Re: "Soft Targets" as Schelling Points

[tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)]

At 8:05 PM 7/29/96, eli+@gs160.sp.cs.cmu.edu wrote:
>Tim May writes:
>>The connection should be clear, but in case it is not: many soft targets
>>are Schelling points for terrorist actions.
>
>I see no coordination problem here.  Schelling points are a useful
>concept when you have several actors, each of whom benefits from
>making the same choice as the others.  Here, I think you want to say
>"soft targets are easy to attack".

There are _many_ "soft targets," of course. Millions, in fact. But some are
"more likely" than others to be hit, a la Schelling points.

Schelling points need not involve "coordination" between actors, though
Schelling points provide one means of coordination without communication
(e.g., where does each think a meeting will occur).

Schelling points are like "The Match Game" (an old t.v. show largely
written by one of the main contributors to "Mad Magazine").  Namely, "Name
a place likely to be attacked by terrorists."

Coordination is not the issue. Rather, the Olympics was (obviously) a
likely target, for a variety of reasons.

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."