3 ms·

A lynch mob has a purpose. It isn't necessarily even the same purpose at the end as it was in the beginning. This is the danger of mobs, people become more emo

by hartror 16y ago

A lynch mob has a purpose. It isn't necessarily even the same purpose at the end as it was in the beginning. This is the danger of mobs, people become more emotional and feel more entitled to take more drastic actions that they would otherwise eschew alone. It would only take one lone nut case with a gun and the information Anon has gathered to turn this media curiosity into the biggest story this side of Libya. I am not against what Anon is arguing for in this case, but what they are doing is highly questionable and crosses the line. This is no longer civil disobedience but something more akin to mobster tactics. If the same was done to them, someone pursuing their families, they would be crying foul from the internet's roof tops.

blhack 16y ago
>If the same was done to them, someone pursuing their families, they would be crying foul from the internet's roof tops. I'm not sure if you're joking here or not, but this is exactly what was done to "them" during the HbGary thing, and this is exactly what is trying to be done to "them" in the George Hotz case (Sony is seeking information on George Hotz, as well as anybody who visited his website.) And they are crying foul from the internet's rooftops. Which is exactly where we are at now.
- hartror 16y ago
  So two wrongs make a right? Because others are doing it Anon is justified in doing it as well? And justified in taking it further and exposing innocent bystanders?
  - mcantelon 16y ago
    >So two wrongs make a right? Because others are doing it Anon is justified in doing it as well? And justified in taking it further and exposing innocent bystanders? Whether it's a proportional response or not is debatable, but it's an unsurprising and natural turn of events in a system where corporations, because of the degree to which they lobby political parties, are catered to by the law and the courts. All Sony execs have to do to restore their personal security is back off from attempting to abuse their power.
    - sudonim 16y ago
      > All Sony execs have to do to restore their personal security is back off from attempting to abuse their power. Bam, that is this, and the wikileaks thing in a nutshell. Gov & Corps are abusing their power at the expense of individuals. Anonymous (The Internet) gives previously weak individuals a way to level the playing field.
      - hartror 16y ago
        Even Wikileaks redact information that could get innocent people in trouble/killed. What Wikileaks does is controlled and measured, Anon is the the school's downtrodden nerds ganging up on the bullies little sister. Going after the loved ones of the target of your fury is a tactic of criminals and despots. Gang up on the bully.
        dhimes 16y ago
        Going after the loved ones of the target of your fury is a tactic of criminals and despots. I agree. However, as others have pointed out that's what Sony is doing. Yet they are not being prosecuted for it. So in some sense perhaps this adopting of the tactics of criminals to use against the criminals themselves (speaking hyperbolically or at least theoretically here- perhaps too strong to apply directly to Sony) is in some sense justice? Especially where the law fails. Hey, I have a family. I sure as hell wouldn't want someone who was pissed at me to come after them. But then, I wouldn't go after their family either.
  - blhack 16y ago
    >So two wrongs make a right? No. >Because others are doing it Anon is justified in doing it as well? No. >And justified in taking it further and exposing innocent bystanders? Absolutely not.
  - cabalamat 16y ago
    > So two wrongs make a right? Is it wrong to respond if someone is attacking you? Sony are subverting governments to make laws that take away my (and your freedom on the internet. These laws are backed by credible threats of lethal force. What anonymous are doing to Sony executives is but a small fraction of what Sony executives are doing to internet users worldwide.
mcantelon 16y ago
>I am not against what Anon is arguing for in this case, but what they are doing is highly questionable and crosses the line. This is no longer civil disobedience but something more akin to mobster tactics. It's unfortunate that more conventional forms of civil obedience have been rendered ineffective in dealing with corporations who, by lobbying government and dominating popular media, have overcome the traditional checks and balances of a healthy civil society.
- leot 16y ago
  Not that I'm condoning this behavior, but it's especially unfortunate that the target here is relatively benign when there are so many more deserving targets.
- drusenko 16y ago
  What evidence do you have that "the traditional checks and balances of a healthy civil society" aren't working? Just because you aren't getting your way doesn't mean society isn't working. You have a viewpoint, but plenty of other people have a very different viewpoint on where things should stand. That we manage to arrive at a reasonable middle ground between all of these dissenting opinions seems to indicate that the system is working. I'm tired of hearing all of this posturing and justification for Anon just because you support what they support. If it was the Montana Tea Party employing tactics like this, they would be called domestic terrorists. So, sorry: DDoSes, stalking, harassment and vandalism are not "civil disobedience", they're just plain old despicable behavior.
  - mcantelon 16y ago
    >What evidence do you have that "the traditional checks and balances of a healthy civil society" aren't working? Representative democracy now represents lobbyists rather than voters. Media now represents corporate interests rather than the public interest. This manifests in a new economic/political order: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/barrie-mckenna/gap-between-rich-and-poor-wont-be-closing-any-time-soon/article1740237/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary... >That we manage to arrive at a reasonable middle ground between all of these dissenting opinions seems to indicate that the system is working. Pretty much anyone I talk to, regardless of their political persuasion, doesn't feel the system is working. >I'm tired of hearing all of this posturing and justification for Anon just because you support what they support. That's unfortunate. Laws, the economy, culture, and politics have changed since the days of a functional civil society. It's unlikely that people in present circumstances will abide by standards of behavior that don't advance their interests. >So, sorry: DDoSes, stalking, harassment and vandalism are not "civil disobedience", they're just plain old despicable behavior. The tactics of the American and French revolutions were likely classifed as "despicable" as well by the out of touch and complacent, but history would be much different without these tactics. Many see Sony's abuse of power as "despicable". Sony is free to withdraw their aggression at any time.

by hartror 16y ago

blhack 16y ago

>If the same was done to them, someone pursuing their families, they would be crying foul from the internet's roof tops. I'm not sure if you're joking here or not, but this is exactly what was done to "them" during the HbGary thing, and this is exactly what is trying to be done to "them" in the George Hotz case (Sony is seeking information on George Hotz, as well as anybody who visited his website.) And they are crying foul from the internet's rooftops. Which is exactly where we are at now.

hartror 16y ago
So two wrongs make a right? Because others are doing it Anon is justified in doing it as well? And justified in taking it further and exposing innocent bystanders?
- mcantelon 16y ago
  >So two wrongs make a right? Because others are doing it Anon is justified in doing it as well? And justified in taking it further and exposing innocent bystanders? Whether it's a proportional response or not is debatable, but it's an unsurprising and natural turn of events in a system where corporations, because of the degree to which they lobby political parties, are catered to by the law and the courts. All Sony execs have to do to restore their personal security is back off from attempting to abuse their power.
  - sudonim 16y ago
    > All Sony execs have to do to restore their personal security is back off from attempting to abuse their power. Bam, that is this, and the wikileaks thing in a nutshell. Gov & Corps are abusing their power at the expense of individuals. Anonymous (The Internet) gives previously weak individuals a way to level the playing field.
    - hartror 16y ago
      Even Wikileaks redact information that could get innocent people in trouble/killed. What Wikileaks does is controlled and measured, Anon is the the school's downtrodden nerds ganging up on the bullies little sister. Going after the loved ones of the target of your fury is a tactic of criminals and despots. Gang up on the bully.
      - dhimes 16y ago
        Going after the loved ones of the target of your fury is a tactic of criminals and despots. I agree. However, as others have pointed out that's what Sony is doing. Yet they are not being prosecuted for it. So in some sense perhaps this adopting of the tactics of criminals to use against the criminals themselves (speaking hyperbolically or at least theoretically here- perhaps too strong to apply directly to Sony) is in some sense justice? Especially where the law fails. Hey, I have a family. I sure as hell wouldn't want someone who was pissed at me to come after them. But then, I wouldn't go after their family either.
- blhack 16y ago
  >So two wrongs make a right? No. >Because others are doing it Anon is justified in doing it as well? No. >And justified in taking it further and exposing innocent bystanders? Absolutely not.
- cabalamat 16y ago
  > So two wrongs make a right? Is it wrong to respond if someone is attacking you? Sony are subverting governments to make laws that take away my (and your freedom on the internet. These laws are backed by credible threats of lethal force. What anonymous are doing to Sony executives is but a small fraction of what Sony executives are doing to internet users worldwide.

mcantelon 16y ago

>I am not against what Anon is arguing for in this case, but what they are doing is highly questionable and crosses the line. This is no longer civil disobedience but something more akin to mobster tactics. It's unfortunate that more conventional forms of civil obedience have been rendered ineffective in dealing with corporations who, by lobbying government and dominating popular media, have overcome the traditional checks and balances of a healthy civil society.

leot 16y ago
Not that I'm condoning this behavior, but it's especially unfortunate that the target here is relatively benign when there are so many more deserving targets.
drusenko 16y ago
What evidence do you have that "the traditional checks and balances of a healthy civil society" aren't working? Just because you aren't getting your way doesn't mean society isn't working. You have a viewpoint, but plenty of other people have a very different viewpoint on where things should stand. That we manage to arrive at a reasonable middle ground between all of these dissenting opinions seems to indicate that the system is working. I'm tired of hearing all of this posturing and justification for Anon just because you support what they support. If it was the Montana Tea Party employing tactics like this, they would be called domestic terrorists. So, sorry: DDoSes, stalking, harassment and vandalism are not "civil disobedience", they're just plain old despicable behavior.
- mcantelon 16y ago
  >What evidence do you have that "the traditional checks and balances of a healthy civil society" aren't working? Representative democracy now represents lobbyists rather than voters. Media now represents corporate interests rather than the public interest. This manifests in a new economic/political order: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary/barrie-mckenna/gap-between-rich-and-poor-wont-be-closing-any-time-soon/article1740237/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/commentary... >That we manage to arrive at a reasonable middle ground between all of these dissenting opinions seems to indicate that the system is working. Pretty much anyone I talk to, regardless of their political persuasion, doesn't feel the system is working. >I'm tired of hearing all of this posturing and justification for Anon just because you support what they support. That's unfortunate. Laws, the economy, culture, and politics have changed since the days of a functional civil society. It's unlikely that people in present circumstances will abide by standards of behavior that don't advance their interests. >So, sorry: DDoSes, stalking, harassment and vandalism are not "civil disobedience", they're just plain old despicable behavior. The tactics of the American and French revolutions were likely classifed as "despicable" as well by the out of touch and complacent, but history would be much different without these tactics. Many see Sony's abuse of power as "despicable". Sony is free to withdraw their aggression at any time.