With the creation of Anonymous's latest Twitter handle @opmckinney in response to the #McKinney incident in Texas, I couldn't help but think what social influence these groups are gaining amongst a disenfranchised population. Hacktivism is becoming a technological religion.

If you have a large enough population with a grievance (perhaps perceived in some cases?) to law enforcement, central government agencies etc... then you have a flash point for protests which can easily escalate to rioting and, in an extreme scenario, revolt.

As Hacktivism gains popularity and credibility (particularly amongst younger generations), distancing itself from nefarious activities and focusing on social change and, as governments continue to disconnect themselves from their citizens you have this huge recipe for positive change or potential disaster.

Hacktivist groups may soon (or already) have the upper hand against intelligence agencies like MI8, CIA. GCHQ etc... If it get's to a point were a government cannot counter hacktivist groups that have gone rogue then it potentially becomes quite a mess if a large enough demographic is in favor of those groups activities; it gains momentum and becomes a movement.

In some ways I'm inclined to worry more about (domestic) cyber security than foreign attacks. As children grow up around programming, and those advances become ever more powerful, it's even more important to instill a moral compass to an easily influenced demographic. With budget cuts to intelligence agencies I wonder if it's possible to attract the type of human intelligence and skills required to counter large, organized cyber groups?

Technology has bought about a lot of change. Mostly for good, but it has also forced an increasing amount of informative transparency which in turn necessitates accountability.

Transparency, in turn, has exposed a lot of injustice. The reaction to which needs to be measured, justified and responsibly influenced by large hacktivist organizations.