The Pentagon, MMORPGs, and Catching Osama 321
MarkRH writes "I know, it looked like a troll to me too. But apparently a Pentagon-funded group, the Highlands Forum, is investigating the possibility of fighting terrorism by postulating that terrorist networks are similar to the online communities found in MMORPGs. By studying interaction within a community like Everquest, the military hopes to find hints on how to crack Al Qaeda." See also the "Uncloaking Terrorist Networks" post of several months back.
MMORPGs (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:MMORPGs (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps by studying jesting remarks in games, anti-terrorism investigators will better understanding real vs. joking threats in real life.
Besides, this is a study of social behavior, not an Everquest anti-terror crackdown. They're not looking for Osama bin Laden's online character.
Personally, I think it would be a blast if the feds EXPANDED their Everquest study, such as practicing their infiltrartion method by putting moles inside Everquest groups for intelligence, or secretly picking off key characters. It would add a whole new dimension to the game. =)
Re:Bin Laden's EQ character (Score:2)
Still, I can't help but laugh at the thought of it:
"Sir, we've found him! He's playing EQ right now, under the character 'Jihad' as a Level 60 Shadow Knight!"
".....Damn! Look at that...he just 0wn3d that Level 60 Paladin in PvP!"
Re:MMORPGs (Score:2, Insightful)
I think it was Stanley Milgram that did the famous "Six Degrees of Separation" experiment. People like Steve Strogatz and Duncan Watts have followed up on that with small world networks, scale free networks, etc. These network structures appear in places like the electrical power grid for southern California, the neural network of the flatworm C. Elegans, and the network of movie actors (the Kevin Bacon game.) See Duncan Watts's web site for more (and more accurate) information.
So I think studying the networks in games like Everquest is a great idea. I don't think that they think they will actually start to pick up coded messages from real terrorist cells, but rather they want to see how these people interact and connect in the network. And this is not the pentagon themselves, but a funded think tank doing the work. Big difference.
Anyway, if the Feds start busting Everquest players, I'll be laughing my ass off. But I don't expect it to happen. However, the rich structure of the networks formed in these MMORPGs has to be worth at least a look.
Regards,
Martin Melhus
(aeronaut)
Re:MMORPGs (Score:4, Interesting)
UK SF fans used to be quite involved in postal Diplomacy. One of them was late orgsanising his moves once and sent a telegram to a potential ally reading "suggest we join forces for an attack on Liverpool".
He spent the following day deep in conversation with gentlemen wearing black raincoats.
Re:MMORPGs (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure they don't, keep telling yourself that. They also don't care if you make a joke about "Burning Bushes" [cnn.com].
Freedom of speech? What's that?
Re:MMORPGs (Score:2)
Re:MMORPGs (Score:2)
Kintanon
Riiiight (Score:5, Funny)
How can we play Everquest all day and get paid for it?
I wonder.. (Score:5, Funny)
Doubtful (Score:3, Funny)
In any case, I know MMORPG players. The only thing they accomplish in the real world is living in the basement and drinking Dew. Hell set up suspected terrorists with an EQ subscription and the only they they'll blow up in orcs.
The real way to beat the Taliban... (Score:3, Funny)
Not that crazy... (Score:2, Insightful)
Al-Qaeda is a loosely affiliated network of nodes trying to acheive a similar goal across large distances and online MMORPG is pretty analagous(when speaking in terms of mathematical models). I'm sure there are a few insights to be had.
-
Re:Not that crazy... (Score:2)
Fine with me; anything that will burn off those defense dollars I'm happy with.
Re:Not that crazy... (Score:2)
But on a MMOG, the typical player has some desire to communicate (even when outside of the game) while still remaining relatively anonymous (I know I don't like my real identy to go out over the net). Quite a bit different that family reunions, but quite similar to terrorist organizations.
So is the Trans-Alaska Pipeline system.
Uhh, oil != people.
So is FedEx's tracking system. Etc.
Interestingly enough, terrorists and MMOG players have to do all of their communication outside of a network designed for that task. The FedEx tracking system is a closed system that generates massive ammounts of revenue to support itself. It's quite a bit different than an Everquest guild organizing for a raid or a group of terrorists communicating plans for blowing up a building. I can see where a group of losely connected amatuers trying to communicate with anonymity while not spending money is much more analogous to terrorist networks than FedEx's tracking system.
Re:Not that crazy... (Score:2)
Because the point isn't that they are watching a coordinated system, but they are watching to see how the system is coordinated on a shoe-string budget by a group of amatuers with no training in how to do the effort and with nothing to gain from the effort. If you can't see the difference between an EQ guild coordinating a weekend raid, and the Alaskan Pipeline, then you lack forsight..
Here's an *idea* (Score:4, Insightful)
Ask the average Joe on the street (in the US) about why September 11th happened and you'll hear something like, "evil doer". This befuddles me. These people aren't driven by pure evil but rather extreme frustration. Until the root of their frustration is addressed, I wouldn't be surprised if this continues forever.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:5, Insightful)
US citizens have an admirable quality of backing their leader in crisis situations, which he can exploit by basically doing whatever he wants...
Like making a war over oil..
Or calling anybody who disagrees with him a terrorist..
Or screwing the environmental issues(which are bad for business) by giving their much-needed funding to the military..
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
I've been saying ever since September 12th that we'll never catch Osama bin Laden. Even if we do catch him, we won't admit to it. He's a name and face for the enemy, and he does the government more good "presumed alive and up to no good" than he does "confirmed dead". After all, if the enemy is dead, why continue the war?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:4, Interesting)
There was some talk for a while that the War on Terror would apply to anybody using terror techniques, such as the Irish Republican Army, but that's an idea that went nowhere fast. Their opponents, therefore, are primarily Muslims, but not all Muslims.
So America-bashing and Bush administration-bashing aside (and I'm not a big fan myself, having voted for the other guy), the administration is faced with the fact that a small subset of essentially very good people is committing despicable acts in the name of those good people. These people are afraid of being punished for the sins of a few. Their support is crucial, and the US in general prefers to make friends rather than enemies. This is an incredibly untenable position for the US government. I'm hard pressed to come up with a better name for the effort, even if it is an obvious euphemism.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:3, Insightful)
How about "war on Al Qaeda"? You can only "win" a war if you can identify the enemy and you can identify objectives - like kill or capture 80% of leadership, reduce cash flows of the network by 90%, eliminate all training facilities, etc. "War on terrorism" is a euphemism like "war on drugs" - which is effectively a war on the freedoms of the American people.
There was a fairly interesting interview with a group of foriegn policy experts that describe themselves as "realists" on NPR (with Ira Glass?) that make a pretty convincing argument that the very lack of definition of a "war on terror" is undermining the efforts. In the interview, these experts provided a number of interesting facts to support their position. For example, only 40% of the Al Qaeda leadership is in custody and that the network still has the capabilities to deliver devestating style attacks.
While I do not know if this is true, there seems to be every indication that the current approach is being bungled - part of that is because the objectives (and enemies) are not well-defined.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:3, Interesting)
I understand very well that sources are extremely valuable, and you must protect them. That means that secret documents are usually more secret for the reasons of revealing the source than they are for the actual data they contain.
Still, this is becoming very disturbing. There have been some very anti-American articles in this thread, and it's behavior like this which encourages such. The government is proposing a war in which the proponents stand to gain very much personally.
I don't like the Bush administration, but I don't believe that they are monsters, either. I don't believe they would kill probably hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis just for the privilege of making a few million (or billion) on oil. It's a plan which involves too many people, at least one of whom must have some sort of integrity.
But I do wish that they'd give me some reason for that apparently futile hope.
[As an aside, having the US own Iraqi oil fields would cement US supremacy, so it is possible that this is part of an overarching plan to secure US power, something which would have better hope of keeping adherents than plain money. But Iraq is far away, and tankers from Iraq to the US would be very vulnerable in case of war. They'd be better off taking over Venezuela or perhaps Mexico. So I tend to discount this theory.]
As for Hamas and Islamic Jihad, I suspect that they are inextricably linked to al Quaeda. When you fight one you fight the others. Israel has done little of late to cover itself in glory, but they do seem to have the moral high ground over those who blow up school buses (even if that's not saying very much.)
The adminstration probably feels that it cannot take a stronger side against the enemies of Israel while Israel is only barely better, morally. I believe that very few Muslims actively hate the US strongly enough to be in favor of al Quaeda, but Israel is a different story. It is a major sticking point with most Arabs and Muslims.
Fighting Hamas and Islamic Jihad is hard, because it's nearly impossible to distinguish between civilians and militants. That's partly because the civilians permit themselves to be used this way, and so the line is very blurred.
The US "war on terror" does, I believe, cover these groups as well. In general it's a war on the Islamic terrorists; Basque terrorists and Irish terrorists are left out. The remaining Islamic terrorists cover a very wide body, which is all linked together. Money flows from Saddam Hussein to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. But fighting the Palestinians directly is a public relations nightmare, both because of civilian deaths and because it would tip the balance of those who only barely tolerate the US as it stands.
My opinion is that Israel should force a two-state solution on Palestine, adopting unilaterally plan that most of the non-Arab would would see as fair. When they were attacked from that state, the US would have an easier time helping them fight it, since the non-Arab would would see Israel as having already made its concessions. [Arabs and Muslims are unlikely to see any plan in which Israel still exists as fair.] But for some reason right-wingers in Israel insist on occupying some of the West Bank territory, and will not give it up.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
This is a war to establish quite firmly that
the technique known as terrorism will not work.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:3, Troll)
You forgot to add "and a massive dose of ignorance and intolerance." Of course I just described fanatics of all shapes, sizes, and colors whether it be terrorists, right-wing fundamentalists, or richard stallman (sorry couldn't resist).
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Now it is worth mentioning that America is probably just as ignorant as anyone else. Just because we have access to media doesn't mean that it's unbiased; even if you assume there ARE unbiased media sources out there, I think it's safe to say that they are not consumed by the average American. They are content to believe what they see on their local news most of the time. A few enlightened individuals (ironically, mostly former soldiers) know that our government is patently full of shit and tells the media what they're allowed to say about a war or police action or what have you, for the most part.
I do think that your dig at fundies was unnecessary...
Anyway it really is true that significant slices of these populations feel that the "decadent American life-style" is a sin against god (in whatever form they find it) and that we should die for our offenses. I think it would be stretching things to say that a majority of any population would prefer that "innocent" Americans should be killed, probably close to the same percentage here in the US who think we ought to go "nuke the ragheads" and similar shit I've heard plenty of. Of course, some dick in a turban did try to pull out in front of me in the parking lot at WinCo Foods the other night... kill the bastards!
But it's true. We run around and shit on the world, we fuck with people to our own ends, and people die; some of our citizens, but many more of other nations'. That is NOT just, and even if we are working in the name of democracy and freedom (I think it's more like money most of the time; right now we're striking a blow for operational freedom more than anything however, clearing some obstacles out of our way so we can go on uncontested.)
take arafat (Score:2, Insightful)
Waiting for your reply.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:3, Insightful)
What do you do when one of the reasons these people are driven to frustration is that people of a certain gender are allowed freedoms that are offensive to said terrorists? Repeat that question to yourself and replace "gender" with "religion".
What do you think the reason is? What's your simple solution?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
osama bin laden and his organization wish to advance islamic fundamentalism as the answer to life's problems. he is frustrated in this task by the west because the west stands for a plurality of ideas, not fundamentalism, whether christian, hindu, islamic, jewish, or whatever form of fundamentalism, fundamentalism is not an acceptable basis for a government in the democratic west. that is the root of his frustration. so he attacks the west. and he attacks the west with terror, the surprise killing of civilians. there is the understanding you need. you may pursue further understanding if you like, but on the basis of these obvious truths, we have enough basis to condemn him as evil. "we" not being western christians, or even westerners, but human beings, islamic, christian, western, or otherwise.
it's still evil.
and it won't continue forever. it is only an endless cycle of violence to you if you don't believe in progress. progress means getting rid of fundamentally (no pun intended) evil people. if you do not consider someone like osama bin laden evil, whether you make a cursory effort at understanding him, or a ten year doctoral thesis level effort at understanding him, who do you think qualifies?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Interestingly enough, that is also the root of George W. Bush's frustration.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
george w. bush is the elected leader of a pluralistic democratic country. if he has private religious views that inform his opinions, those views are bound by his advisors, the judicial and legislative branches of government, and the opinion of the american people.
so not only is your assertion speculative, but even if it were true, it would be pointless.
so pray tell, what exactly is your point?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Fundamentalist idealoges.
"the judicial "
A court stacked with conservatives and about to be loaded with more fundamentalist Bush appointees.
"and legislative branches of government"
Which took as the message of the 2002 elections that being Bush's rubber stamp is a vote getter
"and the opinion of the american people."
We are doomed.......
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Democracy? I'm no expert on Switzerland (the only democracy I can think of off the top of my head) but they seem to do OK. You aren't one of those that thinks the US is one, are you? Ideally the US is a republic - which can work pretty well too. Nah, you use too many big words to be that uneducated. "glorius form of government"? hellifiknow. If I get only one bullet I'd reverse the circa 1886 court decision that granted corporations "personhood" and the rights of an individual under the constitution.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
furthermore, it was great proof of the stability and depth of the american commitment to democratic principles that the country didn't descend into civil war over that election, unlike how other nations might have. a peaceful transfer of power, even when that hotly contested. imagine that blessing.
but you are rather obtuse and show little understanding of democracy, and it's superior value over other forms of government if you confuse his private views with that of the policy of the united states.
they are diagonally opposite in ideals.
us policy (which is what we really are talking about, not the point of view of one man): slow to action (10 years dealing with iraq peacefully), seeking consensus (un agreement, which it got), pained if anything bad happens to civilians (or do you insist on painting american interest as hooting hollering bloodletting cowboys for the fun of it?)
al qaeda policy: act violently and suddenly out of the agenda of a fringe fundamentalist point of view.
comparing al qaeda and the us, or even george bush to osama bin laden, no matter what you think of george bush personally, is propaganda at best, and just plain stupid at worst
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Technically, I think the only way to be 100% sure about the outcome would be for you to count all the votes by hand yourself, without making any errors. Counting thousands of entities manually isn't inherently more accurate than counting them mechanically, whatever the Danish government may have told you.
I imagine that the vaunted superior accuracy of Danish ballot-counting is due more to their QA policies than to their manual counting. Perhaps also the Danes have a strong sense of civic duty, which makes them ideologically more committed to an accurate count than a personally pleasing one. Since machines don't have ideologies, they'd be inferior to Danes in this respect (all other things being equal, of course).
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Thing is, most of the hijackers were Saudi Arabians. Why? Because they're pissed that the US still has a huge force there, ever since the gulf war. Their reasons are more along the lines of "the US is an invading force which has setlled here"...and you know what? By many definitions, they're right. The US barged in and never left. That's one of the reasons behind OBL's crusade, and one of the reasons he gets so many Saudi's involved.
Religious fundamentalism also gets in there, but that's more of a sugar coating than anything else.
Oh, and I consider Bush to be funamentally evil, and someone who is too unstable to posses nuclear and biological weapons, too. GWB and OBL...they're just two sides of the same stupidly evil coin.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
however, you confuse history with present day. history: the us getting into bed with disgusting regimes in the cold war to advance the fight against communism (which we won, but apparently the us gets no points for that in your view). present day: most american opinions and a growing majority of legislators who look at saudi arabia with great distrust. that will filter up to us policy. democracy is slow to anger, but slowness to anger is a good thing, not bad.
the larger interest should be to reduce suffering of all peoples, american, arab, and israeli. osama bin laden, just as you suggest is interested in pan-arabism, which should reduce suffering, BUT: he wants to do it through sharia law, through theocracy. and this will reduce arab suffering how? so when the us opposes osama bin laden, does it oppose pan-arabism, or militant islamic fundamentalism? emphasis on fundamentalism, not islam. islam is a proud, passionate, beautiful religion, and a majority of muslims will tell you osama bin laden perverts islam for his causes, and does not represent them.
so now that we understand osama bin laden more thoroughly, with your help, how exactly have we been informed to change us policy on iraq? exactly, we shouldn't change us policy on iraq at all. you have proven nothing except that you would rather empathize with a disgusting terrorist than a stable prosperous, pluralistic democracy.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
The thing is, a segment of the Arabic Muslim population in the Middle East has been indoctrinated into believing that the cause of their frustrations is not their leaders (who are more often than not monarchs, mullahs, and dictators), but Israel (a modern nation with an elected government) and the United States (which is halfway around the world, and spends more of its GNP on charity and aid than almost any other nation around). And they've been taught two other things: One, that the afterlife has no frustrations, and two, that the more 'infidels' you kill on your way to the afterlife, the nicer it is.
I know that's not an accurate representation of Islam as a whole, but I believe it is an accurate representation of that segment of the Islamic population that breeds suicide bombers and worse.
We know why they're out to kill and terrorize. They've told us, many times. They tell us every time Hamas or Islamic Jihad takes credit for another slaughtering of civilians in Israel.
Or haven't you been listening?
In this case, the root of their frustration is a condition of life imposed upon them by their own 'leaders', and those very same 'leaders' avoid ousting by turning around and telling their people that it's our fault. And you're right, it is a problem that's going to go on until that root is addressed.
So, how do you suggest 'addressing' the oppression of a people that have been taught to hate us by their oppressors?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Do you like that fancy computer you're using right now? Because by your logic we should get rid of them all. According to these groups, we only need to know what they tell us to know.
Know any girls? (Probably not, this is
You think they attack because we use too much Oil? Get a fucking clue. They hate us because their god tells them to. This has NOTHING to do with Oil. Osama didn't read the newspaper one day and say "Damn, I don't like how many SUVs they have."
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
But what if the reason the terrorists are frustrated is because (for example) Israel exists and is recognized by the majority of the world's governments?
How can anyone correct something like that without frustrating another group of people?
Bombing a city and killing 3000 people is Evil. No question about it. To claim that there's any frustration or other extenuating circumstance that mitigates the Evilness of the act is to reject common sense for the sake of PC-ness.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
I don't doubt that people have many good reasons to be frustrated with the U.S. I know I have good reasons. I also don't doubt that terrorists in general, and Bin Laden in particular, are much more "evil people" than they are "reasonably frustrated people".
Saying "I was frustrated" isn't a valid excuse for killing my wife, even if she really is an annoying bitch. I don't see why it should be a valid excuse for killing anybody else.
Sure, terrorism is due in part to frustration with inhumane foreign policies, but you can be as nice as you want and there'll still be people that don't like you. And there'll still be madmen to turn their dislike into murderous rage--not because they want to make the world a better place, but because they want to blow it up.
I'm all for having a kinder, gentler U.S. But I don't harbor any illusions that such a thing will eliminate terrorism. The only thing that will do that is a perfect utopia or a perfect tyranny. If your solution to eliminating terrorism is for the U.S. to become a perfect utopia, then I have a couple buildings in New York that you could buy real cheap.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
The why is well known. The fundies want to protect their culture from such perverse ideas as freedom of and from religion and equal rights regardless of sex. There is a better solution to the problem than war though.
All we have to do is follow the examples from the '60's civil rights marches and organize a million non-believer peace march to Mecca. Just think of the possibilities here! We could ask the National Organization of Women to supply the drivers, and have the Gay-Lesbian lobby to hand out flyers with messages of love to all the locals.
Once in Mecca, Hindus, Jews, Christains, and Muslims alike could all hold hands and sing Kumbiya while circling the Ka'Baa. It would be beautiful man!
Now where did I put my old tie-dyed peace shirt anyway?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Really? So your saying that these people are rational? You're saying they have a darn good reason for doing what they do? Why don't you enlighten us as to what causes rational people to blow up children? What do you think is frustrating them?
There's a LARGE component of psychopathy (Score:2)
We're not just talking about sending twenty or so ashishim to their deaths (causing thousands of other deaths was just a bonus for O., O. & Co.) company,) we're talking about the whole sale slaughter, the veritable decimation of the people of Afghanistan for, if you can pardon the expressions, not being more Catholic than the pope.
Its not about frustration.
Its not even about Saladim getting his arse whupped in the eight century.
The Arabs don't remember about that a whole lot more than we do. "Ivanhoe" and all that Sunday morning cartoon crap.
It about everybody having to kiss the Caliph's butt and eating the Caliph's crap. And the Caliph don't care if you die of disease and malnutrition.
It can't go on forever because, as the health care and nutrition crises in Afghanistan showed, if they win, they'll be reduced to the same situation that Pol Pot was in Cambodia. A band of illiterate degenerates living in the jungle and watching their ammunition become irreplacable.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
If that's what you believe then I am a Nigerian business man. I need you help in wiring millions of dollars to a US bank account. You will receive 30% for your efforts.
There are radical Muslim leaders who have such power and influence over their people, that their people will believe anything they say and do anything that is asked of them - Including using an airplane as a weapon.
If you recall WWII, Hitler was the leader of the Nazi's. Were all the Nazi members inherently evil people? Or were they just weak minded people who were overcome by Hitler's powerful speaking style and persuasive language? Power (good or bad) is a very attractive thing, especially to those who have none.
It is indeed the Al Qaeda top leaders (Including the elusive Osama) who must be eliminated if the bulk of organized terror is to cease. It's simple cause and effect - Osama is a multi-millionaire who is simply an evil human being. He is using his monetary power to influence people to fight for him. Money = power = influence. It's that simple. Remove the evil influence, and you remove the effect.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Out of curiousity, what fustrated Hitler so much? Or Stalin? Amin?
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Oh, wait. Nevermind.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
Re:Or maybe it's pure *hatred* that motivates them (Score:5, Insightful)
You're damn right I'm glad that the majority here embraced Christ, not Mohammed. If they hadn't, I'd be stoned to death or burned at the stake.
Right. Totally unfounded statement backed by no facts and a skewed view of islam. Let's not even start with christian atrocities, nope they never do anything wrong. Christ is obviously better and if we where muslim you would for some reason get burned at the stake. Let's not forget that the koran (never read it have you?) teaches tolerance for all people, as does the basic tennants of islam. Nope, we are just going to gloss over that and make some vain gesture about 'burning at the stake'.
And before you defend Islam's "liberal history" take a look at what Islam is, left unchecked. It's a little land called Saudi Arabia where morality police
And before you defend Christinaity's "liberal history" take a look at what Christianity is, left unchecked. It's a little land called spain/france/england where morality police prosecute and kill and torture people for not believing in the faith (inquisition, etc,etc), or a place like the US where the bible is used to justify the enslavement of african americans. SIgh. You fool, any religion taken to an extreme does exactly what you descibe doing - become a police state.
t it disturbs me how little tolerance so many Muslims display. Saudi text books teach little kids that Jews and Christians are "apes and pigs" and that the day of judgement won't come until Muslims kill of the Jews.
Source? No. Didn't think so. Yes, some fundamentalist schools teach what you speak of - just as some fundamentalist schools in america do the same - i.e. "niggers are below us", etc, etc, etc. Every population has its extremists the difference is in america we *only* hear about the extremist population in these countries. 99% of muslims in these countries don't believe in that stuff. But you wouldn't know... because you have never bothered to check any facts or do any research - you just believe what you hear. Tell you what go talk to a gulf war vet and ask them how evil/whatever the middle east is - i'm sure they will regale you with stories of how the evil mean cruel muslims where oppresin' the americans! Wait - you won't hear any of those stories.
They should be put to the sword without consideration for their "human rights." Because they aren't human, they're not even worthy of the legal rights that domesticated animals have.
The best for last. What you just said sir is the *EXACT SAME ARGUMENT* that osama bin laden and others use to justify their killing of innocent people. Congratulations you get the CLue-Bat award. The first rule in war is dehumanizing your opponent and you have fallen hook, line, and sinker.
Ah yes, blame the victim. (Score:2)
Many muslims envy the United States, and want to be more like us, particularly in terms of technology. What they do NOT want is our culture... they have (rightly) concluded that they don't need/want Jerry Springer. Compared to the typical mores of your more-conservative muslims, the US is a total moral cesspool... they fear for the corruption of their culture, and that is reasonable. What is NOT reasonable are the fundamentalist attempts to kill/maim/burn/bomb us. The logical disconnect that many muslims experience is the relationship between our free society and that technology output. We produce because we are FREE to produce.
The fundamentalists are hardcore, dedicated religious fanatics: They believe in murder, torture, assassination, forced religious conversion, etc... all for the glory of Islam. These people simply have to be killed. Period. No negotiation... you find them, and you kill them. Unpleasant, but necessary. If you haven't the stomach for that hard reality, fine... but be thankful that the US military does.
Another fundamental problem in the middle east is that all their governments are religious... with the exception of Turkey. Separation of church and state does NOT exist there... they are one and the same. The muslims desperately need to secularize their religion, much as the US has done. You quoted atrocities by christians... but the worst of those are hundreds of years old; I think it's fair to say that the christians have largely learned their lesson. The fundamentalist muslims must also, or they will perish.
Also, before you tout the peaceful history of Islam, keep in mind that Islam was spread by the sword for hundreds of years. Muslims have a long history of oppressing jews and christians who live under muslim rule (Hindus, Buddhists, etc are infidels, and can simply be killed. "People of the book" like Jews/Christians/Zoroastrians are supposed to be tolerated, as long as they recognize a muslim authority). As a jew/christian in a muslim country, you cannot vote, cannot own property, cannot look a muslim in the eye on the street, cannot testify in court against a muslim, etc. Much of that is directly from the Koran, BTW.
You cannot draw a moral equivalence between the terrorists and the US; any attempt to so is an insult. The US does not deliberately target innocent civilians, and the US has a fairly egalitarian society where discrimination, religious intolerance, and oppression are frowned upon, if not expressly prohibited. Those things are commonplace in fundamentalist muslim philosophy.
Learn of what you speak... Implying that the US somehow "asked for it" on september 11th is going to earn you nothing but hatred and disgust.
I personally think you sound like a troll, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
Re:Or maybe it's pure *hatred* that motivates them (Score:3, Interesting)
The US supports the royal family, not the religious leaders.
Many recent news stories and interviews with SA officials have indicated that the royal family is attempting to institute reforms but is encountering strong resistance from the religious leaders.
Nice article [meforum.org] on the political structure.
Re:Here's an *idea* (Score:2)
So, they attack America. Since, obviously, you just cannot give in to the demands of terrorists, America must strike back. Increasing the level of perceived American aggression and support of Israel. Increasing anger toward America in the Muslim world. Increasing support for his (bin Laden's) ideology. Brilliant.
Sometimes you have to do something that terrorists want, not because they want it but because it's the right thing to do.
Re:Why do Arabs hate Americans ? (Score:2)
Recently saw a Frontline episode [pbs.org] where a Brit reporter toured Iraq. He went to the hospitals, went to the children's ward. Most of the children were in there for drinking untreated water. He asked the hospital administrator if they were in need of any drugs, nope. He went into a local pharmacy. Well stocked. He wandered the markets, plenty of food.
robust (Score:3, Interesting)
Al Qaeda is as tough as a network node huh? Forget evercrack, study the slashdot community, you'll destroy Ben Laden as soon as you link his node here!
The slashdot effect, fighting terrorism one geek at a time!
"Our analysis indicates..." (Score:5, Funny)
..."that members of Al Quaeda will now be focussed on preparing for their next major mission. They will do this by repeatedly and frequently engaging in petty crimes such as shoplifting and kicking puppies. This activity is apparently known by the codename "Operation: 'Leveling Up'...."
Re:"Our analysis indicates..." (Score:2)
Osama's Belt of Terror:
AC:5
STR+3 DEX+3 AGI+3
Weight 0.1
Granted, it's vendor trash, but look that weight! Definately a monk item.
Re:"Our analysis indicates..." (Score:2)
747's of Mindless Vengeance
+250 Building damage
-75/-75 Landing/Takeoff skill
-10 Whitehouse detection
Willing to trade for "Chemical Fertilizer of Militia Madness"...
Re:"Our analysis indicates..." (Score:2)
Ironically there does seem to be something like this. I remember some early articles on al Queada's operations that mentioned that each cell had to do at least some of its own funding - many cells apparently resort to petty crimes to fund their terrorist missions (though I think it was the support cells that do this so the operations cells don't comprimise their mission by engaging in petty crime).
I'm investigating the possibility too (Score:4, Funny)
So send me some of the fat DARPA cash QUICK!
What this is really about: (Score:2)
Right. I'm sure there'll be a lot of field testing (Score:2)
"How can we infiltrate such a community without anyone noticing"
"How high level (important members) are treated. Naturally we need first hand information on this from the side of the high levels."
"Trust related to time spent, particularly looking at high commitment people (fanatics). Extensive experiments."
Sheesh. I'm glad I know they do some *real* work too, otherwise I'd be really concerned...
Kjella
Terrorist "organisation" != tight network (Score:2)
It sounds to me as though the people funding these studies, and those conducting them are clutching at straws...
Re:Terrorist "organisation" != tight network (Score:2)
Basic infiltration, really.
Makes sense to me (Score:5, Interesting)
In Ultima, they've done it all... flooding the towns with sheep in order to disrupt commerce, stealing on town boundaries and calling the guards on innocent people, attacking unattended macro users (federal workers) who are practicing spells on ships... it's nearly a direct parallel.
I think the biggest insight is that terrorists and computer gamers share the same motivating mentality: I can accomplish my goals by wreaking as much destruction and pain as possible.
Re:Makes sense to me (Score:2)
Hey - I've been here forever and I've NEVER had a chance to mod people! What's up with that?
Re:Makes sense to me (Score:2)
Re:Makes sense to me (Score:2)
Re:Makes sense to me (Score:3, Insightful)
More accurately; I can most easily accomplish my goals if I carry about with a disregard for the amount of destruction and pain I will cause others.
Any higher-level military goal can be carried out in such a way as to minimize casualties during the individual actions leading to its realization. This does make it more expensive and more time consuming. At some point it becomes either too expensive or too slow. Terrorists feel that any action they might take is warranted, so they can get a lot done with very few people and extremely limited resources. I hate to fuel the anti-freedom types but the enormous proliferation of rapid, simple, relatively untraceable and well-encrypted communications make this sort of thing easier every year...
Re:Makes sense to me (Score:3, Interesting)
Your depiction of UO as a state under siege is faulty at best; the PvP and Non-PvP sides (Felucia and Trammel) to each shard (UO server) show this. Before the addition of those sides, you could easily avoid PKers and PvP Combat entirely by either not venturing into dangerous areas or avoiding the game entirely. It was possible not to killed, plundered, etc. The biggest proof is that people continue to play, despite your portrayal of "Terrorists Online". I'm sorry you had bad experiences, but it simply wasn't like that for everyone.
You gloss over the subject of PvP Combat and Player Killing, lumping them together and naming them terrorists. This is blatantly ignorant of the concepts behind them. There's nothing wrong with people competing against each other - and PvP Combat is just that, people competing with each other. The biggest differences in the PvP crowds is where you consent to engage in PvP Combat. IE, should it be by logging into the server (Quake/FPS-style; joining the game means you understand what's going to happen) or by doing something special in game to consent (/duel, zoning into certain areas, declaring yourself +PvP, whatever).
Note that terrorists give no such opportunity to their victims. There is no option not to involve yourself; by virtue of what you are, or where you are, or something else usually uncontrollable, you have become a target.
You also state that Player Killers are like Terrorists in that they seek to exploit "The System". Well, any system is made of rules. He's another one for you: Any Rule Will Be Exploited. Doesn't matter what it is, who made it, or the purpose of it. This is not unique to Player Killers or Terrorists; this is a trait shared by Lawyers, Politicians, Government Officials of all kinds, and yes, YOU, the general populace. We seek to find holes in the system, ways to gain money or power or anything else we desire. Even if it's speeding 1-2 mph to shave a few seconds off your trip - you've done the same exact thing. It might be on a much, much lower level - we're not talking about letting murderers off on a technicality after all - but you still have broken rules for gain.
I, for one, think the sheep thing to be incredibly smart. Who has thought of using sheep offensively? And, at least in UO, you can kill sheep without fear of being attacked by guards. It's not like they flooded Trinsic with the Undead (oh, wait, EA did that). Also, you can't call the guards on innocent people - the guards won't attack unless you attempt to steal or kill another player.
Oh, and unattended Macro-ing? Last I checked, EA forbid it. It was something that explicitly would get you banned from the game (ie, if you were macro-ing and didn't respond within 5-10 minutes). Your "federal worker" analogy is foolish; these people are exploiting the system, same as your 'player-killing/terrorists'.
Finally, stating that computer gamers and people who employ terror as a weapon/engages in acts or an act of terrorism ("terrorist") "share the same motivating mentality" is stupid beyond reason. I'm a computer gamer - I *CERTAINLY* don't *play games* to wreak destruction and pain. I *PLAY* to have fun - I hurt no one, I destroy no property.
Additionally, it is ludicrous that you would limit such behavior to computer gamers. I would argue that SPORTS are FAR more violent and destructive than computer or video games. No one gets physically injured twiddling bits in RAM, no one has broken their knee playing Madden 2k3, there have been no riots over the US Starcraft Team losing to Korea.
On the other hand, Football and Rugby injure people all the time. Simply watch a 'highlights' tape and tell me a 250lbs guy slamming into you doesn't hurt. Or watch the 'classic' Football tape where that poor quarterback has his leg broken in two places. Or consider ALL the RIOTS that have broken out because some college team didn't win - or in some case, WON! - or the 'legendary' soccer riots across the globe.
I'm too long winded: it can be summed up with this: Terrorists are killers. They seek to influence people by fear. Computer Gamers seek an activity providing entertainment or amusement; a pastime. They seek fun.
-LW
-----
One step closer to drones (Score:2)
"In America, it's more like everyone is the Lone Ranger" Yippee Ki Yea, Motherfucker.
Newsflash! (Score:2)
Sony headquarters bombed by the US airforce for allowing a terrorist cell called "Everquest" to communicate in an obscure 3D rendered enviroment hidden behind the facade of a game. Several thousand US gamers ranging from 8 to 80 years old have been arrested and detained by the FBI for alleged connections with this terrorist cell. One was quoted, saying "No! NOO!! IT IS ABOUT TO RESPAWN!!!" which has been explained by FBI officials to indicate a religious tone to this dark cell, possibly trying to summon Satan. US forces are underway to detain terrorists in other countries who will either bend over and cooperate or be bombed to oblivion for supporting said terrorists.
Film at 11.
hmm (Score:2)
This article is ridiculous (Score:2, Interesting)
[MMPORGs] may provide insights into what's known as "network-centric warfare."
Defense intellectuals... believe that the Pentagon must realign itself for "network-centric" operations.
The intellectual groundwork for this "netwar" analysis was laid out in a paper published on the Internet...
Presumably "netwar" is a clever shortening of "network-centric warfar". Beyond that, I'm at a total loss how someone could call themself a journalist without bothering to understand the word that describes the key thesis of their article, let alone explain it to their readers. All I can conclude from this is that somebody at a think tank is an EQ fiend, and is trying to find some way to justify his usage logs.
And by the way, what exactly does he mean by saying that Everquest games can last for months?
Recruit Cheaters and L4mers For War on Terror! (Score:2)
"We've spent so much time sitting around the lab at night, waiting for the next round to start after getting autoheadshotted by aimbots, that we thought, 'hey, if only there was some way to harness their power for national security?'"
"Their first assignment will be in the Sudan. They'll be spamming, trolling and b0ting major targets there, in preparation for a major action in the Gulf theater later in the spring."
"We enjoy ruining your game and fun," said a myg0t representative, identifying himself as [myg0t]g0d. "We expect to join their team, and then block their doorways, teamwound, throw flashbangs at the start of the round, and spawn camp. This should quickly reduce them to whining like little girls for an admin to come and save them."
"If they ban us, we'll just change wonids and come right back. God bless America."
The US Army as a P2P network? The mind boggles... (Score:2)
Sounds pretty heretical. Not incorrect, mind you, just completely blasphemous: imagine a military that relied on communications that didn't take 10 minutes to walk the nodes to the people who needed the info. Like "the bad guys are HERE, NOW" and getting that to the fire support/air support guys instantly.
Pretty revolutionary, which is why it will probably be restricted to intelligence gathering. The idea of some two-striper grunt on the ground talking directly to the pilot who's dropping HE is probably a bit TOO revolutionary.
The idea is a complete bullshit, and this is why: (Score:2)
This is like comparing real-life war in an urban setting to Quake or UT.
Wow, I'm a terrorist leader and I didn't even know (Score:2)
I had no idea we mirrored terrorist organizations.
I mean sure, we kill people. A lot of people. But its all for fun. We also defend our homeland, for fun.
We go on suicide missions
Alright, so on the surface it sounds that way but hey, I'll be the first to stand up and come to my countries aid if they want me to play a MMORPG to figure out how to stop terrorism than by golly I will!
Ok, so thats silly, so is saying that guilds in MMORPGs are anything like terrorist nets. But then, I've never been a terrorist. Just a guild leader.
MMORPG devs thread on this... (Score:3, Informative)
ah (Score:3, Funny)
heh (Score:2)
EQ players scare me (Score:2, Funny)
You too can get goverment funding!(tm) (Score:2)
Heh, i've been crapping on that John Ashcroft "Learn how to be a homeland security officer(rent a pig)" alot lately. Here's my new version.
[John Ashcroft comes in stage left]
"Spy on gamers" Would never get you any type of funding from the goverment.
[wipe to pick of joystick with a circle slash around it]
Simply add our "For homeland security purposes"(tm)to the end of your goverment proposal and !VOILA! Instant money.
We have a complete idiot dumb shit for a president, with me, his Pom Pom holding cheerleader leading the cause. We need many patriotic americans to help us sucker all the money clinton made during his presidency into the hands of complete idiots.
[Wipe to pic of gas station attendants]
It's like a dot com all over again but this time add "For homeland security purposes"(tm) instead of
[Show 100dollar bills snowing down]
Simply call 1-800-ima-twit to get started! Since we don't have a clue how technology was making the world money, we're going to use the personal touch of hired goons to take over the world and hoard all the wealth to ourselves.
[Star spangled banner plays, american flag blows in the wind]
Basically what we are seeing right now in our economy is investors are scrared of investing in the tech sector because so many people got screwed in the 90s. Well, it wasn't just screwing, after all, we have a lot of good that came out of it (slash for one)
Yet the general job of the goverment is to get money out of it's citizens. If the population is scared to invest, what's the best way to get them to do it?
Fud the previous administrations economy to death(bill clinton=devil), A big scare to the populace (9/11), Rally the patriotism (Homeland Security) and get people to invest (HLS schools, programs, spy sattelites, ect)
Despite 9/11, I think the country is heading into the wrong direction with the paranoia. Unfortunately that is completely out of my control and the best I can do is bitch on slashdot till voting day arrives. I think GWB and his administration are trying to milk 9/11 for every investing cent they can grab and hire the security force to enforce their vision of a "Secure America"
Do we really need that? Couldn't we just build a sattelite with a big laser and a big camera, launch the thing then pull the trigger when Osama is in their sites? An orbiting sattelite would be well out of range of any ground based artillery. I feel like they're making excuse after excuse on why we don't have him yet, and sorry for my bit of paranoia here, but I think GWB is letting OBL stay on the lam. I don't think we will ever catch/kill OBL while we have GWB for a president.
It's fucked times, I think Iraq is going to be our generations vietnam. GWB has been insisting on what a long drawn out war this is going to be. Be lookin for those draft cards in a year or two. Gotta do something with this excess no good lazy geek population. We'll make men outta of them yeah! Like prison rapist there has been a subset of blue collar workers that have had their eye on us for a while.
I pray GWB gets a clue before he gets us into something we can't get out of.
OMFG (Score:2)
2002-12-06 18:16:25 Play EverQuest and help defeat Osama (articles,games) (rejected)
Yep. That's right kiddos. I had a FULL 17 day lead on this story.
Fsck. Maybe I should just start my own blog and submit my rejects to that.
Anyone care to participate in a "stories rejected by slashdot editors" site that doesn't have duplicates and is grammatically correct?
Crickey, how stupid is this! (Score:2)
Now how does this relate to how people form a group in EQ? Well, it just doesn't. EQ players don't need that form of anonymity. They don't have different cells working together towards the same goal. While I will admit everyone who plays EQ has the same goal of 'getting more xp'...that's not the same thing, is it? You don't need (or have) all these cells interconnected, talking to each other to 'overthrow a system'.
What the pentagon will find is the mechanics of how a gamne is played...which will bear no reemblance whatsoever to how terrorist cells are organised.
But see, the whole thing is flawed (Score:2)
Laughing (Score:2)
And they did.
terrorist techniques: (Score:2)
(1) Bunny-hopping
(2) Camping
(3) Hacking the client
Re:Waste of time and money (Score:5, Insightful)
If you do, you'll find that they merely wish to observe the social interactions of players on a massive network, as they feel that such networks somewhat mirror the dispersal of Al Quida's terrorist group.
They're not "spying," so much as they are "spectating."
I doubt we'll see any "pirates" or "hackers" picked up off of this one... That's really not the Pentagon's job.
Re:Waste of time and money (Score:2)
But I must confess that I didn't even try to read it as I assumed it had to be slashdotted.
Re:Waste of time and money (Score:2)
Re:Waste of time and money (Score:2)
Bullshit.
Why does everyone justify their actions by saying, "because of the terrorists"? They want to study you like rats for market research(just go look at how they research your habits for TV advertisements).
The US has 30 fucking million "1 metre" satellites(scary detail) to track people, and they still need to do this?
Re:Waste of time and money (Score:2)
The thing is, most MMORG players in the USA are loyal Americans who'd love to help. Spying on them is just buring down the house to roast a pig.
Ungh, okay, screw read the article... read the summary! They're talking about modeling terrorist networks with MMORGs, not seeking out terrorists who play MMORGs!
Re:The Army (Score:2)
You mean like "America's Army: Soldiers"?
Re:The Army (Score:2)
Good points, but remember the game was and still is largely a recruiting tool used to get people interested into the army. You used to see army leaflets and ads in magazines, then online and FPSers are a hit, so why not make one huge Army FPS advertisement?
The game itself though is fun IMHO, because it's so much focussed on realism then any other FPS game, except maybe the Delta Force series, but I got no experience with those and it is highly unlikely that breathing in incorporated into DF. I would HATE to play a game with such emphasis on reality online though, because I'm more of the simple "blast em to kingdom come, with style" type. Combined warfare that is featured in BF1942 is far more interesting to me, at least.
No, and screw the grenade launcher, I want the hummer :) Those babies are rarer then diamonds overe here in the Netherlands and I want one!