6 ms·

> Most of us congregate to learn and open our minds. So not to feel safe and protected, like when we were children? > I don't consider psychopaths as enemy or

> Most of us congregate to learn and open our minds. So not to feel safe and protected, like when we were children? > I don't consider psychopaths as enemy or bad guys But you consider them "bad actors". Furthermore, you simplified everything by declaring that every unsavory character suffers from the same pseudo-psychiatric pathology. And you're supposed to be an authority on the matter because you wrote a book?

PieterH 11y ago
Feeling safe and learning aren't exclusive. The term "bad actor" is widely accepted and understood. If you have a better term, I'm all ears. The term is accurate when seen from the perspective of the majority, which is the perspective I'm taking in this article. As for my authority, no, all I can say is I've studied this dynamic in depth for many years and have a lot of good data on it, and tools that work. You're free to use those tools, ignore them, etc. And it's not a pathology. It is something far more profound than that. If you're interested, and perhaps you are, read just the first chapter of that book (the PDF is free to download).
nailer 11y ago
> bad actors That's a common infosec term. Eg: http://www.csoonline.com/article/2124416/malware-cybercrime/bad-actors-exposed--mccolo--zlkon--hostfresh-and-the-damage-done.html http://www.csoonline.com/article/2124416/malware-cybercrime/...
- stefantalpalaru 11y ago
  It is. You still can't say that "bad actors" are not bad.
  - PieterH 11y ago
    I can, and do. "Bad actor" is a term. "Bad" is an adjective. It's like saying "apple" and "pine apple" must be the same fruit. We're smart enough to give different meanings to the same word, in different contexts. Bad actors act in a specific way that we can observe, model, understand, and predict. This is independent of perspective. "Bad" is a moral judgement that only exists in the head of the target. A beetle parasite of an ant colony is a "bad actor." It is not "bad."
    - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
      > It's like saying "apple" and "pine apple" must be the same fruit. No, it's like saying that a "bad apple" is not necessarily bad.
      - PieterH 11y ago
        If you're making cider, then a "bad apple" is essential. I'm not making this up as I go along. Almost four years ago I wrote (http://hintjens.com/blog:18 http://hintjens.com/blog:18) "The Economics of Evil" explaining why bad actors (I used "bad guy" in that post) were necessary (so "good" overall). Nothing radical here. Predators are bad for individual prey animals yet essential for the health of the prey species. I'm curious what you are trying to argue here because while this is interesting stuff, it seems quite random.

PieterH 11y ago

Feeling safe and learning aren't exclusive. The term "bad actor" is widely accepted and understood. If you have a better term, I'm all ears. The term is accurate when seen from the perspective of the majority, which is the perspective I'm taking in this article. As for my authority, no, all I can say is I've studied this dynamic in depth for many years and have a lot of good data on it, and tools that work. You're free to use those tools, ignore them, etc. And it's not a pathology. It is something far more profound than that. If you're interested, and perhaps you are, read just the first chapter of that book (the PDF is free to download).

nailer 11y ago

> bad actors That's a common infosec term. Eg: http://www.csoonline.com/article/2124416/malware-cybercrime/bad-actors-exposed--mccolo--zlkon--hostfresh-and-the-damage-done.html http://www.csoonline.com/article/2124416/malware-cybercrime/...

stefantalpalaru 11y ago
It is. You still can't say that "bad actors" are not bad.
- PieterH 11y ago
  I can, and do. "Bad actor" is a term. "Bad" is an adjective. It's like saying "apple" and "pine apple" must be the same fruit. We're smart enough to give different meanings to the same word, in different contexts. Bad actors act in a specific way that we can observe, model, understand, and predict. This is independent of perspective. "Bad" is a moral judgement that only exists in the head of the target. A beetle parasite of an ant colony is a "bad actor." It is not "bad."
  - stefantalpalaru 11y ago
    > It's like saying "apple" and "pine apple" must be the same fruit. No, it's like saying that a "bad apple" is not necessarily bad.
    - PieterH 11y ago
      If you're making cider, then a "bad apple" is essential. I'm not making this up as I go along. Almost four years ago I wrote (http://hintjens.com/blog:18 http://hintjens.com/blog:18) "The Economics of Evil" explaining why bad actors (I used "bad guy" in that post) were necessary (so "good" overall). Nothing radical here. Predators are bad for individual prey animals yet essential for the health of the prey species. I'm curious what you are trying to argue here because while this is interesting stuff, it seems quite random.