Reading questions for:
Manion and Goodrum, Terrorism or Civil Disobedience: Toward a Hacktivist
Ethic.
CS-80--Senior Seminar
Fall '01
Trevor Moss (with help filling in the form)
October 22, 2001
- Describe Manion and Goodrum's (for now on called M&G) definition of a
"hacktivist" or electronic political activist. How is this a form of
civil disobedience?
- According to M&G what to hacktivist aim to confront?
- What, according to M&G, is the difference between symbolic and
direct acts of civil disobedience?
- Describe how hacktivism can be described as a legitimate form of civil
disobedience.
- Why might hacktivism, if a legitimate form of civil disobedience, hold
harsh penalties as opposed to non-electronic forms of civil disobedience?
- Why might companies who try to privatize the internet be intimidated
by hacktivism?
- What is the difference between a hacktivist and a cyberterrorist? How
can one differentiate the two?
- Should the laws regarding hacktivism be loosened? Explain your
answer.
- How does M&G's notion of hacktivism fare under the various ethical
frameworks we studied in Chapter 1, in particular: Johnson's ``three rules''
(Ethics On-Line), Moor's ``reason within
relative frameworks'' (Reason, Relativity and Responsibility...),
his Just Consequentialism..., Brey's Disclosive Computer
Ethics, and Adam's ``feminist ethics'' (Gender and...) ?
Reading questions for:
Manion and Goodrum, Terrorism or Civil Disobedience: Toward a Hacktivist
Ethic.
CS-80--Senior Seminar
Fall '01
This document was generated using the
LaTeX2HTML translator Version 2K.1beta (1.47)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996,
Nikos Drakos,
Computer Based Learning Unit, University of Leeds.
Copyright © 1997, 1998, 1999,
Ross Moore,
Mathematics Department, Macquarie University, Sydney.
The command line arguments were:
latex2html hacktivist
The translation was initiated by Jim Rogers on 2001-10-22
Jim Rogers
2001-10-22