back to article Stop worrying that crims could break the 'net, say cyber-diplomats – only nations have tried

The Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) is worried its guidance on preventing the internet and all it connects becoming a casualty of war is being misinterpreted, perhaps wilfully. The GCSC works to create global behavioural norms that hopefully find their way into the diplomatic documents that govern …

  1. JohnMurray

    "Stop worrying that crims could break the 'net, say cyber-diplomats – only nations have tried"

    There's a difference?

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Certainly not in the case of kleptocracies.

      1. Clausewitz 4.0
        Devil

        Spoils of War

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prize_of_war

  2. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Leave it and IT and AI to the Virtual Experts. They Know Best. Ignore Sound Advice at Your Peril

    Quite so, Simon Sharwood, APAC Editor. That is excellently reported and accurately identifies government/nation state actors as targets for quasi-criminal activity and/or paramilitary attention should they veer and intrude and interfere to the detriment of the technical community, civil society, and individuals playing a major role in the protection of cyberspace.

  3. Mike 137 Silver badge

    How effective?

    These norms look fine on paper (screen). But how are they to be enforced? Telling a thief not to steal your car because you need it to get around may not actually prevent the theft.

    The fundamental problem about rules of war is that wars are fought to win. There'll always be some belligerent to whom that's more important than codes of conduct.

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: How effective?

      The fundamental problem about rules of war is that wars are fought to win. .... Mike 137

      Is it not an indisputable fact nowadays .... for the past has no active bearing at all on the present and future so let us not concern ourselves with those memories ....... that that which and those who start wars are always defeated and lose them, and the victors then are entitled to punitive damages and the full cost of reparations.

      Or do nations nowadays try to escape that obligation and pay no exemplary price for their destructive follies and deadly deeds against prior uninvolved souls/innocent victims ?

      Now that would be a universal scandal and monumental crazy assault on humanity which is bound to have almighty repercussions and dire consequences.

      1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

        For the important quick learning of vital lessons .....

        And that simple inescapable fact ..... that which and those who start wars are always defeated and lose them, and the victors then are entitled to punitive damages and the full cost of reparations. ....... clearly identifies before the facts for consideration and capitalisation are in evidence, the future loser and current psychotic enemy to contain with sanctions and refrain from material support and effective defensive capability.

        Take great care though, and beware and be aware that the imposition of such penalties against unworthy innocent parties can easily identify one as the unruly foe and retarded enemy described here to be gravely regarded.

    2. Filippo Silver badge

      Re: How effective?

      That is true, but it's also true that international treaties are not entirely ineffective. Many countries do try to avoid targeting hospitals and schools, using chemical weapons, torturing enemy soldiers for jollies, and the like. Many others do it, but seek to keep it hidden, which means they can't do it rampantly. In the long term, it's also generally good to get the public opinion to agree that such acts are unethical even within the context of war.

      Treaties are really cheap, so even if they are only a little bit effective, they're still worth it.

  4. Mahhn

    Badges? we don't need no stinking badges.

    " warfare needs rules"

    Yeah, good luck with that. Should we hand out blankets and hot coco to everyone involved? (SouthPark - InSecurity)

  5. W.S.Gosset Silver badge

    Noise

    Who the hell is paying for these idiots to sit in a office and issue pointless declarations to the effect that they hope everyone will be nice?

    1. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: Noise and Din, the Blunt Knife in a Gunfight

      Who the hell is paying for these idiots to sit in a office and issue pointless declarations to the effect that they hope everyone will be nice? ..... W.S.Gossett

      One imagines, W.S.Gossett, the same sort of idiots who listen to them and give them credence and a remote defenceless power over the ignorant listener/innocent spectator to unfolding events.

      However, not all will be so smitten and easily led to a novel position without their own clear thinking revealing a correct path ..... which may even be fortunate enough to correspond and be agreeable with that proposed and trialed/trailed and betatested.

      To imagine that no one/nothing leads with rules and regulations to follow and abide by, is to realise madness and mayhem, conflict and CHAOS abound and hold primary sway over future situations and that is not an intelligent outcome to input for systems output ergo is it false and incorrect to believe possible and in any way likely and probable.

  6. Potemkine! Silver badge

    Stop worrying that crims could break the 'net, say cyber-diplomats – only nations have tried

    With such opinions I fear they are ready to win the last war, not the future one.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021