Blog Discussion 2

Should "hactivists" actually cooperate with their respective national governments (as suggested by Milone), or should they develop technologies designed to secure the infrastructure from surveillance by any government, including their own?

I think it would be better if the hactivists can cooperate with the governments in order to prevent the cyber terrorist and criminal activities that will lead both to the infrastructure of the cyberspace as well as create threat and danger to civilians. Since more and more people, nowadays, are being involved in Internet businesses and activities, it is good for hactivists to jointly work with their governments to prevent illegal activities that are being carried out in the internet, both for their own safety as well as peoples’.

Is "hacktivism" a form of cyberpolitical participation that could support, or constrain, "democratization" in both the developed and developing worlds?

I think, it is not only a political involvement of hactivists to either support or constrain democratization, but also their involvement in the economic sphere. As we pointed out in the class the there two types of hackers; one that cooperates with any organization or government to secure their cyberspace, and one that penetrates through systems in order to get secret and valuable information.

The bad hackers are really big threat to any government or organization, because they might be hired by any terrorist organization or simply steel money through hacking in the Internet. Some hackers might work independently while others may work in-group pursuing their goals. Looking at both sides of hacktivism, I can say that good hackers are in support of democratization while the bad ones are on the opposite.