From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Fri Dec 27 2002 - 09:48:53 MST
owner-extropians@extropy.org wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Dec 2002, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>
>> Eugen, what is "blanket realtime agent detection and user notification"
>
> Oh, just an array of sniffers (for nerve agents, aerosol and pathogen
> DNA) hooked to a wireless network, and end user notification (beepers,
> dedicated channel for mobile phone broadcast signalling,
> loudspeakers).
>
> That way you know where and which attack is in progress and can notify
> targets in the area in realtime (use microfilter mask, bunny suit if
> you have one, get out of the open/into shelters, zip up into sterile
> tents, decontaminate, observe quarantine, stand by for further
> instructions). Etc.
>
> A primitive microfilter mask is a few bucks, yet it will quite
> efficiently protect against any aerosol targeting the lung and mucous
> membranes -- provided, you've donned it on time. Combine this with a
> cheap sealed kit containing water (microfilter/sterilizer; ion
> exchanger for the hot isotopes, lyophilized food fortified with
> vitamins and mineral salts, dedicated antibiotics, iodide/iodate
> tablets, atropine injections, a cheap digital radio for emergency
> messaging, and a sterile microfilter family-sized tent for the living
> room and most of B stuff just isn't that scary anymore. Even small
> scale A and C attacks (but for those poor sods who got fried/drenched
> in the open) are not all that scary.
>
> Incremental increase in threats can make above quite mundane and
> people well trained in use of said paraphernalia and techniques. I'm
> pointing to the threat level of the average Israeli or European
> country during WWII. Even the most badass terrorists can't marshall
> anything comparable.
>
> I will also point towards the fact that a lot of the technologies
> required for manned space exploration if use down here can make
> humanity effectively unkillable. Notice that above doesn't invalidate
> need for decentralization; a modern largish city is still vulnerable
> to a meek tritium-boosted (few g T gas, one order of magnitude
> enhanced yield) weapon.
### The methods you advocate are consistent with a siege mentality. Constant
vigilance, heroic efforts at defense. Being on the lookout for unpredictable
dangers, rearranging your lifestyle to suit them.
There is another strategy - to boldly go and attack the attacker. The choice
of the correct strategy, or the mixture of the two, will be dictated by an
analysis of all relevant information, including the physical nature of the
threat, available means of social organization, and information processing
and availability.
Somehow, adopting the pure siege mentality you seem to advocate, is IMO
inappropriate in the case of biological and nuclear threats. Detecting
merely the threats themselves is difficult, and usually means acting after
the horse left the barn: after a successful aerial anthrax attack, or a
dirty-bomb explosion in Manhattan, the economic harm is already
accomplished. It's better to be proactive, at least as long as you have the
means of actually achieving prevention.
A network of sensors detecting microbiological threats without the network
of sensors for detecting their makers is like looking only at the boot
that's kicking you: "Ouch, it kicked me on the left flank, have to cover the
left flank", "Ai, now it kicked me in the ass, need one more hand to keep it
covered", "I see it's moving towards my baAAAAA...".
In real life we can expect that a combination of "blanket realtime agent
detection and user notification" and universal surveillance will be used.
Hopefully with enough sousveillance to keep the system from turning into an
unkillable monstrosity.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:55 MST