Anonymous Strikes Back, Hacks "Internet Security" Firm

[agnosticOCD]

If Anon somehow does something so epic that it takes the government shutting down the internet on a national level, then at least you'd all know who to raid and beat the crap out of when the US turns into what Egypt's been experiencing. I respect Rule 14. I don't argue, but that's just because I'm busy not being a basement dweller.

I like how they stopped the firm that's trying to get them, but it makes you think about how vulnerable you can be with people like Anon going around.

 

[McWrath]

[Post removed by user.]

 

[brodie21]

i didnt find this funny, now i just think that anonymous is annoying. what is this fuss over? some douche who was leaking government secrets. of course they are going to stop that! no amount of technological douchebaggery is going to stop that, all they are doing is pissing people off, and who pays? we do. breeding a whole group of people who think its funny to post someones identity on the internet?

 

[Shjade]

However, I do think the site is better served with quick and decisive derailment of "silly" and un-worthy content... If we engender a community where fluff/sensationalist articles arent called into question, then nothing will set us apart from our inferior peers.

I think The Escapist is the best, and because I think it is the best. Part of that means we must all be ready to take a discerning look at the content.

Let me get this straight: you want the same site that features Zero Punctuation [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation], The Big Picture [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/2709-Magneto-Was-Right], Critical Miss [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/comics/critical-miss/8543-Critical-Miss-Children-of-Steam-2] and a number of other webcomics, video series and often satiricial article themes to cut "silly" and "un-worthy" content, and all that counts as "worthy" is what interests you?

I think you've confused The Escapist for CNN. Specifically, a version of CNN in which you're the producer and/or editor-in-chief. This isn't a hard news outlet; it's an online magazine primarily aimed toward gaming, electronics, the internet and, key element, entertainment.

I am confused by your statement of displeasure at finding sushi on the menu when you chose to eat at a Japanese restaurant.

 

[Deskimus Prime]

I think a major part of this whole affair that makes it interesting is that Anonymous is actually succeeding in doing something. (so far, anyway) I mean, I can't speak for the States, but here in Canada at least, everyone's got this feeling of powerlessness. Sure, there's nothing really unforgivable the government or major companies are doing right now -except maybe this whole internet usage cap- but these guys are actually trying to accomplish something big.

Standing up for Wikileaks was pretty damn cool, I won't lie. The way they did it was a little questionable, but still, I can't help but want to root for people who see things they don't like about the world, and not just trying to change them, but *actually* changing them.

Like them or not; whether you agree with their goals or methods, they're still trying to change things they see as unfair. Which is something I'm sure a lot of people would like to be able to do.

 

[Makon]

I sort of see this as a huge troll wars. I have both respects for both sides, but it is a bit like that.

On a side note -- a challenge for "Anonymous."

'Hey guys? How about putting all your amazing haxoring ability into cracking some terrorists sites? Or China's?

I'm sure the FBI would be your best buds then.

Yes, but where are the luls in that?

"The internet group known as 'Anonymous' has shut-down mainland China, tonight at 7." @_o

 

[Simalacrum]

On the letter, Anonymous claims to seize the website under section 14 of the rules of the Internet.

Now, the most popular rules of the Internet [http://asset.soup.io/asset/0850/2687_e0ac.jpeg] clearly states that section 14 is "do not argue with trolls - it means that they win", which really doesn't make sense under the context... XD

Two possibilities:

-He's reading from a different rulebook than you are.

-He's saying you shouldn't question his rule citation since doing so means you're arguing with him, which means he wins anyway.

I bring in possibility no.3:

we're all thinking too much about this and it was just some random number

 

[Gamegodtre]

truely the funniest thing ive seen this year. i really wonder if thats his real information?

 

[agnosticOCD]

I think a major part of this whole affair that makes it interesting is that Anonymous is actually succeeding in doing something. (so far, anyway) I mean, I can't speak for the States, but here in Canada at least, everyone's got this feeling of powerlessness. Sure, there's nothing really unforgivable the government or major companies are doing right now -except maybe this whole internet usage cap- but these guys are actually trying to accomplish something big.

Standing up for Wikileaks was pretty damn cool, I won't lie. The way they did it was a little questionable, but still, I can't help but want to root for people who see things they don't like about the world, and not just trying to change them, but *actually* changing them.

Like them or not; whether you agree with their goals or methods, they're still trying to change things they see as unfair. Which is something I'm sure a lot of people would like to be able to do.

Aye, you're right there. I was ecstatic when I first saw Anon's support for the Egyptian Revolution. Admirable though they may be, they would still remain a constant threat to ordinary people on the internet. That's my only concern.

 

[MaVeN1337]

Score one for FREEDOM Fuck you FBI.

 

[Gamegodtre]

The FBI is THRILLED about this I mean in times when layoffs are happening they can hire even more agents to track down the "dangerous members of anonymous" I mean they could say that the only way to stop them is to catch all of them, that could take years meanwhile the deficit gets bigger a bin laden's corpse has not been found yet.

Trying to catch all of Anon is like trying to catch all the pokemon.

no thats wrong you can catch all the pokemon it just takes a ungodly amount of effort and about 200 hours of time, trying to catch Anon is like trying to collect all the porn on the internet then categorizing it into genre followed by amount of kilobytes per file.

 

[MikailCaboose]

wow anonymous really needs to be taken out there too dangerous and too good at what they do

They never harmed anyone physically. They just wreck parties, that's all.

The question is where one draws the line. There quite possibly may come a time where they do go too far and cause some serious, irreparable damage.

 

[Rad Party God]

Go Anonymous!, Boo FBI!

 

[agnosticOCD]

The FBI is THRILLED about this I mean in times when layoffs are happening they can hire even more agents to track down the "dangerous members of anonymous" I mean they could say that the only way to stop them is to catch all of them, that could take years meanwhile the deficit gets bigger a bin laden's corpse has not been found yet.

Trying to catch all of Anon is like trying to catch all the pokemon.

no thats wrong you can catch all the pokemon it just takes a ungodly amount of effort and about 200 hours of time, trying to catch Anon is like trying to collect all the porn on the internet then categorizing it into genre followed by amount of kilobytes per file.

they don't really have to catch all of them just enough of them to damage its ability to operate.

That will still take a huge amount of effort and an endless amount of time. These people have no real organizational structure. Admirable and efficient, but that's exactly what makes them dangerous.

 

[agnosticOCD]

wow anonymous really needs to be taken out there too dangerous and too good at what they do

They never harmed anyone physically. They just wreck parties, that's all.

The question is where one draws the line. There quite possibly may come a time where they do go too far and cause some serious, irreparable damage.

They've certainly done some very low things to individuals in /b/, I would draw the line when they've decided to start policing the internet, but they don't seem to have such intentions. Nevertheless, it's in their capability.

 

[phoenix352]

wow anonymous really needs to be taken out there too dangerous and too good at what they do

They never harmed anyone physically. They just wreck parties, that's all.

The question is where one draws the line. There quite possibly may come a time where they do go too far and cause some serious, irreparable damage.

every government has caused such things in history things that hurt many people why are there still governments then?

not all decisions are for the good of the people and in our age governments are mostly corrupt in the pursuit for personal gain. corporations have more say then "the people" ...
the internet is possibly the last place left where the people are in control.

 

[Ken Sapp]

My only thought is that Anonymous is treading on dangerous territory. They may be able to get away with their normal tricks but Government don't like having their noses tweaked.

 

[Devil's Due]

So, I have a question - if Anonymous is this amorphous blob with no organization...who decides what to put in the open letter?

I'm sure your question have been answered already a few times, but if not, I'll try to explain it.

Anonymous is like a collective group of ideals and morals merged into one. To give an idea, lets use an example of say, a mob. This mob has hundreds of random people mashed up together, milling about doing absolutely nothing. Suddenly, someone wants to move, and they shout "Hey, let's move over to the next street!" Suddenly, the mob begins to do this due to not having anything else to do to occupy itself, or it feels like it should morally move there, for whatever reason. Along the way, lets say there's some obstructions, such as trash cans. No one has to shout "move the trash cans," because when they reach it, the closest members already begin to move it without thought. They do this mainly because of "the group is more important than the individual" mentality.

But along the way, there are some that shout "lets kick some trash cans along the way to the street!" Suddenly some begin to kick trash cans just because they can, or because it amuses them, while the rest continue on to the street.

It's a unified mass that has no leader, that has no goals, but is a collective. One thought is passed around, and should anyone believe it's a worthwhile thought, then they'll commit to it and soon it gives them a reason and objective to complete. So for the one that posted the open letter is one of the people that has to "move the trash can" along the way, as it is a necessity for the overall goal they're working on.

(Sorry for the long, boring post)

 

[Newbonomicon]

On the letter, Anonymous claims to seize the website under section 14 of the rules of the Internet.

Now, the most popular rules of the Internet [http://asset.soup.io/asset/0850/2687_e0ac.jpeg] clearly states that section 14 is "do not argue with trolls - it means that they win", which really doesn't make sense under the context... XD

Two possibilities:

-He's reading from a different rulebook than you are.

-He's saying you shouldn't question his rule citation since doing so means you're arguing with him, which means he wins anyway.

3: By opposing Anon, they have argued with the trolls. They are claiming the site as their spoils of war.

 

[agnosticOCD]

My only thought is that Anonymous is treading on dangerous territory. They may be able to get away with their normal tricks but Government don't like having their noses tweaked.

Governments only have their military and police to do the dirty work for them, but if the government is taken down, all the guns will be useless and when governments resort to guns to police the internet, that just means they've lost.