Anonymous Attacks US Government

[Endocrom]

I can imagine the scene in the US Copyright offices

Tech Guy: Boss, the site's down. A bunch of kids are using denial of service attacks on it.

Boss: (looks up from papers) Oh, okay, let me know when it's back up. (goes back to papers)

 

[Death God]

Anonymous has recently been pretty damn active but a war on America? They certainly have some more balls than most protest groups, so in that way, more power to them. But eventually they are going to push the line and get caught for good.

 

[slopeslider]

Anonymous has recently been pretty damn active but a war on America? They certainly have some more balls than most protest groups, so in that way, more power to them. But eventually they are going to push the line and get caught for good.

You can't 'catch' An onymous. A nonymous is everyone, anonymous is no one.

 

[Lem0nade Inlay]

I think I'll sit at the fence and watch...




[sub]...Go 4chan!....[/sub]

 

[Kingjackl]

Anonymous has recently been pretty damn active but a war on America? They certainly have some more balls than most protest groups, so in that way, more power to them. But eventually they are going to push the line and get caught for good.

You can't 'catch' An onymous. A nonymous is everyone, anonymous is no one.

Anonymous are people and people can be caught. And if they are caught, then I doubt a bunch of childish saddos are going to get away easily.

 

[dalek sec]

I can imagine the scene in the US Copyright offices

Tech Guy: Boss, the site's down. A bunch of kids are using denial of service attacks on it.

Boss: (looks up from papers) Oh, okay, let me know when it's back up. (goes back to papers)

Like wise Endocrom, I really doubt they're wigging out about this. Could someone please explain to me why everything single time "Anonymous" is mentioned in a news article here it seems like almost everyone and their mother wigs out about it so much? It's just something I don't get. Not trying to pick a fight with anyone, just confused. D:

 

[Csae]

Anonymous are people and people can be caught. And if they are caught, then I doubt a bunch of childish saddos are going to get away easily.

No you can't.

You can however catch a few higher ups or higher profiles, parade them around as leaders of anon and then claim you caught the group leaders. whether or not that may be true.

 

[Shadyjames]

Well I don't particularly support what they're fighting for, but to their credit, at least Anonymous gets shit done. How many other protest groups can say the same?

Do they though? What has changed as a direct result of the site being down for 30 minutes?

NEWS ARTICLES GOT WRITTEN ABOUT IT AND POSTED ON THE ESCAPIST FORUM.

 

[theevilsanta]

Props for citizens asserting themselves. The more power we own the more power we own.

 

[ZombieGenesis]

They're still not as big dicks as PETA.

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

I believe there was a period where conventional, peaceful protest sufficiently disrupted the world, that it was a viable method of policy change. A few people represented a larger proportion of society, and so their actions carried greater weight.

Society, I would argue, has made us into nameless, faceless, expendable cogs of a functional but inefficient machine. Anonymous, much to their name's credit, have become nameless, faceless, and unidentifiable agents of logistic malfunction. I would consider much of their work to be the modern age of peaceful protest, despite the very disruptive nature it embodies.

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

Anonymous are people and people can be caught. And if they are caught, then I doubt a bunch of childish saddos are going to get away easily.

No you can't.

You can however catch a few higher ups or higher profiles, parade them around as leaders of anon and then claim you caught the group leaders. whether or not that may be true.

"leadership," is a very interesting term to apply to Anon.

I get the feeling that it does not embody the conventional hierarchical leadership structure that we view as prototypical to a group of that size.

 

[dietpeachsnapple]

Anonymous has recently been pretty damn active but a war on America? They certainly have some more balls than most protest groups, so in that way, more power to them. But eventually they are going to push the line and get caught for good.

"War on America?"

When did that get declared again? I don't remember any statements to that nature.

 

[mageroel]

Oh noes, not half an hour! 1/48th of a day! Gasp! That's almost 2% of one day!

How about this anon, they'll stop 'being angry' when you smarten up and realise that people deserve to be paid for the things they work for.
I'm not saying that the RIAA should be allowed to sue people for 100x what they stole but in no way should people's work be taken from them without a [figurative, but literal] cent earned (for each person). Capitalist country, capitalist rules.

Actually, being the nitpick I am, I'd like to point out that 1/48th is more than 2%!

 

[mageroel]

Guy Fawkes has been thought to represent Anarchy by people who take on the label. They believe that he tried to create chaos and destroy the Parliament, When in reality he was only trying to put the Catholic Church back into power, a much less noble Commision.

I have actually given you other references from different sources. You have only said "that's not true" and each one of you posts.

I found another article that backs me up, while you are sitting back and telling me I am wrong. Have you given me anything to back up your statement? Cause last time I checked, I am not the only one who thinks so. Somebody else agreed with me, and I have an article from another source.

I think I smell a straw man in here.

Not only do you provide me with dubious deductive reasoning, but you are attempting to claim logical fallacies by misappropriating what a strawman argument is. All you are doing is looking at a set of facts and reading some sort of face value, ignoring nearly all the contextual content.

In light of your recent tactic, it has also become hypocritical, considering you outright ignored the clearly contradictory fact of historical evidence: that a much more openly agnostic nation celebrates the associated holiday with no pro-theocratic intentions at all. This introduces yet another fallacy of assuming your current, scant investigation supersedes the traditions of people going back hundreds of years.

Kudos to you for having this conversation on a story about Anon attacking some site..

 

[thahat]

The thing is.. You can't really take down Anonymous. There is no body to target so to speak. No leadership, no organization. Only the idea and the hoard of anonymous who supports it.

Good luck to whom ever Anonymous chose to target.

you can, its like gardening. weeds don't have a leader or an organisation but if you destroy them and throw them out of your garden they don't come back or in the worst case the problem is reduced.

welcome to the escapist btw

nah moustachio, it doesnt workt like that.
its quite simple: Anonymous works like a volunairy bot netwerk.
all ddosing at the same time, you could go 'damn you ip people! i shal track you all and get you off the net!' ..but you cant. you have to prove it was THEM. and bot networks are nothing new, you know. all they have to say, what? what is this tool? i have never seen it before!

and your scot free.
since no one can prove that YOU put it there. because a clever hacker CAN put it there.
and its co-ordinated via a damned IRC channel,...how basic can you get XD
but its not illigal to have an ip adress just hanging somewhere... so jeah..
'we cant help it that the anonymous guys like taking the targets we mark' /end of legal possibilites and their not actualy AIDING a criminal or anything., more likely, all the bots are aiding the ip poster, and thats not illigal XD

that, and tracking about 3million ip adresses will be quite, QUITE more costly then just ignoring them. XD

 

[Snor]

The thing is.. You can't really take down Anonymous. There is no body to target so to speak. No leadership, no organization. Only the idea and the hoard of anonymous who supports it.

Good luck to whom ever Anonymous chose to target.

you can, its like gardening. weeds don't have a leader or an organisation but if you destroy them and throw them out of your garden they don't come back or in the worst case the problem is reduced.

welcome to the escapist btw

nah moustachio, it doesnt workt like that.
its quite simple: Anonymous works like a volunairy bot netwerk.
all ddosing at the same time, you could go 'damn you ip people! i shal track you all and get you off the net!' ..but you cant. you have to prove it was THEM. and bot networks are nothing new, you know. all they have to say, what? what is this tool? i have never seen it before!

and your scot free.
since no one can prove that YOU put it there. because a clever hacker CAN put it there.
and its co-ordinated via a damned IRC channel,...how basic can you get XD
but its not illigal to have an ip adress just hanging somewhere... so jeah..
'we cant help it that the anonymous guys like taking the targets we mark' /end of legal possibilites and their not actualy AIDING a criminal or anything., more likely, all the bots are aiding the ip poster, and thats not illigal XD

that, and tracking about 3million ip adresses will be quite, QUITE more costly then just ignoring them. XD

I said it can be done. obviously its hard and some laws have to be changed and adjusted. just like gardening weed is hard to eradicate but not impossible.

honestly i don't give a fuck what they do but ignoring is indeed the most wise. but never say never because it can be done.