73 stories
·
0 followers

LLM Summary of My Book Beyond Fear

1 Share

Claude (Anthropic’s LLM) was given this prompt: Please summarize the themes and arguments of Bruce Schneier’s book Beyond Fear. I’m particularly interested in a taxonomy of his ethical arguments—please expand on that. Then lay out the most salient criticisms of the book.

Claude’s reply:

Here’s a brief summary of the key themes and arguments made in security expert Bruce Schneier’s book Beyond Fear: Thinking Sensibly About Security in an Uncertain World:

Central Themes:

  • Effective security requires realistic risk assessment, not fear-driven responses. We need to rationally determine actual threats versus perceived ones.
  • Security trade-offs need to be carefully balanced against costs to other values like privacy, freedom, and social/economic impacts.
  • Human psychology and biases lead to exaggerated fears that politicians/marketers can exploit, resulting in wasteful and theatrical “security theater.”
  • Security is a process that requires ongoing flexibility, not total prevention. We can’t anticipate every threat but can build resilience.

Key Arguments:

    Analyze risks empirically using evidence, statistics, and probability rather than intuition. Avoid underestimating everyday risks while overestimating novel or sensational ones.

  • Reject the temptation to implement oppressive security restrictions after tragic but unlikely events. Focus only on proportional responses.
  • Where possible, favor openness and transparency over aggressive data collection or restrictions which erode civil liberties.
  • Seek security policies and technologies that enhance society broadly rather than benefit special interests.

Schneier argues for rational, ethical approaches to security aimed at genuine protection while avoiding violations of human rights in the name of safety.

Here are some of the key ethical arguments Bruce Schneier makes in Beyond Fear regarding security policy and practices:

  • Utilitarian Ethics – Security measures should aim to provide the greatest societal benefit and well-being for the most people, not just special interests.
  • Individual Autonomy – Restrictions should be minimized to avoid excessive infringements on civil liberties and individual freedoms. Surveillance creep risks violating autonomy.
  • Privacy Rights – Pervasive monitoring and data collection erode privacy rights and dignity. Citizens are entitled to some degree of opacity.
  • Proportional Responses – Reactive policies should weigh costs versus statistically likely benefits. Draconian rules beyond proportionality are unethical.
  • Justice and Fairness – Security should not create racial, religious or other profiling biases that punish groups rather than conduct.
  • Accountability and Transparency – Ethical security requires checks against excessive power and oversight for responsibility. Secrecy enables abuses.
  • Honest Representation – Officials and pundits have an ethical duty not to stoke disproportionate public fears. Security theater manufactures consent.
  • Integrity and Character – Leaders should have the wisdom and courage to make difficult trade-offs rather than exploit fears for authority and control.

Overall Schneier argues security policies grounded in ethics rather than fear promote human well-being while recognizing inherent trade-offs. Prudence, transparency, and proportionality are essential.

Here are some of the most salient criticisms made against the arguments put forth in Bruce Schneier’s book Beyond Fear:

  • Downplays real threats – Some argue Schneier dangerously downplays serious risks like terrorism and cybercrime by calling fears overblown.
  • Too theoretical – His risk analysis approach may rely too much on statistics versus real-world uncertainties that defy probabilistic reasoning.
  • No easy answers – While citing misguided policies, critics say Schneier provides few actionable solutions or concrete policy guidance.
  • Conflicting values – His balancing of security, privacy and liberty involves inherent trade-offs and tough choices he gives little direction on.
  • Politically naive – Suggesting special interests drive policy may under-appreciate legitimate national security concerns of elected officials.
  • Hindsight bias – Assessing past overreactions easier than predicting future threats that justify caution today.
  • No accounting for psychology – Factoring human irrationality into policy is essential, not dismissed as “security theater.”
  • Technical focus – Focuses narrowly on certain technologies while ignoring broader organizational and sociological dimensions.

In summary, critics argue Schneier’s risk analysis orientation is too clinical, abstract, and devoid of political and human realities to transform concrete policy in the ways he intends. His framework may therefore lack sufficient nuance or guidance.

It’s interesting. The summary is pretty accurate, and so are the criticisms. The book was a product of my thinking twenty years ago, and my own thinking has evolved to address those criticisms.

Of course, this only works with older books that the LLM has ingested, and probably works better with books that have been written about.

Read the whole story
j8048188
149 days ago
reply
Share this story
Delete

Snowdrifts

brr
1 Comment and 2 Shares
4 days of blown snow into a doorway.
Read the whole story
j8048188
188 days ago
reply
This blog is definitely worth a follow.
acdha
189 days ago
reply
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete

Rumors swirl that Huobi executives have been arrested, exchange is insolvent

1 Comment
A navy and sky blue flame, followed by the text "Huobi" with "Huo" in navy and "bi" in light blue

Hong Kong crypto news outlet Techub cited two insiders when reporting on August 5 that "at least three executives" at Huobi had been detained by Chinese police for investigation. The report sparked panic, and the exchange has seen net outflows of more than $73 million in the past week. Huobi's stablecoin balances are down 33% over the same period. Investor and crypto analyst Adam Cochran tweeted of "likely Huobi insolvency", citing Binance's bulk Tether sales, paused "audit" reports, and "weird balance shifts" at the exchange.

Huobi and related people have been busy refuting the rumors, with Huobi's social media head dismissing them as "baseless malicious attacks". Huobi "advisor" Justin Sun tweeted "4".

Read the whole story
j8048188
198 days ago
reply
The number 4 is considered very unlucky in several Asian cultures.
Share this story
Delete

Getting Her Fix

1 Comment

That good shit

Read the whole story
j8048188
246 days ago
reply
I'd love a "Fart Barn" shirt.
Share this story
Delete

Classic Claireface

1 Comment and 2 Shares

>:D

Read the whole story
j8048188
310 days ago
reply
Wow, Jeph first showed her arm flanges/gaskets/attachment points back in #4984.
Share this story
Delete

Amazon vans

2 Comments and 3 Shares

Today I was driving past an auto body shop that specializes in collision damage and I couldn’t help but notice the three Amazon trucks parked out front.

It reminds me of the time my uncle got a job at UPS, driving a truck and doing deliveries about 20 years ago. He hated it at first, not only because it was back-breaking labor and you were on your feet running all day but also he said the driver training part was excruciating and took a couple months of having a mentor riding along with him pointing out all his mistakes.

My uncle thought of himself as one of the best drivers on the planet and hated all the time spent having to relearn how to maneuver a giant van into alleyways and loading docks, thinking it was entirely beneath his experience driving a variety of vehicles over decades.

About a year into his tenure at UPS, he backed into someone’s car at an office building and he was instantly fired for it.


Seeing the three Amazon trucks at the auto body shop in my small town, I’m reminded that I’ve never seen a UPS truck in an accident, or in a body shop’s lot. They seem to take safety seriously.

Of course, UPS isn’t immune, and accidents must happen but Amazon’s track record is so bad you can search YouTube right now for “Amazon driver crash” and easily find dozens of clips from house cameras and dash cams showing Amazon trucks hitting cars and houses and knocking over mailboxes then leaving, plus a bunch jackknifing on freeways because every driver is under immense pressure to hit their goals and deadlines, or risk getting fired if they come up short.

Amazon seems to give anyone with a pulse the keys to a giant Sprinter van and lets them loose. I say this after watching Amazon trucks regularly tear up my gravel driveway that has a slight incline at the exit. FedEx and UPS drivers figure out they should park on the flat area, then get a running start to have enough momentum to glide up the driveway and out. Amazon drivers usually start driving up the gravel incline, lose traction and slow to a stop, then punch the throttle, leaving potholes and spraying rocks all over. When I see this, I tell them to back up and try again and get some speed first from the flatter part of the run-up.

I may be cynical here, but if this post ever got shared to someone high up at Amazon, I don’t think there’d be a memo sent around on how maybe they should train drivers a bit more, perhaps outfit the vans with more safety features like 360º cameras and parking sensors to prevent accidents, and maybe retool their driver incentives program to prevent future accidents by focusing maybe more on safety and having a clean driving record.

Instead, I bet there’d be a memo from the PR team that goes out to all their contracting business telling them in the future to please park any Amazon trucks in the back of any shop because seeing the Amazon “smile” logo at a collision shop is a bad look for the brand.



Read the whole story
j8048188
317 days ago
reply
An auto body shop in my area told me they usually have 1-3 Amazon vans in the shop every week.
acdha
319 days ago
reply
Washington, DC
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
mxm23
322 days ago
reply
Truth
West Coast
Next Page of Stories