>We said a similar proliferation sentence once on communication technology and biology - and here we are. Everybody can build and wield information-technology w

>We said a similar proliferation sentence once on communication technology and biology - and here we are. Everybody can build and wield information-technology weapons and very soon everyone will be able to craft his/her own bio-weapon in a sink. I wonder if there isn't a massive difference of likelihood between remote (IT) and physically deployed terrorism. For example, it may be easy to mess with smart cars by tampering with electronic billboards or leaving devices by the road to "fake out" cameras. But it's always been easy to leave dangerous things on a hidden part of a road (over a hill, around a sharp turn). It doesn't happen because very few people want to hurt random people, and those that might do it impulsively have plenty of time to rethink while going to the location, waiting for a chance, and then placing the trap. So I'm not worried the future will have more location-based terrorism or dangerous pranks. Even biological. I'm worried about easy and remote terrorism. Where people don't have to see or even think about the victims, and there's little time for reconsideration between planning and acting. Needs citation: I wonder if the need to be sneaky in a location is itself a guard rail. It requires the would-be terrorist to imagine how other people might catch them and react, which maybe triggers the social part of our nature. And maybe it only works if they imagine people being present and with faces, instead of disembodied actors on a network.