Re: Ehippies new DoS tools and information (what is free speech?)

[Ben Earnhart <bearnhar@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu>]

[: hacktivism :]

Your point is important, and certainly worth considering.  However, there
are several issues that it immediately raises (at least in my mind).

1) What of organizations (such as many .coms and/or multinationals who are
potential recipients of DoS attacks) whose only message is "show me the
money"?  They often don't have a speech to put out, or can and will
rephrase that speech to maximize income.  If we can get them to change
their speech to maximize income while minimizing social/environmental harm,
then corporations and individuals both win, and DoS attacks might motivate
them to modify their speech.  To make somebody shut up who really has a
point to make is one thing, but to shut up an entity whose sole goal is to
maximize $$ is not necessarily the same animal.

2) What about the difference in resources or access to information channels
available?  The WTO says something, and people (and governments) listen;
furthermore, if it's not too boring or arcane, it automatically goes in the
newspaper and into major media, even with a free press, simply because they
are big, well know, well connected, and well funded.  In a way, this is
even worse, since many of the things they (orgs like the WTO) do go
unpblicized, but the governments and corporations still listen.  On the
other hand, even if activists have a good point, nobody listens unless they
can attract attention, either through marketing a "sexy" issue like the
killing of cuddly creatures, or by getting attention by their own actions.
Many of the policies that are the worst in the long run are simply too
boring to make headlines.  One way of attracting attention is disruptive
protests, physical or virtual, which can include (d)DoS attacks.        

3) Simlar to #2, there seems to me to be a large difference between a
powerful organization or a government restricting speech and a bunch of
individuals temporarily interruptng the speech of that corporation or
government in order to get their voices heard.  But I might be wrong... 

If action propagates the spread of information, then action might be called
for...  it's a large gray area of what is "hate speech" what is "free
speech" and what is "commercial activity," and absolutes in any direction
end up with absurd or undesireable outcomes, IMHO.
 
Cheers,

Ben(t)



[: hacktivism :]
[: for unsubscribe instructions or list info consult the list FAQ :]
[: http://hacktivism.tao.ca/ :]