Unrestricted Warfare December 30, 2007
Posted by erik in : Technology, politics , add a comment
I think about this topic, conflict and unrestricted tactics related to war on and off on a pretty regular basis, there is nothing like the study of conflict and how conflicts are won or lost when it comes to understanding thinking outside the box.
A recent blog post from a friend of mine about a translated Chinese text called “Unrestricted Warfare” got me thinking on the topic again. I found the text pretty interesting and a worthy read for anyone interested in conflict and the “Art” of war in a more modern time.
I however found it very unfortunate that some have developed the belief that the text is directed at Americas destruction. This is likely due to it’s ridiculous and perhaps unauthorized re-publication as a book in 2001 (The original text was published in 1999, and is available for free download). The cover has a picture of the twin towers burning and the tag line “China’s master plan to destroy America” all of which was added by the translator of this specific version. It’s unlikely that the original authors would have written the book as a treatise on the destruction of America but rather on the topic of how one nation might rise up and displace an existing superpower to either take an equal or greater position on the world playing field. It’s no surprise that America is a common subject in the text given the position of the United States today but it could easily be any superpower.
The truth is that at the global political level, there are no laws, ethics or boundaries. There is only a desire to advance your nations power and a willingness to do anything to achieve that goal - anything that you can get away with. There is a strange calculation that occurs at this level, where the needs of your nation outweigh the needs of another and where war, covert action, destruction and death are all justified and acceptable if they further your nations goals.
Billy suggests in his post that the rise in computer network attacks originating from China taken in conjunction with this text seem to suggest that something more direct or organized is in motion. I agree that this is likely, but this shouldn’t be a surprise. China is not the innovator here nor the only nation currently practicing such tactics.
The true innovator (in modern history) on this topic is America itself. The USA has been practicing asymmetrical warfare since the revolution and has continuously honed its tactics over the years. Although from the USA’s point of view it’s not so much asymmetrical as it is unconventional at this point, but the genesis of its methods is clearly a huge influencer in how it approaches conflict and wages war today.
So it should go without saying that America has been practicing the same tactics as the PLA on the Internet for some time now and my guess is that the PLA are now seeking to level the playing field. I see these new challenges from China as ultimately good for the world and the USA. Just as in business the same is true for nations, there is nothing like competition when it comes to keeping people focused and driving innovation.
Which brings me back to thinking outside the box. Unrestricted warfare to me means approaching problems using unconventional methods without the limitations of past thought. The war might be fought for national power or technological innovation, it doesn’t matter, whatever it is, to innovate we all must commit ourselves to waging unrestricted warfare if we are going to move forward.
No More Drama, lets get back to Innovating August 12, 2007
Posted by erik in : politics, security , 1 comment so far
You know what I don’t like about the security biz? All the Drama. I suppose this isn’t much different than any other line of work, but please I just want to sit in peace and think about the problems and then think about solutions and then make lots of money OK? Ahh right, there is the problem, that whole money thing, damn how could I be so naive? To many, fame is just another form of currency and when people start thinking someone is trying to take that away from them, you get drama.
For example, this little chain of events:
- Timing attacks on web privacy (Billy)
- Putting up, then shutting up (Jeremiah)
- RSnake Puts Up (Robert)
Please, all of you, put all this you stole your research nonsense behind you and move on. We all build our work on the shoulders of the giants who came before us. Half of the “new” ideas in security I read today were first presented in this book by James Martin
New research brings old ideas to life when they are presented in a new context. Often a context that didn’t exist back when the idea first appeared. It’s this context that the researcher brings to the idea which is the real innovation and we should all just sit back and bask in its glory. An idea is timeless and the good ones will get re-invented over and over again through the ages, like say for example ultrawideband wireless which was invented in 1894 or the fuel cell, invented in 1845. (Read: Tuning in to Technologies Past). These guys all invented something amazing, but nobody knows who these people are because they didn’t discover or even have the context that would have allowed their technologies to change the world.
There are also many examples throughout history where completely independent inventors have come up with the same idea nearly simultaneously (Gorman, 1998). These simultaneous inventions happens all the time but why? The explanation I like best is what the historian Thomas Hughes described as a Reverse Salient. “A salient is a protrusion in a geometric figure, a line of battle, or an expanding weather front. As technological systems expand, reverse salients develop. Reverse salients are components in the system that have fallen behind or are out of phase with the others” (Hughes, 1987). I believe that it’s these reverse salients that create an innovation vacuum that the leading researchers almost subconsciously rush to fill independent of each other. Or as John Campbell argues “Scientists and engineers, like everyone else, are influenced by their patrons and customers. The cultures of their communities thus affect the pace and direction of technological change.”
Pheww, well that puts it all in perspective right?
So, Robert (Rsnake), Jeremiah, and Billy, please, all of you, get back to innovating and discovering new context. The world is a better place when you are focused on that.
References and great reading
- Standage, R. (Jan 2005). “Tuning in Technology’s Past“, (MIT Technology Review, Online Article)
- Gorman, M. (1998). Transforming Nature, Chapter 3, Section 2 “Reverse Salients and Simultaneous Inventions“
- Campbell, J. (1996). “Perpetual Uncertainty” (Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Online Article)
Clinton on FOX News September 26, 2006
Posted by erik in : politics , add a comment
Former President Clinton recently let loose on FOX news during an interview with Chris Wallace. They were supposed to be there to talk about the billions that had just been raised as part of the Clinton Global Initiative but less than 5 minutes into the interview things got Interesting. The Nation did an excellent job summing up the event, but you really have to see it to believe it.
Is it naive of me to think that this kind of upfront, straightforward, pull no punches type of discussion when attacked by our sleepy media is exactly what people are looking for from our leaders? How many people would have voted for Gore if he had just pulled out the baseball bat during the debates? Don’t get me wrong, the democratic party is in shambles, and has been for a while, it’s pretty clear they lack any sort of strategy whatsoever, but throughout both the 2000 and 2004 elections I was just begging to see the Dems go on the offensive. I was hoping to see just one ounce of conviction, the Dems couldn’t pull it off and America went with the stronger looking choice (Was anyone really surprised at the outcome?). I’m strongly opposed to the regligious right and a deep suporter of the seperation of church and state, so you can guess who I voited for, but even as I went to the polls I knew I was voting for a loser.
So way to go Clinton, I hope you have set a good example this time around and your party or the party that will one day rise up from it’s ashes has taken notice and won’t back down. Please don’t back down, because the battle is just getting started.
Just what is going on? September 24, 2006
Posted by erik in : politics , 1 comment so farAmerica! Just what is going on? As a people, we have become polarized, trained to think red vs. blue. Any doubts in our leaders intentionally, almost willingly, buried by the fears implanted inside of us. We have been programed.
It’s all making me sick, but what has made me most ill of late is the lack of accountability and security in what is perhaps the most sacred right of any free nation - voting
Image Source - Electronic Frontier Foundation
I’ve recently read the Princeton report that describes how just about anyone with a hotel mini-bar key can fake an election, whoops you say you don’t have a mini bar key? No problem. It seems every time someone turns around there are more and more reports of voting irregularities, stories of lost votes that could have swung presidential elections and now Rolling stone has released a chilling tale complete with quotes from a Diebold whistle blower. Diebold by the way is the company responsible for the hardware, but they are not the ones responsible for the mess. No, that honor belongs to our politicians whom we “elected” and are, for the time being stuck with.
What can you do? For starters you (yes you) need to call, write or e-mail your elected officials. I know, I know, what a pain in the ass that is, but it’s pretty easy these days. Your Representatives have web sites and nifty little forms you can fill out. In the time it took you to read this sentence you could have easily popped off a few words like “Hey, I’m a constituent and I’d like to know what you are doing about all this voting nonsense, I urge you to support a voting system that is accountable (has a paper trail) and if an electronic system, is open for public scrutiny. Please let me know your position on the matter”. It’s that simple, but wait, too difficult you say? The EFF has made it so simple you don’t even have to write that, just go here, fill out your address and it’s taken care of. Don’t want to even do that? Then outsource it, send some money to a political group that will take the fight for you. I like the EFF, and Common Cause, but the choice is yours, please use it. What, you say that both of those institutions are filled with a bunch of bleeding heart liberals? Damn it man, stop thinking about which side you are on and pay attention to the issues! Sheesh…
You have no excuse - this as they say, is my call to action, you, right there in that chair, get moving. Now.