Pride vs Safety

[Parasondox]

The Internet. The greatest and most dangerous unknown weapon?

A lot of talk lately has been about cyber terrorism and how those on the receiving end handling that said incident. The internet was a blaze, on fire, with comments coming from every direction and using generic terms and words such as "cowards", "terrorist have won", "PC madness", "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of Expression". However, while reading a lot of the comments of listening to many many views, two things stick out the most. Pride and Safety. Examples below on just two opinions. Remember they are just opinions and not fact.

Pride

Safety

Source: Machinima and AMC Theatres

It would be easy for me as the OP to just pick one side and have a major discussion with you all about it but I would like to talk about both. Are those who are saying "Those cowards Sony should not have cancelled the movie, those pussies", showing too much pride over safety and not thinking about the lives of thousands of people if something were to happen? Or do you think maybe that those on the side of safety were maybe a bit too cautious on the matter and give those willing to use the same tactics again, a chance to install fear to many more.

Sorry If I haven't said much, a head cold limits me from so much. Feel free to discuss any of the points made in both videos and of what you think overall in the wake of this on going situation.

One quote I saw and did liked was about North Korea. You see, they may not sent missiles to the US but they would just take it out on their neighbour South Korea like a child who is having a tantrum and is hitting the child next to them in class.

Pride vs Safety or can both be at play. I will add more when I can and let me know if I made a mistake or not. I am being nice all of a sudden... curse you WINTER!! *shaking fist*

 

[senordesol]

'Safety' isn't really a valid argument (I believe) when discussing terrorism. You are never 'safe' if someone decides to threaten you, any 'safety' to be enjoyed is solely at the discretion of your assailant.

Maybe he'll make good on his threat if you defy him; maybe he won't. Maybe he'll attack you anyway regardless. This isn't a business arrangement; you have no control over what your assailant will do.

So, you can either tell him you're afraid of him, or tell him you're not afraid. If you tell him you're afraid, then they know they'll be able to use that fear against you forever. Conceivably, they could control everything you do from then on.

I say, if we had any damn 'pride' at all, we'd translate the film into Korean and air-drop hundreds of thousands of copies of The Interview AND Team America (along with personal DVD players) all over the Norks.

 

[Zontar]

I have to agree with senrodesol here, there is not "safety" at risk over this. North Korean threats are a paper tiger, something to be mocked and laughed at, not caved to. North Korea doesn't have the ability to back up the threats it made against Sony, and even if it did and tried to follow through it would quickly learn why no one who both can threaten the first world and has tried too is still around.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

 

[Something Amyss]

The internet is inherently contrary.

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

Probably not.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

It isn't about pride, it is about giving power to these kind of groups by rolling over to their demands. It is in the same boat as sacrificing liberty for security.

 

[Zontar]

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

Given that the 'threat' came from North Korea, there is no danger. When a paper tiger tries to make you do something because of fear, the worst thing you can possibly do for your own safety is to do what it says. By caving in Sony has put themselves and the American people in greater jeopardy then if they has simply ignored it, because now others will think that doing the same threats without the ability to follow through on them will work, and worst is they may be right.

 

[Pyrian]

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

Please. I've had my life threatened on the internet more times than I can count.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

Please. I've had my life threatened on the internet more times than I can count.

Not by an entire country you haven't. But you're welcome to elaborate on that.

 

[Something Amyss]

Given that the 'threat' came from North Korea, there is no danger.

You mean the same source of the current attack that's costing Sony tons of money, right? The sort of thing people also pooh-poohed?

And let's not forget how "unthinkable" 9-11 was.

Please. I've had my life threatened on the internet more times than I can count.

And I'm sure you've had it threatened by people who already demonstrated they could compromise your livelihood and cripple you to the tune of millions of dollars. I bet that happens to you all the time. In fact, it's probably such a common occurrence it probably hardly bears mentioning.

I mean, that must be it, rather than the alternative, a major case of false equivalence.

 

[theNater]

I'm not going to disparage anyone for choosing what they do in this kind of situation.

However, I will say I'm glad that enough people throughout history have chosen "pride" over safety that, if I so choose, I can publicly mock my national leaders without fear of imprisonment or execution.

 

[Zontar]

Given that the 'threat' came from North Korea, there is no danger.

You mean the same source of the current attack that's costing Sony tons of money, right? The sort of thing people also pooh-poohed?

And let's not forget how "unthinkable" 9-11 was.

Ah yes, because they can really do more to Sony at this point. There's some digital gold safe that's out there on the internet for North Korea to steal from them that they haven't already.

9-11 wasn't unthinkable, if it was then the terrorists who did it wouldn't have gotten the idea from a Tom Clancy novel which had the same general idea over a decade before the event. But that's beside the point because it's something which is pretty much guaranteed to never happen again. Before it happened most hijackings ended with only the hijackers and maybe a few of the hundreds of civilians dead, so resistance wasn't really something people contemplated. Now, after 9-11 happened? There's a reason no hijackings by terrorist organizations have even been attempted since, with the fear people would have of another 9-11 happening they'd either be crushed under the eight of numbers, assuming they don't simply run out of bullets first. another 9-11 is impossible in today's world because of 9-11 itself.

Though this is all a moot point given it's North Korea we're talking about here, the only places it's threatening the lives of in any way that isn't the delusions of a madman is South Korea and MAYBE Japan. But then again it's North Korea, we know from history their threats are paper tigers. Even if they where to try and fallow through with them and, despite all logic, somehow succeed, what do you think would happen? When 9-11 happened, the world, even Russia, China and Iran, momentarily supported the US. The result of a few buildings being destroyed and a few thousand lives lost in the US lead to the overthrow of two dictatorships and a worldwide anti-terrorist manhunt which has seen the former rulers of nations go into hiding as all who support them are quickly dispelled. To think that because North Korea has nuclear bombs (which it is incapable of actually deploying) the same fate would not befall its government is insanity, one not helped by the fact that they are officially already at war with all NATO members, with the peace only being a cease fire.

It's the perfect storm of being a moment to call their bluff. Either they are just making idle threats with no ability to back them up (which is the most likely case) or the unimaginably unlikely scenario of them making the biggest mistake in their nations history by learning the old fashion way what happens when a first world industrial nation goes to war with an industrial and resource poor one (and also how quickly China abandons its supposed allies when it gets in the way of the only thing they care about: trade).

 

[Pyrian]

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

Please. I've had my life threatened on the internet more times than I can count.

Not by an entire country you haven't.

North Korea's nominal GDP: ~$12.4 billion. Sony's annual revenue: ~$64 billion. Sony is about 5 times the economic size of North Korea. It's the relative equivalent of being threatened by some snot nosed kid.

And I'm sure you've had it threatened by people who already demonstrated they could compromise your livelihood and cripple you to the tune of millions of dollars.

A snot nosed kid who squirted ketchup in my shoes.

 

[Fox12]

Okay, here's the deal. A small number of people can control a large number of people if they use fear mongering tactics. Dictatorships do it all the time. The secret police can't be everywhere at once. However, the fact that they COULD be anywhere at any given time illicits fear. Even if you're not being watched, you don't know that, so the fear of being watched keeps you in line.

Terrorism works in a similar way. Even if a 9/11 sized event happened every year, the chances of you personally being harmed in anyway is miniscule to non-existant. However, it could happen anywhere at any given time, and that makes you uneasy. Thus a small group of undersupplied terrorists, who pose no threat to the United States whatsoever, can influence our foreign policy and behavior. Remember the Boston bombers? Maybe three people died (known as a lazy afternoon in Detroit). Most serial killers kill more. But, because it was a terrorist attack, people allowed the government to force entry into their homes and create a mandatory curfew. The news stations referred to their little bomb as a WMD. Three deaths is not the result of a weapon of mass destruction. We're sacrificing freedoms, and we're not even getting security, because it's possible for the government to take our freedoms, but it's impossible for them to offer us 100% security. A few teenagers in their basement can hatch a poor plan to kill two people, and have the whole nation in a frenzy. As long as we overreact, we empower terrorism. We have to refuse to be intimidated.

We can't overeact and invade sovereign nations every few years. It's unethical, continues the cycle of violence, and is too bloody expensive. There are other ways to support our liberties, and the best way is to go about life as usual and refuse to be intimidated.

 

[Something Amyss]

Ah yes, because they can really do more to Sony at this point.

A shame you can't actually, you know, prove that.

And I'm sure you've had it threatened by people who already demonstrated they could compromise your livelihood and cripple you to the tune of millions of dollars.

A snot nosed kid who squirted ketchup in my shoes.

My bad. It was false equivalence.

 

[Pyrian]

But then again it's North Korea, we know from history their threats are paper tigers.

This bears repeating. A lot of the fear-mongering is coming from people saying, "well, look what happened after their last threat" as if these were the only two threats North Korea has made. Idle threats come out of North Korea all the time.

 

[Zontar]

Ah yes, because they can really do more to Sony at this point.

A shame you can't actually, you know, prove that.

Alright then, please pray tell, what more could they possibly do to Sony? Hell, apart from more cyber attacks what could they do at all?

 

[Pyrian]

It was false equivalence.

Your position has been utterly demolished by multiple posters at this point. Hardly time to make a victory lap while failing to address my counterpoint.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I'd like to see if even half the people that are smugly going on about 'pride' would be willing to jeopardize their own safety in the face of a similar threat.

Please. I've had my life threatened on the internet more times than I can count.

Not by an entire country you haven't.

North Korea's nominal GDP: ~$12.4 billion. Sony's annual revenue: ~$64 billion. Sony is about 5 times the economic size of North Korea. It's the relative equivalent of being threatened by some snot nosed kid.

I don't buy that handwave-y comparison for a second.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

Sounds more like Pride vs Cowardice to me. The guy comparing Aurora to this is a moron, North Korea didn't give a warning, it made a threat.
You might say it's wise to cave to demands/surrender when a force vastly more powerful than you makes a threat, but that isn't the case here. Sony is backed by the western world. They should reformat their systems (or whatever it takes to recover from the cyber attack), release the movie, and say "fuck you" to NK. Cowing to the threats of a nation that doesn't actually follow through with any of the shit they say is not the way to go.