There seems to be a lot of disagreement about what Anonymous (the hackers) is and how they function. It is this discrepancy that becomes really bothersome as one is trying to track their movements through the news and the forums. For example, when the Sony incident occurred, a lot of people became upset that Anonymous had a rogue element suddenly stealing credit card information and causing problems for thousands of PSN users. Implications of rogue elements within a completely discreet organization suggests that Anonymous is not a typical organization with an established or official group membership. Yet people still argue over its composition.
This is where the Escapists come in. I don't know the full story behind Anonymous so I'm going to need all of you to fill in the blanks and see if we can't come to some kind of consensus on how Anonymous functions.
So, the way I see it Anonymous seems to be a cell organization, with each cell being comprised of a single hacker. These "members" have no official affiliation or complete recognition of each other due to the anonymous nature of Anonymous. Each member acts independently and only engages in activity when a message has been posted on their hub-site calling for a "mission", as it were. It reminds me a lot of Uplink in that regard; hackers acting on their own until drawn to action by a message.
Based on this cell organization would it be safe to assume that Anonymous has no official codes of conduct for its members? Also would it be safe to assume that Anonymous is not a standing army of hackers but, instead, a loose affiliation of hacking mercenaries popping in now and then to pursue whatever is posted in the Anonymous hub?
This is where the Escapists come in. I don't know the full story behind Anonymous so I'm going to need all of you to fill in the blanks and see if we can't come to some kind of consensus on how Anonymous functions.
So, the way I see it Anonymous seems to be a cell organization, with each cell being comprised of a single hacker. These "members" have no official affiliation or complete recognition of each other due to the anonymous nature of Anonymous. Each member acts independently and only engages in activity when a message has been posted on their hub-site calling for a "mission", as it were. It reminds me a lot of Uplink in that regard; hackers acting on their own until drawn to action by a message.
Based on this cell organization would it be safe to assume that Anonymous has no official codes of conduct for its members? Also would it be safe to assume that Anonymous is not a standing army of hackers but, instead, a loose affiliation of hacking mercenaries popping in now and then to pursue whatever is posted in the Anonymous hub?