Anonymous Launches Its Very Own Social Network
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
So basically Anonymous threw a fit after the other neighborhood kids wouldn't let him play with them and decided he would just make his own site?
Ah, yes, exactly.
Ah, yes, exactly.
Also Anon (which I think is more distinctive than Anonymous, as weird as that may seem) is not a hacktivism collective, they're a do-whatever-you-want collective, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised at this if they're not even capitalizing Internet.
It occurs to me that if a member of Anonymous was being anonymous, than social networking sites wouldn't know who they are, and thus wouldn't know to block them.
I could be wearing a Guy Fawkes mask right now, but you wouldn't know. Isn't that the whole point of Anon? Being, you know, anonymous.
(I'm not, btw, wearing a Guy Fawkes mask... despite the fact that they are terribly comfortable.)
I could be wearing a Guy Fawkes mask right now, but you wouldn't know. Isn't that the whole point of Anon? Being, you know, anonymous.
(I'm not, btw, wearing a Guy Fawkes mask... despite the fact that they are terribly comfortable.)
Sooo, someone is bringing back usenet?
as far as it being full of stupid people and trolls, there hasn't been a revolution in history not fueled by stupid people and trolls, smart people don't typically stand on the front lines of conflict if it can be avoided.
as far as it being full of stupid people and trolls, there hasn't been a revolution in history not fueled by stupid people and trolls, smart people don't typically stand on the front lines of conflict if it can be avoided.
Not surprising. For awhile now Anon has seemed to want their cake and eat it too. They want to be heroes of some digital revolution, but not actually suffer the blows that come with fighting for change. Nah, they'd rather hide behind a movie prop and countless wannabe members so they themselves remain unhurt.
History doesn't remember the nameless, Anon.
History doesn't remember the nameless, Anon.
stewox said:
In all honesty, you SHOULD be correct. But by nature of HAVING a social group, they've organized themselves into being 'A group.'
Well...sort of. Yes, Anonymous SHOULD be an ideal. But thats not what I'm sensing in the OP. I'm sensing some kind, probably around 12, wanted to sound cool. So he posted something that sounded grand, and said 'here is my social group for awesome people'.
Who is Anonymous? In my mind, its anyone who embodies the ideals that Anonymous stands for, and takes steps to support them. Anonymous pretenders are those who fly the flag of Anonymous as a justification for acting like a petulant child.
If the anon members were banned from Google+ and Gmail, that means Google can somehow identify the individuals of the non-group/group. How is it that authorities are having a hard time physically tracking them down if common sites like twitter and youtube and deny them access?
Isn't anonymous and social networking together a huge contradiction? Watch how quickly this turns into 4chan 2.0.
Did Anon get hacked?!SL33TBL1ND said:Umm... is it supposed to look like this?Andy Chalk said:
Yeah, kind of...Zarkov said:
Hmm...I kinda dig this. I actually dislike sites like Facebook, Google+, Twitter and so on because it's the same thing: try to be a kool kid by creating your own profile, shoot the shit for a while, meet strangers and acquire a eFamous status. And, at the fear of sounding like a hipster, it's too mainstream. I mean, even 5 year olds have Facebook. Yeah, I know they're supposed to be older than 13. But try telling that to them.
Anywho, I would join just for the lulz. I don't know yet if I like or hate these guys. And I gotta admit it's kinda childish what they did: Create their own site just because they were banned from another. You know that Simpson's episode where Bart is kicked out of the casino and a guy taunts him by telling him that he should open his own casino if he doesn't like the rules? And then he does that? And then the guy goes "Well, he sure showed me? ):"
Yeah, just like that. It's still funny.
Anywho, I would join just for the lulz. I don't know yet if I like or hate these guys. And I gotta admit it's kinda childish what they did: Create their own site just because they were banned from another. You know that Simpson's episode where Bart is kicked out of the casino and a guy taunts him by telling him that he should open his own casino if he doesn't like the rules? And then he does that? And then the guy goes "Well, he sure showed me? ):"
Yeah, just like that. It's still funny.
I'm not sure if to laugh or to facepalm.
They are trying to establish law for the lawless.
Order for the anarchists.
You know, it's too damn funny to not laugh.
They are trying to establish law for the lawless.
Order for the anarchists.
You know, it's too damn funny to not laugh.
Well looks like it finally happened.
Facebook blurred the lines between IRL and internet, hence scene kids IRL going 'ONLY 12 PEOPLE TURNED UP TO MY PARTY FOREVER ALONE LOLOLOL'.
If you can't beat 'em, give up and become them in the hope that it will spare you any more humiliation, I guess.
Facebook blurred the lines between IRL and internet, hence scene kids IRL going 'ONLY 12 PEOPLE TURNED UP TO MY PARTY FOREVER ALONE LOLOLOL'.
If you can't beat 'em, give up and become them in the hope that it will spare you any more humiliation, I guess.