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."