[iwar] G2G % I2G
From: Dan Ellis
From: ellisd@cs.ucsb.edu
To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:25:14 -0800 (PST)
fc Tue Jan 30 11:43:07 2001
Received: from 207.222.214.225
by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0)
for fc@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:43:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: by multi33.netcomi.com for fc
(with Netcom Interactive pop3d (v1.21.1 1998/05/07) Tue Jan 30 19:43:01 2001)
X-From_: ellisd@cs.ucsb.edu Tue Jan 30 13:42:44 2001
Received: from mq.egroups.com (mq.egroups.com [208.50.144.79])
by multi33.netcomi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA10724
for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:42:40 -0600
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-901-980883764-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.55] by mq.egroups.com with NNFMP; 30 Jan 2001 19:42:44 -0000
X-Sender: ellisd@cs.ucsb.edu
X-Apparently-To: iwar@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 30 Jan 2001 19:42:43 -0000
Received: (qmail 45848 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2001 19:25:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l9.egroups.com with QMQP; 30 Jan 2001 19:25:17 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO letters.cs.ucsb.edu) (128.111.41.13) by mta3 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2001 20:26:21 -0000
Received: from plover (plover [128.111.48.34]) by letters.cs.ucsb.edu (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA23460; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:25:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender: ellisd@plover
To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Message-ID:
From: Dan Ellis
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe:
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:25:14 -0800 (PST)
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] G2G % I2G
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
As the level connectivity between people rises, our ability to
influence each other increases significantly. Currently there are two
somewhat disjoint ways of thinking about IW based on who initiates the
conflict. If a small group or individual instigates the conflict it is
called terrorism (I2G). If a government or large group instigates the
conflict it is called warfare. Throughout history the types of conflicts
that could be initiated within these two sets have differed greatly.
Although a terrorist could attack with conventional weapons to hurt tens
to hundreds of people (McVeigh), or with the proliferation of WMDs hurt
thousands to hundreds of thousands (more?), it is unlikely that an
individual to sustain a war, or a continuous threat. With cyber attack
tools, is the influence that an individual can have equivalent to what an
entire government could wield (in the scope of millions?)? That is, does
the line between terrorist activity and warfare blur in the arena of
information warfare? I understand that governments will be the first to
acquire cyber attack tools that are comprehensive enough to sustain such
damage (simply because of their sizeable budgets and man-power).
However, once such technology exists and is known in broader circles (an
inevitable process), is there anything in G2G IW that is inherently
different than I2G IW?
------------------------------
Dan Ellis, PhD student, UCSB
http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~ellisd
Home: (805) 971-6183
Work: (805) 893-4394
Fax: (805) 893-8553
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/1/_/595019/_/980883764/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
------------------
http://all.net/