3 ms·

> terrorists reach the point of being able to bomb anyone they want I mean I think all they have to do is attack voters psychologically. Furthermore, what happ

> terrorists reach the point of being able to bomb anyone they want I mean I think all they have to do is attack voters psychologically. Furthermore, what happens when these awful school shooter losers decide to apply Ukrainian tactics on after school activities? They’re all little wannabe terrorists. I personally think it’s just a matter of time, the same way Columbine was (unfortunately) a matter of time. I sure hope I’m just over-paranoid. Could be a really dark future.

ethbr1 3y ago
Technical aptitude tends not to be found in one-off terrorists (school shooters). More so in insurgencies (IEDs), where there's an opportunity for specialization, training, and iterative improvement. Mostly because technical people tend to be well-off, and well-off people don't have many reasons to throw their lives away. The drone attack scenario seems more likely from a clandestine state actor, hoping to take advantage of anonymity. E.g. ship a drone into the country, then detonate it in a mass gathering, then walk away But state actors, even hostile ones, don't usually commit acts of terror against civilian targets, because they're counterproductive. They don't harm military capability and rally the public.
- gnarlouse 3y ago
  I’m sure that was the same logic they had pre-Columbine
  - ethbr1 3y ago
    Walk me through how the Columbine shooters demonstrated technical proficiency?
    - gnarlouse 3y ago
      That’s not what I’m talking about, I’m saying the logic was “something like columbine will never happen because …” like ok, famous last words. Technical proficiency is your contribution here and I just disagree with it. It’s not like drones are (a) hard to fly, (b) expensive or (c) access restricted. Kids my age at 13 were making backshed napalm out of pure fascination. And also I’m pretty sure the columbine kids were trying to build a bomb, so there’s your technical proficiency request. Like I said buddy, I hope I’m wrong.
      - ethbr1 3y ago
        Drone are indeed (a), (b), and to some degree (c), to the extent that if you're proficient with them you currently have employment opportunities in developed economies. It's the capability vs financially beneficial alternatives that matters. Links on the Columbine kids building a bomb? Given how easy it is to make a pipe bomb, I feel failure there would cut in favor of my argument re: Columbine.
    - paulryanrogers 3y ago
      They built then planted bombs in the cafeteria and parking lot. Thankfully the bombs didn't go off as expected. One of them was even into mapping Doom (1993). There have been shootings at universities by students there. So not all poor and desperate and indoctrinated.
- pixl97 3y ago
  Eh... https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/11/theres-a-good-reason-why-so-many-terrorists-are-engineers/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/11/theres-a-good-reason-wh... At least in the West you run into less engineers performing terrorism because they have pretty good life prospects. Now, if you start replacing all their jobs with AI or other means of social upheaval that could quickly change.

ethbr1 3y ago

Technical aptitude tends not to be found in one-off terrorists (school shooters). More so in insurgencies (IEDs), where there's an opportunity for specialization, training, and iterative improvement. Mostly because technical people tend to be well-off, and well-off people don't have many reasons to throw their lives away. The drone attack scenario seems more likely from a clandestine state actor, hoping to take advantage of anonymity. E.g. ship a drone into the country, then detonate it in a mass gathering, then walk away But state actors, even hostile ones, don't usually commit acts of terror against civilian targets, because they're counterproductive. They don't harm military capability and rally the public.

gnarlouse 3y ago
I’m sure that was the same logic they had pre-Columbine
- ethbr1 3y ago
  Walk me through how the Columbine shooters demonstrated technical proficiency?
  - gnarlouse 3y ago
    That’s not what I’m talking about, I’m saying the logic was “something like columbine will never happen because …” like ok, famous last words. Technical proficiency is your contribution here and I just disagree with it. It’s not like drones are (a) hard to fly, (b) expensive or (c) access restricted. Kids my age at 13 were making backshed napalm out of pure fascination. And also I’m pretty sure the columbine kids were trying to build a bomb, so there’s your technical proficiency request. Like I said buddy, I hope I’m wrong.
    - ethbr1 3y ago
      Drone are indeed (a), (b), and to some degree (c), to the extent that if you're proficient with them you currently have employment opportunities in developed economies. It's the capability vs financially beneficial alternatives that matters. Links on the Columbine kids building a bomb? Given how easy it is to make a pipe bomb, I feel failure there would cut in favor of my argument re: Columbine.
  - paulryanrogers 3y ago
    They built then planted bombs in the cafeteria and parking lot. Thankfully the bombs didn't go off as expected. One of them was even into mapping Doom (1993). There have been shootings at universities by students there. So not all poor and desperate and indoctrinated.
pixl97 3y ago
Eh... https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/11/theres-a-good-reason-why-so-many-terrorists-are-engineers/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/11/theres-a-good-reason-wh... At least in the West you run into less engineers performing terrorism because they have pretty good life prospects. Now, if you start replacing all their jobs with AI or other means of social upheaval that could quickly change.