From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Sat Aug 02 2003 - 16:43:40 MDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat@pacbell.net>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 5:22 PM
Subject: Re: NEWS:Why 'Terrordaq' will come - if the Pentagon likes it or
not
> --- Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal@smigrodzki.org> wrote:
> > From: "Adrian Tymes" <wingcat@pacbell.net>
> > To: <extropians@extropy.org>
> > Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 7:51 PM
> > Subject: RE: NEWS:Why 'Terrordaq' will come - if the
> > Pentagon likes it or
> > not
> > > --- Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal@smigrodzki.org> wrote:
> > > > ### I wouldn't be surprised if the Pentagon went
> > > > ahead with a covert futures
> > > > market, open to FBI/Homeland
> > > > Security?CIA/NSA/OtherUnheardOfSpyAgency
> > > > employees, so as to allow aggregation of data
> > among
> > > > persons most likely to
> > > > have data in the first place, with a big "Top
> > > > Secret" stamp on it and some
> > > > deniability (perhaps as in a tolerated
> > semi-informal
> > > > betting market to be
> > > > ditched if the sanctimonious crowd gets wind of
> > it).
> > > > Almost all the benefits
> > > > of PAM, none of the exposure to idiots.
> > >
> > > Problem: the market attracts intel from people who
> > > would not normally otherwise give intel. "Hmm.
> > Big
> > > brother Mufasa said he's gonna blow up that
> > 'Merican
> > > base tomorrow. I don't care for 'em either, but I
> > > can get fifty bucks by betting that base will be
> > > attacked within a week. That's a lot (to the
> > > extremely poor masses that happen to exist - and
> > > produce a lot of the terrorist front line - in
> > > countries that produce terrorists, whether or not
> > > there is any actual causality)! Hmm...yeah, sure
> > I'll
> > > place a bet. Go get 'em, big bro, so I can eat
> > for a
> > > month!"
> > >
> > > Yes, the smart ones would know there's a
> > connection.
> > > Even assuming they'd care enough to forego their
> > own
> > > monetary gain, "smart" implies "smarter than
> > average
> > > for the given populace", and we's only need a few
> > of
> > > the remainder to get greedy.
> >
> > ### I notice you answered my post, which contained
> > the following words: "a
> > covert futures market, open to
> > FBI/HomelandSecurity/CIA/NSA/OtherUnheardOfSpyAgency
> > employees".
>
> Mm-hmm. I was trying to show why limiting it to said
> group would limit or negate the practical value of the
> market, by showing where the real value (or, at least,
> a good part of it) would in fact come from if open.
>
### Oh. Well, as I said before, this covert PAM would be possibly somewhat
less sensitive, by being denied direct access to enemy information sources,
but at least it would aggregate data already available to government agents.
As we know, various members of the FBI did have enough data to raise a lot
of red flags and possibly prevent 9/11, but they literally didn't get their
(separate) acts together. With PAM they would stand a better chance (and
personally make a buck or two, which is a good thing). The loss of
sensitivity would be rather small, I think, since terrorists would be wary
of playing the game anyway, with their justifiably high level of
suspiciousness and separation from the society.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Aug 02 2003 - 16:52:53 MDT