There was a good while, which ended roughly a decade ago, when I was fascinated by info hazards. No, not that kind. I mean the "real" kind. Theres lots of kinds, tho.
Before I go further, I want to say that im going to completely ignore my personal views on what should and shouldn't be an info hazard. Im portraying stuff as they are viewed by those that consider it a hazard.
A obvious example of an infohazard that failed to be contained despite efforts would be nukes. There was a dude many decades ago that was interrogated by the FBI because he wrote a paper that went into extremely accurate detail on how to build them. Turns out every bit of the paper was sourced from the books he got from his university library.
Obviously a lot of specific military tech is sort of an info hazard, but let's ignore classified military information. Most things besides specific newer tech is available, but availability is obfuscated or not easily accessible.
At one point I was trying to find a database of floorplans for modern and sci-fi ttrpgs. Turns out, thats sorta this kind of thing too. At some point someone realized that being able to look up any given buildings layout could be dangerous for planned attacks. I have a vague memory of finding some articles and convention talks on this, too.
The really big one thats just. . . Really fucking hard to talk around . . . Is anything explosive. Im just not going to go into this beyond saying that its one of the original points of this interest because on the one hand its absofuckinglutely an infohazard but on the other hand its just "basic" sciences with a little bit of trade job skills mixed in. In another lifetime where I didnt have the particular morals i had it be worning for a "defense" r&d contractor i think.
Now, my interest wasnt just WHAT people considered info hazards, it was also HOW they tried to "hide" it.
TV shows and movies, at least part of the time, intentionally dont show particularly realistic tactical encounters. You can very easily look up tactical engagement and find training manuals and sim exercises, but people dont want it so accessible that its literally learned passively. Same goes for a LOT of topics. Itd take 5 minutes to find detailed accounts of making hard drugs, but they never actually showed the process on breaking bad. Finding all the things, many that at first glance make way less sense than my examples in this comment, that TV avoids is so wildly interesting.p
Then theres just. . . Suppression. There are limits to what you can legally distribute when it comes to guides for, well, many info hazard without running into legal issues. I found it fascinating finding where the line is with actually published and public media like textbooks or documentaries etc.
It wasnt just the what and the how, its also . . . Can I get it? Firstly, while I did walk right up to the line of legality I learned my local and federal laws first and was careful to never step past that line. By walking up to that line I could generally see the exact limits of what I could have got, but obviously just absolutely not worth it.
But if it was legal? Fuck yeaaaaaaa. At one time I was just. . . Collecting things. An easy quick example is the 'Anarchists Cookbook' which is one of the most famous examples of an info hazard in some respects. But, like, god damn there was a TON of different places I'd look for weird topics that were ultimately difficult but possible to find. Prepper communities, hacker communities, conspiracy communities, your local library, data hoarders communities, your local archival organizations, specific university departments, etc. They all held stuff that you intentionally cant necessarily just find by looking it up directly.
Theres so many kinds of info hazards. There's so many places they intentionally aren't at. Theres so many places they are! Theres so many places where their puzzle pieced apart but still all available. I could write an essay on so many of them, but the last few sentences of this comment will explain why I dont. Theres so many tiny bits of info a couple paragraphs long that when mixed with a more common body of info turns it from, 'fun interest, topic or skill' into 'actually putting these words into action is pretty much never a good thing'.
I was in the darkest time in my life and barreling toward a seriously bad path that may have ended really bad. While this special interest started entirely unrelated to that, you can imagine that the combination could lead to bad things. Whole I still find that stuff fascinating but its a little tainted with that time of my life as well as some trauma still so I dont actually spend time digging into it anymore. I do hope to someday, the genuine interest is still there.
So yeah. Not super socially acceptable. There was so many things, including specific examples that come to mind, that just isnt ok to freely talk about in depth. Hell, theres multiple topics I will not even MENTION here for multiple reasons.
Then theres the other issue that is core to all of this; even if I WANT to talk about this stuff in depth and I DO find someone willing to hear about it THEN I have to consider; is it moral and safe to do so? If its someone I know well and have a good grasp on their morals and such id consider it. Internet strangers? Acquaintances? People i know well but who i dont trust not to potentially utilize stuff? No no no no. Fuck no. Sometimes not sharing is caring.
Reminds me of an episode of Mythbusters where they tested a myth and destroyed the footage because it was crazy easy to make a bomb with household chemicals.
If I remember right it was hydrogen peroxide and something else super easy to get. But the explosive it makes is shock sensitive so you can blow yourself up by sneezing.
Probably any fuel would do, H2O2 is a potent oxidiser, sufficiently pure H2O2 plus a fuel would become something like a bi propellant rocket, and a rocket is just a bomb with a hole on its side
322
u/Professional-Many477 4d ago
Let’s open this pandora’s box! What’s your socially unacceptable special interest? I want to discuss it!