The Defense of Poverty

The economics of certain resources are such that the cost of retrieving them is not worth what they're worth. Indeed, wishful thinking guides much of the economy. While any money spent is arguably in hopes of some type of return, some returns are more feasible than others. From fossil fuels to minerals to whale oil, history has plenty of examples of this.

It also may be applied to military history. Some regions are simply so poor, so backwards, and so remote, influencing control there is harder than it's worth. This is why rural Afghanistan was, is, and will be among the world's backwaters. Even chasing fugitives into such territory may not necessarily be worth it. Some people likewise have little worth stealing. Perhaps insuring that all are poor means that there is little left to steal.

Bad Ideas

Casebook example of a potential problem. Whether they can fix it by decentralizing it is up in the air.

Heterotechnology: Improvised Weapons

In recent news, there is a man who assembles guns, explosives, and other weapons from items beyond airport security. Of interest was the fact basic chemistry is used for an explosive charge, by combining water and lithium. While this differs from conventional black powder and propellants, it is still the use an explosive reaction to propel a projectile. As new security measures arise, so to do new ways around them. A better pro-active response may seek to discourage certain types of behavior (such as attention seeking and denial of infamy) than bans on toenail clippers.

The Process of Perversion

Continuing with last week's theme of regulatory capture, I mused on the process itself. A robust institution may maintain several failsafes in case of abuse. In a free society, this often comes in the form of transparency from the public and press. The judicial and legal branches (in theory) act as ways to ensure the social contract. Security forces exist to enforce the laws of the land and protect citizens. These institutions essentially go mad, as catabolism wracks the system. We live in such a time where most of these had failed. The security system has become an end, rather than a means of defense. In an age of enforced frailty, the best defense is resilience, and opting out whenever one can. 

Rise of the Mesh

While I could harp for hours on the spying scandals, others cover that with far greater skill and depth than I am capable of. The economic consequences for the US result in foreign clients moving outside the spied upon American cloud to greener pastures elsewhere. In addition, technologies are evolving in a direction that is extremely difficult for centralized institutions to control. Automated manufacture, crypto-currencies, basement biochem labs, and solar power is only one aspect. Another is the very nature of the Internet and computer networks themselves. Project Meshnet project aims to create an open source, nearly impossible to shut down, censorship resistant alternatives to conventional internet service providers.

The basic premise is a P2P network built from scratch, easy to deploy with little overhead. Interestingly, Google has investigated the concept of using stratellites, balloons covering a region in wi-fi. Little overhead (no pun intended) is required, save a balloon and specialized wireless router. Their Loon project aims to bring internet to the Southern Hemisphere, recently launching from New Zealand. As one balloon leaves an area of coverage, another arrives. As patents expire and competitors appear, I imagine others will try the same (or a similar) strategy.

Such efforts would be difficult to accomplish, short of blasting the balloons out of the sky (which in itself is no mean technical feat). The primary technical battles of the coming century, I believe, will be the battle of decentralized, autonomous networks against the corrupted husks of nation-states (with rent-seeking kleptocrats behind them). In short, a fight between the T-1000 and Dracula. Already, criminal and non-state groups have deployed conventional communications infrastructure outside government control. Darknets already exist, and further revelations will only drive them on more.

Fun With Surveillance

In light of the recent surveillance revelations, supervillainy abounds. While I'm sure the status quo is well aware of my identity, I'd like to put a few things in comparison. First, the main issue with warrantless surveillance is that is a rather poor tactic as far as far as terrorism prevention goes. Secondly, it puts a lot of private information at the hands of government and corporate entities which may target certain individuals or groups in the future (even if not today). Third, it violates the principles of due process enshrined in centuries of law, and likewise makes transparency of Big Brother much harder.

Much of PRISM operated in a legal black hole, outside of the regular checks and balances. However, as Robert Heinlein said, "Privacy laws make the bugs smaller." Even if this program is shut down, future projects may well continue. While the cypherpunks are trying to hide and encrypt themselves, the status quo will try to break their codes. However, the symbolic resistance of encryption is still a method of self defense available to most people. While it might not totally prevent government spying, it still can make it harder for hackers and identity thieves from stealing your information.

The Distributed Republic

While the rotting husk of civilization is devoured by writhing maggots, many despair there is no alternative. This is untrue, as the failure of one mode of civilization often heralds the arrival of another. Does this mean that the developed world will collapse into a Mad Max-style scavenger world? Given the amount of engineers, technicians, and mechanics alive today, nothing short of a near-total extinction event would set do that. A widespread loss of technical knowledge is a rare event historically, and often is more a pressure to develop (or redevelop) technologies in new directions. Even with a catastrophic and sudden collapse of imports, a significant amount of materials can still be scavenged from landfills, wreckage, and other detritus. 

 

However, political and economic institutions have not kept pace with other technologies. As encrypted cyber-currencies, desktop manufacturing, home renewables, and mesh networks continue to spread, reliance on centralized infrastructure continues to decline. Laws and regulations on such technologies can only delay or hinder the inevitable. Climate change and resource depletion can easily strike at fragile global logistics changes. The status quo aims to sustain the unsustainable for as long as it can, and it will fight like a cornered animal. What could fill the void as a financial, rent-seeking kleptocracy over-expands its grip?

 

 The parasitic plutocrats would tell you that you need to surrender more rights, despite that approach not working. A smart “successor paradigm” would be able to navigate the laws of the “old order,” allow people to produce locally, and connect globally. It would be (at least somewhat) self-sufficient with regards to food, power, water, and manufacturing. In the event of a physical threat, it would have defenses and armed security. In the event of a legal threat, it would have access to lawyers and expert witnesses. Given the directions and trends of relevant technologies, a mostly self-contained enclave would not be out of the question.  

While the Seasteading Institute and Blue Seed projects attempt vaguely similar goals, my proposed approach retrofits existing infrastructure at a fraction of the cost rather than rely on capital-intensive construction of offshore platforms. While such an enclave could be a fortress, it could network with other enclaves like it to share policy, technical designs, and other information. Even if one enclave was under “attack,” it would be assisted by its peers. Now, how might such an organization be set up? First, you need perhaps a few dozen people around the world and the financial resources behind it (perhaps crowdfunding and clever deployment of volunteers, PR, and donations could help with that). A related concept is to sell “shares” in the community, in the spirit of co-op housing. Each shareholder in the community is a voter and offers to share within the social contract. A social contract and constitution would be composed, although it may be altered later. 

The next step would be acquiring real estate in various places around the world. Decrepit urban slums, rural land, or devalued suburbs could all be good places to start. Construction of new buildings or retrofitting of existing structures would occur, perhaps using tools like Open Source Ecology’s Global Village Construction Set or 3D printed building components.

Once the settlement is ready and population is moved in, you would need to hold elections. A security expert, legal expert, medical expert, technical expert, and the like might be selected, as well as an executive committee for leading. From here, the town could begin conducting business with its neighbors and/or its counterparts across the world. Legislative democracy could be handled in the manner of the Swiss, with a bicameral legislature consisting of direct democracy and another being a more “conventional” parliament or congress or senate (although term limits of some kind may be a prudent idea). Any citizen could propose legislation, and if it does not pass, the legislative body may propose counter-legislation as a compromise (or vice-versa). An Anglo-American styled Bill of Rights would serve as another layer of protection of civic rights. To prevent against kneejerk style legislation, legislation could be revived later after a “cool-down” period. A supreme judicial analog could assist with that. 

 

There could be a division between the rights that the distributed republic allows and the legal rights the “host country” allows. Say, there are differences in weapons policy. The distributed republic allows for a particular type of firearm to be held within its enclave that the host country does not. A “solution” could be for the distributed republic to “technically” own the firearm and complete whatever paperwork/permits/etc. for the person in question. (This likewise ensures the distributed republic is particular over who they hand out similar firearms to.) Likewise, this is why self-sufficiency is an admirable goal, being able to produce much of what they need in the event of an “embargo” or isolation from infrastructure.  

However, such a structure could also be used for “evil.” Imagine some of the kleptocrats jumping ship to small gated enclaves as everything else falls apart (as is common in cyberpunk literature). Or worse, imagine a mad cult (such as Aum Shinrikyo 2.0) with a similar structure spreading across the world in a similar way.

Keep in mind that less-savory nations exist today, but that does not prevent their neighbors from taking precautions. The old fashioned method of conquest becomes much harder against a distributed republic, as you must conquer or destroy every enclave around. Some historical cultures (often religious and ethnic minorities) would employ similar tactics across history. The distributed republic merely brings this concept into the present.

Printed Guns: Desktop Manufacturing and Firearms

Desktop manufacture promises a potential for homemade weapons of several types, from potentially using 3D printed firearms to entirely novel designs. While policy implications have been covered before, many aspects of the field could be entirely novel relative to current technology. In other words, homemade weapons and gadgets may not be limited to ones we are familiar with today.

For example, a homemade firearm may no longer need be either a "zip gun" or some ad hoc apparatus firing conventional brass cartridges. Existing technologies hint at what may come. Caseless ammunition, for example, means that all one needs is a projectile and propellant. Desktop production of caseless ammo may mean that ammunition becomes even easier to acquire. (Quality, performance, and consistency of ammunition, however, is another matter entirely.) 

One relevant topic to this is stacked ammunition, or a superposed load. This technology is an ancient one, dating back to the first firearms in history. The concept is multiple bullets in the same barrel, each ignited separately. This was done with wheellock, flintlock, and caplock systems, but this concept has been revisited with the Aussie Metal Storm concept. The Aussie concept used several bullets in the same barrel with electric current used to ignite each round. The barrels would be swapped instead of magazines changed. Imagine, in the not too distant future, a Metal Storm-like system that can be printed at home with the bullets built right in the barrel. Such a weapon would likely lack accuracy and power, perhaps compensated for by a high rate of fire. 

However, the Metal Storm system and this system has flaws. For instance, the Metal Storm operates best when using low power, low recoil loads. This means that powerful, armor piercing or rifle-type rounds may suffer, but pistol or shotgun type shells may work. However, the high volume of fire is offset by the extremely low ammo capacity of the system. So, it may be more useful as a blank firing system (essentially a glorified Roman candle), rubber bullet spraying riot control device, or anti-missile point defense for warships. 

As such, designs with multiple smoothbore barrels from history may come back. For example, the pepperbox pistol may return. A related design is the duck-foot pistol, where barrels are angled away from each other (such a weapon was preferred by naval officers during the Age of Sail) due to utility in close range combat. A revolver with preloaded cylinders may also return, perhaps with several bullets in each cylinder. Furthermore, each barrel (or cylinder) can be loaded with separate types of munitions. One may fire subsonic munitions in one barrel, conventional rounds in another, rubber bullets in another, and so on. 

This versatility makes for some interesting potential combinations (and potential mishaps). As the technology to manufacture weapons and munitions at home is refined from crude tools to automated production, I find it logical to think that law enforcement and military units will remain several steps ahead. Criminals, however, will always strive to find new methods and hacks for their own needs. Crime will not vanish from human society, and I am confident that such weapons can be used by both victims and criminals. 

Arsenal of Democracy

    "Personal weapons are what raised mankind out of the mud, and the rifle is the queen of personal weapons." –Jeff Cooper, “The Art of the Rifle”

 

You may recall I covered weapons and policies regarding them several times in this blog. Weapons and laws regarding their use are very relevant topics for a blog regarding supervillainy. This column is an expansion on Dr. Brin’s excellent “Jefferson Rifle” essay. He proposes setting aside one specific class of firearms from registration as a safeguard against tyranny, as a counterpoint to the “slippery slope” view of gun control: the bolt-action rifle. There is significant historical background and reason for this, as a neighbors covering each other with hunting rifles can turn an urban warfare situation into a meatgrinder for conventional and modern armies. Jeff Cooper, the founder of the "Modern Technique" of handgun shooting, preferred a bolt action "scout rifle" as his ideal firearm. This was shown in countless conflicts, but most recently with the Bougainville uprising. A group of natives, angry about a polluting mine, used obsolete weapons against the forces of Papua New Guinea (and later, mercenaries and international forces). 

Regulation and cataloguing of certain types of firearms can eventually reach a point of diminishing returns. As the New Zealand government determined, hunting and sporting weapons are the least regulated of their own categories of firearms (with pistols and then semi-automatics with higher capacity detachable magazines being more regulated). “Hunting and sporting” weapons include primarily manually cycled long-arms, such as bolt action, pump action, and lever action rifles and shotguns. These weapons are hard to conceal, have a low rate of fire compared to a semi-auto, and are slower to reload. This makes them impractical for most criminals or spree killers. A criminal may try to “saw one off,” but by that point, the weapon has probably already been stolen and/or resold on the black market. New Zealand also counts semi-automatics with a fixed magazine in the sporting category, like the Mossberg 10/22, to be added to the sporting category. It is harder to reload such a system than, say, an AR-15 style rifle or civilian AK copy. Firearms such as these may be good additions to the “Jefferson rifle” advocated by Brin. Other things, such as air rifles, slingshots, and crossbows, also belong here.  

I would argue a few other things could be added to this “least regulated/unregulated category,” as even many countries with strict gun control do. These include black powder pistols, from flintlock horse pistols to cap and ball revolvers. The inaccuracy, size, noise, and awkward dimensions of say, a flintlock pistol make it impractical for spree-killings and more practical as a “range toy” or decoration or movie prop. This “historic” category could also include some early semi-automatic pistols (and perhaps modern replicas), such as the Mauser C96 or C93 Borchardt pistols, due to their low ammo capacity, awkwardness reloading, and awkward size compared to modern semi-automatic pistols. 1901 seems to be a good cut-off point, as the first Browning design utilizing a slide was made in 1899, and this date also includes designs from the Boer Wars. 

Lastly, even Russia and Germany allow for individuals to carry less-lethal weapons for defense without much paperwork. This includes things like gas guns shooting rubber bullets, pepper spray, tasers, and so forth. While less lethal weapons can kill, their purpose is to deter or distract an attacker long enough to get away. A robber may use them for intimidation, but they may do the same for with a sawn off shotgun or knife. As far as carry concealed firearms, I will cover that next.

The ability of civilians to legally carry a concealed pistol is interestingly supported by some gun control proponents, as carry concealed laws are essentially a form of gun control (requiring registration, background checks, and so forth). However, most places even the US have background checks, required training, and criminal penalties against the misuse of such a firearm. As Larry Correia states, a carry concealed permit is not a badge. Small amounts of ammo can be carried (hence why compact automatics and revolvers are favored for the task), rather than say, a higher capacity semi-automatic. To prevent issues such as the Trayvon Martin shooting, cameras may be required to be added to the pistol to record each time it is shot outside of a firing range. It is not merely humans I am concerned with. In wilderness areas, there are threats like wild animals, rabid/feral dogs, and the like that may require lethal force. This is one reason the Pacific Northwest in the USA and western Canada tend to be more permissive of firearms, given the wolves and bears that live in the wilderness nearby. Concealed carry owners have stopped a few spree killings, as may mad shooters tend to turn their weapons on themselves after encountering significant resistance. A concealed carry pistol with limited ammo capacity, a “paper trail” registered with police, limitations on use, stringent storage requirements, and perhaps a camera to ensure proper usage makes for a poor weapon for spree killings and crime.  

There is a last category of firearms which may be completely impractical to regulate or legislate, unlike carry concealed models or historical relics/replicas. That is homemade weapons. There are two broad categories of homemade firearms: the first are hobbyists or recreational users. The second one are “black market” gunsmiths. A hobbyist may indeed manufacture historic weapons, as a hobbyist can include a historical re-enactor, collector, or prop-designer. Their weapons are primarily designed for fun, or legitimate profit (such as making exotic prop guns for a science fiction movie). So long as their designs meet the “Jeffersonian” category I’ve described earlier, I would allow them to produce such devices. The advent of desktop manufacture (potentially with new technologies, like caseless ammo) may mean this could become nearly impossible to track via conventional means. If they start providing or selling weapons for the black market with definite intent, then there are already a number of criminal charges suitable for them. 

The current generation of firearms requires bullets to work, otherwise they are merely clubs. A simpler solution than cumbersome regulations could simply be tracing ammunition rather than firearms. If regulations are to be written, focusing on the logistics of the issue seems more prudent than every individual manifestation of the symptoms. My inner civil libertarian wishes to see everyone allowed to do what they want, so long as they don’t hurt anyone. As stated before, the ideas I list primarily come from Russian, German, New Zealand, and (smarter) US policies. 

As an aside, I believe ending the drug war, for-profit prisons, and the current incarnation of the American criminal justice system/prison-industrial complex will lower gun crime rates more than any bill or executive order being dreamed up now. Drug related shootings comprise about 80-85% of firearms homicide. A professor who studied the history of violence in the US interestingly found that social inequity and a lack of social safety nets is the major driver of crimes and depraved spree killings. A policy like Brin’s “Moron Act” to deny killers infamy is another sound idea, depriving bad guys of infamy. The problem is, the status quo has all the momentum of a cyberpunk dystopia, and the other indicators (climate disruption, resource depletion, market manipulations, legal impunity for endemic financial fraud, etc.) mean the emergence of corrupt neofeudalism more than any kind of democratic grand compromises or enlightened decision making.