1/🧵
So, I'm quietly asked my opinion of @mikko's somewhat ... grandiose claims for artificial general intelligence (AGI) going forward. I invite my questioner to jump in with their own thoughts, but here's mine as cybersecurity's eldest #critic:
2/🧵
My short answer is "I'm okay with anyone making bold claims like this." There's simply no #fearmongering here. @mikko states the obvious and paints a future.
My longer answer centers on the fact @mikko wields a strong character in our industry...
@mikko is RIGHT to instill us with joy that we may finally beat cancer. Or muscular dystrophy. Or whatever else impairs our eventual trip across the cosmos. Cybersecurity MUST...
5/🧵
...be part and parcel of all #cyber advancements going forward.
That's obvious, right?
What's NOT obvious, is our industry's historic egotistical belief in itself as a demigod #arbiter of what may move forward in cyber. You'll find any number of "experts" who would...
6/🧵
...snuff all AI / AGI research because they grew up listening to scary cybersecurity tales. "Polymorphic viruses will destroy the Internet!" "The Code Red worm came within about four hours of taking down the Internet!" "Cybercrime will cost $10.5 trillion in 2025!"
7/🧵
Yet @mikko is a person who wants everyone to achieve their visions in cyber.
Notice he didn't try to hawk a solution. Rather, he proselytized an idea in a single word: "safely."
If we in the #cybersecurity community hope to spearhead the concept of "safely," we must...
8/🧵
...first take an evolutionary leap of our own.
We need to genuinely (repeat: "genuinely") staff #ethicists in cybersecurity.
That's a whole new subfield for an industry that calls itself "mature" yet acts so childish & pompous.
I submit that we are NOT the ones who...
9/🧵
...can establish this subfield. We need #ethicists outside of cybersecurity to enter our realm and establish it themselves.
At this point my "OG" readers -- perhaps even @mikko! -- might say "Rob, you're an ethicist, why don't you lead the charge in your retirement?"
More specifically, though, I've gone soft on @CISAJen because she's building the right relationships with @DragosInc and @RobertMLee, who himself will play the role of "Daddy Warbucks" in the first true #cyberwar.
…is correct. When I say "it's getting better," that doesn't mean it's *good* now.
CISA severely lacks #critics, skeptics, and historians. Their board-level guidance comes from people who, among other things, wrote the book "This Is How They Tell Me The World Ends"…
--he might be missing the Pentagon's perspective. So, let me fill y'all in.
Tanks, missiles, etc. are #classic: they deploy everywhere to strike anything. Need to put a hole in something? Tank. Obliterate? Missile. Crater? Bomb…
Worse, our own global community has never proved it -- and we've got every good reason to prove it if true.
But hey, our industry turned the tables on Kaspersky the day his dictator launched a genocide campaign.
Because we're just like that. We've always been like that.
That's why our industry's #ThoughtLeaders can dance on a pinhead: because IT'S EASY!
The logic in the back of their minds is simple: "Kaspersky is a Russian billionaire who craves genocide in Ukraine and does anything Putin asks. I must destroy Kaspersky with all my willpower."
Steve Morgan's guesstimates stretch from 2015 to the end of 2025. This chart shows how, in less than two years, everyone on Earth will be on the hook for $8,441 of his "global cost of cybercrime."
And that's just by 2025! It gets WAY worse as you project a few years forward...
"$10.5 trillion" exceeds $1,000 annually for only 8+ billion people on Earth. It's simple math.
When we project the 20th year of Steve Morgan's absurd guesstimates, we see the "global cost of cybercrime" per capita in 2034 will reach $19,507 for every man, woman, and child:
There was an immediate feeling that everyone must cancel all Kaspersky subscriptions, as if customers -- especially corporate clients -- had a competitor's product waiting in the wings to replace it in some trivial fashion:
Likewise, there was an immediate plea to [translated] "remove Kaspersky from your PC. Now. Immediately." Again, as if customers -- especially corporate clients -- could do it trivially and without serious consequences:
…legitimate criticism led many (perhaps most) victims in #cybersecurity to cry out that humor negates legitimacy: "the stakes are too high for <THIS|ME>to be taken so lightly!"
Yet these same victims adore e.g. Jon Oliver for his brutal use of #comedy in legitimate criticism.
And here we arrive at the crux of the matter:
The victims, not the #elements of legitimate #criticism, decide what is "fair" in cybersecurity.
This way, anything that is not ✌️criticism✌️ may be labeled as such so victims can associate legit critics to their SCUM counterparts.