4 ms·
I disagree with the author's conclusions that fabs are immune from terrorist acts because a) fabs are too large, and b) terrorists are basically dysfunctional.
by swamp40 13y ago
I disagree with the author's conclusions that fabs are immune from terrorist acts because a) fabs are too large, and b) terrorists are basically dysfunctional.
I can think of several relatively simple methods to take a large building out of commission.
And don't think for a second that terrorists don't know about all of them and more.
- jferguson 13y agoWhat do you disagree with from http://www.gwern.net/Slowing%20Moore%27s%20Law#state-actors-why-not-terrorism http://www.gwern.net/Slowing%20Moore%27s%20Law#state-actors-... ?
- gwern 13y ago> I can think of several relatively simple methods to take a large building out of commission. I'm sure you could, as could I - drive up a truck filled with fertilizer comes to mind. But that's not the question being asked, just attacking a random large building - for example, a truck bomb wouldn't work for a chip fab, though, which is relatively dispersed and well-guarded, and alternatives like 'send over one bomber and drop one daisy cutter on the complex' aren't available to terrorists. > And don't think for a second that terrorists don't know about all of them and more. Please provide 3 examples of competent terrorists using your methods.