On Anonymous

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6
 

So you can't get them to turn on each other because they don't know each other? Oh, but they do. Wasn't there an article not so long ago about an Anonymous Civil War, and some twit threatening to expose the IP addresses of the other twits? I think this reveals that Anonymous can, in fact, be taken down IF you go after the ringleaders rather than the grunts first, because apparently the other Anonymous members aren't so anonymous to them...

I applaud Clipclop for speaking out against Anon. I hope they and all their supporters will, despite disagreeing with what he says, "die to defend his right to say it".

Or you could, you know, just attack him personally and refuse to listen to the reasons he gives for hating anon solely *because* he hates anon...

P.S. Here's to us all going meta and using free speech to defend free speech's advocates as they attack the free speech of the "enemies" of free speech!

Clipclop:

Shamus Young:
Experienced Points: On Anonymous

Shamus considers the Anonymous phenomenon.

Read Full Article

And again you sympathize with a group of bullies. What is it with the escapist and going head over heels to defend the name of anonymous? Are you part of the collective? Do they have you scared enough that you can tackle the real issues they impose?

Seriously, I'm tired of these lopsided arguments you people keep coming up with to shine them as "the good guys" its sickening. And guess what? if you even listen to the voice of your readers in the forums, you will see they aren't buying it any longer.

You do realize you're doing exactly the same thing by branding all of Anonymous as "the bad guys," right?

The whole thing is pointless. Anonymous is a lot of different people with a lot of different aims. We can't even be sure most of those incidents were engineered or performed by the same people. You also make the mistake of confusing Anonymous on 4chan with Anonymous the hacker collective. There may be overlap, but they're not all the same people, and they certainly don't have the same goals. The only thing you do with this polarization is make yourself look na´ve.

Retosa:
Alright, I had a nice long post about what Anonymous is on page... 3 or 4, I forget.

I read it, and responded to it, I think.

Retosa:
Either way, Anonymous did NOT start out claiming noble intent. The original intent of Anonymous was always "For the Lulz". The "noble" side of Anon came about after Operation Chanology/Project Chanology.

You're probably right. I remember there being a kind of perceived nobility to going after CoS, but sitting here and thinking about it, I suspect that came from the media coverage of them, and not from within.

Retosa:
Also, interestingly enough, there are certain core groups within "Anonymous", groups that know each other. Yet, what I find hilarious is that just because its easy to tell that, that instantly "Anonymous" should all of a sudden NOT be "Anonymous" anymore. A group of people who were already friends all join the Anonymous mob, and have ideas that the mob takes up. They do this multiple times through carefully crafting their ideas and posts so that the mob will take up their cause. This gives them the ability to direct the mob toward their goals. All of a sudden, these people are the "CORE LEADERZ OF ANONYMOUS!", which for some reason, means "Anonymous" has a core leadership? Give it a rest, the only reason Anonymous seems coherent is because once the mob takes up a cause, it rushes forward blindly and makes sure that the cause is filled with hilarity. Usually because the results will ENSURE everyone gets lulz, whether or not the cause is righteous or not doesn't matter. And at any time, the mob can decide they don't want to take up the cause.

In information that came out during the schism, it was always about a sub-faction within Anon that had actual control in the movement.

Anon prided itself on being a completely decentralized group, massive, amorphous, and, as a result, invincible. But, since Scientology that's proving to be simply not true. We'd been hearing rumors about ShadowAnons basically from the moment anyone cared about the movement, people who actually had control over the movement, as ridiculous as that may sound, and the schism last month finally gave us, not just a concrete structure, but a lot of insight as well.

Rather unsurprisingly there was always a core leadership structure, people who actually had control over the movement. They directed action in the IRC servers for the group as a whole, and while there were some false starts that occurred without their control, by in large they were responsible for the relative coherency of Anon's actions.

Retosa:
Anonymous does not want to control the actions of Anonymous. Some "spokesanons" like to try to make sure that "Anonymous" doesn't get blamed for shit they didn't do, and will say "Anonymous did it" or "Anonymous didn't do it", but as has been noted, Anonymous can be literally anyone. The main hackers that tend to start up certain operations and follow specific ideals may not have done it, but that doesn't matter. Anonymous shouldn't be considered a group. It's a blanket term for anyone who doesn't want their identity revealed. And if you don't want your identity revealed... Why not hide behind the wall of Anon?

And while this would almost make sense, the fact of the matter is, Anonymous refers to an anonymous (keep track of capitalization here) group that maintained (until fairly recently) a relatively coherent pseudo ideology. This has changed since the schism, but still.

Anonymous published press releases through a server based out Russia. These are, by necessity, not the actions of a bunch of disorganized malcontents. This is the structure of a genuine organization, whatever they like to brand themselves as.

I tend to think of Anonymous as the internet Batman. He does things his own way and has his own line of justice, but in the end of Dark Knight, he was made out to be a criminal. I wonder, if it wasn't Anonymous that hacked Sony, I wonder if the real Anonymous could find these hackers and bring them to light so they can be arrested. I'm sure people would have a much more positive opinion of Anonymous if they did stuff like that.

Grabbin Keelz:
I wonder, if it wasn't Anonymous that hacked Sony, I wonder if the real Anonymous could find these hackers and bring them to light so they can be arrested. I'm sure people would have a much more positive opinion of Anonymous if they did stuff like that.

This part of your post I agree with wholeheartedly.

Barring a truly foolproof way of un-traceably transferring money over national borders that allows both the giver and receiver to exchange money in subpoena-proof anonymity, it would be impossible for them to turn a profit.

BitCoins fit this definition. They aren't impossible to trace, but prohibitively difficult. They're already being used as the standard currency of an online black market site I won't mention by name here, but where people openly trade drugs and even have persistent user accounts and accumulate seller feedback.

Clipclop:

Shamus Young:
Experienced Points: On Anonymous

Shamus considers the Anonymous phenomenon.

Read Full Article

And again you sympathize with a group of bullies. What is it with the escapist and going head over heels to defend the name of anonymous? Are you part of the collective? Do they have you scared enough that you can tackle the real issues they impose?

Seriously, I'm tired of these lopsided arguments you people keep coming up with to shine them as "the good guys" its sickening. And guess what? if you even listen to the voice of your readers in the forums, you will see they aren't buying it any longer.

*Frowns in confusion and rereads the article*

I think you're being mislead somewhat by something else or your own bias, nowhere does he state that Anonymous are 'good guys'. He's talking about how the group functions and how they likely aren't responsible for the PSN attack.

Ultimately only mild observations can be made about them anyway, so I don't know why people would assume that they're inherently good or evil either way.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here