Belligerati

« Is that a useful comparison? | Main | How to handle bank nationalization »

January 21, 2009

Interesting interview

Bruce Schneier is the person who coined the expression security theater. Reason magazine has an interesting interview with him where he discusses what he likes and doesn't about modern homeland security.

Reason: Security and privacy (or, more controversially, security and freedom) are often described as being in opposition. When is that true? When it is untrue?

Schneier: The security vs. privacy dichotomy is a false one. Only identity-based security is in opposition to privacy, and there are limitations to that approach. I believe that approximately two security improvements since 9/11 have made airplane travel safer: reinforcing the cockpit door, teaching passengers they have to fight back, and—maybe—sky marshals. None of those measures has any impact on privacy. It's things like ID cards, and wholesale eavesdropping on telephone calls and Internet conversations, and large government databases that affect privacy, and their security value is minimal. The real dichotomy is liberty vs. control. There might be less crime in a society with strong government controls and police-state-like surveillance, but I don't think anyone would feel safer in that society.

There is also an interesting article about him in last year's November Atlantic Monthly issue, The Things He Carried.

Sadly, cleaning up accidents, crime, and terror is often cheaper than preventing them in the first place. Schneier is right that this is often a politically untenable conclusion. This is what's good about policies that focus on the cheapest ways to save lives (cost per life saved or cost per additional quality adjusted life year). When we focus on the cost of saving lives, the method of doing so becomes less important. That's how you get the discussion away from theater and onto what it really takes to make us safe.

Posted by OneEyedMan at January 21, 2009 5:06 PM

Comments

Post a comment