Rebecca McKenney
Information Ethics
Doctor Yaw
27 April 2018
Hacktivism
In a world that is increasingly becoming electronic, there are bound to be people who attempt to use it for their own advantage through hacking. However, some of these people attempt to use their skills for the greater good of society as a means of civil disobedience. But even if hackers have the best intentions in mind, should hacktivism be considered as an act of civil disobedience?
In order to understand the answer to the question, we have to define hacking, hacktivism, and civil disobedience. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary website, hacking, in technological terms, is the “act or instance of gaining or attempting to gain illegal access to a computer hardware …show more content…
However, others may be able to argue that their only hacking to bring attention to a certain cause or issue. In order for a hacktivist to claim that they are taking part in civil disobedience, there must be a “collection of facts to determine whether injustices are alive”, according to Martian Luther King Jr., author of “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (King). Another condition that needs to be meet to determine the legitimately of civil disobedience is that “the normal appeals to the political majority have already been made in good faith and that they failed” …show more content…
In personal opinion the answer is no. Though King writes that if one had to break a law in order to participate in legitimate civil disobedience that they must do it “openly, lovingly, not hatefully…and with the willingness to accept the penalty”, some things are illegal for a reason (King). Hacking is a concept that cannot be universalized. If everyone was allowed to take part, there would be no way to protect information and to prevent information from potentially falling into the wrong hands. In the case of some issues, supporters and opposers may feel that by participating in hacktivism they are helping society, in general, for the better good. Even if a hacktivist or a hacktivist group were successful in their campaign, there is no guarantee that they work would be seriously considered in the long run or even if people are willing to acknowledge that the protest and resolution to the problem even accorded. After all, there is a saying in that you can’t trust everything you read on the internet. In conclusion, hacktivism is not a legitimate form of civil disobedience. Hacktivism cannot be universalized because it would severally damage the protection of information. It is also not a public activity, as one can become a hacktivist in privacy and do not necessarily reveal their identity from the get go. Hacktivism is also not necessarily peaceful as hacktivist can post threats that would be hard to determine
Information Ethics
Doctor Yaw
27 April 2018
Hacktivism
In a world that is increasingly becoming electronic, there are bound to be people who attempt to use it for their own advantage through hacking. However, some of these people attempt to use their skills for the greater good of society as a means of civil disobedience. But even if hackers have the best intentions in mind, should hacktivism be considered as an act of civil disobedience?
In order to understand the answer to the question, we have to define hacking, hacktivism, and civil disobedience. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary website, hacking, in technological terms, is the “act or instance of gaining or attempting to gain illegal access to a computer hardware …show more content…
However, others may be able to argue that their only hacking to bring attention to a certain cause or issue. In order for a hacktivist to claim that they are taking part in civil disobedience, there must be a “collection of facts to determine whether injustices are alive”, according to Martian Luther King Jr., author of “Letter from Birmingham Jail” (King). Another condition that needs to be meet to determine the legitimately of civil disobedience is that “the normal appeals to the political majority have already been made in good faith and that they failed” …show more content…
In personal opinion the answer is no. Though King writes that if one had to break a law in order to participate in legitimate civil disobedience that they must do it “openly, lovingly, not hatefully…and with the willingness to accept the penalty”, some things are illegal for a reason (King). Hacking is a concept that cannot be universalized. If everyone was allowed to take part, there would be no way to protect information and to prevent information from potentially falling into the wrong hands. In the case of some issues, supporters and opposers may feel that by participating in hacktivism they are helping society, in general, for the better good. Even if a hacktivist or a hacktivist group were successful in their campaign, there is no guarantee that they work would be seriously considered in the long run or even if people are willing to acknowledge that the protest and resolution to the problem even accorded. After all, there is a saying in that you can’t trust everything you read on the internet. In conclusion, hacktivism is not a legitimate form of civil disobedience. Hacktivism cannot be universalized because it would severally damage the protection of information. It is also not a public activity, as one can become a hacktivist in privacy and do not necessarily reveal their identity from the get go. Hacktivism is also not necessarily peaceful as hacktivist can post threats that would be hard to determine