Counterculture, nowadays, is a way of making news that does not follow traditional media standards. These media have over the last twenty years undergone a considerable evolution due to the advent of the Internet and social networks, which have ensured an uninterrupted connection to the world. It’s become a lot easier for journalists to get hold of photos and videos without having to travel anymore. This has made information much faster and global for all media. A national newspaper will not concern itself just with national news but also with international items because it will, fairly easily, be in a position to get hold of the sources quickly. This, on the other hand, has led to news being made more noxious. News items last very little time, as soon as they come off the homepage or social media debates, they tend not to discussed, updated and examined in depth by the newspapers anymore. All that counterculture often does is provide people with information on a given topic in an unbroken and in – depth manner. Let’s take Libya, or the Syrian crisis because of the Turkish invasion. As soon as these topics are off the mainstream radar, if someone wishes to know more, they must find reliable, sources that are regularly and consistently updated, and the Internet is no guarantee. I think that counterculture is what was said earlier with the addition to other different angles. An example that I would associate with counterculture in Italy is that of Mastodon, a very active and lively Italian community that systematically pursues conversations and topics which do not necessarily appear on the front pages of La Repubblica or Corriere della Sera. Most of the time I waste online goes towards working out whether I will be able to trust that source also in future, without having to go backwards to check. Unfortunately, online Italian newspapers do not help because often a news item must be read on a number of pages to work out where it comes from and what value it may have.

Yes, for example that my age varies between 20 and 40?

Yes, I am aware of this. As I was myself the direct source and having established what some newspapers or journalists wrote, I can say that I saw above all how a news item develops. The item is promptly received by local newspapers which, however, turn out to be inaccurate, probably in order to move the information along more quickly and gain credits or have a name to come up with on larger newspapers. On the latter instead, the life of a news item is normally very short. In my case, it was an interesting “scoop” but not a serious one, it was a quirky piece of news; in pop culture the image of a hacker, especially of late, is something that sells well. After February 2018 I have not been excessively bothered by the press and journalists. The news item must be circulated quickly and you perhaps forgo its precise details, you decide to publish it to give some context, to make history.

Yes, the IT world and counterculture go hand in hand, but in a very attentive and scientific manner. The IT community has become highly male – dominated. In the last few years, at least as far I can tell, and this is a very partial and first – hand view, there has been at least an awareness that in the scientific world, and therefore also in the IT one, too few women are present, not enough is being done to create a non – toxic environment, open to everyone. Nowadays I see, though, that there is greater emphasis on this matter, on inclusiveness and this is very positive in my view, as well as being reassuring and comforting.

I studied maths and have a predilection for algebra, especially for the theory of groups and the Galois one. I really appreciated his theories and if I could, I would continue to study this field in depth. In actual fact, I am shifting into the study subject, always to do with maths. When I signed up to Twitter and needed to pick a pseudonym, I opted for Evariste Galois as at that time I had just completed the study of a theorem regarding his theory and this is why I picked him as my pseudonym. I find him an ‘unusual’ character, a full but short life. Probably, had he lived longer, I would never have graduated given all that he produced in just 21 years.

I’m not sure whether he would have been a good lecturer. Undoubtedly his theories are interesting, even today, and are still open.

There is often a distinction between white hat hackers and black hat ones as though this were one thing or the other. In my opinion, there is range of grey nuances that it is always worth studying, on a case – by – case basis. You try and make people see that cause and intent play an essential part which then leads to a given action; therefore, if in terms of laws in Italy, currently, as regards the law, not really on computer fraud but on unauthorized access, the motive “saving the world” is not taken into account, by accessing something illegally, you would have still committed a offence and it would be regarded as such. This is so because, although your motive was more than a just one, the law does not cover it. There are laws instead where the motives guiding you to perform a certain action may have an impact at judicial level on the judge’s decision because it is contemplated by the code. Which is the line between legality and illegality at IT level is a complex question, primarily because the Internet breaks down barriers. You cannot therefore be exactly sure of where something could become illegal. In other words, in which state could something become illegal? It is somewhat hard to understand, sometimes you don’t even know where a given server is located, and therefore you cannot know whether or not you are doing something illegal. Provided always that legality and illegality do not equal ethics and morals. As for knowing when to stop, however, this is a personal choice as it depends on why you are doing something. Even today there are groups of hackers who undertake activism actions in the knowledge that they are doing something illegal. People aware of what they are doing and who deliberately break the law are, i.e., the cases of Cappato, Rackete, the ship’s captain who led the boat to Italy knowing that there was in any event a controversial law against this. It isn’t always easy to be fully aware of what you are doing. So my advice is that if you are trying to do something, it’s best to find out what may fall within illegal access. With regard to how to tell a white hat from a black hat, however, let me repeat, I prefer shades of grey. There are those who give a merely commercial definition. The question is that if someone does not damage the infrastructure and tells you that there is a problem, perhaps they have broken the law from a technical perspective but they haven’t personally committed anything serious. A judge could, looking at Italian law, tell whether this law has been broken, but if you as the seller/producer, notice that no damage has been caused, there has been no leak, no data loss and the suggestion you had received was correct, you only think that you have only been made aware that there was a problem and, additionally, that you are being advised on how to solve it. If, however, someone downloads your database, uploads it online accessible to the public and sells it, you’d assess the judgement differently. On top of this, there is also an endless range of shades of grey as, the further to get into the field of activism, the more complex it is to understand whether it is just. You only need to think of the Assange case, which is full of nuances. To class it as either black or white I think would remove many points and food for thought on the history and work of this character.

The issue of digital rights is an open one as in actuality they are not recognised yet. The various democracies of the Western world are asking themselves how to manage the Internet, how to regulate it and, sometimes, how to limit it. Often you only look at your own target, if there is certain threat and I ask myself how to solve it. The easiest answer: I shut the Internet down. But, in actual fact, this doesn’t work as the Internet is not a purely national structure, although it could become so. If you regard the Internet as a global network, the matter of digital rights is a worldwide one, like human beings with the human rights’ chart. We know very well that there are countries who respect the rights of mankind and of others. I expect the same thing about digital rights, only that this will prove more difficult. Anonymity is a typical example. In dictatorships this is seen as a threat as it enables dissidents to say what they like. In Western democracies, however, the issue was not raised right from the advent of social networks. With these we have two effects: the first one is that we all join using our first and family names, this is a mistake however, the Internet was born with pseudonyms and there is no obligation to sign up with our real name. It can be handy, however, to use our first name and surname for certain areas (i.e. if I wish to open a Facebook page for my business). In this case there is a definite reason whereas, if I wish to be satirical, using my name and surname could be extremely restrictive. Then there’s the fact that the Internet is a recent thing. Apps and social networks are novelties which touch the entire population, but nobody has told us how these tools work. Sometimes they are even devoid of legislation or rules. Those attempting to tackle the problems connected with web services often concentrate on solving problems which regard and interest their point of view only, forgetting that the approach they are using could damage another section of the online community.

A chart that would be strictly based on human rights and that would be extended to digital ones. That digital rights could become part of the chart of human rights would be a potential solution. I think that getting the majority of world countries to agree is tricky. Even though this would be the best way. Another solution would be that those EU/Western countries where historically the strongest democracies are found, should not take hasty or wrong decisions, as it’s then more difficult to go back on them.

I believe that newspapers play an important role in this and I say it primarily as a reader. The publishing world should find a new way of tackling this market, which in the last few years has not rewarded them, if we look at sales and statistics. We are no longer obliged to read a news item in the newspaper, as there is perhaps a reliable Facebook account which provides real – time information. For this reason, too, the world of publishing and newspapers is in crisis and there is less care about contents. I think that sound journalism could be a cure for fake news but it’s hard to come out of the spiral of “non – credibility”. The lower the credibility towards the newspapers is, the fewer readers they will have and this will weigh down on the business revenue for the production of good – quality contents. It is sometimes enough for a newspaper to decide to opt for a ‘click grabbing’ headline to gain visibility. The approach used by many people on social networks is that of sharing without even reading the news item thereby creating a circle of misinformation. Furthermore, we are used to reading only those articles which, in the end, agree with us. It is therefore always difficult to understand who is spreading misinformation, it would be necessary to have more ethics on the part of publishers and journalists and, on the part of users, fewer shares and more reading. Fortunately, this is a trend which, according to early statistics, does not concern the “Generation Z”.

I’d do it again perhaps in different ways. If I notice that a website I’m browsing isn’t safe or an application I use is having problems, I still write to the developers. As I come from an open source philosophy, where there is a tendency to publish the code, the latter gets commented upon or improved by users, or at least by experts. With the developers and the Rousseau team, I pointed out a problem that needed solving. I have drawn a lot of reflections from this experience. The first one being that enduring the press and the media strain is rather heavy – going and the second one is that legality gets confused with ethics and morals. The Italian IT community is well informed, indeed the majority of problems arise with people outside the field. The latter would need to be adequately educated by those whose knowledge is greater.

My experience is that of a user, not that of a designer. I am only the final user, it’s you who are the experts, I can only complain when the key or the button doesn’t work.

I think of the 1960s culture, of hippie communities rather than naive ones. Nowadays in 2019, we see them in a very different way, we extract the best contents, a lot of the narrative has become pop and we experience it in a different light. If I were to pick a specific event, I’d think of the first approach I had with the term hacker, from a 1995 film titled “Hackers” with Angelina Jolie.

Nowadays, on Twitter, there is a hot debate on online anonymity. There has been a suggestion that ID documents be attached to social network profiles. When they talk about linking an ID document to a social network profile they are saying an awful thing. So let’s avoid pursuing this idea in order to fight online hatred, as this will not solve anything. Precisely because on Facebook many people use their first names and surnames.

I don’t think counterculture is dead, it changes and evolves. Also, we should perhaps talk of countercultures, in the plural. Recently social networks, especially Facebook, have been accused of killing it, I myself have widely criticized some choices.