Anonymous Attacks US Government

Recommended Videos

tehweave

Gaming Wildlife
Apr 5, 2009
1,942
0
0
Xzi said:
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?
This.
Ldude893 said:
It's official.

Anonymous has declared war on America.
And this.

And furthermore, I think we are about to see the end of 4chan and anonymous. They attacked the freakin GOVERNMENT of the UNITED STATES. If the US has anything to say about it, 4chan is gone forever, and they'll track the IPs. I don't care how good of hackers 4chan are... They're dead meat at this point.
 

Signa

Noisy Lurker
Legacy
Jul 16, 2008
4,746
6
43
Country
USA
Therumancer said:
_tinned_magpie_ said:
Why do I get the feeling that Anonymous are only going to make things worse? I mean, declaring war on Gene Simmons was just hilarious, but I don't think the Government will react well if they keep it up. If we act like children, they're going to keep on treating us like children, including taking our toys away. Clearly we're not mature enough to use them.

I admit, I've pirated songs. I don't like the idea of pirating films, and usually I've got no problem with buying my music, but occasionally there's something you can't find anywhere else. So I've no real problem on the crackdown on piracy, it's the restrictions of Fair Use that bother me. They're coming down far too hard on anything that even vaguely resembles copyright infringement, and it ends up upsetting a lot of people. Things like tribute videos or putting a song in the background of your own work isn't hurting anyone, or so I think. My university can't even use pictures in lecture slides any more, or else they'll get fined.

I don't know much about copyright law but I think the system needs a re-think, because right now it isn't going too well. We've taken baby steps in terms of Creative Commons, but we need compromise, because it isn't ever going to go away completely. At least, that's my opinion.

Actually Anonymous has the right idea, you have to be willing to take on the goverment to get anything done as far as society is concerned. If you just figure "oh well, we/I will annoy the goverment I should give up or they will crush me" then your basicaly conceding to tyranny. Our right to keep and bear arms is specifically intended so we can go after politicians and the like with firearms if they need was to arise.

Anonymous is simply doing things differantly, fighting for information issues through information networks.

Let me be blunt about something though, I support free speech heavily, and I think the game and music industries are a bunch of crooks who do not operate within the American spirit of capitolism. The game industry in paticular acts like a cartel.

On the other hand Anonymous attacking the copyrights office seems to be going a little too far, largely because I *DO* support the right to patent actual products and ideas. I understand that the copyrights are a big part of this entire battle, but I'd think groups like the FCC and paticular politicians and industry leaders would be better targets. Of course then again I'm viewing this from outside, not fighting the war, and as I've said before, this kind of civil law issue is hardly my specialty.

I don't support piracy, but at the same time I don't support the industry against it. As odd as that sounds, it's a simple matter of me feeling that both sides are crooks, and in the final equasion neither have the best interests of me, the gamer, at heart. Stealing games so the people making them can't make money doesn't encourage their development. At the same time running the industry to constantly gouge the consumer, and engaging in illegal and immoral business practices to do so hurts the consumers.

In the end I tend to feel that the conflict between the industry and pirates is a symbiotic one where they both cause each other to exist as problems. The gaming industry by being greedy, abusing customers (hi Mr. Kotick), and engaging in a lot of it's current practices (DRM, DLC Gouging, etc...) causes pirates to flourish, it's hard to feel guilty when your robbing a bunch of arrogant crooks. By the same token the industry claims that it needs to act like it does because of the piracy and uses the piracy as a "catch all" excuse to justify it's behavior.... and let's be honest, whie it was smaller to begin with the war between pirates and the gaming industry has always been there to some extent. It's simply got bigger as the market has grown. There was all kinds of odd stuff going on in this regard back in the days of the "Commodore 64" and "Apple 2", and video games were never exactly cheap. Even back with the "Atari 2600" I remember as a little kid understanding how crazy the price of a game like "Yar's Revenge" was.
I had to quote you to say "great post."

I'd add more, but I think most people have it covered (at least up to page 3). Anon sucks, Copyright sucks more. and as cited before, look no further than EDGE.
 

Enigma6667

New member
Apr 3, 2010
766
0
0
Say what you will about their goals, at least they actually get shit done.

But about their goals: I personally, hate when copyright bullshit stops me from using shit on YouTube, or listening to shit on YouTube, even though it is under Fair Use, but copyright is still highly important. And I don't really think that crashing a website for just a measly half hour achieves anything...
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
usucdik said:
Tdc2182 said:
usucdik said:
So do you mean to imply that the holiday based on the guy is because the people are pro-theocracy?
It wouldn't be the first time society completely missed the point of something.
But it would be the first time for this case. You just don't understand the intentions.
No actually, it is still the same.

I believe this article mentions Anonymous, I could be wrong. But it does explain it.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18606_8-historic-symbols-that-mean-opposite-what-you-think.html

Very first one, number 8.

Enjoy.
 

Signa

Noisy Lurker
Legacy
Jul 16, 2008
4,746
6
43
Country
USA
Finch58 said:
It is somewhat scary as to how much people can achieve under the anonymous discuise.
If by scary, you mean that it's scary that no one wants to fight the power when need be because of the loss of anonymity and thus we are controlled by the powers we put in place for fear of punishment. Yes.

I agree too with what I think you meant, but it's far more scary when you put the shoe one the other foot and see why anonymity is so important to these people.
 

instantbenz

Pixel Pusher
Mar 25, 2009
744
0
0
viva la revolution! good to see that shit like this isn't just in movies ... fighting back and taking action shouldn't be so scant an occurrence. if i could i would join the fight. seems like a good bit of romanticism.
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
usucdik said:
Tdc2182 said:
No actually, it is still the same.

I believe this article mentions Anonymous, I could be wrong. But it does explain it.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18606_8-historic-symbols-that-mean-opposite-what-you-think.html

Very first one, number 8.

Enjoy.
So basically you are quoting something that had the same wrong impression that you did. Great job making that point.
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.
 

[Gavo]

New member
Jun 29, 2008
1,675
0
0
Xzi said:
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?
QFT.

What they'll do long run, though, I have no idea.
 

Endocrom

New member
Apr 6, 2009
1,242
0
0
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

New member
Jul 6, 2010
1,751
0
0
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

Senior Member
Mar 19, 2009
573
0
21
Death God said:
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.
 

Kingjackl

New member
Nov 18, 2009
1,041
0
0
slopeslider said:
Death God said:
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

Leader of the Cult of Skaro
Jul 20, 2008
10,237
0
0
Endocrom said:
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

New member
Sep 8, 2010
42
0
0
Kingjackl said:
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

New member
Mar 24, 2008
10
0
0
Jesus Phish said:
Xzi said:
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.
 

dietpeachsnapple

New member
May 27, 2009
1,273
0
0
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

New member
May 27, 2009
1,273
0
0
Csae said:
Kingjackl said:
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.