In the real world, if a man ran around a public building, pasting pictures of children being sodomised onto the walls, people would call the police and he would be put in jail for a long time. On the internet, his pictures are taken down, and he's kicked from the website (until he puts on a disguise and comes back).
In the real world, if someone broke into Sony's headquarters, stole tens of thousands of credit cards + account details and then drove away, a SWAT team and fleet of police choppers would be in hot pursuit. On the internet, the police find out a few weeks later, and none of them can do anything.
In the real world, if someone replaced a children's show with hardcore pornography, he would be immediately fired and face criminal charges. On the internet, he's just a prankster who spawned a funny meme.
In the real world, when there's someone caught shoplifting, shop security detains them and the police are called. On the internet, shop security doesn't even exist, and millions of people shoplift so often that it's the moral equivalent of not cleaning up after your dog in the park. So unenforced people aren't even sure it's a crime any more.
Hopefully you see my point. I value the uniquely uncensored nature of the Internet as much as the next guy, and I'm cautious of letting the stupidity of the modern social system seep into it. Internet laws/regulations should be handled very carefully to ensure they're not exploited.
But still, I don't understand people who believe the Internet should be an anarchy. A playground for scammers and spammers and blackhat hackers and pedophiles. If we accept that police should be around to deter criminals in real life (which I'm assuming you do), why shouldn't there be police on the internet to deter cybercrime?
And if you agree, why is there always such massive resistance to any attempt to regulate the internet? I understand that people are concerned about losing their anonymity, but you can't exactly expect to have your cake and eat it too. As long as everyone's anonymous, so are the criminals. If anonymity is really so important, why isn't it a serious issue in real life? You never hear about people passionately demanding the right to wear a balaclava at all times in public, or get a passport without having to give their real name and address.
The number of cybercrimes being committed is rising very fast, and their scale and complexity is ever-increasing. And I think it's our attachment to anonymity (which is really just an exploitable loophole of the Internet's design that we've all grown accustomed to, rather than a human right) that's paving the way for it. If there isn't some sort of international framework for catching cybercriminals put in place soon, the whole Internet will be at the mercy of 12-year-old kids with highly advanced botnets.
That's my opinion, anyway.
I'm interested to hear what you guys have to say, because I'm actually doing a thesis on this topic. So don't be afraid to disagree (as long as your counter-argument has a factual or logical basis).
In the real world, if someone broke into Sony's headquarters, stole tens of thousands of credit cards + account details and then drove away, a SWAT team and fleet of police choppers would be in hot pursuit. On the internet, the police find out a few weeks later, and none of them can do anything.
In the real world, if someone replaced a children's show with hardcore pornography, he would be immediately fired and face criminal charges. On the internet, he's just a prankster who spawned a funny meme.
In the real world, when there's someone caught shoplifting, shop security detains them and the police are called. On the internet, shop security doesn't even exist, and millions of people shoplift so often that it's the moral equivalent of not cleaning up after your dog in the park. So unenforced people aren't even sure it's a crime any more.
Hopefully you see my point. I value the uniquely uncensored nature of the Internet as much as the next guy, and I'm cautious of letting the stupidity of the modern social system seep into it. Internet laws/regulations should be handled very carefully to ensure they're not exploited.
But still, I don't understand people who believe the Internet should be an anarchy. A playground for scammers and spammers and blackhat hackers and pedophiles. If we accept that police should be around to deter criminals in real life (which I'm assuming you do), why shouldn't there be police on the internet to deter cybercrime?
And if you agree, why is there always such massive resistance to any attempt to regulate the internet? I understand that people are concerned about losing their anonymity, but you can't exactly expect to have your cake and eat it too. As long as everyone's anonymous, so are the criminals. If anonymity is really so important, why isn't it a serious issue in real life? You never hear about people passionately demanding the right to wear a balaclava at all times in public, or get a passport without having to give their real name and address.
The number of cybercrimes being committed is rising very fast, and their scale and complexity is ever-increasing. And I think it's our attachment to anonymity (which is really just an exploitable loophole of the Internet's design that we've all grown accustomed to, rather than a human right) that's paving the way for it. If there isn't some sort of international framework for catching cybercriminals put in place soon, the whole Internet will be at the mercy of 12-year-old kids with highly advanced botnets.
That's my opinion, anyway.
I'm interested to hear what you guys have to say, because I'm actually doing a thesis on this topic. So don't be afraid to disagree (as long as your counter-argument has a factual or logical basis).
