Understanding Anonymous: The Culture Of Lulz
from the it's-not-an-organization dept
We've written a number of times about the not-really-a-group Anonymous, and just how little those who position themselves "against" Anonyomous understand what it is they're fighting against. But even for those who are "of internet culture," explaining just what Anonymous really is certainly can be difficult. Either you live it and you get it, or you don't. That doesn't mean that everyone who "gets" Anonymous agrees with Anonymous. Hell, even Anonymous doesn't agree with Anonymous much of the time -- which is part of the point. But for those who are used to arguing against a group or those with an established position, the entire concept of Anonymous is completely alien.Quinn Norton is putting together what looks to be a brilliant exploration of Anonymous and related efforts. The initial piece is the best I've seen to date in encapsulating what Anonymous is. The key point? It’s a culture. And, it's a culture with a long heritage of similar efforts that many people didn't get at the time, but there's definitely a (rather non-linear, of course) relationship:
The birthplace of Anonymous is a website called 4chan founded in 2003, that developed an “anything goes” random section known as the /b/ board. 4chan itself comes from a Japanese-language predecessor called 2chan, founded in 2001. Before that, the lulz and hacker pranking was alive and well in old-school IRC chat rooms, EFnet, and the 1990s hacker scene.Of course, those who don't get Anonymous still won't get Anonymous after this article. In fact, they're likely to be more confused, or more sure than ever that it's "just a bunch of bratty kids" or something along those lines. And thinking that works exactly to Anonymous' favor, which is part of the joke, in which everyone is the punchline.
But if you’re going back that far, add as influences Mondo 2000, and publications like RE/Search, and a billion shitty zines that were dead by 1996. But those all came from something, too.
Hacker culture, and almost all of computer culture back in the day is shot through with the Discordian edge of 1960/1970s counter-culture and Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s Illuminatus. So from there it’s the yippies, Andy Kaufmann, and the Situationists we need to first comprehend. Or do we head back to early 20th century absurdists of Dada? Or maybe we venture all the way to that olde booke of epic trolling lulze, Tristram Shandy?
We’re all the way to 1759 now.
Perhaps this means the 1960s Discordians are right, and there’s a Ha Ha Only Serious giggle that is cosmic in nature. That there is a part of reality, a force of physics, that is actually a Fundamental Sense of Humor. But the gravity we deal with can only be explained to an even larger amount of Dark Humor, woven into the fabric of the universe.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I have some for you.
When was the last time you beat your wife?
Did the people in the park ever press charges when you exposed yourself to them?
[citation needed] or it's just a bad trolling attempt
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Have you stopped beating your wife?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://boingboing.net/2011/11/11/spouse-abuse-humor-ad-1970s.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And when did you stop beating your wife?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Their actions have changed course in the past year because they're worried about going to jail.
Boring nerds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Welcome to the planet earth, where those with egos rarely agree on what time of day it is.
The *real* anonymous is like 3 guys at the most.
Being able to draft dorks- people who've longed their entire life to be in a club, any club, is not exactly rocket science.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
http://www.phrack.org/issues.html?issue=7&id=3&mode=txt
maybe you'll understand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
uh huh.
anyway, re-read what I wrote, Sparky. There is a very important fact in there about human nature, that you missed, and need to compute in order to recognize why it's easy to understand what and who Anon is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Had you considered it wasn't being adept at getting people to do the work, but it was giving voice to the same things the other people were feeling and suggesting a course of action that will be more effective than a letter to Congress or an Editorial page?
And I like how you keep posting as an AC calling Anons dorks who just need to fit in, so you seem well aware of what the hate machine does to people who just don't get it.
And hey on the upside if Anonymous is run by 3 guys, thats one more guy than owns the Tea Party. There are only 2 Koch brothers. Oh I forgot to mention, that qualifies the Tea Party as having known terrorist ties.
http://boingboing.net/2011/10/02/koch-brothers-paid-bribes-to-win-contracts-and-sold-petroc hemical-equipment-to-iran-despite-embargo.html
I prefer my secret club, mine stands for freedom... not sure what to make of the other club.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://cyclostat.bostonbiker.org/2009/09/22/files/2009/09/oh-fuck.jpg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So?
None of the boneheads in that photo get to officially speak as "Anonymous".
Starting to get it yet?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Are you starting to get it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
yea, "anyone" can make official statements this:
http://pastebin.com/RA15ix7S
It is very amusing to see the naivete of some of you.
cute even, yet still sad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You think they wrote nearly all 400 press releases?
As to statements from LulzSec and Anonymous -
They are Anons and do not speak for every Anon, and might be splintered and rejoined... only Nyan Cat knows for sure.
Think of me as being like Anonymous for a moment if you will.
I am at my heart just an AC, I posted here for a while as just AC. Then I started using the name TAC, and then I registered the name. Up until I registered the name, anyone could have posted calling themselves TAC - In fact someone still could, but without the trendy avatar. Someone might think that person was me as I sometimes do forget to login and the cookie with the AC version of TAC stored fills in the blank.
Anons are like ACs, you never know which one has the cream filling till you poke it.
Some ACs are industry shills, some are deep thinkers, but all are ACs. We judge ACs by the content of their message, and not by the name. Anyone can come here and be an AC, Anyone can be Anonymous... to know for sure is to judge the content of the message.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Rule of 5s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
In the words of Peter Pan - written by Carolyn Leigh
If growing up means it would be
beneath my dignity to climb a tree
I'll never grow up, never grow up,
never grow uuuuuuup, not me.
I won't grow up
I don't want to wear a tie
and a serious expression
in the middle of July
And if it means I must prepare
to shoulder burdens with a worried air
I'll never grow up, never grow up,
never grow uuuuuuup, so there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Your imagination, whimsy, belief you could change the world... all gone now.
Your nothing but a cog in a machine, doing the same things the same way they were always done and no spark to make you stop and ask why.
You grew up and gave up... I'm sorry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anon is not hard to understand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Having grown up with the cracker/hacking culture (in all it's forms) Anonymous is everything anyone wants it to be and everything you don't.
It's an IDEA not a group, its a meme not a gathering, its a conceptual take on the original virtuality and Plato's shadows.
Or it's none of the above. Though it could just be that person sitting across from you, that person you see fleetingly everyday and give a nod too, or that person who stares back at you in the mirror.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks to this article...
http://lulzalbums.tumblr.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Thanks to this article...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gn9-80ObGA8#!
"Remember, remember
The fifth of November
The gunpowder treason and plot.
I know of no reason
Why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot."
But what of the man? I know his name was Guy Fawkes, and I know that, in 1605, he attempted to blow up the houses of Parliament. But who was he really? What was he like? We are told to remember the idea, not the man, because a man can fail. He can be caught. He can be killed and forgotten. But four hundred years later an idea can still change the world. I've witnessed firsthand the power of ideas. I've seen people kill in the name of them; and die defending them. But you cannot kiss an idea, cannot touch it or hold it. Ideas do not bleed, it cannot feel pain, and it does not love. And it is not an idea that I miss, it is a man. A man who made me remember the fifth of November. A man I will never forget.
Or maybe its just for the lulz...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Demerits will be awarded for being that repetitious.
Not even enough sense to alter the wording, such a lack of imagination.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
because removing the speaker for them to try to divert attention to leaves... the message.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I missed a secondary demographic.
Really, it wasn't a criticism. I like lulz just as much as the next guy, provided they aren't at my expense of course.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Julian Assange.
Had he not made himself the poster child for Wikileaks, would there still be press coverage about whats in the cables rather than so much effort spent looking at him?
The message has become lost in a series of egos, plots, counterplots, and all sorts of things. Had the cables been released from behind the mask, would there have been as much distraction?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Interestingly, you have just described human civilisation for the last 10,000 years.
Please don't confused these years with the short intermissions within them of Spanish inquisitions, MICE (Money, Ideology, Conscience, Ego) worshipping, and the push for power by those who want to control everything due to inferiority complexes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"This is not a book in the current meaning of the word, this is libel, calumny, a spit on the face of art a kick in the ass of God"
His words in the 1930's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_%26_June
Anonymous are not really something that is new, it is a new name and it came to the limelight lately, but it had been going on for ages. That everything goes is not new, that search for freedom to express something has been going on for ages and surfaces at times, the revolt of the commons where some signs of it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Those OWS types who wander around in Guy Fawkes masks and try to act all serious about it just add to the laughter - no, we aren't laughing with you, we are laughing at you. A movie might have made you think you are relevant, but in the end, it was a movie about a terrorist. What a wonderful example.
The best part is that almost all of those historical groups died off because the people involved realizes that it was meaningless, and didn't really go anywhere. Enjoy the lulz, anonymous people, because sooner or later people stop listening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Even in your own post, you end up saying "he mob no longer calls for chaos in the streets, it calls for thruth on the internet" - you are stating the obvious that the mob isn't really a mob, it's a group.
The LOIC attacks on Mastercard and others really ended up showing the true nature of "anonymous", that it is in fact a fairly organized and structured group, with leaders who chose a target and led their people against them (and let them underlings take the legal heat).
They are also pretty much unsuccessful, see the current state of Wikileaks. Quite simply, all the whining in the world can't change the reality that if you want to play in the real world (and get money to pay for your play), you need to work within the societal norms or you will get cut out. A harsh lesson for the children of 4chan (and they are children, the demographic runs almost entirely in the 12-25 range), but they need to learn that the real world works on reality, no idealism or self-supporting bullshit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Weren't those American Patriots who had a little tea party considered terrorists by England?
Just sayin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Seriously, go read a goddamn history book about those that came before you, and get back to us when you do something that we won't forget by our next piss.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Our Freedom Fighters are your Terrorists, and our terrorists are your freedom fighters
Anonymous gets it, when citizens speaking out against their government become the 'terrorists' of the day (and they will in the US, just wait for it, it's already happening in other countries), then the only way to publicly criticize those in power is by being anonymous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Our Freedom Fighters are your Terrorists, and our terrorists are your freedom fighters
It's funny how Masnick has never picked up on this blatant hypocrisy; something that every person notices the first time they come here.
A blind spot that has most certainly become an achilles heel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Our Freedom Fighters are your Terrorists, and our terrorists are your freedom fighters
Don't even have to register to gain the benefit, thou others might assume your new mantle raising you to new heights.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Anonymous_coward
Blame /.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
When things are so one sided and the people feel they have no voice, sometimes it takes a single voice to rally people towards speaking up and taking action.
No one can name everyone involved in the birth of the US, because many of them were everyday people who were tired of what was happening to them and heard a voice saying we can make a change. We know the leaders and the mythology that surrounds them, but not the average person. Sometimes it is better to not have a leader for people to focus on, because the message is so much more important than the person who said it first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]