3 ms·

Back in the day, there was controversy over the idea of a standing army... the usual moral and economic issues. As war became a faster and larger affair the sta

Back in the day, there was controversy over the idea of a standing army... the usual moral and economic issues. As war became a faster and larger affair the standing professional army made more sense. The speed at which cyber warfare could happen and cripple a nation and the chaos that would ensue has me lean on the side of the necessity of our civilian industries working with the military-industrial complex and government. This might be easier to do if we trusted our government institutions especially the clandestine ones, which I think we rightly question. Of course, if they don't develop the tech, someone else will, and it might come to bite them in the end. May as well have a say. edited: for clarity

snowwrestler 8y ago
"Cyber warfare" as you're referring to it ("cripple a nation") is a subset of total war: targeting the civilian population to achieve a military goal. In the physical version of total war, you can only provide defense with military tools. You need military anti-aircraft guns to shoot down military aircraft. You need tanks and artillery to stop enemy tanks and artillery. To provide defense against cyber total warfare, you don't necessarily need military technology. You just need secure civilian technology. Google is already doing a lot of work in that area. Examples include Project Zero to find and close security vulnerabilities; their work to normalize, monitor, and enforce proper use of TLS across the Internet; Chrome browser and OS security work; Gmail security work, etc. Government institutions can provide predictive surveillance that Google cannot. Only the Cyber Command, CIA, NSA, DIA, etc., and their international partners, have the ability to see inside the HQs of potential enemies. And those are the only agencies permitted to act in an offensive cyber capacity. Is Google under any obligation to support that work? I don't think so. Google can do, and is already doing, A LOT to help the U.S. defend against cyber warfare.

snowwrestler 8y ago

"Cyber warfare" as you're referring to it ("cripple a nation") is a subset of total war: targeting the civilian population to achieve a military goal. In the physical version of total war, you can only provide defense with military tools. You need military anti-aircraft guns to shoot down military aircraft. You need tanks and artillery to stop enemy tanks and artillery. To provide defense against cyber total warfare, you don't necessarily need military technology. You just need secure civilian technology. Google is already doing a lot of work in that area. Examples include Project Zero to find and close security vulnerabilities; their work to normalize, monitor, and enforce proper use of TLS across the Internet; Chrome browser and OS security work; Gmail security work, etc. Government institutions can provide predictive surveillance that Google cannot. Only the Cyber Command, CIA, NSA, DIA, etc., and their international partners, have the ability to see inside the HQs of potential enemies. And those are the only agencies permitted to act in an offensive cyber capacity. Is Google under any obligation to support that work? I don't think so. Google can do, and is already doing, A LOT to help the U.S. defend against cyber warfare.