Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Why Are Hackers Becoming So Angry?

<< < (2/3) > >>

vlastimil:
I agree with the article. The attempts to undo all the good things that internet brought in the name of profit and control would make anyone angry, not just hackers.

Though, I do not think hacking web sites is the proper reaction. The "responsible hacker" should work on something positive and develop technologies that are resistant to misuse. I admire projects like freenet or bitcoin. While they have many drawbacks, others will be built upon their legacy and one day, we'll have the free internet back. The more the governments push against it, the sooner :D.

wraith808:
Though, I do not think hacking web sites is the proper reaction. The "responsible hacker" should work on something positive and develop technologies that are resistant to misuse.
-vlastimil (July 22, 2011, 12:53 PM)
--- End quote ---

This is the part I agree with.  People compare this to other revolutionaries in other areas, but I think if true scrutiny was given to the similarities, there would be one key difference- the other people in question didn't have any other valid recourse within the strictures they'd been given.  There have been an abundance of constructive things within the system that have had real promise- the only problem has been they become part of the system rather than working to change it, IMO.  But they still serve as examples of the ability to work within the system.

worstje:
I think it is short-sighted to say that if someone hacks a website and releases a small part of the data as proof of doing so is bad. Hackers have been criminalized again, again and again. There's very few ways for them to work in the system. When one finds a leak and report it, often it gets ignored - be it by idiots misinterpreting the seriousness of the matter or be it due to miscommunication. When they step into the media, they get charges filed against them with the police, or directly sued if their identity was known.

Commercial institutions only have one interest, and that is covering their own ass. Hackers that reak into their systems, no matter how well-intentioned and good-mannered in wanting to protect the privacy of the users of said systems, are the one to blame. Saying the evil hacker is the wrong party fixes that. Employing professional security analysis to find holes like those costs serious money, so all in all, it is a thankless job.

Mind you, I am not condoning hackers immediately publishing entire databases without regard for law or proper moral justification. But if you take five minutes to look into the media, you can find countless examples of hackers that played nice yet got into serious trouble for it. Look at that, and you'll find working within the system to improve said system is a very difficult job for people with these insights and skills.

40hz:
It is, in reality, the people that are angry.
-Stoic Joker (July 22, 2011, 11:33 AM)
--- End quote ---

I think Stoic hits on an important point here.

One of the reasons why enforcement actions are having so little impact (at least so far) is because there is a lot of popular support for many of Anonymous' activities.

I think it's particularly telling when so many otherwise law-abiding people aren't moved to absolute outrage by most of these "hacking" and media "piracy" behaviors. Or at least not as much as those in power might wish.

I've been told the only differences between a traitor, a rebel, and a revolutionary are:


* who you asked
* whether or not they were successful
* and the amount of popular support they received regardless of the outcome
I think a clear message is being sent. The people are getting fed up with paid-for government 'representatives' passing industry-drafted laws rather than representing the interests of the people who elected them. So even though most people would not normally condone the activities of movements like Anonymous, many of their pranks (and that's really what they are since their chief intent is to embarrass rather than bring about direct change) still bring a smile to the lips of people who would otherwise condemn such behaviors.

And that's a dangerous thing if you're in power. Because it's only one small step away from the general public deciding that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" - even if they don't completely condone the actions of so-called hackers and pirates.

Anonymous is a symptom of a much large problem. It is not the problem itself...

To borrow a phrase attributed to Rasputin: Let those with wit to understand this - understand this. 8)

wraith808:
Look at that, and you'll find working within the system to improve said system is a very difficult job for people with these insights and skills.
-worstje (July 22, 2011, 02:02 PM)
--- End quote ---

I think this quote will shed a lot of light on the true level of belief.  When people took to the streets in Egypt and the other countries of the Arab Summer, they took a difficult route because that was the only way to get things accomplished, and was based on something they believed in.  People died for their cause, and did so because they believed- but didn't cause harm to someone else doing so.  They broke the law of their country, but not the reasonable laws of the world at large.  Is the use of hacking as a tactic because its too hard to work on the inside, rather than it not being feasible?  Are the laws that are broken reasonable to be broken to the world at large because they're too restrictive to any attempt at change?

I've been told the only differences between a traitor, a rebel, and a revolutionary are:


* who you asked
* whether or not they were successful
* and the amount of popular support they received regardless of the outcome
-40hz (July 22, 2011, 03:57 PM)
--- End quote ---

I think there are a couple more factors not enumerated, i.e. the timing of the asking, and who is doing the asking.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page