Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Your Rights Online

On Hacktivism 246

z84976 writes "Oxblood Ruffin, of cDc fame, has produced a nice article discussing various aspects of hactivism and some of the approaches used by their own Hacktivismo group in supporting freedom (of thought, mainly) on the internet. Check it out over at The Register when you get a chance."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

On Hacktivism

Comments Filter:
  • Re:"Online Privacy" (Score:0, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, 2002 @03:55PM (#3375544)
    I might not agree, but I'll fight to the death to ensure your rights to post blatantly fucking obvious trolls.
  • Nothing New (Score:2, Interesting)

    by thryllkill ( 52874 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:14PM (#3375661) Homepage Journal
    Civil liberties are being oppressed the world over, and us techies are pissed!

    This article tells us of some of the horrible things going on in the world and all, but it is nothing we didn't know was going on.

    Hackers collaborate over the web to fight oppression and close mindedness!

    Sound at all like a certain upstart OS?

    I really did like this article, don't get me wrong but it is very lite on the important information like what they are actually doing about it. I doubt making it easier for a Chinese person to rip music off of the internet is going to bring them to the enlightened western thinking necessary to invoke social change.

    What apps are you creating to further this change, where can I get the source (since you sited open source as being the obvious choice among hacktivist coders)? What can I do to help? This article, while being interesting, served no real purpose.

  • Re:Ummm... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:17PM (#3375678)
    An interesting claim made in the article, and it caught my eye too, but for a different reason:

    Just because a nation adopts communism as their economic model does not make them an enemy of the US, of the world, or of any person or ideology. Communism is an interesting economic structure which has good points and bad points. Capitalism is another interesting economic structure which also has good points and bad points. Together a lot of their good points will overshadow the others bad points . . . like maybe there is some optimal mix of the two.

    Of course I'm an AC, what with McCarthy still very much alive in some powerful people . . .

    Does anyone think that the Chineese really want to continue to annex land? If so, then we need to bring some diplomatic efforts to try to resolve the situation. Sharing of technology should be viewed as a Good Thing, as we are increasingly a global society. Otherwise we should be bringing diplomatic efforts to them in the areas of space exploration, global resource management (they are a huge chunk of land), and environmentally sound industrial practices. Anyone who thinks that we can't learn from each other is simply ignorant, or truly stupid.

    This is probably Offtopic -1; Flaimbait -1; Troll -1; Treasonous -10

    Live free or die

  • Open source Food (Score:4, Interesting)

    by RealisticWeb.com ( 557454 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:23PM (#3375710) Homepage

    I have two things to say about this article.

    1) It was VERY VERY long

    2) I really liked the analogy of OSS to Resturants.

    Think about it. The majority of people never think twice about never seeing the ingrediants, but there are some who feel "I'm putting this stuff in my system, I have the right to know what's in it!". Some even have good reasons like peanut reactions and so forth.

    The resturant will say "If we tell you how we made it, we will lose business". I think that's nonscence personally. Ten to one, I'm not going to be able to cook that by myself anyway, and I'm just going to come back to the restaurant to get it donecorrectly. Plus if I do make it and feed it to all my friends and they say "where did you get that recipie?" and I tell them, don't you think they are going to go check out the menu for themselfs?

    And finally, what if the majority of the people eating at your restaurant wanted the food cooked a different way, but didn't have any other choice on the menu? They are going to take those ingrediants and make the food better. If the cook was smart enough, he might be able to learn from what the other cook did, and make his own product better!

    Am I making my analogy clear here, or is this just gibberish?

  • Free Information (Score:3, Interesting)

    by AConnection ( 106831 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:27PM (#3375722)
    Maybe I am simply idealistic. I seem to remember an idea that Information *wants* to be free. I think this concept is accurate, simply by the huge increase in the access to all varieties of information that is on the internet. I also believe that this concept can be expanded by the idea that a "taste" of information is addictive. Think about the reason that information wants to be free, might it be because people desire more information/knowledge the more they get? If that is the case, and you give a taste to "restricted" people in restrictive governments, aren't a certain percent of them going to desire more information badly enough to find the holes in the wall?

    I've heard enough of both sides on the P2P debate over music trading to understand the premise behind both sides and can even see their respective points. This only means to me, that eventually, using my thoughts above that music will be changed forever and "profit" from "selling" your music will be something totally different than we have now and probably something we will not see coming. In the same way, enough people want free information, that I believe that everyone will eventually have access due to the efforts of a small number who fight to make the holes in the walls larger.
  • by MaxwellStreet ( 148915 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:27PM (#3375724)
    Losing your rights (and especially your right to privacy) is not going to happen in one fell swoop.

    Rather, it's more like the oft-spoken-of boiling frog - if privacy is taken away in tiny little increments, then before long it will be compromised in a big way without any substantial opposition.

    I'm not saying that we should all wear tinfoil hats - but constantly recognizing (and opposing, where necessary) the gradual erosion of our right to privacy and governmental abuse of information is our only defense against being... boiled alive.

    The government wants to know more and more about us these days - the excuse du jour is homeland security and counter-terrorism. Throw in stopping child-porn and just about any legislator will support any bill that enables more monitoring of citizens.

    Better to be watchful and vocal - without screaming that the sky is falling - than to sit quietly, watching the privacy we enjoy now disappear for our children.
  • Re:Ummm... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Rorschach1 ( 174480 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:28PM (#3375728) Homepage
    Well spoken. I realized one day that pretty much the only education I'd had about Communism, at least before college, consisted of 'Communist = Evil'. Not even in high school did we ever cover the basics of what it really is.

    I spoke to a friend who spent some time travelling around Laos. Apparently the system's worked pretty well for them. They've got better education and nutrition now, access to healthcare, and at least some hope of sending their children on to something beyond a subsistence-level existence in a small village. And when you're operating on that scale, I really can't see how capitalism could be argued to be that much better.

    Empirical evidence would suggest, however, that communism hasn't worked out terribly well for the long term in larger implementations.
  • back in 1995 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Syre ( 234917 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:33PM (#3375752)
    Back in 1995 I had some arguments... that is um... discussions (in Cannes at Milia) with Nicholas Negroponte and John Perry Barlow. Both Negroponte and Barlow believed that the Internet was an unstoppable force that would inevitably make countries like China become free.

    My argument was that the Chinese and other repressive governments would be sure to set up national proxies with filtering that blocked out sites the government didn't want people to see and kept track of what people were accessing.

    Both Negroponte and Barlow told me that was impossible and would never happen. They also pointed out that the TCP/IP is designed to route around obstacles.

    Well, I've been proven right (so why am I not running Media Lab or flying around the world giving speeches?). China and other countries (Singapore, etc.) have in fact put in national proxies and are blocking thousands of sites, tracking people's usage, and putting people in jail.

    On the other hand, I think that there is a hope that Barlow and Negroponte will eventually turn out to be right in the end, as hackers and other renegades put in alternative links via satellite and other means, which bypass these government blockades.

    If enough of that happens, the blockades will come down, since they won't be useful any longer.

    But I think there will be a long hard struggle befoe that happens.
  • Re:Open source Food (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:38PM (#3375776)
    You've obviously never worked in a restaurant. Outside of maybe a TGIFridays or a McDonalds, the vast majority of chefs and cooks are more than happy to have you come back into the kitchen and will show you exactly how they cook your meal.
  • Re:Open source Food (Score:2, Interesting)

    by RealisticWeb.com ( 557454 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @04:48PM (#3375842) Homepage
    Yes the COOK is, just like the person doing the coding usualy is too, it's the companys that have the restrictive policies. The cook might show you how he cooked it, but if the regional manager finds out he is likely to lose his job. Of cource I'm talking about large restarunts/companies. The smaller locals one will be more fiendly.
  • by josh crawley ( 537561 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @05:47PM (#3376197)
    Evidently, some AC posted a link about cDc (the main group in the article) how they offer to help the government. [cultdeadcow.com]

    Now let's get a piece of that article linked above...

    So we intend to re-architect Back Orifice

    from the ground up. There will be absolutely no
    shared code between the two projects,
    in order to skirt detection by commercial
    antivirus packages. The code will remain
    totally secret. The software will never
    surface publicly.
    And it will be far
    more stealthy than anything we have ever
    released, demoed, or publicly discussed.


    What's this about? Are they friend of foe??? And lastly, the thread was modded -1, offtopic. Evidently somebody didn't want us to see that....

    josh crawley
  • I am of the opinion that activism is amoral whereas civil disobedience is not only moral, but one's duty. I think a good portion of hackitivism is not civil disobedience but instead just activism. At any rate, here is a quote from Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" which is probably the most elegant statement I've ever read regarding the limits (and requirements) of protest.
    If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth--certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter-friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.
    So, in my mind, hacking a web page can never really be justified--no matter what the cause is. On the other hand, refusing to obey government censorship (in places like China) by hacking through their censors is, in my mind, is a very noble thing.
  • Wrong (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Shade, The ( 252176 ) on Friday April 19, 2002 @07:24PM (#3376620) Homepage
    Firstly the police would have to have a warrant by a superintendent or above. Secondly they would have to be watching the communcations when the email has been recieved. Thirdly they would have to show that there is reasonable reason to believe that the target has the keys.

    So yes, if you were being monitored by the police and suspected of a crime, and you were sent an encrypted message, you might forgive the police for trying to decode it.

    That said, there is a lot about the RIP bill that is controversial. But compared to the Patriot Bill over in the US, it's pretty tame; warrants are still needed here for surveilence.

One man's constant is another man's variable. -- A.J. Perlis

Working...