Boston Versus ATHF

[renderman]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17008691/

Prince said Berdovsky had received a call that morning from a friend who told him there was a bomb threat at the Sullivan Square transit station in Boston. He said Berdovsky grabbed his camera and headed out to the scene, unaware it involved one of the electronic devices that he and Sean Stevens, 28, had hung as part of a guerrilla advertising campaign for Turner Broadcasting, a division of Time Warner Inc.

“That’s what he does,” Prince said. “He videotapes things. He’s a videotape freelance artist. He got a call that there was a bomb threat near his house, and he went to tape it. When he got there, he realized what was going on, and he went back to his apartment and called his employer, and they told him they would take care of it. That’s not an inappropriate response.”

[VAX_to_PBX]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

Where the Diodes doped with PETN, or acetone peroxide? Why couldn't M.I.T., and the "experts" call up the local boy scouts, and have them identify the devices before all the stupid people went into a shopping mall panic?

A bomb expert in Boston supposedly can't tell the difference between a LightBrite, and a improvised explosive. Are there not prerequisites for that career like a high school education for example?

Also people who have malicious intent don't try to get there plans foiled by putting lights on there weapons, and exposing there tactic.

I have no clue about explosives, and I could tell it was harmless within seconds of first viewing it.

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

A bomb expert in Boston supposedly can't tell the difference between a LightBrite, and a improvised explosive. Are there not prerequisites for that career like a high school education for example?

again, i think it all comes down to that critical triple-F... First Five Minutes.

in the first five minutes of almost any perceived threat, you have people who are almost never experts making decisions based on pre-written policy usually with only partial information.

the question of the day, at least for me, is not "why did things get so out of hand?" but, rather, "why couldn't the panic and reaction be ratcheted-down almost immediately?"

it's good to have fast-response reaction to potential threats when they're reported. that's a part of living in our world today. but hand-in-hand with that is the ability to de-escalate at a moment's notice, too... or else our society becomes a madhouse and the terrorists win etc etc etc.

like the old farmer who has a shotgun to defend his grounds... he hears a rukus in the barn late at night. he can grab the shotty almost immediately and be running outside in his longjohns with it and a lantern. but, as soon as he sees that a cow merely kicked a post, he can immediately go back inside or risk looking foolish if he continues standing around armed and in his drawers. (heh... is that like weilding a katana in hello kitty pajamas?)

[steampunk]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

again, i think it all comes down to that critical triple-F... First Five Minutes.

in the first five minutes of almost any perceived threat, you have people who are almost never experts making decisions based on pre-written policy usually with only partial information.

the question of the day, at least for me, is not "why did things get so out of hand?" but, rather, "why couldn't the panic and reaction be ratcheted-down almost immediately?"

it's good to have fast-response reaction to potential threats when they're reported. that's a part of living in our world today. but hand-in-hand with that is the ability to de-escalate at a moment's notice, too... or else our society becomes a madhouse and the terrorists win etc etc etc.

like the old farmer who has a shotgun to defend his grounds... he hears a rukus in the barn late at night. he can grab the shotty almost immediately and be running outside in his longjohns with it and a lantern. but, as soon as he sees that a cow merely kicked a post, he can immediately go back inside or risk looking foolish if he continues standing around armed and in his drawers. (heh... is that like weilding a katana in hello kitty pajamas?)

I think that's definitely true of the "first five minutes". However, this bomb squad had time to diffuse the situation and really think about the apparatus, yet the reaction was still "this is a bomb". Eventually, someone with experience has to say "This is not a bomb because of X".

(heh... is that like weilding a katana in hello kitty pajamas?)

lmfao

[Nikita]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

(heh... is that like weilding a katana in hello kitty pajamas?)

HEY!!!! HEY NOW!!! I'll have you know I no longer wear the Hello Kitty ensemble to bed.....Your remark also reminds me to put a katana back into the bedroom.

[Deviant Ollam]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

I'll have you know I no longer wear the Hello Kitty ensemble to bed.

geez... just shoot a dozen holes in my mental image.

Your remark also reminds me to put a katana back into the bedroom.

heh, where has it been recently? keeping it in the kitchen to cut a half-dozen limes at once? pass the Corona.

[Nikita]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

geez... just shoot a dozen holes in my mental image.
heh, where has it been recently? keeping it in the kitchen to cut a half-dozen limes at once? pass the Corona.

Actually.... It's been in the dining room. I was going to mount a few on the walls above the dining table. Needed to get an idea of the space I needed. I'm sorry Ive destroyed your mental image. Would It help if I told you I had plans to make a cotten t-shirt with "I Less than Three my Lock Picked". and wear that to bed? I was also thinking "let's bump keys" would be a catchy phrase as well, but I don't know, it can be interpreted in so many ways.

I want full credit if someone uses those. Damnit, I'm gonna busy this weekend designing those.

[renderman]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

Actually.... It's been in the dining room. I was going to mount a few on the walls above the dining table. Needed to get an idea of the space I needed. I'm sorry Ive destroyed your mental image. Would It help if I told you I had plans to make a cotten t-shirt with "I Less than Three my Lock Picked". and wear that to bed? I was also thinking "let's bump keys" would be a catchy phrase as well, but I don't know, it can be interpreted in so many ways.

I want full credit if someone uses those. Damnit, I'm gonna busy this weekend designing those.

Bwahahahaha!!

Those really need to be made into t-shirts or stickers....

[Nikita]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

Bwahahahaha!!

Those really need to be made into t-shirts or stickers....

I guess I will have to, I want them for myself. Im going to have to get girl shirts that are decent, not just babydoll tees. I don't know if those vendors realize but those shirts aren't exactly comfortable for girls who have boobs and aren't stick thin. I've got the lets bump keys shirt totally pictured in my head too. Guys will love it.

So, as an update I've added one of the accused gentleman to my myspace. YAY! I'm going to see if he will conduct an interview with me.

Also, his website
http://zebbler.com/

[bascule]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

I think that's definitely true of the "first five minutes". However, this bomb squad had time to diffuse the situation and really think about the apparatus, yet the reaction was still "this is a bomb". Eventually, someone with experience has to say "This is not a bomb because of X".

I think it's too easy to slip into the Chicken Little "sky is falling" mentality. Once people are in it, no one stops to ask "Wait a second, is the sky actually falling?"

[Nikita]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

http://news.com.com/2061-10802_3-6158059.html

"I am sure you are aware of recent events in which a component of an Adult Swim marketing campaign made Turner Broadcasting the unintended focus of controversy in Boston and around the world. I deeply regret the negative publicity and expense caused to our company as a result of this campaign. As General Manger of Cartoon Network, I feel compelled to step down, effective immediately, in recognition of the gravity of the situation that occurred under my watch," Samples said in his statement.

This is just insane. I'm disappointed I don't live in Boston. Ive never felt the need to rally around a cause like some deserve. Maybe it's just laziness on my part, because there are a lot of good causes out there. I haven't really wanted to get off my butt, log off the online world, and walk the streets in a Sean Penn fashion, waving "wake up world" protest signs, until recently. All this from something the rest of the world took at face value.

[steampunk]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

I think it's too easy to slip into the Chicken Little "sky is falling" mentality. Once people are in it, no one stops to ask "Wait a second, is the sky actually falling?"

I couldn't agree more. I also think that some people use the phrase "Post-9/11" as an excuse to act like complete idiots.

[Thorn]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

A question for those of you who think the police actions were uncalled for: Have any of you ever actually dealt with a possible explosive device? Just to be clear, I'm not talking about fireworks or something equally trivial; I'm talking about something that will severely injure or kill a person within a 10 to 20 ft. radius and cause injury within 100 ft. or more. If you have not, then I would submit that you're not in any position to judge how the actions are carried out.

Before the anyone asks: Yes, I've done it. Once. It was scary. I was in over my head, and I knew it. When the bomb squad took command of the scene, it was fine with me. Then when they destroyed the device and it was proven to be an actual IED, I was very happy that I had called them in and not made a stupid and possibly deadly choice that it "wasn't real."

Sure, the ATHF signs were relatively small, and only had small containers on the front. However, so called "plastic" explosives (or even plain old black powder) can be placed in a container of almost any shape, and relatively small quantities can injure or kill. It can be very difficult to determine exactly the device is, sort of opening the device and running the risk of setting it off if it is real. Some of you may or not recall the "letter bombs" that Ted Kaczynski (the "Unabomber") used in the 1970s to the 1990s. Some of Kaczynski's devices were contained in standard mailing envelopes, yet he still managed to kill three and injure twenty-three people in computer and tech industries.

In retrospect, the situation in Boston was unwarranted, but hindsight is always 20/20. The nature of dealing with reported explosives means that you proceed with all possible caution, and you never assume that a device is safe until it is rendered safe or proven not to be an explosive.

[Vyrus]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

i would be inclined to see your side of the coin, if it wernt for the fact that all the devices were the same.

they were up for 3 weeks, and the local population said they looked "harmless". even if they WERE devices involved in an attack, the official that located the first one would have called in the bomb squad (which was done eventually <_<) and they would have identified it as harmless, END of story.

the issue at hand isnt "paranoia is totally unwarranted in this situation", most bombs that do the most damage do so because they DO "look harmless". the problem is that like a bad south park episode, once the discovery was made that there was nothing to be afraid of, the situation spiraled WILDLY out of control, so badly that the common people of the nation felt the need to point and laugh.

in short, the problem is AFTER the paranoia ended, nobody wanted to be seen pressing the stop button. and the point is, that kind of recklessness can do as much damage as a REAL terrorist attack -_-

[renderman]

Re: Boston Versus ATHF

Sure, the ATHF signs were relatively small, and only had small containers on the front. However, so called "plastic" explosives (or even plain old black powder) can be placed in a container of almost any shape, and relatively small quantities can injure or kill.

That's an interesting fact and is the truth.

However if one applies it in a blanket fashion, any item larger than a pack of gum is a 'suspect device' and requires following 'protocol' thereby grinding everything to a halt

Conversely, if a non-suspicious and innocuous looking item (i.e. envelope) can be a dangerous item, one should treat them with *more* suspicion than obviously suspicious items. Basically, spend more time freaking out about the water bottle beside the bomb than the bomb itself because 'you just don't know'

The point is that there has to be a base threshold of suspicion before you make the call. The requirement that 'it had wires coming out of it' should not be the base line, nor should the requirement of 'bigger than a breadbox' be one as well. If anything, the bomb squad successfully educated bad guys that if they make a bomb and place it in a public place, make sure you hide the wiring harness.

If an innocuous looking item can be a dangerous item, we should therefore treat all innocuous items as suspicious items and run around freaking out like chicken little.

Where's the threshold? All I can tell you is that it's dangerously low.