Chapter 9 Law, Ethics, and Cyber Crime(电子商务课件-英文版)

犯罪学英文书单摘要：一、犯罪学简介二、英文犯罪学书籍推荐1.《犯罪学原理》2.《犯罪心理学》3.《社会犯罪学》4.《刑事法学》5.《犯罪与刑罚》正文：犯罪学是一门研究犯罪现象、犯罪原因、犯罪预防和犯罪矫治的科学。

它涉及法律、心理、社会等多个层面，旨在揭示犯罪现象背后的规律，从而为制定相关政策和措施提供理论依据。

在英文犯罪学书籍方面，以下五本书具有较高的推荐度：1.《犯罪学原理》（Principles of Criminal Justice）：这本书详细阐述了犯罪学的基本原理，包括犯罪现象的描述、解释和预测，以及犯罪预防和矫治的方法。

书中还讨论了犯罪学与法律、心理学、社会学等相关学科的关系，为读者提供了一个全面的犯罪学理论体系。

2.《犯罪心理学》（Criminal Psychology）：这本书主要研究犯罪者的心理特征、心理过程以及犯罪动机。

通过分析典型案例，作者揭示了犯罪心理的成因、发展和变化规律，为预测和预防犯罪提供了心理学依据。

3.《社会犯罪学》（Social Criminology）：这本书从社会结构和社会过程的角度探讨犯罪现象。

作者详细分析了社会经济地位、教育、种族、性别等因素对犯罪行为的影响，并提出了针对性的社会政策建议。

4.《刑事法学》（Criminal Law）：这本书主要介绍刑事法的基本原理和主要制度，包括犯罪构成、刑事责任、刑罚制度等。

作者通过对各国刑事法的比较研究，揭示了刑事法的演变规律和发展趋势。

5.《犯罪与刑罚》（Crime and Punishment）：这本书是俄国著名作家陀思妥耶夫斯基的经典之作，通过一个充满哲学思考的故事，探讨了犯罪与刑罚、道德与法律等诸多问题，对犯罪学的发展产生了深远影响。

高科技是福还是祸英语作文In the modern era, high technology has become an integral part of our lives, shaping our world in ways that are both profound and pervasive. It has revolutionized communication, transformed industries, and opened up new frontiers in science and medicine. However, the rise of high technology has also brought about numerous challenges and concerns, leading to a debate about whether it is truly a blessing or a curse.On the one hand, high technology is undoubtedly a blessing. It has made our lives more convenient and efficient. The advent of smartphones, for instance, has allowed us to access information, communicate with others, and manage our daily tasks with unprecedented ease. The internet has connected the world, breaking down barriers of distance and time, enabling people from diverse cultures to share knowledge and ideas.Moreover, high technology has also revolutionized industries. Automation and robotics have increased productivity and efficiency, while artificial intelligence (AI) has enabled machines to perform complex tasks withremarkable accuracy. These advancements have not only ledto economic growth but have also created new job opportunities in fields such as data science, cybersecurity, and AI ethics.In the field of medicine, high technology has also brought about remarkable advancements. With the help of modern technology, doctors can diagnose diseases more accurately, develop personalized treatment plans, and monitor patients' progress remotely. Technologies like genetic engineering and regenerative medicine are pushing the boundaries of what is possible in healthcare, offering hope to those suffering from chronic illnesses and disabilities.However, the rise of high technology is not without its downsides. One of the most significant concerns is the impact it has on privacy. With the proliferation of smartphones, social media, and surveillance technology, our personal information is constantly being collected and analyzed. This has led to concerns about data breaches, identity theft, and the misuse of personal data by governments and corporations.Moreover, high technology has also contributed to the rise of cybercrime. Hackers and other malicious actors can use advanced technologies to steal sensitive information, disrupt critical systems, or even launch attacks onnational infrastructure. This poses a significant threat to national security and the safety of individuals.Furthermore, the dependence on high technology can also lead to a loss of human interaction and social skills. People often prefer to communicate through digital platforms rather than face-to-face, which can lead to a decrease in empathy and understanding. This can have negative impacts on personal relationships and society at large.Moreover, the rapid pace of technological development has also created a digital divide, with those who have access to technology enjoying its benefits while those who don't are left behind. This divide can exacerbate social and economic inequalities, leading to further disparities in society.In conclusion, high technology is a complex phenomenon that brings both benefits and challenges. While it hasrevolutionized our lives in many positive ways, it has also created new problems and concerns. It is, therefore, important for us to approach high technology with acritical eye, weighing its pros and cons, and ensuring that its development is balanced and sustainable. We must also strive to address the challenges it poses, such as protecting privacy, combating cybercrime, and bridging the digital divide, to ensure that technology serves as a force for progress and unity rather than division and harm.**高科技：福还是祸？**在现代社会，高科技已经成为我们生活的重要组成部分，它以深刻而普遍的方式塑造着我们的世界。

Cyber Crime>Cyber Crime Essay:A crime that involves a network and a computer is known as computer-oriented crime or cybercrime. Such a crime affects the security of everything, might be a person, institution or even a nation. The computer is either used to commit a crime or is usually a target. Things that are hacked include information, privacy, data and it is often released out in the open to bring someone or some people down. Cybercriminals can be anyone, even your next-door neighbour or a high functional, advanced organization. Likeany other form of criminal activity, cybercrime is committed to gain excess money and finish the lives of people without murder.Long and Short Essays on Cyber Crime for Students and Kids in EnglishWe are providing students with essay samples on an extended essay of 500 words and a short piece of 150 words on the topic Cyber Crime for reference.Long Essay on Cyber Crime 500 Words in EnglishLong Essay on Cyber Crime is usually given to classes 7, 8, 9, and 10.There are various forms and types of Cyber Crime all over the world. Cybercrimes are committed by hackers not only for profit but for personal gains and with aims to damage a person, institution or nation. Internationally, both governmental and non-state institutions engage in cybercrime. Cybercrime is known as cyber warfare as soon as it crosses international borders.Most cybercrimes fall under two broad categories, namely, Criminal Activity that Targets and Criminal Activities that Uses.Other categories of cybercrime include, cyberterrorism which is is terrorism committed through a network or a computer, Financial Fraud Crimes, Cyber extortion which is when individuals ask for money in return of stopping malicious attacks on a system, Cybersex Trafficking, Online Harassment, Drug Trafficking, etc. Phishing, Malware Attacks, Denial of services and distributed DoS attacks are few of the most common examples of cybercrime.Online Harassment is something that is not considered as a form of cybercrime by most people, but it, in reality, is what happens in bulk. Under the category of online Harassment also falls the sub-category of cyber crimes against women, which is defined as ‘crimes targeted against women with a motive to intentionally harm them either physically or psychologically, using modern communication networks’.Tracing a cybercrime delinquent isn’t the most straightforward task to do because of their use of virtual spaces and attacks from various parts. It has been recorded that in 2018 The InternetCrime Complaint Sector received 351,937 complaints alone.Sine, everything you do on a computer or a network is recorded one way or the other, getting hold of the criminals isn’t impossible.Since many developing countries like the Philippines have underdeveloped laws regarding cybercrime and cybersecurity, it becomes easy for cybercriminals to use the underdeveloped laws of the developing countries to remain undetectable and anonymous.With the rise of the increase of technology, cybercrime has become a critical part of the society, and majors like that of Cyber Security have been established in many universities, hence, becoming an integral part of the academic system.You can now access more Essay Writing on Cyber Crime topic and many more topics.Since the age of computers and technology is rising every day, our lifestyles are becoming computer-dependent, and everything is stored on there. As the main aim of cybercriminals isthe breach of privacy, things become simpler for them.One major step towards prevention of cybercrime is the spread of Awareness. There are many individuals who aren’t comfortable using a computer, and hence they are more prone to cybercrimes. People don’t know how much and to what extent things can be done with the help of technology and computers; once, people are made aware of all these factors, a little wall of prevention can be created. Updated software and use of reliable anti-virus software are critical practices in preventing cybercrimes.The phrase, ‘prevention is bett er than cure might be old but has been relevant since forever and is relevant in today’s technology-dependent world full of all sorts of crime.Short Essay on Cyber Crime 150 Words in EnglishShort Essay on Cyber Crime is usually given to classes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.Crime synonymous with the use of computers and network as means or targets is known as computer crime or cybercrime. Cybercrime is not a new word for anyone living in the 21st century,but not many know in how many forms they are present.Some of the most relevant forms of cybercrime are online Harassment, even though some might not give too much attention to it, it is part of the heinous umbrella term. Drug Trafficking, Cyber Warfare, Cyber Extortions, etc. are a few other famous forms of cybercrime.The cybercriminal can either use a computer to commit the crime or have another computer as his aim. Most of these criminals commit cybercrimes for money, no matter the reason, their primary objective is to a breach of privacy.Since most people have their lives saved on computers, they need to be extra cautious, which will only be possible through education and Awareness.10 Lines on Cyber Crime Essay in English1. Crimes committed by using a network or computer is known as cybercrime.2. Cybercriminals either use the computer as a tool to commit the crime or aim the computer to commit the crime.3. Online Harassment, no matter what anyone says, is a significant and ubiquitous form of cybercrime.4. Most cybercriminals resided in America sinceAmerica’s development with the computer was faster than that of any other country, but now, no place is devoid of cybercriminals. 5. Cyber-crimes can bring down a person, an institution or even a whole nation with the breach of privacy.6. Cyber Criminals use underdeveloped laws of the developing countries to manipulate records and remain anonymous; hence laws need to be made stricter.7. Education and Awareness are the initials steps taken to prevent cybercrimes from taking place.8. One needs to have a reliable anti-virus service and have all their software updated if they want to prevent cybercrimes.9. Cyber Security has become anintegral part of the curriculum in developed countries in the past few years. 10. Anyone can be a cyber-criminal. They can be a well-structured organization or a novice hacker.FAQ’s on Cyber Crime EssayQuestion 1.How to prevent cyber crimes?Answer:The best way of prevention is by keeping everything updated and secure with a reliable anti-virus service.Question 2.How to file cybercrime reports?Answer:Almost all countries have a cybersecurity cell, and their contact information is available online easily.Question 3.Is Online Harassment Cyber Crime?Answer:Yes, it is; please report the individual as soon as possible.Question 4.Is it very hard to catch cybercriminals?Answer:Yes, it is hard to catch cybercriminals but not impossible.。

文献信息文献标题：Juvenile Delinquency in the Virtual World: Similarities and Differences between Cyber-Enabled, Cyber-Dependent and Offline Delinquents in the Netherlands（虚拟世界中的青少年犯罪:荷兰使用网络犯罪、依赖网络犯罪和线下犯罪的异同）文献作者：Josja J. Rokven等文献出处：《 International Journal of Cyber Criminology》,2018.12(1): 27–46.字数统计：英文3172单词，18497字符；中文5758汉字外文文献Juvenile Delinquency in the Virtual World: Similarities and Differences between Cyber-Enabled, Cyber-Dependent and Offline Delinquents in the NetherlandsAbstract This study examines similarities and differences between juvenile delinquents of self-reported cyber-enabled offenses, cyber-dependent offenses, and offline offenses. The study builds on past studies by examining a broad range of online and offline offenses among a national probability sample of Dutch juveniles aged 12-17 years old. Results show that juveniles who report both offline and online offenses have the most high-risk profile. Within the group online delinquents, juveniles who commit both cyber-dependent and cyber-enabled offenses have the highest risk profile. The results further indicate that cyber-dependent delinquents are a distinct group from online delinquents.Keywords: Online offending, cyber crime, cyber-dependent crime, cyber-enabled crime, risk and promotive factors.IntroductionSince 2007 police census data have shown a sharp decline in juvenile crime in the Netherlands (Van der Laan & Goudriaan, 2016). Because of this crime drop, the urgency to deal with juvenile crime seems to have decreased, and the focus has shifted to more specific forms of crime, such as high impact crimes. However, official statistics relate primarily to traditional offline offenses. One possible explanation for the observed crime drop is that juveniles have shifted from committing traditional offline offenses to online offenses (Tcherni et al., 2016). With the digitalization of society, new ways to commit traditional offline offenses have emerged, as well as opportunities to commit new types of offenses online. This raises the question as to whether ‘street criminals’ have gone online, or whether we are dealing with a new type of delinquent.Previous research distinguishes two types of online delinquency: cyber-enabled and cyber-dependent delinquency (Holt & Bossler, 2016; McGuire &Dowling, 2013). Cyber- enabled delinquency refers to ‘traditional’ offenses that are committed using Information Communication Technology (ICT), and includes acts such as online fraud, extortion, and online stalking. Cyber-dependent delinquency refers to offenses that can only be committed using ICT and that are primarily directed against computer or network resources. This includes acts such as hacking, distributing viruses, and orchestrating DDoS- attacks.In an attempt to better understand what kind of individual is involved in online delinquency, scholars have now started to examine correlates of online delinquency and their differences and communalities with correlates of offline delinquency. The majority of previous studies have limited their focus to either one or, at most, a small number of online offenses. Regarding cyber-enabled delinquency, research has focused on offenses such as bullying and online harassment (e.g., Kerstens & Veenstra, 2015; Raskauskas & Stolz, 2007; Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004), online child pornography (for an overview, see Babchishin, Hanson & Hermann, 2010), and digital piracy (e.g., Brunton-Smith & McCarthy, 2016; Higgins, 2005; Higgins, Fell & Wilson, 2006; Wolfe & Higgins, 2009). With regard to cyber-dependent offenses, most studies have focused on hacking (e.g., Bossler & Burruss, 2011; Khey et al., 2009; Yar, 2005a). Tothe best of our knowledge, only one study has focused on a broader range of online offenses, whilst also including offline offenses (Donner, Jennings & Banfield, 2015). Donner and colleagues found that online delinquents were often prone to offline delinquency as well. However, these findings are based on a sample from a specific population, namely undergraduate college students in the US. The question is whether their results can be generalized to a national probability sample of juveniles.In the current study, we build on previous research by first investigating the extent to which cyber-enabled and cyber-dependent delinquents differ from each other, and secondly the extent to which they differ from offline delinquents. Studying types of online delinquents and their similarities and differences with traditional offline delinquents is important, because if online delinquents are similar to offline delinquents, the same prevention methods could be used for both. However, if differences emerge within and between groups, different approaches regarding prevention and forensic treatment may be required.To study potential differences between cyber-enabled, cyber-dependent, and offline delinquents, we used the Youth Delinquency Survey (YDS), a cross-sectional self- reported study on a national probability sample of juveniles from the Netherlands (see Van der Laan, Blom & Kleemans, 2009). The YDS contains detailed information on both self-reported online and offline delinquency, and on risk and promotive factors that are related to traditional offline delinquency. Risk factors increase the likelihood of delinquency, whereas promotive factors decrease this likelihood. Determining the differences between cyber-enabled and cyber-dependent delinquents, and determining the extent to which online delinquents differ from offline delinquents, is done by examining these risk and promotive factors. The main research questions of this study are: What distinguishes juvenile delinquents of cyber-enabled offenses from juvenile delinquents of cyber-dependent offenses? What distinguishes juvenile delinquents of online offenses from juvenile delinquents of offline offenses?1.Theory1.1.Risk Factor ModelThe risk factor model is based on the (bio) social ecological model of Bronfenbrenner (1979).The general idea behind this model is that different domains influence the likelihood of antisocial and delinquent behavior (Farrington, 2003; Lipsey & Derzon, 1998; Loeber et al., 2008). The domains are generally organized into five broader categories: the individual, family, school, peers, and the community domain.A variety of factors have been found to increase the likelihood of delinquent behavior. Individual risk factors include impulsivity or defective moral beliefs (Agnew, 2003; Farrington, 2003), unstructured routine activities without the supervision of parents (Osgood & Anderson 2004; Osgood et al., 1996), and (excessive) substance use (Felson, 1998). Another important risk factor is self-control. Self-control has been demonstrated to be one of the most influential correlates of traditional crime, and has also frequently been applied to various forms of cybercrime (e.g., Bossler & Burrus, 2011; Higgins, 2005). Next, certain online activities may place individuals at risk for online delinquency. Past studies suggest that more advanced forms of cyber-dependent crimes, such as hacking, may require higher levels of computer skills (Bossler & Burrus, 2011; Xu, Hu & Zhang, 2013). A factor that may favor the development of these skills is gaming; juveniles, who frequently play online games, may develop more online skills, which are necessary for the (successful) pursuit of cyber-crimes (Xu, Hu & Zhang, 2013).In the family domain, poor parental bonding, little openness to parents, and the lack of parental supervision have been found to predict delinquency (Rutter, Giller &Hagell, 1998; Stattin & Kerr, 2000). In the school domain, poor academic performance and low attachment to school are examples of risk factors (Junger & Haen Marshall, 1997; Mason & Windle, 2002). The delinquent behavior of friends is considered an important risk factor in the peer domain (Warr, 1993; Weerman, 2011), and poverty and community disorganization are examples of risk factors in the community domain (Hawkins et al., 2000).In addition to risk factors, scholars have also identified promotive factors (Farrington et al., 2008; Sameroff et al., 1998). Promotive factors reduce thelikelihood of negative outcomes, and can counterbalance risk factors. As such, promotive factors can (partially) explain why not all juveniles that are exposed to risk factors become involved in antisocial or delinquent behavior (Farrington & Welsh, 2007; Loeber et al., 2008). Examples of promotive factors are strong social bonds, pro-social norms, parental support, and a strong attachment to school (Catalano et al., 2004).Research has shown that the accumulation of risk factors across multiple domains increases the likelihood of negative outcomes, including antisocial and delinquent behavior (Loeber et al., 2008; Stouthamer-Loeber et al., 2002). Studies on promotive factors show that an accumulation of promotive factors reduces the likelihood of negative outcomes (Farrington et al., 2008; Sameroff et al., 1998). Because promotive factors have the ability to buffer the negative influences of risks, scholars have also examined the cumulative impact of risk and promotive factors across different domains. Overall, the more risk factors and the fewer promotive factors present, the higher the likelihood that individuals engage in (serious) delinquent behavior (e.g., Stouthamer-Loeber et al., 2002; Van der Laan et al., 2010). As such, we expect juveniles who commit several types of offenses, both online and offline, the most serious delinquents, to be characterized by the highest risk profile(i.e., most risk factors and fewest promotive factors).1.2.The Current StudyIn this study, we first examine the differences between self-reported cyber-enabled and cyber-dependent delinquents on risk and promotive factors, distinguishing between factors in the individual, family, peer and school domain. Secondly, we test whether these online delinquents differ from offline delinquents on these factors. So far, research on online delinquency has mostly focused on a single type or limited number of online offenses, and/or are based on samples of student populations. Our study builds on and extends this body of literature by examining a broader range of cyber-enabled, cyber-dependent, and offline offenses among a national probability sample of juveniles. This way, we are able to provide a more comprehensive picture of different types of online delinquents, and their differenceswith offline delinquents. For this purpose, we focus on a variety of risk and promotive factors derived from the risk factor model, and also investigate the cumulative impact of these risk and promotive factors across different domains.2.Data and MethodsWe used data from the most recent wave (2015) of the YDS. The YDS is a cross-sectional, self-report study, conducted every five years among a national probability sample of Dutch juveniles, aged between 10 and 23 years. Within the YDS, a random stratified sampling method was followed. The initial sample was divided into 30 strata, defined by age and ethnic origin, followed by a random selection of juveniles from the Municipal Population Register. Ethnic minorities (Turks, Moroccans, Surinamese and Antilleans/Arubans) and juveniles under twelve (10 and 11-year-olds) were oversampled, as these groups tend to be less likely to participate in survey research.In the current study, we focused solely on minors aged between 12 to 17 years. We excluded juveniles under the age of twelve, as these individuals cannot be prosecuted by the juvenile justice system in the Netherlands. Young adults (18-to 23-year-olds) were also excluded, as these individuals are prosecuted by the adult justice system in the Netherlands. Between January and June 2015, a total of 2,207 juveniles, aged between 12 and 17 years, were approached to participate in the study. With an unweighted response rate of 61.8%, the final sample consisted of 1,365 juveniles. The sample was largely representative of the target populations. Juveniles from Turkish and Moroccan origin were less likely to participate in the study (response rates respectively 52.2% and 56.2%). However, this underrepresentation is small enough that the data can be considered representative for these groups as a whole (Engelen, Roels & de Heij, 2015). The data were gathered by means of Computer Assisted Personal Interviews (CAPI) and Computer Assisted Self Interviews (CASI), with CASI being used for questions about sensitive information, including self-reported delinquency.2.1 Dependent VariablesTo measure delinquency, we used 27 items on offline delinquency, and 10 itemson online delinquency. Offline delinquency items included whether or not a juvenile had been involved in any of the following type of offenses in the 12 months prior to the interview: violent offenses (7 items), property offenses (11 items), vandalism (5 items), distributing narcotics (3 items), and the possession of weapons (1 item). Online delinquency was measured using 10 items, differentiating between cyber-enabled (5 items) and cyber-dependent offenses (5 items). Cyber-enabled delinquency included: threats through text messages, e-mail or chat-box, threats through social media, not supplying goods that have been purchased online, not paying for goods that have been purchased online, and distributing sexual pictures of minors through the internet. Cyber-dependent offenses included: carrying out DDoS attacks, hacking without changing information, hacking and changing information, sending viruses, and changing passwords. For readability, we use the term ‘digitized delinquents’ to refer to juvenile delinquents of cyber-enabled offenses, and the term ‘cyber delinquents’ to refer to juvenile delinquents of cyber-dependent offenses.Juveniles were asked to indicate whether they had ever committed any of these offenses, and if so, how often in the 12 months prior to the interview. Juveniles were coded as delinquents if they reported committing at least one offense in the 12 months prior to the interview (one year prevalence). In total, 23.4% of the juveniles reported that they had committed at least one online offense in the 12 months prior to the interview (N=320). Of those online delinquents, 42.2% reported only cyber offenses (N=135), 32.2% reported only digitized offenses (N=103), and 26.6% reported both cyber and digitized offenses (N=85). These three groups were used to study the differences between cyber and digitized delinquents. To study the differences between online and offline delinquents, four groups were distinguished: a group of non-delinquents (N=796, 58.3%), a group only reporting online offenses (N=85, 6.2%), a group only reporting offline offenses (N=249, 18.2%), and a group that reported both online and offline offenses (N=235, 17.2%).2.2.Independent VariablesTo study the differences between (different types of) online and offline delinquents, we examined factors concerning the individual (self-control, alcohol anddrug use, gaming, attitude towards delinquency), family (emotional warmth, parental solicitation, parental control), friends (delinquent behavior of peers), and school domain (satisfaction with school). Unfortunately, the YDS does not include questions regarding the community domain.DiscussionThe purpose of the current study was to identify differences between digitized delinquents and cyber delinquents, and to examine differences between them and traditional, offline delinquents. For these purposes, we used data from the 2015 wave of the Youth Delinquency Survey (YDS), a cross-sectional study with a national probability sample of juveniles aged 12 to 17 years in the Netherlands, containing detailed information on both self-reported online and offline delinquency, and risk and promotive factors.The results of our study suggest differences between juveniles who reported only online offenses and juveniles who also reported offline offenses, regarding risk and promotive factors. Juveniles who report both offline and online offenses have the most high-risk profile, in comparison to juveniles who only commit online offenses and juveniles who only commit offline offenses. This finding supports the assumption that the risk factor model primarily provides an explanation for more serious delinquency (Loeber et al., 2008). Furthermore, evidence is found for a counter-balancing effect of cumulative risk and promotive factors. The more risk domains and fewer promotive domains that were experienced, the higher the percentage of juveniles that committed both offline and online offenses. This implies that for these juveniles, preventions and interventions across multiple domains are required. Within the group of online delinquents, juveniles who commit both cyber and digitized offenses had the highest risk profile.Our findings suggest that cyber delinquents are a distinct group from online delinquents. Cyber delinquents have the least severe risk profile: they report more promotive factors and fewer risk factors compared to other groups of online delinquents. Furthermore, cyber delinquents are the group least likely to also commitoffline offenses. These findings support the findings of Yar (2005b), and Bossler and Burruss (2011). They too found mixed support for the applicability of traditional theories to cyber-dependent delinquency. As such, our results imply that whilst traditional criminological theories can be used for explaining cyber-enabled delinquency, new theories may be needed for the explanation of cyber-dependent delinquency.Our finding that online delinquents, and cyber delinquents in particular, have the lowest risk profile in terms of risk and promotive factors may, however, indicate a lack of relevant risk factors to characterize these delinquents. To determine profiles of online delinquents we relied on the existing risk factor model (Loeber et al., 2008). This model was designed for understanding why juveniles commit offenses offline, but not necessarily online. The results of our study suggest that some of these risk factors do apply to self-reported online delinquency. Yet, in particular for cyber delinquents, we found few significant associations with the risk and promotive factors. This supports the suggestion that delinquents of cyber-dependent offenses are in need of a typological approach that specifically explains this type of delinquency (Capeller, 2001). However, instead of, as some have suggested, developing a new theory, an alternative approach is to expand the risk factor model to include a digital domain. Digital risk and promotive factors, such as social media use, digital activities, and programming skills, are often related to cyber-dependent delinquency (Bossler & Burrus, 2011), but are mostly missing in research on online delinquency. In addition, in order to verify whether our results hold when using data sources other than self-reported data, we recommend future studies investigate how police and judicial records can be used to distinguish offline delinquency from online delinquency. Furthermore, it would be of interest to explore whether alternative (online) sources, such as data from social media, can be used to measure or predict online delinquency.ConclusionIn conclusion, the results of this study provide a first insight into the differences between juvenile delinquents of cyber-enabled and cyber-dependent offenses, and intothe extent to which they differ from traditional offline delinquents. Based on self-report data from a national probability sample of Dutch juveniles, we showed that juvenile cyber delinquents are a distinct group compared to juvenile digitized delinquents and to juveniles who report both cyber and digitized offenses. Given that the prevention and treatment of juvenile delinquency is primarily focused on traditional offenses, it remains to be seen whether existing interventions are also effective in preventing juveniles from committing cyber-dependent offenses.Limitations and Directions for future researchAlthough this is the first comprehensive study on the characteristics of juvenile online delinquents using a national probability sample of juveniles, the findings and implications should be viewed in light of some limitations. First, the data we used are based on self-report data. Self-report data has the advantage that it supplies information on delinquency that is not known to the police or justice system. However, the use of self-reports also has limitations. For instance, juveniles maybe reluctant to reveal criminal activities, which may lead to an under-representation of more serious forms of delinquency (Weijters, Van der Laan & Kessels, 2016). Moreover, self-reports may be affected by respondents’ recall errors, if a long period of time since the delinquent act has elapsed (Junger-Tas & Haen Marshall, 1999). Second, the cross-sectional nature of this study precludes temporal inferences. As such, the various risk and promotive factors may not only cause juvenile delinquency, but they may also be the result of juveniles’ engagement in delinquency. It is feasible, for instance, that juveniles who commit offenses develop a more positive attitude towards delinquency. In addition, in criminological literature, there is an ongoing debate on whether peer delinquency is a cause or consequence of delinquent behavior (Weerman, 2011). To study temporal order, longitudinal data are required. Lastly, although many of the factors in previous research were also addressed in the current study, we knew little about the internet behavior of juveniles. In various studies, different aspects of internet behavior have been identified as strong predictors of online risk behavior among juvenile delinquents (Kerstens & Veenstra, 2015). With this in mind, werecommend future research specifically focuses on factors that are related to online behavior.中文译文虚拟世界中的青少年犯罪：荷兰使用网络犯罪、依赖网络犯罪和线下犯罪的异同摘要本研究调查了青少年犯罪在自述使用网络犯罪、依赖网络犯罪和线下犯罪中的异同。

大数据时代的隐患：机遇与挑战并存In the age of big data, the volume, velocity, and variety of data have exploded, revolutionizing the way we live, work, and think. With the ever-growing accessibility and affordability of data, its potential to transform industries and revolutionize decision-making processes is immense. However, alongside the remarkable opportunities that big data presents, it also brings a myriad of hazards that cannot be ignored.One significant hazard posed by big data is the issue of privacy. As more and more personal information is collected and stored, the risk of privacy breaches and misuse of data increases exponentially. Hackers and cybercriminals are constantly on the lookout for vulnerabilities in data systems, exploiting them to steal sensitive information or launch malicious attacks. Even well-intentioned organizations can fall victim to data breaches, putting the personal details of millions at risk. Moreover, the rise of big data analytics and predictive modeling has led to concerns about the potential for abuse. With the ability to analyze vast amounts of data andpredict behaviors, organizations can gain unprecedented insights into individuals' lives. This knowledge can be misused for discriminatory practices, such as targeting certain groups for unfair treatment or excluding them from opportunities based on flawed algorithms.Another hazard of big data is the ethical implications associated with its use. In the quest for data-driven insights, organizations may be tempted to overlook ethical considerations. This could lead to unethical practices such as manipulating data to fit a desired outcome or using data in ways that violate individuals' rights and freedoms.Furthermore, the sheer volume of data generated by big data can be overwhelming, leading to issues of information overload. As individuals and organizations struggle to process and understand the vast amounts of data available, they may miss important signals or fail to identify patterns and trends that could lead to valuable insights. Lastly, the dependency on big data can create a false sense of security. Relying solely on data-driven decisions can blind organizations to the need for human intuition and expertise. In some cases, data may not capture all relevantinformation or may be subject to interpretation and misinterpretation. Relying solely on data can lead to decisions that ignore important contextual information orfail to anticipate unexpected outcomes.In conclusion, while big data holds immense potentialto transform our world, it also brings a range of hazards that need to be addressed. It is crucial that we strike a balance between harnessing the power of data and safeguarding privacy, ethics, and human values. By doing so, we can ensure that big data serves as a tool for positive transformation rather than a threat to our society and wayof life.**大数据时代的隐患：机遇与挑战并存**在大数据时代，数据的数量、速度和多样性都呈爆炸性增长，彻底改变了我们的生活方式、工作方式以及思维方式。