Is it fair to compare terrorist groups to computer hackers?

[Deja Q]

Poll question: Is it fair to compare terrorist groups to computer hackers?

Microsoft recently spoke about a big need to make computers secure, equating hackers to Al Quaeda running around in the internet. :eyes:

I say it's insulting and patronizing to compare hackers to trained murderers.

It's triply so when it's Microsoft saying all of this about needing to be prepared and secure, trying to pretend it's the King of security when, in truth, Microsoft was late in the game after realizing way too late that its software openly begs to be misused, not to mention cheating in order to become the dominant player in the first place! Power (getting and keeping) means more to them than doing a good job.

That having been said, it's interesting how the computer world and our corporeal world share the same flaws...

[sui generis]

1. the problem with "equating" terrorists with (name your noun)

is that the very definition of terror involves violence and death.

Terrorism is violent crime, but not all violent crime is terrorism.

Once we understand that terrorism is not an act of war it's a lot simpler to categorize it first as international or ideological violent crime, and then to put other categories of crimes where they belong appropriately.

The danger in "equating" is that the meaning of terrorism gets changed. I might think that people who vandalize bumper stickers are terrorists, or people who drive down the street and yell "faggot" are terrorists, but the fact is, they're all criminals.

The kind of terrorist that practices violence against strangers in the name of a political or religious ideology is a particularly vile sort of criminal but a criminal nonetheless.

The kind of criminal who spoofs a web page or steals a credit card list - just a greedy selfish crook. By definition you cannot equate non-violent crimes with terrorism.

[parasim]

5. Actually...

The definition of terrorism includes the threat of violence.

ter·ror·ism     
n.
The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition



So, I'd say that yes, a hacker could potentially commit an act of terrorism if s(he) did something that was widely believed to be a threat of violence or force against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing a society.

Sure, it's a bit of a stretch, but it could happen.

[schyzo-nas]

2. It's funny to equate hackers to evil...

... when you are Microsoft considering that the first meaning of hacker is: a very skillful UNIX programmer.

[qnr]

4. Precisely (though not strictly Unix)

It applied to all of us that liked to twiddle bits in the old days, actually. Though I understand your point of the "first" meaning.

[Radical Activist]

3. No, terrorists are not that dorky

But hacking could be a serious problem beyond the run of the mill hacker.