NOTE: A big shout-out to our local university, Dakota State University (http://dsu.edu/), which trains people in "ethical hacking", cybersecurity, cyber operations, etc. Training the good guys (I hope) to tackle future cybercriminals around the world!But there's another problem with cyberspace, and that is that it's an open platform for anyone at any time.
Look, we are having our hearts broken, over and over again, by terrorist acts. Bastille Day saw the terrorist act in Nice, France, a beautiful city that I remember with especial fondness because it was the highlight of my last European trip.
Nice, France - Michaelphillipr, Wikimedia |
Vladimir Putin, the day after the attack |
But what kind of action? Do something violent to take out ISIS and the threat of radical Islamic terrorism - like pave Syria? Ban all Muslims from here or there or anywhere? Patrol Muslim neighborhoods at home and abroad? Etc. Now we could do all these things. And more. But it won't stop the problem.
Because the real problem is that jihad (like every other kind of extremism) is now on the internet. From Facebook to Twitter to the Dark Web, there are all sorts of slick, persuasive sites proselytizing (among other things) jihad. And these sites are telling people - mostly young men - all across the globe that they can make a difference, that they can save the world, that they can make everyone honor and respect them and kiss their feet and fannies. And they can have revenge upon a world that has never given them the respect or money or women or lifestyle they think they deserve. All they need is a gun, a truck, a car, a bomb, a lot of guns, some cohorts, any combination - just go out there and kill a lot of people for the cause. And, if they die in the process, they go to heaven and the 72 virgins while, back on earth, their deeds and their names will be splashed all across the international news media, and everyone will be terrified and horror struck and wounded by what they did, because they are so powerful and important. At last.
That's what we're really up against. Not some 40,000 "fighters" trying to hang on to their caliphate of bloody sand in Syria. If that was all there was to it, the solution would be relatively simple. But we're up against an idea, metastasizing across the internet, and gobbling up people's minds and lives in cyberspace. And what do you do about that?
NOTE: The average person now spends 8 hours and 41 minutes per day online. (See here.)
Visualization of Internet Routing Paths by the Opte Project, Wikipedia |
NOTE: The average person now spends 8 hours and 41 minutes per day online. (See here.)
The most harmless one I could find for an example - by Dimboukas, Wikipedia |
So what are we to do with all the sites - and the people behind them - who are using the internet to brainwash the world? Ourselves included? Who are fomenting hatred and bigotry, jihad and racism, murder and violence, death and war, war, war, all in the name of truth, whether religious or political? How do we stop this? how do we change this? Because the war is in cyberspace, not on the ground. We want to stop "soft" terrorism? Lone wolves, brothers, friends - influenced, radicalized, persuaded, perhaps even instructed in the privacy of their own bedrooms?
We're going to have to tackle cyberspace. BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE TERRORISTS (of all kinds) ARE BEING CREATED.
NOTE: Don't even start about how parents need to keep an eye on what their kids are doing. Remember your own childhood, even if it was cyber-free. Parents have always been trying to keep an eye on their kids and failing miserably, because teenagers will not be led, driven, watched, or followed, and will do anything under the sun to keep their parents having any idea of what is going on in their locked world.(Re the Nice perpetrator, he is apparently no longer a "lone wolf", according to prosecutor Molins, who recently arrested 2 men for giving the perpetrator "logistical support", and said that the perpetrator had plotted the attack for months with "support and accomplices". BUT, so far, all that support was done on line - via cell phones, computers, etc.)
The cyberworld is addictive and consuming enough even when it's harmless. People can't get their eyes off their smartphone, even while "supervising" their children at the playground. They fall off cliffs playing Pokemon Go. They stay on Facebook even in their sleep. They sleep with their smartphones. And, in the process, they create their own cyberworlds. And if you live in a cyberworld of hate and fear and menace, it really doesn't matter what the real life around you is. You believe. What's before your screen-stuck eyes. And you act accordingly.
NOTE: The average person now spends 8 hours and 41 minutes per day online. (See here.)
A good piece. It seems each new technology is all consuming at least for a while. TV and radio have also been incredibly powerful in stirring up hatred of all sorts. The difference I suppose with the internet is that it is so cheap and portable. It's a real question of whether we can adapt to the the technology and develop more generally ethical uses for it before it seriously weakens the social networks.
ReplyDeleteIt's the echo chamber effect that scares me about the Internet - it's so easy to just lock yourself away in a world where the only news, opinion, etc. you get is from your selected sites. And the result is a world in which people literally post things as news that are completely bogus: but they believe the site it came from, and that's what counts.
ReplyDeleteOver 8 hours online?? I'm stopped on that one right there. When do they sleep? Don't they work? Yikes, Eve! (Okay, I'll get back to writing in just a minute...)
ReplyDeleteBut you make an excellent point about the Echo chamber. That's why I tell my kids, you need to get a real newspaper. (In our case, The Globe and Mail in Toronto.) Some place where you will get opinion that isn't necessarily your own.
I find this a thought-provoking post, Eve--and a frightening one. I like what you say about the echo chamber effect, and what Melodie says about real newspapers as opposed to news websites. Among other things, in real newspapers, there's usually at least some attempt (not always completely successful) to put news in one section and opinion in another. On websites, too often there's no such attempt, and opinion gets presented as fact.
ReplyDeleteNot only that, but wild claims are made. I know too many people who post things on-line that they've gotten from completely bogus sites (Brietbart among them) and claim that they're 100% true (because they WANT them to be true), and also claim that the major networks (except Fox, of course) are always lying. They know that there is a race war against whites in this country; that - no matter what the polls say - Donald Trump is going to win, and win big, and if he doesn't, it's because the election is rigged; that... well, you get the picture. Oh, and that David Duke's just a nice country boy who wants to make America great again, too. You get the picture.
ReplyDelete