[extropy-chat] Psychology of investments in infrastructure
russell.wallace at gmail.com
Tue Jun 20 02:54:38 UTC 2006
On 6/20/06, spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> My notion is that building expensive vulnerable infrastructure can
> *cause* terrorism, in which case past history doesn't really help us much.
> The most expensive most vulnerable target will be hit first, for it
> the most bang for the buck. Examples: the Japanese subway, the World
> Center (twice), the Spanish and British rail station attacks.
> The next lesson from kindergarten is that having your block tower knocked
> down requires no provocation. The little girl in the corner hurled no
> insults. Canada did nothing to provoke an attack. Russell, do explain
> is irrational about this line of reasoning.
A long time ago I read an account by a woman whose uncle molested her as a
child. It was when she reached puberty, and she recounts that the
explanation she ended up with at that time was: "It was my fault because if
I hadn't grown the breasts, then I wouldn't have tempted him."
What are you suggesting, doing away with everything above the level of a mud
hut will keep you safe? Ask the Khwarezmids or the Albigensians how well
that works. They didn't have subways, and their losses weren't in mere
handfuls of thousands.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat