I'm suprised there are no threads like this yet, I know there are threads about the PSN network going down and how it is blamed on Anonymous though, but what I'd like to ask you; What do you think of the group known as Anonymous? I for one support them. By support them, I mean in spirits, because I do not know how to hack. I know some of the stuff they have done might be a bit... strange, but I think they are a good group to actually have. the PSN downage is because of what Anonymous believe to be sub-groups of themselves. A long downtime was not what they was going for, supposedly. I think my favorite activity has to be Project Chanology though. Anyway; discuss!
I don't mind them. Although they take things to far sometimes and kind of flaunt their power. It honestly depends on the situation. I hate them and I don't.
I swing more to the side of disliking them. I don't like their methods (stealing family/personal details and posting them is plain wrong) and they appear to me to be incredibly arrogant. Plus, sometimes even the group are unsure what they're doing. Like with the PSN DDoS attack. One of the members had said that psn users were 'collateral damage', while another said it wasn't in their interest to bother users and that's why they stopped. It can be confusing at times since there is no leader as such to lay down the lines, which has it's positives and negatives. I know they're fighting for our rights of freedom, but they're just an inconvenience to the people who had nothing to do with whatever they're fighting for. To be honest, I get the impression that many of them just jump'd on the bandwagon for kicks and giggles. Don't get me wrong, some of the stuff they fight for is great for us, but I dislike their methods and attitude.
Just wanted to add this: But yeah, I can see that people disagree with their methods and attitude, but freedom and censorship is something people have to do with though? What they fight for is not solely anti-piracy or anti-scientology, but for example the attack they did in Australia, "Titstorm," I fully approve of that protest. I've always been fascinated by Vigilantism too though, so it might have something to do with it.
Anonimoose didn't do it. Plus, it sort of depends on how Anonimoose play their actions. They can be either, good, or bad. Mostly negative though. Eh, my opinion.
I think they fight for decent things, like freedom of speech and all that jazz. But I don't agree with their methods of doing it. Like Kitty said, there's the stalking, the DoS attacks (which ARE illegal), and such... it's not right. So while I feel bad that they're getting targeted for the Sony thing, which they didn't do, I don't have much sympathy--they kind of brought it upon themselves by associating themselves with DoS attacks.
Anonymous is, has always been, and always will be about the lulz. That's it. You can say that they're fighting for freedom of speech or whatever, but they're really just trying to have fun and this is their way of doing it. When they made fun of scinetology, that was just because it was an easy target. Stealing Facebook passwords isn't the hardest thing in the world either, and the results are often damn funny. And when all they get is positive reinforcment you can't really blame them.
Yeah, but I mean, even though they started out as being about the lulz, they do have a bit more serious rep. than before, wouldn't you agree? They don't forget, and do not forgive, not too lulz, if you get it? ;)
Yes, they have a serious reputation, but it doesn't really mean anything. Anonymous doesn't REALLY blow up yellow vans, and they didn't REALLY take down PSN. What they DO do is blast Rick Astley when scientologists are trying to have church. What they DO do is post gay porn on youtube and facebook. They have a reputation that doesn't represent who they really are.
Oh yeah, I had forgotten about the youtube porn! But yeah, good point. They wouldn't be violent, only mess around. But I mean, what about the 2009 Iranian election protests, "Operation Tunisia" and "Operation Egypt," What I mean is that they do more than only lulz, they do things that matter (for some people more than others ofc)
Neither of those things have gone anywhere or made a serious impact. Yeah, some of them take things more seriously than others, but the vast majority of what is actually done is more like operation Youtube Porn Day
i might be missing something but i don't understand why they can deny hacking Sony and expect people to believe them because they're supposed to be annoynomous. so how can we believe anyone claiming to be speaking for them? i remember seeing youtube videos claiming to be them, some taking credit for hacking Sony, while others deny it. the thing is, since no one ever knew who they were, how can they discredit fakes? i think it was actually kind of smart for whoever hacked Sony to blame Annoynomous since they can't prove they weren't involved AND hide under anonymity at the same time. anyways, i stumbled upon this article last week about them and it's a pretty good read. it raises some pretty good points. http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tr-out-loud/when-does-the-group-anonymous-go-too-far/3764
I don't think their efforts in tipping police about known criminals was for the lulz. But then again, Anonymous isn't always a single entity; some members do things for fun, others actually do constructive things.
What I read was that someone had left a file after the hacking that said; "Anonymous, we don't forget" or something, and every hacker out there knows; if you're gonna blame someone else for something; leave a trail. And no one in Anon would be that dumb, I believe at least. EDIT: Haha; "This guest post was sent in anonymously by a TechRepublic member."
Becuase Anonymous is always very outspoken about the things they do. You never see them deny stuff that they did. They're a proud people.
I find them interesting and fascinating by some actions. Of course there will be corrupt members/factions and there will be very serious ones being vigilantes. I think the message of free speech is good and some approaches have not been right; but I suppose being a vigilante means they're going to be using illegal methods as part of an attack. Some will be in it for the lulz but some are there for the real meaning. I think the anonymity very odd because most factions/groups needs a leader for control and order. So I think there must be some form of a leader or a group of leaders. I think they also marked an attack against the Westboro Baptist Church (Google them; I blame nobody for hating such a cult) but then again...that "church" make up their own **** to keep their own public profile living (which sadly I'm doing by this post...)
