On Anonymous

A_who

New member
Sep 17, 2010
64
0
0
I wish Shamus would talk about something other than what Extra Credits talks about for once. Borg?
 

Jenx

New member
Dec 5, 2007
160
0
0
I have posted on 4chan on and off for a few years. I have only posted TWICE using any kind of a name.

I am the Devil!
 

Retosa

New member
Jul 10, 2010
107
0
0
Let me begin by stating that I love how every thread that deals with anonymous ends up with a bunch of new faces (or returning banned faces) seem to crop up.

Clipclop said:
Chatboy 91 said:
Clipclop said:
Chatboy 91 said:
CM156 said:
snip
Still holding onto that blatant absolute lie huh? well than I guess its time to kick it up a notch.

http://711chan.org/i/
http://boards.808chan.org/i/
http://rockstararmy.com/i/
http://partyvan.info/wiki/Main_Page

please everybody, enjoy these boards. They attack everything from a school{not fucking kidding, check the first link}, to myspace users, facebook users, hacking random poeple and anything vile you can possibly think of. This doesn't even touch on the racism and homophobia happening with almost every post. Most of these attacks are completely unwarranted. You will find that these "great acts of kindness and safeguarding our liberties" are strangely in the minority here. gee I wonder why... Oh wait, thats because they are BULLIES.

of course these aren't bullies. they are doing it for free speech. They are doing it for human rights and for US.
Right, because the idiots on those boards actually have any true affiliation with Anonymous.
of course they do and you know it. Hell they recite the "pledge" a thousand times across the boards. They aren't even a splinter group, just anons, you admitting to it or not is rather moot to the obvoius. They make no attempt to separate themselves from the collective and anyone at any time can jump in and out and claim they are or not anonymous based on either they think the raid is worthwhile.

This is the part of anonymous they don't want you to see.
Now, where to begin....

We are Anonymous
We do not forgive
We do not forget
Expect us

Now, I have a name attached to my account.
Searching my online handle on Google (if you know what you're doing) will eventually lead to other accounts across the internet I have with the same name.
Eventually this WILL lead back to information about me, because I have not made much of an attempt to hide myself.

Am I still Anonymous? I just quoted their mantra. I also go on the *chan's, read anonops, etc. Does this make me Anonymous?

No, as I am not anonymous here. I can be traced back to a person, with just a little ingenuity. However, if I had a different handle here that couldn't be traced back to me (without using much more complex means that would knowledge that would allow you access to my IP address through the forum, etc etc etc) I would be anonymous, and therefore technically part of "Anonymous".

Anonymous is many things, and it's funny because everyone who's arguing about what Anonymous is, has provided some little bit of insight on it.

Anonymous is everyone on the internet who wishes to remain anonymous. This includes the many instances of /b/, Newfags and Oldfags alike (until their anonymity is stripped, of course).

This also includes the hacktivist groups who do their best to try to do GOOD, using the name of Anonymous (this will include a core group who do heavy lifting, while posting information and getting a cloud of followers to join them), they also use Anonymous as a cloud to hide their activities, while bolstering their numbers and anonymity. They will take on whatever cause they feel is just, and are also the ones who are at the forefront of the protection of a free internet. They are also the ones who will deny being a part of activities that go against their ideals.

This also includes the skilled hackers who do shit "For the Lulz", or because they hate something or someone. They will recruit (generally the same methods as the hacktivists) for some schemes, or stick to their core groups (if they have a core group, many are lonewolves), depending on what they need/want to accomplish. They don't give a shit whether or not anyone knows who they are/what they did. They'll do it, and take profit from it if they can. (Note: There IS a currency that is fairly anonymous and easy to transfer, Bitcoin [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade]) They'll let people wonder if it was "Anonymous", and rightly so. As they are another face of what has become "Anonymous".

The problem is that people decided that being "Anonymous" meant being part of a specific collective, rather than the natural state of being on the internet. And this is interesting because now hacker groups that used to pick a specific name for themselves now have a blanket group to fall under that will spread suspicion over an incredibly wide userbase, if no other easily identifiable evidence is found. While it means they won't take credit for it the way they would if they had an easily identifiable name, such as our friends the Lulz Boat, it gives them a lot more security. This is why I find that people claiming "Anonymous are a bunch of attention seeking man-children" to be such a preposterous notion. The mask is too broad, and everyone who has spent any time within the 'collective' of anonymous, and considered themselves a part of it, knows this.

Being anonymous should be the state of BEING on the internet. I honestly believe that a lot of this "Anonymous" stuff has come from EVERYWHERE on the internet requiring a login name, with most places making it 'against the rules' to have more than one account. And of course, the appearance of social networking on the internet. While I knew it was going to happen some day, I didn't expect it to change the rules the way it did. It started the push for internet anonymity to be quashed. I see people here on the Escapist pushing for anonymity to end so that people can be held accountable for what they say and do on the internet. THAT sickens me, to be honest. The internet is one of the last places where you can say what you REALLY feel without backlash, if you know what you're doing of course. Problem is, everyone's decided that they WANT the internet to change so that they can feel safe and cozy on it. And honestly, this is WRONG. You will never be completely safe on the internet. Someone with knowledge will always prey on those who don't know, or those who don't at least moderately protect themselves. The first thing most parents say to their children who go on the internet is "Don't tell anyone who you are, how old you are, or where you're from", and they should follow this example themselves. And yet, you go on Facebook and see people making Facebook pages for their children.

What is going to happen within the next couple of years will determine whether we can truly stay safely anonymous on the internet, or whether we all have to register our Government Issued Photo ID with our ISP to get a IPv6(or a newly defined protocol) IP address that will allow us access to the internet.
 

Dmitri Monro

New member
Apr 29, 2011
2
0
0
ok, ok, ok. Kudos to Shamus for saying something sensible. Turd sandwiches to some other people for spouting the usual insipid crap. That is all.
 

Evill_Bob

New member
Nov 18, 2009
85
0
0
Anon suffers from the very reason it has rarely been caught, the fact that everyone is anonymous. They can?t be stopped permanently because they have no set leadership (though they have prominent figures who host their meeting grounds and build their software that, if targeted, could bring down the network) also there is no accountability for what they do because there is no set leadership to make others actually follow Anon ?ideals? and punish those who do not. Though there is much tout about ?newfags? and what have you, they are as much a part of Anonymous as any other member due to its nature. As much as they want to claim that the ?bad apples? do not represent the group as a whole it does show what kind of operations can exist under the protection of their swarm. This is why I think Anonymous is incompetent. Note: not evil just incompetent, but just as much if not more harm can come from incompetency as evil. If you give someone a good place to plan and organize an assault, don?t act innocent when the counter-strike comes. They have given shelter to those who seek to cause nothing but harm in today?s world as much as they have given shelter for those who seek freedom of speech. So when Anonymous meets its eventual end, for all things will eventually end, no one can blame the hand that makes the killing blow.

Also I see a lot of people linking this hate against Anonymous as coming from ?newfags? or Sony fanboys. Not so, since many people have been in internet communities that have been assaulted by Anonymous. The backlash of their many actions be they for good, evil, or ?lulz? does build resentment and that is something they will have to just deal with.
 

Lorechaser

New member
Aug 28, 2004
80
0
0
klasbo said:
If you want to hate someone, start with Andrew Wakefield. 50+ deaths every year since 2006, and counting.
Gods, do I. I recently found out he lives in Austin, TX now. I *used* to live in Austin. I wish I had known at the time, so I could have adjusted my route home to throw rotten fruit at his place every damn day.

Honestly. I have an autistic child, and I despise the man. He's done more to set Autism research back than any other human alive, as people spend millions of dollars and countless hours disputing and discussing his random ass baseless study.

At least he's lost his license to practice medicine at this point.
 

ckam

Make America Great For Who?
Oct 8, 2008
1,618
0
0
I would definitely have said something lengthy that shows agreement to what Shamus, fucking awesome name by the way, is saying, but I just don't really feel like doing so after midnight.
 

rembrandtqeinstein

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,173
0
0
Imagine the police drag you in and explain that they want the names of all of the people in your organization.
I have to take the opportunity to post this video. The TL;DW is talking to cops under any circumstance is a bad idea. The only words you should say are "am I free to go?" and if the answer is no then the only proper response is "I would like to speak to an attorney"

 

Grey Walker

New member
Jul 9, 2010
135
0
0
Retosa said:
Let me begin by stating that I love how every thread that deals with anonymous ends up with a bunch of new faces (or returning banned faces) seem to crop up.

Clipclop said:
Chatboy 91 said:
Clipclop said:
Chatboy 91 said:
CM156 said:
snip
-snip-
-snip-
-snip-
-snip- (It's not too far up, give it a read.)
This is a topic well worth discussing, perhaps even in a thread on it's own.

Do we want anonymity on the Internet, or accountability?

Complete anonymity allows for people to spout their strongest feelings for or against anything without repercussions. There are no societal pressures to counteract how you feel or to regulate what you say. This allows for the discussion of controversial thoughts and topics without the feeling that someone will punish you.

Of course, there are problems with such freedoms, as demonstrated by forums and threads such as /b/. (Note: I don't go on 4chan, although my friends have shown some of the threads to me in the past. I apologize in advance for any false statements.)

To counteract the chaos created by anonymity, accountability leaked in, assigning people a username or at least making note of an IP address, which could be used by moderators to enforce rules. True anonymity is lost at this point, and some societal pressure returns through authority figures.

With the advent of social networking and linking to profiles, it is easy for a person to surrender their anonymity to anyone who wishes to do a bit of research, allowing for more personal rebuttals and attacks than were previously possible.

Now one can purposefully create an "anonymous" account, but I'm uncertain as to what percentage do so. I imagine it's pretty low.

To level the playing field, should every person be held accountable to their actions on the Internet the same as they would in reality? Or should it be anarchy, where accountability flies out the window, and it falls to the individual to govern themselves? Is there a compromise that can be reached between the two?

*Going a little off topic here*

Freedom of speech is not as well defined as I would like it to be. You may hold the idea that you can speak out for anything, but as soon as you launch in to hate speech or symbols, you have to deal with harassment laws or worse. (Again, rather ignorant of this topic, anyone who can clarify has my gratitude.)

Freedom of speech only seems to apply as long as there isn't a strong enough opposition, and it has its place in everyday life.

But should those same restrictions apply on the Internet?
 

Hristo Tzonkov

New member
Apr 5, 2010
422
0
0
Nick_Snyder said:
Hristo Tzonkov said:
Clipclop said:
Gonna make this as simple as possible for you. Its a 12 year old acting stupid online. a bunch of mostly 21+ year olds completely wrecked her shit in the HUNDREDS. NOTHING she could have done would warrant this.

Nothing. And guess what? if they had come out from behind their keyboards, instead of being completely slimy poeple dispensing "justice" from hundreds of miles away. They would have all been arrested and put into INTENSIVE THERAPY for harassing in mass a 12 year old girl because she "deserved it"

This is not the way functioning humans adults are supposed to work. This is SICKENING.
Neither should a 12 yo girl function that way.It's her retarded kind that invented the kiddy cyber bullying.Running around fb posting shit on slightly chubby children further ruining their self esteem.You probably don't even know about that problem around the internet and it's not for the lulz or spawned from 4chan/anonymous.

PS:She did deserve it.And I lold when I saw it.

PSS:Thanks for making it simple.Totally reminded me of the whole ordeal and got me cheered up.
No 12 year old deserves that! She's 12 for Christ sakes! When you were 12 did you ever say anything relatively intelligent?
I didn't go around bullying anyone.Although I could've since it was the age when people shared a lot of things over the internet.
 

Hristo Tzonkov

New member
Apr 5, 2010
422
0
0
Starke said:
Massive snip
Thanks for calling my ideology stupid.We can totally clash and measure their IQ.The girl claimed she was 16.Trying to troll,saying she has tits etc.Tits or gtfo is a rule of the internet.She could have always hidden for a while.Apologised.Simple actions that any 12 yo would know.I know I did that age.

I'd rather not have some industry clown speak his mind with something rather offensive because he thinks he's untouchable.

Justin Bieber is already a laughing stock.That said people don't just attack him out of spite.There was also the case where he put a guy's phone number on twitter and told his fans he was a troll.Effectively bullying the kid.But you know best right.
 

Macrobstar

New member
Apr 28, 2010
896
0
0
Ericb said:
Don't feed the troll. Some people always seem to forget that.

I'll forgive some potential newbies here, but even you Shamus? I'm disappoint.

iDoom46 said:
(...) and most people these days aren't racist.
God bless your innocence and may one day those words be nothing but truth.
wow. where do you live where 51% of people have a hatred for other races
 

klasbo

New member
Nov 17, 2009
217
0
0
Clipclop said:
I just use all caps to illustrate words of importance, not to slam you over the head that I'm right...even through i know I am.
I'd like to see the reason why you're right. I don't even know what you think you're right about.
Clipclop said:
I don't have to prove myself because its a well know fact
Uh..
Clipclop said:
anonymous is not a "harmless entity"
Sure, neither am I
Clipclop said:
anybody who has been online for a single day could tell you this.
This is a complete non-argument. You haven't said anything here, apart from "people aren't harmless".
Clipclop said:
last of all, your side is just, if not more biased than mine. How many poeple so far said that girl deserved it? How many have had a completely callous and cavalier attitude towards anons doings?
My side so far is just that you have not in any way made a case for your point. I have nowhere said I support anonymous. I have not made any statement on the girl-story (which I don't know the details of anyway). Attacking me for a point of view I don't have is a bit of a fail.
 

BrotherRool

New member
Oct 31, 2008
3,834
0
0
The thing about Anonymous is they also like to combine their anonymity with the other famous internet equation and pretend to be idiots. At least with protesters, there is a chance for dialogue and discussion. Not only do Anonymous delight in choosing silly ideas it's much hard to get a grip on convincing them out of it.

But I do think they do normally manage to keep it within decent protesting limits. And as they "said" (and it is very hard for anonymous to actually say anything, which makes the dialogue part a little worse) just before the PSN crash, messing up with things like the PSN isn't cool and that's the sort of thing that goes too far.

Saying that anonymous were fine with trying to post the CEO's family contact details online, which is far less cool
 

Kenjitsuka

New member
Sep 10, 2009
3,051
0
0
A way to avoid getting everyone arrested when one gets caught is to work in small groups called Cells.
Which is what terrorists have been doing for a loooong time now.
Semi-anonimity is a viable organisational form, without the Internet.