
Ask HN: What can we do against terrorist attacks, like the one in Paris? - mininao
Hi,
I live in paris, and I&#x27;ve been profoundly hit by the violence of tonight&#x27;s attacks in Paris ( http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2015&#x2F;11&#x2F;14&#x2F;world&#x2F;europe&#x2F;paris-shooting-attacks.html )
I think that as technology makers, we have a power to change the world.
So my question is simple : What can we do to prevent these awful acts ?<p>Thanks.
(I trust that the HN community is wise enough to discuss about this matter without violence, racism, etc..)
======
kleer001
Technology can help increase empathy. At least I think it can. I hope it can.

That technology might help. Maybe by sharing the marginalized stories of
vulnerable people.

We've tried fear and anger to stop these kind of things, but it's just like a
whack-a-mole. Why don't we try empathy and understanding?

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IgOVOPLTYI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IgOVOPLTYI)

disclaimer: My heart goes out to all of those touched by needless violence. I
in no way endorse violence of any kind, and the perpetrators of such deserve
to be caught, tried, and if guilty, locked away for the rest of their lives.
That said, those that do overt violence are not the root of the problem. They
have (or had) friends and family that could have steered them in a different
direction.

~~~
TurboHaskal
The more empathy the more effective terrorism becomes.

~~~
kleer001
I'm not sure how you got to that. Do you see the empathetic as somehow easier
to scare?

Fear does not necessarily follow from empathy. What does follow from more
empathy (as I understand) is more care of poor people, more inclusiveness,
quicker action to the needy, less warmongering.

edit: Here's a primer on Empathy technology:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT5X6NIJR88](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT5X6NIJR88)

------
maxharris
The #1 thing you can do is to name the party responsible (once it is known for
certain), and to name the _ideology_ that motivates these repeated, ever more
brazen attacks.

If this is what everyone thinks it is (but is cautiously tip-toeing around),
"extremism" is not specific enough.

~~~
dynamic99
Didn't you just tip-toe around it?

~~~
AnimalMuppet
No. He said "once it is known for certain". We're pretty close, but it is
still reasonable to say that we're not there yet.

------
stray
It is impossible to prevent while only criminals/terrorists have the weapons.

An armed citizenry is not so easily victimized.

~~~
miguelrochefort
A recent tweet by Newt Gingrich echoes precisely that:

[https://twitter.com/newtgingrich/status/665312487147896832](https://twitter.com/newtgingrich/status/665312487147896832)

I understand that this is not the popular opinion around here, but I genuinely
can't think of an alternative.

~~~
sirrocco
I call bullshit on that. Tell me one theater/school/whatever attack in the
States that has been foiled by armed citizens.

~~~
miguelrochefort
"Since 2009, 92 Percent of Mass Shootings Have Occurred in Gun-Free Zones"

[http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/10/since-2009-92-percent-
of-m...](http://freedomoutpost.com/2015/10/since-2009-92-percent-of-mass-
shootings-have-occurred-in-gun-free-zones/)

~~~
hokkos
But what is the proportion of not gun free colleges ? (because this is where
most shooting are)

------
miguelrochefort
The only true way to prevent these acts is to eliminate ideological conflicts
altogether. Usually, this is done by letting the state pick a winning ideology
and suppress those who don't adhere to it. This tends to ensure a level of
homogeneity that makes violence obsolete.

A more moderate solution is to allow conflicting ideologies to exist as long
as they don't reach extremes. This is usually done through mass surveillance,
which supposedly should be able to catch extremists before they act. Sadly,
we're still very far from Minority Report's level of accuracy.

Alternatively, we could adopt a more reactive approach which would focus on
reducing the gravity of such events rather than trying to prevent them.
Namely, law abiding citizens should be able to conceal-carry weapons. Although
it couldn't stop all kinds of terrorist attacks, it could very well put a stop
to most mass shootings. This assumes an important "good" to "bad" people ratio
(where "good" is defined by the majority and/or by the state).

Basically, live in a society that's xenophobic and armed.

~~~
sirrocco
No, having guns won't help one bit. Just name one attack in the States that
has been foiled by a citizen.

What will happen unfortunately is that the surveillance measures will increase
exponentially, normal citizens will throw privacy out the window, terror
attacks will still happen.

It's the world we live in.

~~~
mrits
It happens quite frequently. If everyone had a gun it would prevent almost all
of the incidents. I'm not sure why you would argue this. The other question is
how bad is the result of everyone carrying a gun.

~~~
DanBC
> I'm not sure why you would argue this.

Because there are plenty of places where lots of people have guns but suicide
bombings or kidnapping or etc still happen regularly.

------
lgieron
The terrosist attacks are caused by political, cultural and economic factors,
I don't think technology has an important role to play in an eventual
solution...

~~~
cJ0th
In the grand scheme of things this is possibly the correct answer. However,
what technology can do is bring some meaning to more peoples life. One reason
people do things like those which happened in Paris is due to the fact that
these people are not integrated into a friendly, peaceful society. Thus they
feel a void and need to fill it with something that gives them a sense of
power and belonging. Technology can be used to enable people to create meaning
for themselves. For Instance, the advent of digital music production enabled
people who couldn't play a "real" instruments in the olden days to express
themselves musically now. I know a guy who used to get into fights at night
clubs until the day I introduced Cubase to him!

And even if these individuals are not strong enough to do something productive
technology could at least give them a glimpse of power and belonging in online
communities. For example, a person who is busy playing WoW all day won't get
to shooting someone in the streets.

What I wrote above is, unfortunately, hugely idealistic. More realistically I
see two options for this problem:

1\. don't just bomb targets but level the ground. This is of course not
something we actually want to do because it would kill many innocent people.
Still from an unempathetic point of view: Is killing millions of people now
worse than eventually allowing <made up stat>twice as many people to be killed
over the comming decades</made up stat>? instead:

2\. We have to fucking evolve and acknowledge that they found a bug in our
system and "we are the best, democracy rules, those guys are in the wrong -
why are they so mean?" as well as a couple of bombs simply don't cut it
anymore. Instead, we should come off our high horses and work our ass off to
address the (political, cultural, economical) domains OP mentions so that we
can leave our current conception of the world behind us and progress to
something that serves us better in the coming years. However, this is radical
and it is hard to make a society move into this direction as all of us would
have to question everything we do. Maybe finding time for teaching refugees
your language for free is more important than working longer hours so that you
contribute to pushing the GDP. Maybe moderate Muslims should do more to
prevent those attacks even though it is neither their fault not their
responsibility to do anything about it. Maybe the "average customer" should be
more mindful when s/he goes shopping by making sure that s/he doesn't support
supply chains which somehow benefit terror supporters. In short, every member
of society has to work their ass of to bring some positive change about.

~~~
lgieron
I'm not sure if WoW and similar games fulfill the deep needs of connection and
belonging people have (for example, Breivik was pretty much playing WoW 24/7
for a couple years before he moved on to his radicalism and, eventually, mass
murder). Given by the amount of negative emotions I've seen in online games,
my guess is that's more of a paliative, similar to alcohol or drugs. As for
the Fight Club -> music production story, that's great and gives some hope.
However, most people are not cut for and/or interested in solitary activities
like this.

I don't see first option as a viable one, simply because there's currently 1.7
billion Muslims in the world (most of them doesn't support the radicals, but
I'm guessing that could change very quickly if their innocent family members
get killed during the "levelling of the ground"). It would lead to WWIII.

I think the positive route, along with some smart interventions (i.e. not
having borders open to any and all refugees which want to enter Europe, but
rather absorbing them at a manageable rate), is the way to go.

~~~
cJ0th
> I don't see first option as a viable one

I agree "option" wasn't a good way to put it. As to Breivik, I didn't know
that he played WoW. You are probably right that games don't offer enough
substance/not a positive atmosphere.

------
JSeymourATL
If you're a Data-Minded individual, it might be useful to first learn who
exactly the terrorists (and their comrades) are.

The vast majority of terrorist attacks in E.U. countries have for years been
perpetrated by separatist organizations>
[http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/01/08/3609796/islamist-t...](http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/01/08/3609796/islamist-
terrorism-europe/)

------
J_Darnley
Little at the moment. A largely open border to the rest of the Eurasian
continent allows for an inflow of weapons even if you successfully collected
all that are already here. Weak explosive devices can be made with common(ish)
materials. Even with tight controls you will still get knife attacks. Just
look at Palestine recently.

Tight controls will require a more authoritarian government. I for one don't
want that but I expect we will get it and the masses will demand it. Yay for
neighbours.

------
thrwwy123
Tech people can disable the forums where terrorists recruit and promote their
ideology. There are many foreigners who join ISIS, and many who initiate
attacks based upon what they read.

------
eivarv
Make people realize what types of thinking leads to these types of actions, in
addition to under which conditions, how and why.

I think it's very strange that what we know of common errors of thinking (e.g.
logical fallacies, cognitive biases, etc.) have no real place in our pop-,
political or common intellectual culture. The fact that we don't use these
"checklists" when evaluating ideas directly leads to the spread and rise of
intellectually bankrupt ideas, or ways of thinking that make no sense (at
best), all over the political spectrum.

Also: Education, equality, social mobility and inclusivity (all known to play
their parts in this complex equation).

~~~
eivarv
Sorry; not to comment upon that which must not be commented upon, but I'd love
to hear what people disagree with my post about, as opposed to not getting to
know anything other than its popularity.

------
gesman
Long term - open dialogs.

Short term - allow law abiding citizens to carry guns to protect themselves.
This will make life of police much easier and would save lives.

~~~
davidtron9999
suicides will increase overnight

~~~
gesman
You mean people will buy guns en masse to finally be able to commit suicides?

------
colund
Unfortunately, I think the terrorists suffer from a severe lack of empathy.
I'd say the terrorist seem to be psychopaths or schizofrenic. So probably they
need to be de-brainwashed via some hard-to-reject facts. The problem with the
world is that social structures work in cluster (especially with Internet) and
it's hard to reach into social structures with people who have opposite
beliefs for a meaningful discussion.

~~~
eivarv
I'm surprised so many people during the last days have said stuff like this
here on HN, i.e. that these things have something to do with mental illness.

Do people really know this little about what mental illness (in this case
psychopathy or schizophrenia) actually is?

I also thought it was widely known that very little is needed for people to be
able to act abhorrently towards someone they identify as somehow other than
themselves (e.g. sociological out-group, "otherization").

~~~
colund
Come on. I am aware that most people have a "psychological dark side" so to
speak and that normal people can go to war. My point was that the ruthlessness
of the terrorists show a sever lack of empathy of innocent people, and that it
seems hard to reason with their obsessive minds. I'm not saying that all
terrorists are psychopaths. _Probably their manipulative leaders are, though!_

I'm sure that you can debate whether they are sane or not.

A psychologist supports the view that terrorists may be psychopaths when she
writes "As we turn now to Islamofascist terrorists, we can begin to see that
they meet almost all the criteria listed above for psychopathic traits. They
even use the same excuses for their unwillingness to accept any responsibility
for their own actions." [http://drsanity.blogspot.se/2004/10/psychopathology-
of-terro...](http://drsanity.blogspot.se/2004/10/psychopathology-of-
terrorism.html)

Another article supports the idea that terrorists are not mentally ill and
furthermore discusses whether terrorists may be depressed:
[http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2015/06/29/mental-i...](http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2015/06/29/mental-
illness-and-terrorism/)

~~~
eivarv
I totally understand what your point is, I just don't think that it makes much
sense. I would even hesitate to call it a "dark" side, as many of the same
patterns of thought are used (to an extent) by most people.

You _might_ be able to establish some sort of link between ruthlessness and
"psychopathy". I'd love to hear where schizophrenia enters the picture,
though.

While your first link is only a personal blog post, it does present some
coherent thought - but even the author states that "terrorists, by and large,
do not suffer from psychosis".

There is also the fact that what we think of as psychopathic actions (or
stereotypes thereof) are primarily driven by the ego of the perpetrator, as
opposed to the alleged ideological motivations of (e.g. islamic) terrorists.

Note that the first article focuses on the common superficialities (their
behaviors appears somewhat similar), but says nothing of the cognitive
processes at play in practice - the piece is mostly speculation.

By the way, the statements that "the Palestinians have perfected victimhood as
a science" (near the end of the article) leads me to take this source with a
grain of salt.

The second article is an argument based on a hell of a lot of assumptions (it
even admits this), and basically assumes that since the causes of mental
illness and terrorism resemble each other they must be connected (or even the
same).

My gripe with your initial post is that the assertion is dubious (at best, and
not really theoretically supported), and that it:

\- Gives a psychologically satisfying explanation as to how "they" can do
things like this, that makes it easier for us to see them as something other
than us.

\- Ends up perpetuating mental health stigma.

\- Politicizes psychopathology.

I suggest taking a look at what a professional authority, e.g. APA [0] says
about the matter.

[0]:
[http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/11/terrorism.aspx](http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/11/terrorism.aspx)

------
manuelh
Fight the causes, the real causes; stop neocolonialism (France has bombed
Lebanon, Syria, Lybia, Afghanistan, Somalia, Iran, all Muslim countries, and
I'm not quoting military intervention in Africa), education - but meaning
sensibility from the West to Third country history (links to the technology
issue below)

That's just to start.

------
atmosx
I hold equally responsible the extremist groups (ISIS, Al Qaida, etc.) and
entirety of western and eastern governments (USA gov, EU, UK gov, China gov,
Rus gov, France gov and my country's gov) for this mess. Our policies are the
ones who allow these extremist groups to _grow_.

I feel that these events are connected a la _V for Vendetta_ :

[0] In Afghanistan, tie between 9/11 and the war often gets lost

[1] U.S. Weaponry Is Turning Syria Into Proxy War With Russia

[2] Drone Strike in Yemen Hits Wedding Convoy, Killing 11

[3] EU and France deny any change in Syria policy

[4] Collateral Murder (Wikileaks - Iraq)

[5] Italy Arrests ISIS Terrorist Disguised As Refugee

[6] Syria: A human tragedy

[7] Cheney Insists Iraq War Was Worth It Because Of WMD

[8] Who are Isis? A terror group too extreme even for al-Qaida

[9] Charlie Hebdo Shooting

These are random links, I just collected from DDG mind you, nothing well-
thought. I could start from the crusades I guess and everything would be
equally aligned in my mind.

On a personal note feel terrorized. I was planning a trip to Paris this year.
Now, I don't know. The only thing that remains, unfortunately, is fear. We
can't see straight anymore.

Obama calls Paris attacks 'outrageous'. Is he willing to stop fueling the war
in Syria?

“An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.” - Ghandi

“Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” - Asimov

[0] [http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/10/world/la-fg-
afghanis...](http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/10/world/la-fg-
afghanistan-911-20110911)

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/world/middleeast/syria-
rus...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/world/middleeast/syria-russia-
airstrikes.html)

[2] [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/world/middleeast/drone-
str...](http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/13/world/middleeast/drone-strike-in-
yemen-hits-wedding-convoy-killing-11.html)

[3] [http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/16/us-mideast-
crisis-...](http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/16/us-mideast-crisis-kerry-
france-idUSKBN0MC1Z820150316)

[4]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0)

[5] [http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/09/italy-arrests-isis-
terrori...](http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/09/italy-arrests-isis-terrorist-
disguised-as-refugee/)

[6]
[http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidesyria/2014/03/syri...](http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidesyria/2014/03/syria-
human-tragedy-201438153157493734.html)

[7]
[http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/10/29/2853061/cheney-...](http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/10/29/2853061/cheney-
iraq-wmd/)

[8] [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/isis-too-
extrem...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/11/isis-too-extreme-al-
qaida-terror-jihadi)

[9]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting)

------
junto
There is very little we can do in the short term. We have to understand the
reasons why ISIS are targeting the west. They have a multiple pronged
approach:

\- Provoke the west to further attacks on Muslims. Ideally the deaths of
Muslims in Muslim lands should include innocents. Drone strikes and bombings
are good, because it helps them turn the local people to their side.

\- Provoke the west to hatred and bigotry of the greyzone Muslims (moderates)
living in the west. Ideally they feel further marginalised and excluded. They
need to be turned to fight for the caliphate, or be killed with the rest of
the 'kuffār' (western non-believers).

\- Provide young impressionable marginalised Muslim male youths with 'heroic'
role models. Ghettoes in Paris where the 2005 riots took place are an ideal
breeding ground for marginalization. Most are unemployed, have no education
and no opportunities.

\- Removal of despotic dictators from Muslim lands. Promoting instability,
unemployment and isolation improves the chances of additional soldiers to join
the fight.

I highly recommend an article called "THE EXTINCTION OF THE GRAYZONE" [1]:

    
    
      The Muslims in the West will quickly find themselves between
      one of two choices, they either apostatize and adopt the 
      kufrī religion propagated by Bush, Obama, Blair, Cameron, 
      Sarkozy, and Hollande in the name of Islam so as to live 
      amongst the kuffār without hardship, or they perform hijrah 
      to the Islamic State and thereby escape persecution from the 
      crusader governments and citizens.
    

This shows how the aim is two end up with two sides. No greyzone. Finally this
highlights what we are up against:

    
    
      As the world progresses towards al-Malhamah al-Kubrā, the 
      option to stand on the sidelines as a mere observer is being 
      lost. As those with hearts diseased by hypocrisy and bid’ah 
      are driven towards the camp of kufr, those with a mustard 
      seed of sincerity and Sunnah are driven towards the camp of 
      īmān.
    
      Muslims in the crusader countries will find themselves 
      driven to abandon their homes for a place to live in the 
      Khilāfah, as the crusaders increase persecution against 
      Muslims living in Western lands so as to force them into a 
      tolerable sect of apostasy in the name of “Islam” before 
      forcing them into blatant Christianity and democracy.
      
      Muslims in the lands ruled by the apostate tawāghīt will 
      find themselves driven to the wilāyāt of the Islamic State, 
      as the tawāghīt increase their imprisonment of any Muslim 
      they think might have a mustard seed of jealousy for his 
      religion, or lead them to apostatize by working as agents, 
      soldiers, and puppets serving the banner of the tāghūt.
      
      Mujāhidīn in the lands of jihād will find themselves driven 
      to join the ranks of the Khilāfah, or forced to wage war 
      against it on the side of those willing to cooperate with 
      the munāfiqīn and murtaddīn against the Khilāfah. If they do 
      not execute these treacherous orders, they will be 
      considered khawārij by their leaders and face the sword of 
      “independent” courts infiltrated by the Sufis, the Ikhwān, 
      and the Salūlī sects.
    
      Eventually, the grayzone will become extinct and there will 
      be no place for grayish calls and movements. There will only 
      be the camp of īmān versus the camp of kufr.
    

ISIS believe in a prophesy. They are trying to make it come true. If you look
at the list of things above, we are falling slowly into their hands, one step
at a time.

The sad thing is that there is no quick fix. We could leave the middle east
and stop interfering. It would be a good first step to defusing tensions based
on our presence there, but it would simply open the door to ISIS at the
moment, leaving a vacuum for them to fill.

If we go full out war, with boots on the ground then we end up joining a fight
that we cannot win.

I've heard calls to "nuke them back to the stone age". That's great, but many
of them are living amongst us. Paris has had several terrorist attacks and the
vast majority of the attacks were French born. The same went for the attacks
in London.

Long term we need to add to the grey zone. In fact we need to westernise and
have inclusive policies to make sure the marginalized Muslim youth (in fact
all disenfranchised youths) are included in society. They need to see that
they have a future.

The best thing we can do is to train them and employ them, making them
valuable members of society and giving them something to feel proud of.

At the moment, poisonous Mullahs are doing that job a hell of a lot better
than we are.

[1] Source: THE EXTINCTION OF THE GRAYZONE:
[https://archive.is/VE0jj#selection-459.1-463.388](https://archive.is/VE0jj#selection-459.1-463.388)

