
Schneier: The War on the Unexpected - pg
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/the_war_on_the.html
======
jimbokun
"In criminal matters, law enforcement is experienced in separating legitimate
tips from unsubstantiated fears, and allocating resources accordingly; we
should expect no less from them when it comes to terrorism."

I don't think you can expect untrained citizens to distinguish between false
alarms and something genuinely concerning. However, it is asinine for a
trained police officer to then investigate, find nothing, and arrest someone
anyway. There needs to be consequences for anyone in a position of authority
for arresting an innocent person simply to cover their own posteriors.

------
brlewis
False alarms abound. A general sense of alarm is maintained. The government
sets itself up as a protector. People do whatever the government wants. The
system is working perfectly. What problem is Bruce Schneier trying to solve
here?

------
savrajsingh
To better educate yourself against a common "false alarm" check out this movie
--all TSA screeners are req'd to watch it before Thanksgiving. It's produced
by the Department of Justice.

<http://sikhswim.com/2007/10/16/video-on-common-ground/>

-Savraj

------
ivankirigin
It is at the same time astounding and unsurprising how wrong our security
policy setting bureaucrats are. I work with bomb disposal robots. I'm no
security expert, but I understand a bit about the field.

Not only is the edifice of security extremely inconvenient and abuse-numbing,
but it doesn't actually accomplish much of anything.

Take a CD. Break it in half. Now you have a plastic knife. The idea that we
need to suffer through half measures ignores the most import premise in
security: you're only as strong as greatest vulnerability.

------
corentin
My only explanation is that a country is globally as intelligent as the mode
of the 51% less intelligent of its citizens (it may even be much less than
that due to bipolar politics).

I can't explain the braindead politics we have to deal with in western
countries otherwise.

------
edw519
Sorry, Schneier, but I have to report this to the authorities.

------
cellis
Alas, this may be the beginning of the end for startup news as I once knew it:
a forum free from the messiness of politics.

~~~
rms
The sky is falling!

------
juanpablo
USA is becoming a scary place to live.

------
DanielBMarkham
This privacy/security issue to me is the most important issue of our
generation -- especially with the huge datastores everybody is building.

As a libertarian, I want to be completely left alone by government. If I act
odd then that's my own business. In fact, eccentricity in thought and action
are things we should praise, not report.

I do, however, understand that there is going to have to be some uncomfortable
trades to make the modern world function. A retired politician once asked,
"Nobody wants to record and mine behavior, but lets assume that right now
there are five guys in this country with a lethal, contagious disease that
they have been trying to spread to as many people as possible. We would really
need instant access to everything they've done over the past week or two, and
it would be too late to try to pass some kind of law to create a database to
get it. Do you collect and mine that information beforehand, preparing
yourself to save millions of lives, or do you make the decision that
individual privacy is more important than all those lives?"

To me it's a tough and complicated issue. At the end of the day, I'm willing
to put up with some degree of false positives, even if it involves my
detention or arrest if it supports the greater good. False positives are
always an issue with any system. The question is whether the current security
system is appropriately tuned to the security threat. Does it do more harm
than good?

Beats me.

~~~
corentin
> The question is whether the current security system is appropriately tuned
> to the security threat. Does it do more harm than good?

Let's see... The current "security system" of the US seems to consist in
attacking other countries, turning its citizens into paranoids and
implementing counter-productive policies. It kills thousands of people and
destroys wealth. Kind of like a second 9/11, with less intensity. So I guess
it does way more harm than good.

And please, don't mod this as a troll; that's basically the thesis of
Schneier's book "Beyond fear".

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Please. Tell us what you really feel. Stop holding back so much. :)

I know it's fun to lob rhetorical hand grenades around. The nice thing about
the US is that we have a system where failure is accepted. If you don't like
the policies or leaders, there will always be someone along later that's more
to your liking. We've done all kinds of screwed up stuff -- and all kinds of
good stuff. I think it's absolutely important to point out where we're wrong,
but a little perspective can be useful too.

In my perfect world there would be a lot less government involvement in all of
our lives. We would be armed and take care of things like terrorism ourselves
right when it happened, instead of farming the responsibility for our security
out to big government. But both the left and the right want to take away all
of our freedoms and do all the worrying and thinking for us. So that means we
turn what should be personal things like health care, personal security,
property ownership, and privacy into a huge multi-generational political
argument without resolution. And then people complain that the government gets
it wrong! I think people are all too happy to take away somebody else's
freedom for their pet cause. It's just when somebody else does it to them that
they squeal the most. That's why I can only answer what freedoms I am
personally willing to trade in the war on terror. I can't and won't make those
decisions for other people.

I can make one observation, though. As democracies are attacked by terrorism
they have a tendency to get more and more restrictive. I would expect the US
to follow that pattern -- it has in the past. The thing I am watching is
whether those restrictions are temporary or permanent.

I don't countenance too much the argument that politicians use fear to keep
the war on terror machine humming along. To me that sounds a lot more paranoid
than just simply acknowledging that there are people right now who are
actively plotting to kill lots of Americans. It's nothing to go beserko about,
just something to consider when you make decisions to vote for
representatives. If attacks continue over the next few decades, voters will
punish politicians who downplay the threat of terrorism. That's just political
reality.

~~~
pg
_The nice thing about the US is that we have a system where failure is
accepted. If you don't like the policies or leaders, there will always be
someone along later that's more to your liking._

I wish. Some of the top layer changes in elections, but it seems like the bad
guys in the government have very long careers, alternating between government
appointments and jobs in companies closely tied to the government. Cheney is a
famous example, but there are thousands more like him.

The culture in this world seems to be quite different from that of startup
hubs. These people are suits squared. They fail a lot, but not because they
try wildly imaginative things. They fail because succeeding (as we'd measure
it) is not their goal; power is.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
I don't know, Paul. I just am not the person to sit around wringing my hands
over how bad the political system is -- and I'm a political junkie :)

I've consulted with large government agencies and I've seen the alliances that
form between various players, congress, and various agencies. My opinion is
that any cohesive group of people with a lot of time on their hands is going
to try to take political power from other people. The caricature people use is
Cheney and the military, but it happens all over the place. I remember back in
the 80s environmental groups would go around to state legislatures, getting
them to write very complex laws. Then they would hit all of the local
governments, offering to consult with them so they would be in compliance with
the laws they helped write! So the big old wheel just keeps turning around and
around.

I will agree that the structure of the system is broken. Complex systems have
a tendency to spin out of control. But in general the whole thing kind of
hangs together anyway. We're not out in the streets with M-16s shooting at
each other. Instead we can sit in our cushy chairs enjoying all of the
benefits of freedom while we craft pithy arguments to toss at one another.

I remember when the economy was in the toilet during the late 70s. Carter used
to get on TV and say not only did the country suck, it was pretty much all our
fault. Here's hoping that form of leadership doesn't return.

~~~
aswanson
I'd take Carter over the current leadership of this country any day of the
week.

