> If we can have internationally coordinated efforts such as NATO, why can't we have them for extremely important/basic elements of our society such as technolo

> If we can have internationally coordinated efforts such as NATO, why can't we have them for extremely important/basic elements of our society such as technology? This is a very interesting question. The answer, most likely, is that the perception of security moves slower than the security concept[s] itself. We come from an era where security was in most part physical, and we're transitioning to an era where it's much more logical; society though, is having a hard time adapting to the change. For this reason, a technologist may see as obvious to take care or OpenSSL more than, say, building a tank, while a politician is stuck in with the latter only. Also, I think we're only scratching the surface here. It's interesting, for example, to think of a parallel between the interests in keeping the world insecure. In practical terms, NSA has certainly a great interest in keeping security software broken even if used by the people it's supposed to protect; I wonder what was the parallel of this, 50 years ago, and especially, how is society going to react over the time.