4 ms·
I would call it vigilantism which is a type of definitional terrorism. People in the US don't like that word, but there's a good many things that are terrorism
by _ktx2 4y ago
I would call it vigilantism which is a type of definitional terrorism. People in the US don't like that word, but there's a good many things that are terrorism that we don't call such. At the end of the day, violence with political aims is terrorism.
- Dylan16807 4y ago> I would call it vigilantism which is a type of definitional terrorism. Only if it's sufficiently political. Lots of DDoS is not. And that bar gets higher for an attack that's minimally violent.
- kodah 4y agoThere is no DDoS that's minimally violent. You are right though, not all DDoS attacks are politically motivated.
- Dylan16807 4y agoWhatever, can we say it's a 3/10 or less on the violence scale instead of having an argument about what "minimal" means?
- kodah 4y agoFor certain things I will measure/compare harmfulness relative to potential outcomes because sometimes doing enforcement is suboptimal. In this case, however, we're talking about someone co-opting the governments monopoly on violence, which is more of an issue of principle. Once you let people co-opt that, it's a fairly run-away train. That's a long way of saying, for me this situation is very binary. There's no degrees of vigilantism.