The different worldviews, ideologies, or beliefs that exist in the real world, translate in cyberspace. For instance, Richard Clarke asserts that cyber war has already started, which sounds like a realist view. Conversely, Thomas Rid defends that cyber war will never occur, which appears very idealist. Others, like Martin Libicki argue that the current focus and fantasy about this topic is merely a temporary craze and that cyberspace is not even a war-fighting domain. Lastly, some pragmatics say that the cyber realm is a tool of which human should take advantage. The latter even anticipate an emergence of intelligence from the Internet that humans could and should then leverage.
This broad variety of opinions explains the perplexity that …show more content…
This self-regulatory character materializes in the denial of weapons efficiency. Indeed, much more than in the real world, the effectiveness of the use of weapons, be they offensive or defensive, is far from certain in cyberspace. First, defensive weapons are not sure. Researching an ever-stronger protection, let alone an absolute one, is futile. Protections such as firewalls or antivirus require extensive programming and computing resources and, remain fallible. Probably the most striking example is that of the cyber-security company bankrupt by the activist group Anonymous. On a smaller scale, there is always somewhere an individual smart and stubborn enough to humble the most secure protective …show more content…
Indeed, cyberspace challenges the international order. Its global, borderless nature shakes the international regime dating from the Peace of Westphalia to such an extent that scholars, such as Nazli Choucri, claim that even the analytical tools of international politics are outdated and useless in the cyber era. From the communication of populations across the globe, civil society emerges as a new actor, which can lead to new political rules and systems. These self-regulatory actions show, to those who doubted, that humans are reactive, inventive, and can show solidarity, which, from a democratic perspective, is rather good news. The public authority that the military partly represents should, therefore, foster and not hinder these
This broad variety of opinions explains the perplexity that …show more content…
This self-regulatory character materializes in the denial of weapons efficiency. Indeed, much more than in the real world, the effectiveness of the use of weapons, be they offensive or defensive, is far from certain in cyberspace. First, defensive weapons are not sure. Researching an ever-stronger protection, let alone an absolute one, is futile. Protections such as firewalls or antivirus require extensive programming and computing resources and, remain fallible. Probably the most striking example is that of the cyber-security company bankrupt by the activist group Anonymous. On a smaller scale, there is always somewhere an individual smart and stubborn enough to humble the most secure protective …show more content…
Indeed, cyberspace challenges the international order. Its global, borderless nature shakes the international regime dating from the Peace of Westphalia to such an extent that scholars, such as Nazli Choucri, claim that even the analytical tools of international politics are outdated and useless in the cyber era. From the communication of populations across the globe, civil society emerges as a new actor, which can lead to new political rules and systems. These self-regulatory actions show, to those who doubted, that humans are reactive, inventive, and can show solidarity, which, from a democratic perspective, is rather good news. The public authority that the military partly represents should, therefore, foster and not hinder these