Linux now and when
- From: Mutant <mutant@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:13:17 -0700
This is posted without permission and hopefully without repercussions.
- Peace -
Don't Be a Tool
Benjamin Franklin said on founding the U.S. free public library system
"To pour forth benefits for the common good is divine."
Truth and Knowledge are fundamental principles for hackers. Hackers
abhor lies, FUD and academic knowledge restricted to a Privileged Few.
Nothing irritates a hacker more than reading a technical analysis
without supporting data. Information should be free - available for
all to draw their own conclusions. When told there are only two ways
to do something, hackers figure out a third based on their own
interpretation of available data. This creative, innovative mindset is
not popular with the mainstream - unless they think they can profit
from it.
We all know there are a plethora of definitions for the term "hacker":
old school; black hat; white hat; grey hat - hell, we've got more hats
than Dr. Seuss.
How can you define a term for a group that will argue any definition,
knowing such definitions to be limiting? Mainstream society usually
defines hackers as destructive kids who deface web sites or steal
credit cards - criminals. Mainstream security companies and government
may soon have a new definition: "tools".
Sadly, many hackers are unwitting tools, blindly following the
proddings of the security industry. Prime example was the recent
"Defacer's Challenge", a supposed competition to name the top defacing
group, the prize 500mb of web hosting and a free domain name. Oh, yes
- and bragging rights to being known as the top defacer.
Who benefited from this "challenge"? The hackers? Any hacker who can't
figure out how to get a paltry 500mb of storage and a domain name
should just give it up right now. As Deep Throat advised Bob Woodward
during Watergate: "Follow the money." ISS - a company that sells
security products and services - led the pack by inflating the
importance of the Defacer's Challenge, prompting many others in the
technology field to desperately seize the opportunity to hype products
and services. The hype got to the point that even those who knew this
to be of little consequence were forced to address the so-called
"threat".
Security marketing people just love when hackers reinforce the
stereotypical image that they are a threat to society. This helps sell
articles, services and products to a fearful public.
People tend to fear what they don't understand and this fear is often
manipulated to control the masses. A few decades ago, it was feared a
few super computers would rule the world, eliminating free choice.
This was demonstrated in science fiction movies like "Demon Seed" and
"Colossus: The Forbin Project". Even the classic "2001: A Space
Odyssey" portrayed the dangers of having computers in control. "Man's
greatest invention could be Man's greatest mistake."
Computers are now as common as the household TV. People feel reassured
that they have achieved some control over computers. After all - the
term "personal computer" connotes personal control. Yet now people are
conditioned to fear losing control - if they ever had it - to
nefarious hackers. The boogieman has shifted from domination by
computers to domination of computers by hackers.
Who is really threatened by hackers? Assuming a "hacker" is one who
desires the free flow of information, it isn't hard to recognize who
would feel threatened by this: those who want to control the masses
such as government and Big Business. Although the U.S. was founded on
the principles of freedom, it is rapidly regressing to a repressive
government supporting business monopolies.
The Powers That Be would have one believe that hackers are a threat to
the common good - "they'll steal your credit card! they'll steal your
identity - your very soul!!" What are they really afraid of - that
hackers might free people from the thumb of monopolies like the RIAA
and MPAA? Hackers represent freedom and people now, more than ever,
are willing to relinquish freedom for the false sense of security they
are told repressive legislation such as the U.S. Patriot Act or the
DMCA will bring. People - especially in the United States - now seem
to be experiencing doubts about the necessity of information and the
importance of freedom. They are being conditioned to fear technology
innovation that isn't controlled by a sanctioned source.
The RIAA and MPAA is rapidly losing the fight to control file sharing
and is now resorting - with the cooperation of the U.S. government -
to instill fear by threatening freedom in the form of lawsuits.
Instead of holding on to an archaic (though highly profitable)
distribution mechanism, they should move with the times and develop
technologies more suited to today's culture. People don't want to be
forced to buy an entire CD of music when they only like 2 songs and
there is no reason why they should be forced to.
Technology hasn't eliminated free choice. On the contrary - it has
enabled wider choices. Where once competition was limited to local
merchants and their distribution methods, vendors now have to compete
with a world-wide market. Don't like the price your local car dealer
wants for a car? Just search on the Internet to find it cheaper and
with the options you want.
Those who seek to control society are now desperately trying to
control the Internet. Technology is being classified as "good" or
"bad", the latter including anything that is bad for government and
business. As with any tool, technology itself is ethically neutral.
It's value to society as a whole depends on how it's used. Those in
the security field are accustomed to viewing firewalls and Intrusion
Detection Systems as "good" - they keep the bad guys out. Yet in
countries with repressive regimes, such as China, they are used to
control information so people only hear what the government deems
appropriate. Something "good" can be equally "bad" depending on how
it's used.
Technology has simply permitted us to accelerate what we were already
doing as a whole: good, bad or indifferent. Yes, bad guys will use
technology to facilitate their actions. They probably use telephones
as well, yet we understand the benefits of telephones to society
outweigh the threat to society.
Hackers become tools of the system when they confirm the stereotype of
being a threat to the common good. Fight the real enemy - the
monopolies dictating how and in what format we can receive music and
movies. The governments that want to censor our information input and
enact laws that make criminals out of researchers. Hackers can help by
developing technology that will make it increasingly futile for
control methods to be effective.
If you don't have the technical ability to develop such technology,
you can still help by supporting those who do. Free technology
resources are rapidly disappearing as their operators surrender to the
desire to actually make a living. If you can't financially support the
people developing free technology, you can write your legislators and
tell them how you feel about repressive legislation.
In closing , consider this quote from Vinton G. Cerf:
"The Internet is one of the most powerful agents of freedom. It
exposes truth to those who wish to see and hear it. It is no wonder
that some governments and organizations fear the Internet and its
ability to make the truth known."
If you can't be part of the solution, don't be part of the problem.
Don't be a tool.
..sioda.
<sioda at nmrc dot org>
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Help finding old source code
- Next by Date: Ex Windows Slave
- Previous by thread: Re: Help finding old source code
- Next by thread: Ex Windows Slave
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
