WikiLeaks...it's a good thing

I just want to start by saying that I don't think that denial-of -service attacks are a fair way to engage in war. While they may slightly effect websites like Paypal they can do much greater damage to ordinary citizens. The small business person that uses Paypal to take payments or the small Ebay seller could be left without the money they rely on to feed their families. Are these hackers concerned about who may be hurt in the crossfire or are they more interested in proving a point?

Even though I am against DDOS I am pro WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks has the power to bring important information to ordinary people. As long as the information they are providing is not going to be endangering someone's life then they have the right to free speech and we should have the right to read what they post. As tax paying citizens of the United States we have the right to know what our government is doing. Like why do they threaten the use of deadly force if anyone gets too close to area 51? What are they hiding? Maybe finding out what is so top secret in area 51 should be WikiLeaks next goal. The government may not be too happy about WikiLeaks because they are providing information to ordinary citizens. Information equals power and the last thing the government wants is large masses of educated, empowered citizens. Not surprisingly the government is using the activity of these hacktivists to try to gain more control over the internet which would then give them more control over people. General Keith Alexander said that he needs "more access to e-mail, social networks, and the Internet to protect America". Isn't that what the government always says when they want to invade our privacy? I think enough is enough and the government should stop edging their way into our lives. If people want to look at or post on WikiLeaks, post a video on youtube, or even go without a seat belt they are not hurting anyone and the government should leave them alone.

WikiLeaks: Harming our country?

WikiLeaks is the controversial website that has been posting classified government documents that has been affecting our country and our access with the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. I can't believe that there is even a website out there that displays our classified government documents. Why is this legal? In my opinion, this should not be allowed on the Internet because of all the access that it gives to other people in other countries. Not only does this give our classified government documents to our enemies, but it can also lead us to having potential new enemies. I think Kevin Werbach explains it well when he says, "WikiLeaks is a fascinating microcosm of a larger trend --that the Internet allows freer flow of information, including things we want to be available and things we don't." This is exactly what the website WikiLeaks does and it allows information to be spread all throughout the Internet for anybody to see. Julian Assange is the founder of WikiLeaks and is currently being held in the United Kingdom with no bail. A recent release by WikiLeaks gave out confidential U.S. State Department cables that has implications for business and corporations. Is it time to put an end to all of this? Should WikiLeaks be allowed to release confidential United States government information?

I really think that WikiLeaks could be very dangerous not only to the American government, but to all of American society. I even consider it treason. The reason I feel this way is because WikiLeaks seems to be a betrayal of the American nation and sovereign. It opens up our nation's private information and reveals it for others to see like it's not a big deal at all. I really believe that WikiLeaks will continue to put our nation in danger and it can only lead to worse situations and circumstances. The information that is being revealed is affecting corporate communication and Joseph Turow says, "The cables that have been released look incredibly tame compared to the e-mail that people send around corporations." I think that betraying your country by supplying information to the whole world should not be tolerated. I understand that the information could be a public concern and the public deserve to know about it, but I think the information shouldn't be released to a later date. WikiLeaks remind me of the Pentagon Papers and the H-Bomb court cases. In the Pentagon Papers case, the information was not restricted because it occurred several years after the Vietnam War and was no longer a threat to American Society. However, the H-Bomb was not allowed to be released because of the danger and threat it caused to America. In newspapers, there are 5 exceptions on things that you can't write or publish:

1.) Obstructing military recruitment

2.) Publish true sailing or movement in war

3.) Obscenity

4.) Promote violence

5.) Attempt to overthrow American government

I believe that these 5 reasons should come into play when publishing an article or information online. In this instance, it would be aimed towards WikiLeaks and displaying confidential information towards the American government. It could have a huge affect on our status in the war in Iraq. America is known as being a strong nation, but there are some people who are trying to affect our great reputation and stature. WikiLeaks harms public interests, cause a crackdown on government security, and have a bad effect on foreign relations.

This link helps to argue my points on why WikiLeaks is dangerous towards America. http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Wikileaks-is-a-threat-to-United-States-national-security./1/

WHAT DO YOU THINK? DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH ME?

Are We Addressing the 'Online Threat?'

The online threat is real. I know firsthand the extent of computers and networking, all lined to the World Wide Web, has on the infrastructure of this nation. Working on safety systems that people depend on that are coded is scary, to say the least. Soon, our cars will be networked and require the latest security patches to keep up with the trends. Groups like Anonymous, although best intentioned, could jeopardize lives.

With the increasing dependence on our LIVES, are we properly addressing the online threat? According to the article “The Online Threat,” security is a major growth industry … create what has become a military-cyber complex. The United States, along with companies like SAIC that are pushing cybersecurity, has developed a team ready for war. A quick search even reveals a Department of Homeland Security website for Computer Readiness with helpful information.

In the end, like any warfare, we have prepared, but not enough. Much more has to be done on the software design level to prevent attacks. Computer software should be tested and rated for security, eliminating many of the problems that we run into. The warfare needs to be shifted from reactive to proactive and make it harder to infiltrate in the first place.

Copyright

The issues of copyright, fair use and piracy have always been a big problem in today’s society. There are so many concerns and arguments that arise on all aspects of these issues; it’s hard to even determine where to start.

It is so easy to bootleg a movie or DVD and to create and sell counterfeit items and sell them to make money off of someone else’s ideas or work. There are certain ways to use other people’s material and ideas without completely stealing them, or taking credit for something that you didn’t create. Everyone is different, so why be like someone else and steal their ideas?

I guess the answer is simple. The internet has made downloading and using copyrighted material much easier than before. This is why it is such a downfall for artists and other creators who have their material copied. These laws and policies have been made for a reason. They help prevent the stealing from occurring in the first place.

To address both sides of the coin, I believe that it is a tough topic to touch on. Many people who use copyrighted material in a video or other work don’t have any idea that they are doing wrong, and if they do, it has no effect on them. If I wanted to use copyrighted material in any of my work, I would make sure to find a way to not do it illegally. Although it may be more difficult to make sure that I am following all the rules for using copyrighted material in my work, it is way more beneficial than being in trouble for carelessness.

I do admit that I do use limewire and other cites to download movies and music, who hasn’t? It’s easy and it’s free! What more could you ask for? So I guess I have failed victim to piracy. I do believe that the internet though is causing a major problem with killing the creative industries like music and movies. It makes these people lose money because their works are being copied and sold or even downloaded for free. At least iTunes makes you pay for each song in order to download it, but even then there is ways around it.

I have to agree with this part of the piracy article for several reasons as stated above. It goes to show how easy it really is to copyright material and the fine line that exists between copyright and uncopyrighted.

“Today we are in the middle of another "war" against "piracy." The Internet has provoked this war. The Internet makes possible the efficient spread of content. Peer-to-peer (p2p) file sharing is among the most efficient of the efficient technologies the Internet enables. Using distributed intelligence, p2p systems facilitate the easy spread of content in a way unimagined a generation ago. This efficiency does not respect the traditional lines of copyright. The network doesn't discriminate between the sharing of copyrighted and uncopyrighted content. Thus has there been a vast amount of sharing of copyrighted content. That sharing in turn has excited the war, as copyright owners fear the sharing will "rob the author of the profit."

I don’t believe that the remixing and reposting of copyrighted material outweigh the harms for several reasons. Everyday people have to pay money for all the material they steal, and jail time can even be served. These policies are not easy to understand so I can see where people have difficulty when dealing with them.

I do believe that the laws were made for a reason and are fair to a certain extent. There are issues with these laws though. Some of them go too far because instead of punishing the people who are doing the downloading, they should be directing their attention to taking down the websites that are creating these illegal activities to happen.

Lessig’s points about the historical goals of copyright are extremely involved. He explained how the laws created in the 1790’s were established for 14 years. They were enforced to protect the individual before the publishers.

The goals in today’s society are to protect both the publishers and creators of the work. It is constantly changing, as well as the laws and technology. The policies now are more accurate to the cultural changes than the time before.

There were many points of interest that came up in the readings and videos this week. There were also lots of questions that are left unanswered.

Is there any way that piracy and copyright will ever stop? Or is it better if we just let it be? Who is ultimately at fault with illegal downloads of music and movies?

This link gives all the updated copyright laws and also ones from the past, including the ones form 1790.

http://copyright.laws.com/

New prompt: Cyberwar

Here's an updated word cloud of our class blogs so far!

We continue this week with more on Hacktivism, but now taking it to a much deeper and more political level as we examine it in the context of war. In particular, we look at ways that the internet and it use (or abuse) can have a real impact on the lives of whole societies of people.

This week with your post, we'll do something a little different. First, this will be a bit of an open post in which you should take a reasoned position on an aspect of hacktivism and cyberwar; that is, argue for a particular point of view related to the topic. So, for example, is Wikileaks valuable to democracy? Does Wikileaks undermine democracy? Are distributed denial-of-service (DDOS) attacks a fair way to engage in "war," especially compared to traditional war? Or more dangerous? Etc.

THEN, when you comment on a classmate's blog, play DEVIL'S ADVOCATE to their position. In other words, how can you challenge their points, or come up with reasonable alternatives to their position? Has the poster overlooked an important point?

Let's get some real discussion going this week.

iPhone Girl Victim of Human-Flesh Search

     The young woman you see here is the "victim" of a human-flesh search. Her photo was mistakenly left on an iPhone that ended up in the hands of a customer, and he now wants to know who she is. It's not because he's mad, he's just curious!
     The case of the Cat Bin Lady is driven by justice. Taking into account that this happened in China, I'd have to guess that this is a way for the people to take justice in to their own hands, without going through the government. And I have to agree with what they did.
     There is a fine line though. Yes, what the Cat Bin Lady did was wrong - go ahead and hunt her and the cameraman down. But be careful, because if you do something illegal in turn, that's just as bad. If you take into consideration that consequences of going too far, I think that this human-flesh search engine is a really good thing. It really is a way to expose something that "isn't right".
     You might ask, how do you know it's "not right"? A video, a comment, a plot, whatever it may be is likely to offend someone, so they comment on it. If the "majority" of people agree, they'll also comment and help investigate. If they don't agree with the offended user, they won't reply and/or won't help the cause. It's that simple.
     I also feel that this form of search can be used for less-serious reasons as well, like the iPhone Girl. (Read the article here: http://tinyurl.com/dlmtn8 ) As mentioned before, the cell phone user doesn't want to punish her for having the picture on the phone, he just wants to know who she is! By reaching out to other users on the internet, you can quickly come up with an answer, just by asking around, and passing on a message. It all depends on what you're trying to achieve!

Hacktivism

     Hacktivism is the act of hacking into a computer system for a motivated purpose.  In Brenna Erlich’s The Ballad of Cat Bin Lady: The Internet’s Latest Viral Villian, a surviellance video caught a woman placing a cat into a grabage bin.  This video was virally leaked on the Internet and soon she was identified as Mary Bale.  Her explanation was “I really don’t see what everyone is getting so excited about – it’s just a cat. I was walking home from work and saw this cat wander out in front of me. I don’t know what came over me, but I suddenly thought it would be funny to put it in the wheelie bin, which was right beside me.”  Subsequently, some of her personal information was leaked, death threats were made, and a Facebook page was created to destroy her public image.  Does this wrongful action deserve such ruthless personal destruction?

     In my opinion, hacktivisim is an effective means to achieving justice because it allows offenders to be punished without violating human or civil rights.  If Mary Bale was caught on a security tape in the act, then truth is discovered.  It was wrong for her to treat another life with such disrespect.  However, the personal deprication she suffered is not justified.  If she was found guilty of such a crime, people should certainly not make death threats or spread personal information (even though this was available online).  Instead, they should allow her to be found guilty in a court of law.  This is the only way to true justice.

     The entire issue shows us that political protest and demonstartions are easier than ever.  People can quickly communicate ideas and truth through the Internet to the masses.  The Internet provides grounds for many new forms of political protesting, encourages people to speak freely, and poses many difficulties for regulating such acts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacktivism

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8567934.stm

http://www.thehacktivist.com/whatishacktivism.pdf