Stand Alone Complexes: Copies Without an Original

I just finished watching the “1st gig”  of Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex and all I’ve got to say is “WOW”. I remember catching a few episodes of the series when I was in my teens. It’s a shame that I didn’t watch it in full, back then. It was just one of those shows that didn’t grab my attention and it was too confusing. I didn’t understand it back then, and I still don’t fully understand it right now. But I understand enough of the plot and themes to form an opinion on it. It’s an excellent series. It’s one of those series that just keeps on giving no matter how many times you watch it. There’s just so much to it.

But this article isn’t about the series (I could write an entire series of articles about the series). This article is about one of the primary themes within the series. A theme (phenomenon) that currently effects society today and will become more prevalent in the future. This phenomenon is the stand alone complex. To get started, let’s define what a “stand alone complex” is.

Officially, a stand alone complex is a series of unrelated, yet similar actions, based on an action that never occurred, performed by unconnected individuals which give the appearance of a concerted effort.

That’s quite a mouthful (and a mindful), so I’ll clarify what I mean by “stand alone complex” by comparing it to another phenomenon: copycat behavior.

Emergent copycat behavior is a phenomenon that involves the occurrence of a specific event and a series of related events that occur after the initial event. For example, news of an arson inspires other people, the copycats, to also commit arson.

So, a stand alone complex IS emergent copycat behavior with one difference: the triggering event in a stand alone complex never actually occurred. It is only believed to have occurred. Copies without an original.

To use the arson example again, a stand alone complex would have occurred if copycats committed arson when the initial, triggering, arson never occurred, but was believed to have occurred.

Why do I believe that stand alone complexes will become more common in the future? Allow me to list and explain my reasons:

• - Ubiquity of Information and information channels
• - Mutability of information
• - People trust their news sources

Ubiquity of Information and Information Channels

Information, more so than ever, has become increasingly accessible, ubiquitous, and (at times) absolutely unavoidable. There is simply no escape. Think of all the information channels that you encounter every day: television, radio, computers, smartphones (and dumb phones), word-of-mouth communication, billboards, books, smart watches/bands, etc. These channels, and the information that flows through these channels, grow every day.

Mutability of Information

Mutability of information goes hand-in-hand with the previous point. Consider how easy it is to change/alter/modify information. Additionally, consider how easy it is to add information to the sea of information. Just about anyone can add information to the total aggregate of information. It’s easy. I’m doing it right now and I don’t even have a degree in a field of study or an ounce of credibility. Stunning huh?

People Trust their News Sources

Yes, people have a natural trust in their news providers. After all, if the people didn’t trust the source, they wouldn’t get their news from it. And if the source were untrustworthy, people wouldn’t listen to it. Can’t beat that logic! Yeah, yeah, the logic isn’t perfect, but it is perfectly reflective of how most people view their news sources. The sea of information is so vast, so complex, that most people don’t have time to sift through it. They want a news provider that can break down the information and serve it to them in a 30 second sound byte. Okay, perhaps the sound bytes cap-out at 10 seconds these days.

But let’s face it, its often difficult and time-consuming to verify every piece of information that floats our way. That’s another reason people listen to their “trusted” news sources. They trust their news sources to be both honest and competent. That’s one hell of a relationship.

This is turning into quite the perfect storm. Let’s see, what do we have here. We have a large populace that is constantly bombarded by mutable information from a multitude of channels. The populace, therefore, places all their trust in their preferred news sources to sort and dispense the information to them. That sounds like a recipe for a stand alone complex if I ever heard one.

What makes this issue all the more troublesome is that the major, and minor, news sources seem to copy one another in their reporting. That is, news sources occasionally report the same false information!

So, considering all of the above, what would happen if a news source got a hold of a piece of information claiming that a hacker group attacked a certain institution when no such event occurred? My guess, as you may guess, is that there would be many copycat attackers who follow suit, a stand alone complex would form out of the blue.

But, you may say, wouldn’t the multitude of other news sources work to counterbalance the false piece of information. Yes, but remember, people trust their preferred news source, so they may not believe a competing news source. Additionally, a counter balance may occur and may prevent emergent copycat behavior (or a stand alone complex), but consider the number of people who watch the news. We’re talking about millions and millions of people. If only 17 people were to form the stand alone complex and become copycats, it would only add weight to the belief that the initial incident did occur.

This all seems really dire, now, doesn’t it? How do we prevent dangerous, as opposed to benign, stand alone complexes? I guess they can be prevented by circulating the truth. If a hacking attack never occurred, while news sources claim that it did, circulate that truth as widely as you possibly can. And remember, only you can prevent forest fi- dangerous stand alone complexes.