"Anonymous" hacker group member caught

aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
"Anonymous" hacker group member caught

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_10751346
 

Prosecutors say Guzner, has agreed to plead guilty.

 

People who think there is something they refer to as god don't ask enough questions.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
If any of them are looking

If any of them are looking for sympathy...

It's between shit and syphilis in the dictionary.

If the kid gets 10 years then how many other people are going to agree that the judicial system is broken?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
Not a hacker!

Okay, it was bad enough when the crackers stole the term "hacker." Then all the script-kiddies decided that they were also hackers. Now anyone who launches a DoS attack is a hacker? WTF!

Gah. I remember when the term "hacker" was used to denote someone with skill.

Oh, and get off my lawn.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


Fanas
Posts: 249
Joined: 2008-03-27
User is offlineOffline
nigelTheBold wrote:Okay, it

nigelTheBold wrote:

Okay, it was bad enough when the crackers stole the term "hacker." Then all the script-kiddies decided that they were also hackers. Now anyone who launches a DoS attack is a hacker? WTF!

Gah. I remember when the term "hacker" was used to denote someone with skill.

Oh, and get off my lawn.

 

Stay off my computer Smiling Only the hacker could get mad because of that Smiling

But it's true, it's annoying, how media represents them, but don't worry all the media is annoying these days.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Get off your high horses,

Get off your high horses, gentlemen. At least they're doing something.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Give the kid a reward, fuck

Give the kid a reward, fuck Scientology, go go revolution, Sue the Pope, sue the FCC. All is fair in love and war. Rationalism is not law, if it was, I wouldn't break the law. Free speech is always a WAR. Get it on ... I bring a sword .... war to end all war, to divide separatists from oneness ... the battle is on .... turn it up.

Judas Priest - Breaking the Law

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=380C_nVJotY

 


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I can't cheer for them since

I can't cheer for them since I heard what those dillholes do.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Fuck him. I hope he does

Fuck him. I hope he does time.

 

Anonymous is not just a scientology protest group. They're a gang of malicious cyber-goons who get their jollies from stealing personal information, impersonating people and harassment. Anyone who thinks that these guys are heroes should check into the stunt they pulled involving attempting to induce epileptic seizures in victims visiting a site for epilepsy.

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3681
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
 So there is a lot of

So there is a lot of negativity towards Anonymous here! Interesting. I was very curious after Watcher informed me about this.

My short comment would be that there seems to be two different groups of Anonymous. The original was simply a group of malicious hackers, but when war was declared against Scientology, Anonymous exploded and grew into something completely different.

Arrg, I'm too stupid to embed the video. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuHF_br-DBs

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Yeah yeah, war sucks, but so

Yeah yeah friends, war sucks, but so it is. Who are the real hero's? Perhaps I didn't read the OP coherently, but my point is needed revolution is always punished, and so we muddle thru the mud at a slow pace to improvement .... The law? .... Who's law?

  Thanks butter , your last link works.

   This kind of relates, the ending is most cool ....

"The Machine is Us/ing Us" , 4 min http://www.dharmaflix.com/wiki/The_Machine_is_Us/ing_Us

 


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle wrote:So there

butterbattle wrote:

So there is a lot of negativity towards Anonymous here! Interesting. I was very curious after Watcher informed me about this.

My short comment would be that there seems to be two different groups of Anonymous. The original was simply a group of malicious hackers, but when war was declared against Scientology, Anonymous exploded and grew into something completely different.

Arrg, I'm too stupid to embed the video. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuHF_br-DBs

Two is an understatement. It's a decentralized, probabalistic "movement," "united" only by a few points of ideology (mainly the pursuit of lulz). Anyone can join the fun. Think in terms of Google Mail's labels rather than Yahoo! Mail's folders.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Also, no offense, but I

Also, no offense, but I don't think anyone here is in a position to snub potential allies, or at least ideological cousins (e.g. anti-religious movements relying on publicity stunts, hacking notwithstanding).


 


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Also, no offense, but

Quote:
Also, no offense, but I don't think anyone here is in a position to snub potential allies

...Even ones that attempt to kill people via epileptic seizure, 'for the lulz', Mag?

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
Also, no offense, but I don't think anyone here is in a position to snub potential allies

...Even ones that attempt to kill people via epileptic seizure, 'for the lulz', Mag?

The view implied is, pardon the comparison, rather Christian. You can draw a line around an idea or morality, and say that all that falls outside of it is a failure; then pretend every failure is some kind of aberration that was wholly unexpected. It's more accurate to think people congregate around an idea, with the majority in some proximity to center, with a fuzzy edge of aberration to be considered within the equation. I won't defend Anonymous, because it's impossible to speak for it. A voice will rise from the fray, and if the idea it raises is compelling, so people will be compelled. Some voices will stand out more than others, and be kinda-sorta leadership. Creating a formal organization is largely illusory, IMO. The people involved will still follow the same patterns, coming to compelling ideas (i.e. The Blasphemy Challenge, or L. Ron's birthday), and dropping off when the novelty wears thin. Anonymous is largely harmless because people are largely harmless. But it's not totally harmless, as people are not. That's life without the ideological security blanket of religion or disproportionate reverence for wonkiness. It's messy like that. You can accept the reality of what people coming together for a cause really looks like, or you can start an organization and pull the No True Scotsman whenever a member embarrasses the group.

I find the disapproval quaint, though. Thanks for that.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
So you're in denial, then,

So you're in denial, then, that Anonymous is a 4Chan spawn of cyber-criminals (and not nearly as amorphic as you claim).

Gotcha.

 

EDIT: To expand upon Magilum's idiocy in this arena (and address his claim that I'm making a theistic argument, presumably alleging that I have no evidence and/or am attacking rational people), allow me to defer you to the following article:

click here for article

Anyone who pursues social sciences professionally: How would you rate the above interviewees contributions to our understanding of the world throug the 'experiments' they ran on a scale of 0 to 10, zero being Dr. Josef Mengele's work and ten being Dr. B.F. Skinner.

Anyone else: Would you agree that these are the sort of people we should be associating with, supporting and defending simply because we share a common interest in despising Scientology?

[mod edit: link]

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown wrote:So

Kevin R Brown wrote:

So you're in denial, then, that Anonymous is a 4Chan spawn of cyber-criminals (and not nearly as amorphic as you claim).

Gotcha. [...]

That being the only way to frame it that works for a mindless pseudo-skeptical RRS fanboy. Oh, ha, and I just noticed your signature. Not that DG doesn't merit respect, but wow, smooch smooch. Anyhoo, my friend from America's Hat, I think I framed this in a way that should make sense to anyone not pulling the Godwin card from their well-worn Magic deck of shambling failure.

Like it or not, Kev, the so-called "Anonymous" (there is only a so-called anymore) has made a positive impact on people. The protests are full of well-meaning people, thumbing their nose at Scientology's intimidation tactics, getting young people involved in activism, emboldening former members to speak out, and current members to question their beliefs. Is everyone who calls themselves "Anonymous" going to be cool? Maybe the uncool people have more of a claim to the title than the rest! But it doesn't matter apart from an academic exercise. And, as I'd said before, the only difference between a "group" like Anonymous and a formal group is the latter has leaders that can disown their transgressions. "This does not represent us," they say. Everything represents Anonymous, because anyone can claim it. Is that claim valid? If anyone believes it, it's valid enough for the purpose.

The wonks can just keep preaching to the converted, or impressing a minority of people interested enough in facts to be influenced by them alone. And they can waste their time trying to perfect some theoretical ideology, or complaining about the dubious origins of other ideologies, etc., but it doesn't mean shit. Trying to impress the public with facts is pure masturbation.

Anonymous will go away when the novelty wears off, or when a "member" does something bad enough to spoil the name for everyone. Just like formal groups, except without all the whining and protracted "We're not dead yet. Oh, OK, we are." phase.


Death Dragoon
Bronze Member
Death Dragoon's picture
Posts: 62
Joined: 2008-07-24
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown wrote:Fuck

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Fuck him. I hope he does time.

 

Anonymous is not just a scientology protest group. They're a gang of malicious cyber-goons who get their jollies from stealing personal information, impersonating people and harassment. Anyone who thinks that these guys are heroes should check into the stunt they pulled involving attempting to induce epileptic seizures in victims visiting a site for epilepsy.

 

From what I understand, and feel free to correct me, Anonymous isn't just one group, nor are they co-related. Anonymous is just a term that alot of groups use based on the 4chan forum/site. There is a scientologist anon, and a borderline terrorist one as well (probably alot more groups). I believe there is a hackers anon too. I kinda view this like I do Pitt Bulls, there are so many dogs labeled as pittbulls, so the media falsely reports pittbulls to be overly aggressive when they are not.

 

When once asked in the library if I believed in Jesus Christ, I pointed out that zombie novels are in the fiction section.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown

Here's the original:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html?_r=1&emc=eta1&oref=slogin

This is specifically what Kevin was referring to:

Quote:
Fortuny spent most of the weekend in his bedroom juggling several windows on his monitor. One displayed a chat room run by Encyclopedia Dramatica, an online compendium of troll humor and troll lore. It was buzzing with news of an attack against the Epilepsy Foundation’s Web site. Trolls had flooded the site’s forums with flashing images and links to animated color fields, leading at least one photosensitive user to claim that she had a seizure.

WEEV: the whole posting flashing images to epileptics thing? over the line.

HEPKITTEN: can someone plz tell me how doing something the admins intentionally left enabled is hacking?

WEEV: it’s hacking peoples unpatched brains. we have to draw a moral line somewhere.

Fortuny disagreed. In his mind, subjecting epileptic users to flashing lights was justified. “Hacks like this tell you to watch out by hitting you with a baseball bat,” he told me. “Demonstrating these kinds of exploits is usually the only way to get them fixed.”

“So the message is ‘buy a helmet,’ and the medium is a bat to the head?” I asked.

“No, it’s like a pitcher telling a batter to put on his helmet by beaning him from the mound. If you have this disease and you’re on the Internet, you need to take precautions.” A few days later, he wrote and posted a guide to safe Web surfing for epileptics.

 

This part will make you just fall in love with em, so hilarious, and lulzy!  HAHA!

Quote:

 

Sherrod DeGrippo, a 28-year-old Atlanta native who goes by the name Girlvinyl, runs Encyclopedia Dramatica, the online troll archive. In 2006, DeGrippo received an e-mail message from a well-known band of trolls, demanding that she edit the entry about them on the Encyclopedia Dramatica site. She refused. Within hours, the aggrieved trolls hit the phones, bombarding her apartment with taxis, pizzas, escorts and threats of rape and violent death. DeGrippo, alone and terrified, sought counsel from a powerful friend. She called Weev.

Weev, the troll who thought hacking the epilepsy site was immoral, is legendary among trolls. He is said to have jammed the cellphones of daughters of C.E.O.’s and demanded ransom from their fathers; he is also said to have trashed his enemies’ credit ratings. Better documented are his repeated assaults on LiveJournal, an online diary site where he himself maintains a personal blog. Working with a group of fellow hackers and trolls, he once obtained access to thousands of user accounts.

I first met Weev in an online chat room that I visited while staying at Fortuny’s house. “I hack, I ruin, I make piles of money,” he boasted. “I make people afraid for their lives.” On the phone that night, Weev displayed a misanthropy far harsher than Fortuny’s. “Trolling is basically Internet eugenics,” he said, his voice pitching up like a jet engine on the runway. “I want everyone off the Internet. Bloggers are filth. They need to be destroyed. Blogging gives the illusion of participation to a bunch of retards. . . . We need to put these people in the oven!”

I listened for a few more minutes as Weev held forth on the Federal Reserve and about Jews. Unlike Fortuny, he made no attempt to reconcile his trolling with conventional social norms.

 

 

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:That being the only

Quote:
That being the only way to frame it that works for a mindless pseudo-skeptical RRS fanboy. Oh, ha, and I just noticed your signature. Not that DG doesn't merit respect, but wow, smooch smooch.

Curious thing for someone to say who has over twice the number of posts I do here, has a moderator position within the community and rarely (never?) has had an intellectual debate worth mentioning with any of the core membership.

The quote I thought (Well, still think) is hilarious (you'll note that my signature and avatar change on a semi-regular basis, and this would be the only time I've had it changed for something one of the core members has said).

 

But, hey - since we're exchanging pleasantries:

Do you recall the time when the drive-by poster swung through the forums, bragging about how he shat in a church? Do you recall your reaction back then? Watching people reconcile hypocrisy is always interesting - so why the change of heart, Maggie? One illegal activity against one religious group is okay, but the other isn't?

Quote:
Anyhoo, my friend from America's Hat, I think I framed this in a way that should make sense to anyone not pulling the Godwin card

Josef was the most immediate example of inane and cruel experimentation. In fact, it's the only one that spurs to mind even now.

Feel free to amend it to something unrelated to Nazi Germany if that's what soothes your ego.

Quote:

Like it or not, Kev, the so-called "Anonymous" (there is only a so-called anymore) has made a positive impact on people.

As has Scientology. Some people have made money from it and some people allege that it makes them happy. Christianity's made a positive impact on people too.

What's your point?

Quote:

The protests are full of well-meaning people, thumbing their nose at Scientology's intimidation tactics, getting young people involved in activism, emboldening former members to speak out, and current members to question their beliefs.

Nice deflection. Was I talking about the protests?

No.

Is this thread about the protests?

No.

 

This thread is about an asshole using an illegal ddos attack against someone's private property. It's the equivalent of me throwing a brick through a church window - and there you are, cheering me on. Before you go on about thumbing one's nose at intimidation tactics, did you bother reading the article I linked to? If someone sent you your own Social Security number in the mail, you wouldn't consider that an intimidation tactic?

Quote:
Is everyone who calls themselves "Anonymous" going to be cool? Maybe the uncool people have more of a claim to the title than the rest! But it doesn't matter apart from an academic exercise.

Quote:
The view implied is, pardon the comparison, rather Christian.

...So who is using the Christian moderate defense now, pray tell?

If the 'uncool' (the fact that you dance around ever using the term 'criminal' is rather telling) people are the equivalent to the Christian fundamentalists, you're easily the equivalent of their moderate enablers (I mean, just look at what's being argued here! You're saying that the Anonymous script-kiddie here shouldn't be charged for the crime he committed because, well, he's part of Anonymous). Love the vagueries, too; what exactly makes it merely 'academic excercize' to point-out that it was founded and still by sociopathic criminals?

Quote:

And, as I'd said before, the only difference between a "group" like Anonymous and a formal group is the latter has leaders that can disown their transgressions. "This does not represent us," they say. Everything represents Anonymous, because anyone can claim it. Is that claim valid? If anyone believes it, it's valid enough for the purpose.

So, let's say that I go and protest Scientology tomorrow with a large body of people on behalf of Al Qaeda (another fairly informal and unstructured, mostly conceptual, group). Would you argue that, even though we aren't following the original tenets of the organization and are in no way affiliated with it's founders, our claim is still valid (and now Al Qaeda is really just a Scientology protest group)? Afterall, anyone can claim Al Qaeda membership, so everyone must then represent it (you non-sequitor, not mine), right?

 

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
That being the only way to frame it that works for a mindless pseudo-skeptical RRS fanboy. Oh, ha, and I just noticed your signature. Not that DG doesn't merit respect, but wow, smooch smooch.

Curious thing for someone to say who has over twice the number of posts I do here, has a moderator position within the community and rarely (never?) has had an intellectual debate worth mentioning with any of the core membership.

If you had just taken the time to read all my posts... then I would feel sad for you, actually. That would be the way to support your position that I'm a doodyhead.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

The quote I thought (Well, still think) is hilarious (you'll note that my signature and avatar change on a semi-regular basis, and this would be the only time I've had it changed for something one of the core members has said).

This qualification implies guilt, ass-kisser.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

But, hey - since we're exchanging pleasantries:

Do you recall the time when the drive-by poster swung through the forums, bragging about how he shat in a church? Do you recall your reaction back then? Watching people reconcile hypocrisy is always interesting - so why the change of heart, Maggie? One illegal activity against one religious group is okay, but the other isn't?

No, I don't remember. That you do concerns me. I haven't in this thread condoned any specific actions, so neener neener. Even if I had, I'm comfortable with my own double-standards, so the hypocrisy card doesn't bug me. Such is the world.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
Anyhoo, my friend from America's Hat, I think I framed this in a way that should make sense to anyone not pulling the Godwin card

Josef was the most immediate example of inane and cruel experimentation. In fact, it's the only one that spurs to mind even now.

Feel free to amend it to something unrelated to Nazi Germany if that's what soothes your ego.

OK, I'll think of a different red herring you can borrow.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:

Like it or not, Kev, the so-called "Anonymous" (there is only a so-called anymore) has made a positive impact on people.

As has Scientology. Some people have made money from it and some people allege that it makes them happy. Christianity's made a positive impact on people too.

What's your point?

Something about babies and bathwater. We have the luxury of opposing religion now because we know its positive traits don't belong to it; but that fact alone is not compelling to the vast majority of people -- even those with every reason to favor progress and technological advancement over superstition. If there's something good happening, and people are off their asses momentarily, it must be taken advantage of even if it's not perfect. If there's something without the mixed reputation of "Anonymous," that can capture people's imaginations, then by all means spit it out.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:

The protests are full of well-meaning people, thumbing their nose at Scientology's intimidation tactics, getting young people involved in activism, emboldening former members to speak out, and current members to question their beliefs.

Nice deflection. Was I talking about the protests?

No.

Is this thread about the protests?

No.

This thread is about an asshole using an illegal ddos attack against someone's private property. It's the equivalent of me throwing a brick through a church window - and there you are, cheering me on. Before you go on about thumbing one's nose at intimidation tactics, did you bother reading the article I linked to? If someone sent you your own Social Security number in the mail, you wouldn't consider that an intimidation tactic?

If it's about an individual that's one thing, but if that person is taken to represent "Anonymous," it's about the protests, the hackers, et al. If the subject is really that narrow, then I withdraw my comments as irrelevant. But I don't think the subject can be narrowed anymore; such would require the public knowing the intricacies of a "group" that's already nebulous.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
Is everyone who calls themselves "Anonymous" going to be cool? Maybe the uncool people have more of a claim to the title than the rest! But it doesn't matter apart from an academic exercise.

Quote:
The view implied is, pardon the comparison, rather Christian.

...So who is using the Christian moderate defense now, pray tell?

If the 'uncool' (the fact that you dance around ever using the term 'criminal' is rather telling) people are the equivalent to the Christian fundamentalists, you're easily the equivalent of their moderate enablers (I mean, just look at what's being argued here! You're saying that the Anonymous script-kiddie here shouldn't be charged for the crime he committed because, well, he's part of Anonymous). Love the vagueries, too; what exactly makes it merely 'academic excercize' to point-out that it was founded and still by sociopathic criminals?

Where did I say anything about charges? I said they (the hackers, the protesters, et al) are reaching more people at the moment with a message of empowerment than a nasty git jacking off to Pale Blue Dot. But, that's not necessarily to be disparaging. The world's not black and white; even the most unpleasant, shrill and obsequious can probably reach a few people.

The founding is only as important as the strength of its connection to the broader range of those involved. From my experiences, the thing is completely decontextualized, with the individuals involved making up their own reasons for being so.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:

And, as I'd said before, the only difference between a "group" like Anonymous and a formal group is the latter has leaders that can disown their transgressions. "This does not represent us," they say. Everything represents Anonymous, because anyone can claim it. Is that claim valid? If anyone believes it, it's valid enough for the purpose.

So, let's say that I go and protest Scientology tomorrow with a large body of people on behalf of Al Qaeda (another fairly informal and unstructured, mostly conceptual, group). Would you argue that, even though we aren't following the original tenets of the organization and are in no way affiliated with it's founders, our claim is still valid (and now Al Qaeda is really just a Scientology protest group)? Afterall, anyone can claim Al Qaeda membership, so everyone must then represent it (you non-sequitor, not mine), right?

Like you could grow a beard.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Death Dragoon wrote:From

Death Dragoon wrote:

From what I understand, and feel free to correct me, Anonymous isn't just one group, nor are they co-related. [...]

Bingo.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Sapient wrote:Kevin R Brown

Sapient wrote:

Here's the original:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html?_r=1&emc=eta1&oref=slogin

This is specifically what Kevin was referring to:

Quote:
Fortuny spent most of the weekend in his bedroom juggling several windows on his monitor. One displayed a chat room run by Encyclopedia Dramatica, an online compendium of troll humor and troll lore. It was buzzing with news of an attack against the Epilepsy Foundation’s Web site. Trolls had flooded the site’s forums with flashing images and links to animated color fields, leading at least one photosensitive user to claim that she had a seizure.

An epileptic bit my lucky Blackwing in half. You can't get those anymore. I was upset when I started that. Get off my back.

Anyway, already addressed this.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Everyone who belongs to that

Everyone who belongs to that group should be executed.


Schobeleth
Schobeleth's picture
Posts: 17
Joined: 2008-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I remember a good friend of

I remember a good friend of mine getting involved with 4chan and all the other crap before Anonymous was started, and then when it all was started he kept me updated on all their pranks and attacks on various websites, most of them were to just annoy or piss people off, most were random though some were enemies of them. When he told me that they were going to openly declare "war" on Scientology I just laughed, I pictured a bunch of preteen wannabe hackers literally storming Scientology churches across the globe or something but he told me that their main means of attack are general pranks involving (obviously) the internet and various things relying on the internet, protesting openly in publc with masks on, etc etc.

Personally, I think it's stupid and their "war" on scientology could very easily be linked to skeptics and atheists and therefore make people like me look bad when I think they're a bunch of lunatics. One of their main platforms was one woman who was supposedly abused severely by Scientologists to where she actually died. If that's good enough of a platform for them then I think if people considered the body count for Christianity and Islam it'd be without a doubt a much greater tool but do you see me doing that? No.

"Truly, if there is evil in the world, it lurks within the hearts of mankind." -Edward D. Morrison


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3681
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:Everyone

MattShizzle wrote:
Everyone who belongs to that group should be executed.

Though they started off as a little group of bored, criminal, teenage hackers, the entire identity of Anonymous changed when they declared war on Scientology............or, lack of an identity. 

Somehow, for the first time, the message was not just about the "lulz," but contained connotations of knowledge and freedom because of their feelings of injustice towards Scientology. Their facade, though mostly introverted and, in the long run, harmless, was extremely well phrased and ignited a response in the general Internet populace. Normal people, not hackers, responded to the war cry against Scientology. 

Matt, I assume you are referring to the original group of cyber-terrorists, not the spontaneous Internet phenomenon that exploded from its influence. The same goes for you too Kevin. Certainly, these people should be punished.

However, to despise "Anonymous" as a whole is to misinterpret what it is. Anonymous is nothing. It has no leaders, no followers, and no structure. Derived from the function on Internet pages that allows individuals to post their thoughts while remaining anonymous, Anonymous is now occasionally regarded as a massive collective that represents the ideals of its individuals - this is the definition I like.  

Anonymous, it's just a word.

You can watch videos of actual protests on Youtube. 

Most of the protestors are average citizens. They're not itching to murder epileptics by triggering seizures. In fact, I doubt many of them even know about the incident.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
The enemy of my enemy

The enemy of my enemy is....

a bunch of confused kids hell-bent on controlling and/or causing internet chaos for the lulz???

Are we hanging our heads in despair or laughing our proverbial asses off?

 

The only thing that would make this funnier/sadder is if the Raelians were providing some computer funding for Anonymous.

Clonaid

Clitoraid

Hackeraid.

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Hack the Hackers , peace is

Hack the Hackers , peace is war ... pick your battles, sharpen your swords, no appeasment, I am god , with no god on my side. I love , I hate.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Schobeleth wrote:[...] One

Schobeleth wrote:

[...] One of their main platforms was one woman who was supposedly

"Supposedly," eh? Then you must have evidence that Lisa McPherson wasn't wasn't neglected and denied legitimate medical treatment until her untimely death.

Schobeleth wrote:

abused severely by Scientologists to where she actually died. If that's good enough of a platform for them then I think if people considered the body count for Christianity and Islam it'd be without a doubt a much greater tool but do you see me doing that? No.

 

Then you must have a really great plan for generating public involvement. I look forward to your manifesto.

On a more serious note, people have an easier time conceptualizing small numbers. A single tragedy is a more potent image than a huge, undifferentiated mass. To quote Stalin, "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." Just another amusing quirk and obstacle to motivating people to act.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
butterbattle

butterbattle wrote:

[...]

Anonymous, it's just a word.

You can watch videos of actual protests on Youtube. 

Most of the protestors are average citizens. They're not itching to murder epileptics by triggering seizures. In fact, I doubt many of them even know about the incident.

Egg-zactly. Like I've said, it's become a category for movement, not a solidified group. It's like being a hippy, or a biker. There's no regulatory body (and such are largely illusions in real groups, anyway); and for the moment, it's inspired some interesting activities. Where they're usually dour occasions, I've never seen people have so much fun at a protest. They kept on general message, but the overall tone was so weird and incoherent, the Scilons didn't know how to react. The support from passers-by was massive. If someone doesn't recognize the potential of the idea -- of exploiting memes and anonymity in this way -- all I can say is, yeah, like have fun with that.


Schobeleth
Schobeleth's picture
Posts: 17
Joined: 2008-10-22
User is offlineOffline
magilum wrote:Schobeleth

magilum wrote:

Schobeleth wrote:

[...] One of their main platforms was one woman who was supposedly

"Supposedly," eh? Then you must have evidence that Lisa McPherson wasn't wasn't neglected and denied legitimate medical treatment until her untimely death.

Schobeleth wrote:

abused severely by Scientologists to where she actually died. If that's good enough of a platform for them then I think if people considered the body count for Christianity and Islam it'd be without a doubt a much greater tool but do you see me doing that? No.

 

Then you must have a really great plan for generating public involvement. I look forward to your manifesto.

On a more serious note, people have an easier time conceptualizing small numbers. A single tragedy is a more potent image than a huge, undifferentiated mass. To quote Stalin, "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." Just another amusing quirk and obstacle to motivating people to act.

I definitely see what you mean. I didn't want to say anything for sure because I haven't been keeping up to date with all the information regarding their platform, it was vaguely in the back of my mind when I posted originally on this. I should've worded that different Sticking out tongue I would love if it were possible to motivate that many people to move towards peace and atheism, but I don't think the world is ready at this point. I think religion is a poison that is slowly dying off with older generations of people as newer generations come out as skeptics, trying to pursuade indoctrinated people is (as most of you know) a perilious crusade.

"Truly, if there is evil in the world, it lurks within the hearts of mankind." -Edward D. Morrison


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Schobeleth, glad to hear it

Schobeleth

, glad to hear it young friend ... keep posting .... LOUDER.


 


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Schobeleth wrote:magilum

Schobeleth wrote:

magilum wrote:

Schobeleth wrote:

[...] One of their main platforms was one woman who was supposedly

"Supposedly," eh? Then you must have evidence that Lisa McPherson wasn't wasn't neglected and denied legitimate medical treatment until her untimely death.

Schobeleth wrote:

abused severely by Scientologists to where she actually died. If that's good enough of a platform for them then I think if people considered the body count for Christianity and Islam it'd be without a doubt a much greater tool but do you see me doing that? No.

 

Then you must have a really great plan for generating public involvement. I look forward to your manifesto.

On a more serious note, people have an easier time conceptualizing small numbers. A single tragedy is a more potent image than a huge, undifferentiated mass. To quote Stalin, "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." Just another amusing quirk and obstacle to motivating people to act.

I definitely see what you mean. I didn't want to say anything for sure because I haven't been keeping up to date with all the information regarding their platform, it was vaguely in the back of my mind when I posted originally on this. I should've worded that different Sticking out tongue I would love if it were possible to motivate that many people to move towards peace and atheism, but I don't think the world is ready at this point. I think religion is a poison that is slowly dying off with older generations of people as newer generations come out as skeptics, trying to pursuade indoctrinated people is (as most of you know) a perilious crusade.

I've been re-reading Naomi Klein's book, "The Shock Doctrine," which is an expansion on the premise that neo-conservative ideology is comparable in economics and sociology to shock therapy and torture in psychology. That is, their goal is to erase what  exists currently in some arena, and replace it with something artificial based on their philosophies. I think we share that conceit, in a way, if we look at something like the United States, and think, "If only..." No matter how much I'd like it if we could get past this religion thing, and on to better topics, I do see the arrogance in my position. "Anonymous," for lack of a more precise term, struck some significant chords with people. And, no, it can't steer them squarely into one ideological playpen or another, but it does raise consciousness in its way. I think, outside of lifetime quests, all we can hope to do is chip away, taking advantages of trends, trying to raise consciousness in similar ways.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Have you ever noticed that

Have you ever noticed that when you say something about Anonymous as a group then suddenly they become a collection of individuals DESPITE the assertion of "We are legion."?

Then of course there are those lovely entries made about us as a whole and as individuals.

Fuck 'em. I hope the kid rats out the whole lot to keep himself out of jail.

I don't want them to do jail time either. I'd prefer something along the lines of Hackers the movie. Put a restraining order preventing them from operating computers. THAT would be justice. N'est ce pas?

After all, they wanted to take other people's rights away preventing them from using the net.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:Have you

darth_josh wrote:

Have you ever noticed that when you say something about Anonymous as a group then suddenly they become a collection of individuals DESPITE the assertion of "We are legion."?

It's kind of like, "Believe in God? We can fix that."

darth_josh wrote:

Then of course there are those lovely entries made about us as a whole and as individuals.

Fuck 'em. I hope the kid rats out the whole lot to keep himself out of jail.

I don't want them to do jail time either. I'd prefer something along the lines of Hackers the movie. Put a restraining order preventing them from operating computers. THAT would be justice. N'est ce pas?

After all, they wanted to take other people's rights away preventing them from using the net.

I'd rather they put themselves to the task of class warfare; intruduce our betters to the other side of unfairness. If, by some monstrous turn, Obama loses by a small margin, I can't imagine something not happening. Much of this exchange has been small minded, myopic and disappointing; based on adherence to ideological purity and methods that have either waned in efficacy, or outright failed from the beginning. To make my words match my creeping thoughts, I'm not looking to RRS, or any existing organization, for the next big move. Nor am I looking to "Anonymous." Centralization is dead, and the power dynamic has shifted. The next big thing will rise from the noise and tumult, and all we can do is amplify and direct it.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
magilum wrote:darth_josh

magilum wrote:

darth_josh wrote:

Have you ever noticed that when you say something about Anonymous as a group then suddenly they become a collection of individuals DESPITE the assertion of "We are legion."?

It's kind of like, "Believe in God? We can fix that."

Ummm. No. That's one facet of the site and it's directed at individuals whereas "We are legion." is explicit self-description. Correct?

magilum wrote:

darth_josh wrote:

Then of course there are those lovely entries made about us as a whole and as individuals.

Fuck 'em. I hope the kid rats out the whole lot to keep himself out of jail.

I don't want them to do jail time either. I'd prefer something along the lines of Hackers the movie. Put a restraining order preventing them from operating computers. THAT would be justice. N'est ce pas?

After all, they wanted to take other people's rights away preventing them from using the net.

I'd rather they put themselves to the task of class warfare; intruduce our betters to the other side of unfairness. If, by some monstrous turn, Obama loses by a small margin, I can't imagine something not happening. Much of this exchange has been small minded, myopic and disappointing; based on adherence to ideological purity and methods that have either waned in efficacy, or outright failed from the beginning. To make my words match my creeping thoughts, I'm not looking to RRS, or any existing organization, for the next big move. Nor am I looking to "Anonymous." Centralization is dead, and the power dynamic has shifted. The next big thing will rise from the noise and tumult, and all we can do is amplify and direct it.

So, are you asking everyone to treat the scientology ddos as 'water under the bridge' because someone else within our class will do something more obnoxious?

Not forgiveness necessarily, but forgetfulness?

Isn't this the quest for the "At least we're not as bad as them" argument???

I'm sorry, magilum.

I am human. I am individual. I do not forget. I do not forgive. Expect me to berate them for the lulz.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
No lutz about it, no magic ,

No lutz about it, no magic , WE ARE GOD, thermodynamics ....


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:magilum

darth_josh wrote:

magilum wrote:

darth_josh wrote:

Have you ever noticed that when you say something about Anonymous as a group then suddenly they become a collection of individuals DESPITE the assertion of "We are legion."?

It's kind of like, "Believe in God? We can fix that."

Ummm. No. That's one facet of the site and it's directed at individuals whereas "We are legion." is explicit self-description. Correct?

The original 4chan people don't have any control over many of the people/groups calling themselves "Anonymous."

darth_josh wrote:

magilum wrote:

darth_josh wrote:

Then of course there are those lovely entries made about us as a whole and as individuals.

Fuck 'em. I hope the kid rats out the whole lot to keep himself out of jail.

I don't want them to do jail time either. I'd prefer something along the lines of Hackers the movie. Put a restraining order preventing them from operating computers. THAT would be justice. N'est ce pas?

After all, they wanted to take other people's rights away preventing them from using the net.

I'd rather they put themselves to the task of class warfare; intruduce our betters to the other side of unfairness. If, by some monstrous turn, Obama loses by a small margin, I can't imagine something not happening. Much of this exchange has been small minded, myopic and disappointing; based on adherence to ideological purity and methods that have either waned in efficacy, or outright failed from the beginning. To make my words match my creeping thoughts, I'm not looking to RRS, or any existing organization, for the next big move. Nor am I looking to "Anonymous." Centralization is dead, and the power dynamic has shifted. The next big thing will rise from the noise and tumult, and all we can do is amplify and direct it.

So, are you asking everyone to treat the scientology ddos as 'water under the bridge' because someone else within our class will do something more obnoxious?

Not forgiveness necessarily, but forgetfulness?

Isn't this the quest for the "At least we're not as bad as them" argument???

I'm sorry, magilum.

I am human. I am individual. I do not forget. I do not forgive. Expect me to berate them for the lulz.

I'm beyond exasperated now. If you frame "Anonymous" as a cohesive group, what you're saying is applicable given a premise excluding moral self-contradiction. But that framework is inapplicable, as is what follows. I've made every effort to explain it, and the most I've gotten -- as a rebuttal to firsthand experience -- is Kevin's limp "Nuh-uh."


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
The point I want everyone to

The point I want everyone to note is that these kids have shamed us. In the current rhythm of communications and trends, the traditional notions of activism are quaint; which is as good as dead. RRS got lucky, "Anonymous" god lucky, but is it not plain to see the diminishing returns on these campaigns? Or the difficulty in replicating prior successes? This is why I think pure ideology is hopeless now; and beyond that, arrogant and immoral. Change has to be gentle, insidious, and must take advantage of the tide.


 


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
I fail to see the law of

I fail to see the law of diminishing returns as being applicable in either instance. We (both 'groups') still get attention from past 'achievements'. As a note, there are still blasphemy challenges being made. There are still discussions about Nightline and that stuff is OLD by yours and my standards now.

RRS was formed as a group of individuals from the hop. The only people accusing us/we/me/others of being a cult or a group are the people who just can't wrap their tiny minds around the concept.

Has that been the same with Anonymous? If so, why is it that you are the only person presenting this argument?

Does change have to involve young men facing jail for performing the will of the 'group'?

 

 

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3681
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:Does change

darth_josh wrote:
Does change have to involve young men facing jail for performing the will of the 'group'?

Ah, but what is the will of the group?

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
I sure learn a lot here as

I sure learn a lot here as RRS. That "original" article Sapient posted above was worth the read.

Umm, crime and rational punishment. A complicated issue. Ethics. More stress on "healing" the criminal is needed. It's often true, "they do not know what they do" .... they are "blind". Umm, I read that some where.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
darth_josh wrote:I fail to

darth_josh wrote:

I fail to see the law of diminishing returns as being applicable in either instance. We (both 'groups') still get attention from past 'achievements'. As a note, there are still blasphemy challenges being made. There are still discussions about Nightline and that stuff is OLD by yours and my standards now.

Maybe I'll be proven wrong. I don't make predictions, only refer to precedent. Novelty fades, and people move on, always. It's hard to deal that when one is literally invested in something, as any small business owner can attest.

darth_josh wrote:

RRS was formed as a group of individuals from the hop. The only people accusing us/we/me/others of being a cult or a group are the people who just can't wrap their tiny minds around the concept.

Do you read these posts while on the treadmill? Just cos... "Huh?"

darth_josh wrote:

Has that been the same with Anonymous? If so, why is it that you are the only person presenting this argument?

I don't know what you're presenting as my argument, so no comment.

darth_josh wrote:

Does change have to involve young men facing jail for performing the will of the 'group'?

That's misleadingly normative, and pretending someone beyond the individual has control over that is a bad joke. The fact is it did happen that way for a small percentage of the people flying the "Anonymous" banner. It's almost like people are upset that there's no official leadership to disavow knowledge of those acts, like a real organization. Maybe someone will apologize for it; but it'll be just as spurious or legit as any other claim to represent the "group." One can to the extent that their ideas compell others to follow. This is where we can mercifully abandon loyalty to groups, and our silently abiding their bad ideas if we choose to. There's a small window here where, at least on the basis of novelty, a meritocracy is possible.

What I'm getting at here is that I think we're seeing a more honest ideological representation of the "group" idea emerge, free from many of the illusory conventions of party bullet points; where the good and the bad both are represented as part of the picture. Real groups are too image conscious, constantly trying to revise their histories, and improve their narratives according to some artificial set of goals. You end up with something awkwardly inorganic, like Esperanto written in pure Unifon.


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2642
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
We can talk in 1337 if

We can talk in 1337 if necessary. lol.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:If you had just taken

Quote:
If you had just taken the time to read all my posts... then I would feel sad for you, actually. That would be the way to support your position that I'm a doodyhead.

Your post count is listed on the left hand side of your posts.

Quote:
This qualification implies guilt, ass-kisser.

Whatever you say, wise one.

Quote:
No, I don't remember. That you do concerns me.

Why? Because my memory happens to be a tad more functional than yours?

It's terrible what living in Jesusland does to you guys, really...

Quote:
If there's something good happening, and people are off their asses momentarily, it must be taken advantage of even if it's not perfect.

May as well get out there and rile-up a mob to run down the Scientologists and feed them to the lions then, eh?

Sure worked for the Romans when they had to get people up off their asses to deal with the Christians, didn't it? Oh, wait...

Quote:
If there's something without the mixed reputation of "Anonymous," that can capture people's imaginations, then by all means spit it out.

Well, the Renaissance brought us out of the dark ages largely through discovery and emergent cooperation.

Might just be more of the crazy talk I get, but I hear that history's a pretty good teacher.

Quote:
Where did I say anything about charges? I said they (the hackers, the protesters, et al) are reaching more people at the moment with a message of empowerment

Which is an outright lie (or, at best, something you just pulled right out of your ass).

Do tell, Maggie: Where is your evidence that this attack 'woke more people up' and caused a bigger stir than, say, the Blasphemy Challenge? Any numbers to actually back your bald assertion?

No?

Didn't think so.

 

How about the protests? Anonymous as a conceptual entity? Where the evidence that it's doing more for rational thought than the work of Carl Sagan (as you just implied), The RRS, The Richard Dawkins Foundation, the James Randi Paranormal Challenge, Penn & Teller's 'Bullshit', etc?

Figures? Stats?

Anything at all other than special pleading for your pet little group?

Quote:
The founding is only as important as the strength of its connection to the broader range of those involved. From my experiences, the thing is completely decontextualized

Oh, well, if it's your experience, that makes things so much more different than the evidence suggests...

Sticking out tongue

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown

Kevin R Brown wrote:

[...]

Quote:
If there's something without the mixed reputation of "Anonymous," that can capture people's imaginations, then by all means spit it out.

Well, the Renaissance brought us out of the dark ages largely through discovery and emergent cooperation.

Might just be more of the crazy talk I get, but I hear that history's a pretty good teacher.

Awesome, let's get started on tha... wait a minute... that's a vague observation, not an idea. Silly "North American."

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
Where did I say anything about charges? I said they (the hackers, the protesters, et al) are reaching more people at the moment with a message of empowerment

Which is an outright lie (or, at best, something you just pulled right out of your ass).

Do tell, Maggie: Where is your evidence that this attack 'woke more people up' and caused a bigger stir than, say, the Blasphemy Challenge? Any numbers to actually back your bald assertion?

I never compared the two in terms of reach. Rather, I said they both reached people in ways that most ideas do not. But replicating that success, whether by a formal organization, or a loose collection of strangers rallying toward a broad interpretation of an idea, is not a given. IMO, it's not likely either will be replicated, which is why I think it's a severe squandering of opportunity not to engage these ideas even if they don't match an ideological criteria perfectly. There's an audience for old school atheism, and old school socialism, and all that. They're called "geriatrics." If you want to sit around with a bunch of griping old farts in Ivy caps, that's most likely something you'll do sans audience. The world is compelled by a mixture of practicalities and irrational sensations; and if it ever comes to embrace atheism, it will probably be for the "wrong" (i.e. not explicitly justifiable) reasons. So be it.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

How about the protests? Anonymous as a conceptual entity? Where the evidence that it's doing more for rational thought than the work of Carl Sagan (as you just implied), The RRS, The Richard Dawkins Foundation, the James Randi Paranormal Challenge, Penn & Teller's 'Bullshit', etc?

Figures? Stats?

Anything at all other than special pleading for your pet little group?

You seem to want me to frame it as the end-all and be-all, conveniently omitting my characterization of it as a trend. But, as a trend, it reaches a broader audience than the frustrated libertarians and embittered nerds those things reach. Which isn't to discourage reaching those people, but to put the limits of purer ideologies into perspective. I think "Anonymous" marks an interesting window for organic social movements to emerge, and I think they've done a lot of good in the Scientology arena; especially in deflating claims of "hate crime" with their protest methods.

Which isn't to say I disapprove of hacking. I don't. I don't want to be hacked, of course, but I don't apply the standard universally. Universal standards are a lie. The underclasses have to do what they must or die in the gutter beside their untested principles.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
The founding is only as important as the strength of its connection to the broader range of those involved. From my experiences, the thing is completely decontextualized

Oh, well, if it's your experience, that makes things so much more different than the evidence suggests...

Sticking out tongue

Sorry my real life experience pales in comparison to your impressive browser history.


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:But, as a trend, it

Quote:
But, as a trend, it reaches a broader audience than the frustrated libertarians and embittered nerds those things reach.

Uh.

 

EVIDENCE?

 

EDIT:

Quote:
The underclasses have to do what they must or die in the gutter beside their untested principles.

...Anyone ever hear of the Grey Ranks?

This sounds a lot like something they'd say. Sticking out tongue

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


kevin morton
kevin morton's picture
Posts: 11
Joined: 2008-08-31
User is offlineOffline
hmmm

Hi just want to have my blurb.

I think you can look at anonymous as an anarchistic group, the hole group may work towards a conman goal but the individuals work by them self fore there phone goals whit no leaders there is no one can dictate who is a member and who is not . 

I think that the epilepsy "hack" was daft but the original 4can anonymous group we hikers/cracker they had the hacker/ cider terrorist view "fuck the world this is my internet ( going around doing what they like), I think they use the term anonymous to both seem intimidating and as a form of anonymity , or potability because they liked the name . 

now yes they started the war with Scientology, It was taken over by others as well and most are intelligent and work true peaceful means . others use less peaceful means but because its an anarchy the group is not responsible but the individual's are.

p.s.

If you don't like my spelling plez spell check it fore me

 


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3681
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
 Kevin R Brown wrote:How

 

Kevin R Brown wrote:
How about the protests? Anonymous as a conceptual entity? Where the evidence that it's doing more for rational thought than the work of Carl Sagan (as you just implied), The RRS, The Richard Dawkins Foundation, the James Randi Paranormal Challenge, Penn & Teller's 'Bullshit', etc?

 

 

Figures? Stats?

Ugg, if you want to see evidence, then stop bickering about it and watch one of the trillion billion quadrillion videos of people peacefully protesting.

Like this one,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNBbuRklLfo

and this one,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=se5v_OdllA8

And all these,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNQ4LwOgRwY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3ZNND6vL7c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIK3cmFycIY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1NEah2J1jo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILI8O-uffMg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TVXLU2mRsI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoqKgTFzBC0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgXQpwohzW4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1k-TAxnj4pY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjRFCPCRMlE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsrVMBUtDSo

And more,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr-_scXfzjI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFj0tdsGuLw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8ELj_Uxzn4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRvjeAMwM7E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8EM6DYI61M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1LIAQoIJtY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WSHTPw65EM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhmYdZT_6Bs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1jWXdBlpCg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HnL1u322SDM

And more,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oOCBDjdoWY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLM9JDuGfXA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LozD5Stc9U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLb9dSW5Uwo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2aLCWB30ro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri_-NYB2WVk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cV1QQ6v0Cqs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=squoGnlVFWY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtBZ6nhCqM0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4qdSc2BQHY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_quYVwx7Gg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81U0ueMUHkA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SGHICUs520

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4lGYogQHIg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5VO-tX_WiE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxY1wIkXWz4

And on and on and one. To infinity and beyond.

Also, the original famous threatening video- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCbKv9yiLiQ

And, of course, Thunderf00t's perspective on the issue- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuHF_br-DBs

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Ugg, if you want to

Quote:
Ugg, if you want to see evidence, then stop bickering about it and watch one of the trillion billion quadrillion videos of people peacefully protesting.

That is not evidence that Anonymous has made a greater impact for the rational thought movement than any of the groups Maggie decided to desparage.

EDIT:

Amusing comparison:

Given thay Anonymous is so fond of Guy Falks masks, and the ideology behind making sweeping changes is rather similar (violent force over reason), do tell - whom do you think made a greater societal impact: Guy Falks, or the scholars of antiquity?

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Awesome, let's get

Quote:
Awesome, let's get started on tha... wait a minute... that's a vague observation, not an idea. Silly "North American."

Nope. Popularizing science sure isn't an idea at all, and neither is popularizing history.

 

Oh, wait...

Quote:
I never compared the two in terms of reach.

 

Quote:
The point I want everyone to note is that these kids have shamed us
<--Comparison to the RRS / Blasphemy Challenge

Quote:
Where did I say anything about charges? I said they (the hackers, the protesters, et al) are reaching more people at the moment with a message of empowerment than a nasty git jacking off to Pale Blue Dot.
<--Comparison to Carl Sagan

Then again, you already admitted that you don't really care about being honest /consistent, so I suppose pointing-out this one will be a waste of time.

Quote:
The world is compelled by a mixture of practicalities and irrational sensations; and if it ever comes to embrace atheism, it will probably be for the "wrong" (i.e. not explicitly justifiable) reasons. So be it.

Bald assertion.

Care to share with us your socio-political expertise that would allow you to speak with such authority here?

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
Awesome, let's get started on tha... wait a minute... that's a vague observation, not an idea. Silly "North American."

Nope. Popularizing science sure isn't an idea at all, and neither is popularizing history.

Meaning what, practically speaking?


Kevin R Brown wrote:

[...]

Quote:
I never compared the two in terms of reach.

Quote:
The point I want everyone to note is that these kids have shamed us
<--Comparison to the RRS / Blasphemy Challenge

Sigh. I don't see how I can make my position on that any simpler.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
Where did I say anything about charges? I said they (the hackers, the protesters, et al) are reaching more people at the moment with a message of empowerment than a nasty git jacking off to Pale Blue Dot.
<--Comparison to Carl Sagan

Why would I compare them to Sagan? I was comparing the benign protest kids to an embittered, myopic loner. Guess who.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Then again, you already admitted that you don't really care about being honest /consistent, so I suppose pointing-out this one will be a waste of time.

I didn't sheepishly admit anything. I flat out stated my double-standards. The difference between myself and most other people is solely that acknowledgment. I'm talking about the real world, not some hypothetical world where you've stopped smoking and your treadmill isn't a laundry hanger.

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Quote:
The world is compelled by a mixture of practicalities and irrational sensations; and if it ever comes to embrace atheism, it will probably be for the "wrong" (i.e. not explicitly justifiable) reasons. So be it.

Bald assertion.

Care to share with us your socio-political expertise that would allow you to speak with such authority here?

If you disagree with the observation, then articulate as much. You can still form original thoughts, right? Assuming you could ever.