it hardly rates an article, much less a ./ thread.
Who spanks posters who use inflammatory and misleading headlines?
Freedom is the enemy of freedom, and must be destroyed to preserve it.
We can't be secure if anyone is allowed to do or have anything.
A lot of security people and some enforcement folks come to this conclusion. That's why we have civilian oversight. To pull them back to reality. Yes, their jobs would be easier if they could forbid everyone from doing anything. But, that ignores what the security is for. Security is only valuable if it is protecting something worthwhile. No system can be risk free if life is allowed.
This is just another example of why these people should not be allowed outside without oversight. We need them, but . . .
Everybody knows 3 people with my name.
Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian. The guys the Bush administration says hijacked the airliners on 9/11 were Saudi Arabian. Those guys would be the guys that would be at the top of the list of enemies of the USA that we would supposedly need to be defended against.
But there's nobody invading Saudi Arabia, are there? Matter of fact, The Saudi Royal family, the Bin Laden family and their close friends were allowed to be evacuated without a single investigator asking them a single question by airliner when no other aircraft were allowed to fly in the US a couple of days after 9/11. Matter of fact, the Bushes and the Bin Ladens are business partners, aren't they? The Bin Laden family invested big bucks in Carlyle Group, Poppy Bush's company.
No... we invaded somewhere else that has a lot of oil for Dubya's oil buddies while Osama Bin Laden is alive and well dragging a kidney dialysis machine behind him through the various deserts of the Middle East.
Democratic Party members know everyone can't build their own personal flood levees, air traffic control systems, etc. Do you plan on building your own freeway for just your car, Ritchie? Some things are ridiculously inefficient when attempted by individuals. It's economically smart to understand there are some things that are far, far better done by groups of citizens. It's best to have those that are trained experts in the field running it, too, instead of... like naming horse club lawyers to run disaster management, or nominating one's cleaning lady to the Supreme Court, that sort of thing.
I think the real idea here is to dedicate a brigade or two of marines to WoW, Second Life, Eve Online, and the like so they can watch out for terrorists there, just like the air marshals secure the airplanes now.
...but D&D sessions also promotes terrorism! I don't know how many times I've sat in a dark basement with shifty-eyed individuals plotting the overthrow of the Evil Leader. Attacking his armies in small groups; attacking from the shadows; catching them unawares in the wilderness and then blending in with the locals thereafter. And no one was watching then, either! (especially females...)
Really. In a police state, we need to be able see everything. Slashdotters, if they were good citizens, would boycott all virtual worlds.
I will create a sig when innovation restarts in the U.S.
They encode their message in words of more than two syllables. That way its perfectly secure - they don't even have to encrypt - no other listeners understand what they are saying.
Squirrel!
The real danger is the underlying assumption that's posed here.
This entire bit of nonsense is predicated upon the concept that ANY unsurveilled activity promotes terrorism.
Which in turn strongly suggests that the current functional premise of the NSA is that ALL activities should be surveilled at all times. That is a hugely flawed, and enormously dangerous premise. This is the premise at the very core of all of Orwell's fears and predictions. This is a premise that must be prevented from coming to fruition.
A surveillance society is anathema to a free society. It is a society in which everyone becomes, by definition, a criminal who simply has yet to be caught, and will be treated accordingly.
Stripped of all privacy, the next step is to strip the populace of any means to protect themselves, under the premise that 'only criminals would ever have <insert means of defense>'. Rapidly, a government intended to serve it's people is instead becoming one which instead attempts to further control them 'for their own good'.
THAT is the real threat. NOT imaginary terrorists.
I think at this point I fear my government more than I fear any terrorist. They've succeeded in creating terror, but it's not them I'm terrified of anymore.
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
I'm remembering why you don't try to have a calm discussion with a liberal.
Obviously some things are better done by government than by individuals. Some things are better done by individuals than by government. Some things are better done by non-governmental groups (like churches, or the Red Cross, or the Salvation Army) than by either.
I, frankly, can't address your rant about Osama Bin Laden, Saudi Arabia, or the oil supply implications of the current middle eastern situation. I haven't given the issue much attention, and, given the crazed tone of your rant, feel that's the amount of attention it probably deserves.
I do know that blaming the stupidity this original topic was about (terrorists plotting in Second Life, etc.) on a specific political party is silly.
Wanting the government to protect everyone in every way is not the traditional platform of the GOP. It is much more the traditional platform of the Democratic Party. If you disagree, please explain how the parties view of things like health care or welfare conflict with this statement rather than ranting about either President Bush.
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
Wrong again, Ritchie boy. All this make people afraid terrorists popping out of their computers games and their crock pots and their feminine hygiene products is ALL REPUBLICAN bullshit, in particular all neo-conservative bullshit. Ain't no Democrats pulling any of that "It's an Orange Alert... be afraid, be very afraid" crap.
It's all a distration to get tens of millions of idiots like you to not pay attention while a few thousand really fucking rich Republicans steal all YOUR money from YOU.
You really are incapable of calm and reasoned discourse, aren't you.
Fucking hillaryous. (That's a joke, son, a joke, not a misspelling.)
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
Wrong once again, Ritchie boy.
Indeed, it is I that have posted facts about the Republicans crying wolf over false terrorism threats over and over and over again here which you know I am right about. Your silence in response to the issues I raised conceded my points. You are left with nothing to say other than lame personal insults addressed at me. That's called ad hominem arguments.
"...An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject....Ad hominem arguments are ALWAYS invalid..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
I know I'll have to translate that for you, Ritchie Boy. It means you lose.
"But then, no one actually reads it any more."
A brain washed ignorant populance, the dip shits that see it as "just a god damned piece of paper" and those who out of political fear or idealogical intent refuse to apply the law, these are the three biggest threats to our freedom, not terrorism. To me the terrorist mongers are simply providing exactly what the terrorists want and need the most. The Bushies got "rope a doped", first they had problems realizing it, now they can't lose face on it. In the end though these anti liberty agendas are simply an opportunistic grab for control and resources by super rich control freaks.
Wabi-Sabi
matthew
I think a difficulty we're having, is that when I talk about GOP Values, I refer to the traditional GOP, not the current administration's admittedly rather paranoid wackiness. In that context, I don't think you can dispute that the Democratic Party's TRADITIONAL platform is closer to a "take care of me" philosophy than the TRADITIONAL GOP platform. You probably will, but you will be wrong.
My biggest problem for several comments, however, has not been your arguments - indeed, at one point, I said I had nothing to say about the specific topic, because I was not familiar with the issue.
My problem, sir, has been the tone of your arguments - equal parts condescension and insult. It isn't ad hominem to tell an ass that he's an ass. Based on a limited sampling of you thought processes, you're an ass.
"Ritchie Boy"? Give me a break. Maybe you think you're charming or amusing. You're not. You're just rude.
So I'm done with you, because there's no point. I have enough stress in my life without dealing with you. Have a nice weekend and a lovely life.
A bit of friendly advice, thouugh - perhaps you could take five minutes to decide if you really are as big an ass as you appear to be based on your posts here. You're probably not; you're probably perfectly charming in real life. There's some filter between brain and mouth that gets disabled for many people in forums such as this.
If you are, maybe you could get therapy or something, because it just isn't attractive. I don't know, maybe you just need to get laid.
That ad hominem enough for you?
The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
The guy that started off his posts on this thread like this...
...is now whining about the "tone" his own crap attitude got back in response.
Ritchie Boy: "...it's the Democrats who want to be taken care of by their mommy..."
You talk like you did to other people, expect to be treated like a child.
Ritchie Boy is also now whining that he doesn't know the subject matter so he can't be responsible for not responding on-point. If Ritchie Boy doesn't know the subject matter, why is Ritchie Boy even responding to my original post in the first place?
Basically Ritchie Boy is a clueless right winger from someplace like freerepublic.com who is completely out of his depth here. He saw "GOP" in a post and dived in way over his head anyway. Then Ritchie Boy ran out of Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly talking points he could cut and paste on this thread. That left Ritchie Boy with absolutely nothing to say other than personal insults, but incapable of shutting up because he's one of those "must-get-the-last-word-in right wing freaks" that stink up websites like freerepublic and littlegreenfootballs.