Nice write up, Holly. I agree with a lot of what you wrote.
I'd add another layer here - in order for a "warning shot" to be effective, it can't just be something that connects a chain of dominoes and "makes sense". If it makes "too much sense" and does nothing to surprise you, little may be "noticed" or "learned". I believe this is sometimes referred to as "Boiling the frog".
To be effective, a warning shot needs to be "shocking", like a bullet whizzing past your ear - that provokes a response!
But be careful, because if it's TOO shocking, that can circle back around again and trigger denial, as the brain refuses to accept that something SO shocking is happening ("this can't be real!").
So an appropriately-calibrated warning shot is really hard to "get right", and even if one is possible, we shouldn't be counting on it. We probably won't get as lucky as Ozymandias in Watchmen.
I'm excited by the prospect that we might be reaching a point in our civilization where asking valuable questions becomes considered more useful than providing valuable answers.
Nice write up, Holly. I agree with a lot of what you wrote.
I'd add another layer here - in order for a "warning shot" to be effective, it can't just be something that connects a chain of dominoes and "makes sense". If it makes "too much sense" and does nothing to surprise you, little may be "noticed" or "learned". I believe this is sometimes referred to as "Boiling the frog".
To be effective, a warning shot needs to be "shocking", like a bullet whizzing past your ear - that provokes a response!
But be careful, because if it's TOO shocking, that can circle back around again and trigger denial, as the brain refuses to accept that something SO shocking is happening ("this can't be real!").
So an appropriately-calibrated warning shot is really hard to "get right", and even if one is possible, we shouldn't be counting on it. We probably won't get as lucky as Ozymandias in Watchmen.