Priviledged Information
2001 September 11
These are bad days indeed, with coordinated multiple mass murders, total destruction
of the equivalent of a small city, hundreds of home searches and arrests, a global effort
to eradicate terrorist networks, and military actions half a world away from the crimes
to destroy the bases of fanatics who have indoctrinated thousands of young men
into a cult of hate. The cost in human life and in resources expended on destruction
rather than raising the standard of living is high.
You may feel removed from direct involvement, but you may not be as far
from the front line as you might hope. Why? Because someone may think
that you have and would share knowledge that would help them kill and destroy.
Terrorists are seeking information and equipment to develop and implement
ever-more efficient ways to wreak havoc in our communities.
What the terrorists can't obtain directly from public sources and courses
media reporters may obtain using their research and interview skills
and then publish to inform both the public the terrorists.
The following paragraphs reflect on the change in attitude and social status
of those with advanced knowledge and suggest several responses to reporters.
Master, Guilder, Professor
The attitude of skilled workers toward the information they possess and transmit
has changed over the centuries. For many years understanding of medicine, chemistry,
and engineering was restricted to modestly branched chains through individual masters to their apprentices, with minimal exchange between the different chains.
Later on guilds developed, with information now shared among a group of masters.
This change made the information transmitted by the chains more uniform
and more widely tested.
In both cases advanced understanding was restricted to those with years of training
under a senior mentor in an atmosphere that reflected respect for the need
to apply the knowledge to constructive applications.
The Oath of Hippocrates (see your encyclopedia for the complete oath) contains
several phrases restricting the transmission and application of knowledge:
"I will impart a knowledge of the art to my sons and to those
of my teacher .... but to none others."
"I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked,
nor suggest any such counsel...."
"... I ... will abstain from every voluntary act of mischief
or corruption...."
In medieval times our understanding of nature became more detailed,
and it took students longer to gain a sufficiently advanced technical
capability to be competitive with others and to deliver the goods and
services desired and required by the community.
Advanced education beyond simple craftsmanship was now provided through lectures
by those professing specialized knowledge, and the professions were born.
As elementary education and travel became more widespread, entry into more and more
professions was opened to the general public rather than being restricted to friends
or patrons of the masters. Practitioners were induced to focus on constructive
applications of their talents by the examples of respected practitioners,
the adoption of codes of ethical conduct by professional associations,
and the passage of legal restrictions on practicing those professions
most likely to damage the community if not done well and with concern
for public welfare.
Mentor, Consultant, Accessory
During the twentieth century industries based on technology grew,
and there arose a need for short-term assistance from people
with significant specialized experience, instruments, equipment, or contacts.
Small companies that cannot afford to maintain an internal staff
of specialists can hire faculty, retired technologists, or other specialists
on a part-time basis to fill needs requiring specialized knowledge.
The expert may act as a mentor, with a long-term commitment
to educating a less experienced partner inside the company
or as a consultant, providing advice or research work
with little interaction with or transfer of specialized knowledge
into the company.
The short-term nature of consultation makes it hard to determine the intent
or final application of the specialized information transmitted to the client,
who may pose questions about one application while intending to apply
the information to something very different.
In the past ten years the World-wide Web has allowed anyone
to post anything for everyone everywhere to read without any requirement
of prior training to provide proper context for the knowledge or
of supervision by a senior professional to prevent hazardous use by novices.
As a consequence, bomb manuals have been posted as freely as bicycle manuals,
and children may experiment with them as though they had equivalent value
and safety. Email and chat rooms have allowed youth (and adults)
to be instructed by teachers or psychopaths with equal anonymity.
Unrestricted public access to information that was previously
priviledged -- restricted to a carefully structured environment
-- is now the norm.
Fortunately, most information on the Web is not advanced enough
to be useful for advanced weaponry. Unfortunately, the advanced information
may be sought out and then publicized by media reporters can use their research
and interview skills to find experts experts in particle technology
and obtain from them specific knowledge that could help a terrorist understand
and exploit a particular situation.
For example, a newspaper report on nozzle design and performance could help both
the public and a terrorist determine what equipment would be needed to modify
a crop duster for spraying bichemical weapons. If you are the one
who provides specific information that facilitates wide-spread destruction,
you might well be considered to be an accomplice to mass murder.
What to Do?
Many members of the Particle Technology Forum of the AIChE are fortunate (priviledged)
to be technical professionals with advanced degrees and extensive experience
in the practical application of sophisticated theory, instruments, and equipment.
We use this knowledge to solve practical industrial production problems so as to provide
the public with valuable products at low cost, with high safety and minimal environmental
impact. In spite of this some corporations and governments have employed professionals
for projects that were (at least in hindsight) destructive. Now we have terrorist cells
seeking information for destructive ends and other, seemingly innocent requests
for related information.
What will you do when a media reporter calls and asks for your professional
advice on how a terrorist might do something? Or when a neighbor asks?
Such information -- which you acquired at great personal cost over many years
in an atmosphere of respect for the public good
-- should not be given to non-professionals without considerable review of
their credentials, the circumstances, and the likely (or possible)
use to which the information will be put.
You can call the FBI (a local FBI number is in the front of your phone book)
to report questions coming from people you don't know and to discuss what might be
the best response to a specific request for "privileged" information.
Remember that one potential hijacker was stopped because a flight school
called the FBI when a prospective student stated that he needed instruction
only on flying a 747 straight and was not interested in learning how to take-off or land.
And remember the story of the sorcerer's apprentice, who overheard
a secret spell, used it out of context, didn't know how to counteract it,
and would have drowned if the sorcerer had not returned just in time.
What might you reply if someone asks for information in an area
that might have destructive capacity? You should think about this before
it happens. Here are some suggestions:
"I discuss technical matters only with my employer."
"If you want to learn more about that, sign up for my course."
"I don't consult in that area, and I don't know anyone who does."
"I provide consulting services only to my established client list."
"I don't know, but that's an interesting question."
We should honor the responsibility inherent in our priviledged positions
as highly-trained technical professionals by keeping specific information
that is easily used for harm (priviledged information) out of the hands
of those who do not understand the dangers or who do not subscribe to this
responsibility or who plan to use the information to harm the community.
We should avoid becoming either willing or unwitting accomplices to evil.
What about ERPT?
Any knowledge can be dangerous, but we hope that the tutorials and links
provided through ERPT are of a sufficiently introductory
and general nature that they will not be a significant help to terrorists.
We plan to post additional tutorials and links so as to accomplish ERPT's
goal of providing a comprehensive introductory education in particle technology.