Anonymous IS an ideology. Read it up: Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess, V for Vendetta by Alan Moore.
"Welcome to earth yourself. Perhaps you might want to open your eyes and start paying attention, rather than just buying the lines you are fed."
This from an anonymous coward that bought a lot of lines in an article and omitted one very important word I used for describing Anonymous - organized. I never denied that anonymous is a group. I just pointed out that they are not an organized group - Anonymous is not "run by a very small group of people" and you will not change my mind without some evidence. And no - one FBI honeypot scheme that caught Sabu and a few of his friends is not evidence. He was a part of a hacking group that has a similar agenda to Anonymous and that's about it; correlation does not imply causation.
If anything - all these hacker groups are probably viewing Anonymous as noobs with LOIC cannons and are not eager to be associated with "noob hacks" and "script kiddies".
Also - we are not suggesting that Anonymous is "flat and random" (what does that mean anyway? A total polar opposite to a pyramid power structure? We're doing black&white now?) - it's more similar to a torrent swarm with a tracker: there are directives but are handed on in a crowdsourced way in a contrast to the power structure you suggest).
You see - I don't buy lines;
I do this:
1. read them,
2. doubt them,
3. check them,
4. un-FUD them,
5. check them again,
6. compare them.
Now if some media site (e.g. this blog) gains my trust with repeated checks of news sources and quoting them for me to check (which I still do), I'll read that site more often. But if they try to manipulate me (e.g. Michael Moore documentaries - I like his agenda but not the way it's conveyed to the audience) they'll lose a bit of my trust.
And who are you to be seated high up there and look down on me, telling me what the REAL truth is? I'm from Europe, my 50 liter fuel tank makes my wallet up to 70 € lighter (1,343 €/liter) and you are telling me to open my eyes? Condescending is the word I was searching for...
"It's a group of people with the same goals, to perpetrate illegal acts, to hack systems, and to cause problems for companies that oppose their points of view."
What illegal acts? Illegal where? DDOS attacks are not illegal everywhere... Hacking websites was happenening long before hackers got an umbrella group to hide in. They are causing problems for companies that oppose point of view of the masses - not that individual hacker. That is called civil disobedience, imo.
"CNN even quotes "Barrett Brown, who identifies as an Anonymous spokesman" - again, why would a flat, loose group have a spokesman, or have anyone who feels they are a spokesman?"
Why would you believe CNN or Barret Brown? Find sources of that news, compare it with other sources of similar news and voila - (like someone up the comments put it) anonymous has numerous mouths, hands, eyes... and brains. Anonymous is as organized as ants are. (and before you jump and cry "Ants ARE organized!!", I urge you to read up on self-organization patterns. Here, we're talking of organization top(leaders)-->bottom(e.g. LOIC users))
"You don't want to do the time? Don't do the crime."
Sure. Because saying/writing anything could be illegal anywhere (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lese-majesty).
(Not an evolution fan? Ok - they, khm, recreate themselves over and over again, to get closer to perfection the big kahuna in the sky wants them to be. Like evolution, ehm, recreation of the bible.)
Lulzsec is effectively a subset of the anonymous leaders"
You should get that plugin that reads your comment out loud before you post it. If nothing else - shills would learn to read. Subset, really? I am a subset of semi-anonymous group called the internet. So is Anonymous. Or FBI. Anyone with an IP, actually. Obviously I am an organized group of a subset of 1.
Technically, everything happening at this exact moment (as we perceive it) is already the past. For example - everything you see, happened in the past - distance-to-object/299792458 m/s. Taking moon for example; wee see the moon as it is in the past, or "exactly" 384400000/299792458=1,282220381941696 seconds in the past.
:)
Aren't hats defined along these lines:
- black hat - hackers that use their hacks for their own gain (monetary? e.g. 0-day exploit sales)
- white hats - working with the company or at least asking for permission
- grey hats - same as white, but not asking for permission and sometimes ridiculing the company by exposing the hack (so, not working with the company but not selling or extorting with that exploit)
Lulsec are not selling 0-day exploits, are they? I see them as grey. Like Adrian Lamo, before FBI informant days.
Jester seems white. But he also could be viewed as grey.
Do you peddle free stuff? Android market has around 70% of free apps. It's not really news that a lot of it is garbage - check github or sourceforge. This is how open source system works.
not even that - it is like google giving you an address of a shop that makes things you search for, for a very low cost. When everyone owns a 3d printer (replicator) this will become true.
"Fact is he still believes that wikileaks is important, and was a 'game changer' that is actually not the case, wikileaks had and is having virtually zero effect, it has not caused anyone to do anything differently, or anyone fired or punished.. "
Wikileaks was a flop? In what way? Like Internet is a flop until these pesky google engineers implement gimme-money-many-times-for-the-same-horrible-service techy thingy on the internet, that will save the content industry (?) and with that the world!! It seems your bubble does not include news from... I don't know, the world? Middle east? Green revolution? Wikileaks ofcourse had nothing to do with that - it was all twitters fault that these strange men with strange beards are making your fuel more expensive!
Hidden agenda? Clearly. His agenda is truth. I know - it is horrible - this truth thingy. You can't change it, it's stuck in its ways and that has to be changed. It would be so much easier to manipulate truth if only we would have a tool that would give power to select people for replacement of these pesky facts with something nicer. Hmmm, maybe Jacob Appelbaum could help - he has so much experience in these things and he looooves USA!
Actual facts about your statement:
1. You are not taken seriously because your english is worse than mine (and my native language is not english).
2. You could have been taken more seriously if you had an account here.
3. Stating your opinion on actual affairs does not make your statement the truth. If you do know that - then you're just seeking attention and an emotional response to further devaluate the debate (troll)
On the post: Guess What? Copying Still Isn't Stealing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This from an anonymous coward that bought a lot of lines in an article and omitted one very important word I used for describing Anonymous - organized. I never denied that anonymous is a group. I just pointed out that they are not an organized group - Anonymous is not "run by a very small group of people" and you will not change my mind without some evidence. And no - one FBI honeypot scheme that caught Sabu and a few of his friends is not evidence. He was a part of a hacking group that has a similar agenda to Anonymous and that's about it; correlation does not imply causation.
If anything - all these hacker groups are probably viewing Anonymous as noobs with LOIC cannons and are not eager to be associated with "noob hacks" and "script kiddies".
Also - we are not suggesting that Anonymous is "flat and random" (what does that mean anyway? A total polar opposite to a pyramid power structure? We're doing black&white now?) - it's more similar to a torrent swarm with a tracker: there are directives but are handed on in a crowdsourced way in a contrast to the power structure you suggest).
You see - I don't buy lines;
I do this:
1. read them,
2. doubt them,
3. check them,
4. un-FUD them,
5. check them again,
6. compare them.
I admit, it's easier if you don't have to weed out the lies... (A law against lying on the news)
Now if some media site (e.g. this blog) gains my trust with repeated checks of news sources and quoting them for me to check (which I still do), I'll read that site more often. But if they try to manipulate me (e.g. Michael Moore documentaries - I like his agenda but not the way it's conveyed to the audience) they'll lose a bit of my trust.
And who are you to be seated high up there and look down on me, telling me what the REAL truth is? I'm from Europe, my 50 liter fuel tank makes my wallet up to 70 € lighter (1,343 €/liter) and you are telling me to open my eyes? Condescending is the word I was searching for...
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: Re: Just a simple point...
What illegal acts? Illegal where? DDOS attacks are not illegal everywhere... Hacking websites was happenening long before hackers got an umbrella group to hide in. They are causing problems for companies that oppose point of view of the masses - not that individual hacker. That is called civil disobedience, imo.
"CNN even quotes "Barrett Brown, who identifies as an Anonymous spokesman" - again, why would a flat, loose group have a spokesman, or have anyone who feels they are a spokesman?"
Why would you believe CNN or Barret Brown? Find sources of that news, compare it with other sources of similar news and voila - (like someone up the comments put it) anonymous has numerous mouths, hands, eyes... and brains. Anonymous is as organized as ants are. (and before you jump and cry "Ants ARE organized!!", I urge you to read up on self-organization patterns. Here, we're talking of organization top(leaders)-->bottom(e.g. LOIC users))
"You don't want to do the time? Don't do the crime."
Sure. Because saying/writing anything could be illegal anywhere (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lese-majesty).
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: What happens next? Evolution
(Not an evolution fan? Ok - they, khm, recreate themselves over and over again, to get closer to perfection the big kahuna in the sky wants them to be. Like evolution, ehm, recreation of the bible.)
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: Re: Re:
You should get that plugin that reads your comment out loud before you post it. If nothing else - shills would learn to read. Subset, really? I am a subset of semi-anonymous group called the internet. So is Anonymous. Or FBI. Anyone with an IP, actually. Obviously I am an organized group of a subset of 1.
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Attacking The Hacker Hydra: Why FBI's LulzSec Takedown May Backfire
Re: Re: Re: Re:
:)
/splitting nano hair
On the post: Why LulzSec Was Un-Hackable, And Why That's A Good Thing
Re:
- black hat - hackers that use their hacks for their own gain (monetary? e.g. 0-day exploit sales)
- white hats - working with the company or at least asking for permission
- grey hats - same as white, but not asking for permission and sometimes ridiculing the company by exposing the hack (so, not working with the company but not selling or extorting with that exploit)
Lulsec are not selling 0-day exploits, are they? I see them as grey. Like Adrian Lamo, before FBI informant days.
Jester seems white. But he also could be viewed as grey.
On the post: Key Techdirt SOPA/PIPA Post Censored By Bogus DMCA Takedown Notice
Re: Re: Reinstated
...because ACs always have a constructive debate.
...because you never used logical fallacies.
See what I didn't do there? :)
On the post: Key Techdirt SOPA/PIPA Post Censored By Bogus DMCA Takedown Notice
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Entertainment Industry Embraces New Business Model: Suing Google For Third-Party Android Apps That 'Promote Piracy'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Entertainment Industry Embraces New Business Model: Suing Google For Third-Party Android Apps That 'Promote Piracy'
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: How To Turn A Legitimate Buyer Into A Pirate In Five Easy Steps
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: RIAA/IFPI Explored Possible Lawsuit Against Google For Not Ranking iTunes Above Pirate Bay
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Dear USTR: Want Other Countries To Sign Your Trade Agreements? Stop Letting Hollywood Write Them
Re: Re:
On the post: Dear USTR: Want Other Countries To Sign Your Trade Agreements? Stop Letting Hollywood Write Them
Re: Re:
On the post: Wikileaks Denied A Speaking Opportunity At UN Conference About Wikileaks?
Re: Lets Face facts
On the post: Wikileaks Denied A Speaking Opportunity At UN Conference About Wikileaks?
Re: Re:
Wikileaks was a flop? In what way? Like Internet is a flop until these pesky google engineers implement gimme-money-many-times-for-the-same-horrible-service techy thingy on the internet, that will save the content industry (?) and with that the world!! It seems your bubble does not include news from... I don't know, the world? Middle east? Green revolution? Wikileaks ofcourse had nothing to do with that - it was all twitters fault that these strange men with strange beards are making your fuel more expensive!
Hidden agenda? Clearly. His agenda is truth. I know - it is horrible - this truth thingy. You can't change it, it's stuck in its ways and that has to be changed. It would be so much easier to manipulate truth if only we would have a tool that would give power to select people for replacement of these pesky facts with something nicer. Hmmm, maybe Jacob Appelbaum could help - he has so much experience in these things and he looooves USA!
Actual facts about your statement:
1. You are not taken seriously because your english is worse than mine (and my native language is not english).
2. You could have been taken more seriously if you had an account here.
3. Stating your opinion on actual affairs does not make your statement the truth. If you do know that - then you're just seeking attention and an emotional response to further devaluate the debate (troll)
On the post: Wikileaks Denied A Speaking Opportunity At UN Conference About Wikileaks?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>