3 ms·

> the only law that applies is the survival of the fittest. Is this such a problem? In a world where exploits are used to break infrastructure, isn't the best

by ancarda 12y ago

> the only law that applies is the survival of the fittest. Is this such a problem? In a world where exploits are used to break infrastructure, isn't the best solution simply to build increasingly more secure code? If that won't solve the problem I don't know if legislation will. Right now a determined hacker can harm a company via the internet (e.g. Sony). Are laws really going to stop that from happening? If not, please correct me. I know little about cyber warfare and would love to know more.

dthal 12y ago
I think you are exactly right. Any solutions to this have to be technical and largely defensive. Legal or diplomatic solutions will only bind parties that intend to follow the law. Counter-attacking and deterrence will fail if the attacker is not defending much of anything, so that approach might work against states and state-backed actors, but not against non-state actors.
- allendoerfer 12y ago
  > Legal or diplomatic solutions will only bind parties that intend to follow the law. Simple rule of thumb: This argument is always false. Our society is too complex. It is never about good guys vs. bad guys. It is mostly about money, who has the most and how laws can change incentives and prices. It is the same with drugs, guns, atomic bombs and nearly every other topic were this argument is brought up. We need to get over this because it is just slowing us down.
CaveTech 12y ago
Legislature can't prevent bad people from doing bad things. But it can prevent good people from doing bad or ignorant things, and it provides a framework to punish those who cause harm. Every law can and does get broken, but that doesn't mean laws are useless.
- throwaway349823 12y ago
  There are other ways to have an impact with laws than punish the aggressor. Airplanes aren't safe because the pilot or mechanic gets punished when something happens, it's because (very simplified) the airlines and manufacturers do.

by ancarda 12y ago

dthal 12y ago

I think you are exactly right. Any solutions to this have to be technical and largely defensive. Legal or diplomatic solutions will only bind parties that intend to follow the law. Counter-attacking and deterrence will fail if the attacker is not defending much of anything, so that approach might work against states and state-backed actors, but not against non-state actors.

allendoerfer 12y ago
> Legal or diplomatic solutions will only bind parties that intend to follow the law. Simple rule of thumb: This argument is always false. Our society is too complex. It is never about good guys vs. bad guys. It is mostly about money, who has the most and how laws can change incentives and prices. It is the same with drugs, guns, atomic bombs and nearly every other topic were this argument is brought up. We need to get over this because it is just slowing us down.

CaveTech 12y ago

Legislature can't prevent bad people from doing bad things. But it can prevent good people from doing bad or ignorant things, and it provides a framework to punish those who cause harm. Every law can and does get broken, but that doesn't mean laws are useless.

throwaway349823 12y ago
There are other ways to have an impact with laws than punish the aggressor. Airplanes aren't safe because the pilot or mechanic gets punished when something happens, it's because (very simplified) the airlines and manufacturers do.