[DRAFT] Cyber Weapons Security Act

[Imperium Anglorum]

Cyber weapons are not physical objects and ought not be treated as if they were. Hyper-literalism...

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Cyber weapons are not physical objects and ought not be treated as if they were. Hyper-literalism...

"They may not be physical objects, but they can be stored in physical objects. Therefore, we should treat them as such."

[Separatist Peoples]

Cyber weapons are not physical objects and ought not be treated as if they were. Hyper-literalism...

"They may not be physical objects, but they can be stored in physical objects. Therefore, we should treat them as such."

"That is nonsensical. They are intangible, and operate in an intangible medium. They shouldn't be treated like something they aren't."

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

"They may not be physical objects, but they can be stored in physical objects. Therefore, we should treat them as such."

"That is nonsensical. They are intangible, and operate in an intangible medium. They shouldn't be treated like something they aren't."

"But they can be physical, should that be the form the manufacturer chooses."

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

"They may not be physical objects, but they can be stored in physical objects. Therefore, we should treat them as such."

"That is nonsensical. They are intangible, and operate in an intangible medium. They shouldn't be treated like something they aren't."

Cyber weapons are not physical objects and ought not be treated as if they were. Hyper-literalism...

"I have re read the draft, It lacks the word 'physical'."

[Imperium Anglorum]

3. Requires that member nations in possession of cyber weapons must
a. To the best of their ability secure the location where cyber weapons are stored,
b. Have a proper training program for safe storage and handling of cyber weapons,
c. Refuse entering the training program for any person known to be a terrorist or known to having strong ties to any terrorist group,
d. Restrict access to the cyber weapons to staff who have successfully completed the training program,

OOC: 3a is impractical, because it is the case that cyber weapons are stored and transmitted on computer networks. This means that you would have to secure the entire computer network. This is nonsensical. It is also an example of you pretending that cyber weapons can be treated as if they are normal physical objects which are expended like normal munitions and therefore, can be secured.

3b is also impractical. One does not need to have a training programme for safe storage. These things are not chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. They do not function if they are not executed by the computer. Storage is literally keeping them on an unplugged hard drive. This is another case of how you're pretending that they are like normal physical munitions.

3c should be 'Refuse entrance of [object] to the training programme'.

3d is impractical and also means that we can't actually use cyber weapons, because to use them requires storage thereof. If a computer gets a virus, it has to be stored on that computer somewhere. And if we are to restrict access to staff, then we cannot also use them, i.e. store and execute them on an enemy machine to prevent them from refining uranium or something like that. Also, how are nations going succeed in restricting access when computer viruses can self-duplicate? This is again, a case where you are treating these weapons as if they were physical munitions which have to be stored, transported (Ha.), guarded, and secured. These are virtual programs whose security protocols should not be based on physical paradigms, but rather, have to be rooted in a real understanding of how computer networks work and what exactly they can do.

[Bears Armed]

Cyber weapons are not physical objects.

OOC: This thread has been moving -- and the drafts have been changing -- faster than I've been able to keep up with. Am I to take it that EMP attacks would still be legal?

[Cogoria]

So as long as we utilise a sapient programming we can legally attack our enemies systems with no repercussions? Haha! Time to shut down all if the Royalists hospitals and cause a few nuclear meltdowns!

[Araraukar]

OOC: Not ignoring this, but I came down with a stomach bug, so I'm making Derpy do most of the fact-checking and he's not as used to it as me, so it may take us a little time to address the points raised, in proper fashion.

*needs to run back to the toilet*

EDIT: Quick point to Cogoria: AIs are sapients and have human rights.

[Separatist Peoples]

"That is nonsensical. They are intangible, and operate in an intangible medium. They shouldn't be treated like something they aren't."

"But they can be physical, should that be the form the manufacturer chooses."

"Whether or not it's pertinent to the draft, that is entirely untrue. Software is not physical. It cannot be. It is inherently abstract, regardless of what a manufacturer wants. The medium it is stored on can by physical, but software itself is totally intangible."

[Cogoria]

What to human rights have to do with it? AIs may serve the military freely, and if they're ordered to melt down a powerplant or two?

[Araraukar]

What to human rights have to do with it? AIs may serve the military freely, and if they're ordered to melt down a powerplant or two?

OOC: If they are soldiers, they're bound by all the legislation that affects human soldiers as well, and can be guilty of committing war crimes. Also, they can refuse to follow illegal orders. But that's not really got anything to do with the proposal here, as the cyber weapons are defined as non-sapient.

This stomach bug is making me hate my body more than normally... *whimpers*

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Cyber weapons are not physical objects.

OOC: This thread has been moving -- and the drafts have been changing -- faster than I've been able to keep up with. Am I to take it that EMP attacks would still be legal?

OOC: I'd think so.

[States of Glory WA Office]

OOC: This thread has been moving -- and the drafts have been changing -- faster than I've been able to keep up with. Am I to take it that EMP attacks would still be legal?

OOC: I'd think so.

OOC: That's not very encouraging considering the fact that this is your draft.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

OOC: I'd think so.

OOC: That's not very encouraging considering the fact that this is your draft.

OOC: I know it won't beacuse they don't match up with the definition of Cyber weapons.

[Araraukar]

OOC: That's not very encouraging considering the fact that this is your draft.

OOC: It's now a co-effort, we're talking via TGs, and please don't blame Derpy for me getting sick and thus not having much energy/time to waste on NS today.

[States of Glory WA Office]

OOC: That's not very encouraging considering the fact that this is your draft.

OOC: It's now a co-effort, we're talking via TGs, and please don't blame Derpy for me getting sick and thus not having much energy/time to waste on NS today.

OOC: This is going to end up like Pesticide Regulations, isn't it?

I really don't know why you don't post a draft on PPU. Your lack of badges belies your activity.

[Araraukar]

OOC: This is going to end up like Pesticide Regulations, isn't it?

OOC: No. That's why this will be slow. I'm actually making Derpy do his half of the work.

I really don't know why you don't post a draft on PPU. Your lack of badges belies your activity.

Because I don't care about the badges. My "badge" is the mention in my forum siggy.

[States of Glory WA Office]

OOC: This is going to end up like Pesticide Regulations, isn't it?

OOC: No. That's why this will be slow. I'm actually making Derpy do his half of the work.

OOC: That...was a pretty solid burn. May I sig that?

[Araraukar]

OOC: No. That's why this will be slow. I'm actually making Derpy do his half of the work.

OOC: That...was a pretty solid burn. May I sig that?

OOC: Please don't, at least not without replacing "Derpy" with "him".

And it's not a dig at Derpy specifically. It would've been about 5 times as slow as it was, if I'd bothered to do it with ND back then. But, I didn't care. And he didn't learn anything, he just got a badge.

Umeria I bullied into becoming a resolution writer without wanting to become a co-author, mostly because I didn't like the premise of the proposal. But I'd like to think he's better than he was, thanks to my bullying.

So I'm trying a middle road this time, with Derpy. I'll be able to perfect this one day, but it may take a few more newbie authors.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

3c should be 'Refuse entrance of [object] to the training programme'.

"When you say 'object', could you clarify that?"

[Excidium Planetis]

"While the current draft is free of any outstanding flaws, it does not seem as if it really does anything. The requirements are pretty reasonable requirements which any competent nation would likely already be complying with. I can't imagine a military that does not train the personnel who will being handling weapons in the use and care of those same weapons. And nations who are already complying with existing WA law will not be training known terrorists anyways."

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

"While the current draft is free of any outstanding flaws, it does not seem as if it really does anything. The requirements are pretty reasonable requirements which any competent nation would likely already be complying with. I can't imagine a military that does not train the personnel who will being handling weapons in the use and care of those same weapons. And nations who are already complying with existing WA law will not be training known terrorists anyways."

"Thank you for your support, Ambassador Blackbourne."

[Excidium Planetis]

"While the current draft is free of any outstanding flaws, it does not seem as if it really does anything. The requirements are pretty reasonable requirements which any competent nation would likely already be complying with. I can't imagine a military that does not train the personnel who will being handling weapons in the use and care of those same weapons. And nations who are already complying with existing WA law will not be training known terrorists anyways."

"Thank you for your support, Ambassador Blackbourne."

"That is a rather odd interpretation of my comments."

[Araraukar]

"That is a rather odd interpretation of my comments."

OOC: Everything's comparative - if other comments are clearly negative and one comment is neutral, in relation it looks positive. But no real support is yet assumed.

The draft has been updated, by the way, we tried to address some of the issues raised.