The article explains that when War Games was released it created a flurry of news articles and reports on if it could actually happen. So much so that it forced Congress to impose legislative acts regarding the internet. NORAD even had to come out and make a statement informing the public that a system of checks and balances are in place that present a "War Games Scenario."
To a filmmaker, this is the highest praise, starting a discussion about the themes in your movie that actually effect real world issues. The fact that a simple movie about government hacking can cause such a riot shows the publics anxiety about this unknown internet at the time. The internet was fairly new, for the public at least, and we did not know about it's true power. War Games showed the tip of the iceberg of what hackers really can do.
The older general in the movie represented the older generation. He was not embracing of the computer's power and wanted everything to be done the old fashioned way, with human involvement making the decisions, which is how it is always done at NORAD. Lightman and the tech guy at NORAD represented the newer generation. The tech guy showed that computers can take care of human error, and to some extent they can but the internet was in such a premature state that it would be irresponsible to base a system around that. Lightman showed the power of the internet in the hands of the teenager who knows exactly what they wanted to do.
The internet was a huge social anxiety, and I think it still is. The article describes it as a "hacker mystique" and I think that that is a completely accurate term. The fact that hackers have access to bank accounts, plane tickets, school grades, and government database, they can control the world. And when you control all of those, you do not want to be their enemy. The situation in War Games may not be completely possible with how NORAD is set up but it is still probable. And even then, hackers can find many other ways to control the outcome of something.
Today we still have that hacker mystique about us. 4chan with the click of a mouse can take down massive credit card company sites or find the address of any single person in the world. Get on their bad side and you will be in a world of hurt. Because of this, pushes have been trying to be made to get rid of the so called net neutrality, the fact that every piece of information on the internet should be treated the same and therefore the users should not be charged or discriminated based on what content they access. This of course flies in the face of 4chan and they backers of this act have been put on blast, so to speak, on the internet. I'm not sure how much the public fears the internet today, seeing as how it is ingrained into almost every aspect of our lives. I think the people that back acts like SOPA and similar ones are just like the General and fear net neutrality or they are using it as levereage to grab a profit with internet providers.
I am a strong supporter of net neutrality and I think that all information should be free. I understand that many social anxieties come from this debate and that social anxieties have been around since the birth of the internet, and I think they will always be here.
I agree with your points on the internet still being a source of social and cultural anxiety. I thought it was interesting that the article said that Wargames started conversations in Congress about regulating the internet. I thought the older general in the film was a perfect representation of how most people of that generation felt about the internet. I also agree with your points about the hacker mystique still existing today. The government has made huge strides in trying to control crime on the internet but it is still very difficult to catch these criminals, making them feared amongst the government and the public. I think there has been a lot downsides of the government trying to control the internet. I agree with you about net neutrality and that information should be free. I also think that in efforts to catch criminals, we are left with no privacy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that this movie was a great reflection of the cultural anxieties experienced in the eighties. Although the internet is still a threat today, I feel that it was even more feared when it was first introduced. As we've seen before, when people are unfamiliar with something, they fear it, which is exactly what happened in this film. The government relied so much on technology that they were completely oblivious to what was really occurring. I also agree with you that computer hackers have the capabilities to control the world. It's a scary thought to think that someone can easily access your bank account. I was sympathetic towards David in the film, however, because I did not consider him to be a true hacker. He encountered some serious problems from trying to hack into the game system, which was really not that bad. He was a typical teenager using his knowledge to have fun and did not intend to cause any harm, unlike most computer hackers. Unfortunately, not all hackers are like David. With new advances in technology, we must keep in mind that anything is possible.
ReplyDeleteThe internet is far less open as it was in the 80`s. The hacker kids that got busted in the 80`s got turned into today's security consultants for corporate bodies and government institutions.The internet no longer simply connect vital infrastructure, it is a source of all information. The proto-net we see in Wargames is tiny and it's primary security measure is that barely anyone is logged on. Today with thousands of users information is funneled more precisely and with the death of net neutrality those 80's prodigies now protect the banks they once hacked.
ReplyDeleteNicely done. Really good synthesis of the main points of the readings, larger social concerns, and your own observations. I'd really like to hear more about hour War Games hate though. I didn't know anybody hated this movie. Sometimes also not liking something can yield even more interesting and relevant analysis than if you like it--which actually might be the case here because clearly you get the point. But I'm all for a good, constructive and well-informed hate-on (eg my loathing of all things John Hughes. But for good reasons. Dammit.)
ReplyDelete