Slashdot Mirror
Technology Blamed For Helping UK Rioters
Hugh Pickens writes "The WSJ reports that following three nights of rioting and looting in London, Blackberry's messaging network and social networking sites are being blamed by police, politicians and media organizations for helping rioters in London spread word about the next hot spot . It's an 'encrypted, very secure, safe, fast, cheap, free, easy way for disaffected urban youth to spread messages for the next targets,' says Mike Butcher, editor of TechCrunch Europe and digital advisor to the Mayor of London. But Ian Maude, an analyst at Enders Analysis, said it's unfair to lay the blame on technology. 'Certainly, it's a lot easier for people to communicate with each other in real time via some of these services but that's a fact of life. They're not good or evil in themselves, its the purposes for which people use them.' The Metropolitan Police, known as Scotland Yard, say they are monitoring social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook. Research In Motion Ltd. (RIMM), the maker of Blackberry smartphones, says it has 'engaged with the authorities to assist in any way we can.'" An anonymous reader points out that the rioters aren't the only ones using technology. London police have begun posting pictures on Flikr of people they'd like to interview following the riots over the last few days.
Blaming technology for the rioting is bullshit. You have to have people willing to riot and loot in the first place, this just helps them group together....
But more than that, the real bullshit is that in any group that size, there's no way the communication is "secure", in fact it MUST be broadcast (by tweet or whatever) where anyone could see it. Yes that lets rioters group but it also SHOULD give police a heads-up where to be. If technology is to blame for the riots then the police are almost as much to blame for allowed the riots to occur when the targets are handed to them on a digital platter beforehand.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
A few months ago the western world wailed loudly when some arab countries terminated internet and mobile phone connections because it was thought to be assisting their local rioters. Here we have a supposedly democratic country where, at the first sign of trouble, government officials are suggesting exactly the same thing.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
Guns blamed for helping gunmen shoot people.
Bombs blamed for helping suicide bomber blow up.
Planes blamed for helping people crash planes.
Fire blamed for helping people start fires.
Phones blamed for helping people coordinate bad things.
Internet blamed for child pornography proliferation.
How about this?
Sensationalist media blamed for making everything a scandal or a controversy!
People wanting to ignore and pass off responsibility just fire the blame cannon everywhere. Why are they rioting? Why is there so much civil unrest in England? Are the English that repressed that this is a cry-out for help? Or is this all being blown out of proportion, and the riots are really just a couple of small groups causing trouble. Personally, I think the PoliceState in that country has spiraled out of control, and now there is a growing underground movement with there backs to the wall, so we are seeing the rebellion swell as more and more dissenters act out the only way they personally feel they can. How about looking at the fundamental causes for societal unrest, lets analyze the sociology of the The Land of the Panopticon Complex.
'We are trying to prove ourselves wrong as quickly as possible, because only in that way can we find progress.' RPF
Today has been a rather different story - Twitter has been used to organise a community-driven clean-up process, with large numbers of people gathering in the damaged areas of London to help fix things and tidy up. #riotcleanup is still trending worldwide, and has been for most of the day, #riotwombles (a wonderful tag) has been used for organising people on the streets, and @riotcleanup has picked up over 70,000 followers today. There's also a sort of website running now.
Social media, the Internet and technology in general are just tools - it's how people use them that matters; and today we've definitely seen them being used for good.
Give law-abiding Britains their gun rights back and let them use them in public when attacked by people who clearly intend to render substantial harm to life, limb or property.
Liberals were predicting that the "make my day" self-defense statutes Florida and Georgia have would result in a bloodbath because recipients of violence could not only stand their ground (by abolishing the "duty to retreat") but also lowered the threshold for using a weapon in self-defense.
Instead, a lot of criminals suddenly realized it would be open season on them.
Of course, you're well within your right to lecture these "redneck states" on how uncivilized their behavior is--even as your city is struggling with outright barbarism in its midst.
I've followed the BBC feed on the riots, and I can't say I've heard anyone, including the police, "blame" the technology, as much as simply acknowledging that the rioters use it to organize. That's it. Nobody is screaming "remove technology from the premises".
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
The disturbing part is that the police and more importantly the politicians are focusing on the tactics being used rather than the underlying causes of social unrest. How about figuring out why you have disaffected youth rather than how they are effective at being disruptive.
With all the surveillance cameras in London one would thought that is has to be the most secure city in the world.
Oh the irony.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
How about figuring out why you have disaffected youth rather than how they are effective at being disruptive.
The job of the police isn't to determine why, it's to stop it from happening. The police are doing their job. The 'why' is only for politicians to work out and try to address.
Living in London, and seeing the chaos first hand, I find the millions of ignorant teenage American basement dwellers posting here, with their stupid, teenage libertarian logic highly offensive. Britain is a different country, with different traditions, and different laws to the US.
IF these gangs of hoodlums were all packing .45s, then hundreds of innocent people would likely be dead.
There is NO government conspiracy to start riots as a pretext to limit our civil liberties
CCTV does work -- ask all the homie-g gangbangers being busted right now, where the evidence that put them behind bars came from
Grow up, and kindly refrain from commenting on things you obviously know nothing about. Ignoramuses.
When a young man was asked by a reporter, if he thought rioting was the correct way to express disconsent, he answered with
"Yes," said the young man. "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you?"
The TV reporter from Britain's ITV had no response. So the young man pressed his advantage. "Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press. Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you."
http://worldblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/08/07/7292281-the-sad-truth-behind-london-riot
I don't live in the UK, so I obviously don't have my finger on the pulse of London. I'm sure SOME of the people are upset over actions of the police and real or perceived inequalities and the police shooting of a young man in a poorer neighbourhood. But there is undoubtedly a number of people for whom this is just an opportunity to behave badly.
As someone who has observed pointless, causeless, riots, or attempts to get riots started at so many large public gatherings and events over the last decade, from the Seattle WTO meetings, the Toronto G8 summit, the Genoa G8 Summit, the Vancouver Stanley Cup finals, a failed attempt at the Vancouver Olympics, football hooliganism across Europe, etc. in most of these cases, there was really no social cause, just an opportunity to behave badly and anonymously in a crowd. Most of the participants, were simply partying violently and could not even articulate what social injustice they were upset about.
No one loves their government, there is always unrest, and always the "disaffected" and "disenfranchised". Sometimes there is a cause, but it has to be recognized that every large public gathering provides an opportunity for the darker side of human "crowd mentality" to come out.
If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
Not to crap on your analogy but sometimes those fires are put out with explosions. That might be analogous to how they end the riots...
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
Specious Bullshit.
Texas has the highest number of cattle per ranch; clearly that why you don't see destructive flash mobs.
Hey, Texas has a nigher suicide rate then Wisconsin, clearly that's because lots of Texans walk around armed all the time.
Stop pushing your ideological statements and specious reasoning and use facts.
The highest gun death is in the states with the highest gun ownership.
Texas has a lower concealed weapon owner ship then Michigan. Does Michigan have few crimes then Texas? How about Florida?
Do any of these states:
Percent of Adults with a License to Carry in each Shall Issue State
7.45% South Dakota
6.79% Indiana
6.76% Pennsylvania
5.23% Connecticut
5.12% Washington
4.34% Idaho
4.10% Utah
3.86% Oregon
3.45% Tennessee
3.15% Alabama
2.72% Florida
2.71% Kentucky
2.67% Wyoming
2.41% Maine
2.18% Arkansas
2.11% Virginia
1.94% West Virginia
1.76% Arizona
1.75% Oklahoma
1.70% Montana
1.70% Michigan
1.62% Texas
Do you even realize that per capita, there are 32 other states that has more gun ownership then Texas?
More data:
States with the Five HIGHEST Per Capita Gun Death Rates
Louisiana--Rank: 1; Household Gun Ownership: 45.6 percent; Gun Death Rate: 19.58 per 100,000.
Alabama--Rank: 2; Household Gun Ownership: 57.2 percent; Gun Death Rate: 16.99 per 100,000.
Alaska--Rank: 3 (tie); Household Gun Ownership: 60.6 percent; Gun Death Rate: 16.38 per 100,000.
Mississippi--Rank: 3 (tie); Household Gun Ownership: 54.3 percent; Gun Death Rate: 16.38 per 100,000.
Nevada--Rank: 5; Household Gun Ownership: 31.5 percent; Gun Death Rate: 16.25 per 100,000.
States with the Five LOWEST Per Capita Gun Death Rates
Hawaii--Rank: 50; Household Gun Ownership: 9.7 percent; Gun Death Rate: 2.58 per 100,000.
Massachusetts--Rank: 49; Household Gun Ownership: 12.8 percent; Gun Death Rate: 3.28 per 100,000.
Rhode Island--Rank: 48; Household Gun Ownership: 13.3 percent; Gun Death Rate: 4.43 per 100,000.
Connecticut--Rank: 47; Household Gun Ownership: 16.2 percent; Gun Death Rate: 4.95 per 100,000.
New York--Rank: 46; Household Gun Ownership: 18.1 percent; Gun Death Rate: 5.20 per 100,000.
Think.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
What? Nobody is asking why this is possible at all? I mean, let's look at what's going down here: Someone got shot. Someone else spreads the (false or true, who cares?) information that he was the victim of police violence. And suddenly all hell breaks loose and people are rioting.
Could it be, just COULD, that we're sitting on a powder keg with a damn lot of people SO pissed at government and the whole mess governments have put us in that they will accept ANY reason to vent their anger violently?
That's the only explanation I could see. I mean, think about it, why else should a lot (and we're talking about a LOT) of people go out, become a mob and riot? Because they care for the guy who was shot? At best, it's the spark for the already filled to the brim keg.
The problem isn't technology, and it isn't that someone was shot. They now want to close the lid on the keg to keep it from exploding, because that's all that's needed, not only in London.
A spark.
People are angry. VERY angry. It's like looking at a saturated solution ready to crystalize, and all it needs is a disturbance to set it in motion.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I don't think most of the people who are actually rioting are pissed at their government, they've probably paid pretty little attention to what the government has been doing in general. They're pissed at their society, because they're jobless and have no future prospects. That has very little to do with what the government has or hasn't done recently and a lot more to do with persistent problems that technology has brought about but society hasn't been very effective in dealing with.
At least that's certainly the impression that the writer of this article gives.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
And THAT is exactly the point. That is the key to the rioting and looting this time around. I've posted this in two place now, but here's goes again: The London riots cannot be divorced from the recent political and financial scandals in the UK and beyond.
In the last few years, the general public has been made privy to the monumental failure of ethics and responsibility in institutions both public and private. Bankers and financiers have been seen publicly seen to profit enormously from feckless and irresponsible behaviour. Politicians and civil servants have been shown to be inept at best, and in collusion at worst. And--in particular in the UK--the media and police force have been found to be involved in the most scandalous, unscrupulous and unethical behaviour of recent times.
We are living in an age of irresponsibility.
It's interesting to see that many of the rioters are expressing no political, social, or ideological motivations. They are either engaged in arson or larceny. It is simple opportunism. But this behaviour not a random incident; it is an inevitable consequence of our times. I would hold that these rioters across the UK, discontented from the effects of austerity and unemployment, and cynicised by the endless stream of unresolved scandals, have simply decided to have their own slice of the rotten pie.
If bankers can loot the nation without consequence, if the media can destroy lives with impunity, and politicians lie without consequence, then why should a young unemployed man with few prospects turn up what may be his only opportunity to own a big flatscreen TV, or some designer clothes, or to vent his rage at the state? Because it would be "wrong"? Because it is "immoral", "unethical"? But for his entire life this young man has been shown by example that crime pays, that ruthlessness and wrongdoing pays, that rage and emotion pay.
I don't wish to sound like a religious reactionary, bemoaning the loss of public morality. But what kind of ethics have these young men learned from their leaders and public and private institutions? In the UK and beyond. Where are the ethical pillars of our society who lead by example? In politics? In the church? In the media? In private industry? I see none such. And moreover, I see those in such influential positions profiting from their poor examples.
Remember to these young people, the state over the last 10 years is all they have ever known. A state that has lied and warred. A media that has colluded and harassed. Public institutions who have lost all sense of civic duty. Industries that have profited from the most wanton recklessness and greed. And everywhere, none have been held to account.
There are other underlying causes such as deprivation, unemployment, and hooliganism. But such things have always existed in the UK and elsewhere, but I see this spontaneous outbreak of criminal opportunism first and foremost as a sign of our times. These opportunist rioters have been lead by example by our corrupted ruling classes. As the saying goes, "As above, so below".
May the Maths Be with you!
Well, the pictures don't look too different. In both people run around, fight the police and light buildings on fire. In both scenarios people get hurt and looting happens. The main difference seems to be that we agree with one and disagree with the other.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.