So in my own mind I think that hacking is wrong, but then again, there are exceptions. This article from SMH reports on Mitsubishi's missile making facility being hacked and information being stolen. So in my eyes this is essentially wrong, because it is likely that someone is using this information to be malicious or steal ideas.
Then you look at something such as WikiLeaks, and from 'WikiLeaks and Julian Assange' on Assange, it makes me feel that okay maybe hacking is okay if it is in some sort of quest to obtain the truth. So I guess it just comes down to morals, if you intend to do damage then it is bad, but if it's for a noble cause, then it's probably good. I guess you could nearly call what Assange has been doing as some form of investigative journalism, which is reiterated in the article. So we know all this information that we probably wouldn't have if it wasn't for WikiLeaks, but then again, what have we really gained?
I recently gave a presentation on "Media, Conflict and War" in another subject and showed this video. The reactions were really different, and one question that arose in debate on it was whether or not it really affected us if we knew what was going on from this particular WikiLeak.
The only idea we got from the debate was that it enhanced already instilled anti-war views. But we couldn't really do anything about it, so does this make WikiLeaks somewhat redundant?
But then again, having the right to know is something which is important, and I guess with people trying to hide such footage, we are not getting this right to decide if we really want to know or not.
Anyway, back to the main topic. I'm an advocate for the idea of situation and context when judging the idea of hacking and the 'dark side of the internet'. Hacktivism can be a good idea, especially when traditional methods of protest are not working to have your voice heard, but the moment you get malicious, is the moment it becomes wrong.
I think I may have just confused myself even more with this blog, so what does everyone else think?
Yer, ethics, morals and awareness is complicated. Perhaps the important issue is that we are talking about it and debating it all like Jurgen Habermas' Public Sphere. Habermas says that a healthy democracy has a lively & vigorous Public Sphere. I think it's really important that people are aware and have the opportunity to decide for themselves, but maybe this is different with children, I'm not sure. I think some people believe that we don't need to 'know', perhaps they feel that a good life is about being content and happy. I personally want to 'know', I never stop asking 'why' and I wouldn't be happy or content otherwise. I don't know what all this means, maybe it's about whether you look at the process or whether you look at the ends, I'm not sure. I think that we needed Wikileaks, I think that Western governments need to be more answerable to their public. I think the public has the right to make informed decisions.
ReplyDeleteNice post Ben! I completely agree! I guess like everything there is two sides to the story. Hacking can be used for good, in the case of WikiLeaks, and for bad, PSN credit card details stolen etc. I think hacking is one of those things that was just inevitable, it was meant to happen in the same way that people fight back against Governments and those in power through activism and more extreme, rebellions. There a those who use it to fight back, to try and bring about a change and to give a voice to the little guy that cannot be heard. Then again you have those that do it because they can, they seek personal gain and don't care about who or what they hack as long as they get something out of it. Whichever way you look at it they are both forms of hacking, but both have different reasoning behind them.
ReplyDeleteIs hacking wrong or is it right? I don't think yes or no could do the answer justice. I think on the same wavelength as you Ben when it comes to the question of right or wrong. I see it as if the purpose of the hack is for a purpose less desirable such as stealing personal info and as you noted stealing secret info on missiles the result could lead to catastrophic results BUT if the hack is for the purpose of revealing a truth that we as the public should know of this is where I would categorise that hack as a right. End of the story...it is very complicated!
ReplyDeleteBen, you have done a very good job in illustrating the complexities evident when we are deciding whether something is right or wrong. My gut reaction, like yours, is to consider hacking as wrong... but similarly, when it is used to reveal wrongfully hidden information, I am not so sure. I am wary, however, of getting to a point where I am saying that the means justifies the ends, as I've always thought this a dangerous and inadequate argument.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I think that you are right to turn our attention away from the hacking itself for a moment, in order to consider what it has really accomplished. Although I believe that a lot of the information (although not all of it) that wikileaks released needed to become known, the reality is, other than making governments more secretive and defensive, this doesn't seem to have had that much effect. I wonder if we should focus less on the revelation of information that further confirms what we already suspect of the authorities, and more on moving people to action in standing up to said authorities.
I was also confused by this topic because on the one hand I would hate for my personal files to be looked through and drag up pieces of unsavoury information from my past and present, but on the other hand, I want to know the truth about things that affect me like what really is in a McDonald's beef patty (silly example I know). I think that Wikileaks revelations are important because it changes peoples opinion about important issues like the Iraq war. I completely agree with their mission statement of only hacking to gain information, not ruin systems.
ReplyDelete