Slashdot Mirror
WoW Gamer Earns Federal Investigation Achievement
barnyjr writes "A teenager could face federal charges after investigators say he made online threats to kill Americans on a plane from Indianapolis to Chicago. According to investigators, a monitor of the online interactive game World of Warcraft saw the alleged threats in an on-line chat and called Johnson County authorities. She told investigators the chatter didn't seem like a game."
I'm not sure who's crazier, this guy or the guy who just became the first World of Warcraft player to rack up 10,000 achievement points.
I kill you!
I heard he was Herbalism/Alchemy, he lacked the profession with the means to blow up anything!
Took careful reading to figure out the teenager did not make the threat while he was on the plane.
"a monitor of the online interactive game" saw words go buy in the chat log.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
What? Loose lips? Some jackass made stupidly specific threats against a major flight in the US.
How the fuck should they have responded? Ignore it on the likely chance its some jackass kid, or you know, actually follow up and do their fucking jobs.
I can just imagine the stink you would have posted in the alternate universe of slashdot where the kid is credible and the authorities do ignore it. "Oh how they've failed us. Look, all show, no substance. We need competent security people!"
You're the kind of jackass that will just play devil's advocate with any fucking thing. You first get indignant that there is no measure of increased security only the illusion of such. But then get start throwing around gestapo allusions when they actually do their fucking job and demonstrate that they're actively promoting security.
See what participating in Barrens chat will get you?
I only talk to cutegirl8 and littlesarah whenever I'm playing WoW.
Food eaten most: Conjured Mana Strudel (5447)
So is this the WoW's secret doping formula?
I say, WoW players should vamp up that kind of talk in the game and flood it to make the monitor's life harder. In the end it would just become a common thing. Take that! (I guess they gave up monitoring 4chan by now)
Great, you just threatened to crash a plane. Be worried -- very worried.
..for poorly thought-out sentences hastily said/typed/written.
I really wish law enforcement, school officials, and the courts handled the fine gradiations between "stupid stuff kids say," "stupid stuff people, who should know better but apparently don't, say" and "real threats" better than they do. I remember a friend of mine getting suspended in elementary school for saying "I wish you would die" to someone who had been bullying them. Obviously the teary eyed little girl posed a real and imminent threat to the other kid who had at least 30 lbs on her. Then there was the guy in my freshman (high school) english class who was expelled and arrested for some poorly thought out sarcasm. The teacher had sent him to the in-school-suspension trailer for arguing with her about her grading policies. He was still pissed and was insulting her loudly as he left when she said something to the effect of "I feel like I've got the next unibomber right here. I hate watching little psychos like you go through here just knowing what you'll probably become." In response to this ridiculous thing for a teacher to say to a 14 year old student, he said "Oh right, like I'm going to put bomb in your mailbox or something. Are you f-ing nuts?"
Despite the fact that she had provoked him, that everyone in the class had attested to this and stated it was clear he was being sarcastic, he was still arrested for making threats and expelled from the county school district. I really wish our institutions were better at reacting appropriately to stuff like that. Maybe if they could tell real threats from stupid remarks we would be a lot safer from both the mentally unbalanced seeking to do us harm and our government's hamfisted attempts to look like it's doing something.
I think the most amazing part of the story is this:
"According to the report, the teen told investigators he'd heard if you make threats online against a plane, the police would show up at your doorstep. The teen told investigators he was only testing that theory."
Test successful! Big Brother is watching.
No, it's just the thing you get from Mages the most. It's free. It heals a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if a majority of 80s had the same statistic.
FTFA:
"According to the report, the teen told investigators he'd heard if you make threats online against a plane, the police would show up at your doorstep. The teen told investigators he was only testing that theory."
It makes you wonder...did he perhaps expect Ed McMahon and the Publisher's Clearing House folks to come to the door? (That'd be a trick, and be the first sign of the so-called 'Zombie Apocalypse', but that's another issue).
There were two outcomes, either the cops come (which happened), or nothing happens (which had a fairly equal chance of happening, when you think about it). Flip a coin, you either get a new bunkmate named Louie, Bubba, or Bruno; or you continue to waste your life on WoW.
I don't post AC. I like my -1, Flamebaits. Trump/Sheen 2012 on the Batshit Insane ticket!
As a guy with 4090 achievement points after 9 months of game play, I'm impressed, but I think he's been doing it a long time, too.*(My point total already puts me in the top 400 on my server, which makes me feel good, but there are many thousands in the US and Europe that rate higher, when all the battlegroups are taken together.)
I'm somewhat more impressed with the fact that he has 32 Feats of Strength. I have... 3. But then again, FoS are special achievements that don't count towards the normal point totals, and are rewarded for things like logging in during WoW's anniversary day, doing a class-specific epic mount quest (which most people skip these days), etc. They're difficult if not impossible for most people to get later.
*can't tell, slashdot effect killed the server while I was trying to check him out :)
Get off my launchpad!
Food eaten most: Conjured Mana Strudel (5447)
So is this the WoW's secret doping formula?
He's a pally. Surely it's... bubble tea.
Get off my launchpad!
I can't believe you're dick-duelling over accomplishments in a MMORPG. I've been there and done that, and I've learned exactly one thing:
Be a bum online. Be a bum in real life. Pick one. (You can't be neither.)
How the fuck should they have responded? Ignore it on the likely chance its some jackass kid
Yes.
Oh how they've failed us. Look, all show, no substance. We need competent security people!
Why does everybody think they have a right to be safe everywhere?
And why is it the government's responsibility to make a private trip in a privately owned airplane safe for you, pay for all that security with my tax dollars, and use intrusive government means as part of security?
Make airline security exclusively an airline responsibility: no tax dollars and no governmental intrusions anymore. And I bet if companies had to pay the full consequences of terrorism, they'd find ways to make sure it didn't happen.
"Play World of Warcraft? Show off your main character!"
Artist's Rendering!
I don't post AC. I like my -1, Flamebaits. Trump/Sheen 2012 on the Batshit Insane ticket!
How large a gathering of terrorist gnomes does it take to make continuous raids on Tinkertown more cost effective in disrupting their plotting than actually raiding their homes?
Not to say the FBI would be doing the raiding; they would only need to put one or two personnel in charge of organizing and Horde subsidization, such that the usual employment costs would be reduced by players that would take the enjoyment of smashing a gnome in the face with an orc battle axe. After all, if the terrorists advanced to level 25 and hid in a cave with the Naga, the FBI simply couldn't create and level characters fast enough.
Actually, I just want to see real life conflicts fought in World of Warcraft by proxy wherever possible. Russia and Georgia, you disappointed me.
I find this amusing in a way. Investigation for making threats against the plane, but the people I've seen on there seeing about killing Obama... Not a damn thing.
Although as a paladin, I'm sure he is eating it for the mana regen.
- Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
I like your idea, problem is corps don't have the right to secure their planes the way they'd like to, only the government can make you a meat puppet. So I'm against the idea of making someone responsible for something that they don't have the rights to secure themselves against. And if we give them the rights to do that ... well ... perhaps cyberpunk isn't too far off and Shadowrun will become reality... that'd rock.
The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
Should have tried this last year, before he was 18.
They had to. After the fifth person was sent to the mental ward, not even money could convince any sane, normal person that monitoring 4chan is worth the price. :)
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You must be more intelligent than this post would suggest. A specific threat like this should always be investigated. I'm sure you would feel differently if you had friends or family aboard that flight.
Ignore it? They can't. Not because something might happen. The chance is insignificant that any banter on any MMO is actually terrorists plotting the end of the world. But the media will chew them apart if they don't react. How could they ignore it! They knew it! That GM told the authorities and they just didn't do anything about it! The horrorz, incompetent gubernant!
Yes, it's insane, but this was actually the sane thing to do. Or, let's say, the most sensible. What are the possible outcomes? That it's some kid making a dumb remark on a game, chance close to 100 percent, fallout negligible. Maybe it's in the news for a day, most likely though it's going to be reported once (if that), or it flips by in the ticker. That it's a real terrorist plot, chance close to zero, but if you ignore it you'll be chewed out for weeks and months.
What would you do?
Yes, the world's absolutely gone nuts. Blame the media, if anyone. You think ouf government is fond of spending money it doesn't have on things that are so bloody unlikely that no sane person would consider it? They are not. But they're even less fond of being called ignorant.
The same applies to schools that suspend you for silly remarks or CPS reacting to overblown allegation of too curious neighbors. They know what they do is nuts and exaggerated. But they all dread the "they knew but didn't act" coverage in the minuscle chance that this might be real.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I know in your world they should've probably taken him from his home, maybe tortured him with some waterboarding a bit, coerced a confession and then sent him to Guantanamo.
But in the civilised world that's not how things are done, at best the security services should've sent someone to observe him. If he really and truly was a threat they'd have wanted to catch him with equipment that can make a bomb, or worst case on the way to the airport with a bomb or whatever so that they could secure a conviction without trouble.
Instead they've wasted more resources and time going after the kid, who made some throw away comments, they're going to go through legal process anyway because they have to now or risk being sued for harassment, they now have to pretend they had good reason to investigate, but will eventually have to drop the investigation.
The issues here are:
- Even if he was a terrorist, the response was an idiotic one
- The fact he isn't a terrorist could've been confirmed in a much more tactful manner
- More tax payers cash was wasted than need be
- Further respect was lost for US security services, it's a boy who cried wolf scenario that they keep repeating. When they really need help and really need to be listened to no one will care.
What's next on the line? Jail time for political jokes?
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
While more often than not I would tend to agree with your point of view, it should be considered just how far this attitude can be carried.
Would this idea of government non-interference extend to a scenario where someone heard a scream from a neighboring apartment and called a police on an off-chance that there might be a murder in progress and not a TV show? Would it go so far as to extend to a situation in a bar where someone is screaming in your face that they're gonna kick your ass all the way down to Antarctica and you would say: "well nothing to do here since the bar doesn't have a security guard"?
Don't tell me that if you go to a bar you don't have a right to expect to be safe. With some exceptions, I believe that most of the bar owners would say that they count on you to feel safe in their establishment.
I do agree that there are places and situations where the government doesn't have it's place, but security isn't one of them.
If anything I would prefer to have most of the private security firms replaced by real police with real training, responsibility and accountability. I know that this statement sounds naive but a lot of security companies are simply a collaboration of thugs, looking for an excuse to beat someone up if they're having a bad day/night at work.
Knowing that their government is monitoring motherfucking world of warcraft chat for terrorist activity. I mean, I personally play on Defias Brotherhood (EU) and I'm fairly sure the July 7th bombers didn't plan their attacks in any major alliance cities. Can't speak for the horde of course, its an RPPVP server.
Why do anti-terrorist agencies keep throwing up lonely teenagers with fantasies about blowing things up that they will never carry out? The most obvious explanation is that they are unable to really do anything about terrorism, they know it, and are essentially justifying their budgets.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
First, from a European point of view, the "I'll sue your ass for not telling me the sky is blue" way of handling responsibility has caused any identity (government, business, neighbor, colleague, celebrity) that cannot hide in anonymity to be overly cautious. Any acceptable risk of danger is offset by the enormous danger of due compensation if something does go wrong. Secondly, the government is, due to their required independence, by definition an onlooker with regard to the communities they have to watch/control. Could we easily tell from carefully watching a box of thousands of bouncing rubber balls which ones are behaving differently from the others when it all looks like a blur? Surely, each individual ball would notice discrepancies upon encountering such an outlier, but this cannot be expected from an outsider. Thirdly, and this combines the first two, the best the onlooker can do to exclude any false negatives in its selection procedure, is to make sure any voluntary irregular behavior is absent, so that the irregular ones are more easily distinguished. For that same reason any, maybe in itself harmless, strange behavior at airports is dealt with as if it were the real thing to discourage such behavior in the future. The assumption is, of course, that the odd balls are unable to act as normal as the regular ones.
Yes, because the best approach to rational government is to make all decisions from the perspective of people who are personally, emotionally compromised in their judgment. Fucking retard.
If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
don forget about the settlement cost for harassment, etc, etc
Your post doesn't make sense. Did you even *browse* TFA? Kid's 18 years old, first of all, that's not a kid. That's an adult, it's reported as a kid because it's more SHOCKING! if the police are wasting time over a kid than a legal adult. SPIN!
Don't forget there's been several cases recently where postings were made on the internet shortly before somebody like this kid DID go on a killing spree. I'm sure you remember that right? There is precedent for people boasting about serious crimes that will result in loss of life in their chosen favorite online hang-out before the fact. The kid also stated that he had heard making a threat like that would get the cops at your door and wanted to test it, so I'm going to guess he said a bit more than "I'M GONNA BLOW UP A PLANE LOLZ".
I completely fail to see how you could think that if he was a terrorist that the response was idiotic. What would YOU have done? Sent somebody to observe him, when the threat was he would be blowing up a plane the NEXT MORNING? I'm sorry? Fact of the matter is, he singled out a specific plane and a specific time, and that crosses the threshold from throw-away threat in to actual threat. This is no different than making a posting somewhere that in the morning you're going to shoot up your school (hai2u 4chan), or walking through a mall and being overheard telling somebody that you're going to blow up the library at XYZ address first thing Monday morning.
Stop acting like this kid's been mistreated. He deserves what he gets for acting a fool. He's not a kid, he's a god damned adult, he should know better than to do something like this.
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
Seriously? You're going to compare the level of crazy of someone (allegedly) making a (credible) threat on someone else's life -- perhaps many people's -- and that of someone who spends "too much" time playing a video game? Seriously?
Acts 17:28, "For in Him we live, and move, and have our being."
All transactions, including communication between players, is logged. What happened here is that other players reported this person making the threats. All reports made to WOW game managers have to be reviewed. As such they found the offending text and they are obligated by their own TOS to report it.
Look at it this way, teenager makes threats to kill his parents because they won't let him play. Blizzard has it logged but does not report it. Teenager tries to or does kill parents, who do you think is going to be sued let alone vilified here?
I have no problem with Blizzard reporting threats to local authorities. Frankly we don't need these type of people in society, let alone virtual ones. Anonymity and protection of free speech is one thing, making threats is a whole other issue.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
The corporations would just do a cost benefit analysis and figure out how much it really costs if a plane is taken over by fanatical terrorists and then provide the minimum amount of security necessary to financially mitigate that risk.
There still is a public concern over this actually - for instance what if a guy wanted to fly a plane into a populated area or building?
a lot of security companies are simply a collaboration of thugs, looking for an excuse to beat someone up if they're having a bad day/night at work.
And that differs from the FBI/NSA/DEA how?
corps don't have the right to secure their planes the way they'd like to
Whose idea was that passengers must be conscious during the trip, anyway?
We'll see what the Feds decide to do with the wanker. If he mentioned a particular spell he had in mind for the plane, it could make for an interesting trial. During the Vietnam war I must have had pizza for dinner half a dozen times because the dorm food service was closed for bomb threats. Nobody was ever prosecuted back then.
Becomes easier and easier the more you believe it projects it's power. The CIA, yup that's America, the Rand Corporation yup that's America, Microsoft that's America, Israel pretty much America.
China starts to look really reasonable when you consider how many of their "atrocities" they take responsibility for. America looks really scary when you consider how many of their "atrocities" "aren't really their responsibility".
Paladin -> Holy Warrior -> Terrorist
Obama calls it the Fairness Doctrine.
Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
He's not old enough to drink alcool yet. Also eighTEEN means he's a teenager, not an adult.
"Not to mention all the idiots who use words like boxen."
Anonymous Coward on Monday August 04, @06:49PM
The FBI/NSA/DEA report to the government the US voters apparently elected.
:).
Whereas the other bunch of thugs don't.
They might all be thugs but there's still a slight difference.
That and the former probably get more taxpayer money
"Don't forget there's been several cases recently where postings were made on the internet shortly before somebody like this kid DID go on a killing spree. I'm sure you remember that right? There is precedent for people boasting about serious crimes that will result in loss of life in their chosen favorite online hang-out before the fact."
There isn't a precedent for terrorist attacks on aircraft being announced on World of Warcraft, or in fact anywhere, before they happen. Large well funded terrorist groups can't even pull it off nowadays even with extremely small sleeper cells as their actors, so what makes you think a lone kid announcing it beforehand on a computer game could? At best we have a precendent of bomb attacks on buildings being announced to the police beforehand, not on World of Warcraft.
"I completely fail to see how you could think that if he was a terrorist that the response was idiotic."
That's because you appear to only be capable of irrational thought.
"What would YOU have done? Sent somebody to observe him, when the threat was he would be blowing up a plane the NEXT MORNING? I'm sorry? Fact of the matter is, he singled out a specific plane and a specific time, and that crosses the threshold from throw-away threat in to actual threat."
How do you think he was going to get past airport security? Particularly if they were aware there was a threat against the plane?
The kid was no threat regardless, a lone kid just does not have the resources to pull off the kind of terrorist plot being implied here.
But what if it wasn't a lone kid? what if he was part of a network? Sure, go and arrest him - good luck finding the other people in the network after that though.
Real terrorists are now well aware (although they probably were anyway) that communication via WoW isn't safe, real terrorists will now not be caught out this way.
Many more kids will try this stunt as a joke on WoW and various other places on the internet. Security services will be tied up with countless wastes of time that they need to investigate to be sure (although presumably they've learnt their lesson so wont waste quite as many resources on it and will be a bit more tactful now) and in general, all they have achieved in arresting this kid is a massive home goal.
I think the line I have in my mind is:
Threats to people should be protected by "real" police with the authority to use serious force. If you pose a real threat to the physical safety of other people (life, limb, etc) it's justifiable to use deadly force to prevent that threat in the most extreme cases.
Threats to property should be protected by the people who benefit financially from that property, and the force allowed should be limited to non-lethal means, and non-permanent. Catch 'em and turn 'em over to the civil authorities, but the civil authorities should NOT have to provide the protection in the first place.
A plane full of people is a piece of private property, but if it is damaged unduly in flight, people are at risk; the government should therefore take steps to secure it, up to and including deadly force if necessary. Note that I'm absolutely NOT saying that the way flights are protected now is anything but an absolute joke - anyone with an IQ over 80 could likely come up with dozens of ways to inflict mass casualties without even engaging the airline security.
On the case of the idiot this story is about - I think one of the ways to *actually* provide security is pre-emptively investigating potential threats. This kid certainly wasn't a potential threat (though I bet it was funny to watch him pee a little when they came to get him - I often wish Barrens-chat could be punishable by arrest and cavity search). What I *am* glad about is that we're hearing about it, rather than the kid just ... disappeared.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
But did they make specific and credible threats about killing Obama? Just saying "I'm going to kill Obama, he deserves to die" is nothing. There are thousands of people everywhere who say that, but there are very few who should be taken seriously.
For example if they threatened to kill Obama at a certain time and place, and Obama was indeed going to be at that place, and they were also likely to be in that place too, I'm sure they'd get investigated and possibly arrested too.
To anyone in the USA who doesn't believe me, try it: publicly post a specific threat to kill Obama some place where he WILL be, and then for bonus points, make plans to fly/travel to that spot some days before. But don't complain about me if you get arrested or worse. I'll just laugh at you when the relevant slashdot story appears.
If this nut was in Hawaii, and said he'd blow up the Indiana-Chicago flight, I suspect the FBI wouldn't have bothered about it (and just investigated him later on if the plane actually did blow up). But he was living close enough to the relevant airport (maybe 25-30 minutes away?). So the FBI certainly should investigate him.
So 18 year olds aren't adults, huh? That's funny. You're funny. Ha ha. See, I'm laughing. Ha.
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
Sure, it's pretty clear NOW that there was no actual threat. Doesn't change the fact that there WAS a specific threat made. If we were to use your logic, any time there's a bomb threat called in to a school it should just be ignored, right? The likelihood of it being real is pretty low. And heck, let's not even investigate it at all, KIDS WILL BE KIDS amirite?
Bombs can be snuck on to planes, and without investigating the matter at all there's no way of telling if this was just someone running their mouth or some kind of weirdo's legitimate threat. It's not like it took a huge amount of money to investigate. He mouths off in the trade channel, someone reports him, a Blizzard GM sees this and hey, wouldn't you know, they have his credit card info. Call the local cops where he lives and they go check it out. No more money was wasted on this than had there been a NOISE COMPLAINT called in on his place.
In other words, the cost of looking into the matter was very low, but the potential cost of ignoring it could have been high. Without knowing anything other than Person X at Address Y made Threat Z, there's no real way to verify if it's a legit threat or not.
Matter of fact, I'd be willing to bet that the cost of sending cops over to this ADULT's apartment was lower than the total cost for increased security the day of the threat would have been.
So be happy. They arrested some irresponsible asshole AND saved money.
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
Why libertarianism doesn't work:
The downside cost of an action (or failure to act) can be greater to society than the individual actor is capable of reimbursing, while the upside benefit of so acting (or failing to so act) can be substantial.
Remember the financial crisis after 911? From an airlines cost/benefit perspective it's better to scrimp on security, because they personally are unlikely to recoup the cost of security expenditures. However, if even a single airline has sufficiently lax security to attract a terrorist strike, the cost to society as a whole is astronomical. Meanwhile, that one airline folds as soon as it is sued, and your 401(k) suffers.
Damn straight!!!! Mod parent up +10.
Hope is the currency of fools
Where no amount of spells can save you.
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jaunt
"Bombs can be snuck on to planes"
lol yeah okay then. If there's a specific threat against a specific plane and airport security is aware of it, no one is going to be getting a bomb on that plane. No additional costs are incurred because security will be doing their job anyway, perhaps just being told to be more alert for that day and be alert for a specific person. Have you ever actually been to an airport in recent years?
You've got a poor understanding of costs involved in these things if you think a simple low ranking police stakeout is more expensive than an arrest, interrogation, the paper work that goes with it, referal to the FBI, the FBI investigation that's now going on and the costs at the US attorneys office to investigate whether charges should be brought. If they are, there's the cost of the case itself too.
I see you conveniently ignore the point that in the event this was a real threat that this would be the worst possible way to go about handling it because it could potential send a cell underground or disrupt evidence gathering?
No, the fact is everything about how it handled was amateurish. As a result it was little more than a waste of money. It could've been handled much better, much more professionally, and ultimately with lower costs.
You do not appear to understand the extent of the costs this will have drawn and similarly do not seem to understand the logistics required for the type of attack the kid was claiming. You also do not seem to understand the sorts of profiles attached to people who do bomb planes - hint: they're not people who blurt it out on World of Warcraft on a public channel. This is partly related to the resources required for the attack - again, no one is going to spend all that time, planning and money simply to blurt it out on WoW.
I know the Bush administration have spent the last few years fear mongering telling you there's a terrorist at every corner, but christ, there are people that actually fall for it? Prior to 9/11 this kid would not have been arrested, this would hence not be news, but one attack in the last decade on US soil means everyone's a terrorist? talk about a paranoid nation.
problem is corps don't have the right to secure their planes the way they'd like to,
Horseshit.
They are 100% free to install, for example, bulletproof/bombproof doors to the cockpits, but they don't. Why? It would mean more weight and thus less people on a flight, resulting in lower profits. Even with all of the government funding, the assholes STILL can't keep accurate track of your luggage. Why? Because they are too cheap to put a simple RFID tag on each one- most retail stores keep better track of their inventory than the airlines.
The government sets the minimum safety standards, the airlines are more than welcome to exceed them. The only restrictions involve the use of firearms, but most of the flight crews and airlines are against arming their staff in the first place, so that's a moot point as well.
A specific threat like this should always be investigated. I'm sure you would feel differently if you had friends or family aboard that flight.
If every specific threat was investigated, it would only take a well financed terrorist organization to swamp all the investigators with false positives by paying people over in 3rd world internet cafe $0.01 per threat.
Just saying...
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
The first argument is a very interesting point. Well said. I'm going to reflect on that at length when I have some free time.
As for your example, it's ridiculous to argue that a political philosophy is somehow fundamentally broken because s specific implementation might not guarantee a utopian outcome. e.g. Are you willing to throw out The U.S. Constitution and the phlosophical ideas of democracy and republic just because the criminals who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks were able to do so within our system of government? That makes so sense. By that rationale, every political philosophy ever invented likewise "doesn't work".
I believe that would be the FDA and the AMA as, to the best of my knowledge, they have yet to authorize a drug or technique that makes knocking someone out 100% safe. Reactions to anesthetics (the way doctors knock people out for surgery) are one of the most well known ways that people die during, even mundane, surgery. Even when the surgery works, there is an anesthesiologist there the whole time monitoring the patient's condition. This is the real world, not fantasy. Just because the rest of the A-Team gave BA a shot every time they needed to take a flight doesn't mean it's a realistic technique that could be done to every airplane passenger.
Rules of Conduct:
#1 - The DM is always right.
#2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
Lets just leave it at the fact that the gov was doing its "job" and by doing that it proved to everyone by making an example out of this kid that they are NOT F*ckin around. So yet again one retarded kid lets all the people who they should be catching know that these mediums of communication ARE NOT SAFE. Why not wait for someone who's not some punk 18 year old, and actually maintain order thats not mainting itself by playing games like WoW in the first place.
Haha, that's the first thing that came to mind!
Doing dumb shit on the internet under the guise of anonymity should be punishable by death. At least this is a step in the right direction.
The example is a specific rebuttal to the GP's assertion that we should let airlines handle their own security. I'm not dismissing libertarianism only on the one example, I'm dismissing it based on the general principle I laid out. I could offer dozens of examples to support this, for instance, particualrly timely are Liehman/AIG, Bernie Madoff, and countrywide financial.
Socialized risk and privitized reward is the worst of all worlds. And since some risk is always going to be socialized, since the individuals will be unable to fully account for their actions even after we level our most sever punishmets (see Bernie Madoff again) some level of regulation is absolutely essential. This is true in enviornmental cases (superfund), economic cases (glass-steagall), and security cases (airlines).
I am in no way requiring that we "throw out the constitution." I'm making the case that some level of security at airports is necessary. If you find the airport search to be "unreasonable," you're free to find alternate travel arrangements. That is not to say that any measure is acceptable. We're seeing some pushback on millimeter wave technology, and one can hope that someday the TSA will get their head out of their asses and stop making me take off my shoes and give up my cologne. But even if those measures are frustrating and useless, they are not unconstitutional.
Would this idea of government non-interference extend to a scenario
Who said anything about "government non-interference"? The government can interfere... once there has been a crime. It should hold the airline liable for not providing enough security.
With some exceptions, I believe that most of the bar owners would say that they count on you to feel safe in their establishment.
And they hire and pay for the necessary security themselves.
The downside cost of an action (or failure to act) can be greater to society than the individual actor is capable of reimbursing
The government can require insurance or sufficient funds to cover the costs.
From an airlines cost/benefit perspective it's better to scrimp on security, because they personally are unlikely to recoup the cost of security expenditures.
Not if they are actually held liable.
Meanwhile, that one airline folds as soon as it is sued, and your 401(k) suffers.
Not if they are required to insure each other.
I don't mind airline regulation. I mind the government giving airlines freebies or providing private security services.
AIG was selling insurance. Insurance is no substitute for regulation because it is at least as easy to game as the system you're insuring.
No one is capable of insuring against the next 9/11, the next sub-prime mortgage crisis, or the next dot-com bust.
See also: cost accounting and risk analysis of nuclear power.
In security be it police, firemen, ambulance there really is only ONE right response. EVEYTHING. Sadly, that is expensive but still, what if this crazy kid HAD acted on it? It is trivial to cirumvent airport security and even if it works, they got to be right every single time while an attacker only has to get lucky once.
think back to all the big scares, IF only someone had responded earlier with excessive force, then they would be labelled as using excessive force because we would never have seen what would have happened if they didn't.
The security guard who stopped 10/11 is still paid minimum wage. (and if you never heard of 10/11, that is my entire point)
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I was working for a 2-letter tech company in Corvalis. One of my computers had the company installed and configured Linux distro running on it, which cycled through screen savers. One of the screen savers put up fortune file quotes. One of the fortune files contained the Zippy the pinhead quote, "I want to kill everyone here with a cute, colorful Hydrogen bomb!!". Now imagine the reaction of a company rent-a-cop wandering through the empty cubicle farm at 3am and seeing this come up on a screen... I was called into a 9am meeting with security, immediately suspended for a week because "it was on your computer, so obviously you are responsible for it", and of course given no recourse for defending myself. Fortunately, one of my co-workers analyzed the computer, explained it to them, and a week later I was allowed to come back to work -- with no apology whatsoever for their overreaction or accusations of terrorism. Needless to say, I spent that week applying for jobs elsewhere, and a few month later one of those positions came through, and I was out of that madhouse. The worst part? I was suspended with pay -- which meant my project kept paying me for that week as it fell a week behind schedule since I was on the critical path.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
"And why is it the government's responsibility to make a private trip in a privately owned airplane safe for you, pay for all that security with my tax dollars, and use intrusive government means as part of security?"
Someone called the police because of a perceived threat of murder. Yes murder, that's what it would be if the threat was real and carried out. In general, threats of violence are not covered by the 1st amendment. That is where police come in: a law was broken. This is outside the domain of private security.
Anyhow, the police responded by investigating and finding the man who broke the law by making the threat. They arrested him, which means they got a warrant to do so. He is now in the hands of the criminal justice system, which will probably end up going lightly on him because the threat was apparently idle.
There are certainly times when police officers overstep their boundaries and such, but this is a case where, as far I can see, the police did their jobs properly.
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
If anything I would prefer to have most of the private security firms replaced by real police with real training, responsibility and accountability. I know that this statement sounds naive but a lot of security companies are simply a collaboration of thugs, looking for an excuse to beat someone up if they're having a bad day/night at work.
I still fail to see the difference between the two...
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
After this, the next time someone tells you that you've been "REPORTED!!!" maybe you'll take it seriously. LOL!!
To avoid corruption, one must remain dishonest.
Lol, he seriously was reported. What a douchebag. I mean, really, he should know making dumbass threats like that online is just asking for trouble, granted nearly all the time nothing happens. He just proved it does and can happen, so watch your mouth when you're in a hugely populated game like World of Warcraft. Plus, what did he gain out of it? A news report on Slashdot and a big headache from his parents, which could possibly go on his record as 'Made threats to American lives.' - which won't happen, but still come on. Just a perfect example of a really stupid kid who needs some time off from World of Warcraft and gaming all together, get to studying and do a summer job; like mowing lawns. Earn money, dipshit.
I didn't read it all until now. He's 18 and was on a plane and threatened to blow it up? -
I mean really, what in the hell was he thinking?
- He was on a plane
- He threatened to blow it up
- He was in a massive game with hundreds and thousands of people, of course there would be a moderator.
This just proves that kid(really an adult in age) is really stupid and doesn't know what he is doing, even if he thought it was a 'test' or a 'joke' he really is far from being able to do anything but play a game.
I doubt he's had a job or has a job. Instead of playing that shitty, overpriced, boring, and redundant game, he should get having a job and working to do something with his life. Instead of sitting around, playing games and having his poor parents pay to waste his life away.
Also get a girlfriend at least - It's a given, he plays World of Warcraft. People who play this game are mindless, broke ass anti-social losers. Most are at least.
AIG was selling insurance. Insurance is no substitute for regulation because it is at least as easy to game as the system you're insuring.
What's there to "game"? Once an incident occurs, the insurance company pays, period. Insurance companies, like airlines, need to be regulated and supervised. They should not, however, get government subsidies for their day-to-day activities. In particular, they should not get government subsidies for providing security.
No one is capable of insuring against the next 9/11
Why not? The WTC itself was insured. Insuring things that cost a few billion dollars is pretty commonplace. And flying planes into the WTC is pretty much a worst case scenario.
The real problem is that insurance costs aren't high enough: airlines should be liable for millions of dollars per passenger lost in accidents or terrorism.
the next sub-prime mortgage crisis, or the next dot-com bust.
What do they have to do with this discussion?
The game is selling insurance policies that you can't cover. Sure we could (should) regulate credit default swaps, OR we could just regulate the industry issuing the loans so we can be reasonably certain that they're not taking on unreasonable levels of bad loans. It's a whole lot easier to audit a portfolio of mortgage loans than it is to audit a pile of mortgage backed securities hedged with credit default swaps. It's financial obfuscation, and the CDSs (insurance) makes it harder to untangle the real risks. It's been widely reported that Lehman was leveraged 40:1 before it went bust, doesn't it make more sense to say don't bet 40 times your capital reserves on the shitty tranches of shitty mortgages, then to just say, "do whatever you want" but be sure to buy insurance... Buying insurance just moves the risk up a level. If a company needs insurance because it might make bad business decisions, who covers the insurance company when it makes the bad business decision to cover bad investments? (AIG issuing CDSs on MBSs) The idea that buying insurance decreases financial risk is the business equivalent of declaring that "it's turtles all the way down."
EVEN IF AIG were able to cover it's obligations, that would only protect the financial institutions who owned a stake of the mortgages. It wouldn't do a damn thing to stop or even stem foreclosures or any of the other less immediate bad effects of of the sub-prime melt down. People would still be losing their homes and going bankrupt, which drives down consumer spending which causes the economy to tank. The people issuing, selling, bundling, and reselling MBS don't care about all those less immediate effects, the only care if they can make a profit in 2 weeks on a horribly tangled and complicated pile of 30 mortgages by selling it off to the next sucker before it starts to stink too badly. Insurance makes that more likely, not less, and insurance in this case helped the economic meltdown.
The same story can be told about 9/11 or the savings and loan crisis. Everyone covered their bases with insurance, but no one was looking out for the system as a whole. Insurance covers individual, not systematic risks. Airlines (or more accurately airlines insurers) ARE liable for millions per passenger lost. All told there was somewhere around $40 billion in insurance payouts resulting from 9/11 - but that didn't stop us from entering an 8 month recession which ended up resulting in far greater loses than the $40 billion that was directly covered.
The sub-prime meltdown wouldn't have been possible without AIG offering insurance hedges, the dot-com bust isn't directly related, but failures of regulation with Enron, MCI, are closely linked.
We don't need to insurance for people who do stupid things with far reaching consequences, we need to stop those people from doing stupid things.