Men vs Culture

Jan 26, 2008

Where can I sign up?

19 sucka ass fools had something to say:

A Jokersaid...: That makes more sense if you watch the 2nd one first...but pretty cool. I'm all for killing whiney emo bitches and spoiling the shitty harry potter books.; January 27, 2008 11:08 AM
Moon Trampsaid...: Maybe I'm a little old school here, but I still believe targeting random or "innocent" people (yes you can make an argument that no one is innocent) is unacceptable.

Go after Scientology, go after the government, go after Fox News, but sending death threats to some random family is lame. Why take over someone's Myspace page? Is that really all that funny? Does that accomplish anything?

It seems to me that Anonymous is really just a collection of groups and individuals working separately and with no organization nor unifying principle other then whatever entertains them. Again, I may be out of date here, but I don't see what that accomplishes.; January 28, 2008 9:58 AM
Lankowniasaid...: I have to agree with Moon Tramps question. This seems no better than a schoolyard bully picking on someone simply for their own amusement because they can (or perhaps because they feel the need to compensate for something). Disagreeing with someones religious beliefs or taste in books/music seems no better/worse to me than picking on someone for wearing clothes that don't fit the cultural norm.

Or am I missing the point entirely?; January 28, 2008 10:05 AM
Space Zombiesaid...: Agreed--as much as I hate to say it, FOX News is right: as long as anonymous is targeting random victims, they should be considered cyber-terrorists. Not to mention that these kinds of pranks can have disastrous effects on people--especially kids.
Hackers are the biggest bunch of pussies in the criminal world.; January 28, 2008 10:11 AM
Moon Trampsaid...: True enough, y'all may have heard about the girl that ended up killing herself in at least part because of myspace. Story goes she met a boy on myspace, became close, and then the boy turned on her and insulted the hell out of her. Turns out the "boy" was actually a girl from school acting with the help of her mother.

Not saying that the myspace thing drove her to suicide, but I know that if something similar had happened to me back when I was 15 or 16 it would have messed me up.; January 28, 2008 10:23 AM
Jay Gee Whizsaid...: I don't really think you're supposed to take this so literally or seriously. It's just theatrics.

Also, the fact that you're generalizing on hackers, means you have little to no understanding of what they are. They're all over the board. They're not an organized group with a common purpose. Some of them aren't criminals. The original meaning of the word is a hack, a copycat. Someone that takes someone else's code, modifies it slightly, and claims it as their own.; January 28, 2008 10:26 AM
Jay Gee Whizsaid...: Did you guys take Danzig's "Mother" this seriously?; January 28, 2008 10:30 AM
Space Zombiesaid...: Ok--malicious Internet criminals are pussies.
Criminals who copy and steal code are assholes, but probably usually not always pussies.
Open source is (usually) cool.; January 28, 2008 10:43 AM
Moon Trampsaid...: You're kidding right? How could you question the seriousness of Danzig?

But back to the debate. The first and last video are probably just theatrics (you never know), but the second video was a supposedly true news story. Leaving death threats on someone's answering machine is not "just theatrics". Ask Mrs. Gee Whiz about that. Taking over someone's myspace page, while not as serious, is still more then theatrics, and it would suck to have it happen to you. Though after doing more reading, it sounds like that specific incident was more likely just squabbling between friends.

Hackers are of course various, with different actions, and motives. But in general, not a group that's got all that great of a reputation outside of sci-fi books and movies.; January 28, 2008 11:19 AM
Lankowniasaid...: I'm admitting to missing the point. "Mother" is a song that as far as I know didn't actually involve acting out on anything or causing anyone harm. This thing sounds like it is actually more than just theatrics - at the very least causing discomfort or annoyance (which mother may have caused too, but that would have been self-imposed by choice, unlike the ruining Harry Potter thing.); January 28, 2008 11:20 AM
Jay Gee Whizsaid...: My bad. I didn't realize there were three videos. I only watched the first video. I still haven't watched the others. I don't know what I'm talking about.; January 28, 2008 12:14 PM
A Jokersaid...: It makes me sad to think of the conservative, middle-class bent that is this group's consensus.

Is Fox news suddenly a trustworthy newsource? I'm pretty sure there are reams of evidence that indicate otherwise.

Another take on Anon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology; January 28, 2008 1:53 PM
Moon Trampsaid...: It's not actually Fox News, it's a local Fox affiliates news program. I don't know how trust worthy they are, but by doing a little of my own research I came across a page wherein someone was bragging, in the personae of "anonymous" about the stuff that happened to the kid (myspace hacking, gay photos posted on his site, etc.) I trust my own ability to do research.

As for accusing us of being conservative middle class, the group that you are supporting is using tactics more common of the conservative side. What the supposed war on scientology amounts to is an attempt to censor them. They want to remove the scientologist presence from the web, all because the scientologists removed a pirated video from youtube.

Really there are three different "groups" in each of those videos. Maybe they are all connected, maybe not. Maybe the group that is going after the church of scientology is the same one that called and left death threats on a family's phone, maybe not. Maybe they're the same ones that hacked the kid's myspace page. In the end it doesn't really matter. Their tactics amount to a use of force.

Plus the concept is flawed. You have an anonymous group, with no stated goals, or missions. You only operate by a lose set of rules that don't really restrict you from much. You pretty much give permission to any whack job with a vendetta out there to use the name and do as they please. How this could lead to change, I don't know. On top of that you give them a false sense of security by allowing them to claim anonymity, leading people to do things that they might otherwise think better then.

If you really want to dedicate your time to taking down the church of scientology, then do it. Step out from your computer, make a reasoned argument, use your own voice, and if people still choose to believe, then so be it.

In the end, there's more to being progressive then just "fighting" for change. It matters how you do it. Using force, censorship, violence, or terror are not acceptable forms. Maybe that view point makes me a middle class conservative. If so, I'm fine with that.; January 28, 2008 2:46 PM
A Jokersaid...: It may sound like semantics, but I didn’t really say any one was a middle class conservative…just that that was the consensus often reached on the boards. News on fox is to me Fox news, but whatever the label that “news” story was sensationalized, pandering, biased, and extremely bad journalism.

Kids do stupid things. I can think of people on this board who played similar jokes in high school, on people who also post on this board. It’s stupid. Whatever. It happens. If your life is seriously affected by something happening to your Myspace you probably need to re-assess your priorities.

For the record, I don’t really have a side. I guess I like it when people are anti-religion but I’m not going to undertake any of those activities. Is what they’re doing illegal? Probably. Is it immoral? I don’t know. Morals are relative, and having a social gadfly in your community can necessitate change, as uncomfortable as we find gadflies to be (think about the eventual fates of Socrates, Galileo, and any other pariah/martyr of those who opposed the system).; January 28, 2008 3:02 PM
Space Zombiesaid...: Who cares what Fox says about these dipshits--judging from their own statements, they are a petty, pathetic hate group. I would find it to be particularly disgusting and upsetting if anybody were to associate these kinds of sadistic jack-asses with a liberal or socially progressive ideology.; January 28, 2008 3:48 PM
A Jokersaid...: I don't want to disgust or upset, so I will stop here.; January 28, 2008 3:55 PM
Lankowniasaid...: Is Fox news suddenly a trustworthy newsource?

No, but it was the only one presented. Personally, I had never heard of Anonymous until seeing it here. Fox NEWS is different than Fox, but all local network TV news tends to be sensationalized garbage.

-------------------------

Everyone blogging on this site is firmly entrenched in the middle class (as far as I know, clearly no one is impoverished, but if you're in the upper class please feel free to enlighten me by buying me a beer), so it would make sense that the site has a middle-class bent. I didn't realize this was a bad thing or cause anyone sadness. My experience is that most progressives bemoan the shrinking size of the middle class and aim for a more equitable distribution of wealth. As for conservative label, I would disagree, but I guess its a matter up for interpretation.

The Wiki link was informative. I'm not sure the "censorship" of Scientology warrants the attack, but I will plead ignorance to the degree of the Church's crimes. In general, I have a problem with people trying to suppress other's religious beliefs or lack thereof. I didn't like when the U.S. government invaded the Branch Davidians in Waco and I view this as a similar assault (i.e. a minor offense used as a petty excuse to attack a group you don't approve of or agree with), albeit on a smaller scale.

---------------------------

I would agree that the tactics of the Anonymous fall much closer to the conservative/right political ideology than the progressive/left.
"we are prepared for a long, long campaign. " sounds all too familiar.

---------------------------

Kids do indeed do stupid things. Thats why my initial reaction to "where do I sign up" was - probably your local middle school.

-----------------------------

The gadfly comment is interesting. I think it comes down to a matter of interpretation. Probably all of us would like to think of ourselves as welcoming to notions of challenging the status quo. But its important to consider what elements are being challenged and how. In this context, the status quo that is being challenged is free speech and freedom of religion - the members of anonymous are practicing precisely what they claim to be rebelling against. They are not "fighting the system" or conventional belief in any sense - they are simply picking on someone on a battlefield where they are weaker (hence my impression of bullying).

--------------------------

Regardless, this focuses on the more interesting and discussion worthy aspect of Anonymous - their battle against Scientology.

The problem, as mentioned, is that they are so unorganized, any dipshit could take it and feel like their activities are somehow justified as part of a movement.
I don't like the notion of getting killed because of my music tastes brand me as a whiny emo bitch or having the ending to my books ruined because someone else doesn't happen to agree with my taste.

The discussion did bring to light some interesting viewpoints though.; January 28, 2008 6:41 PM
Lankowniasaid...: how come when I get emails about comments to this thread they say "where do I sign up", but the title here says "untitled"?; January 28, 2008 6:44 PM
Space Zombiesaid...: Someone posted a death threat to my myspace page once. I was not too threatened by it, but it scared my wife. Also, it made me pretty mad that someone would do that sort of thing. I don't care if it's a prank, it's lame and offensive and it makes people feel violated.; January 29, 2008 8:13 AM