Talk:Systempunkt

Computer Security: Computing Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer Security, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computer security on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer SecurityWikipedia:WikiProject Computer SecurityTemplate:WikiProject Computer SecurityComputer Security articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer Security with:

Article alerts will be generated shortly by AAlertBot. Please allow some days for processing. More information...

Answer question about Same-origin_policy
Review importance and quality of existing articles
Identify categories related to Computer Security
Tag related articles
Identify articles for creation (see also: Article requests)
Identify articles for improvement
Create the Project Navigation Box including lists of adopted articles, requested articles, reviewed articles, etc.
Find editors who have shown interest in this subject and ask them to take a look here.

This article is rather obscure but I think it is about Hacking (computer security) so I have put it in that category. Please correct the cat if I have got it wrong. I don't know why the talk page was deleted when the article wasn't. Biscuittin (talk) 17:31, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A systempunkt can be in relation to anything that relates to any sort of system. This can infrastructure, markets, etc. I'll quote John Robb (which this article should have a link to).

In global guerrilla warfare (a combination of open source innovation, bazaar transactions, and low tech weapons), the point of greatest emphasis is called a systempunkt. It is the point point in a system (either an infrastructure or a market), always identified by autonomous groups within the bazaar, where a swarm of small insults will cause a cascade of collapse in the targeted system. Within infrastructure, this collapse takes the form of disrupted flows that result in immediate financial loss or ongoing supply shortages. Within a market, an attack on the systempunkt destabilizes the psychology of the market to induce severe inefficiencies and uncertainties. The ultimate objective of this activity, in aggregate, is the collapse of the target state and globalization.

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/globalguerrillas/2004/12/the_systempunkt.html

72.227.231.178 (talk) 01:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have added the category "Market failure". Biscuittin (talk) 10:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some clarity might be injected by mentioning the probable etymology of the term. I think it is a portmanteau word derived from the German term 'schwerpunkt' and the English word 'system'. The German term literally means 'heavy point' and is often translated as centre of gravity or focal point. It is probably used here in relation to it's military context of use, in which it describes the focal point of an attack against an enemy line, usually at some vulnerable part of that line, which will lead to the collapse in the enemy line of defense.

Creating the neologism with the word System seems to refer, therefore, to a weak point in a system that is vulnerable to attack and therefore serves as the focal point for attacks, the intended result of which is the collapse of the system.

One article that should be linked to here is Blitzkrieg, which contains a definition of the german concept of Schwerpunkt. Joyaselatak (talk) 13:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a completely fabricated word by a chap called John Robb, posted here to drive traffic to his blog. He published a book in 2007 - all the talk above is dated 2007, 2008 - but he appears to have done nothing of note since then and systempunkt went nowhere. It's a complete waste of an article on a neologism that might have taken off in the late 1990s, if someone of the stature of Paul Krugman had used it frequently. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 15:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]