New word: Hacktivism 1

[BJCooperIT]

Formed by combining “hack” with “activism,” hacktivism is the act of hacking into a Web site or computer system in order to communicate a politically or socially motivated message. Unlike a malicious hacker, who may disrupt a system for financial gain or out of a desire to cause harm, the hacktivist performs the same kinds of disruptive actions (such as a DoS attack) in order to draw attention to a cause. For the hacktivist, it is an Internet-enabled way to practice civil disobedience and protest.

Something about this definition seems fundamentally wrong.

^{Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance. ~George Bernard Shaw}
Consultant Developer/Analyst Oracle, Forms, Reports & PL/SQL (Windows)
Author and Sole Proprietor of: Emu Products Plus

 

[sleipnir214]

I still don't see any moral high ground.

If someone does not like what I am saying, that person has the right stand beside me and try to shout me down. That person, however, does not have the right to gag me to keep me from speaking. There is a difference between disagreement and assault. Any time a protester uses anything more than reason and a stentorian bellow to make his point, he's lost the moral high ground.

Similarly, a person has the right to host a website that attempts to point out that everything I've ever said as is lie. That person, however, does not have the right to shut down my server or deface my website. There is a difference between disagreement and vandalism.



Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!

TANSTAAFL!!

 

[CajunCenturion]

Thadeus - How do you define "moral high ground"? Under what circumstances do you consider hacking right?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Thadeus]

If someone does not like what I am saying, that person has the right stand beside me and try to shout me down.

Really Sleipnir? Tell that to the students standing in Tiananmen Square.

CC - I already gave my specific examples earlier in the thread... Apparently some people aren't taking the time to participate in the discussion, just offer their view and run....

~Thadeus

 

[sleipnir214]

Really Sleipnir? Tell that to the students standing in Tiananmen Square.

Really. Admittedly, the Chinese government does not recognise that right.

But I covered Tianamen Square when I said

There is a difference between disagreement and assault.

And because the Chinese government does not have the right to assault when there is disagreement, neither do hackers.


Want the best answers? Ask the best questions!

TANSTAAFL!!

 

[Chopstik]

Thadeus, sorry, but I am unable to see your point of view. If I understand you correctly, you are stating that hacktivism is ok when the hacktivists possess the moral high ground. Yet "moral high ground" is, I would posit, a very relative term - relative to the individual and there is no standard.

For example, who has the moral high ground: US hackers who shut down Islamist (not Islamic) web-sites that promote violent extremism or Islamist hackers who shut down sites the promote the US (or Western) view of democracy? I would again posit that it depends on the view of the individual. So is it ok for one group to be hacktivists and not the other? Would that not smack of hypocrisy or a double-standard? Or perhaps both views are wrong but there is another that would be ok?

The essence of the argument is that the act itself is wrong, not the reasons behind the act. "Moral high ground" is irrelevant relative the the act itself. I may support the views of some of the hacktivists, it does not mean I support their activities.

<aside>
As far as Tiananmen Square, you should talk with many of the people from that generation, both inside and outside of China. Personally, I expected that many people inside China would condemn the students for fear of government retribution and those outside would be in support of the students. But many of the people I've talked with, including some who protested with the students during the Beijing Spring of 1989, have said that the government was right in suppressing the demonstrations - both in and outside of China. Not in the violence of the act itself, mind you, but in that the government had to re-assert itself for fear of losing sovereignty. Too many Chinese lived through the chaos and anarchy (luan) of the Cultural Revolution and there are many who, now a generation removed from 1989, have a more objective point of view of those events than the picture of a man standing in front of a tank in Changan Boulevard as commonly seen in Western references to the spring of 1989. Sorry, I digress and this is probably best handled in a separate forum if you want to continue this line of thought...
</aside>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)

 

[Thadeus]

Yet "moral high ground" is, I would posit, a very relative term - relative to the individual and there is no standard.

Thank you Chopstik. That is exactly my point. Which is why I said earlier:

It's a big world out there...

The very point of my first post was that you cannot have a black and white discussion about this... It is a gray area because each case is "relative to the individual and there is no standard".

I would agree with LookingForInfo that the first line of the definition is a definition... everything else is commentary from a limited (socially, politically, economically) perspective.

~Thadeus

 

[CajunCenturion]

Thadeus - The examples you gave were in response to one who is engaged in hactivism and taking the moral high ground. That's not what I asked. I asked under what circumstances you consider hactivism right. If you wish to equate 'being right' with taking the 'moral high ground', then that would provide an answer, but I fail to see where you've equated the two. Further, you've yet to define what you consider to be the 'moral high ground'.

If you hack my site, regardless of its content, then you have harmed me. How is hacking that site, and inducing harm, taking the moral high ground?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[Chopstik]

Thadeus, I agree with both you and LookingForInfo that the first sentence of BJCooperIT's definition is the only definition. Everything after is, quite frankly and as put so well by the two of you, relative.

However, I believe this is a black and white discussion. Hacking, or any variation thereof, is illegal and wrong regardless of motivation or justification. We could argue the moral high ground, but the point would be moot in terms of hacktivism since it is the act of hacktivism itself that causes the discussion in the first place.

That said, I'll end by agreeing with BJCooper's original assessment: there is something fundamentally wrong with the definition as she originally posted it. End it with the first sentence and I think there would be far less controversy.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not young enough to know everything."
Oscar Wilde (1854-1900)

 

[BJCooperIT]

Amen Chopstik.

My apologies, CajunCenturion, for a topic that has strayed from your forum's premise. Had I wanted to debate the act of hacktivism I would have posted to the "Information Technology Ethics in the Workplace" forum.

^{Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance. ~George Bernard Shaw}
Consultant Developer/Analyst Oracle, Forms, Reports & PL/SQL (Windows)
Author and Sole Proprietor of: Emu Products Plus

 

[AnotherHiggins]

Oh boy, I hate to jump into this - and I don't want to wander too far off topic, but I think this post is more in keeping with the MAI forum that most of the discussion that has taken place....

Hacking, or any variation thereof, is illegal and wrong regardless of motivation or justification.

First, I'm no hacker (I'm not a good enough coder to qualify, even if I wanted to be one), but I'd like to point out the difference between hackers and crackers.

This difference was alluded to by PaulTEG in his post of 5 Aug 05 7:14.

Even cracking can be both legal and not 'wrong'. That is, when it is done by professionals to test a company's computer security.

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue]
[/tt][red]Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.

 

[CajunCenturion]

BJCooperIT - There are no apologies necessary, as I'm as guilty as anyone for helping take the discussion down this road. You are absolutely right, we should focus on the definition of the term here, and leave discussions about the acts and rationale to another forum more suited for that purpose. Thank you for a little sanity.

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[SilentAiche]

[red]her[/red]d: A bunch of she cows. Females and all. In a group. Besides, "hisd" is hard to pronounce.

Tim, as far as you know...

[blue]______________________________________________________________
Once, while sitting on the bank of Stick Creek, I found myself thinking about small lakes. Then, I realized, I was probably just pondering. [/blue]

 

[AnotherHiggins]

Tim - or Bob, as far as I know - have you been taking your medication like a good boy?

Perhaps you meant to post this in the Daffinitions thread?

[tt]_____
[blue]-John[/blue]
[/tt][red]Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur[/red]

Help us help you. Please read FAQ181-2886 before posting.

 

[SilentAiche]

Goodness, cow embarrassing is this.

I saw here a fence/post where the members seemed to have a beef with one another. I hope they work it out without grilling one another too much.

And then there was something about the "corral thigh ground (beef)", so naturally I thought of cows. Perhaps I herd it wrong. As for my meds, it was kind of you to ask. I've lately been taking what they call [red]farmaceuticals[/red], so the point it, er, Moo. Not sure of their effect yet.

I know you like Latin, John, so let me just say "Ipso Lasso."

boB
(spelled backwards on purpose to disguise my identity. Tim.)

[blue]______________________________________________________________
Once, while sitting on the bank of Stick Creek, I found myself thinking about small lakes. Then, I realized, I was probably just pondering. [/blue]

 

[SilentAiche]

anotherhiggins,

I hope to hell "Ipso Lasso" doesn't actually mean anthing in Latin - I was just continuing my very weak "cow" line of humor, assuming that "humor" means "learning English."

Tim

[blue]______________________________________________________________
Once, while sitting on the bank of Stick Creek, I found myself thinking about small lakes. Then, I realized, I was probably just pondering. [/blue]