3 ms·

Freakonomics had an episode recently "Is there a better way to fight terrorism?" [1] An interesting statistic they note is that occupation is the primary cause

Freakonomics had an episode recently "Is there a better way to fight terrorism?" [1] An interesting statistic they note is that occupation is the primary cause of terrorism. Rather than focus on prediction, why not focus on the causes? [1]: http://freakonomics.com/2015/02/13/is-there-a-better-way-to-fight-terrorism-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/ http://freakonomics.com/2015/02/13/is-there-a-better-way-to-...

BonsaiDen 12y ago
Focussing on the cause won't give you the side-effects (or benefits, depending on how you look at it) of installing a surveillance state / building up intelligence for economic advantages etc. If in today’s world the act of merely "kidding" around on the internet or dropping a suitcase in front of some building, is enough to bring whole cities to a grinding halt, then the terrorist already one. And because of this, you won't need anymore technology to stop terrorist, but the technology to remove all the fears from peoples minds. Fear and the removal of freedom are the terrorist ultimate goals, they may achieve this in part by killing people, but they also receive a tremendous amount of help by your government of choice which wants to know every little detail about you. It's a game about visibility after all, many many more lives are lost every day due to illness and hunger than through means of terrorism. But there is no visibility, because spending money on medical research isn't as "effective" as spending it on your military / intelligence budget. Partly due to the lobbyists and partly due to the fact that helping - seemingly "random" - people won't convince your average voter, that you're actually doing something for them. Arguing about how you're protecting their children is much more convincing in the short term. Sadly, at the moment I don't see any way out of this dilemma, except for some horrible events to take place which will wake everyone up e.g. someone newly elected using the existing surveillance mechanism in their country to install a totalitarian regime along with the mandatory secret police. Which I really hope won't happen.
saeguaiga 12y ago
n.b. occupation by a foreign power; so it's DAR-based terror all the way down, much though finding a subtle hand for the reprints is put into Requirements. I was all ready to read how underwriter was a bad place to be in '12, but no.

BonsaiDen 12y ago

Focussing on the cause won't give you the side-effects (or benefits, depending on how you look at it) of installing a surveillance state / building up intelligence for economic advantages etc. If in today’s world the act of merely "kidding" around on the internet or dropping a suitcase in front of some building, is enough to bring whole cities to a grinding halt, then the terrorist already one. And because of this, you won't need anymore technology to stop terrorist, but the technology to remove all the fears from peoples minds. Fear and the removal of freedom are the terrorist ultimate goals, they may achieve this in part by killing people, but they also receive a tremendous amount of help by your government of choice which wants to know every little detail about you. It's a game about visibility after all, many many more lives are lost every day due to illness and hunger than through means of terrorism. But there is no visibility, because spending money on medical research isn't as "effective" as spending it on your military / intelligence budget. Partly due to the lobbyists and partly due to the fact that helping - seemingly "random" - people won't convince your average voter, that you're actually doing something for them. Arguing about how you're protecting their children is much more convincing in the short term. Sadly, at the moment I don't see any way out of this dilemma, except for some horrible events to take place which will wake everyone up e.g. someone newly elected using the existing surveillance mechanism in their country to install a totalitarian regime along with the mandatory secret police. Which I really hope won't happen.

saeguaiga 12y ago

n.b. occupation by a foreign power; so it's DAR-based terror all the way down, much though finding a subtle hand for the reprints is put into Requirements. I was all ready to read how underwriter was a bad place to be in '12, but no.