Poll: So where do you stand on Anonymous and why?
- Thread starter creager91
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I wouldn't. I define Anonymous as anyone who posts on 4chan and related websites. In my experience, most of 4chan hates the Legion mindset. At least I know I do.opuri said:
I still think that the ones who do the hacking scare the ever-living crap out of me. Like the whole counter hacker thing that I vaguely heard about on the daily show while I wasnt paying full attention to....Probably wrong but I think it was some guy was paid by the government to counter anon and then pretty much had all of his e-mails and private info publicized...is that how it went idk but if they can and do do that at will thats what scares me, just that someone can easily be watching me, i guess after that I sort of saw them as like the big brother of the internet...always watching...
If anyone is doing their part to make sure that governments and corporations think twice about stepping on the little guys (i.e., you and me), it's Anonymous.
I don't always agree with their methods or their mentality, but I can appreciate what seems to be their general objective.
I don't always agree with their methods or their mentality, but I can appreciate what seems to be their general objective.
Some things can only be said from an anonymous standpoint. In a world without prejudice or profiling existed, sure, anonymous would be completely unnecessary. Unfortunately, we still live in a world where ideas and perspectives are judged by their sources, due to age, gender, etc, etc. You know the rest.
So Anonymous being used as a way for an idea to be seen as traceless or origin as a way to be accepted without prejudgment I think is not only fair but logically reasonable.
However, someone being anonymous to say things that are rude or upfront when they are unnecessary (e.g. internet chatrooms) is just a way of hiding from the consequences of ones actions, and is not tolerable.
That's the way I see it. Kind of an unusual question, but interesting.
So Anonymous being used as a way for an idea to be seen as traceless or origin as a way to be accepted without prejudgment I think is not only fair but logically reasonable.
However, someone being anonymous to say things that are rude or upfront when they are unnecessary (e.g. internet chatrooms) is just a way of hiding from the consequences of ones actions, and is not tolerable.
That's the way I see it. Kind of an unusual question, but interesting.
They're beyond counter-productive in their "war for the freedom of information". They're doing more harm than good.
I also find them to be highly hypocritical. How can you fight for the freedom to access information, when you're keeping information about yourself a secret?
I can't wait until they die down and the world forgets about them.
I also find them to be highly hypocritical. How can you fight for the freedom to access information, when you're keeping information about yourself a secret?
I can't wait until they die down and the world forgets about them.
As long as they don't cause any inconveniences for me, I don't care.
Though if they go too far, they might do for the word "anonymous" what Hitler did for the swastika (it used to be a symbol for good fortune).
But I doubt they'll go far enough to become known as a group of cyber-terrorists...
Though if they go too far, they might do for the word "anonymous" what Hitler did for the swastika (it used to be a symbol for good fortune).
But I doubt they'll go far enough to become known as a group of cyber-terrorists...
Love what they are doing. If the press isn't going to do any reporting anymore, somebody has to do it. And actually important information is going to be venomously withheld by those with a vested interest, but people with money shouldn't be the last word on freedom of information. I applaud Anonymous for going where others dare not tread. Also, they wear V for Vendetta masks, which is clearly AWESOME.