Re: HateWatch Press Release: Activism vs Hacktivism

[Parsifal <noosph@noosph.org>]

[: hacktivism :]

You wrote on 6/09/98 22:28 from Nick Baudouin 
rgemme@prv.centresjeunesse.qc.ca

>[: hacktivism :]
>
>Parsifal wrote:
>
>> Hackers are digital terrorists.
>
>then, why at all would you want the 'hack' in 'hacktivist' ... wouldn't
>net-activist 

and why not just activist ?
why to set up an artificial border between the digital and real world ?
After all, the internet is a platform to organize actions in the real 
world, isn't it ?
Separated from the real world, i don't know how it could be useful for 
any efficient activism...we live in the real world.


>>Don't you understand that when you fight against something, you promote it ?
>
>i agree with u on such causes like fascism and hate, but what about corporate
>dominance

oh, here is a greater and more ferocious ennemy than the KKK, indeed.

>
>if you leave the front door of your house open and i get in and i leave you a
>note, does that make me a thief. i haven't commited a crime here. 

humm...if i kill you because you have forgotten to protect your life, is 
it really a crime ?

In a free society, i should be able to leave the front door of my house 
open, without worrying about intrusions.
Bars (and firewalls) exist only because we cannot rely in courtesy and 
respect from others.

>so before we try to define what hacktivism is,
>maybe we should try to define what hacking is ... unless we want to give it
>empty meaning : to me, a net-activist is not an hacktivist )

indeed. these terms need to be defined.

>
>is a web site really private property since it's very purpose is to be 
>seen by
>the public. 

hummm....the frontage of an house is seen by the public. Does it mean a 
house is not a private property ?
HTLM pages are only the frontage of websites.

>(just as the ad on the bus station)

an ad in the bus station is only a frontage. There is nothing behind. You 
cannot compare an ad and a web site.

> i think private property 
>has to
>be defined properly if it is to be meaningful. 

Indeed. Like an anarchist stream does (amongst many other anarchist 
streams....), i think we must differenciate the personal private property 
(your house, your car, etc...) from the huge properties owned by cartels.


>corporate fuckers refer to our
>land and water and even their workers knowledge and the data in our cells as
>their property ! do you support this view ? 

No.  If there must be a target, here it is....but you cannot reach it by 
attacking its web sites..it is so...laughable !


>
>i thought ( perhaps mistakenly ) that this was where hacktivism could come 
>in,
>namely, trying to define how technical knowledge ( referred to as hacking )
>could be used effectively to fight the shit corporate tyrannies serve 90% 
>of the
>world population from birth to death. this is where i see the utility of this
>list. if hacktivism (as opposed to net-activism) is to go anywhere now, these
>are the issues that are to be discussed on this list.

I agree with you, and i'm glad to discern a possible more efficient way 
of acting than floodnet...
Now, if there is such a divergence of opinions about the validity of web 
sites aggression (if you prefer this to "hacking"), is it possible to go 
on and develop a "net-activist" strategy on this list ?

At this point, the purpose of this list should be defined more precisely.
At first, what is hacktivism ? What are its means of acting ? What are 
its purposes ?

>
>by giving importance to such non-events as hate web-sites defacements ( imo
>inappropriately referred to as hacking ), you are promoting these so-called
>hackers and by the same token giving hacktivism a meaning that i don't quite
>understand.

The point was not about web-sites defacement, but freedom of speech.
If some subscribers of this list tend to have fascist opinions, it could 
have been useful to make them understand it.


Parsifal

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